direct experience

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

direct experience

Postby dirtytuba » Fri Dec 05, 2003 6:59 pm

What is a "Direct Experience" and how is someone's "Direct Experience" interfered with at burningman?

and what happens to burningman when art projects start getting banned from attending?
User avatar
dirtytuba
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:38 pm
Location: Oak town

Postby Chai Guy » Fri Dec 05, 2003 7:08 pm

I think the official phrase you are seeking is "immediate experience" (but I could be wrong).

As for art being banned, do you want to talk about a specific example, or is this just a hypothetical future possibility?
User avatar
Chai Guy
 
Posts: 1824
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 1:37 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: direct experience

Postby Guest » Fri Dec 05, 2003 7:10 pm

[quote="dirtytuba"]What is a "Direct Experience" and how is someone's "Direct Experience" interfered with at burningman?

and what happens to burningman when art projects start getting banned from attending?[/quote]

What happens? Nothing. Most of the people who attend the event these days are mindless sheep. Here's an example: Burning Man organizers collaborated with the cops when the latter decided to censor a gay-themed piece of art at the event a couple of years back. A few people tried to protest this outrageous act of homophobia, but backed down obediently when BMORG told them not to rock the boat. Burning Man is dead and has been dead for years: it's just an embarassing shadow of its former self.
Guest
 

Postby ecliptic » Fri Dec 05, 2003 7:34 pm

Chai Guy,

DFTT, or socks
User avatar
ecliptic
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 12:18 am
Location: Portland, OR

Postby dirtytuba » Fri Dec 05, 2003 10:32 pm

Chai Guy wrote:I think the official phrase you are seeking is "immediate experience" (but I could be wrong).

As for art being banned, do you want to talk about a specific example, or is this just a hypothetical future possibility?


the example has already happened... no need for specifics, because I want to have a general discussion... but I want to get to the definition of what a immediate/direct experience is, and why interfering with it is a bad thing. OR actually why BMORG uses that kind of language as a diffenitive thing to ban an art project.
User avatar
dirtytuba
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:38 pm
Location: Oak town

Postby Bob » Fri Dec 05, 2003 11:48 pm

What is a "Direct Experience" and how is someone's "Direct Experience" interfered with at burningman? and what happens to burningman when art projects start getting banned from attending?


The LLC bans utter stupidity, in many cases, though I suppose you'd have a protected-class problem with that.
User avatar
Bob
 
Posts: 6762
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 10:00 am
Location: San Francisco
Burning Since: 1986
Camp Name: Royaneh

Postby actiongrl » Sat Dec 06, 2003 4:30 pm

actiongrl
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 12:22 pm

Postby dirtytuba » Tue Dec 09, 2003 8:22 pm

actiongrl wrote:http://www.burningman.com/blackrockcity_yearround/jrs/extras/jiffylube.html


that is a very good example of what I am thinking about. and one of the biggest questions raised by this article is "The question that remains for us to answer is exactly whose standards were violated. Did a twelve foot tall pornographic sign violate the standards of Black Rock City?"

it goes on with a difficult analysis of what I see BM having to deal with now that it has peaked. who is this deciding factor of Burning man and who lets them make these decisions, decisions like "Banning Art" like La Contessa.
User avatar
dirtytuba
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:38 pm
Location: Oak town

Postby precipitate » Tue Dec 09, 2003 8:37 pm

> who is this deciding factor of Burning man and who lets them make
> these decisions, decisions like "Banning Art" like La Contessa.

I'm not sure what parallel you're drawing here. Jiffy Lube was asked to
take their sign out of view of the general public because it (probably)
violated local Nevada laws. That was a law enforcement decision, and one
which I'm quite certain the participants would not have prevailed against
if they'd tried to take it to court.

As far as I know, La Contessa will not be driving the playa next year
because they engendered numerous complaints from participants.
That was a Burning Man organizational decision.

Is the question should people be allowed to anything and everything,
regardless of how it affects others?
precipitate
 
Posts: 747
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 10:51 pm
Location: Somewhere near an ocean and a desert and a mountain

Postby dirtytuba » Tue Dec 09, 2003 10:38 pm

precipitate wrote:> who is this deciding factor of Burning man and who lets them make
> these decisions, decisions like "Banning Art" like La Contessa.

I'm not sure what parallel you're drawing here. Jiffy Lube was asked to
take their sign out of view of the general public because it (probably)
violated local Nevada laws. That was a law enforcement decision, and one
which I'm quite certain the participants would not have prevailed against
if they'd tried to take it to court.

As far as I know, La Contessa will not be driving the playa next year
because they engendered numerous complaints from participants.
That was a Burning Man organizational decision.

Is the question should people be allowed to anything and everything,
regardless of how it affects others?


after reading more of the Jiffy lube story, you are right there not much simalarities.

That's a good question in the La Contessa case. What affects did La Contessa have? I was on that boat basically on all the voyages from tuesday on and all I saw was BMrangers throwing there bikes and bodies out infront of our path. I saw other art cars trying to take off the front part of the ship by speeding in a midship to cross our bow unsafely. I also saw the most spactacular correographed duel between the hite whale and the ship.

I think the other question is why was la contessa singled out. when many other projects recieve complaints, like the rave/loud music scene. or motorcycles speeding through the night with no lights. and then what about the troller we've got on this board, why hasn't he been banned. he has "engendered numerous complaints from participants." yet no ban. and what about the artcars that actually injured people, are they banned?

My real question is: gets to decide these things, and who decides who is going to decide these things. what I have heard so far (in somemany words) "its their Party they can do whatever the fuck they want". which I can understand, but what does that say about this so called community who really has no say in the decisions that are made by this "Burning Man organizational decision" and no recourse....

But, alas, this all mute, the Contessa Clan, and its Marching Band will be off touring Europe next summer and has already started another event which hopefully gain enough steam to be a yearly thing.

so in a sense... y'all are right, "if you don't like this party, go start your own".
User avatar
dirtytuba
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:38 pm
Location: Oak town

Postby actiongrl » Wed Dec 10, 2003 12:04 am

I'm turning into a link machine:

http://www.extra-action.com/index.php?page=BM


I'll miss it too, believe me.
actiongrl
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 12:22 pm

Postby stuart » Wed Dec 10, 2003 12:03 pm

My camp was 100ft away from the la contessa parking lot on the esplanade. I really loved seeing that big beautiful thing in my neighborhood. The view of it silhouetted during sunrise was a favorite thing of mine to see from atop SRC. However, the view of it careening around the playa at top speed made me cringe. Fuck, whoever was driving that thing was breaking the speed limit when they were doing J-turns while parking the damn thing in camp.
Now, in terms of being singled out for BLATANT speed violations it is important to think of two things.
1. If people are to complain to rangers about certain art cars dangerous speeds they will need to describe the violating vehicle. That can be hard but not in the Contessa's case; 'uh yeah, it was the huge fuckin sailing ship mr. ranger sir'. So, the utterly recognizable aspect of that lovely piece of art may have been the Jackie Stewart wannabe fuckhead drivers undoing.
2. Just because other people are being fucktards does not excuse your fucktardedness. Just because others did not get punished does not mean you did not deserve your punishment.
User avatar
stuart
 
Posts: 3328
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:45 am
Location: East of Lincoln

Postby precipitate » Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:49 pm

> 2. Just because other people are being fucktards does not excuse your
> fucktardedness. Just because others did not get punished does not
> mean you did not deserve your punishment.

Amen to that.

And on that note, there was a shark car that took the door off my friend's
195(mumbledymumbledy) Ford pickup during the DPW parade. They
were able to weld it back on so he could drive home, but the damage was
pretty bad. I'd like to hear that those folks won't be able to bring their
vehicle back, and that the driver (if the driver could be identified) had art
car driving privileges revoked indefinitely. He nearly took the passenger
out with the door.
precipitate
 
Posts: 747
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 10:51 pm
Location: Somewhere near an ocean and a desert and a mountain

Postby stuart » Wed Dec 10, 2003 3:00 pm

I believe there was vigilante action directed at the shark mobile. I believe someone said something like 'Don't assume we think you have a right to tire pressure'.
User avatar
stuart
 
Posts: 3328
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:45 am
Location: East of Lincoln

Postby precipitate » Wed Dec 10, 2003 3:32 pm

Heh. I heard of one other vigilante action this year. Didn't hear about that
one.
precipitate
 
Posts: 747
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 10:51 pm
Location: Somewhere near an ocean and a desert and a mountain

PSA

Postby technopatra » Wed Dec 10, 2003 5:44 pm

dirtytuba wrote:My real question is: gets to decide these things, and who decides who is going to decide these things. what I have heard so far (in somemany words) "its their Party they can do whatever the fuck they want". which I can understand, but what does that say about this so called community who really has no say in the decisions that are made by this "Burning Man organizational decision" and no recourse.....


Aha, you've found Techopatra's kryptonite - the fallacy of "us vs. them"

And I've found that I am trying harder and harder to not respond in thought, word or deed with knee-jerk generalizations or get carried away with sentiments that don't look at a larger, or perhaps a closer, picture. I'm not always succesful, but the effort is there. In this vein I'd like to translate "its their Party they can do whatever the fuck they want".

Forgive me if you've heard this one before, but it sounds like some folks haven't, or could use a friendly reminder:

The "organization" of Burning Man volunteers, just like you. There is a very small paid staff (around 20) that is mostly comprised of FT office and IT staff. The vast majority Senior and Junior staff members are unpaid but dedicated. Decisions like this are made by them, their volunteer teams, and their managers.

The people who are making these decisions are regular Joe & Jane Burner who have shown some initiative, shown up to meetings, shown that they can convey their thoughts in a collaborative environment, and shown the ability to see something through.

It's only "their" party because you've made conscious decision not to get involved. Everyone is invited.

If you want to get in on the decision-making, you most likely can, but you have to do more than state your opinion on the matter. You have to pony up and participate in the other work that accompanies those teams.

That said, various volunteer teams have actively solicited opinions on a number of issues over the year's and have committed to doing more of same, using the JRS and the polling tool we instituted on the website this year. In that way, you can at least help inform the decision-making by voicing an opinion.

</soapbox>
technopatra
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 3:04 pm
Location: SF, CA

Postby Isotopia » Wed Dec 10, 2003 7:02 pm

<swoon...>
User avatar
Isotopia
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:26 am

lmao

Postby dj big E » Thu Dec 11, 2003 10:53 pm

yeah what technopatra said!!!!!!!!!!!! i concur .Anyways i believe no matter how offensive the art is it shouldnt be banned maybe moved out were the installations are thus preventing accidental exposure to children which that is a whole different thread.I believe 2000 2001 was when i got to see the painting of jesus recieving bj from alter boy i laughed other people cried wondering if local law enforcement officials commented on that piece of art. as well as maybe theyre is some way for the llc to obtain a temporary ssort of permit or whatever laws that museums are protected bye.alla the jello biafra case the frankenchrist poster of a famous painting with several dicks and asses he was attacked by police but yet every year 10's of thousands of elementary students tour the museum were it is hung .So someone with a little more knowledge than me drop it please.By the way 2001 was my 2 nd year and i was camped nekt to slip and slide and around the corner from jiffy lube i think lmao and i never saw the said art piece.but maybe i did or was that the gay nazi camp lol either way allthough i wasnt interested in participating in theyre camp games lol i wasn't offended wouldn't be no fun without the without all the different lifestyles and last but not least the 60's will never be like the 50's and the 80's wont be like the 70's etc etc you get the point bm will never be like it was and what it was can never be like today .lmao dj big "E" laugh dont cry mofo
User avatar
dj big E
 
Posts: 277
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:00 am
Location: las vegas

Postby technopatra » Fri Dec 12, 2003 4:57 pm

Isotopia wrote:<swoon...>


*blushes*
technopatra
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 3:04 pm
Location: SF, CA

Postby blyslv » Fri Dec 12, 2003 5:51 pm

dj Big E

showing controversial art is often more a question of money, who gets it and who doesn't, then just a quesiton of pure law. When the Mapplethorpe bullwhip up da bumm and Serrano "PissChrist" came to Washington DC it was originally going to be in a museum that received a lot of federal dollars. When the fundies did what they do the museum lost its nerve, a decision that probably saved it several if not tens of million of dollars. It wasn't a first amendment issue because there was no outright prohibition on showing the work.

The show opend several weeks later at a private gallery. It was boon for them. For about a month there was a line around the block of people waiting to get in and see it.
Fight for the fifth freedom!
blyslv
 
Posts: 1562
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:22 pm
Location: Fanta Se NM

Creativity

Postby dirtytuba » Sat Dec 13, 2003 10:24 pm

poop.
Last edited by dirtytuba on Sat Dec 27, 2003 1:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
dirtytuba
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:38 pm
Location: Oak town

Postby Captain Goddammit » Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:45 pm

Hey Precipitate: I understood that the Shark owner was actually ejected from the event, and that the shark will not be allowed back. If it WERE to reappear, it would be reduced to unwreckognizable MOOP by an angry mob. However, if the owner isn't blackballed from BM, he could just build another artcar... maybe register it in a buddy's name... and goddammit doesn't it suck; that shark was one of the coolest artcars ever and it's owner was such a dick (and a friend of a friend of mine).
"Whaoomph! Whaomph! Burbbleburbblepattpattpattpatt... WHAAAAAaaoooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa........!!!"
Top fuel dragster, by Elliot Naess
User avatar
Captain Goddammit
 
Posts: 4506
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:34 am
Location: Seattle, WA
Burning Since: 2000
Camp Name: Camp I'm going to Hawaii Instead

Postby Badger » Sun Dec 14, 2003 6:13 pm

I have no knowledge of the Shark Car guy being ejected from the event.

What I do understand is that the car will not be allowed back at the event next year. BTW, the 'main' guy wasn't the only prick at the camp that had the shark. There was a whole nest of assholes there. What was weird was how individually they all seemed reasonable but put five or so of them together and they turned into this seething, venemous mass of fucknuts.
.
Desert dogs drink deep.

Image
.
User avatar
Badger
 
Posts: 3322
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:43 pm
Location: San Francisco

Postby Zane5100 » Mon Dec 15, 2003 1:12 pm

Badger wrote:What was weird was how individually they all seemed reasonable but put five or so of them together and they turned into this seething, venemous mass of fucknuts.


I've seen that happen too many times, and yes, it is fucking spooky to watch that particular group dynamic.
middle-aged, wannabe-hipster, dilettante
User avatar
Zane5100
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 9:51 am
Location: closer than you think

Postby BlueBirdPoof » Mon Dec 15, 2003 1:37 pm

Badger wrote:There was a whole nest of assholes there. What was weird was how individually they all seemed reasonable but put five or so of them together and they turned into this seething, venemous mass of fucknuts.


Oh this makes me hungry for unpostable details.
In fact, I almost chimed in "Great idea for a short story!" and to me, there is almost no excuse for short stories.
Nothing like meeting your evil doppleganger on a Monday morning.
User avatar
BlueBirdPoof
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:44 am
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: PSA

Postby technopatra » Mon Dec 15, 2003 2:21 pm

Slight correction, thank you AG for the 411:

technopatra wrote:
The "organization" of Burning Man volunteers, just like you. There is a very small paid staff (around 20) that is mostly comprised of FT office and IT staff. The vast majority Senior and Junior staff members are unpaid but dedicated. Decisions like this are made by them, their volunteer teams, and their managers.


The 20 sr. staffers are, in fact, mostly paid. But everything else stands.

As you were.
technopatra
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 3:04 pm
Location: SF, CA

Postby dirtytuba » Thu Dec 18, 2003 8:29 pm

poop
Last edited by dirtytuba on Sat Dec 27, 2003 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
dirtytuba
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:38 pm
Location: Oak town

Postby Badger » Thu Dec 18, 2003 8:41 pm

Especially this group... I love watching you pat each other on the back for your UNcreative responses.


Yeh, well, your lack of salient, creative feedback doesn't necessarily have me chomping at the fucking bit for whatever wisdom you might impart regarding the issue. Floor me. Put me in my place. Stop me in my tracks. Prove me wrong.

In short: Put up or shut up.
.
Desert dogs drink deep.

Image
.
User avatar
Badger
 
Posts: 3322
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:43 pm
Location: San Francisco

Postby dirtytuba » Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:15 pm

poop
Last edited by dirtytuba on Sat Dec 27, 2003 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
dirtytuba
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:38 pm
Location: Oak town

The thought police...

Postby Last Real Burner » Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:31 pm

You rang?... Image

"Never miss a good chance to shut up."
inconsequently,
mr smith
"Do you know what happened to the boy who got everything he wished for? - He lived happily ever after".
User avatar
Last Real Burner
 
Posts: 943
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 9:34 am
Location: Heaven

Next

Return to Politics & Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest