[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Big ugly Helms posters
ross, i somewhat, almost, agree witchew concerning big ugly helms posters.
one came into my possession. i was in expresso-self. some guy walks in with
an armload of them. he looks at the first guy he sees and asks, hey, would
you like to pass a bunch of these out to your friends? the feller sezs yep
and takes a quantity of them. as soon as poster man was out the door, the
volunteer distributor chucks the whole mess of them in the trash. i retrieved
one as a memento, coffee stains and all.
this came a couple of days after i'd seen a row of them plastered, literally,
to the walls of the rr bridge crossing over erwin at ninth streets. the main
impression they made was, geez, this art is uglier than into the groove.
that is, i prefer 'ugly' art, i want to see a space for it, i understand the
intent. the calls to castrate those responsible for 'vandalizing' our o so
beautiful urban vistas with this speech fall on deaf ears, here. but i think
the impression made on most undecided voters passing by might be rather
disinclining and there is only one seat for election. as we may not like that,
as it is liberal fascism, plato-style, it is, anyway, unlike spaces of more
diverse unfolding.
i think your observations concerning artists coming to save us are right
onnit, also. although, it rings uncomfortably close to arguments that flamers
should be heard but not seen in the sexual rights movements. let's put it
this way, i'm struck by the bourgeois nature of artists with the luxury of
devoting large resources to political discourses, out of proportion to the
spaces afforded others. kinda reminds me of adbusters killing off forests
to milk high tech computer graphics layouts with reviews of the latest
public domain reprints from barnes and noble. again though, i'm uncomfortable
with how close this passes-by arguments from helms, however ironic, concerning
contributions to his opponents from high profile members of the hollywood
bourgeoisie. in the 'end', maybe i dunno if i should sympathize with this
art-baiting. rich artists baiting, yeah, maybe. i dunno. works for me.
but i take exception to the notion that an examination of the record will
produce any better results. repeated resorts to this technique have failed
time and time again against mr. helms. he only plays dirty. and any claim
to higher moral grounds are met with erision that appeals more to the common
voters sense of machosophism and faux-civility. and even then, post mortems
of such campaigns invariably assign dirty motives to the intent of helms's
opposition, coming from the mainstream political scientists of our
universities, who have to maintain some appearance of even-handedness.
pardon me if i'm wrong, but it appears to me that a realization of the
futility of reason against this might be at the root of ruby's quitting
triangle.general.
i am anxiously waiting for a campaign that will undertake, with greater
ferocity and sophistication than mr. helms, a more insidious colonization
of the electoral ecology. i wanna see helms out guttered. democrats will
be blamed for negative campaigning, anyway, even in their most florid of
moments. might as well earn the title. an electorate who doesn't even
know who helms is could care less who gantt is. we are in the age of election
by image, whether we like that or not. that is the surreality with which
we must deal.
the latest poll results, conducted by fgi of chapel hill (a most disgusting
telemarketing sweatshop, btw, for the n&o to be contracting), are most
depressing. this is likely the last election in which the health of mr.
helms will allow him to run (and even now, it is helms who should be taken
to task for being invisible; his public appearances are practically nil
and well orchestrated as his rapidly deteriorating health hardly allows
him to be as incoherent as usual; by contrast, gantt is barnstorming).
i would very much like it for him to be sent the message to pack up by the
voters of this state at least once in his lifetime. he 'needs' to hear that
message for me to be satisfied. i wish for him a day of jake.
i don't like this view, particularly. might makes right and the ideology of
election are two of my most irritating pet peeves. but in politics, these
memes will prevail -by design-. so maybe i'm just saying, i hate fucking
politics. but i hate the results of politics more. thus, GET DIRTY! this
election is pretty much down the tubes anyway, what with the coattail effect
sucking down anyone even remotely on the same ticket as clinton. i have very
very few minutes a week with the tv and even those are en passant. but what
few i have seen in the past week have been rewarded with highly vitriolic
ads in abundance concerning helms's social security and medicare records.
if this doesn't get him, nothing will. ever.
thank you.
3.2.3
Follow-Ups: