Jane Crayton
Since 2004
Works in Boulder, Colorado United States of America

identities are nothing short of a name times a face divided by an attitude at the square root of the observer. art is a place where i can explore and express the different identities that create me. i am an artist, poet, scientist, athlete, inventor, theorist, student, feminist, naturalist, parent, sister, daughter, friend, and what ever else i decide to be today or in the future. so as i travel this long twisted road through this perceptive reality of my reference frame, least i can do is document it....
Discussions (2) Opportunities (0) Events (0) Jobs (0)

The Inherent American Design Flaw

The Inherent American Design Flaw
For Educating Youth In
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics.
by: Jane Crayton
Erica Ellingson
Modern Cosmology 2010
May 5, 2005
Educational Public Outreach is a new way for industry and groups get involved in the education of
our youth. It is important for all kinds of industry to participate in educating students for future employment
needs, as well as preparing them to be productive citizens. Yet in the technologically advanced world we live
in, America is leading the industrialized nations as the least educated in science, technology, engineering and
mathematics. This is a deeply rooted cultural problem, and we need to address this situation before it spirals
out of control. We are not just fi ghting a battle between creationism and evolution in our schools, it is a battle
of religion versus scientifi c method, a battle of gender rolls, and social stigmas. American students are falling
behind in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) because it is inherent in our society in our belief
system to be negative towards change and the pursuit of knowledge. What do American Students understand
about STEM and is there a problem? Are we teaching our youth enough in STEM to make them competitive in
the future? The answer is no, and the reason is a combination of compelling circumstances and social systems
entangled with government infrastructure that have hindered STEM education and development for centuries.
Motivated by A Nation at Risk in 1983, systematic research in science education has confi rmed that,
despite well-intentioned efforts of interested scientists and dedicated teachers, too many students
leave the US educational system with fundamental misconceptions of key scientifi c concepts. (Of-
ferdahl, Prather, Slater)
Why are we not teaching our children enough about Natural Sciences? What social attitudes exist about
these subjects. How can we change the social stigmas and stereotypes that exist about STEM? What happens if
we donʼt? These questions are fundamental for us to understand how to better communicate basic STEM educa-
tion into our modern youth.
Eighty-two percent of our nationʼs twelfth graders performed below the profi cient level on the 2000
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) science test. The longer students stay in the
current system the worse they do. According to the 1995 Third International Mathematics and Sci-
ence Study, U.S. fourth graders ranked second. By twelfth grade, they fell to 16th, behind nearly ev-
ery industrialized rival and ahead of only Cyprus and South Africa. (US Department of Education)
Although this is not a disease is still is an epidemic of mass proportions, Even president Bush considered
a member in the Religious Right Movement canʼt ignore that his countryʼs children are behind in STEM. This
lack of science education is a deep rooted debate, which has resulted in the dumbing down of millions of Ameri-
can children, especially girls. Educational Public Outreach is now going to serve as an important roll for the
scientifi c community because we have to serve as the translators of this critical topic that encompasses several
different social dilemmas.
Research indicates that the greatest gains in learning and attitudes toward science result from
instructional environments that engage students by taking into account the needs of learners, in par-
ticular, their pre-instructional beliefs and reasoning diffi culties. (Offerdahl, Prather, Slater)
Beliefs? How do beliefs play a role in the education of science? Well they have always played a roll in
the education of science, because science is almost seen a direct competitor to religion. Understanding our uni-
verse and the creation of it, is somehow seen as diminishing the authority of beliefs and religious creationism,
and this is the fi rst hurdle that must be knocked down. Simply belief and theory are two different things, one can
understand theory, yet still have beliefs.
Evolution and gravitation are fundamental scientifi c theories. The American public has no problem
accepting the theory of gravitation, a.k.a, gravity, but the theory of evolution is widely attacked.
Even more amazing is that the theory of gravity is as understood and widely accepted yet the theory
of evolution is not. In fact gravity, we know it exists, we know how it acts, but it is still not a fully understood
force of nature. We do not fully understand the properties of gravity at the subatomic level. Just as we have not
fully developed a map guiding us through the exact phases of evolution of human beings, or of our solar system,
and even our universe. And it is very unlikely that we ever will, I wonder what the probability of that is?
Whatʼs important here is that we are thinking and we are fi guring out what is happening in the world
around us. We are using our inductive and deductive scientifi c methods to help us generate the bigger picture
and greater understanding of the natural laws of physics. But these methods are only considered theories and the
term theory can imply a lot of different meanings especially in the eyes of the American Public. What is it about
the word “theory” that has got so many people questioning it? Maybe itʼs the fact that there are currently six
defi nitions for the word in the American Heritage Dictionary.
the·o·ry (thēʼi-rē, thîrʼē)
n., pl. -ries.
1 A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one
that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about
natural phenomena.
2 The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and
methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fi ne musician who had never studied theory.
3 A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
4 Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
5 A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house
on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
6 An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
[Late Latin theōria, from Greek theōriā, from theōros, spectator : probably theā, a viewing + -oros,
seeing (from horān, to see).]
Is there a problem with The Theory of Evolution? Or simply the word “theory” and itʼs common under-
standing. Coincidentally enough this subject came up a couple of times during the question and answer phase of
the presentation Itʼs Only a Theory: American Attitudes about Evolution at the NAI conference. And although
most of the scientist in the room understand the Latin meaning for the word theory, the majority of the Ameri-
can public views the word theory and understands it like the previous explanation from the American Heritage
Dictionary, defi nition number 6, “An assumption based on limited information or knowledge, a conjecture.”
So how did we get from 1“ A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phe-
nomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predic-
tions about natural phenomena.” And 2 “The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements,
accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fi ne musician who had never studied
theory.” To 6” An assumption based on limited information or knowledge, a conjecture.”? That is a bit contra-
dictory, wouldnʼt you say? But then again, The American Heritage Dictionary is just giving all known all known all explana-
tions and meanings for the word. And they are in effect a form of media just as much as the bible or any tele-
vised NOVA program. Its no surprise that the understanding of one theory versus another theory is not any more
clear than the current meaning and understanding of the word theory itself.
For astrobiologists, there may be questions about the specifi c events, mechanisms, and processes of
evolution, but not the fundamental importance of the theory of evolution. For the anti-evolutionists,
biological evolution is the central but not sole target. The origin and evolution of the universe, stars,
and planetary systems including Earth are also under siege. (DeVore)
So where do we start to unravel this complex web of social stigmas, beliefs, and fears about our own
existence in this great cosmological universe? How do people have faith when they learn how insignifi cant they
are? How can we have something to live for, when we are just a speck of dust? I can understand these fears, and
I think that they are an important part of learning how to defi ne our own meaning in life. These are questions
that are not only scary for people, but they are scary for societies and for governments.
Questions that defi ne our importance in the universe are the type of questions that governments are
concerned could bring about anarchy, or disruptive, behavior according to some “theorists”. This is the kind of
stereotype that can change critical thinkers into critical doers, and could defi ne terrorist thinking in the age of
the Freedom Act. Science breeds critical thinkers, and critical thinkers are people more likely to question things
they donʼt understand, including governments and religions.
“Evolution is at the center of an American science vs. Religion debate that shows little prospect of reso-
lution,” according to DeVore. Even today in the year 2005, public schools across America are teaching creation-
ism instead of evolution.
HARRISBURG, PA-The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, Americans United for
Separation of Church and State and attorneys with Pepper Hamilton LLP fi led a federal lawsuit
today on behalf of 11 parents who say that presenting “intelligent design” in public school science
classrooms violates their religious liberty by promoting particular religious beliefs to their children
under the guise of science education. (ACLU)
This is an example of current battles happening here in America right now, This legal action was fi led
just 6 months ago in December of 2004 in the State of Pennsylvania. But, is this a surprise? This battle has been
going since 1633 when Galileo published his Dialogue well before Darwin. This was the beginning of the war
between religion and science, belief and knowledge, hope and scientifi c deduction. In his Dialogue, Galileo sup-
ported the Copernican theory of a heliocentric system, in which the earth revolved around the sun. At the time
this was quite a controversy because the Bible suggested that the sun orbited the earth, providing society the
beginning of anthropocentrism.
be·lief (bi-lēfʼ)
1 The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confi dence in another: My belief in you is
as strong as ever.
2Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something: His explana-
tion of what happened defi es belief.i
3 Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted
by a group of persons.
[Middle English bileve, alteration (infl uenced by bileven, to believe), of Old English gelēafa.]
SYNONYMS belief, credence, credit, faith. These nouns denote mental acceptance of the truth,
actuality, or validity of something: a statement unworthy of belief; an idea steadily gaining cre-
dence; testimony meriting credit; has no faith in a liarʼs assertions. See also synonyms at opinion.
ANTONYM disbelief
When we look at the defi nitions of belief we fi nd that there is a lot more assuming and placing confi -
dence in something, the acceptance that something is true from simple mental conviction. Is creationism more
widely accepted belief over the theory of evolution. Could you say that creationism is a theory, could you say
that evolution is a belief?
American attitudes toward evolution have been studied via polling and other more extensive re-
search efforts. Analysis reveals that a minority of Americans accept the theory of evolution as a
valid explanation for the origin of human beings. (DeVore)
So where is the line between creationism and evolutionism in the classroom, and how do we make sure
our students and youth are getting what they need to prepare them for the future of technology and science in
our modern world? How do we know what they need, and how do we measure our success or failure in teaching
this diffi cult set of theories and accepted knowledge?
Certainly we cannot be dogmatic in our approach, or appear to be preaching a religion of “sci-
entism.” If we do, then we have no more right to a piece of the science curriculum than the religion-
ists. (Stenger)
It is hard to accept something as truth when it may question your preconceived beliefs. That is why we
have to be careful in our approach to educate our youth about science and technology. It is evident that the sepa-
ration between the religious and the scientifi c communities is still at great distances. Just as we do not want to
be preached or harassed about creationism, they probably view scientist as attacking their value system with the
theory of evolution.
Science is not easy to understand, it is a cumulative process of information gathering and assembling
throughout ones life. Evolution is a powerful tool of understanding compounded and constantly changing
knowledge and it takes time to understand the process of this natural phenomena we are a part of. And it takes
a person a certain amount of inherited knowledge from their environment, learned behavior and educational in-
struction which helps defi ne the persons ability to understand and learn the complexities of the natural sciences.
In the beginning was nature. The background from which and against which our ideas of God
were formed, nature remains the supreme moral problem. (Paglia)
In the beginning humans needed a reason, an explanation for natural phenomena, disaster and disease.
They needed a reason to keep going, they needed a reason as to why such doom should come their way. The
explanation they created became a system of beliefs in deities and gods. These beliefs transformed into a belief
that we are important and eventually the anthropocentrism belief systems were well and thriving. These reli-
gions have transformed and recreated themselves over time trying to explain and reclaim the desired knowledge
of creation and the natural sciences.
Astrobiology affords new understandings of life on earth and the possibility of life beyond earth.
These new understandings raise profound implications for humanity. It is important that these impli-
cations be explored rigorously. (Olien, Impey, Poss, Slater, Woolf)
When we start to look at science and break down our existence, we become simply a living being, an
organism on a world, in a solar system, within a galaxy, residing in a universe. When a person starts to break-
down the physical and societal norms they can begin to accept themselves as simply human. “I gain self esteem
because I realize I am a human, and as capable as any other human.”
I am also conscious and an intelligent being. It is very enlightening to understand your own conscious-
ness within this great universe. Especially when you understand how unlikely you were to exist anyway, and
then to exist and to have consciousness, would be quite rare. I think the Drake equation considers consciousness
to factor with the intelligent section. How conscious do we have to be to be intelligent and vice versa.
When one realizes that they are just an organism and a realization that there are only slight differences
between the sexes, and even other organism all together we become simply creatures of existence. The female
can now transcend to equality, and now we are broken down into our simplest forms “beings”.
“If the bringing of women - half the human race - into the center of historical inquiry poses a formi-
dable challenge to historical scholarship, it also offers sustaining energy and a source of strength.”
Women have a lot to offer in the way of equal knowledge and skill, even more they are half the human
race as Lerner points out in his statement supporting women in technology at IBM. The problem of religion and
sexism is one of great complexity, one that deals in politics centuries old, social stigmas and stereotypes, na-
ture, art and general education. A culmination societies knowledge fi ltered into a system of selected knowledge,
ready to distribute evenly and lightly upon fresh open minds. Even more alarming is the thought that this is hap-
pening more often through the media than educational institutions.
How do I make sure that my future daughters will be taught the importance of natural science, equally to
their male counterparts? Can we effectively fi ght creationism and religion without addressing feminism and the
gender rolls that society still participates in via the media and material culture? The invention of cyberfeninism
and the technofeminist culture to come.
Like feminism, cyberfeminism is open to defi nition but contains gender as the common overarch-
ing element. Cyberfeminism takes feminism as its starting point, and turns its focus upon contempo-
rary technologies, exploring the intersections between gender identity, the body, culture and tech-
nology. (Brayton)
What is empowering in their research is the understanding that the gendered stereotyping of tech-
nology as being a masculine domain and practice must necessarily fall apart, as younger women are
growing up with new information technologies as part of their everyday reality. Unlike older wom-
en who grew up without computers in their lives, these young women have more easily accepted
cyberspace by its everyday presence in contemporary society. (Brayton)
When religion is present, in culture, society and in the classroom; the female is seen as a sexual, moth-
erly object. She is the Mary, Mother Teresa, even Princess Diana, and the simplicity of equality is forgotten in
the language of our ancient philosophers and modern press. Yet today we see that our girls are just as interested
in technology as most boys given the right opportunities. Religion casts a shadow of disgrace and indifference
upon the sexes, and that can cause serious delays in the education of all students in STEM.
Religion makes the natural world signifi cant and gives us purpose and presence without proof, asking us
to believe in an invisible proof of faith. Its no wonder America ended up behind in STEM because we are still
trying to fi gure out the ultimate debate started centuries ago. We claim to have a separation of church and state,
but we still have “In God We Trust” on our money, and thus creationism in our classrooms.
In Aguillard, the high court invalidated a Louisiana law that forbade the teaching of evolution in
public school unless “creation science” was taught alongside it as an alternative. There, as in Dover,
the law made no express reference to God or to any religion. Yet the Justices nonetheless found that
its purpose “was to restructure the science curriculum to conform with a particular religious view-
point.” (Dorf)
In 1987, the Supreme Court ruled in Edwards v. Aguillard, that the belief that a supernatural creator
was responsible for the creation of human kind is a religious viewpoint and cannot be taught in pub-
lic schools along with the scientifi c theory of evolution. (Dorf)
Why did we decide to not include religious training in our schools? Why was there a separation of
church and state? Freedom or the desire to have freedom is the answer. Religious groups have always been try-
ing to get involved in government, predictively so they can get to the people whom “need to be saved” or need
to have “faith”.
Is the American Public afraid that we will loose our faith, our will, our desire to participate if we do not
have religion as our guide. Will people go crazy, and have no cares if they realize the signifi cance of time? Are
the scientist just using the term science as a crutch to carry out their own atheist views? Can someone believe in
science and evolution and still have moral values and function in society?
In critically examining evidence for or against intelligent design to the universe, it must be under-
stood that we are following the traditional practice of science, seeking a scientifi c explanation for
observations about the universe that have been previously attributed to the action of supernatural
deity. Believers will call us nasty names, like “atheist” and “secular humanist,” and accuse us of
undermining faith and morality. (Stenger)
How can Americans play a roll in making sure that each child, male and female has equal opportunity
to a full and equal education? Recently the new legislature introduced got a lot of publicity for its efforts to
make sure No Child [is]No Child [is]No Child Left Behind. This legislature mandates that all students must receive a certain qualifi ed
amount of education by a certain age or grade. And the legislators were careful to include specifi c guidelines as
to how to research and coordinate such educational training for teachers in STEM. President Bush although con-
sidered aligned with the religious right has fi nally realized the importance of our youths knowledge in STEM,
and pushed to have this No Child Left Behind Boosts Science Achievement.
As the U.S. Commission on National Security in the Twenty-First Century reports, “More Ameri-
cans will have to understand and work competently with science and math on a daily basis . . . the
inadequacies of our systems of research and education pose a greater threat to U.S. national secu-
rity over the next quarter century than any potential conventional war that we might imagine.” (US
Department of Education)
It is ironic that the lack of education can be used against us in conventional war fare and terrorism on
one hand, but then on the other, critical thinking derived from scientifi c deduction is often considered a form of
terrorist thinking.
No Child Left Behind requires states to fi ll the nationʼs classrooms with teachers who are knowl-
edgeable and experienced in math and science by 2005. The president supports paying math and
science teachers more to help attract experience and excellence. (US Department of Education)
The rights of our citizens, to be granted equal opportunity of education, no matter what gender, or eco-
nomic status. Nor shall the school, city or state interfere with the type of education a person receives, yet sadly
it does. Educational boards across the nation are subject to local laws that also govern them. Sometimes these
laws are set against the national legislation. Hopefully with the new legislature and support from President Bush
of the Religious Right we can continue to support STEM. By supporting this mandate we can continue EPO
from the science community directly, which helps to narrow the knowledge gap.
Our teachers are strong and our students want to learn and master this very important combination of
natural science, modern technology, social and moral values. They want to lean to live with an acceptance
of both belief and theory as fundamental building blocks for our society and understanding our universe. It is
important for us to realize the impact of the knowledge we present to our children, and that the impact of cre-
ationism, religion, intelligent design all have in the development of our future society, today. To teach American
students the basic fundamentals of STEM will require a complete change in thinking for our society. It will
require us to accept the critical thinker, to accept the feminist, accept our selves as people who can change and
promote progress towards a greater knowledge and empowerment for everyone.
Works Cited
(ACLU) American Civil Liberties Union. Pennsylvania Parents File First-Ever Challenge to “Intelli-
gent Design” Instruction in Public Schools “Intelligent Design” is Religious Argument, not Science, Say Par-
ents. (2004) http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID207&c9 , May 1, 2005
Brayton, Jennifer. Cyberfeminism as New Theory (1997) http://www.unb.ca/web/PAR-L/win/cyberfem.
htm, May 1, 2005
DeVore, Edna. Itʼs Only a Theory: American Attitudes about Evolution Education and Public Outreach
SETI Institute, Mountain View, CA. NIA 2005 Abstract
Dorf, Michael C. Why Itʼs Unconstitutional to Teach “Intelligent Design” in the Public Schools, as an
Alternative to Evolution. Find Laws Legal Commentary, Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004, http://writ.news.fi ndlaw.
com/dorf/20041222.html, May 1, 2005
Impey, Chris; Olien, Tom; Poss, Richard; Slater, Tim; Woolf, Nick. Astrobiology and the Sacred. Stew-
ard Observatory University of Arizona Tucson, AZ. NAI 2005 Abstracts
Lerner, Gerder. IBM Women in technology, From plugboards to petafl ops: The evolving role of women
at IBM. (1982) http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/witexhibit/wit_intro.html, May 1, 2005at IBM. (1982) http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/witexhibit/wit_intro.html, May 1, 2005at IBM
Miffl in Houghton , The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition,
(2004) Houghton Miffl in Company. http://www.answers.com/beliefs&rg, May 1, 2005
Miffl in Houghton , The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
(2004) Houghton Miffl in Company. http://www.answers.com/theory, May 1, 2005
Offerdahl, Erika G., Prather, Edward E., Slater, Timothy F.; Astrobiologyʼs Impact on Science Education.
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics University of Arizona, Tucson AZ. NAI 2005 Abstracts
Stenger, Victor J, Intelligent Design Humans, Cockroaches, and the Laws of Physics.1997; http://www.
talkorigins.org/faqs/cosmo.html, May 1, 2005
US Department of Education The Facts About...Science Achievement, No Child Left Behind http://www.
ed.gov/nclb/methods/science/science.html, May 1, 2005


Poetic Terrorism and Guerrilla Art in the 21st Century

Poetic Terrorism and Guerrilla Art in the 21st Century by Jane Crayton aka JanedaPain

"Art as crime; crime as art." Hakim Bey.

One of the most relevant statements made about art by a man whom walked the line of expressionism. Hakim Bey, did he see the future, or did he contemplate the past, a combination of both I would guess.

The word guerrilla is a word of Spanish descent (guerra, meaning war) first used to describe the Spanish-Portuguese guerrilleros (insurgents). Guerrilleros have existed through out time often in defense of some wrongs imposed to a group of less represented and defended peoples. They often fight a foreign invader or a ruling government and crimes against humanity. In the modern world we have seen these same groups and individuals come out in a new form of guerrilla tactics that is often non-violent and thought provoking art. Unfortunately in the post 9/11 era we are now limited in our expressions, for fear that they may be considered terrorism and not art. Mind you some of these artist push the line, evacuating neighborhood and closing down cities, all in the name of their art projects and political views. But is it the over reaction of our post 9/11 era that has taught us to react with such eager and violent haste, and condemn the works of these political artist?

Is it the art or the tactics, that deliver the fear that resonates in the unaware and suddenly captured audience? That sudden and captured audience today can be an over alerted citizen or government workers. With the heightened threat of terrorism and the orange security levels at the airports, we are all being programmed that we are never to be safe again. And what a great subject for an art project, huh? Artist around the world are finding them selves in precarious positions, and having to explain themselves to courts around the world and defend their art. These artist are the guerrilla artist of the 21st century. But are they justified in their use of guerilla tactics for making their statement? Is this a struggle to control the people and their freedom of expression? Where do we need to draw the lines for artist and government?

To be an artist has always been a daring act and a future of impoverished hell. It has always been looked down upon until or unless you achieve fame for your art. Artist usually tend to lean towards the side of interesting characters, someone daring, someone expressive of ideas and opinions, someone sending a message. Their approach when successful is usually one of great surprise and inventive nature. These artist are often ridiculed at first and later praised for their daring ability to take on a challenge when all are against them. Typically guerrilla artist have been viewed as punks spray painting on the sides of buildings, but this goes far beyond simple vandalism. There is a culture, a revolution and a style of guerrilla art that is comparable to a peaceful protest utilizing guerrilla tactics.

Banksy a graffiti and guerrilla artist from the UK has delivered some of the best examples of well engineered guerrilla art. His art is legendary, from dodging Israeli soldiers to paint beautiful scenes on the 'security' wall in Palestine. To placing a parking boot on a sculpture in a central square in London. He has placed multiple pieces of modern remakes of art like Early Man goes to Market, and The British Pensioner in the Hat and Coat, in london Museums where they were not discovered for days even weeks. What a brilliant mind, how better to get into the museum, than to put your work there, yourself, video tape it and then wait for it to get discovered. But his guerrilla art is not just self promoting, he is making political statements by painting on the security wall in Palestine, and by placing the parking boot on the historical statue in a central location of London.

Mode 2 one of the most recognized graffiti artist in the Uk. Known for his unmistakable style and technique of sketchy fill-in with detailed backgrounds and scenes. His work is more like paintings, yet his technique is definitely that of a graffiti artist. His work can be found around the streets of London and his commissioned work can be found on some large Billboards. He is considered a guerrilla artist because of his guerrilla like tactics of graffiti art. The simple fact that most of it is illegal painting on private property, makes it illegal. Although his work is relevant as a guerilla artist, this trend of guerrilla tactics has grown and become a popular way for artist and activist to render their work in public spaces.

A group of artist who seemed to pickup wisely on the term guerrilla artist is the Guerrialla Girls. "We're a bunch of anonymous females who take the names of dead women artists as pseudonyms and appear in public wearing gorilla masks." is how the Guerrilla Girls describe themselves. This artist based feminist performance group started in New York. They have been surprising people all over the world with their outrageous guerrilla performances that often incorporate social and feminist issues. They focus more on the issues, than their personalities and individual identities, by wearing the gorilla masks. Their feminist conscious statements and demonstrations often transform the audience, and community, addressing a specific theme the girls have decided to share with the public. Would their audience take them as serious if their faces were shown? And do they fear public and social exclusion from their peer groups if their identities are discovered?

Yes Men are a group of artist and guerrilla activist utilizing artistic guerrilla tactics. Utilizing technology, New Media and theatrical tactics to achieve their desired identity alteration or 'correction'. From redesigning dummy websites to recreating fake marketing packages, to spoof the media with live interviews of impersonated persons whose identity they wish to correct. In November of 2004 the Yes Men went on BBC with breaking news that the Dow Chemical Company, (whom they claimed to be representatives of ) were going to clean up the mess in Bhopal and compensate the victims for their companies lack of responsibility. From this "identity correction" of Dow Chemical Company, they helped show the true intension of the company which did not intend to help the victims at all. The Yes Men call out actions by industry, commercial or political persons by utilizing guerrilla tactics. They often imitate company executives, and 'big time criminals' to publicly humiliate them in order to 'correct' their public identities. Their targets have included Mc Donald's, Dow Chemical, and Elected officials just to name a few.

The South Venice Billboard Correction Committee (SVBCC) A collective group of artist who administer radical social art changes to billboards in South Venice. This group works with guerrilla tactics to redesign and illustrate their social and political agenda. This group works to recreate a new politically corrected ad in place of the old ad. The group uses the existing design and redesigns the billboard to create a new public message. These actions are obviously illegal and a defacing of private property. The group is well aware that their activities are illegal, yet they continue to execute these guerrilla tactics to administer what they call "radical social art changes" to the billboards in order to deliver their social message. These guys literally scale the billboards at night and repaint them, and create a completely different message, in this public space. The idea that public spaces are the new canvas for political generated guerrilla art is a unique phenomena of the 21st Century New Media Artist.

Artist Jason Sprinkle (1969-2005), also known as Subculture Joe, was also an artist whom seemed to only catch negative attention from the city of Seattle. On Labor Day of 1993 Jason and his accomplices tied a ball and chain around the foot of Jonathan Borofsky's "Hammering Man" stature, that graced the entrance to the Seattle Art Museum. Sprinkle's guerrilla art performances and installations ranged from celebrated to terrorism related. In 1996 Sprinkle abandon a truck with a large red metal part of an installation in it, flattened all the tires and painted on the fender read a graffiti tag "the bomb". As a result the Seattle bomb squad was called out, city blocks were evacuated and robots deployed to disarm any potential exploding devices.

"Christopher Boisvert, 25-year-old student from the School of Visual Arts in Manhattan, may have the next few years to think over the implications of art in public places. That's because a class project he produced involved some art placed in a very public place that unfortunately went a bit awry. The public place was Union Station, one of New York City's busiest transportation nexuses, and the public art was the placing of close to 40 black boxes at various locations with the word 'FEAR' emblazoned on them," MAYORBOB writes. "To say that this project created a stir would be a gross understatement. In this post September 11th world, a display like that is going to engender just one reaction - fear. Union Station was shut down for about five hours while the NYPD bomb squad checked out the boxes. Boisvert turned himself in when he found out that the police were questioning people about the incident." This is just another example where the artist although making a very powerful statement, should have been more aware of his actions and the potential fear that he created with his political and social statement. And if he did think of the potential dangers and the potential reactions to his art piece, should he have considered delivering it differently, or accepting the responsibility of it, or be prepared to cover yourself adequately like the Billboard Correction group or even Banksy.

But these incidents are not limited to guerrilla artist, because even artist whom simply speak of the controversial subject of terrorism are subject to suspicion. Within a few weeks of the September 11th terrorist attacks, the FBI contacted the Whitney Museum of American Art about Mark Lombardi's drawings' on exhibition there. Mark Lombardi had apparently committed suicide the year before but his controversial work illustrating the links between terrorism and the global economy were still on display in the museum. Lombardi's work is considered not only art but also pieces of detailed and researched history. His art works are obvious interest to the government in the wake of the new era of terrorism we now live in. But is it really as bad as they want us to believe, or has the technology and the tactics of terrorism just fed the fear of radical self expression to be included within these terms.

Zanny Begg, produced a work of 10 life size checkpoint US solders for exhibition in the town of Sidney as a part of the [out of Gallery] project. Each life size replica was to have the slogan "Checkpoint for Weapons of Mass Distraction." Her intension was to satirize the US search for weapons of mass destruction. Zanny was instructed to remove her life size solders shortly after erecting them by the City Counsel and Mayor Leo Kelly. She was threatened with arrest and her works were later impounded. "It's a disgraceful interference with the freedom of speech of these artists," said Council of Civil Liberties president Cameron Murphy. Another exhibition in November was canceled because the title "Guerilla Art" some how "discredited the council" according to Kelly. Artist are now being censored by city councils and mayors, and art work is being confiscated in the 21st Century. Artist are no only being targeted as terrorist, but they can not even display work on the subject of terrorism or occupation. Is our own censorship not just as bad as the ones we are trying to grant to those in which we seek to give freedom through war...yeah...um... thats an oxymoron.

Columbian born painter Fernando Botero exhibited works in California that depict the Abu Ghriab prison and suspected abuse to prison inmates. His works are bold and courageous, and depict the artist disgust in US policy regarding prison inmates. "I, like everyone else, was shocked by the barbarity, especially because the United States is supposed to be this model of compassion." His goal is to make people remember the human tragedies sot hat no one will forget the unjust action of the US soldiers to Abu Ghraib's prisoners. His pictures look to shake people to disturb them, to make them think, and hopefully make them act. We have artist that are working with portraying the victims and the perpetrators of terrorism on both sides of the fence.

Nasrin Mazoi, a graduate student selected to present works at the Museum of Israeli Art in Ramat-Gan displayed six portraits of Palestinian males all she averred, were prepared "to blow themselves up in order to change the present situation." Her work has now traveled around the world, featuring these life size pictures of apparent suicide bombers or family members of one. This is not an isolated incidence of a Pro-Palestinian exhibition but it is a rather bold and very critical one. Some of these works have been lucky enough to squeak buy, but others have been subject to censorship and confiscation clearly because of the controversial subject.

Steven Kurtz is an associate professor of art at the University of Buffalo, in Buffalo, New York. He aroused suspicion in Spring 2004 when he called medical personal to his home because his wife unexpectedly died. When medical persons arrived at his home to help, they became suspicious of some medical, scientific, and technological equipment in his home. The authorities over reacted and shut down his neighborhood, evacuating people from their homes in surrounding neighborhoods, and closing streets. They took the body of his diseased wife into custody and arrested him, while dozens of agents searched his property. Mr Kurtz was now facing criminal charges as a member of the Critical Art Ensemble, "dedicated to exploring the intersections between art, technology, radical politics and critical theory". In July of 2004 a grand jury rejected the 'terrorism' charges, but he still faces federal criminal charges today for mail and wire fraud. What is interesting about Steven Kurtz is that he was arrested not for his performance or his art per-say, but because of what they thought it could be. Gary Younge from The Guardian in Buffalo describes the situation. "What began as a personal tragedy for Mr Kurtz has turned into what many believe is, at best, an overreaction prompted by 9/11 paranoia and, at worst, a politically motivated attempt to silence a radical artist." So where is the limit between crime and art, and art as crime? How do we define Kurtz, and other radical artist that work in new mediums that push boundaries with technology, should we limit their research? These are all important questions to be asking artist and their audience in the 21st century.

Are you scared to speak out, demonstrate, or produce radical art? I am, and I think even writing about this could get me on a list of people to be watched. I fear the police-state in which we live today, wants to censor our art and prosecute our artist as terrorist. I think that each of these artist has the responsibility only to themselves to weigh these actions, for they know their art has consequence, that is why it is so potent. It is apparent that the government wants to regulate what is said and demonstrated to the people. It is obvious that the current US administration is prepared to make permanent changes to laws in order to ease the legalities of entrapment for these guerrilla artist.

That said, when Banksy is striding through the Museum with a fresh addition ready to hang, does he not consider what will happen if he is caught and apprehended. Is it not the ultimate publicity for your work to be discovered and captured or even detained? Although horrible in the case of Steven Kurtz, who was not actively presenting work at the time of his arrest. Is he still not aware of his potential surroundings and the danger his work could have to his personal life and freedoms. But as artist and as activist, I think we are all willing to take these risks in our work and activism. I think some of us have been luckier than others. And I believe that some have carefully executed plans of great detail, with wisdom of potential hazards and legal obstacles.

When we examen the most recent incident in Boston on January 31st, where two artist Peter Berdovsky and Sean Stevens were charged with creating a panic because they placed electronic LED art that somehow caused a bomb scare. The installation was actually commissioned by the Turner Broadcasting Network and the art work depicting a popular animated character from Adult Swim's, Aqua Teen Hunger Force "flipping the bird". The artworks were actually installed for several weeks without, panic or notice throughout the entire country. What is crazy is it was a guerrilla marketing plan by the network, and they had several hundred LED boards placed in cities throughout the United States. Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis called the stunt "unconscionable," while Boston Mayor Thomas Menino called it "outrageous" and the product of "corporate greed." Democratic Rep. Ed Markey, a Boston-area congressman, added, "It would be hard to dream up a more appalling publicity stunt." It seems that because the city over reacted, with the resulting "snarled traffic and mass transit closings as the bomb squad fumbled to find all the LED light boards. Do they now seek revenge for their over-reaction, or should they just consider themselves lucky to have gotten a good practice run. According to a student Todd Venderlin, "It's so not threatening -- it's a Lite-Brite," he told the press, referring to the children's toy that allows its users to create pictures by placing translucent pegs into an opaque board. "I don't understand how they could be terrified. I would if it was a bunch of circuits blinking, but it wasn't."

When we look back into history we see that the great artist, scientist and inventors of our time have often had their actions and theories mistaken for evil conspiracy driven terrorism. Even Galileo was taken into custody and held by the church for speaking his views and publicly demonstrating his support of the new heliocentric view of the solar system. The modern inventors have to be risk takers in order to produce their inventions in theory, art and science. Yet they need to exercise extreme caution when demonstrating with guerrilla tactics because their politically charged art is still subject to the new laws of the Homeland Security Act, and may end up face to face with the terrorism task-force in the 21st Century. Hakim Bey said it best, "The best Poetic Terrorism is against the law, but don't get caught. Art as crime; crime as art."


Art of Mode 2. Retrieved Feb. 2, 2007 <http://www.whitedust.demon.co.uk/mode2/mode2.html>

Begg, Zanny. Retrieved Feb. 10, 2007 <http://www.geocities.com/immateriallabour/beggpaper2006.html>

Belluck, Pam. 2 Arrested in Boston Over Bomb Scare. Feb. 1, 2007 Retrieved Feb 2, 2007 <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/01/us/01cnd-boston.html?ex27986000&en