There was a period in the seventies (eighties?) when Zappa appended the slogan 'KILL UGLY RADIO' on his album covers. Meaning - I assume - play 'real' music by real musicians rather than synthed pap.

I'm thinking about this due to Michael Lally's post yesterday in which he says:

This is the kind of mail I (and I suspect a lot of poets and artists and other art makers) would anticipate finding in the mailbox everyday back before the internet. I still feel that sense of anticipation when I go to the mailbox these days, though it's usually mostly bills, but now and then an unexpected goody or more, like today's.

This led me to wonder what I get in the post in an average month:

1. latest issues of The Wire, the LRB, occasionally Fence or The Chicago Review
2. a CD or book from Amazon (more usually sent to my work address)
3. a phone bill, car tax/insurance, credit card and bank statements (my 'banking relationship' is the phrase, believe it or not)
4. junk mail from supermarkets, shops, magazines etc.

3 and 4 far outweigh 1 and 2. And there's never a letter (it's all e-mails nowadays), once in a while a postcard.

So perhaps it's time for a KILL UGLY POST campaign as well as a defiant stand against the erosion of postal services through underfunding and internet use.

The first question L. asks as we get back from school - "is there any post?" And I know what she means - anything interesting? And so often - sadly - there's not. I used to feel the same excitement and deflation (and still do).

Joseph Cornell understood this - I'm thinking of his sendings. Ray Johnson, too. And perhaps what I'm really arguing for is MailArt for everyone. The hope that everyday would bring something interesting in the post. A counter-blow to Commerce and Finance and Advertising. Why should the post only bring bad news?

Art for Art's sake - which, of course, means the transformation of daily life. After all, what else is there?

So if anyone's listening ...

*

Stuck on the back of a 4x4 yesterday a sticker claiming 'I Love (heart symbol) Polluting'. First interpretation: a truly offensive individual (and there are plenty around) who simply couldn't give a toss. Second interpretation (on noticing the sticker had been partially picked off and scribbled on): an act of street activism - people going round labelling such cars to shame the owners. I suspect that this is the more reliable interpretation.

*

On the radio this morning, a banker employs 'incent' as a verb - as in 'to incent workers'. 'Incentive', yes; 'to incentivize', yes; - but to 'incent'? Does this word go beyond the Square Mile? Typically weasely way of arguing in any case - how useful The Board is when you want to duck out of taking the responsibility for decisions yourself. Bonuses all round!