A blew right threw this intersection a couple of times that night and didn’t stop. was on my way from finally catching young blood skateboards/then kibbee & over to eyedrum/mattress…..
heres my review-ish thing iffin you care:
http://everythingburnsaway.blogspot.com/
oh yeah..i guess i shld go ahead and confess:
i combined the title of your blog with the title of karen’s blog to make a sassy name for one of my blogs,at the time it amused me in some tongue n cheek way, now it doesn’t. oh well. i dont use it much anyways.

The energy and the crowd seemed lively at edgewood/boulevard. Is it possible to flesh out this coverage a bit more? What you’ve written is intriguing enough to make me want to hear more of what you thought.
did you find some merit in the castleberry comparing observation?
i wonder if the reason this was said was because of the art itself or because of the environmental influence-location and feeling…

hey-do you find yourself predisposed in mindset/experience by area of town you are in?
tell us about it from a bicyclist’s perspective.
do you like cars?
what is your favorite piece of art in the whole wide world,ben?
did you know one of the previous art directors at spruill had the name ben? He was great,it honestly sucked when he passed. Atlanta lost a man with an eye and a tongue that followed it unflinchingly. would you bike to spruill? have you ever rode your bike on 285? what if mason murer moved to the corner of beaver ruin and 29? would you bike there? have you ever been on beaver ruin road? how did it get its name anyways?did beavers ruin it a long time ago? do you like beavers?
that picture with the people standing upside down at the top of this article is so neat,ben. how did you do that?

Thanks for taking the time to thoroughly respond to all of my questions. You fielded them well- and managed to wrangle some interesting n worthwhile answers out of them. i dont recall an answer to whether or not you like beavers,tho. i think they are cute, myself.
did you admit to being sold drugs in your response,tho? You shldnt buy drugs,ben. it is illegal. There is a drug out there called 2c-i that apparently is legal,tho. but they say you shldnt do it,because drugs are bad. 2c-i is supposed to be some sort of legal strong hallucinogen. compared to LSD and mushrooms or microdots,i forget. who knows? (ask somebody that’s into that jam band Phish)The 1st LSD experience written of (and i believe experienced by…albert hoffman?i believe he was researching rotten rye that,when cows ate it,caused them to abort pregnancies and get rashes on their legs they called “st, anthony’s fire”)was from a bike ride,by the way…
theres a really old p.floyd song called “bike” that is fun.their lead singer did too much lsd and was ultimately not picked up for a gig -or any others thereafter. i like chick-fil-a.
i did not know you lived in turkey or the uk. Intriguing.In a cave,huh? cool. did you ever go see the cave paintings of france?

i am not sure how i feel about the environmental influence or the fact that the art intersection experience was more of an experience to experience than having anything worth critiqueing. do you find it a challenge to regularly find work in atlanta worthy of a comprehensive critique? is this why we have fillers like heart throbs (gawsh, i so want to have hot sweaty kisses with that wonderroot guy now-can you get me his digits?) and simplified “photo tours”?
i’ve heard of yr fellow burnaway writer guy jeremy abernathy. hes from mississippi,he wrote for a darling little thing called false magazine for a bit,he started his ghostmap blog,then he wrote for artvoices,then creative loafing’s blog,and i hear he got a piece in art papers recently.now i suppose he does all of em’. i know lots of people who find art papers rather stuffy and somehow vaguely dour. maybe it’s in the layout.,the design of the mag itself? naaah.it’s also in other more substantive aspects,i suppose.which brings me back to environmental influence..feeling,one cld say…and how u guys are going to change the appearance of this blog this summer?
do u think u can change the appearance of atlanta’s art scene? or are you guys like,playing the cold eye of the camera thing about this one? is that possible with art?is there any point in even trying to be “objective”? and if not-why not go all the way with subjective?just embrace it..or would that resultin unsafe,unprofessinal moments-and perhaps even an exposed process of development and discovery,and that would feel..oh…unprofessional,now wouldnt it?
i understand not wanting to mention stuff you dont like…that seems to be the way to go,its so niiiiice..except for perhaps in those rare cases where something gives itself to us with a golden opportunity to critique it on terms of its failure- for what it attempted to do. like thomas dozol,or that guy that does the magazine covers of himself professing to be “the shit” while seeming to make some sly commentary about marketing as he markets his soul. it’s tricky.i suppose its about having a point of reference within the self and measuring everything against that with some consistancy.speaking of which: i once published a review that i regret now. shld have just not done it. it was as if the artist had created an air tight alibi,a studied aerodynamic thing that did what it was designed to do. so unto itself in that regard it was aces,but as far as if it had …done anything “new”–hell no. so did i like the work? yes and no.what are the terms? it’s tough. what is worth mentioning? i really dont know…part of me liked the work for one reason,but then i consider a bigger picture and the work suddenly becomes almost detrimental to ..well-atlanta.
i suppose it has to do with the environment,the feeling- of atlanta and its art. is this always just going to be a place to practice-as some say? if so,it is a place to take chances,thats what they say.or- can we see ,dream of,making this a place where artists can make a living,want to live here,even …holy smoke–move here to live and work as an artist.
would that mean focusing on the meaning of the art happening here? i mean ,sure-pretty stuff is pretty,skilled stuff is skilled,but in the end–what’s art for? the whole living available process is a catch 22,cuz in order to become this contradictory thing,it has to ignore that goal…right?or not ignore-make it obvious it isnt even relevant.
tell you what…ben,you ride yr bike around…do a review on mr.fangs…i think that would be spiffy.

thanks for reading all this. i know i am carried away….and perhaps painfully parochial.

And if you’ll allow me this tangent, for the political junkies in the audience: another wonderful podcast from my hero, Tom Ashbrook:
http://www.onpointradio.org/2009/05/president-obama-at-notre-dame

I recall an earlier tangent conversation on this blog, re: Nature, ecology, ethics, etc.

The podcast is about academia, Catholicism, abortion, and the nature of dialog itself, whether political, academic, or whatever.

Obama said in his speech at Notre Dame that he wanted to create dialog on the issues. But if he merely *says* there will be dialog, does that mean one will actually happen, truly and effectively?

Can anyone with authority, especially the President, truly dialog with the public, especially while they’re standing on a podium for an hour with massive PA equipment? It seems you’d have to relinquish some of that authority to accomplish anything close.

And what about the more “egalitarian” alternatives, e.g. the much-lauded Town Hall discussion? When John McCain waddled around shaking hands with the Proles, was he ever really communicating those people, or just telling them/us what we wanted to hear?

So much for the masks of “gods walking abroad.”

It interests me terribly, especially given my recent (and perhaps short-lived) flirtation with Hegel. We saw the outcome of post-partisanship this winter. If you extend your hand to your enemies, how soon will it be until it’s bitten off? And even if we cease to consider them enemies (which I honestly think is a good idea, though problematic in practice), isn’t it so much better to use the resources we have right at our feet.

To call those willing and near to work for what they believe in … ?

::: )