The Hot Chestnut Man

Claire Fox from The Institute of Ideas attacks The Hot Chestnut Man around rights etc

http://littleonion.posterous.com/institue-of-ideas…

Gee! These chestnuts are shaping up might tasty!

Thanks to Claire for her comments. The Institute of Ideas ‘Battle of Ideas’ takes place at the Royal College of Art 30th, 31st October. It is co-sponsored by Shell.

Shell Oil Make Billions In Nigeria

“As convenor of the Battle of Ideas festival, with a slogan Free Speech Allowed, we take the issue of free expression too seriously to reduce it to a juvenile stunt. What is more, the idea of book-burning is an anathema, a revolting notion that goes against the ethos of free speech. Artistic freedom may extend to idiots, but that doesn’t mean that we endorse every nonsense act in its name. The Institute of Ideas disassociates itself from the planned idiotic and childish actions of The Hot Chestnut Man”.

Claire Fox, Director, Institute of Ideas; convenor, Battle of Ideas festival

Just got sent the above from a journalist who asked for a reaction to The Hot Chestnut Man. He’s asked for my reaction…

Well the quote from Claire probably illustrates and amplifies better the underlying context / intentions of the Hot Chestnut Man than I ever could- so I’ll just say for the moment “Thanks”

More Hot Chestnut talk:

Stewart Home The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it. Karl Marx (1845), Theses on Feuerbach (Thesis XI)

Paul Conneally one of my favourite quotes from Thesis X1 ! here are some more out of the luscious lips of Mother Goose – a nursery rhyme before bed.. http://littleonion.posterous.com/macrame-for-beginners

Stewart Home The Splacist Revolution Has Begun!

Paul O’Kane The Marxists have only changed the world, the point is to imagine it.

Stewart Home Marx was in fact the first person to insist he was not a Marxist….

Gerry Mallon why?

Paul O’Kane I think this comment refers to the fact that for Marx ideas must remain to some degree speculative and not dogmatic. The failure of Marxism can be seen as due to its dogmatic interpretation by Stalin. One becomes dogmatic once one becomes ‘a thing’ and defends that ‘thing’ rather than being an idea, adaptable to change, dynamic, evolving. To say ‘I am a Marxist’ makes one a thing.

Stewart Home Also it makes a fetish of the contributions of one man to the workers movement, Marx of course made a major contribution to communism but communists don’t make a fetish of individuals….

Paul O’Kane Hear Hear! Let’s not do that. It sounds dirty and nasty.

Stewart Home Yes, we’re communists not marxists!

Paul Conneally Splacey!

Paul O’Kane In Blanchot’s ‘The Unavowable Community’ he says that during and after May ’68 the heart of the Left realised it could no longer avow or describe itself either to others or even to itself. He said it became (of necessity) ‘the community of those who have no community’. I’m sure this is right. I wouldn’t say I am a communist or a Marxist but avow only to that community described above by Monsieur Blanchot. (this might also be a good riposte to Cameron’s abuse of the term ‘society’.

Stewart Home But where do you fit class politics into that – there is no real community in capitalism so you end up in the same sort of place as Camatte claiming capitalism has escaped and now oppresses a universal human class….

Paul O’Kane I suppose it IS a rather educated take on things, and came out of the university occupations Blanchot witnessed, not the factory occupations of course. Interesting point though. I wonder if there is away to rephrase it in a way that IS adap…table to the working class perspective?
It’s so urgent to find a new framework for class politics, it’s all over the shop now and dangerously so. If I find the answer I will trumpet it to you.See More

Stewart Home I’ll stay tuned then….

Paul Conneally spent day at Snibston Colliery – an artist briefing – fascinating – the miners in Leicestershire did not join UDM but stayed NUM but did not strike… thirty – the dirty thirty as they were called by other Leicestershire miners – stayed out… for the whole strike – the non-striking miners were seen as heroes by Thatcher and maybe the many of the population who wanted to see the miners smashed – their pits were closed of course along with the others – some artists writers etc have made a good living out of works about the strike especially about striking miners – today i got a sense that this whole mining community around Snibston (which is now a heritage site) have never recovered from being heroes of thatcher to being class traitors I’m interested in the whole place space and time politics that now see the area a hot bed for right wing recruiters with a BNP councillor… just a few (2 -3) miles away Wordsworth, Coleridge, Scott, Constable stayed and worked – wordsworth built a grotto… got to do some work here… class politics… walk the minefield… BOOM!

Paul O’Kane Sounds rich material for research … projects etc. Strange how today all these pivots and divots you mention are still the ground on which we are standing -Palimpsests!

Paul Conneally still scraping…

Paul Conneally /p/705241/1/asc

Paul O’Kane Great work (hang on you should be on strike!)

Stewart Home Art strike? Strike an artist!

Paul O’Kane http://www.thing.de/projekte/7:9%23/y_About_the_Art_Strike.html

Stewart Home We don’t need it now…. the art world is falling apart of its own accord!

Marx and Engels Meet Mother Goose

ENEMY OF INTELLIGENCE

Things are hotting up.

This week has seen several jounalists calling me to see if I would ‘allow’ or even ‘encourage’ the burning of holy books such as the Bible and the Koran.

I explained that people could burn what ever texts they wanted on The Hot Chestnut Man’s brazier, and that I am not really interested in what they choose to burn or not as long as it helps get the chestnuts nice and hot and tasty.

I was asked, I suppose taking a similar line to that Dave Beech originally did, if The Hot Chestnut Man was anti-culture, anti-debate, even anti-intelligence.

Well he can be all these, the opposite and more.

Here’s a video with one response but it’s not of course definitive, just one truth that some have already found.

What’s your take on the whole thing?

I’m going to ask my dad.

As Paul Conneally prepares for his The Hot Chestnut Man piece outside the Royal College of Art Battle of Ideas he is accused of being Anti-Intelligence, Anti Left Wing, Anti Religion, Marxist, Fascist

On the way out throw me an idea or two … cont.

Dave Beech Acconci wouldn’t be the classic artist of dematerialization. You would maybe get more mileage out of Barry or Weiner in terms of a dematerialization of physical matter that prioritizes their conceptual nature. Or you could think of the eras…ed de Kooning drawing maybe as different kind of precedent? Or the various examples of self-destructive art? Picabia’s ‘Fig Leaf’ might be interesting too. What about Landy’s skip?

My view, Paul, is that the conceptualists seriously underestimaged the materiality of ideas and culture. Ideas that are denied material presence (and I am including speech in this) eventually wither and die. Ideas simply do not exist independently of materiality even if they are not ontologically reducible to it. People who are very experienced at Chess can play in their heads, but they need to learn on a board with pieces. The same goes for learning holy scripture by heart. We might like to think that our ideas are internal and belong to us, but their existence in large part depends on the material practices and institutions that seem to be separable from them.

Paul O’Kane Yes, I am always amused by the prevalence of B&W phortographs and typewritten texts which now stand-in for what may have seemed at the time to be ‘dematerialsed’ practices. Photography and typewriting in the heyday of Conceptualism seemed t…o be considered a kind of invisible and objective record untouched by idiosyncratic material qualities -hilarious.

However, studying PhD in a framework of ‘History of Ideas’ I did become very impressed by the way that our ‘world’ is so thoroughly shaped by ideas, ideas which, while immaterial take concrete forms in order to impact upon the world but which are also infinitely ‘plastic’ and ‘malleable’ in the sense D&G would agree I think. Ideas must be irreverently ‘forged’, ‘reformed’ ‘juxtaposed, ‘turned upside-down’ etc. etc. i.e. we must never treat them as sacred or unworldly but in just the same way we treat any other material.

Dave Beech I think we have very different ontologies of the ‘idea’ Paul

Paul O’Kane Oh no that’s awful!