[syndicate] bweep bweep I'm an artist

[Se][wo][man.tic]

At 02:06 PM 4/18/2002 -0500, John M. Kuykendall  wrote:

> >Although I found mez to be very emotional about various things at
>times,
> >probably the most human of these artists/people/persona and very
> >communicative at times as well..I have also enjoyed some of the text
>that
> >mez has put out into the net as well. There is defiantely a conscious
>mind
> >working away there that is
> >informed/intellegent/political/compassionate...many are not any of
>these.
>
>I do not disagree, I have seen some good stuff from <it>

till now i really haven't been bothered n.gaging in this...... as john, yr 
][*][ini.tial confront|attack-thru-sarcastic-drivel post then open dialogue 
call seemed 2 indicate most of the multilogue that would follow [& yes, it 
did].......

1st, in geophysical terminology i'm a *she*, not an it.....
2ndly, i'd prefer if u could list x.amples here....wot 'good stuff' of mine 
did u *c*? my code.wurks? the object-mimicking|oriented web-dilution 
projects ? wot made it 'good stuff'? or is this where u trot out the 
obligatory bail-out clause of "i'm only concerned with my own 
craft/WASP-derivative practice, & therefore have no obligation 2 actually 
absorb & hence offer valid critique regarding an.other artists practice" 
line (after offering surface throwaway comments regarding a genre u 
obviously have had very little x.posure 2?]

do u have any depth perception commentary 2 offer on my wurk? practice? 
dispersal & connectivity delivery methods?


>but I have also
>seen stuff that looks to have been fished out of one of Oprah's book
>club books.


again, i'm keen 2 have x.amples here?


>Truisms and new-agey hocus pocus with a pinch of William
>Gibson thrown in.

heh. have had my stuff described like this b4, but with a fair bit of 
rigorous analysis thrown in, unlike here......
just curious [as i have 2 decide whether 2 align yr feedback along a 
"useless" or "thoughful" axis] if u can break down this _new-agey hocus 
pocus_ term? i'd lurve u 2 offer yr opinion on how my net.wurks actually 
reflect a Gibsonesque leaning?

yr use of Gibson [white guy print(deadtree)-stereotyped cyberpunkish 
template] as a comparison point is telling, n.deed....u can't c Cadigan in 
there? Perhaps Dement? or even da Rimini?
Have u absorbed any data about code.wurking?  i'd like 2 kno yr thoughts on 
the genre.......

>In fact, it occurs to me that <it> must've been a big
>fan of the genre and simply wanted to make the romance of the "ghost in
>the machine" a reality. Too bad, though, that we see the supporting
>wires so easily.

.....gimme a hint here....these support wires...i assume yr referring 2 
form, 2 certain medium-specific elements....how in yr opinion, does 
mezangelle reflect this?

w][r][o.mantically,
mez




.           .    ....         .....
  net.wurker][mez][
[trans. loose. (e)NT][ity][]
[sel][l][f  reply.cation]

{

www.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/
  www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker
.... .               .???  .......