69 Things to Do With Stewart Home

"69 Things to do with a veteran of art resistance and class war; housewife; plagiarist; prolific writer of
fiction, criticism, and politically inspired pornography; propagandist; polemicist; prankster; art striker; founder of Neoism; scourge of anarchism; arsedestroyer; martyr to the revolution; and notorious self-denying self-publicist.
CHOOSE ALIENATION
Karen Eliot
(from Neoism, Plagiarism & Praxis)
Karen Eliot is a name that refers to an individual human being who can be anyone. The name is fixed, the people using it aren’t. Smile is a name that refers to an international magazine with multiple origins. The name is fixed, the types of magazines using it aren’t. The purpose of many different magazines and people using the same name is to create a situation for which no one in particular is responsible and to practically examine western philosophical notions of identity, individuality, originality, value and truth.
Anyone can become Karen Eliot simply by adopting the name, but they are only Karen Eliot for the period in which the name is used. Karen Eliot was materialised, rather than born, as an open context in the summer of 1985. When one becomes Karen Eliot one’s previous existence consists of the acts other people have undertaken using the name. When one becomes Karen Eliot one has no family, no parents, no birth. Karen Eliot was not born, s/he was materialised from social forces, constructed as a means of entering the shifting terrain that circumscribes the “individual” and society.
The name Karen Eliot can be strategically adopted for a series of actions, interventions, exhibitions, texts, etc. When replying to letters generated by an action/text in which the context has been used then it makes sense to continue using the context, i.e. by replying as Karen Eliot. However in personal
relationships, where one has a personal history other than the acts undertaken by a series of people using the name Karen Eliot, it does not make sense to use the context. If one uses the context in personal life there is a danger that the name Karen Eliot will become over-indentified with individual beings.

Demolish Serious Culture
(from Neoism, Plagiarism & Praxis)
We call on all cultural workers to put down their tools and cease to make, distribute, sell, exhibit, or discuss their work, from January 1st 1990 to January 1st 1993. We call for all galleries, museums, agencies, “alternative” spaces, periodicals, theatres, art schools, to cease all operations for the same period.
Art is conceptually defined by a self-perpetuating elite and marketed as an international commodity. Those cultural workers who struggle against the reigning society find their work either marginalised or else co-opted by the plutocratic art establishment.
The ruling class uses art as a “transcendental” activity in the same way it once used religion to justify the arbitrariness of its enormous privilege. Art creates the illusion that, through activities that are actually waste, this civilization is in touch with “higher sensibilities” that redeem it from accusations of exploitation and mass murder. Those who accept this logic support the plutocracy even if they are
economically excluded from the class. The idea that “everything is art” is the height of this smoke-screen, meaning only that certain members of the ruling class feel particularly free in expressing their domination of the masses to one another.
To call one person an “artist” is to deny another the equal gift of vision; thus the myth of “genius” becomes a justification for inequality, repression and famine. What an artist considers to be his or her identity is a schooled set of attitudes; preconceptions that imprison
humanity in history. It is the roles derived from these identities, as much as the art products mined from reification, that we must reject.
Unlike Gustav Metzger’s Art Strike of 1977–1980, our intention is not to destroy those institutions that might be perceived as having a negative effect on artistic production. Instead, we intend to question the role of the artist itself and its relation to the dynamics of power within
contemporary society.

Plagiarism
(from Neoism, Plagiarism & Praxis)
Plagiarism is the conscious
manipulation of pre-existing
elements in the creation of “aesthetic” works. Plagiarism is inherent in all “artistic” activity, since both pictorial and literary “arts” function with an inherited
language, even when their practitioners aim at overthrowing this
received syntax (as happened with modernism and post-modernism).
At the beginning of the twentieth-century, the way in which pre-existing elements were used in “artistic” productions underwent a quantitative leap with the discovery of collage. This development was pre-figured in the “writings” of Isidore Ducasse (1864–70), who is better known by his pen name Lautréamont.
In his Poems, Ducasse wrote: “Plagiarism is necessary. Progress implies it.” This maxim summarises the use to which plagiarism has been put ever since. Two, or more, divergent elements are brought together to create new meanings. The resulting sum is greater than the individual parts.
The Lettristes, and later the Situationists, called this process détournement (diversion is a literal translation from the French), but the activity is still popularly known as plagiarism — the term that Lautréamont used.
Plagiarism enriches human language. It is a collective undertaking far removed from the
post-modern “theories” of appropriation. Plagiarism implies a sense of history and leads to progressive social transformation. In contrast, the “appropriations” of postmodern ideologists are individualistic and alienated. Plagiarism is for life, post-modernism is fixated on death.
Festival of Plagiarism — London January/February 1988

A Short Rant Concerning our “Cultural Condition”
(from Neoism, Plagiarism & Praxis)
With the reduction of public spending on culture, it is possible — particularly in more “experimental” fields — for “autonomous” elements to destroy the hegemony of the bland initiatives favoured by grant dispensing bodies. In particular areas — which will never be “financially viable” or “attractive” to business sponsors — grant cutting, which monetarists imagine delivers culture to the “free market” (as though culture were no more than a superstructural effect of the economy!), actually offers control of entire sectors of the arts to those whose hatred of capitalism is the most fanatical (and who are quite prepared to work without any financial “reward”).
A major component of such “fanaticism” is the refusal to make universalist claims for any form of cultural production (and to mock these and similar assertions that artists have traditionally used to “justify” their work). A genuinely “radical” cultural practice must reject essentialism and simultaneously recognize the reality of the Power relationships that characterise our society. (Post-modernists reject essentialism in theory while simultaneously exploiting the human ideology of “romantic” and “modernist” art whose legacy enables them to
receive grants and enjoy state financed teaching careers. On the subject of what characterises this society, these nouveaux Nietscheans — or at least the Baudrillardian wing of this “movement” — make the completely ridiculous claim that Power has “disappeared”).
However, the aforesaid should not be mistaken for some form of neo-Marxism — although capitalist society is characterised by gross inequalities of Power, there is (at present) no unified class in the process of carrying through a collective programme to transform social relations (nor is there any historic “inevitability” that such a class formation will appear in the forseeable future). For these reasons, I have adopted a strategy of struggle — here and now — in an area which is of immediate concern to me (rather than attempting to “organise the class!” or act as a “torch of enlightenment” to others). In any case, organisation along the lines of “new social movements” seems eminently more sensible than attempting to impose traditional Marxian class models on a society that has undergone enormous changes since these were first outlined (and even 150 years ago such models were worse than useless since any “genuine” understanding of class requires more than mere economic reductionism).
The Marxist-Leninist assertion that human society consists of an economic base and a cultural and political superstructure is utter non-sense; there is a dynamic interaction between economics, culture and politics (any of these categories may assume dominance at a specific time according to the interplay of historical factors). An analogous pattern of interaction exists between production and consumption (since the onset of industrialisation neither of these two categories has enjoyed a state of permanent dominance over the other). Hence my
concern to emphasis the productive role played by theaudience in the cultural sphere. Concomitant with this concern is a rejection of the idea that there is a “radical and politicised” body of semi-passive consumers eagerly awaiting the opportunity to attend events such as the Anon installation (and it is for this reason that I have seized upon the opportunity to site work in locations where it will be seen by individuals who have not planned to view it — i.e. the display units located in Luton shopping centre).
Anon — 33 Arts Centre, Luton February/March 1989

Slogans to Be Spread By Every Means Possible
(from Neoist Manifestos)
Leaflets, announcements over public address systems, comic strips, speech bubbles on paintings in the National Gallery, during the disruption of films and concerts, sprayed over advertising hoardings, before having sex, after having sex &c.

THOSE WHO DO NOT
UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF THESE WORDS WILL BE IGNORANT OF THEIR
IMPLICATION

STRENGTH THROUGH POWER

CREATE THE FUTURE BY DESTROYING THE PAST
LIFE BEGINS WHERE HISTORY ENDS

ART IS SANCTIONED PORNOGRAPHY

LOOTING TAKES THE WAITING OUT OF WANTING

PLEASURE IS THE NEGATION OF DESIRE

DEMOLISH SERIOUS CULTURE

SHOPLIFTING: EVERYTHING YOU WANT FROM A STORE AND A LITTLE BIT MORE
LIVE NOW, DIE LATER

LOVE IS THE INTERNALISED INVERSION OF THE SPECTACLE OF OPPRESSION

ABOLISH TRUTH

CHOOSE ALIENATION

The neoist culture conspiracy is a quest
(From Neoist Manifestos)
The object of this QUEST cannot be recognized until it is found — and even then, it may not be recognised.

The QUEST involves total commitment to honesty and truth.
The QUEST takes the form of random train journeys, made from unspecified points of
departure, to unspecified points of arrival.
These journeys may be made at any time of the year — there must be a time span of at least one week separating each journey.
A minimum of three journeys must be undertaken a year. No more than sixty-two journeys should be made during a three-year period.
Journeys may be made individually or by groups of initiates. There is no need for groups to stick together or for individuals to remain alone — the journey is an open situation and change is permitted as it progresses.
Records may be kept of journeys — these are in no way essential.
Postcards should be sent to friends and acquaintances during the course of the journey.
Seekers are advised to travel first class — it may be necessary to spend large portions of any given journey in train toilets, in order to avoid ticket inspectors.
Initiates are warned against the dangers of eating, drinking or sleeping during any journey undertaken as a part of the QUEST.
Seekers should carry NEOIST materials with them at all times.
Initiates are warned that Cultural Customs Checkpoints may be set up at any point during the course of their journey — seekers should be ready to declaim the NEOIST catechism at all times.
The recruitment of new initiates is to be encouraged during the course of the QUEST.
Seekers have the right to strip-search other passengers. However, initiates are warned that such actions should only be undertaken in exceptional circumstances.
Seekers are not subject to the lies of science and may flout the laws of gravity at their own discretion.
Once embarked upon, the QUEST must be maintained for a lifetime.

BE WARNED, MONTY CANTSIN is a hoaxer, a practical joker and a thief. However, behind this facade there is a GREAT TRUTH which awaits the more discerning among you. This TRUTH will ASTONISH, AMAZE and ASTOUND you. This TRUTH can only be revealed to those who embark upon the QUEST.

Blood Bread and Beauty
(from Neoist Manifestos)
From Lautréamont onwards it has become increasingly difficult to write, not because we lack ideas and experiences to articulate — but due to Western society becoming so fragmented that it is no longer possible to piece together what was traditionally considered “good” prose. That is, writing which is unified by a single idea or body of ideas, where each sentence follows logically from the proceeding one — and where every paragraph and chapter flows smoothly into the next. Today, thoughts seem to break before they are fully formed, they turn back on themselves, contradict each other and make it impossible to write in a style which appears harmonious.
The great problem with twentieth -century art is the constant demand for something new and original. As a consequence, while everything appears in a state of flux, nothing actually changes. Instead, the same half-baked ideas constantly re-appear under a succession of different names. It took thousands of years to develop perspective and yet today people demand radical innovations every week. The result is they get exactly what they deserve — insults.
Neoism is opposed to Western Philosophy because it repudiates the rhetoric of logical argument. Logic is the road that leads to nowhere, or at the very best madness. Neoism has never claimed to resolve anything, Neoism simply is. It asserts no more than is obvious and nothing is more obvious than Neoism. Neoism is the ultimate form of Western Philosophy because it is not a philosophy at all, it is an illegible note that Tristan Tzara allowed to fall from his breast pocket prior to a performance at the Cabaret Voltaire in 1916. It is no more than a sneeze, or rather hollow laughter. Neoism is undefeatable, self-refuting and incomprehensible.
Every act of superstition confirms and reinforces a belief in something above and beyond wo/man. The whole point of revolution is to smash the fragmentary world of capital and lynch the bosses who quite deliberately promote an ideology of individualism in order to prevent the development of class consciousness. Because religion is a support, a crutch, a recognition that wo/man can’t live fully as an isolated individual, it contains within it the seeds of a mass revolutionary consciousness.
Today, the dead weight of history oppresses us with more efficiency that the most reactionary politicians could imagine in their dreams of bureaucratic perfection. We stagger and suffocate under the burden of thousands of years of accumulated debris. Debris that stifles anything but the most aggressive and creative sparks. And today, that spark is threatening to burn us alive in a prison of our own making. Today the urge to smash the venerable museums has reached a point from which it threatens to become more burdensome than any previous history.
The only movement to work consistently towards the death of history since the disbanding of the Situationist International has been the Global Neoist Network. Only Neoism carries within it the revolutionary potential for the realisation of our complete humanity. Since 1979, Neoism has been defending the revolutionary gains made by the Situationists and Fluxus. The Neoists are the only group to have brought the conjunction of nihilism and historical consciousness — the two elements essential for the old order, the order of history.
Neoism stands at the end of history, the present. Despite the uncertainty such a position inevitably entails, Neoism draws strength from its sense of history, its sense of reality of the past — and of the importance of Lautréamont, the Situationists and Fluxus. We have studied these people carefully and discovered that there is nothing to be learnt from them. Those who look to the past walk blindly into the future.
Neoism has always been more concerned with propagating confusion than serving itself up in consumable chunks. A Neoist is someone who believes in the value of carrying an umbrella on a rainy day, or rather stealing someone else’s umbrella if it starts to rain. S/he is someone who, as a matter of conviction, refuses to work. Who would rather survive on someone else’s money than the fruits of their own labour. Someone who seeks gratification in the present rather than security in the future. Someone who is quite genuinely surprised when their relatives express anger at their turning up at five in the morning demanding to be lent a considerable sum of money. Someone who, utterly convinced of their owns genius, believes that not only are they owed a living — but that their very existence entitles them to be kept in the lap of luxury at some else’s expense. Above all, a Neoist is someone who believes that art, rather than being the creation of genius, is merely an exercise in public relations, A dull sham, not even worth debunking in public.
Leave Your Body For Sexual Experimentation
(From Re:Action, Newsletter of the Neoist Alliance, Neither Being Nor Becoming!, No.9 Autumn Equinox 399)
Necrophilia remains an important weapon in the struggle against patriarchy because the end of oppression necessitates the reintegration of the living and the dead. One way in which (male) revolutionaries might rediscover the feminine is by thinking through what it means to be dead. Table tapping and ouija boards reinforce the hegemony of the reigning society by creating an imaginary world that compensates us for the deficiencies of the one we live in. It has been claimed that dozens of men paid a mortuary attendant to have sex with Marilyn Monroe’s corpse. Sex with the dead should be a gift but under capitalism it is often reduced to the commodity form and the cash nexus. In its drive to prolong life at any cost, the medical establishment encourages the living to fill in forms in which they leave their bodies for the purpose of organ transplants once they are dead.
Revolutionaries can throw the humanitarian pretences of the overdeveloped world into total contradiction by leaving their bodies for sexual experimentation. It’s time to storm the cemeteries and free the dead. The communist project will both live on and live out its death to the revolutionary cry of “well dug old mole!”

Photo credit: Marc Atkins, Stewart7
Photo credit: blow up doll, Julia King
"

01.02.2002