Syndicate (ref. Broeckman, Arns, Kluitenberg, Benson, Pandilevski...)

[ana peraica]

Dear "Anna",

The problem of the circulation of ideas, and tracing of them is today quite
hard. Circle is replaced by the more dimensional bowls, explosions, curves.
Tracing (of authors, of e-mails, of people...) is also hard. Linearity is
impossible. For that one should have at least continous space or time.

Once I done an exhibition project completely based on gossiping, it was on
the Oreste show in Venice, on Biennale (I hope you will not take this as a
self-promotion I don't intend to do among people that know my work and
ideas). It was the same obscure idea that lead me, that things are running
out of the documentation, catalogues, newspaper's reports or critiques. That
information is spoiling.
Then, as the problem of redundancy happened to me (and somehow I expected
and calculated on that phenomenon), as every name would invite in mind
another one, at least those of love affairs related, and each topic and
reference
another one, and we know it from the hypertexts that it is - real, I decided
not to border anymore.

I am, myself, more considered with the streaming ideas than on linking them
endlessly in any case even in .html (and that is why I never use footnotes,
so what? - McLuhan never give his due respect to anyone before, hardly
mentioning any other name, and that does not make him less fair writer).
Only bad writers need to plug in the theory into someone elses, as the
theory they plugged in will save them from the critique. Only desperate
souls need to say - you didn't make a reference on me.

Reading according to names reminds me on the old time investigations... 'I
read complete Hegel' - do you think Hegel is the one that is interesting or
the world of his ideas. I know, it is a matter of the original thinking and
hypercitation, when the author becomes the 'author', and a person becomes a
kind of - it, a book, and turning back to their original existence on this
planet is also an interesting point, but reading Hegel so deeply one can
only become Hegel. Moreover he is dead, so becoming a dead person is not
some erotic idea...

What do you get willing to pay attention to dead ideas (and what worse can
be than a dead idea?), and making your own a cornerstone for the graveyard?
That is nercophilic, and more - nomenophilia is the worst deadness of the
dead. Nomen est amen! Name does exist separately from the named... That is a
point of buirocracy. Even alive authors don't like to live only in the
brackets (((((as they are claustrophobic)))))).

Why do you go back and did you really find important branding of thoughts?
Authenticity in the Internet age???? Don't you find yourself doing a kind of
Sizif's job. Why didn't you post that text, why are you bordered with
copyrights, authenticity, and invention of small notions such the one of
deep europe is. Copy-left it, we done it on the Syndicate not egoistically,
and now you protect your own rights? And you were, as you say, reading it?
Why do you border with words, dots, commas... What do you want to say is
important, not how you designed it. We all know who told what, we are not
illiterate so much to think that things might be so original...

I understand the term Deep Europe, but not like you. I don't like it, i feel
referring to the  d e e p   s h i t  and i wouldn't like to enter deeper in
that part of the Europe, as I was already too deep. That means 'your' term
is for me frightening, not challenging on thinking. It makes me to run
away....

Unfortunately in your e-mail I saw more the problem of the originallity of
the name Syndicate, not the problem of Deep Europe, as - sorry on a note -
Syndicate meant more than one term, and it made many of terms to be coined.
Actually why, when you feel so related to authenticity don't face the fact
you lost the Syndicate of the Syndicate? You quoted the name with no
content?

If you were consistent, you would have to write Syndicate (ref.Broeckman,
Arns, Kluitenberg, Lovink, Benson, Harger, Pandilevski, Zivanovic... and
around hundreds of more?) in the head of every e-mail on that bracket list
(the quote, the reference to the Syndicate). And pay attention to the order,
use alphabetically, it is better, there was no hierarchy of me - myself
and - I!.

Who the fuck invented friends !!!???? (cough, ref. M. Benson)

best,
ana