Welcome to our new members!
Kay
From: M. <bra...@direct.net>
:That was no proposal Lauri,
:that was self-defense.
:I couldn't care less what is
:done here on or on raf.
:Leave it to the flamers,
:I'm on my way.
And it's about damn time!
Quo Vadis
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>
>And it's about damn time!
>
I second that. Motion carried.
I propose we fire Dan as moderator .... he was a spineless git ... and
vote for Kay as his successor. Oh what the hell - I declare Kay as the
new moderator. Motion carried.
I propose myself as administrator - new FAQs on the way in due course.
John can write them for me - he has a good imagination ;-)
Rule number one: no boring technical talk about things that would never
concern real artist.... like the fucking make of pastels you use. Gag !
Stephen Morgana
I see now that I dont belong here. Good bye.
--
Stephen
http://homepages.go.com/~scm2000
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Erik A. Mattila
nothing. I hope it is clear to you that this is a personal matter betweem
Marilyn and Alison being aired out in public, and we are being ordered to
take sides, and admonished if we don't. And we will be punished if we
don't take sides in the full extent of the law. Big Sister is Watching
You!
We all became very competent with this kind of social fisticuff at about
the third grade, and some of us have moved on.
I hope you'll reconsider.
Best,
Erik
Alison A Raimes
I think you will find that is extremely incorrect, Erik - in fact is a
downright lie. No one is being *ordered* to take sides and never have
been and I am surprised at you for saying so. Can one single person on
this group say I ever ordered them to do so ? Most of you didn't express
one single opinion.
Marilyn needed her butt kicking and she got it. Good riddance to her.
When have I ever asked anyone to take sides, particularly you ? I didn't
even ask John to and knew that he was still writing to Marilyn way after
this thing started. She wrote him and told him that she was setting her
mail to reject any from him after she found out that he and I are going
to visit each other. Of course, you never actually bothered to find out
what was going on but you still feel qualified to make judgements. I
took my stance because of Kay and the appalling way that Marilyn treated
her. I would expect any friend to do the same for me under those
circumstances. You chose to sit on the fence rather than risk an opinion
as did everyone else here - your silence said it all. Intervention by
you or Dan or anyone else who cared about this group during the early
stages would have dispersed the row. What were you all scared of ? What
was that all about, Erik ?
At least we all know where we stand now - I for one am a lot more
comfortable with that. Carry on boring each other to tears.
In article <37CA2FA9...@tomatoweb.com>, Erik A. Mattila
<emat...@tomatoweb.com> writes
>I disagree, Stephen. Of course you belong here. You weren't invited for
>nothing. I hope it is clear to you that this is a personal matter betweem
>Marilyn and Alison being aired out in public, and we are being ordered to
>take sides, and admonished if we don't. And we will be punished if we
>don't take sides in the full extent of the law. Big Sister is Watching
>You!
>
>We all became very competent with this kind of social fisticuff at about
>the third grade, and some of us have moved on.
>
>I hope you'll reconsider.
>
>Best,
>Erik
~
Erik A. Mattila
exactly correct, and your words below verify it. Read them, for Christ's
sake. What you are discribing is an absolutely trivial situation - nothing
more that two or three people ruffling each other's feathers, and you go on to
admonish those who could not make it seem important in any way, shape or form
to themselves and chose not to comment or join-in this rediculous squabble.
Rather than sitting on a fence, I have voiced my opinion to you on more than
one occassion. I don't see it as a legitimate beef -- how can I be clearer?
I feel no need to support you or Kay or Marilyn, since it just looks like
insignificant nit-picking to me. That is not having 'no opinion' by the
furthest stretches of the imagine. So you're pissed-off that I say so. Well,
get used to it. I'm not interested in bickering. Now if you want to continue
taking your shots at Marilyn, there's absolutely nothing I can do about it.
Equally, if I want to remid Stephen, who felt personally insulted by your
callousness, that it wasn't about him, there's absolutely nothing you can do
about it. You made your bed, now sleep in it.
Erik
Alison A Raimes
<emat...@tomatoweb.com> writes
>Not a snowball's chance in hell that I will find 'that' incorrect. It is
>exactly correct, and your words below verify it. Read them, for Christ's
>sake. What you are discribing is an absolutely trivial situation - nothing
>more that two or three people ruffling each other's feathers, and you go on to
>admonish those who could not make it seem important in any way, shape or form
>to themselves and chose not to comment or join-in this rediculous squabble.
>
Trivial to you maybe, but it wasn't to Kay when Marilyn tried to get her
server to cancel her account - nor was it trivial when she cut John off
because John chose to stay neutral and not *take a side*. You had a
responsibility, if you cared about a group that had worked hard to
establish a relationship, of voicing your opinion at the time. How did
you think the group could ever survive under those circumstances ? You
said yourself that we had a nice group - we had a responsibility to each
other to keep it that way and to stop people like Marilyn destroying it.
This is the result.
>Rather than sitting on a fence, I have voiced my opinion to you on more than
>one occassion. I don't see it as a legitimate beef -- how can I be clearer?
>I feel no need to support you or Kay or Marilyn, since it just looks like
>insignificant nit-picking to me. That is not having 'no opinion' by the
>furthest stretches of the imagine. So you're pissed-off that I say so. Well,
>get used to it. I'm not interested in bickering. Now if you want to continue
>taking your shots at Marilyn, there's absolutely nothing I can do about it.
>Equally, if I want to remid Stephen, who felt personally insulted by your
>callousness, that it wasn't about him, there's absolutely nothing you can do
>about it. You made your bed, now sleep in it.
I am not pissed off at all with what you have said. I am pissed off it
took you so long to say it. It should have been said long ago and this
thing would have dispersed.
If Stephen took my post as a personal insult that is his problem - he
didn't even enter my mind.
--
Alison
Kay
Erik A. Mattila wrote in message <37CA6CB6...@tomatoweb.com>...
:Not a snowball's chance in hell that I will find 'that' incorrect. It is
:exactly correct, and your words below verify it. Read them, for Christ's
:sake. What you are discribing is an absolutely trivial situation - nothing
:more that two or three people ruffling each other's feathers, and you go on
to
:admonish those who could not make it seem important in any way, shape or
form
:to themselves and chose not to comment or join-in this rediculous squabble.
But you are joining in this rediculous squabble aren't you, Erik? You call
it a trivial situation? Your server is tomatoweb. What a rediculous name
for a server, but that's what we get in these rural areas, isn't it? Is
your server, like mine, the ONLY server available to you since you live in
such a remote place? See, a report becomes a bit more serious, then. I
certainly don't expect you to take sides but:
#1. There was NEVER any fighting or bickering before Marilyn joined - and
she had ragged Alison before she reported me.
#2. Alison, you and myself pretty much kept this entire group going with
our contributions. At least, I was well aware of it and felt compelled to
post interesting things.
#3. Reporting me to my server is much more insulting than being flamed, it
is an act of cowardice since if I were to be flamed, I could flame back.
Marilyn not only reported me, but e-mailed me to inform me so. If that is
not an act of cowardice on HER part, not mine, please tell me and I will
apologize.
#4. I appreciate that Alison *has* stood up for me. While I don't expect
others to do so, her's is an act of friendship and it did take a lot of
courage to risk alienating people for taking a side. And see what happens?
People hate her now more than me! Incredibly bizzarre! In an avante-garde
group, such as this, I would assume that flames would be ignored or
disapproved, but that reporting one of this group to their server would be
universally discouraged. Everybody here turned their heads and looked the
other way. Well, Erik, YOU are WRONG! It is not PETTY! It was pretty
damned SERIOUS to me! THANK YOU for invalidating my feelings and
TRIVIALIZING them so.
Kay
:
:Rather than sitting on a fence, I have voiced my opinion to you on more
than
:one occassion. I don't see it as a legitimate beef -- how can I be
clearer?
:I feel no need to support you or Kay or Marilyn, since it just looks like
:insignificant nit-picking to me. That is not having 'no opinion' by the
:furthest stretches of the imagine. So you're pissed-off that I say so.
Well,
:get used to it. I'm not interested in bickering. Now if you want to
continue
:taking your shots at Marilyn, there's absolutely nothing I can do about it.
:Equally, if I want to remid Stephen, who felt personally insulted by your
:callousness, that it wasn't about him, there's absolutely nothing you can
do
:about it. You made your bed, now sleep in it.
:
:Erik
:
:Alison A Raimes wrote:
:
:> I think you will find that is extremely incorrect, Erik - in fact is a
:> downright lie. No one is being *ordered* to take sides and never have
:> been and I am surprised at you for saying so. Can one single person on
:> this group say I ever ordered them to do so ? Most of you didn't express
:> one single opinion.
:>
:> Marilyn needed her butt kicking and she got it. Good riddance to her.
:> When have I ever asked anyone to take sides, particularly you ? I didn't
:> even ask John to and knew that he was still writing to Marilyn way after
:> this thing started. She wrote him and told him that she was setting her
:> mail to reject any from him after she found out that he and I are going
:> to visit each other. Of course, you never actually bothered to find out
:> what was going on but you still feel qualified to make judgements. I
:> took my stance because of Kay and the appalling way that Marilyn treated
:> her. I would expect any friend to do the same for me under those
:> circumstances. You chose to sit on the fence rather than risk an opinion
:> as did everyone else here - your silence said it all. Intervention by
:> you or Dan or anyone else who cared about this group during the early
:> stages would have dispersed the row. What were you all scared of ? What
:> was that all about, Erik ?
:>
:> At least we all know where we stand now - I for one am a lot more
:> comfortable with that. Carry on boring each other to tears.
:>
:> In article <37CA2FA9...@tomatoweb.com>, Erik A. Mattila
:> <emat...@tomatoweb.com> writes
:> >I disagree, Stephen. Of course you belong here. You weren't invited
:
Kay
Quo Vadis wrote in message ...
:>
:>And it's about damn time!
:>
:I second that. Motion carried.
:
:
:I propose we fire Dan as moderator .... he was a spineless git ... and
:vote for Kay as his successor. Oh what the hell - I declare Kay as the
:new moderator. Motion carried.
I accept! And I vow to do the best moderating possible as long as I feel
like it.
:
:I propose myself as administrator - new FAQs on the way in due course.
:John can write them for me - he has a good imagination ;-)
:
No sex talk!
:Rule number one: no boring technical talk about things that would never
:concern real artist.... like the fucking make of pastels you use. Gag !
I don't use pastels. I know some people who do. There is a hierarchy in
materials as well, you know. Oil users feel superior to acrylic users who
both feel superior to pastel users who feel superior to watercolor users who
feel superior to charcoal users who feel superior to crayola crayon users
who are happily oblivious to the entire thing. Now I've encountered the oil
vs linen snobbery. I only have worked on linen one time and it is mucho
expensivo. I am not quite sure of the benefits of linen, though, having
painted on it. But I do know that linen can sell for more than canvas. Have
you ever used linen? I am befuddled by the choice!
Kay
Kay
Kay
Stephen Morgana wrote:
:
:I see now that I dont belong here. Good bye.
Alison A Raimes
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>
>I accept! And I vow to do the best moderating possible as long as I feel
>like it.
Brilliant - *you* are now the moderator... when you feel like it. I
trust you will kick the butt of anyone who decides reporting someone to
their server is fair play ...... as administrator I think I may be
qualified to help a little !
>No sex talk!
Shucks ! Spoil sport. Anyway I am too busy bullying him to finish my
website at the moment for sex talk.
>I don't use pastels. I know some people who do. There is a hierarchy in
>materials as well, you know. Oil users feel superior to acrylic users who
>both feel superior to pastel users who feel superior to watercolor users who
>feel superior to charcoal users who feel superior to crayola crayon users
>who are happily oblivious to the entire thing. Now I've encountered the oil
>vs linen snobbery. I only have worked on linen one time and it is mucho
>expensivo. I am not quite sure of the benefits of linen, though, having
>painted on it. But I do know that linen can sell for more than canvas. Have
>you ever used linen? I am befuddled by the choice!
>Kay
>
Interesting you should say this. My agent is a snob when it comes to
this - and if any of my paintings are on board she turns her nose right
up. I tried to explain that I needed a solid surface because the canvas
is too porous (even with five layers of gesso) and also the weight of
the resin makes it sag. She still prefers canvas even though the
paintings aren't as good.... so now I started stretching canvas over
board ! As for linen, I have used it but can honestly say, for the way
I work, it makes no difference.
Artists will make art out of whatever resources they have to hand.
Everyone has different preferences - its a matter of finding your own
suitability and is stupid to think that another person's will suit you.
You have to find out for yourself. In the studio at the moment I have
charcoal drawings and pastels on the go - trying to bring colour into
the charcoal ones. Damn it is tough - been doing the charcoal for so
long. In a moment of frustration I sprayed two coats of varnish into a
pastel drawing and then poured the oil/resin mix over the top. The
effect is astounding !
BTW did I tell you I got another agent ? he took six paintings into a
group show which opens tomorrow in West London .... he's fun - he called
the show *Invest in your sole* ...... don't ask !
Keep moderating ..... when you feel like it.
--
Alison
Alison A Raimes
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>But you are joining in this rediculous squabble aren't you, Erik? You call
>it a trivial situation? Your server is tomatoweb. What a rediculous name
>for a server, but that's what we get in these rural areas, isn't it? Is
>your server, like mine, the ONLY server available to you since you live in
>such a remote place? See, a report becomes a bit more serious, then. I
Don't you get access to the main servers then, Kay - like AOL? I think
we have approximately thirty now - most of them are free. Demon is one
of the main ones which we pay for - incidentally they would NEVER cancel
a subscription because of something on Usenet - they have no
jurisdiction here. Apart from that they have to deal with the real *bad*
elements. They would laugh at this fracas. I once asked one of them
about Usenet and he told me to go look at their own newsgroup - which
made this one look like a walk in the park. So if the employers of a
company are having their own flame wars then how on earth could they
ever cancel one of their customers accounts for a few nasties !! With my
Dfax account and my ISP they get almost a thousand bucks a year out of
me.
Let the good times roll !
Alison
Kay
Alison A Raimes wrote in message ...
:In article <UIxy3.27221$gO1.1...@news2.giganews.com>, Kay
:<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
:
:>But you are joining in this rediculous squabble aren't you, Erik? You
call
:>it a trivial situation? Your server is tomatoweb. What a rediculous name
:>for a server, but that's what we get in these rural areas, isn't it? Is
:>your server, like mine, the ONLY server available to you since you live in
:>such a remote place? See, a report becomes a bit more serious, then. I
:
:Don't you get access to the main servers then, Kay - like AOL?
No, I can't get it. The calls would be long distance and I would pay by the
minute. I don't think even paying by the minute, I would be able to get
other servers. That's why when I see silly sounding names I assume they are
in rural areas.
I think
:we have approximately thirty now - most of them are free. Demon is one
:of the main ones which we pay for - incidentally they would NEVER cancel
:a subscription because of something on Usenet - they have no
:jurisdiction here. Apart from that they have to deal with the real *bad*
:elements. They would laugh at this fracas. I once asked one of them
:about Usenet and he told me to go look at their own newsgroup - which
:made this one look like a walk in the park. So if the employers of a
:company are having their own flame wars then how on earth could they
:ever cancel one of their customers accounts for a few nasties !! With my
:Dfax account and my ISP they get almost a thousand bucks a year out of
:me.
I'm paid 6 months in advance and they sure don't want to refund my money,
but I was very, very upset at the time being new to the computer I didn't
know the rules or penalties. Now I realize that there aren't actually any
rules or I would quit getting the at home e-mails from Desiree with the
subject title "I'm gonna make you cum." Sheesh! But at least I know that
though I've been in heated battles, I've never reported anyone. It really
is a cowardly act, don't you think. A futile way to win an argument -
trying to silence them.
:Let the good times roll !
:Alison
Let the games begin!
Kay
:ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
:http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
Kay
Alison A Raimes wrote in message ...
:>I accept! And I vow to do the best moderating possible as long as I feel
:>like it.
:
:Brilliant - *you* are now the moderator... when you feel like it. I
:trust you will kick the butt of anyone who decides reporting someone to
:their server is fair play ...... as administrator I think I may be
:qualified to help a little !
Rule #1 (We may have several Rule #1s): Flame if you must, but don't be a
chickenshit and report posters to their server. It indicates a lack of
vocabulary skills and shows that you have no cohesive thought processes in
which to express your disaproval.
:
:>No sex talk!
:
:Shucks ! Spoil sport. Anyway I am too busy bullying him to finish my
:website at the moment for sex talk.
I was kidding! Rule #1 - I don't make rules, but if I do, they should be
ignored if you feel like it! Sex talk will pop up (pun intended) and as
long as it is germain to the discussion, should present a problem. If
someone gets offended by the occasional blow-job, they shouldn't be here.
(snipping the actual art discussion post which I will respond to later)
Kay
:
:Keep moderating ..... when you feel like it.
Alison A Raimes
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>I was kidding! Rule #1 - I don't make rules, but if I do, they should be
>ignored if you feel like it! Sex talk will pop up (pun intended) and as
>long as it is germain to the discussion, should present a problem. If
>someone gets offended by the occasional blow-job, they shouldn't be here.
>
>(snipping the actual art discussion post which I will respond to later)
>Kay
Oh good ! I wouldn't have anything to say if I couldn't talk about blow
jobs ......dunno nuthin about aort.
Alison
Alison A Raimes
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>
>I'm paid 6 months in advance and they sure don't want to refund my money,
>but I was very, very upset at the time being new to the computer I didn't
>know the rules or penalties. Now I realize that there aren't actually any
>rules or I would quit getting the at home e-mails from Desiree with the
>subject title "I'm gonna make you cum." Sheesh! But at least I know that
>though I've been in heated battles, I've never reported anyone. It really
>is a cowardly act, don't you think. A futile way to win an argument -
>trying to silence them.
Well, I did it to Hutto and that is when I found out that there are NO
rules - that was my initiation ;-) At least he had the guts to come out
and say he was wrong and that in actual fact he wasn't even any good at
art - which was his original basis for being so hostile. Mind you by
that time he had invaded my own mailbox - like Marilyn did to you. That
is what is cowardly.
You still in your jimjams ?
Kay
Alison A Raimes wrote in message
:>I'm paid 6 months in advance and they sure don't want to refund my money,
:>but I was very, very upset at the time being new to the computer I didn't
:>know the rules or penalties. Now I realize that there aren't actually any
:>rules or I would quit getting the at home e-mails from Desiree with the
:>subject title "I'm gonna make you cum." Sheesh! But at least I know that
:>though I've been in heated battles, I've never reported anyone. It really
:>is a cowardly act, don't you think. A futile way to win an argument -
:>trying to silence them.
:
:Well, I did it to Hutto and that is when I found out that there are NO
:rules - that was my initiation ;-) At least he had the guts to come out
:and say he was wrong and that in actual fact he wasn't even any good at
:art - which was his original basis for being so hostile. Mind you by
:that time he had invaded my own mailbox - like Marilyn did to you. That
:is what is cowardly.
But I have internet service at school too. I don't use it because it is not
*mine* - it is available to me as a courtesy, not a right. By posting
through an employer's account my statements could reflect bacly on them.
When I post from my own account, I reflect only my own opinions. I am sure
Hutto is around, very near in fact. But, he has likely obtained his own
account.
:You still in your jimjams ?
Yep. 2PM here. Time to shower and start my day :-)
Kay
:Alison
:
:ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
:http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
Kay
very nice and intelligent. But, first I am going to do a Deja News search
on his posting history. Someone whose only posting history is recent and
only to raf is, very likely, not that person but someone imitating someone
else. Agreed?
Kay
Quo Vadis
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>But I have internet service at school too. I don't use it because it is not
>*mine* - it is available to me as a courtesy, not a right. By posting
>through an employer's account my statements could reflect bacly on them.
>When I post from my own account, I reflect only my own opinions. I am sure
>Hutto is around, very near in fact. But, he has likely obtained his own
>account.
Oh yes, Hutto is not far away .... I have him logged and I play his
game.
>
>:You still in your jimjams ?
>
>
>Yep. 2PM here. Time to shower and start my day :-)
>Kay
Get up ! I am going to bed. See you manana - hasta luego !
Quo Vadis
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
Damn good idea - he is a lot of fun.... and likes sex too ;-) I think
that ought to be a stipulation in your Non Rules, don't you ? Don't
bother with a search on James - he is genuine and new to Usenet. I have
sent him some stuff in the post here and he is at Swansea University -
very intelligent kid.
Its fun to see all these people changing their names and getting new
accounts ... what the hell are they scared of ? let them imitate ... its
a sign of insecurity ... you only have to look at Dan to know that.
Quo Vadis
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>I am inviting James Foster to the group. His art is fantastic and he is
>very nice and intelligent. But, first I am going to do a Deja News search
>on his posting history. Someone whose only posting history is recent and
>only to raf is, very likely, not that person but someone imitating someone
>else. Agreed?
>Kay
>
own name ? At least he is intelligent, has strong opinions which he
stands firm by, and has guts ... which is more than can be said for
most of the people around here, right ?
Kay
Alison A Raimes wrote:
(snip)
:>I don't use pastels. I know some people who do. There is a hierarchy in
:>materials as well, you know. Oil users feel superior to acrylic users who
:>both feel superior to pastel users who feel superior to watercolor users
who
:>feel superior to charcoal users who feel superior to crayola crayon users
:>who are happily oblivious to the entire thing. Now I've encountered the
oil
:>vs linen snobbery. I only have worked on linen one time and it is mucho
:>expensivo. I am not quite sure of the benefits of linen, though, having
:>painted on it. But I do know that linen can sell for more than canvas.
Have
:>you ever used linen? I am befuddled by the choice!
:>Kay
:>
:Interesting you should say this. My agent is a snob when it comes to
:this - and if any of my paintings are on board she turns her nose right
:up. I tried to explain that I needed a solid surface because the canvas
:is too porous (even with five layers of gesso) and also the weight of
:the resin makes it sag. She still prefers canvas even though the
:paintings aren't as good.... so now I started stretching canvas over
:board !
I've never used resin as a paint material, but having used it in sculpture,
it would sag for sure. Since you work in oil, maybe the canvas over board
will make it adhere better. I don't like board myself because it always
seems to buckle and bend and with canvas, I can abuse it pretty much and
just restretch it if necessary. I saw a show of Sue Coe (awesome) and then
of (what's her name???) I think it was Jennifer Bartlett, no not her, the
one who does the shaped canvases and guess what? The canvases were
unstretched and often creased and wrinkled. More and more are doing
unstretched canvases and I can see it in the works of Sue Coe (her's were
incredibly wrinkled, like she shoved them in her suitcase and flew in and
plopped them on the wall, wrinkles, warts and all. Mine wouldn't look good,
unstretched. Maybe more political art is suitable for unstreatched canvas?
I donno!
: As for linen, I have used it but can honestly say, for the way
:I work, it makes no difference.
Well, I can see how it makes no difference the way you work, but I work like
a normal (whatever that is) painter and I can feel a tiny bit of a different
stroke when I apply paint, maybe smoother, but can see no finished product
difference. The oil on linen fetches more than oil on canvas though. Maybe
linen lasts longer? Dunno!
:Artists will make art out of whatever resources they have to hand.
When I was a student and couldn't get canvas in town I gessoed a sheet and
painted on it! I guess it won't last long but it was OK in a pinch :-)
:Everyone has different preferences - its a matter of finding your own
:suitability and is stupid to think that another person's will suit you.
Well, I see people get a little too hung up on the preservation aspect and
on the quality of paint, etc. In a pinch, I will use those $10/giant tube
Windor cheapie stuff. I don't recommend *hues* not because they are
inferior, but because you have to use so much to get the same effect as a
non-hue. I use Daniel Smith a lot because of the price and the big tubes
and a lot of the artists I know and respect use them as well. I've never
shown a work and people say to me "Nice concept and very well painted but
the inferior paint materials ruin it" Don't get me wrong, I buy superior
materials whenever possible, but it is not that much of a difference and
beginning painters should use anything they feel like, the cheaper the
better and assume they will get better and they will. At that point, they
can know what works for them. Word of mouth is good as well. A friend of
mine called and said "You've got to try these new colors: Indian Red, Naples
Yellow Light and Buff Titanium" Well I obediently went out and bought them
(excuse to shop for art supplies!) and Loved the Naples Yellow Light (though
I tried regular Naples Yellow and didn't like that) and Buff Titanium.
Hated Indian Red! Last week I mixed Indian Red with a Black and white
mixture to try and achieve a silver effect with a bit of blue and I was
astonished at how damned good it looked! So self-discovery is fun and
important.
:You have to find out for yourself. In the studio at the moment I have
:charcoal drawings and pastels on the go - trying to bring colour into
:the charcoal ones. Damn it is tough - been doing the charcoal for so
:long. In a moment of frustration I sprayed two coats of varnish into a
:pastel drawing and then poured the oil/resin mix over the top. The
:effect is astounding !
I wonder what the effect looks like? I remember the last time I used
pastels, I was in high school and I dipped them in water before drawing
(painting) with them and the teacher kept yelling at me that it is not done
and I am ruining his pastels but I kept doing it, and don't know why and I
still have that work. It looks so rich and creamy, like oil - almost. I
wonder why I did that?
You still work in charcoal. I haven't drawn in eons! I want to try the one
where you do a charcoal drawing, gesso over it, charcoal again, gesso again,
repeat, repeat, repeat. I saw a drawing like this on extremely large paper
and it was simply magnificent!!!
:BTW did I tell you I got another agent ? he took six paintings into a
:group show which opens tomorrow in West London .... he's fun - he called
:the show *Invest in your sole* ...... don't ask !
Sold more paintings? B_I_T_C_H !
Uh, congratulations - in all sincerity :-(
Obscurely,
Kay
:Keep moderating ..... when you feel like it.
Don't feel like it now and have forgotton what to do.
:Alison
:
:ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
:http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
Quo Vadis
>But I have internet service at school too. I don't use it because it is not
>*mine* - it is available to me as a courtesy, not a right. By posting
>through an employer's account my statements could reflect bacly on them.
You could be a total bore and put a disclaimer after your post ... that
apparently is the answer (?)
>When I post from my own account, I reflect only my own opinions.
Me too ! of course there is no question of it with me. I am who I am and
happy with that.
Kay
Erik A. Mattila wrote:
:Why bother? Alison has already cross-posted to raf, so everyone there
knows
:about brallen.
:
:Erik
Well, Erik, that's where the problem begins, doesn't it? We are an
invitational group only. If there are lurkers then they have to wait to be
invited which was why M.s daughter was offended though not invited. As for
Alison cross-posting, I did NOT notice that and I have never read of anyone
on raf mentioning it. Anyone doing a Deja News search can find out about
it, but it IS invitational, isn't it?
Kay
:
:Kay wrote:
:
:> I am inviting James Foster to the group. His art is fantastic and he is
:
Erik A. Mattila
about brallen.
Erik
Kay wrote:
Kay
Quo Vadis wrote:
:>I am inviting James Foster to the group. His art is fantastic and he is
:>very nice and intelligent. But, first I am going to do a Deja News search
:>on his posting history. Someone whose only posting history is recent and
:>only to raf is, very likely, not that person but someone imitating someone
:>else. Agreed?
:>Kay
:You ok with Burning Chrome too ? Even though he doesn't post under his
:own name ? At least he is intelligent, has strong opinions which he
:stands firm by, and has guts ... which is more than can be said for
:most of the people around here, right ?
Truthfully, I've never had a problem with BC, but his politics and mine are
on opposite ends of the spectrum. I don't know what his art is like. I
can't help it, I have a definite prejudice against Deja News posters. Also,
he hates the kind of art I do, I'm sure. Well, that can't be a factor
because today *I* am hating the kind of art I do. He would dislike Jame's
work and he makes short statements which many former members of the group
here did as well. To me this indicates a lack of caring - to merely comment
briefly or quote something but to not risk anything by posting a lengthy
position on anything. Let me think it over,
<power making me dizzy>
Kay
Actually, we had a policy that worked until lDan and Marilyn broke it. We
all voted. When that stopped, problems occurred that almost destroyed this
group. My ego isn't so big that I need power like that. I don't need to be
in control but I do expect fairness that has NOT been shown here when
Marilyn's daughter was invited unannounced and unknown to the majority here.
I agree only to be fair because it stinks when it is not!
Chris
Kay wrote:
>
> I am inviting James Foster to the group. His art is fantastic and he is
> very nice and intelligent. But, first I am going to do a Deja News search
> on his posting history. Someone whose only posting history is recent and
> only to raf is, very likely, not that person but someone imitating someone
> else. Agreed?
> Kay
Re James, fine by me. Re. posting - a) many people use the
x-noarchive:yes header, so you won't find them; b) change ISP's c) post
under old book titles in one group, and their own in another. :P In the
case of uncertainty, just invite the persona you know.
Cheers;
Chris
Kay
numerous posts here that have nothing to do with one another. Is there some
type of purpose here? Yes, there is one that is cross-posted that I hadn't
noticed. Did anyone respond? No, then maybe you are getting much too
involved and quite a bit hysterical. Continued below after extensive
snippage.
Erik A. Mattila wrote in message <37CB6F55...@tomatoweb.com>...
:Subject: Re: Queen Bee
:Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 16:57:20 +0100
:From: Alison A Raimes <Ali...@signature.in.address>
:Newsgroups: alt.brallen, rec.arts.fine
:References: 1
:
:In article <37C563...@direct.net>, M. <bra...@direct.net> writes
:>Sorry I don't read your posts, since I ran out of gravol.
:
:What's gravol ???
:
:>I'm sure they are performance-art-stand-up-comedian entertaining.
:>Here's some entertainment for you:
:>
:>"Alison's Song,
:>
:>I'm the Queen Beeee
:>So don't come on this ngeeeeee
:>Unless you post to meeeeeeeee
:>Talk about meeeeeee
:>Listen to meeeeeeee
:>
:>or
:>I'll sting and sting and sting
:>
:>Listen to meeeeeeee
:>I'm the Queen Beeeee
:>
:>and
:>I sting and sting and sting"
This is the MOST moronic thing I have ever seen posted on Usenet! You think
it is cute Erik? Harmless?
:Tut tut, Marilyn - pinching my ideas again. Is there one single original
:idea in that little pinhead of yours ????
:
:--
:Alison
:
:ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
:http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
:
:Kay wrote:
:
:> Erik A. Mattila wrote:
:> :Why bother? Alison has already cross-posted to raf, so everyone there
:> knows
:> :about brallen.
:> :
:> :Erik
:>
:> Well, Erik, that's where the problem begins, doesn't it? We are an
:> invitational group only. If there are lurkers then they have to wait to
be
:> invited which was why M.s daughter was offended though not invited. As
for
:> Alison cross-posting, I did NOT notice that and I have never read of
anyone
:> on raf mentioning it. Anyone doing a Deja News search can find out about
:> it, but it IS invitational, isn't it?
:> Kay
:>
:> :
:> :Kay wrote:
:> :
:> :> I am inviting James Foster to the group. His art is fantastic and he
is
:> :> very nice and intelligent. But, first I am going to do a Deja News
:> search
:> :> on his posting history. Someone whose only posting history is recent
and
:> :> only to raf is, very likely, not that person but someone imitating
:> someone
:> :> else. Agreed?
:> :> Kay
:> :
:
:As far as I am concerned, there is no form or protocol here. It's a
:free-or-all driven by a vindictive spirit.
When did this begin? No one will seem to answer this! Curious to me since
I know the exact moment it began. Seems like you have selective amnesia.
Your's isn't vindictive Erik? Again, your purpose?
: The above was copied from raf, but
:if you'll read the posts on this ng you will see that Alison's revenge was
duly
:noted a few days ago.
And this cause you a problem with all of your claims to neutrality?
: And, oh yes, all the expose about Dans secret identities
:on raf. That was done with some high motive also, right?
Maybe to show that Dan has multiple identities with whomever he posts with.
Let's see. He is doing M. & her child's webpage. No problem, but it would
indicate bias. He also invited M to invite her tribe which started this
entire ugly mess, so if he is insulted, he will have to deal with it. He
broke the rules we all agreed to. Am I lying?
: I would like to see
:these discourses advance to at least the 4th grade level.
And YOU have done it tonight?
At any rate, if
:there ever was any trust among us it it gone.
Gee, funny thing is that I had long ago quit trusting the bitch that
reported me to my server and then had the nerve to e-mail me at home and
gloat about it. I did try and trust you today and post to you. Big mistake
and I will not make that mistake again. So deal with your own lack of
trust. It is petty because no one has harmed you. You have been offended
but indirectly. What exactly do you want? You never specify.
: It should be clear to you that
:the high-minded idea of brallen was far beyond our capacity as human
beings.
Well, only 3 contributed anything of intellect. And it worked fine for a
while. Can you tell me when you saw it fracture? Can you be honest?
:Sorry to be so cynical, but I'm personally soured by this whole ugly
episode.
Nothing has soured me lately as much as this purposeless post.
You have single handedly continued this war that I at least was trying to
forget. Now YOU have tried to destroy what was left. You see yourself as
blameless tonight. Fine. You aren't though and I see you stirring up
trouble that you claimed didn't concern you. Dan can defend himself quite
well. You are the Superhero of the verbally weak? Well I am NOT verbally
weak so if you want to continue this pointless battle carry on.
:BTW, Tomatoweb is one of California's larger isps, located in Sacramento.
It's
:such a kool company that I even get local dial-up way down here in the
asshole
:of California -- something GTE, Bell, Compuserve, AOL and the other giants
:can't provide. If you have ever been to the Sacramento/Yolo county area
this
:time year, you would know all about tomatos - every road curve has at least
200
:lbs.squished ones that have fallen off the trucks while they speed to Del
Monte
:or Chef Boy-ar-dees.
:
:E
Well, the river has no damned river! I tried with you erik and NOW - screw
it! You had no reason to bring anything up since you claimed neutrality,
yet you are continuing YOUR little fucking flame war with Alison. You and
Alison are the ONLY ones who challenge me mentally, but this post shows you
as mentally challenged instead, so screw it and screw you too.
Kay
:Erik
:
Erik A. Mattila
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 16:57:20 +0100
From: Alison A Raimes <Ali...@signature.in.address>
Newsgroups: alt.brallen, rec.arts.fine
References: 1
In article <37C563...@direct.net>, M. <bra...@direct.net> writes
>Sorry I don't read your posts, since I ran out of gravol.
What's gravol ???
>I'm sure they are performance-art-stand-up-comedian entertaining.
>Here's some entertainment for you:
>
>"Alison's Song,
>
>I'm the Queen Beeee
>So don't come on this ngeeeeee
>Unless you post to meeeeeeeee
>Talk about meeeeeee
>Listen to meeeeeeee
>
>or
>I'll sting and sting and sting
>
>Listen to meeeeeeee
>I'm the Queen Beeeee
>
>and
>I sting and sting and sting"
Tut tut, Marilyn - pinching my ideas again. Is there one single original
--
Alison
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
Kay wrote:
free-or-all driven by a vindictive spirit. The above was copied from raf, but
if you'll read the posts on this ng you will see that Alison's revenge was duly
noted a few days ago. And, oh yes, all the expose about Dans secret identities
on raf. That was done with some high motive also, right? I would like to see
these discourses advance to at least the 4th grade level. At any rate, if
there ever was any trust among us it it gone. It should be clear to you that
the high-minded idea of brallen was far beyond our capacity as human beings.
Sorry to be so cynical, but I'm personally soured by this whole ugly episode.
BTW, Tomatoweb is one of California's larger isps, located in Sacramento. It's
such a kool company that I even get local dial-up way down here in the asshole
of California -- something GTE, Bell, Compuserve, AOL and the other giants
can't provide. If you have ever been to the Sacramento/Yolo county area this
time year, you would know all about tomatos - every road curve has at least 200
lbs.squished ones that have fallen off the trucks while they speed to Del Monte
or Chef Boy-ar-dees.
E
Erik
Lauri.L.
"Kay" <K...@theriver.com> wrote:
> Well, Erik, that's where the problem begins, doesn't it? We are an
> invitational group only.
As Alison correctly pointed out, "this is an open usenet group, after
all". You may invite people, but not exclude them.
> As for
> Alison cross-posting, I did NOT notice that and I have never read of
anyone
> on raf mentioning it.
The first crossposting was by M, then A replied.
There is however a more recent crossposting list, too.
--
//www.saunalahti.fi/~laurleva/
M.
The "administrator" and her "moderator" are unable
to block posters who
1. are rude
2. use obscenities
3. harrass other posters
4. are off topic
5. cross post
Be careful of posting any biographical material here as it can
and will be used against you. Not only is this ng not
moderated, it is reverse-moderated as the abuses above are
seen as some kind of controls by the "administrator" and her
"moderator."
Even in the tough arena of Usenet, I believe this has been a
record one-sided flame war which I tried to end with a piece
of doggerel (cross-posted by A.) It is a record in the length of over
one month and continuing at least as far as Alison is concerned.
I won't be reading it anymore, and I'm sorry that you bystanders
are being subjected to her flaming. Think what it would be like
to be targeted by her.
Good-bye
Marilyn
Kay
M. wrote in message <37CB80...@direct.net>...
:This is not a moderated ng, not even a courteous ng.
:The "administrator" and her "moderator" are unable
:to block posters who
:
:1. are rude
:2. use obscenities
:3. harrass other posters
:4. are off topic
:5. cross post
:
:Be careful of posting any biographical material here as it can
:and will be used against you. Not only is this ng not
:moderated, it is reverse-moderated as the abuses above are
:seen as some kind of controls by the "administrator" and her
:"moderator."
:
:Even in the tough arena of Usenet, I believe this has been a
:record one-sided flame war which I tried to end with a piece
:of doggerel (cross-posted by A.) It is a record in the length of over
:one month and continuing at least as far as Alison is concerned.
It was extremely insulting and poorly written and posted by YOU!
:
:I won't be reading it anymore, and I'm sorry that you bystanders
:are being subjected to her flaming.
I thought you already said goodbye? Goodbye again and good riddance to you.
I'd rather be subjected to ANYONE's flaming than to your back-stabbing.
NEVER e-mail me at home again.
Think what it would be like to be targeted by her.
Is this a manipulative way of making people take pity on your professional
victimization? No one else but Dan and you are targeted by her. She is
simply smarter than you both and more apt verbally.
:
:Good-bye
:Marilyn
We've heard that song many times before. Pity you never mean it.
Alison A Raimes
>This is not a moderated ng, not even a courteous ng.
>The "administrator" and her "moderator" are unable
>to block posters who
Actually this was voted as a retro-moderated newsgroup with Dan, who
compiled the original list of invitees as moderator, and myself as the
administrator. Dan has now been replaced by Kay because even though he
decided on the original invitees, he hasn't bothered to do his job. I
spent a lot of time writing the FAQs and applying for a new newsgroup,
which was approved by the alt hierarchy and which can be processed at
any time. That involved a lot of correspondence with the alt hierarchy
and learning how to create a newsgroup.
>
>1. are rude
>2. use obscenities
>3. harrass other posters
>4. are off topic
>5. cross post
>
We agreed that anyone arriving without invite would be ignored and that
we would first put to the vote future members. I thought it was very
*rude* of Marilyn to arrive in an already established newsgroup and
complain about our topics just because they didn't fit into her category
of acceptable. It was ok for her to jeopardise the group with the Mani
and Nita Leland topics but when Kay and I discussed _The Woman's Room_
she disapproved. How does any of that make sense ? After that she
continued to complain about our *off topics* even though she had had her
own fun as Mani and NL. At that time I warned her by mentioning their
names on the group she was putting us in danger as any search of
dejanews would have brought up Brallen. She complained that *lurkers*
had been complaining to her about the lack of art topics even though
*she* was top of the list of perpetrators. The lurker, she then told us,
was her daughter - who she hadn't even had the courtesy to propose to
us. Following that she told Kay she was going to complain to Kay's
server about her - if that isn't harassment what is ?
>Be careful of posting any biographical material here as it can
>and will be used against you. Not only is this ng not
>moderated, it is reverse-moderated as the abuses above are
>seen as some kind of controls by the "administrator" and her
>"moderator."
>
>Even in the tough arena of Usenet, I believe this has been a
>record one-sided flame war which I tried to end with a piece
>of doggerel (cross-posted by A.) It is a record in the length of over
>one month and continuing at least as far as Alison is concerned.
>
>I won't be reading it anymore, and I'm sorry that you bystanders
>are being subjected to her flaming. Think what it would be like
>to be targeted by her.
>
>Good-bye
>Marilyn
Good bye and good riddance and try and keep to your promise this time.
You got your ass kicked and you deserved it.
Alison A Raimes
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>And your point, Erik? What exactly are you trying to say? You have put
>numerous posts here that have nothing to do with one another. Is there some
>type of purpose here? Yes, there is one that is cross-posted that I hadn't
>noticed. Did anyone respond? No, then maybe you are getting much too
>involved and quite a bit hysterical. Continued below after extensive
>snippage.
Kay: you will recall elsewhere in cyber, when someone voted NOT to
invite Erik to that location because they said he was too intimidating.
That made me think a lot. I think Erik likes to be in control - he
certainly doesn't like to be challenged and if something doesn't fit
into HIS category of what is important then it is dismissed - and
everyone else is stupid. Haven't you noticed this pattern on r.a.f ? So
he couldn't control us - hard luck to him. He is right about the trust
though - that all went out the window long ago. The Brallen we created
is not this one. The one we had was built on mutual trust and respect
and we created an arena where we were starting to really get to know
each other. That is all gone now - the camp is divided - but as you
know, some of us have now become life long friends as a result. Let's
just celebrate that. OK ? Ali.
Alison A Raimes
>
>Erik A. Mattila wrote:
>:Why bother? Alison has already cross-posted to raf, so everyone there
>knows
>:about brallen.
>:
>:Erik
>
>Alison cross-posting, I did NOT notice that and I have never read of anyone
>it, but it IS invitational, isn't it?
>Kay
Lets face it - all the *rules* have been broken. I vote for no rules.
Alison A Raimes
<emat...@tomatoweb.com> writes
>Why bother? Alison has already cross-posted to raf, so everyone there knows
>about brallen.
>
>Erik
>
Alison A Raimes
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>Truthfully, I've never had a problem with BC, but his politics and mine are
>on opposite ends of the spectrum. I don't know what his art is like. I
>can't help it, I have a definite prejudice against Deja News posters. Also,
>he hates the kind of art I do, I'm sure. Well, that can't be a factor
>because today *I* am hating the kind of art I do. He would dislike Jame's
>work and he makes short statements which many former members of the group
>here did as well. To me this indicates a lack of caring - to merely comment
>briefly or quote something but to not risk anything by posting a lengthy
>position on anything. Let me think it over,
><power making me dizzy>
Well he took that name to get away from Marilyn - it is perfectly clear
who he really is. In off line discussions with him he is articulate,
intelligent, open minded about art even though he prefers realism. I
think the rest is just r.a.f rage - look how it happens ;-) But I hear
you ....... lie down when the power overtakes you
>Kay
>Actually, we had a policy that worked until lDan and Marilyn broke it. We
>all voted. When that stopped, problems occurred that almost destroyed this
>group. My ego isn't so big that I need power like that. I don't need to be
>in control but I do expect fairness that has NOT been shown here when
>Marilyn's daughter was invited unannounced and unknown to the majority here.
>I agree only to be fair because it stinks when it is not!
>
Don't forget that the original list was compiled by Dan so we have his
*army* - nothing democratic about that. I certainly wouldn't have
invited Lauri and Marilyn was a no no - you must have missed it when she
told me that because I was engaging in debate with two people on r.a.f
she had just had a flame war with, she had no respect for me. I didn't
even know the damn woman ! I told her she didn't know what respect was.
This is clear .... hadn't you two been Email buddies for some time prior
to the *incident* ?
Alison A Raimes
<emat...@tomatoweb.com> writes
>As far as I am concerned, there is no form or protocol here.
Agreed.
> It's a
>free-or-all driven by a vindictive spirit. The above was copied from raf, but
>if you'll read the posts on this ng you will see that Alison's revenge was duly
>noted a few days ago. And, oh yes, all the expose about Dans secret identities
>on raf. That was done with some high motive also, right?
Right.
> I would like to see
>these discourses advance to at least the 4th grade level.
Working on it.
> At any rate, if
>there ever was any trust among us it it gone. It should be clear to you that
>the high-minded idea of brallen was far beyond our capacity as human beings.
>Sorry to be so cynical, but I'm personally soured by this whole ugly episode.
>
Good. So you should be. If you and the others had entered into a
discussion at the time then at least it would have all been up and above
board instead of all the underhand stuff that went on afterwards. But
no, you are above that aren't you, Erik ?
Don't slam the door on the way out.
Alison A Raimes
<lauri....@nokia.com> writes
>
>As Alison correctly pointed out, "this is an open usenet group, after
>all". You may invite people, but not exclude them.
What does that mean ? The agreement was that you can invite people if
the rest of the group agree. Some people were not invited because they
had had personal disagreements in the past with other members. As for
Marilyn inviting people who we didn't even know - she should have had
the courtesy to first ask.
>
>> As for
>> Alison cross-posting, I did NOT notice that and I have never read of
>anyone
>> on raf mentioning it.
>
>The first crossposting was by M, then A replied.
>There is however a more recent crossposting list, too.
>
I cross posted - no one else did. Are you very confused ? And if anyone
else wants to write me poems I will also cross post those to r.a.f. I
invite you all to cross post my flames there also - anything I say here
I would happily say there also.
Alison A Raimes
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>I've never used resin as a paint material, but having used it in sculpture,
>it would sag for sure. Since you work in oil, maybe the canvas over board
>will make it adhere better. I don't like board myself because it always
>seems to buckle and bend and with canvas, I can abuse it pretty much and
>just restretch it if necessary.
Been worrying about the boards buckling - that is why Samantha objects
to them. She said she sold some work to a client and then was called to
say that the boards had buckled with the heat in the offices.
The resin I use is synthetic - it is not the same as the one for
sculpture - the one Rachel Whiteread uses. This one, in essence, is the
medium that you mix to the oil paint to make it dry fast. Somewhere
along the line I discovered that by reversing the proportions I created
a coloured varnish that was completely pliable. At degree I was doing a
lot of monochromes - five foot square. Recently been recycling the
canvases - re-stretching them over smaller frames like upholstery -
curved edges - and pouring around them. Nice.
-
> I saw a show of Sue Coe (awesome) and then
>of (what's her name???) I think it was Jennifer Bartlett, no not her, the
>one who does the shaped canvases and guess what? The canvases were
>unstretched and often creased and wrinkled. More and more are doing
>unstretched canvases and I can see it in the works of Sue Coe (her's were
>incredibly wrinkled, like she shoved them in her suitcase and flew in and
>plopped them on the wall, wrinkles, warts and all. Mine wouldn't look good,
>unstretched. Maybe more political art is suitable for unstreatched canvas?
>I donno!
>
It always amazes me how sloppy some artists work is. I remember
inspecting a Barnett Newman painting, which I expected to be perfect,
only to find many faults. I decided never to scrutinise work again - it
takes away the magic.
>Well, I can see how it makes no difference the way you work, but I work like
>a normal (whatever that is) painter and I can feel a tiny bit of a different
>stroke when I apply paint, maybe smoother, but can see no finished product
>difference. The oil on linen fetches more than oil on canvas though. Maybe
>linen lasts longer? Dunno!
To hell with it ! so many artists are so tied up in the technical
aspects they forgot what art is for.
>I wonder what the effect looks like?
It looks like there are two paintings on top of each other. Like a stage
set.
>I remember the last time I used
>pastels, I was in high school and I dipped them in water before drawing
>(painting) with them and the teacher kept yelling at me that it is not done
>and I am ruining his pastels but I kept doing it, and don't know why and I
>still have that work. It looks so rich and creamy, like oil - almost. I
>wonder why I did that?
Like dipping ???????? Do you dunk your cookies too ?
>
>You still work in charcoal. I haven't drawn in eons! I want to try the one
>where you do a charcoal drawing, gesso over it, charcoal again, gesso again,
>repeat, repeat, repeat. I saw a drawing like this on extremely large paper
>and it was simply magnificent!!!
>
Draw every day. have to.
>Sold more paintings? B_I_T_C_H !
>Uh, congratulations - in all sincerity :-(
>Obscurely,
>Kay
Actually I said I had a new agent ! but yes, as you know, its been a
good selling summer. Still can't pay the bills though so something is
wrong ;-) Back to cleaning the toilets then.
>
>:Keep moderating ..... when you feel like it.
>
>
>Don't feel like it now and have forgotton what to do.
>
It will come back to you. You just have to do nothing - like your
predecessor.
Kay
Alison A Raimes wrote:
(snip)
:*army* - nothing democratic about that. I certainly wouldn't have
:invited Lauri and Marilyn was a no no - you must have missed it when she
:told me that because I was engaging in debate with two people on r.a.f
:she had just had a flame war with, she had no respect for me.
Yes, I missed it. I unsubscribed from raf for quite a while because I had a
lot of work to do and a deadline and I missed almost all of the Hutto thing.
I know that she e-mailed John a nasty note because of his communication with
you. I don't care if she respects me or not. I would not even mention her
name except for the fact that I had her blocked as Marilyn and now she posts
as "M" and I can't block "M" because then I can't read posts by Mani (I find
them amusing), Mark, JaMes, etc. If I didn't read her drivel, I would be
happy but she is imitating "N" a poster before you came along. Very
intelligent guy. We locked horns, but he sure knew his art and artists.
: I didn't
:even know the damn woman ! I told her she didn't know what respect was.
:This is clear .... hadn't you two been Email buddies for some time prior
:to the *incident* ?
Not at all. I had e-mailed her one time about a post. Forgot what it was.
And then John said she had emergency surgery when I was unsubscribed to raf
and I e-mailed her then and wished her a speedy recovery and she e-mailed me
back briefly thanking me. No, not buddies, but civil.
Have you updated your site yet?
Kay
:else wants to write me poems I will also cross post those to r.a.f. I
:invite you all to cross post my flames there also - anything I say here
:I would happily say there also.
:--
:Alison
The poem surpassed any stupidity I've seen on this group OR raf. Alison
could have done things much, much worse and you don't seem to have a clue.
It was not a smart thing to do, yet who here objected? Silent approval, huh?
Kay
:ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
:http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
Kay
any "Aha!" chords with me. Are the newly peaceful posts bothering you?
Didn't you already say you were leaving this group forever 2 times now?
You point here is? Posting this after a few of us are trying to post
peacefully would serve what purpose? (Let me think for a
minute.......................) Oh, I get it now! I am supposed to tell
Erik what a jerk he is and then huff off and maybe he can tell me a few of
my shortcomings as he sees fit and then we can all fight again and then YOU
WILL BE HAPPY AGAIN! This post may mean something to Erik, maybe even to
Alison. I hadn't seen it and it mean nothing to ME. What meant something to
me is that you reported abuse BY ME - TO YOU to MY server after the psycho
Mattison did, which I had told you about. Now, I don't even have a problem
with THAT if you get your jollies from that go ahead and report me again, I
do not care. DO NOT E-MAIL ME AT HOME AND TELL ME THAT YOU HAVE DONE SO!
And another thing, please quit imitating "N", he was much smarter than you
and I am having an impossible time blocking you. Get lost. Take a hike. Go
away. Hit the road. You know the routine, I'm sure.
Kay
Alison A Raimes
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>I've never seen this post before. Just skimmed it. Didn't really strike
>any "Aha!" chords with me.
Sorry, can you explain why she has posted it, Kay ? I read it and
responded to it already. Erik hates me as a result - why isn't she happy
with that ??
>and I am having an impossible time blocking you. Get lost. Take a hike. Go
>away. Hit the road. You know the routine, I'm sure.
>Kay
>
Can't you block her posting address ? I suppose the problem is that she
changes it so often ? As for the rest, I would suspect she has heard it
many, many times.
--
Alison
John Haber
an absent party before indulging our interest in fine arts. Really.
Let's get going. Talk about how lovely the work we're seeing is.
Did I post publically that, at Alison's invitation, I contributed a
page about her new work to her site?
john
John Haber
I ought to confirm Alison's factual claim there: I was writing
Marilyn about her interest in contemporary fiction when I got the
message that I was on the wrong side of her imagined fences.
john
Alison A Raimes
<jha...@haberarts.com> writes
Glad you are back, John. I am sorry that you, as an innocent party,
became a target for Marilyn. I know that you are very sensitive to such
things - even though you say you don't care about it.
Looking forward to reading you here.
--
Ali
Alison A Raimes
<jha...@haberarts.com> writes
>Of course, screwy as Marilyn was, there's only so long we can berate
>an absent party before indulging our interest in fine arts. Really.
>Let's get going. Talk about how lovely the work we're seeing is.
>
I don't know whether I can offer you *lovely* art, John - but I have
just been checking the exhibition itineraries for the time you will be
here in London. The BP National Portrait Exhibition will still be on ..
and of course you will want to see the Holbein restoration won't you ?
The Courtauld has had a major revamp and apparently is looking much more
like a real museum :-) Somebody called Chuck Close has a show on at the
Hayward (never heard of him); a collection of Morandi at Canonbury
Square; Raphael at Buckingham Palace - true this; Pastel studies of
Hockney (I will pass on that one) Gerhard Richter at Antony D'Offay (I
will join you for that one); and of course the Summer Exhibition at the
Royal Academy. That should keep you busy - and there are all the
contemporary alternative spaces that you must discover.
>Did I post publically that, at Alison's invitation, I contributed a
>page about her new work to her site?
>
And worked very hard - too hard in fact. It looks good ! I have had
stacks of Emails - I can't believe how many British lurkers there are on
r.a.f .. and they don't seem to be put off by my antics ;-) perhaps they
relate to me better !
Cheers
Ali
Alison A Raimes
<jha...@haberarts.com> writes
>Of course, screwy as Marilyn was, there's only so long we can berate
>an absent party before indulging our interest in fine arts. Really.
>Let's get going. Talk about how lovely the work we're seeing is.
>
that are on in London for your trip in a couple of weeks.
>Did I post publically that, at Alison's invitation, I contributed a
>page about her new work to her site?
>
>john
John Haber
infamous Brit-pack show from last year is making it to NYC this fall,
at the Brooklyn Musuem. Old hat for you!
Did they ever build the Tate on the south bank with a bridge there, or
is that just artchitecture magazine stuff? It sounds nice to be
able to throw art into the Thames if you don't like it! :)
John
Alison A Raimes
<jha...@haberarts.com> writes
>Your posts on London are so exciting. BTW, did you know that the
>infamous Brit-pack show from last year is making it to NYC this fall,
>at the Brooklyn Musuem. Old hat for you!
It seems ridiculous to come to New York and go to see *Sensation*
especially as I saw it four times here ;-) but I would be very curious
to see how it is shown and to listen to people's reactions.
>
>Did they ever build the Tate on the south bank with a bridge there, or
>is that just artchitecture magazine stuff? It sounds nice to be
>able to throw art into the Thames if you don't like it! :)
God yes. That project is huge and will be finished in May. They are
building a footbridge across the river which is all folded up at the
moment .... I drove past it yesterday, seeing it from the North. It will
be fascinating to watch them erect the thing. Of course, the old Tate is
only just across the River too .. I am told that they will both exist
with the Tate keeping the old collection and the new Bankside housing
the Modern Art.
They announced that the Millennium Dome is on schedule and will be open
on New Years Eve - you will see that monstrosity many times while you
are here.