The year 1996 was a watershed year for Burning Man: the theme was
HeLLCo; the
neon Smiley flickered in the effigy for a brief minute;
Michael Furey was killed in motorcycle collision; and three people were seriously injured when a car ran over their tent. Also that year today's guest
Danger Angel worked as the night supervisor for the
Black Rock Rangers and after that she never again returned to the playa. In this interview we find out why. Music by
SolarCycle available on
Magnatune.
"1996 was the year Burning Man went over the edge: too many people for the infrastructure, too many gawkers, too many cars, too many arrests, too many heartbreaks. After years of beating the odds, we got our asses whipped, and we did it to ourselves."
-- Stuart Mangrum
Editor of Twisted Times
and former Director of Communications
for the Black Rock City LLC.
The year 1996 was a watershed year for Burning Man: the theme was HeLLCo; the neon Smiley flickered in the effigy for a brief minute; Michael Furey was killed in motorcycle collision; and three people were seriously injured when a car ran over their tent. Also that year today's guest Danger Angel worked as the night supervisor for the Black Rock Rangers and after that she never again returned to the playa. In this interview we find out why. Music by SolarCycle available on Magnatune.
11 comments:
"So you don't consider yourself a Burner, so why are you here?"
HA! That about sums it up. Boo hoo, get over it, "Danger Angel."
Another thing: she says at first that she wants nothing to do with an art festival where someone can die, but then goes on to say that it was so much better when it was more dangerous.
This is an interesting & informative interview, thanks!
Interesting how criticism (constructive, etc) is usually met with rude rebuttal by some (not all) “burners” disturbingly, it reminds me of how religious cults & political right wing extremist behave.
I admit I was a bit rude in my first comment, sorry for that. However, I didn't hear much constructive criticism in this interview. BM is huge and unwieldy and not all that chaotic any more? Sure. Pretty much no way to stop that progression aside from ending it or limiting ticket sales. It's the classic tale of something that was once underground and somewhat subversive being absorbed by mainstream culture. It loses something in that transition, but if the point is to expose more people to some of the transformational aspects of BM (I don't know, maybe that's not the point, or maybe there is no "point"), then it is not only inevitable but necessary.
That's my main gripe with what Danger Angel says in the interview. Same old tale of early-adopter pining for the good ol' days. She's got every right to do so, but expect some pushback.
I should add that I really enjoy Burncast! Ha. Didn't mean for my first comment to be so negative. Keep up the good work!
Yeah - that first comment was exceedingly lame. I was obviously there because SHE ASKED ME TO BE THERE. And boo hoo? WTF?
And saying "Same old tale of early-adopter pining for the good ol' days." is obviously bullshit, because in the ACTUAL INTERVIEW I say that everyone should START THEIR OWN THING, and they especially should do so if they are pining for the good ol' days. JV needs to go back and actually listen to what I said instead of generalizing and being a kool aid drinking cult member ready to defend his beloved art festival with a bunch of hack responses.
I personally like my suggestion of holding BM where ever the G8 summit is. I find that idea lovely. Except then Larry would have get a day job.
"Kool-aid drinking cult member."
Talk about a hack response.
Just for clarity I want to post the actual excerpt from my interview with Danger Angel so as not to take it out of context.
Listen to excerpt here.
I feel she indeed as a unique and HONEST perspective, one you don't often hear on other media outlets. This is why I asked her to be a guest on my show.
Thanks for the discussion here. I appreciate the comments.
Hmmm... if there were a battle between the early adopters who created things interesting enough to follow vs. the followers who gleefully prop up the dead husks movements once the founders of those movements have long since moved on to other things... who would win? Old timers vs. kool aid drinkers throwdown!
My money is on John Law... not Larry Harvey. So I think anyone who gives money to Larry is a rube. Start your own festival.
And DaBomb... you're a media maverick, seriously.
I went once in '95, then didn't go again until 2007 (had a few kids in between), and sure, the difference was staggering. It's more a lark now than anything else, but what's so bad about a lark? With each comment, you're cementing my initial impression of you, Danger Angel. Calling me and others rubes because we choose to spend our money at BM? Get over yourself, girl. I'm fully aware of what my money is going towards, not all of it I agree with, but I still think it's worth it. That's fine if you think it's not, I can respect that. I know a few others who feel the same way.
I find it interesting you need to quantify old vs. new, as if it was some kind of competition. We get it. You're far hipper than us. You were there first. Etc. Past a certain age, that shit is lame.
I can't see a link to the sound file anymore.
Occasionally we have server issues. I think it's working now. If not try back later.
Post a Comment