Looky here!  I was looking into artist who cross boundaries, whose art separates from the normative scene, and deals withsocial activism icluding prsions.  So when I found Paul Rucker I was instantly amazed.  HIs work can be profound and visceral at times.  Proliferation is not eactly interemdia, but it is interdisicplinary becasue of his fosus on sociological issues and history.

Polish Documentarian who tries to make sure that society doesn't make the same mistakes.  

http://www.artmuseum.pl/

So while reading about performance I keep coming up with how to diagram the art energy as the intermedial work is created, assimilated, and honed to reach it max affectation.  Then it is copied and repeated therefor losing it's sense of 'Artness'.  I've been thinking about this diagram for a while.  Not all charts can tell the whole truth but this is an exploration.  Do you agree with the chart?  What would you change to make it better?  

I have no clue if this is true, but it does add a little to the notion of mixing art and life.  

Marcel

"The old avant-gardes, Bourriaud tells us, were oriented toward conflict and social struggle; relieved of this dogmatic radical antagonism and macro-focus on the global system, relational-alleviational art “is concerned with negotiations, bonds, and co-existences.” (p. 45)"  (From the article "A very shoet critique of Realtional Aesthetics, written by Radical Culture Research Collective, found in Histories & Theories under "Art & Culture.")

This highlights the discussion that Johanna and I have been promulgating about the Futurism and Dadaism.  This article has the view point that I have been searching for.  That as artists we must understand that we are relationally tied to the environment we are in, and so is everyone that we are addressing.  The social structures that we live within may cause "alienation and misery", but we must understand that these systems are too large and nessecary to tear apart.  In order to affect positive change it is imperitive for us to accept the "Existing Real", then play and explore within the social framwork that is given.

I'm all for radical change but only within the ethos of positive reconstruction.  I still, maybe naively, believe that non-violence is the first step which should be taken.  This allow for the freedom of dialectical discourse, which I believe the be the path to a newer enlightenment.   

I have read through the history of Dada, and presequentially Futuristism, and wondered what their impact on the world was.  I have been perseverating on this question for quite sometime because I am concerned about my own artwork.  I have some pretty heavy things to say and want to use my art and life to speak my mind.  To those of you who do not know me or my situation I will say that I am in a precarious position.  As a felon, and because my criticism of the incarceration system can be interpreted in many wrong ways, I hope to understand how to stand up and shout my opinion through various media and have more than most of the people listen and at least consider what I have to say.  

Instead, many people turn themselves off to whatever they don't want to hear.  Especially if it challenges their views of reality, meaning, and safety.  If you point at someone and say "Your a hypocrite" they are probably not going to stop what they are doing and say "Oh geez, your right let me change my ways to suit your perception!"  No, unfortunately what is likely to happen is they will get defensive, in a mindless reactive manner, dig a trench and stand their ground even if you could get them to agree with you through a positve dialectical discussion.  This is what I think the myriad reactionary forces of the Futurists and Dadaist didn't undertsand.

How is attacking people going to get them and others in society to believe in what your trying to say.  I admit that as a younger and more uneducated person I would generally look at these artworks and actions and call it nonsense that has no effect on my world view and move on.  If someone were to atack me or my ethos I would probably staunchly defend what I am not even sure of in the first place.  I think most people are like this.  Of course, we could use this this to our advantage as artist/social activist.  Sort of a reverse social action.  Maybe I'll go out an join the republican party and push that we build prisons to incarcerate anyone that doesn't think like us.  Though, I'm afraid that would work too well and not achieve it's reverse affects!

This is why I like what I have read about Kurt Switter.  He seems to be the answer I am looking for.  If you want to affect a social ethos and perception then maybe the best way is to make allies and find pathways that are alluring that free and democratic people will want to follow themselves.  To me this is the most organic way of growing anything.  Simply provide all the nesscary resources for enlightenment and sing to the people a song that makes them want to come and look.  If they believe in and love what they find enough they will defend it, and for that moment it will be right.   

[ Soldiers! ]

             [ Forward March! ]

Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud Kathud , (pow) zew

Zew                                         zew zew zew Kathud Kathud   (boom)    zew Kathud Kathud Kathud            Kathud

Booooooooooom!!!!!!

[Hit the deck!]  Tromp Tromp

Tromp

Tromp

Tromp                       (boom)

    Tromp

Tromp

Tromp

Zew zew zew   thwack     Oh shit!

                                   [ Oh God, No! ]    Thud.

zew

zew                          ta ta ta ta ta ta ta ta ta ta ta ta zew zew ta ta ta ta ta ta ta pow pow

(boom) ta ta ta ta(booom) ta ta ta zew zew thack Ahhhhhh! Pow pow      BOOOOOM!

ta ta ta ta ta [ Corporal get your men out of there...  Oh God!]

                        ta ta taa

                        ta ta ta ta ta

                                                 zew

                                                                 zew

                                                                        zew

                                                                                    zew zew

 pow pow zew pow pow pow(boom)  zew pow (boom)  zew zew zew zew thwack ahhhhhh!

            Boom  Boooom! BOOOOOOOM!

                        Zew zew ta ta ta ta

                                    zew zew zew ta ta ta zew zew  

                                                pow ta ta ta (boom) pow pow                                      pow pow pow.

(boom) (boom) zew zew (boom) (boom) ta ta zew zew zew ta ta ta ta

                        zew

                                    zew Thwack!! [ AHHHHHHFUUUUCK!! ] (boom)                                                 [ Ah Fuck! ]

[ Ah Fuck! Ah Fuck! Ah Fuck! Ah Fuck! Ah Fuck! Ah Fuck! Ah Fuck! ] 

[ Help Me!!!! ]

                       [ My leg...                     Please? ]

                                                                        [ Oh God!!! ]

                                                                                                                       [ Help Me! ]

                                                  Zew zew zew                   BOOOOOOOM!

                                                                                                                       [ Oh God Please…  Help Me! ]          

                                                 Zew… Thwack!      

This was  a poem I had written for Constance Hunting's poetry class in unergrad.  I was heart broken to see that Marinetti had already done it.  I guess nothing is original.  But my intention was to place the words on the page to analogously express the breaking of form and structure that is inherent in the break down of social relations and ethoses resulting in war.  Which I see Marinetti hadn't done... so pblththththththththth!  His poem concerning the noise of war still seems more mature.