Congratulations, standing ovations, bouquets, and such are in order... take a bow, accept flowers, crack open the champagne...

This post is a break from the essay test drive mode I've followed up to now. A Heiligen Testament, theses nailed to the "cathedral" door? Or just a temporary departure, an aberration? I know less than even the unwariest reader. It is, however, a return and a new direction - to wit the change of name. I was never happy with "Mountainair Meanderings" or "Mountain Flâneuse." "flâneuse contrariante" may suit. If it doesn't, I'll just change the blog name until it does suit.

Anyway, as I said, congratulations, standing ovations, bouquets, and such are in order...

Say wha? Well, I have finally arrived as a blogger, even if the authenticating source (hereafter referred to as "they" with obligatory nod to pomo irony) swims in the local twitdom pool. Local arts council PTB are taking umbrage at blog - not Mountainair Arts one but at this one, formerly the other Mountainair blog, which said unidentified "they" claim confuses "people" (more indefinite pronoun abuse) into thinking it is the "official" arts council voice. Apparently, all art aficionados are equal but some are more equal than others...

There is even just the tiniest implication that I've hatched this nefarious plot on purpose out of an inherent sense of soul-scouring negativity. So "they" are advising members to shun both blogs. Needless to say the self-same censors & thought police promoting "they" parade themselves about as enlightened liberals. I am of course delighted delighted and have been chomping at the bit to blog it.

To have their knickers in a knot over this, any blog, or even personal opinion as inflammatory or incendiary, which is what I have heard it called, among other absurdities. But really, thank-you's & e-flowers are more in order than grice. I do wonder though what very sheltered & intellectually arid lives they must lead.

"Negativity" bit is another compliment, affirming my continued membership in the Naked Emperor Chapter of Enlightenment and Question Authority Club. Manipulated consensus sucks. Editorially then, eschewing even seemingly innocent "group think" constructions (such as the editorial "we") cannot but follow.

I share Mark Twain's reservations about the first person plural: "Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial "we." The 1st person plural deceives the reader by creating a false illusion of consensus, manipulating fake agreement. The undecided, resistant, or naturally inclined to question authority have a right to make up their own minds in their own time and without undue pressure to "go along.”

Interestingly, the source appears to be primarily what I might call old wave arts PTB rather than newcomers I've mocked for their oddly naive notions of instituting change. They mean well but really should read more Balzac. PTB have grown accustomed to authority - questioned yes but not so publicly or frontally - and being the deciders on anything passing as an art event.

The dynamic here is definitely worth a considered essay (as opposed to just another off the cuff, unrevised blog post) - one drawing on and citing appropriate post-modern cultural theorists. At the moment I'm leaning toward Baudrillard and Guillory.