etiquette for the aisles

seeing back-to-back lectures on architecture and photography, two of the most fascinating topics, in my thoughts, I am saddened to say the only lasting impression I take away is this: how do we rid the format of the excrutiatingly demented obligatory post-lecture Q&A?

with all the hoopla around architecture and "design" in edmonton, the opportunity, the rarity, of asking someone like antoine predock a question could and maybe would have been exciting. asking predock (twice) to comment on what he thinks about our upgrades was a nice exercise in imagining our city's plans for architecture has any effect whatsoever on anyone, especially this year's AIA gold medal winner, but at least it was civil enough.

tonight, however, I feel honestly embarassed. visiting lecturer martha langford got a good dose of crazy when an interruptive audience member continuously barged her comments in throughout the talk and in the end, compared Langford's comments to Nazism. but what was worse, and it did get worse, was that this audience member tried to say it in a nazi german accent and being completely serious about it.

lecture etiquette rule #1: do not impersonate a nazi.
lecture etiquette rule #2: do not call the lecturer a nazi (even if it's within the context of digital photography.)

it's safe to say all Q&A's I have ever encountered have been bad, bad experiences. this time, I attended the langford lecture with MCO, the former arts writer for SEE and now my faux nemesis at VUE. we each appropriately wore black and white similiar long pea coats and cackled like harpies afterwards, but as two very different writers writing on the same subject, I wonder if we both miss the mark.

MCO reviews art from a very astute and intellectually provocative voice; I only explain (not reivew) exhibitions and make them safely appealing. both are done to engage a dialogue, but who are we talking with? to someone who only attended this past lecture, it would be crystal clear why 'art' remains on the periphery. I really wonder at the end of the day, or at the end of that circus, what can really be done when people are only listening to themselves. this is why I hate art, when the opportunity for dialogue turns into a one voice statement of complete and utterly drry bullshit.