While doing research on another topic, I came across a profile of Peter Berdovsky doine in 2006. I think it provides perspective, so here is the link:
Much of his artwork is deeply introverted, hauntingly nostalgic with an overriding sense of decay, but talking to Peter Berdovsky one gets the impression of growth and new life.
Speaking from his tour bus somewhere outside of Columbus, Ohio, Berdovsky is excited about touring as the video artist for the British psychedelic quartet the Ozric Tentacles.
His work is synesthetic by nature, serving as a perfect complement for any musical happening. A sworn mission statement is to cater to the immediate emotional state of the audience.
Please share widely!
…but I cannot think when an artist last so misjudged and failed to cater to ‘the immediate emotional state of [the] audience.’
<
p>
I am trying very hard to be good, and will pass over observations vis a vis overriding decay, new growth and life, and his avowed concern with his hair.
Apparently, there was an “immediate” audience, the “posse” that videotaped and that was there, and THAT audience was amused, where as “the larger invisible audience” was not amused. Even from the stage, though, a performer cannot see the audience’s faces because of the lighting.
<
p>
Your comment was a good one – there were several differing audiences here in both time, location, and demographics.
<
p>
I had never gone to Berdovsky’s web site or looked at his art or music on it until after the relentless spotlight of public media had Berdovsky fixed under a kind of magnifying glass. I had only heard a couple of friends refer to him as “an artist” but had no idea what kind of art he did before the great Turner Guerilla Stunt Blow Up.
I am curious, why does the “I was just following orders” excuse work for this guy in this situation? Many people are feeling all warm and fuzzy over this man (not boy) who apparently went along with his employer’s plan to delay notifying the overraught city that the gizmos were just ads. When is that ok, and when is it not? This guy is benefitting from the whole thing. I’m not ok with that. Why are you?
True, I am OK with Peter and Sean getting free publicity – and with Boston making 100% profit from Turner Broadcasting.
<
p>
You and I are totally entitled to feel whatever we feel about this whole odd and unexpected chain of events, that no one apparently forsaw.
<
p>
Is it because I did not feel threatened [I did not]. Is it because I was not personally inconvenienced [ I was not]. Is it because I was an art major as an undergraduate [I was] and participated in some performance art, such as carpeting a ceiling without permission [I did]…each of us, as individuals, respond differently based on our experience. That is to be expected.
<
p>
But as I see it, no one suffered actual harm, the towns and cities actually made a profit and now have a chance to audit what did, and did not work, in a situation that could have been dangerous and fortunately was not.
…and who won’t be seeing a repayment.
<
p>
The lady who took a personal day for a doctor appointment, spent the day in traffic, and now must spend another day to have her meeting with her doctor.
<
p>
The man who is docked for not delivering time-sensitive pacgages on time.
<
p>
Those were actual stories I heard on the radio, but I can imagine hundreds, if not thousands, of similar hypotheticals.
<
p>
Nobody is paying any of them back.
<
p>
And that lady who lost a day’s pay is just as important as Peter and his committment to art, Amber. Just not as young and exciting. So define ‘actual harm’, Amber – and just thank God nobody with a heart attack was trying to get to Mass General. Or a stroke, when minutes count, trying to get to Tufts. I’ve heard the argument that a traffic accident screws up traffic all the time, so why is this diferent? The answer is that it WAS an accident, not a heedless and deliberate act, putting your own desires over those of others.
<
p>
(BTW – Amber – did you know Howie Carr reads your emails on the Arlington web site aloud? There can’t be TWO Amber Paws!)
Just like your over-the-top posts about all the “bombs” being “detonated” on the day of the incident–posts which were immediately debunked by other posters who maintained cooler heads in the face of the exact same reports?
<
p>
The woman who lost a day’s pay has no beef with the people who put up advertising signs. Her beef is with the people who panicked, and tried to get others to panic, too.
<
p>
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who’s the most responsible party of all?
You brought some excitement into my hum-drum day.
Why not ask the Mayor to set aside part of the 100% good will payment and let someone who, for example, had taken a personal day off work with no pay to go to the doctor and was not able to make their appointment and had to pay for a no show and had lost wages, make a claim against some of that extra million dollars. Why not?
..ARE YOU REALLY ONE PERSON? :~)
<
p>
The idea that the police are to blame is nonsense (no, Amber, I realize it was not you who said that). Once the emergency was accidently begun, the police had to follow procedure through to the end. To me, the most damning bit of behavior is that the artistes realized what was happening around 1 pm and CHOSE not to step forward and say, Hey! We put them up, know where they are, etc. At the behest of Interference, Inc. or not is irrelevant – it was the right thing to do, and they didn’t.
<
p>
The big fish will be taken care of, but you and Howie (who can be a populist when is isn’t busy being a snark) seem to grasp that the little fish will go hungry.
THINK they should frame them? Also, I googled “Turner Broadcasting” and Boston and there were 424,000 hits [no I am not kidding] as of 3:00 PM. That means it only cost Turner $4.00 per placement. They got off cheap. Apparently every language and every country on the GLOBE covered this story. Tell me what to make of that?
I was referring to the folk whose plans were ruined who won’t even see the 300 that they got as little fish.
What puzzles me is a rush to judgement based on assumptions about what exactly happened. You seem to know exactly who told what to who at what time.
<
p>
The press is still confused about the whole thing, and embarrassed and defensive. However, I did see video of a press conference where Menino was asked on Wednesday afternon about Turner’s claim that this was just a publicity campaign, and he answered by saying the facts aren’t yet clear.
<
p>
I submit to you the possibility of miscommunication, and the possibility that the city just didn’t believe Turner. Other possibilities aren’t too hard to think up, but in the meantime, I marvel at your omniscience.
That is because you are still fixated on the reaction as if it made sense: It happened this way, so this is how it should’ve been expected to happen. In reality, the reactions of a certain part of the audience were ridiculous and absurd, and nobody should’ve forseen it, any more than I could forsee that my buying batteries at the drugstore will cause someone to lose her job later that day because she neglected to bring batteries for her presentation and didn’t notice until too late and this drugstore was the only one nearby and they were out of stock because I bought them.
People are working very hard to establish conventional wisdom based on a fabricated narrative. It’s not easy, and you’re not helping!
Add in chocolaty overtones, and he’s a Merlot! Sorry, but sometimes descriptions of art, like wine, are just too hilarious for the good of the grape. chuckling