Ray Johnson, dead 17 years ago today: “I have simply had to accept the fact that out of a life necessity I have written a lot of letters, and given away a lot of material and information, and it has been a compulsion.”
Mail-Art is an international network of hundreds of artists who apply communicationmedia as artmedia. It concerns networkers or mail-artists who distribute their work primarily via mail, and less or not via galeries and museums. Through the years thousands (sometimes 50.000 is mentioned) of artists and non-artists have participated to this artistic movement. Ray Johnson once got the historical titel of “Father of Mail-Art” and that will always remain.
Ray Johnson [was the] initiator of the international mail art movement, . . . one of the most complex and idiosyncratic art projects of the 20th Century. A painter associated with the New York School of painting, Johnson had started it all the mid-1950’s, slowly building up a network of correspondents who would exchange objects and messages through the postal system. Initially it was Johnson himself sending out small collage-like works to a mailing list, urging people to keep them, to add to them, to change them, to send them to others, to return to sender. In time others joined in this activity, and in the course of the 1960’s and 1970’s the network grew way beyond the immediate reach and touch of Johnson’s own mailing activities. The initial network was named The New York Correspondance School (sic) – a spin or pun on the idea of artistic schools and the concomitant idea of art history as a succession of such schools. But then the quip about the history of Mail Art was itself a pun, of the most serious kind. Like so many other avant-garde artists (who left painting and behind) Johnson waseager to cut through the historicist temporality that informed modern art history and art production, with its logic of continual succession and supersession of artistic tradition. Cutting through this logic meant placing the production and thinking of art within the immanence of an eternal present, an uncontrollable present of events, not unlike the eternally present liveness of television [or the Internet? -- PF] – a technology and a communication medium which was just at that moment appropriated for artistic purposes.
On January 13, 1995, Johnson was seen diving off a bridge in Sag Harbor, Long Island, and backstroking out to sea. His body washed up on the beach the following day.Many aspects of his death involved the number “13″: the date; his age, 67 (6+7=13); the room number of a motel he’d checked into earlier that day, 247 (2+4+7=13), etc. Some continue to speculate about a ‘last performance’ aspect of Johnson’s drowning. Hundreds of collages were found carefully arranged in his home. He left no will and his estate is now administered by Richard L. Feigen & Co.
Chuck Welch, otherwise known in the mail art network as the Crackerjack Kid, has been an active participant in the international mail art network since 1978. In March 1995 — over 2 months after Johnson’s drowning – Welch received in the mail Johnson’s last self-portrait.
Clive Phillpot, in “The Mailed Art of Ray Johnson,” writes:
Examining the elements of Ray Johnson’s work, or disentangling the threads of his activity, would not be so worthwhile if he were not a superb graphic artist who pursues the embodiment of his thoughts with consummate economy and skill – and wit. The movements of his hand are responsive to the fluidity of his verbal and visual ideas. He animates the most unpromising shapes: he makes life flicker in the simplest forms. He is highly sensitive to words, both the way they look and the way they sound. He detects words within words, puns, and other oddities as easily as a heat-seeking missile rips through skeins of camouflage. He shapes letters and words deliberately and effortlessly, giving them, too, an organic life. He also knows how to animate the page, how to make the white spaces buzz. He combines pictures and texts in new, hybrid forms that seem genetically determined.
Mailings from Ray Johnson are a concatenation of ideas, sometimes distinct or decipherable, sometimes slippeng or sliding into one another Thus , Johnsonian physiognomical and biographical images mingle with recycled images of earlier work, with facets of a current art, and with other uncategorizable motifs and insertions, almost paralleling he flux of thought itself. Any of these elements may also overprinted with other images or texts, so that a mailing may be literally multilayered.
Reading such mail is simpler than reading a collage, for the layered elements can generally be isolated and examined. But Ray Johnson’s mind is so fertile, information-rich, and cross-connected, so full of potential visual and verbal associations, metaphors, puns, and rhymes, that while the flavor of his work may be enjoyed, some of the ingredients may remain mysterious. An unanticipated incident, image, or remark sets the Johnsonian circuits humming, and images and ideas print out that relate overtly or obscurely to the stimulus. Ray Johnson’s thinking is marvelously fluid and full of Leonardesque eddies. His ideas move and change, swerve and submerge, but continue on like a river.

[T]he New York Correspondence School has no history, only a present, which was a pun, of course, on present as now, and present as a gift, a pun on my way of giving information and objects or whatever in letterform. . . .
I’d like to do my own history as to what I think happened. Every time I get any publicity or press everybody has a different version as to when anything happened or as to what anything was and I myself don’t even know when anything happened, or what happened . . . .
I have simply had to accept the fact that out of a life necessity I have written a lot of letters, and given away a lot of material and information, and it has been a compulsion. And as I’ve done this, it has become historical. It’s my resumé, it’s my biography, it’s my history, it’s my life. And now, people always come up and say, “oh, you’re the father, you’re the father of mail art, and everybody got the idea of it from you, or was influenced by you” . . .
Why would any musician give away his music for free?
Have you ever known a Dead Head? Do you know any other band with such a devoted following? Did you know that it has been said that the Dead “may be the most profitable rock band in history.” Do you think that’s possible for a band that never had a #1 song or a #1 album and had only 2 songs ever that cracked the Top 40?
Maybe the money involved will make you believe:
Despite the death of its leader Jerry Garcia in 1995, Grateful Dead Productions continues to generate about $60 million a year in sales and licensing fees. Pretty good for a group that no longer exists.
Surely making that kind of money requires a fierce protection of one’s intellectual property rights, right? Bono, after all, took to the pages of the New York Times to warn that without fierce protection of their copyrights the movie and television industries might suffer the fate of the music industry:
Caution! The only thing protecting the movie and TV industries from the fate that has befallen music and indeed the newspaper business is the size of the files. The immutable laws of bandwidth tell us we’re just a few years away from being able to download an entire season of “24” in 24 seconds. Many will expect to get it free.
A decade’s worth of music file-sharing and swiping has made clear that the people it hurts are the creators — in this case, the young, fledgling songwriters who can’t live off ticket and T-shirt sales like the least sympathetic among us — and the people this reverse Robin Hooding benefits are rich service providers, whose swollen profits perfectly mirror the lost receipts of the music business.
We’re the post office, they tell us; who knows what’s in the brown-paper packages? But we know from America’s noble effort to stop child pornography, not to mention China’s ignoble effort to suppress online dissent, that it’s perfectly possible to track content. Perhaps movie moguls will succeed where musicians and their moguls have failed so far, and rally America to defend the most creative economy in the world, where music, film, TV and video games help to account for nearly 4 percent of gross domestic product. Note to self: Don’t get over-rewarded rock stars on this bully pulpit, or famous actors; find the next Cole Porter, if he/she hasn’t already left to write jingles.
Rather than prevent their audience from taping their concerts, as every other band did, the Dead set it free and encouraged tapers, hence sparking a revolution. You’d think giving their music away would have dampened their success; instead, the freebies propagated it. Even though people could get the Grateful Dead product for free, the band found itself playing in larger and larger stadiums as the fan base swelled and album sales accelerated: 19 gold albums, six platinum, and four multiplatinum.
And so on the official Grateful Dead web site you can listen to any of the weekly Grateful Dead Radio Hour, which, “[s]ince 1985, the show has featured exclusive interviews, music from the roots and branches of the band’s musical family tree, and of course a generous helping of unreleased live and studio recordings.” At the Internet Archive, you can listen to a seemingly endless number of those bootleg recordings the Grateful Dead encouraged, and you can download for free those that audience members made. And if that’s just too much to begin to comprehend, don’t worry! The Grateful Dead Listening Guide is a series of podcasts you can download to hear an expert’s introduction into the Work.
Perhaps it is not such a surprise, therefore, that we have articles like the one entitled “Management Secrets of the Grateful Dead.”
And you can even listen — right here below — to a recording of the Grateful Dead concert I attended 33 years ago this week, on January 18, 1979, at the Providence Civic Center
John Oswald, pioneer of the aural collage: the futility of law in the face of technology it cannot control.
I’ve written at length in this blog about compositions consisting of digital remixes of pre-recorded samples and the contentious and utterly unresolved tensions between copyright, fair use, and the extra-legal reality of practices that cannot be controlled by legal rules. I’ve written about artists as varied as Negativland, Girl Talk, Steinski, and Kutiman, among others. Negativland and Steinski were pioneers in the genre, composing their aural collages back in the ancient days before digital media made the stitching together of digital information something one could do sitting in front of a laptop in bed.
But no one was there before John Oswald of Plunderphonics. A mere fraction of his career’s chronology demonstrates that he is perhaps the pioneer of the genre:
1973-75
With the sanction of William S. Burroughs, John Oswald cut up recordings of him reading his texts advocating cutting up methods, & consequently discovered an acoustic pallindrome, mediations between backwards & forwards, polysyllabic masking & phase imploding.
1975
Oswald melds a radio evangelist with alleged satanists Led Zepplin in the early rap track POWER. released in 1995 by Musicworks magazine.
1975-85
MYSTERY TAPES assembly & dissemination (by Mystery Tapes Etc.International), include many early plunderphonistic experiments.
1980
Oswald guest produces a one hour radio show for CFRO in Vancouver called Sounds Wrong which includes the first public issues of Dolly Parton & Rite of Spring transformations.
1982
Collusion, a British magazine publishes an article by Oswald, entitled “Revolutions & Mr Dolly Parton – a vortex of of androgeny”.
1985
An essay by John Oswald entitled “Plunderphonics, or, Audio Piracy as a Compositional Prerogative” was presented at the Wired Society conference in Toronto.
1988
The original Plunderphonics EP (never-for-sale, out-of-print) was for its time the most extreme example of sampling ever produced. Four well-known music personalities representing four musical genres & four notable epochs of recording history were presented in surprising ways, or, as the press release put it: warp drive.
1989
The Plunderphonic CD (never-for-sale, remaining stocks destroyed by Michael Jackson & CBS) has become an underground cult classic. The realistic cover photo of a nude Michael Jackson revealed as a white woman paralleled the musical transformations depicted on the disc. Other electroquoted artists included Bing Crosby, The Beatles, Glenn Gould, Public Enemy & (consequently) James Brown.
You can read a more complete biography of Oswald here.
Far more interesting is an extensive recorded interview with Oswald. One of the most fascinating parts of the interview is Oswald’s account of his experience with the overwhelming legal forces brought to bear in the name of copyright enforcement against his new compositions. In a series of events not unlike those experienced by Negativland in connection with their composition U2, every last CD Oswald retained of his recording was destroyed. Of course, he had already distributed some of those CDs and was unable to recover them. And we all know digital media metastasize beyond any capacity of corporate control. So, of course, as with Negativland’s U2, Oswald’s recording not only continues to exist; it is available (for free) for digital downloading.
For your listening pleasure, I include here one track from the album: Glenn Gould-Aria(mp3).
Creativity? YOU CAN’T HANDLE CREATIVITY!
In a study out of Cornell University, The Bias Against Creativity: The Reason People Desire But Reject Creative Ideas, the authors point out that creative responses to problems create uncertainty, and that people reject those creative ideas because they can’t handle the uncertainty:
Although the positive associations with creativity are typically the focus of attention both among scholars and practitioners, the negative associations may also be activated when people evaluate a creative idea. For example, research on associative thinking suggests that strong uncertainty feelings may make the negative attributes of creativity, particularly those related to uncertainty, more salient
The authors conclude:
Our results show that regardless of how open minded people are, when they feel motivated to reduce uncertainty either because they have an immediate goal of reducing uncertainty, or feel uncertain generally, this may bring negative associations with creativity to mind which result in lower evaluations of a creative idea.
I’ve always told students and colleagues that being genuinely creative requires courage and the ability to persevere in the face of rejection. There’s good reason for that. As much as “innovation” is the catchword of our age, very few people in decision-making positions are really brave enough to accept innovative ideas (whether they’re teachers, school administrators, politicians, lawyers, or corporate executives).
hat tip to Farnam Street
