[no subject]

Sounds like a surrealist mandate to create weird objects and jolt the
unsuspecting observer into the awareness that they inhabit a lucid dream
rather than reality. Certainly this is better than Breton's charge that the
most surreal act is to fire shots at random into a crowd. We already inhabit
that world, so I'm interested more in this connection between creative
objects at work within the context of capital. Check out James P. Blaylock's
_The Last Coin_ and _The Paper Grail_, in both of which he draws some
interesting connections between kitsch objects and this kind of jolt into
lucidity that you're describing. This is the occult function of microsound,
which I believe to function at a level of occult materiality as the unseen
but manifesting layer of programming enacts (rather than represents) matter
in order to hint at weird and subtle layers of organization and activity.

kim wrote:
> very interesting...I like this concept of extending the act of droplifting
> to other 'data-types'...I think in a way this is already being done by
> virtue of the fact that no-one receives any money for posting their pieces
> on the microsound website...but this is not 'droplifting' in the strictest
> sense...re-contextualization is the key: taking something out of its
> 'expected' context and locating it elsewhere...in my opinion this is one
of
> the most vital actions that can take place with a piece of art...one that
> Duchamp taught us about many years ago...

My sense is that our microsound projects are largely too
self-contained/self-referential to reach out into the other world and hence
achieve the effects of droplifting. More prankster behavior is necessary. It
seems that we missed a prime droplifting moment when we turned the McDonna
project into our own deal rather than saw it as a way to invade the
"official" contest. What we did was almost more of an act of
reverse-droplifting, for rather than taking our own work and
re-contextualizing it INTO the Madonna contest, we took those samples and
re-contextualized them into works hosted on our own website. Arguably,
Duchamp makes the same mistake by bringing readymade art objects into the
gallery; the gallery STILL fulfills its traditional, authorizing, endorsing,
and legitimizing function. Thus, Kim, the Duchamp analogy also strikes me as
somewhat backwards, though I do appreciate his prankster habits. I think it
would be more interesting, and more of a "droplifting" act, to put Mona Lisa
in a public urinal than to put a urinal in a gallery. Freely posting pieces
on .microsound.org is more along the lines of situationist potlatch, though
not really THAT different from any number of people giving away their MP3s
on the Web; rather, we need to figure out ways to take our works and
droplift them into different contexts.

> ***it would be interesting to schedule a chat about this subject for the
> hotline server...anyone interested? if so, post to the list and I'll take
a
> head-count and schedule a time...

I'm very interested in this, for sure. Good stuff!

-=Trace

------------------------------