Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 22:35:38 -0500
From: Michael Betancourt <mwb2-AT-netside.net>
Subject: Re: the surrealist exhibition


Hi.

I know I'm going to be shouted down. There's no need to go through the motions.

...but I feel that the following needs be said:

                                                ("the truth will out")

Let me start by saying, "Thank you, no." and then explain why I feel thus.

While it is very nice of you to offer both your time and your space to us,
personally I would prefer that this internet exhibition be created by and
only by the people who are _actively_ involved in these discussions about
both the potential and possible future for surrealism.

And Everyone *please* note: I no longer include myself in this group, either.

As I said, it should be done by the people involved in the discussions,
rather than someone whose *only* appearances on this discussion-list have
been in conjunction with this exhibition. In other words, the ONLY reason
you have to speak to us is to tell us how you (personally) have gotten us
space for the exhibit. 

This limit seems only appropriate (at least to me) since they are the ones
who are doing the real work -- creating the content to be contained on those
pages you're so happy to put your name on.

Being an artist myself, I would not put my name on anything that I wasn't
involved in the actual creation of. If you were as willing to make this
exhibit happen as you sound, is there any sample available? If so, why
haven't you told us about it before -- and don't say that it's OUR job to
make the content. A surrealist exhibit should encompas both the material and
the form of the exhibit.
[This was agreed upon by all involved when Wm, Pierre, Barrett, Carlos,
Frank, Stuart, and I (may have missed somebody, please don't take offense)
initially began talking about simply putting some material on the web for
people who weren't otherwise connected, specifically a few people in
England, Kathy Fox among them.]

So I know it sounds like I'm not being fair. Perhaps not (I don't care to
argue it having neither time nor energy for such), but I do know this: 
Lynn appeared fairly far into the discussion, and so far has no apparent
interests in this group than the possibility of being the one to "curate"
[which is essentially what she is proposing, in case you missed it] an
exhibition for a group she rather clearly wishes to have nothing to do with.
In my opinion, that's offering (politely) to use us to further her career,
and I will have nothing to do with that. 

Yes, I know about this space at sito. I have never ftp'd anything for
exactly the reasons above. 
And I suspect that I'm not alone in this, an idea supported by the lack of
response.

...

On the other hand, if Lynn had been involved with ANY of the discussions of
the past few months (from the question of kiddie porn to the situation with
A.R.T.I.S.T. in NY to my own run-in with censorship [yes, I do pay attention
to who my friends are and aren't; them that supports me are, those who don't
or fail to take ANY position aren't]) my opinion would very definitely be
different; *however*, this is not the case, and this absense speaks volumes
about what and where Lynn stands in relation to the rest of us. 

Consider what gets her attention and what doesn't. ANYTHING having to do
with the rest of us (and not just on this list as the A.R.T.I.S.T. statement
indicates -- she didn't sign it) is of NO CONSEQUENCE TO HER. 

I am being personal, yes. At the same time, what I'm saying is _factually true_.

Look at the record and you'll see that it is.


***

This is a very harsh response:
DO NOT THINK IT WAS SENT WITHOUT DUE REFLECTION
OR CONSIDERATION OF WHAT IT MEANS.

***


-- Michael Betancourt
                    E-mail: 	mwb2-AT-netside.net
 Index to Web Sites:	http://www.mosquito.com/~mwb2