|
The undone interview of Andrew McKenzie to Jim Haynes (The Wire) I had attempted to get in touch with you earlier about an ongoing book project for 23five, Incorporated; and while that previous invitation is still on the table, I've recently been assigned to get in touch with you about a possible interview / article to be run in The Wire. If you are interested, please get in touch with me at your earliest convenience, so that I can confirm this piece with my editors. <...> Along with writing for The Wire, I've been working with 23five, Incorporated -- a non-profit organization that exclusively works in the development of sound art. We've assembled several well-received festivals and events at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art and released 4 cds to date; and I am currently working on the first book for 23five. This book, tentatively entitled 'Noise as Crucible,' will be a collection of essays and interviews from various artists working the nebulous realm of sound art, although the majority of the practitioners who are contributing hold ties to the noise culture and the dronescapism that emerged out of industrial culture: including John Duncan, CM Von Hausswolff, Masami Akita, Francisco Lopez, Zbigniew Karkowski, as well as installation based artists like Ed Osbourne and Christina Kubisch.
As far as an interview goes for The Wire, I don't know of anything odd about you or that article. I've only been writing for the magazine for two years now, and I live in San Francisco. So I am distinctly outside the realm of any quibbling politics that may go on at the organisation. Rob Young, the editor in chief, has given me the go ahead to do this piece, with hopes of running it in the March issue. I can try and figure out what happened with that previous article, and do my best to avoid any pitfalls.
I prefer for interviews to be more of a dialogue than a set of standard questis that address boring facts. So, if you don't mind me proceeding with the interview, would you mind talking about your current medical conditions and how the treatments are progressing? I have to say that I've been listening to your records for over a decade now, and still find them unnerving and perplexing intellectual puzzles, often announcing that sound is another form of information which may have psychological implications. How has your current medical condition changed (if at all) your outlook on the creative process and how does 'the body' now operate within the field of sound / information?
Well, as far as any research I had done for the book, I am attempting to collect and present information about a particular history of art which hasn't received much if any documentation. I was unaware of any problems you have had with any of the qualitatively convenient categories which I have addressed; never the less, if you feel your work does not fit into catagories or with the 'people' I had mentioned, by all means, you shouldn't be involved in the book.
but support a project that involves some of the people you mentioned? no.
not ever. and what I was saying previously is that this is well known.
many people try to brush it off as if I am being cranky, but my reasons
are very definite and concrete, and based not on personal dislike or
previous experience with these 'people', but other reasons that as I said
before, can easily be considered 'unreasonable'. but that's due to the
idea of a moral stance being currently unfashionable.
Yes, I was being presumptuous in my previous letter; but like your
declaration of intent in not being rude, difficult, or unreasonable,
I too meant no malice by my assumption. My intent was merely the
expediency of communication. If you will allow me to back track,
please let me offer again: would you like to participate in an
interview that would later be worked into an article to be published
by The Wire?
To the best of my knowledge, I do not believe that there will be any
problems forthcoming between you and The Wire. I have asked Rob about
any history, and he is unaware of any problems. He has made himself
available if you choose to bring these issues up with him; otherwise,
those problems are irrelevant to me and to how you choose to proceed.
From what I understand, there are a number of recordings due out in
the forthcoming months, including a trilogy of albums (two on
Nextera, one on Die Stadt), a release on These Records, and a double
cd on Fire, Inc. My hope would be talk with you about these
recordings in relation to previous works you have created and to any
intent that you bring to those recordings.
you misunderstand me fundamentally. I do not bring intent 'to' anywhere.
The result of this conversation <...>
a 'conversation' requires some sort of dialogue which in turn requires
understanding. you and I just aren't on the same page, as evidenced by
these exchanges. this is not a criticism. if you're a plumber and I'm an
electrician, there is a very limited crossover of terminology and
experience. I don't expect you to understand what I mean when I refer to
any of it, even if we're both physically in the same building temporarily.
all you see are the effects, and it does what you want it to. what is
actually behind it and MY motives and reasons are not in your domain of
comprehension, and neither is the training and experience that were
involved in me getting to that point.
<...> may bring forth a critical analysis of your work that <..>
I don't see how 'critical analysis' is relevant to any of my publicly stated aims.
<...> may be enlightening to the readership of The Wire.
enlightening? in what way? how is this possible in the present situation?
I have no intention of denigrating your work or you in a public arena, as I
have enjoyed your work for sometime now...
and this is an example of why this "conversation" cannot take place. you
are trying to project your own thoughts onto mine. I never suggested you
were going to do anything of the sort. if you read what I wrote *as I
wrote it* you would see this. if you cannot get this, and many of the
other 'clues' I have dropped over the last few mails, how can I even
expect you to 'get' anything in the auditory domain that I have done,
which is far more multi-levelled and complex? or the writings that often
accompany them? or the packaging? or the images? or the graphics? which
are all a unit that cannot be dissected? how are we to even start with a
discussion of these?
I don't see it.
If there are any terms and conditions, all that I can ask is for
honesty; and in return, I will do my best to deliver a well-written
piece of critical analysis that is an honest exposition on your work.
Is there anything that you need?
what I need is medical attention, which I'm not getting. by march I may be
dead. if there were any way that such an 'interview' (and I have my doubts
as to the level of efficacy of this medium as presented by a publication
such as the Wire to actually do any 'good' whatsoever which this present
exchange is doing nothing to alter - quite the contrary) could remedy
this, I would do it. but it won't. all it would do is sell more magazines.
the day when such an opportunity could be properly utilised appears to
have gone. cause for regret, I'd say.
lastly, you only state your conditions: I don't see any advantage or
compelling reason for my participation. in fact, I sincerely believe that
you will get much more of what you want by consulting the huge website at
www.brainwashed.com/h3o. but then, that shows that the work has already
been done. doing it again serves no purpose. I do not 'do' these things.
this sort of repetition and waste of resources is anathema to me. there is
no useful situation to be created by the rehashing of old 'facts' that can
be accessed for nothing elsewhere. what I actually represent is a way of
doing things that operates in a very different place: not one that
devolves and re-affirms. this is there in what I have done for anyone to
see.
I now see that this cannot work, and I respectfully withdraw my invitation.
[December 2002]
.....time passes.....
Dear [elided],
Difficult to verify or check any of the above
allegations, all of which we are aware of. It is
impossible for us to communicate with McKenzie, he
does not want to deal with press, including The
Wire (we HAVE tried). There are all sorts of
rumours and half truths in circulation around this
man and we do not wish to gratuitously wash dirty
linen in public, nor go into print with unconfirmed
or libellous information.
Best regards
Rob Young
.....time passes.....
8 December 2003
A good hello to The Wire ~
Greetings. I have a query for you. The Wire is
(deservedly) considered to be on the cutting edge of
underground & 'alternative' music and culture.
However news that one of experimental music's most
prolific, influential and enduring geniuses is dying
has not been reported in the least. Not even
mentioned in passing. This isn't a story to be
ignored! Not with both your reputation (as stated
above) and the benefit to said sonic genius. The man
in question is Andrew McKenzie of the Hafler Trio.
Bafflingly The Wire has never paid much attention to
H3O, for whatever reason. However the time is now to
change that. Mr. McKenzie not only is respected, no
revered, enough to warrant coverage but would benefit
enormously. His situation is a dire one; terminally
ill with both Hepatitis B and Auto-immune Hepatitis,
he has been betrayed by Touch (which he helped found!)
and is also without steady label support or even a
job. That's right -- one of the brightest minds of
our generation can't even find
employment...incredible. For more information about
his situation you can read about it here:
http://www.brainwashed.com/h3o/helph3o.html
This news isn't obscure or irrelevant. So why hasn't
The Wire even so much as mentioned it in passing? As
the clock ticks for Mr. McKenzie, the time is at hand
for you to report this to all your readers who have
admired and been inspired by this great man.
Sincerely
Dear Mr. Young ~
Thank you for your prompt reply! I can appreciate
your feelings. I have to admit not being impartial;
I am part of the Help H3O team and Andrew is a friend
of mine. I can reassure you that he *does* wish to
communicate with the press; if you've had problems
contacting him I would be very happy to assist.
I can facilitate contact, clear up rumors, and/or get the
wheels of communication going if you'd like.
Thanks and best regards
he was contacted earlier this year by one of our writers, Jim Haynes,
who was interested in interviewing him. Jim reported back to me that: "he mentioned that there was a previous interview [1] which never got published,
and he also hinted at some 'serious problems' between the magazine and him."
I don't know the actual text of AM's reply, but I am not aware of any previous
interview, nor of any serious problems between the magazine and him.
and I haven't got unlimited time to deal with this bullshit.
Rob Young
[1] Andrew McKenzie comments: "the interview was commissioned by the then editor, Mark Sinker, in 1993 in Amsterdam and done by Phil England. It was refused publication because the only photograph I would supply the magazine with was this one. The incoming editor claims that h3o material is "unlistenable", and 'pulled' the article."
Some history:
|