OT: A mosaic of soldiers who have died in Iraq
Just another Californian
Tian
--
This afternoon there was an emergency peace march and
rally in San Francisco. At it I got a great meal of vegetarian
food for $5 and heard George Johnson tell the crown that
Jimi Hendrix was an Army Veteran from the 101st Airborne.
Nuclear Waste
"Just another Californian"
> This afternoon there was an emergency peace march and
> rally in San Francisco. At it I got a great meal of vegetarian
> food for $5 and heard George Johnson tell the crown that
> Jimi Hendrix was an Army Veteran from the 101st Airborne.
What is an "Emergency" peace rally?
NW
Dee
Do you know (and you may very well not, since this is not your site) how
the pics of teh indivisual soldiers were acquired? I hope the artist had
their families' permission to use them in this manner.
--Dee
Just another Californian
That's one where some hyperactive person was suffering under the
drumbeat of "five killed in action in Faluja today" stories on the news
and decided to DO SOMETHING. The first I heard about this one
was Thursday. Most peace rallys in San Francisco are preceeded by
at least a month of grass roots publicity. They got about 3,000 people
to show up for this one. Normal levels of publicity bring at least five
times that many people onto the streets.
Tian
--
This morning I'm using my white plastic coffee mug with
the green FUTURE, a smaller green ELECTRONICS and a large
green F on it for the first time. The black lid is still in closet.
At the moment I'm procrastinating on doing my taxes.
Just another Californian
>Tian--
>
> Do you know (and you may very well not, since this is
>not your site) how the pics of teh indivisual soldiers were
>acquired?
I have no idea. I just thought the picture should be seen
by more people. I respond to art that way....
>I hope the artist had their families' permission to
>use them in this manner.
Honestly, I'm doubtful. My suspicion is they were lifted
from military press releases or something like that.
Dee
"Just another Californian" <dontbe...@aol.com84340468> wrote in message
news:20040412131114...@mb-m07.aol.com...
> Dee wrote:
>
> >Tian--
> >
> > Do you know (and you may very well not, since this is
> >not your site) how the pics of teh indivisual soldiers were
> >acquired?
>
> I have no idea. I just thought the picture should be seen
> by more people. I respond to art that way....
>
> >I hope the artist had their families' permission to
> >use them in this manner.
>
> Honestly, I'm doubtful. My suspicion is they were lifted
> from military press releases or something like that.
>
I suspect you are right. But if the images were used without
permission, then those soldiers' deaths are being used to make a political
statement that is the very opposite of what at least some of them would
wish, most likely. And that makes it, IMO, not so much art as a cheap shot.
--Dee
Dehede011
the very opposite of what at least some of them would wish, most likely. And
that makes it, IMO, not so much art as a cheap shot.<
No, Dee, that is more like a low blow in boxing.
Dehede
Howard Berkowitz
dehe...@aol.com (Dehede011) wrote:
Tian is too young to remember the sixties-style protest that I will vary
carefully call "radical", but one of the presentation techniques, be it
called "guerilla theater", "teach ins", etc., tended often to seem
shocking observers as a major, if not principal, goal. Using picturess
of dead people who, by what they are doing at the time of getting
killed, may very well be opponents of the protesters, is irrelevant,
often expressed in some revolutionary jargon.
An alleged goal is to "radicalize" people who see what the protesters
deem to be unjust, but the general history of psychological warfare
indicates this is not an effective technique. I think some of the same
motivations apply to the reaction to "guerilla theater" as does the
historic failure of civilian population bombing to break morale and
create resistance -- misery, sure, but the WWII populations of the UK,
Germany, and Japan kept about the same morale.
One of Tian's references was to "art", and there is a long history of
artists that feel entitled to do anything such that they can "make a
statement."
Just another Californian
>Tian is too young to remember the sixties-style protest that I will vary
>carefully call "radical", but one of the presentation techniques, be it
>called "guerilla theater", "teach ins", etc., tended often to seem
>shocking observers as a major, if not principal, goal. Using picturess
>of dead people who, by what they are doing at the time of getting
>killed, may very well be opponents of the protesters, is irrelevant,
>often expressed in some revolutionary jargon.
Thank you.
>An alleged goal is to "radicalize" people who see what the protesters
>deem to be unjust, but the general history of psychological warfare
>indicates this is not an effective technique. I think some of the same
>motivations apply to the reaction to "guerilla theater" as does the
>historic failure of civilian population bombing to break morale and
>create resistance -- misery, sure, but the WWII populations of the UK,
>Germany, and Japan kept about the same morale.
Reminds me of that old saying "art is in the eye of the
beholder." Did you ever notice how much the word 'eye'
looks like a face?
>One of Tian's references was to "art", and there is a long
>history of artists that feel entitled to do anything such that
>they can "make a statement."
I am familiar with some of that. I remember back in the
mid 1990s I saw a show on PBS in which they documented
the fact that an NEA grant had been used to literally make
somebody bleed on stage in Minnesota, or something like
that. Since then, when I've wanted to "bleed for the general
public" I give money to PBS or NPR.
Howard Berkowitz
> Howard Berkowitz wrote:
>
> >Tian is too young to remember the sixties-style protest that I will vary
> >carefully call "radical", but one of the presentation techniques, be it
> >called "guerilla theater", "teach ins", etc., tended often to seem
> >shocking observers as a major, if not principal, goal. Using picturess
> >of dead people who, by what they are doing at the time of getting
> >killed, may very well be opponents of the protesters, is irrelevant,
> >often expressed in some revolutionary jargon.
>
> Thank you.
>
> >An alleged goal is to "radicalize" people who see what the protesters
> >deem to be unjust, but the general history of psychological warfare
> >indicates this is not an effective technique. I think some of the same
> >motivations apply to the reaction to "guerilla theater" as does the
> >historic failure of civilian population bombing to break morale and
> >create resistance -- misery, sure, but the WWII populations of the UK,
> >Germany, and Japan kept about the same morale.
>
> Reminds me of that old saying "art is in the eye of the
> beholder." Did you ever notice how much the word 'eye'
> looks like a face?
Actually, no. I try to focus on realities. My experience in assisting in
medicine indicates that when too many faces, symbols, or messages are
seen in ordinary objects, it can be an early warning of visual
hallucinations and evaluation is required to see if medication is
appropriate.
>
> >One of Tian's references was to "art", and there is a long
> >history of artists that feel entitled to do anything such that
> >they can "make a statement."
>
> I am familiar with some of that. I remember back in the
> mid 1990s I saw a show on PBS in which they documented
> the fact that an NEA grant had been used to literally make
> somebody bleed on stage in Minnesota, or something like
> that. Since then, when I've wanted to "bleed for the general
> public" I give money to PBS or NPR.
When I have money, I am an active supporter of artists and create art
myself. At the same time, I would happily see the NEA disappear
completely from the Federal budget.
LV Poker Player
>When I have money, I am an active supporter of artists and create art
>myself. At the same time, I would happily see the NEA disappear
>completely from the Federal budget.
Me too. I read an article about it a while back, a few months or so. It seems
the Republicans, you know, fiscal conservatives, are now voting for increases
in the NEA budget, now that they have more control over what sort of art is
produced.
Blech. Ok, its budget is not all that high, but add up those a billion here, a
billion there, and pretty soon you are talking about real money.
--
Ferengi rule of acquisition #192: Never cheat a Klingon...unless you're sure
you can get away with it.
Howard Berkowitz
> >From: Howard Berkowitz
>
> >When I have money, I am an active supporter of artists and create art
> >myself. At the same time, I would happily see the NEA disappear
> >completely from the Federal budget.
>
> Me too. I read an article about it a while back, a few months or so. It
> seems
> the Republicans, you know, fiscal conservatives, are now voting for
> increases
> in the NEA budget, now that they have more control over what sort of art
> is
> produced.
Sir, you clearly must misunderstand. Why, could a fiscal conservative,
enamored of the truly free market, EVER let anything but the market set
standards of what art can be produced and distributed?
It's fascinating to watch a supposedly economic conservative try to
explain away that the market has made pornography among the first
profitable Internet products, and then try to ban it on moral or social
conservative grounds.
DUCKofDEATH
Berkowitz <h...@gettcomm.com> wrote:
I think the same "radicalism" that lets people justify any outrage--as
long as it furthers their political extremism--is what enabled people
to live with themselves after spitting on our returning Vietnam vets
and calling them "baby killers".
--DoD
DUCKofDEATH
Berkowitz <h...@gettcomm.com> wrote:
I agree, as Heinlein's Jubal Harshaw put it, "A government-supported
artist is an incompetent whore!"
--DoD
Nuclear Waste
"DUCKofDEATH"
> > When I have money, I am an active supporter of artists and create art
> > myself. At the same time, I would happily see the NEA disappear
> > completely from the Federal budget.
>
> I agree, as Heinlein's Jubal Harshaw put it, "A government-supported
> artist is an incompetent whore!"
Which begs the question: "Do you think I should express my approval of my
wife's creations by noting that she is a competent whore?"
NW
Howard Berkowitz
<myha...@mchsi.com> wrote:
Well, RAH certainly approved of competent artists of sensuality and
sexuality, from Mars to Tertius.
John M. Atkinson
another Californian) wrote:
>Dee wrote:
>
>>Tian--
>>
>> Do you know (and you may very well not, since this is
>>not your site) how the pics of teh indivisual soldiers were
>>acquired?
>
>I have no idea. I just thought the picture should be seen
>by more people. I respond to art that way....
>
>>I hope the artist had their families' permission to
>>use them in this manner.
>
>Honestly, I'm doubtful. My suspicion is they were lifted
>from military press releases or something like that.
So, how would you feel if someone was using your image in an
advertisement for the Republican Party?
I mean, you damn "peace" bastards are more or less declared allies of
the Iraqi Fedayeen and enemies of the United States of America. Would
you want your image taken and dishonored by your enemies?
--
John M. Atkinson
"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in
history than has any other factor, and the contrary
opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds
that forget this basic truth have always paid for it
with their lives and freedoms."
--Robert A. Heinlein
Stephen Jordan
> http://photomatt.net/archives/2004/04/07/mosaic/
>
FWIW, this is what I posted in the comment section of that
scumbag's site:
"(1) What evidence is there that the photos in the montage
are actually photos of members of the military who were
killed in Iraq?
(2) What are the sources of the photos?
(3) If the photos are genuine, did the publisher obtain
permission to publish the photos? If not, why not? If so,
from whom?
(4) It is noted that there are far more photos than there
are casualties. This is deceptive. Why the deception?
Lastly, a comment: If the photos that are not duplicated to
fill out the picture actually are those of casualties, this
is an example of the extremes to which some will go,
regardless of the pain that they might inflict, to assert a
political point. Those who are responsible for its
publication should be, but I think are not, ashamed. There
are some in our society who believe that, so long as they
are righteous, they can without censure do anything at all –
however distressing to their victims."
Steve J
__
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary
security, deserve
neither liberty or security."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Nuclear Waste
"Howard Berkowitz" <h...@gettcomm.com> wrote in message
news:hcb-CE9242.0...@text.giganews.com...
OK, I am going to go with you on this one. If I am out of touch for a while
I can be reached at the VA Medical Center in Minneapolis MN>
NW
Bill Reich
johnma...@y.com (John M. Atkinson) wrote:
>On 12 Apr 2004 17:11:14 GMT, dontbe...@aol.com84340468 (Just
>another Californian) wrote:
>
>>Dee wrote:
>>
>>>Tian--
>>>
>>> Do you know (and you may very well not, since this is
>>>not your site) how the pics of teh indivisual soldiers were
>>>acquired?
>>
>>I have no idea. I just thought the picture should be seen
>>by more people. I respond to art that way....
>>
>>>I hope the artist had their families' permission to
>>>use them in this manner.
>>
>>Honestly, I'm doubtful. My suspicion is they were lifted
>>from military press releases or something like that.
>
>So, how would you feel if someone was using your image in an
>advertisement for the Republican Party?
>
>I mean, you damn "peace" bastards are more or less declared allies of
>the Iraqi Fedayeen and enemies of the United States of America. Would
>you want your image taken and dishonored by your enemies?
DAMN it John, don't pussyfoot. Say what you MEAN. It was awfully quiet around
here until just now.
--
Will in New Haven
This hand will raise now,
There is no I who does it;
The cards themselves act