for what it's worth

briele speaks (and i'm feeling inclined to listen)

Maybe it's because the circumstances of my day allowed for a solid two hours of uninterrupted Magus-reading; maybe it's because there seems to be a definite trend among many of us new operatives to sit back and relax a bit; maybe it's simply because I'm being telepathically coerced by my alter-ego. Whatever the reason, I'm compelled to post this, despite the fact that most of us have already read the post in question:

I thought you may be interested in this posting... I think this persons
understanding is very eloquent and possibly the most insightful and
interesting perspective that I have read to date regarding Neurocam... and
it may help you in your quest and understanding. It is ok not to know some
things, and sometimes crucial to the experience and to a deeper
understanding of yourself...

Avery's post, for those who missed it

So if one engages from an interested, curious but not suspicious place,
willing and open to inquire participate and make offerings, this can allow
self reflection - rather than an anxious, reactive  and closed pointing to
an'other'

Perhaps you could post that from A.C on your blog too...?

This all makes perfect sense, especially as The Magus unfolds before me. But there's one nagging question I can't resolve, about either Neurocam or The Magus: How do you give yourself completely to the Masque, when by its nature the Masque raises such mind-boggling questions?

Perhaps that's not an ideal analogy for what's really bothering me about Neurocam. So hey, how about I stop speaking in analogies and just say what I'm trying to say? Such a novel idea, straightforwardness.

How are we supposed to juggle (1) advice to accept the unknown with (2) warnings that Neurocam is a dangerous organization and (3) cryptic suggestions that we look into this-or-that? Though these warnings and clues never come from Neurocam officials, they do come from people who claim -- and are often able to prove -- insider knowledge of Neurocam in one form or another. And they're typically the same people who exhort us to have patience, grasshopper.

Perhaps this would have been better addressed in a private email to Oulios, but I'm also interested in the thoughts of other operatives.

Bueller?

accusations and denials

I remember now what #3 in that last post was actually supposed to be. Heh. Brain cells, soggy.

In the comments on Briele's email there's been discussion of accountability. That is: If you use your home address when registering a domain, don't cry foul when that publicly available information becomes even more widely publicized. A fair and valid point. But it operates under the assumption that Briele did indeed register that domain. To be willfully gullible for a moment: What if Briele and Graham are being manipulated by Neurocam? What if they, like us, really are just operatives?

Neurocam is an experience. If nothing else, we know that. Could this deliberate confusion be part of the experience -- both for us and for the people whose identities are being appropriated?

Yes, I'm aware that we may simply be getting too close to the "real" truth -- the busy bees behind the curtain -- and all these flustered denials could be attempts to throw us off the track.

But maybe they're not?

neurocam: identity thieves

Briele Hansen asked me to post this email she sent me:

Dear JH,

My immediate response to the inquiry is that I dont really understand why
there is so much interest in HAVING to know who why and how.

My work is in its motivation and intention may be similar to Neurocam in
what it attempts to inspire and draw attention to, but the form and
methodology of inquiry seems very different - in the limited time I have
been involved. I mean Neurocam may not have anything to do with anything to
do with my work as an artsist... if you know what I mean.

I may have supported neurocam in a form of facilitating something, but what
has that got to do with anyone else? Why not generate your own facilitation
- create you rown story without implicating other people. What ever we
expose ourselves to is our own responsibility. I am aware of this.

All I ask is that people be very carefull about intrusion and respect.
Publishing a personal address onto a blog or a chat site is a very
disrespectful and irresponsible thing to do because while you or whoever put
it there may have totally innocent intensions, it is totally impossible to
gauge who else may read and utilise that information - and to monitor and
affect their actions.

So I ask people to respect my own personal privacy and home.

I am not the founder of Neurocam
I am not a director of Neurocam
I am a recent new opperative of Neurocam
I do not know how my name became attached to so many things involved in
Neurocam... perhaps those who are in the ranks use new opperative names to
create new layers of Neurocam...?

Thank you for the comment and response to my own persoanl art work and
practise - I am very happy to engage in dialogue any time regarding what I
do and who I am.

Please post this message on your blog

Thank you

Soon
B

who's driving this bus, ey?

Briele Hansen held an apa from 2002-2004 and completed her MA by Project in the School of Art and Culture, Fine Art in 2004. Her research project “Sensing Experience” explored how technology can be used; to mediate our understanding of what is real and; to question what role perception plays in how reality is understood.

Briele’s project culminated in a series of installation works exhibited throughout the Fine Art postgraduate studios. The installations layered time-based media such as video, sound and photography, in combination with actual objects and sites, to initiate an embodying experience which oscillated between the actual and the virtual, challenging ones understanding of what was actually happening.

Briele is currently working on several public projects.

dang, bridget

There comes a time when you have to stop protecting people from their own mistakes. In this particular instance, that time seems to have come.

First there was this comment on the trout post, by the amusingly named Shelley Guilt:

In the Neurocam Operatives document which has been floating around bulletin boards and blogs, the name Briele Hansen appears however is only shown in a broken part of the document. The domain name ROBINHELY.COM is actually owned by this person.

Registrant:
   briele hansen
   32 wright st
   CliftonHill
   Melbourne, Victoria 3068
   AU

   Registrar: DOTSTER
   Domain Name: ROBINHELY.COM
      Created on: 16-SEP-04
      Expires on: 16-SEP-06
      Last Updated on: 16-SEP-04

   Administrative, Technical Contact:
      hansen, briele  [email protected]
      32 wright st
      CliftonHill
      Melbourne, Victoria  3068
      AU
      +61 3 9489 9737

Now here's the email exchange between Hansen and I concerning her involvement with Neurocam, given Bridget Fischer's claim that Hansen is/was an operative. I was waiting on Hansen's permission to publish this exchange, but she's yet to reply:

To: Briele Hansen
From: J Hawthorne
Date:  14 January 2005

Dear Ms Hansen,

Please excuse my intrusion upon your inbox.

Your name, and that of your colleague Brendan Lee, were discovered
yesterday amidst the metadata of a document sent that morning to
several people involved with a Melbourne-based project called
Neurocam. Directors of the project have indicated that you and Mr Lee
are currently or have been in the past involved with Neurocam.

Would you be so kind as to confirm or deny this allegation? Also, do
you have any idea why your name would have been contained in the
document in question (a guide for new Neurocam operatives)? Last, what
is your relationship to Graham Henstock, whose name appeared adjacent
to yours in the document?

Thank you for your time.

J Hawthorne
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To: J Hawthorne
From: Briele Hansen
Date:  17 January 2005

Dear J,

No intrusion, no problem

what I can tell you is:

I am a new Neurocam operative and I have been given 1 assignment so far

I meet Brendan Lee in Melbourne a couple of years ago. He is an interesting
video artist and now curator.

I have never heard of Graham Henstock, and am doing my own research on him

I do not know why my name appeared next to his and have not receive the
document you mention. Can you forward it to me?

I am interested in your use of the word allegation... why that word?

What kind of project do you think Neurocam is?

With interest

B

And last, though it twists at my sense of ethics to do this (see opening sentence of this post for moral justification): Those who were motivated enough to investigate the New Zealand Companies Office documents relating to Neurocam should recognize that Clifton Hill address. How many fake identities are we talking about here?

hrmmm

Well, the lid's blown off. Or is it? Graham insists he has no idea how or why his name came to be embedded in that Fischer document, and he may well be right. But grouped with two other Melbourne avant-garde artists, the implications do seem kind of damning, don't they?

Let's take a quick look at our collaboratuers. First there's Brendan Lee, of the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology and the VCA (Hely's old stomping grounds). Lee, who is attached to the university's PVC Design & Social Context Creative Media department, has a particular interest in experimental film and video production. (Need a fake torture tape, anyone?)

Lee, as curator of Projekt Video Catalogue from August 2002 through December 2003, had no shortage of opportunity to become familiar with the works of Robin Hely (see Issue 1, misspelled as Healy) and Peter Burke (Issue 4).

Next we have Briele Hansen, another RMIT artist with an interest in video installation.

I wrote to Bridget Fischer to get the denial (of Graham's involvement, specifically) straight from the pony's mouth, and in due course received this response:

Dear JH

This processing error is of no consequence. The names within the macro
data are past and present operatives.

Cheers

Bridget

I wrote to Lee and Hansen to inquire of their Neurocam involvement; they should be drinking their morning coffee right about now, so we'll see if they eventually reply.

naming names

Well, well. The latest twist, as noted this afternoon by jditezzio and QBKooky (aka Zephyrial), is one among several names embedded in the Brief Guide doc. I mentioned Brendan Lee earlier, because it was the easiest to spot. But what I failed to see was the following:

 

  UnknownGraham Henstockﾑ・,ﾑ・

---

[1]
Brendan LeeHMacintosh HD:Users:brielehansen:NEUROCAM:A brief guide to being a Neuroc7

+ｼｵｦｼ5

Yep.  Graham.  So who are Brendan and brielehansen? Co-workers or housemates who use the same machine? I've already sent an email to Bridget -- Graham, care to offer your two cents?