challenging "the Temple"

Share your views on the policies, philosophies, and spirit of Burning Man.

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby unjonharley » Sun May 11, 2014 5:14 pm

It will all be forgotten by Monday as I pull into Cedarville and sit down to the Fire Department's pancake feed and fundraiser..
I'm the contraptioneer your mother warned you about.
User avatar
unjonharley
 
Posts: 10011
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 11:05 am
Location: Salem Or.

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Jovankat » Mon May 12, 2014 6:14 am

Here is a pretty detailed response from the artist http://www.temple2014.net/
'STRAYA DAY: Australian Themed BBQ Party: Tues 2pm to 6pm at The Flamingo Trap
Also the official on playa meet up for Aussies and those that love them.
User avatar
Jovankat
 
Posts: 1384
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 4:11 am
Location: Australia
Burning Since: 2013
Camp Name: The Flamingo Trap

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby aserendipity » Mon May 12, 2014 7:22 am

thank you

serious feelings of the artist always need honor
aserendipity
 
Posts: 1778
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:34 pm

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby shroom » Mon May 12, 2014 7:27 am

Interesting. Sounds like it came down to insurance and artistic license. I wonder why bm wants the rights to the temple? The don't make souvenirs of it.....seems odd.
"Success is not the result of spontaneous combustion. You must first set yourself on fire."~~Fred Shero
User avatar
shroom
 
Posts: 1060
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:11 pm
Location: Georgia
Burning Since: 2010

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Elliot » Mon May 12, 2014 7:37 am

I would have thought all that had been settled six months ago. But I bet it will be from now on.
Elliot's Naked Bicycle Service & Piano Bar - on 4:30 Plaza

--------Bike come unglued? Take it to the nude dude!--------


http://www.elliotsbikes.org

Fundraiser now live: http://igg.me/at/elliotsbicycleservice/x/11087604


Image
User avatar
Elliot
 
Posts: 6450
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:41 pm
Location: Clearlake, Northern California
Burning Since: 2006
Camp Name: Elliot’s Bicycle Service

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby ygmir » Mon May 12, 2014 8:15 am

I'd bet BM wants the rights, so others don't get them. Not to use, but to keep from being used.
YGMIR

Unabashed Nordic
Pagan
User avatar
ygmir
 
Posts: 27532
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 8:36 pm
Location: nevada county
Burning Since: 2017
Camp Name: qqqq

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Simon of the Playa » Mon May 12, 2014 8:32 am

what, Yarmulkes aren't properly insured headgear for a temple?


oy gevalt..
fuck you, it's magic



Frida Be You & Me

A gift for the Playa

THIS YEARS POSTERS

2015 posters
User avatar
Simon of the Playa
 
Posts: 15774
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 6:25 pm
Location: Rochester, Nevada.
Burning Since: 1996
Camp Name: La Guilde des Hashischins

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby VultureChow » Mon May 12, 2014 10:37 am

Eric wrote:Just seems... lazy.



I think you mean safe. Best has a history of producing.

I'm just surprised they didn't go with Embrace. Maybe not "BIG" enough.
FREE THE STRIPPERS!
User avatar
VultureChow
 
Posts: 2115
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:08 pm
Burning Since: 2012
Camp Name: Camp Hooker @ Barbie Death Village

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby aserendipity » Mon May 12, 2014 10:42 am

not shaving is lazy

loving beautiful is smart
aserendipity
 
Posts: 1778
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:34 pm

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby shroom » Mon May 12, 2014 12:46 pm

ygmir wrote:I'd bet BM wants the rights, so others don't get them. Not to use, but to keep from being used.


that makes more sense
"Success is not the result of spontaneous combustion. You must first set yourself on fire."~~Fred Shero
User avatar
shroom
 
Posts: 1060
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:11 pm
Location: Georgia
Burning Since: 2010

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby trilobyte » Mon May 12, 2014 1:12 pm

The post is somewhat nebulous. If his discussion regarding rights and contract terms is directed primarily at Burning Man, I don't understand how the issues Ross describes in his post could be a shock or surprise. He'd been working on temples as part of David's crew since 2002. Surely in the months/years leading up to his submitting the proposal he would have had some conversation about the logistics and details.

It doesn't quite read that way though. He speaks (passionately and eloquently, I might add) to a broader audience of benefactors and mentions something about negotiations with a benefactor and things not happening in the short amount of time allotted, and that his benefactor (ie financial backer) not agreeing to the terms of the contract with Burning Man.

My heart goes out to Ross and the members of his crew. While I've never been in the position they're in, I have been a part of big projects and events that were canceled before being realized...it's heart-wrenching.
User avatar
trilobyte
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13446
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: San Francisco
Burning Since: 2004
Camp Name: Eridu Society

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Roundabout » Mon May 12, 2014 4:57 pm

Although from reading the artist's somewhat rambling explanation I am cannot discern which point was the most critical in the benefactor's decision to instruct the artist to not sign the BM contract, it does seem to be a fair point that BM should be the financially responsible party for liability insurance on the Temple. The piece is central to the entire design and layout of the city and for many (not all) it is critically integral to the experience of the event. It certainly plays a central role in bm's marketing of the event. I think it is fair to expect BM.org (not the artist) to pay the insurance bill, as I am sure BM does for The Man and for Center Camp.
Every aspect of life is education. Even if you don't immediately grasp the lesson. robbidobbs
User avatar
Roundabout
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:41 pm
Location: Memphis, TN
Burning Since: 2013
Camp Name: Playa Choir

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Jackass » Mon May 12, 2014 6:35 pm

Roundabout wrote:Although from reading the artist's somewhat rambling explanation I am cannot discern which point was the most critical in the benefactor's decision to instruct the artist to not sign the BM contract, it does seem to be a fair point that BM should be the financially responsible party for liability insurance on the Temple. The piece is central to the entire design and layout of the city and for many (not all) it is critically integral to the experience of the event. It certainly plays a central role in bm's marketing of the event. I think it is fair to expect BM.org (not the artist) to pay the insurance bill, as I am sure BM does for The Man and for Center Camp.



Ditto, well put. +1
Sooner or later, it will get real strange...

11th Principle: Depussyfication - Keeping Burning Man potentially lethal. Token
User avatar
Jackass
 
Posts: 1115
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 9:25 pm
Location: way out in left field

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby A-RockLeFrench » Mon May 12, 2014 8:01 pm

I don't know much about about event insurance or the inner workings of BM, but I can say that if I ran a corporation that threw a massive party I would assume fiscal responsibility to insure the structures designed and built by the corporation (center camp and the Man), however any structures designed and built by someone else (no matter how integral of a piece it may be) I would want them to be the ones to insure it. If you build it, you insure it.

I would imagine there is a vigorous process (with engineers and inspections) to ensure that whoever is building the temple is going to build one that will withstand a week on playa with thousands of burners climbing all over it. But if something catastrophic were to happen and people were hurt I would want the people who built the damn thing to assume responsibility by paying for insurance. That kind of expectation of accountability shouldn't come as shock to anyone prepared to build a massive art piece for BM, or anyone prepared to fund it.

aserendipity wrote:too sophisticated now..for a D.B. perfectly wonderful temple ? ; and you are in Oregon !


Don't worry, I'm not too sophisticated for anything, except maybe shaving. Yeah, I'm way to too sophisticated for shaving, besides beards are hip in Oregon these days... :mrgreen:
User avatar
A-RockLeFrench
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Siskiyou Mtns
Burning Since: 2010
Camp Name: PLUNDERGROUND

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Roundabout » Mon May 12, 2014 8:47 pm

I agree that the artist must always remain responsible for the safety of the structure. ... And that is usually manifest with an indemnification agreement. On the other hand, who should foot the insurance bill is just a matter of economics - the artist who receives no income from the art, or ... the corporation that gets multi-millions of dollars from the people who were drawn to the Playa by the art?
Every aspect of life is education. Even if you don't immediately grasp the lesson. robbidobbs
User avatar
Roundabout
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:41 pm
Location: Memphis, TN
Burning Since: 2013
Camp Name: Playa Choir

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Jackass » Mon May 12, 2014 10:57 pm

I guess I've always viewed the temple kinda as BMorg's baby, but I guess not...
Sooner or later, it will get real strange...

11th Principle: Depussyfication - Keeping Burning Man potentially lethal. Token
User avatar
Jackass
 
Posts: 1115
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 9:25 pm
Location: way out in left field

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby EspressoDude » Tue May 13, 2014 7:22 am

If the artist is liable; and from the above link

"1) I cannot find adequate insurance, can you put this piece and my name on your insurance policy?"

would you build an uninsured project? especially if you have anything to lose if something happens and you have a claim filed against you?
Is 4 shots enuff? no foo-foo drinks; just naked Espresso
Tactical Espresso Service http://home.comcast.net/~espressocamp/
Field Artillery Tractor
FOGBANK, GOD OF HELLFIRE
BLACK ROCK f/x Trojan Horse,Anubis,2014Temple
burn shit and blow shit up
User avatar
EspressoDude
 
Posts: 4839
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:30 pm
Location: the first Vancouver

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Tiahaar » Tue May 13, 2014 3:06 pm

we could rebuild and repurpose Uchronia as The Templetm, one of my all time favorite pieces on the playa 8)
Image
Burning Man 2003-14; Desert Carillon, HypnoHorse, Ulaume's Chimes, Iron Native, Black Rock Solar, Portal Collective, Center Camp Café Stage and Sound Tech
Keru's Phenomenal Phantasmagoria of Terrors and Delights
User avatar
Tiahaar
 
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: Mojave Desert, CA (also Forever via Pandora)
Burning Since: 2003
Camp Name: Starship Palomino

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Ugly Dougly » Tue May 13, 2014 4:19 pm

Maybe something that honors Giger.
User avatar
Ugly Dougly
 
Posts: 16510
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 9:31 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Burning Since: 1996

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby A-RockLeFrench » Tue May 13, 2014 4:26 pm

A Giger temple is something I would be excited about!!
User avatar
A-RockLeFrench
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Siskiyou Mtns
Burning Since: 2010
Camp Name: PLUNDERGROUND

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby some seeing eye » Tue May 13, 2014 5:04 pm

I've heard that some things are changing with the new non-profit org. Did the insurance approach for art/ the temple change? Perhaps they are kicking the temple back to BRAF, which would carry the insurance. Not exactly clear, but perhaps one of the donors read the contract, and rationally did not want to donate unlimited liability to the event. Rational.
increasing the signal to noise ratio with compassion
User avatar
some seeing eye
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 12:06 pm
Location: The Oregon
Burning Since: 1999
Camp Name: Woo

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Eric » Tue May 13, 2014 6:12 pm

some seeing eye wrote:I've heard that some things are changing with the new non-profit org. Did the insurance approach for art/ the temple change?


As far as I know the artists have always had to get their own insurance for pieces, including the Temple (I may be wrong). The Temple is an independently created piece with prime real-estate, the only major pieces created by the Bmorg are the Man/ Man Base and Center Camp (not including the city layout & streets, the trash fence, Gate road, all the Gate & Greeters infrastructure, etc, which are extremely large creations)

Perhaps they are kicking the temple back to BRAF, which would carry the insurance.


BRAF does not fund on-playa art, and I don't think they can the way they've been set up. They are designed to bring playa art, and playa-inspired art, to communities outside of Burning Man (it was incredibly cool to stumble onto a BRAF-supported piece in downtown Boise, ID last fall)
Survival Guide * First Timers Guide * Ticket Info

It's a camping trip in the desert, not the redemption of the fallen world - Cryptofishist

Eric ShutterSlut
Ass't Editor, BRC Weekly
User avatar
Eric
Moderator
 
Posts: 8488
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 9:45 pm
Burning Since: 2003
Camp Name: BRC Weekly

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby some seeing eye » Tue May 13, 2014 6:34 pm

Thanks Eric, I'm speculating. I mean who can argue with MOSES!

But does point out artists need to set up a legal corp, get the contract, and due diligence it as early as possible if not earlier...
increasing the signal to noise ratio with compassion
User avatar
some seeing eye
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 12:06 pm
Location: The Oregon
Burning Since: 1999
Camp Name: Woo

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby trilobyte » Tue May 13, 2014 6:46 pm

@Tiahaar - Uchronia cost more and took longer to build than any Burning Man temple (and was self-funded).

@someseeingeye - my understanding is that the establishment of the Burning Man Project in 2011 and the subsequent transitional changes have not had any impact whatsoever on honorarium art grant or insurance requirements. Burning Man is still an event being organized and produced by the for-profit LLC. As Eric said, BRAF has not actually funded any of the playa art - they are focused on supporting out in the world outside BRC. I'm not sure that either Burning Man, BRAF, BMP, or any other related entity has any provisions to provide artists with free/granted insurance coverage. I agree - the bigger the art gets, the more planning and due diligence needs to be done.

@Ugly Dougly & A-Rock LeFrench - you may want to look into the Alien Siege Machine. Not the Burning Man temple, but in so many ways it's a far more fitting tribute.

Taking a moment to thing back to Ygmir's original post, I can't help but feel more strongly than ever that people assign too much fucking weight and importance to the temple. I'd love to see it de-emphasized, and see more of the funding and public support that goes with it spread around to some of the hundreds of other amazing pieces of art. The idea that Burning Man (or anyone) somehow owes the population a sacred structure to use as some kind of wailing wall feels a bit weird (especially when you see people who've never been to the event with such hard-formed expectations). We can honor and celebrate and mourn the loss of friends and loved ones in more than just the designated manner... can't we?

Matt Schultz and the Embrace group being upset about the choice of the temple (initially or with this recent news) seems to underscore the problem. They've gotten a huge fucking grant and are getting massive levels of support from both Burning Man and the community at large... but that's somehow not enough? Great art is great art. Embrace will be spectacular and magnificent and meaningful and loved for all its own reasons, regardless of where it's placed on the playa.
User avatar
trilobyte
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13446
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: San Francisco
Burning Since: 2004
Camp Name: Eridu Society

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby aserendipity » Tue May 13, 2014 8:41 pm

Completely in agreement with everything Trilo says..a first maybe

Also there is an aspect of the temple which is a downer for me..I don't go to it after first check in
and
the guardians tend to be somewhat officious also

except the year the music played
aserendipity
 
Posts: 1778
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:34 pm

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby Ratty » Tue May 13, 2014 10:59 pm

I asked a Temple guardian, "Exactly what do you do out there?" Her explanation was we guard the temple and man from being burnt down prematurely. Sounds like a worthwhile job. I have a better appreciation for their diligence now that I know they aren't just hangin out.
Pictures or it didn't happen Greycoyote
I a recovering swagaholic I have to resist my grabby nature VultureChow
Those aren't buttermilk biscuits I'm lying on Savannah
We're out there to play like adults with no adult supervision CaptG
User avatar
Ratty
 
Posts: 2878
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 7:43 pm
Burning Since: I'm not sure
Camp Name: Sporks are For Pussys

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby graidawg » Wed May 14, 2014 1:20 am

The idea that Burning Man (or anyone) somehow owes the population a sacred structure to use as some kind of wailing wall feels a bit weird (especially when you see people who've never been to the event with such hard-formed expectations). We can honor and celebrate and mourn the loss of friends and loved ones in more than just the designated manner... can't we?

surely at an event called "Burning Man" the ONLY important structure for the org to make is the man itself the temple seems to be nothing more than a distraction yet it gets to be the final major burn every year unless of course this all part of the plan so people can get away before the hippies clog up the road.
FREE THE SHERPAS
Burners with torches is right and natural and just.-fishy.
CATCH AND RELEASE.
User avatar
graidawg
 
Posts: 3098
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:50 am
Burning Since: 2011
Camp Name: Dread Pirate barbie

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby DhammaSeeker » Wed May 14, 2014 5:43 am

aserendipity wrote:the guardians tend to be somewhat officious also

I cringe when I read comments like that. It means that we (Temple Guardians) have a way to go in our training and acculturation for all our volunteers. Our presence is supposed to be unnoticed except in times of immediate need. Thank you for speaking up though!
User avatar
DhammaSeeker
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 5:26 pm
Location: Denver CO
Burning Since: 2010
Camp Name: Pretty Pickle

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby aserendipity » Wed May 14, 2014 7:10 am

thank you for noticing my comment

it is the notion of better than thou which makes me turn away and look for a regular person

xoA.
aserendipity
 
Posts: 1778
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:34 pm

Re: challenging "the Temple"

Postby ygmir » Wed May 14, 2014 7:32 am

I guess I'd like to see, an experiment, with several, if no dozens, of small, individual, "temples".......each done by a small group or an individual (of any size), denominational or not........no rules. Guarded or unguarded.
An area, as a blank slate, to be made by and for "the peeples". as grandiose or plain as wanted.
See what organically evolves. "nothing lasts forever".

the thought came, from my dismay a few years ago at the temple:
I was going to climb up and some suited "goons" (3) stopped me, and said it was a "private party" up there, and I'd have to come back later........WTF?
Later, saw tons of suits and well dressed folks coming down, maybe a wedding or some such? got into limo/MV's and drove off. All clean and pretty, their own security keep the "rabble" away...........
At that point, I knew it was "for sale".............
YGMIR

Unabashed Nordic
Pagan
User avatar
ygmir
 
Posts: 27532
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 8:36 pm
Location: nevada county
Burning Since: 2017
Camp Name: qqqq

PreviousNext

Return to Politics & Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests