Category: censorship (Page 3 of 4)

Re: Reality Playings April 2009 page is up! (Paul Escriva) II

Hi Frankie,

Well it figures.

Sounds like the combine is trying to worm it’s way into public access?

Your poem is amazing and it’s composition on the page is beautiful!

Pablo

* * * * *

you got that right! See my email to Annie! In the big picture, the phone company, the cable company and politicians are actively doing away with public access, first in California, then the rest of the country. They have been successful in L. A. and in San Francisco. In Berkeley the public access people out of dumbness are making this much easier… As liberals often do!

In Freedom,
Frank Moore

FRANK MOORE’S UNLIMITED POSSIBILITIES on BTV, Ch. 24 & Ch. 28, May-June 2009

Hi Annie,

We are playing your “Herstory of Porn” on Frank’s Show on Berkeley’s Public Access Channel. Here is the schedule.

Linda

FRANK MOORE’S UNLIMITED POSSIBILITIES on BTV, Ch. 24 & Ch. 28, May-June 2009

402. “Reality Playings” 2/21/09, Temescal Arts Center, Part 2 / Annie Sprinkle’s “Herstory Of Porn” / “Bad Thoughts” cartoon (from IHC sampler)
Monday, May 11, 11pm
Thursday, May 14, 11pm
Saturday, May 16, midnight

Hot shit!
Linda Mac

* * * * *

Really? Can you show that on TV!!!? Amazing.Fisting, pissing, stump fucking, etc? Good luck. You are very brave!

xannie

* * * * *

well, Annie, it is art and her/history, hence not obscenity. They have tried that one on me and lost. I have played explicit art from time to time to keep the freedom active. But it is funny you wrote today because they just came out with new rules for having series on the channel, rules obviously aimed to limit my presence on the channel. One of these rules states that no two shows on the same day shall not have the same Host… So that effectively banned THE BEST OF FRANK’S MOORE’S UNLIMITED POSSIBILITIES which now runs late night every night. It would make sense if they had shows to fill the time slots. But they don’t! But today I pulled the plug on THE BEST OF… Saving myself for the future fights which obviously are coming! My run on public access probably is running out… As the existence of public access probably is also.

hey, we just watched THE BEST OF MIDNIGHT BLUE: THE PORN STARS and there you were! You were great with your power Tools! A fun video! One netflix reviewer said “Annie Sprinkle was funny a la Sarah Silverman.” I agree! Al Goldstein did a cameo in THE OUTRAGEOUS BEAUTY REVUE… I interviewed him on stage. He wanted to put some of the acts of OBR on MIDNIGHT BLUE. But I did not like the cameraman Al picked. So I demanded to see the footage before I agreed. This pissed Al off for years!

In Freedom,

Frank Moore

you guys may like…

Hi, guys! Below is a oldie but goodie. I wrote it before the internet hit the public, before the zine movement, before Berkeley had a public access channel, etc. As I told Penny on the show, when I went to the San Francisco Art Institute in the early eighties, I freaked them out. At best they ignored me. But they gave me shit about everything. I didn’t do anything the right way. VHS had just come out. I got a whole vhs system. [that is a story in itself!] They looked down upon vhs as home movie shit, not professional like three quarter inch tape. But vhs was cheaper, lighter, easier to use… Much more practical! So for years I made videos and basically put them in the closet, waiting for channels to show them on.

So one day I was watching the local college television channel and noticed that their general manager had the same name as my best friend from high school in southern California! Ruth, remember John Webb? He was the only longhair in the school in sixty-five. A radical. Ruth, John, and I did an underground paper, with the help of our World Cultures teacher Raymond Haight. Mr. Haight is one of my personal heroes who by example shaped my life.

Yes, it was John, my high school friend! I thought I had it made in the shade! I finally had a channel for my videos! But John was not the same! He had become a yuppie liberal! He would not play my videos… Not because of their content, mind you. But because they were not technically broadcast quality, not professional, people would not watch them because of their form. I argued we needed to expand outside the narrow zone of what was acceptable beyond the prescribed brainwash. The prescribed brainwash kept the Media outside of the grasp of us. Of course the content was the real issue. But for liberals, technical quality is a more appropriate reason for rejection… they don’t have to admit that they are censoring. For years I saw John around town. I always needled him about changing. Of course in high school they couldn’t bar me, their poster crip from graduation as they did John for our underground paper. Of course my fate was sealed when Mr. Morton, our ex- marine right wing journalism teacher came up to me at graduation and said, “you will be a conservative within ten years.” That ain’t going to happen!

The experience with John triggered this essay. Within a couple of years of writing this essay everything opened up… The internet, the zine movement, Berkeley getting its public access channel, etc. and I was ready!

Cultural Subversion
copyrighted 1991 Frank Moore

This will be personal. But the personal level is the key to understanding the cultural, artistic, and political movement which is taking back technology into the personal control of anyone who has something to say, something to create. It is personal technology, anarchistic technology. It is not like cable T.V. which we were told ten years ago would liberate the person by giving him intimate and direct information and communication channels…but which today is simply more channels for the money types who have always controlled the communication flowing through mass media…just more monopolized channels for passive entertainment, selling, and manipulation of information and of reality. The only exception to this is the local access channels which are kept in the closet and are always in danger of being axed by the cable company. These access channels are a part of the personal technology.

Personal technology is basically a slip up of what I have called elsewhere “the combine plot”. I took the term “combine” from the Ken Kesey novel One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. The combine plot is a hidden dynamic system of power, control, and interest that keeps the tools of creation and of effective change out of the hands of the common people. This keeps the people powerless, keeping the power within an elite. The tools of effective change have been kept out of the hands of the common people by false rituals of education, money, and bulky expensive equipment which took a cult knowledge to operate. Added to this maze of creative blocks was the false myths about talent and the acceptable quality levels needed to reach people, acceptable quality levels below which people are trained to not watch or listen.

All of this is too abstract and philosophical. In this article, I will try to pull these issues down into the real world by using my own artistic experiences as a context. But it is important to realize at
the beginning that personal technology, anarchistic technology is still technology. All technology has hidden, built-in links to the established order of isolation and fragmentation. These links can
frustrate attempts to use technology to subvert the established reality. Only by being always aware of these links to isolation and fragmentation inherent in all technology, can technology be safely used as a tool of cultural subversion. This fact again banged me over the head when I was talking to a successful musician who didn’t understand why all performers do not stop touring, considering the pollution caused by traveling…and do what he does, which is do everything through telecommunications. I just said you can not touch through phones, computers, videos…and even through writing. To restore humanity to our culture by using technology, we must know and admit the limitations of that technology.

All technology is a double-edged sword. This includes the very first communication technology…writing/reading. We usually think of the invention of writing as extremely liberating. And in so many ways it was. But in so many other ways it confined humanity. For one thing, it placed a fixed linear frame of thinking within the human brain much more than spoken language had done. Moreover, writing/reading created a very exclusive elite for most of the known human history. Before writing, everyone knew the tribal language…everyone knew how to paint, sing, dance. Information flowed both between people and within time to the future through this tribal accessible language both of spoken word and of art. If information did not flow through this tribal channel, that information was lost. All of this changed when writing was invented. Now there was a channel that was not accessible to everyone, a channel that did not easily lose information. Those who could access this channel had power. Because of this, for most of recorded history, the skill of reading/writing was monopolized by the ruling elite to maintain its power. This was true even after a larger minority gained limited access to the flowing channel of writing. One of the ways the elite maintained its control was by withdrawing the important ideas…dangerous ideas…both sacred and profane, away from the common people, withdrawing the dangerous ideas into a dead language such as Latin or Greek. Only the members of the elite who went through the rituals of education of the established order (be it religious, political, and/or class) could read or speak this dead language of power. There was another channel of flowing information which was folk art, folk music, and folk words, be it written or spoken. This folk channel was accessible to everyone. It was a dynamic, interactive channel of communication. But the full force of this folk channel was always kept in check by the elite channel with the myth that anything which comes through the folk channel was not worthy or important because it did not come from the hidden knowledge.

This control by the elite did not start to break down until the printing press became cost- accessible to the members of the common people. This opened to the common people a communication channel which was not rooted in physical time…that is, you write something and someone within another time, another place reads exactly what you thought. This is the real force which was unlocked by the printing press, and not the ability to reach mass amounts of people. Without the printing press being to a large degree accessible to the forces of change, the American and French Revolutions may not have happened.

But the elite quickly developed strategies to limit access for the common people to this printing channel. The elite spread the myth that to be really effective, a writer had to go through the rituals of the educational system, and then be blessed by being recognized by the publishing factory, which became increasingly massive and impersonal. Self-publishing was labeled “vanity press”. The presses that offered this service were seen as cons, as scams. Writers who used this service were thought of as untalented fools who got conned. The individual who believed in this myth of the power of the corporate media system to bestow access to communications, and to bestow validity through acceptance, was frozen out of any real position for subversive change.

All of this is an historical background on which I can talk about the issues of personal technology, anarchistic technology in the context of cultural subversion.

I started out in the late 60’s writing for underground papers as a political columnist…sneaking into the mimeograph room at school to run off a hundred copies under the protection of a friendly teacher. Of course, the teacher always, as well as us, got into hot water…and the access to the mimeograph machine was closed. No access, no underground paper. There was not any question about our buying our own mimeograph machine…no money.

But it took only a year or so for the underground press to move from the mimeograph stage into being run off at offset print shops. The underground press had its roots going back through the radical press of the 20’s and 30’s and in the poetry press. The kind of person who put out these papers poured all their personal money into it, then hoped by selling ads, selling papers, by magic, the paper would stay afloat. There was rarely any question of making money on it. But when your nest egg, your dead aunt’s money, ads, sales, or whatever was supporting your rag ran out, that paper of visions died. But there was always a new paper being born to fill the empty space.

There was a rejection of the old standards of quality of both form and content which had kept the common people from creating. As a result of this rejection, a new way of looking at art, politics, and life was thus created. The underground press became so effective that by the early 70’s there were over 700 of these papers and an underground press network. It became so effective that the F.B.I. targeted the underground press for destruction by a covert war. By using the fact that the underground papers rarely had direct access to a printing press, and by using the organization which developed around the underground press, the F.B.I. and the rest of the combine could bring the underground press into control, into the fold.

Around this time, I rejected politics as a means for effective subversive change, and began looking towards art and magic for an effective channel. I took a film-making course, learning the technical rituals of 16mm. 16mm was then the home movie technology. But when I did the technological rituals of lighting, shooting, splicing, etc., they took me away from the actual magic of doing. Hidden within these technological rituals are deadening roadblocks to direct personal creative communications. Roadblocks can be gotten around. But why bother when there are direct alternative routes?

After the film course, I still had no money to make films. One road would have been to put my time and energy into getting money or a position to make films. But I always have mistrusted the myth of changing the system from within. It never works. Once you compromised, modified, changed, distorted both yourself and your message to get the media channel, why bother sending the message? The system myth is a major vacuum that sucks creative power away from people by putting vast amounts of time between the person and the act of creation. Whether the myth is of waiting to get enough money, education, or power before you create, the effect is the same…waiting for Godot.

For these reasons, I created a no/low tech form of live performance which did not need money, theater space, sets, stage lighting, approval, or a particular audience size. This no/low tech
form is vital to work which is culturally subversive by expanding the concept of sexuality and reality beyond the frame of taboos.

For me as a no/low tech artist, the personal technology, anarchistic technology is a very important dimension. I first realized this when I was trying to get established in N.Y.C. in the early 70’s. I could not find out about art events until after the fact when I read about them in THE VILLAGE VOICE. So I couldn’t go to them. So I couldn’t meet people with whom I could have gotten something going. One reason for this was there was very little flyering. In N.Y.C., organized crime has a monopoly on putting up posters. I did not realize how much no flyering isolated people until I moved to Berkeley where on every telephone pole, there were 10, 20, 30 flyers. Anyone who has an event, a group, a cause, something to say, can go to a xerox place, run off hundreds, or even thousands of flyers and staple them up all over town. This direct two-way form of the press plugged me immediately into the community where I could do my work.

We have to start seeing flyering, be it on telephone poles or on computer bulletin boards, as a form of personal press, and as such is protected under the freedom of press. Big Brother comes in many forms from the mafia to government (down to the anti-flyer laws as part of a city’s “beautification” campaign) to corporations such as A.T.&T. and Blockbuster Videos. Just recently I saw the power of this direct personal press. For years I have not been able to be booked in the “alternative” performance galleries in the Bay Area for various reasons…so I put 500 “too controversial for the Bay Area” flyers up asking for leads to spaces in which to perform. From the very first flyer we put up came three good leads into the true alternative art scene. Moreover, the flyer directly exposed the true condition of the established “alternative” art world.

This direct exposing is one of the strengths of the personal technology, anarchistic technology in the context of cultural subversion. Be it a camcorder capturing police brutality or a xerox zine publishing radical heretofore unpublishable material, the effect is to decentralize power, putting it into the personal level. I noticed this again last year when Senator Jesse Helms targeted me for investigation for my art. With only one exception, no one from the regular press contacted me to get my reaction or story. Some of the art magazines printed my open letter to Helms and my article on censorship. But I reached a wide national audience when THE SPIRITUAL REVOLUTIONARY (TSR), a newsletter zine by S/R PRESS, printed both. While TSR has a small readership, other zines reprinted my two pieces from TSR, without my permission but without editing. Then still other zines reprinted the material from those zines. The effect of this anarchistic grapevine of xerox zines is I had exposure to a wide national audience which was made up of small subcultures.

The combine recognizes the uncontrollable force represented by the direct personal communications through the anarchistic technology. The combine is trying to put this genie back in the bottle. The easiest, and the most obvious way to do this is to censor the physical channels…be it phone lines, the mail, or T.V./radio waves. But there are hidden means by which the combine can thwart the direct personal use of technology. One of these is making equipment such as computers, obsolete every six months, not for any real functional improvement, but for progress. The effect of habitual upgrading is not only that we keep having to buy new soft/ hardware, but it also creates a false mystery around the computer very much like the dead language of Latin did in the Dark Ages.

But the best way for the combine to curb the use of personal technology is by the standards of “professional quality”.

When I xerox-published by first two books, I did not run into this wall of “professional quality”. This is because I sold them directly, personally at my performances, as well as by the mail
through a review in BOX OF WATER.

But when S/R PRESS xerox-published by book, CHEROTIC MAGIC, we took it, along with my zine THE CHEROTIC rEVOLUTIONARY, around to bookstores. The reason why a lot of the bookstores gave for not carrying the book was not the written or the visual contents of the book, but that it had a spiral binding, rather than a regular binding. Having a regular binding would boost the cost out of the realm of personal level and into the traditional publishing with its concerns of mass sales. Kyle Griffith is fond of saying that if the book’s format is too revolutionary for a bookstore, then the content is also…so it would serve no purpose for us to try to package it differently. I must quickly add that there are quite a few bookstores that are not locked into buying solely from a distributor, that will carry personal xerox-published books and zines. Moreover, there are bookstores devoted to personal xerox publications…for example, METROPOPHOBOBIA in, of all places, Phoenix! These outlets for personal publications will multiply in the coming years.

I have dealt with the barriers of format and technology to personal direct human involvement in every medium I have tried. A lot of people have assumed this was because I was poor, did not know how to get grants, did not know how to use technology, or did not know how to use the system. In reality, even if I had tons of money, I would still use the same no/low tech, because that is the best way to take back the creative force from the combine…back into the hands of anyone with a creative urge…or, for that matter, a destructive urge.

Since we are communicating on the personal level, you can send feedback, inquiries, or whatever to me at:

Frank Moore
P.O. Box 11445
Berkeley, CA 94712
e-mail: fmoore@eroplay.com

In Freedom,
Frank Moore

RE: Students’ questions

Hey Frank,

For some kids, they really can think 😛 They deserve answers ! 🙂

I was just saying, about the nude thing, you shouldn’t stop with it entirelly, BUT: le contenant ne doit pas se transformer en contenu ( your message should not stand in yourself being nude, your nudity is just what surrounds the content of your message; In others words, when your buying an excellent chocolat candy piece, would you rather enjoy the chocolat or the foil ? Both if ever, but your in it to taste the chocolat piece, not to eat the foil ).

Anyways, who the fuck am I to give you lessons about anything, I still got so much to learn…

And maybe I understood it all wrong, I just wanted to help giving my opinion,

C’est la tienne qui compte en bout de ligne de toute façon,

Salut O Grand chaman !

Et à la prochaine,

Rafael

* * * * *

I find most people can think if you don’t sell them short or out. They will rise to your expectations most of the time.

Mmmmm, I have been getting and ignoring such dreadful if well meaning advice for over forty years… Since high school! The job of being an artist is not to limit the art, but to push back the limits… At least that is what I am about.

In this case there was no nudity, eroticism, whatever. None! What triggered the freaked out state of the teacher was going outside of the normal boxes to where all is possible. In reality that is usually the case even when they can blame their freak out on nudity, eroticism, whatever.

In my art of a shaman writing about my show of the seventies, the outrageous beauty revue, I wrote:

There was tremendous pressure on me to polish the show up to make it more sellable, more entertaining. This pressure did not come from the critics, but from friends and cast members. “Add rimshots, tighten it up. Then the show will be a commercial success.” “We should rehearse more,then we could be good theatre, good music.” But the vision was not about commercial success, nor reaching a lot of people, nor about good entertainment, nor art. The vision is to create trances and realities which will bring change. This is my vision. The vision has me. I am its tool. If I had not stayed within the vision, I would have been lost within artistic pressures. Art should be a vision quest.

Other kinds of pressures were to change the content, the tools, and the focus of the work. People always say they like the work because it is strong, but I should get over my obsession with sex and nudity, and get on to more important issues; I should not get “stuck” in one vision. What they do not realize is what they like about the work, the strength, comes from being committed to a single vision, no matter what the current trends and fashions are. I cannot imagine more important issues than sex and freedom symbolized by nudity. But, as this paper shows, these are not my ultimate focus. Sex and nudity are powerful digging tools to reach the intimate community. By limiting the tools of art, art itself is limited.

When the artist is rooted in private rituals, it becomes clear that she is not an agent for society, or some political movement, or the art galleries and art “experts”, or even for her own individualistic imagination. Instead, she is an agent of gods, of dreams, of visions and myths. This causes reactions in society, especially when the piece is public. Karen Finley is criticized for limiting her audience because she offends them by her words, anger, nudity. An artist who is rooted in the private channels is not affected by this attempt to curb the power of the art by strapping it to audience acceptance and agreement. The power of a Karen Finley is TO the taboo-breaking energy she releases into society. This societal pressure to tame art down, which usually sounds very reasonable and comes even from liberal sources, is very hard for the artist to resist who is not familiar with the hidden channels of change.

Another example of society’s attempt to rechannel the change coming from Shamanistic Art is what an “art expert” told me: “Your work is…not art…(because) it doesn’t address the concerns…(which are a) part of the current art dialogue, whether it be mainstream or ‘alternative’…curators and presenters are (not) obliged to show it”. She went on to say that I should stay “in (my) own sphere”, and that I don’t need the public channels that galleries represent. Which is true. But galleries and the people who think what is in galleries is the full range of art need the artists, not the reverse. The magic of private performance is needed to expand the narrow, shallow river of “the current art dialogue”, controlled both in content and depth by the art experts. Fortunately, there are galleries which are willing to go into the magical unknown represented by private performances.

I have debated with myself about stopping resisting the label SEXUAL. By insisting what I am doing is not sexual, I am opening myself up to people questioning my honesty and integrity. If I accept the sexual label, people would just have to decide whether or not they like sex in art — decide whether it is art or not. That would be the depth of the questioning. They may feel uncomfortable seeing sex as art — but that uncomfortableness would be just from breaking the taboo of sex — which would not be that big of a deal. What I am doing is taking nudity and acts that are usually considered sexual and giving them a new, nonsexual context. That creates a tension, a conflict, an examining, a leap into something new. That is what I am after. This leap into newness is why people who are normally comfortable with casual nudity and casual sex sometimes get very uncomfortable with the nudity and erotic play in my work. By taking “sexual” acts and sincerely putting them into a different context, it creates another reality, another way of relating. It also creates conflict with the normal reality — and that conflict may change, in an underground sort of way, the normal reality. I think art — or at least this kind of art — should create conflict and change. And I like relating with people in the “unnormal” way in this different reality. This is why I do performance.

Rawness in itself is threatening because it opens the way for everyone to express their feelings directly. Rawness inspires. It breaks the chains of the rules.

The show was in bad taste, was called “exploitive”. What made it thus was not just what was done, but who was doing it…crips, women and other “untalented” unfortunates. The first assumption of the people who were offended was that these were able-bodied actors making fun of crips; then, when it became clear we were real crips, the leap into dumbness was that someone was exploiting us. When they got it into their heads that we had created our own acts, the new way to deny our power was to say we were exploiting our own bodies. Forget nudity. Forget being sexual. Just by getting up onto the stage we were exploiting our own bodies. Women share this hidden yoke of suppression. By breaking this yoke, by offending a lot of people, the show released, inspired, and liberated a lot more. Artists and musicians come up to me today and say they saw the O.B.R. when they were kids and thought if we could do that, they could do what they dreamt.

and in my Numbers Game I wrote:

Most people think to be the most effective, you have to reach as many people as possible. And to do that, they think you have to do it through the mass media. And to do that, they think you have to fit (water down) the content, style, and form to the mass media, to play by the rules of the game. This is based on the faulty formula of Effectiveness = Number Directly Reached (or how big the audience is). It always seemed to me this formula is extremely simplistic and inaccurate. A more accurate formula is Effectiveness = Purity-of-the-Art x (Number Directly Reached x 10). Purity-of-the Art is a measurement of how close the delivered art is to the original intent, content, message, power, etc. Obviously the higher the P.A. Count, the more effective the art is. It is simple science! And you can just imagine what happens if the P.A. Count happens to be in the negative! By the way, the 10 represents Number Indirectly Reached, which in reality is always an unknown number.
I have never focused on how many people have come in contact with the work. I focus on doing the work. So I have never been sucked into the numbers addiction, have never been tempted to shape the work to get “an audience”.

BUT I WENT ON TO SHOW PLAYFULLY HOW I HAVE REACHED MANY MORE PEOPLE THAN MOST ARTISTS WHO FOCUS ON REACHING THE MASSES!

In Freedom,
Frank Moore

RE: oh, well ?

Socrates used to open the young’s mind: he got executed for that ( well, as far as history tells us, but we know it might have been for some other reasons ( conflict of interest perhaps )

Should we suppose the official reasons of the power’s decision was to not disturb public order.

In your case, I suppose that you would be opening these young minds with your nudity art.

But should you consider these are Christians ( born again or strong believers, we don’t care… ), you would be disturbing their “order” and beliefs.

In a more pragmatic way, maybe the teacher, whom I supposed is sympathetic to you and your philosophy
and the fact that your not afraid of prejudice and judgement, is afraid herself to get into trouble ( fired or suid by parents ) with the nudity content if ever some kids naivelly report your performance to their very christian parents…

May I suggest you consider collaborating with university teachers instead, or at least, liberal and laic organisations ?

You just can’t beat endoctrinated children/young teenagers, Frank: like in the “Matrix” movie, if they knew allready how much their mind could open, and how reality really is ( even if we undertstand only portion of it ), they would certainlly take the blue pill. And even if you force or trick them into taking the red pill, too many would regret and rather return to their state of “sheep”, sleepwalking in the illusions of doctrines. In other words, they might be easier targets because their minds are constructing and of their innocence, but in my opinion, they would also be more fragile.

To us, fighting the system and enlightening ourselves and others is honorable and exiting; To them, ignorance is bliss.

Don’t mellow your position Frank, reach out to our potential allies instead, so that we can outnumber them at last;

In freedom of thought we stand in the face of this new centurie’s pluralist totalitarianism, but should be aware of not falling into that game by our position: we have no other choice but to see ourselves in opposition to “them”, but should seek the opportunity to band with those who nourish the same hopes as us, may it be on different battlefields and with complementary view points.

Rafael ( sorry for the revolutionnary poetry, but you know I like that and I got more and more possesed as I’ve gone through with my text )

* * * * *

it is more a case of “self-censorship “… The most dangerous kind of censorship… And the most common kind also.

In Freedom,
Frank Moore

* * * * *

Hey Frank,

Well, if you don’t wan’t to start in that path, choose other targets: you shoudn’t have to censor your convictions unless for purposes of protection, and even then, you have to fool them into believing you have censored yourself and choose that path 😉

Rafael

* * * * *

well, I always thought censorship, and especially self-censorship, is anti-art, to put it nicely. And self-censorship is shooting your own foot, a shitty form of “protection.” and there’s no such thing as self-censorship. You are censoring the art, censoring the audience, censoring reality. And you are promoting censoring, making censoring easier and more “reasonable “/”acceptable.” my policy is they will have to do the censoring and I will expose them… Which is one of the functions of the job of being an artist.

In Freedom,
Frank Moore

Re: NowCasting.com – Pending Casting Notice

Frank,

Thanks for thinking of NowCasting.
However, I think this is not a good match. I have seen your work live and I have seen the website. It is what it is and power to ya! But it is not something that the actors using NowCasting are going to respond to….and I guarantee that no matter how clear and explicit you are in the Casting Notice, this will just end up a headache for me. NowCasting is one of the nations primary casting websites. I don’t think any of the main three will post for eroplay unless they fail to to investigate it at all. I really think that you should stick with Craigslist and maybe message boards that aren’t geared towards professional actors.

Best of Luck,
Bruno Oliver
NowCasting.com

* * * * *

hi, Bruno! Which performance of mine did you see?

Yep, I have been doing performance for over forty years. I know that a large percentage of mainstream actors aren’t interested in doing edgy performance like I do. But on the other hand, I have gotten quite a few mainstream actors for my work by putting casting calls in theatrical papers. I try to put all the information in my ad so that the actors aren’t blind sided, and so that they can decide for themselves if it is something they want to explore… Saving everybody time. Yes, there are those actors who don’t read things carefully or don’t believe nudity means nudity, etc. But that is their responsibility. You know i am legit.

The problem with Craig’s list is if the word NUDITY is in the ad, they only allow it in the “adult entertainment ” section. The people I am looking for don’t look in that section. The people who look in that section want rightly to be paid for what they do. This defeats what I am trying to do.

I hope you will reconsider.

In Freedom,
Frank Moore

Fw: Audition submission

(Submitted to Bay Area Casting News:)

PROJECT: AN OPEN AUDITION
PRODUCER: Frank Moore
DESCRIPTION:
An Open Audition for potential underground actresses and female dancers in the S.F. Bay Area for the videos, internet series, and live performances by Frank Moore. Moore’s work has been compared to Warhol, Zappa, and the Living Theater. Must be adventurous, comfortable with improv. The work involves nudity and eroticism. 18+, all races & types. Non-union Non-paying.

FORMAT: digital video and live performance
ROLES: actress/dancer, a lead role involving nudity

* * * * *

Hi Frank, Corey and Alexi,

After careful review, we are taking the liberty of not distribution this listing to our client/subscribers. We are unable to support un-paid nudity and eroticism. If you find you have a budget for talent, by all means, re-send your audition call. We can only recommend gig/erotic posting at Craigslist. Good luck with your project. We wish you the best.

BACN (Bay Area Casting News)

* * * * *

mmmm! Only nudity for money! Mmmm!

In Freedom,
Frank Moore

Fw: YouTube Video Notification

Subject: YouTube Video Notification
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: YouTube Service
To: lavapen@gmail.com

YouTube | Broadcast Yourself™

The following video(s) from your account have been disabled for violation
of the YouTube Community Guidelines
http://youtube.com/t/community_guidelines:

* The Molten Core – Frank Moore’s Cherotic All-Star Band – (cherotic)

Your account has received one Community Guidelines
http://youtube.com/t/community_guidelines warning strike, which will
expire in six months. Additional violations may result in the temporary
disabling of your ability to post content to YouTube and/or the
termination of your account.

For your reference, a copy of this message has also been emailed to the
address associated with this account.

Sincerely,

The YouTube Team
Copyright © 2008 YouTube, Inc.

* * * * *

TOO HOT FOR YOUTUBE! and I thought it was rather mild! What do I know!

In Freedom,
Frank Moore

i’m flattered!

Corey called the Berkeley Daily Planet about the fact that they had not listed the Temescal performance in this week’s issue. Under March 21st, there was no heading for Theater, as if there were no Theater events that day. Last month, they had listed us for two straight weeks, because the calendar spanned that much time. We had been listed as Theater. Corey told all this to the woman who picked up when he pushed the line for the Arts & Entertainment calendar. Her first response was maybe they just didn’t get the listing … Corey said, “Oh …” and started looking for the email he had sent them, but then she asked, “What was it?” Corey told her that it was called “Reality Playings”, a performance by Frank Moore … She said, “Oh … well, you know, we get a lot of complaints about Frank Moore …” They had chosen not to list the performance. Corey asked if they got complaints about simply listing Frank’s performances? “Yes. Its not exactly ‘family fare’ … Frank does have his detractors …” Corey asked if they only listed calendar events that were “family fare”? She said, “Well no …” She said that they edit the calendar, its not an open thing, they have the right to decide what they want and don’t want to include … they don’t always list everything they get, don’t always list things every time … She said that “adults only” listings were less likely to be listed, and that they often recommended that people just buy an ad.

In Freedom,
Frank Moore

« Older posts Newer posts »