Quote from: Andrew McIntosh on April 12, 2010, 02:16:35 AMWe want to bring back fear.
I don't personally rate very high the "fear" or things like physical fight. You know, to provoke some unknown audience members who are disturbed by noise to throw some beermugs on your face or such. I remember certain high profile noise name saying that the transgressive noise / noise for provocation is the dated thing of 80's. And in some ways I can agree, some ways not.
Opening message is pretty much brain diarrhea with just typing things in random order into some sort of opening. But I think perhaps the core of idea isn't as much about disturbing with noise. I have played handful of mixed genre shows. And each of them have several people to complain and yell about fucking disturbing ear-irritation they wouldn't want to experience. Rather hear the next metal/goth/punk band. It's ok. I don't reject sound confrontation, yet I'd think that the core would be the question about multi-media/diverse approach of project. Like, where art is more than just the currently such a hip thing of "individual-" / "personal experssion". Where PE/Industrial isn't just the sound, and what where the sound goes, but approaches the visual art, literature, performance arts, etc. Like in the.. hmm "old days".
Quote from: Andrew McIntosh on April 12, 2010, 02:16:35 AM
One thing we where concerned about, though, was getting past the whole "performance art" bullshit, something we don't like the idea of. That's comfortable as well. We don't want to do that, we want something that actually targets and challenges viewers.
One could say, that performance arts used to be valid form of expression. Which it isn't anymore to same extent. Reasons and ideology of shitting on stage and butchering animals to use swan-head as dildo, may not be now what it was in past decades. But sitution is like within industrial. Some talk about beating the dead horse. Was talking about in already 25 years ago. But the methods and actions are still there, and largely abandoned. Perhaps not because they would be useless bullshit, but because the role of sound and the role of artists aims has changed?
Perhaps it could be lessons learned from Coum or Duncan.. thinking about what actually is performance? Does it require arranged moment for audience who expects you to behave in certain way? Or could it be event happening, even without audience, which may (or may not) be documented.
Like Duncan dressing as slutty female, going to street and see how hookers get treated, yelled at, abused etc. Fucking a corpse, and later playing back audio for audience.
Where audience isn't exactly withinessing. It is not done for sake of entertainment, but as comment, study, observation of human nature, etc.
I have done several things, which I consider to be IOPS installations and performances, since they are planned and pre-meditated acts for that specific idea (as opposed to just thing popping in head in your.. hmm "private life"). I may have mentioned about them to some people in Finland, but I doubt I have written about them anywhere. It has very little of "global" importance to be talked about. As examples, there has been scenes of public obscenities, where documented is not really the act what takes place, but bypassing withnesses and possibly their reactions. Act of fucking, in parking lot in bright daylight, might not be much, but having group of boys on their bikes, driving by.. soon returned on the scene, trying to take a peek on what's happening, ending up in same camera view of semen splatters of asphalt. To me, that is performance arts. Not for the art audience.
Installations involve sexually charged objects, such as freshly used dildos, placed in locations where they will be found by people who least expected. Locations which may be invisible for eye unless you really happen to go into very specific angle or place. It's not installation held for purpose of amusing artlovers who go to exhibition opening.
Of course, I expect this is pretty much routine behavior which happens, and is not necessary thing worth to mention. But I do also have slight feeling, that maybe there is a tendecy, where the substance of the project starts and ends with play/stop button. Where project or the listeners wouldn't have a slightest interest of expand their action or reach out of the narrowly limited circle of devotees.
Like why would band with content oozing of blasphemy, heretical views, uncommon interests and such settle for presenting a tape to 50 guys. If with less effort could be for example modified church pamphlets filled with tasty bits of misinformation replacing the originals. Where changes are minimal, yet extreme. Audience, being the church going decent citizen. Modern day underground reply is always "it doesn't change anything". And reply goes, what should it change? And why you expect its done for sake of change? I loathe the apathy of modern times. I loathe the excuses thrown like "I don't have time", "I don't have money", "I don't...". I loathe the weak little men who's expectation is nothing but comfort hidden in pasted-on misanthropy. Its not that there would be something to prove by doing something. Like who's real and who's not type of sillyness, since it ultimately leads into dead end with little to offer. But the excuses and lack of real substance and lack of real interest in basically anything. It sometimes disturbs me. In same way as I may refuse to watch certain things on TV which I find to be zero value, its regrettable to see "noise" having too many similar characteristics. In form of participants who view it purely for shallow entertainment, and who hope to create it for perhaps motivations very different than I'd hope "art" to be created.
