The Olympia Press, 1968 edition of SCUM MANIFESTO held by the New York Public Library defaced by Valerie Solanas in 1977.
Mr. Lannon speculated that Ms. Solanas slipped into the library in 1977, when she apparently returned to New York for the first time in several years. She had served time in prison for the 1968 shooting of Warhol and had been in and out of mental institutions, including one in Florida.
At the library, she would have filled out a slip requesting the book. It would have been pulled from the shelf and handed to her, he said.
Ms. Solanas scratched out her name on the cover and wrote “by Maurice Girodias.” Mr. Girodias, who had published that version of Ms. Solanas’s text, was famous for having published Vladimir Nabokov’s “Lolita,” which had put him at odds with censors in France. He published Ms. Solanas’s 11,000-word text under the imprint of his Olympia Press.
“She’s creating intellectual capital,” Mr. Lannon said, “but it’s being taken away from her — I think that’s how she saw it.”
In her anger, Ms. Solanas wrote “flea” beside Mr. Girodias’s name inside the book. She also wrote, “Read my version and events in my next book.” (She told The Village Voice she had received a $100 million advance for that next book — from “the mob.”)
On the title page, she wrote “This is not the title.” She also wrote that Mr. Girodias’s edition was “full of sabotaging typos.”
On the copyright page, she wrote “LIES! FRAUD!” She also circled “S.C.U.M.” and wrote, “Never! Never!”
Inside the back cover, she wrote, “Lies! Lies!” Then she signed her name.
Ms. Solanas did some copy-editing on the back cover, too. The published version had white lettering on a red background. “Only three years ago, we used to make fun of Valerie Solanas, agitator, writer and would-be revolutionary — with her wild, insane radical feminism,” it said. “Then we were horrified when she shot Andy Warhol in 1968, just to make a point.” She crossed out the last five words and wrote, “Lie.”
– James Barron, ‘Warhol’s Assailant Left Another Mark, on a Library Book’, New York Times blog, February 22, 2012, http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/warhols-assailant-left-another-mark-on-a-library-book/?_r=0
Original self-published mimeograph
of 21 A4 pages 1967 edition
A one day conference examining how contemporary art practices engage with the current housing crisis
18 November 2016
Time 10:00 – 16:00
Duration 6 hours
Cost In order to keep our events programme affordable to everyone, please make a donation
The Institute of Urban Dreaming (IUD) is hosting a one day conference examining how contemporary art practices engage with the current housing crisis.
The event will consist of a series of talks and round table discussions. It aims to consider the encounter between art and housing in a critical, trans-disciplinary way. It will consider housing and art practice before and beyond the current trend for socially engaged art. It will also debate the ethics and politics of practices that relate to gentrification and displacement.
This conference is part of IUD’s public events programme to coincide with their exhibition Promising Home, on show at PHM until Sunday 15 January 2017.
The event has been funded by The Arts Council.
Suitable for adults and young people
Booking Requirements: Booking required via Eventbrite
By dissecting the words we like, without bothering about conforming either to their etymologies or to their accepted significations, we discover their most hidden qualities and the secret ramifications that are propagated through the whole language, channeled by associations of sounds, forms and ideas. Then language changes into an oracle, and there we have a thread (however slender it may be) to guide us through the Babel of our minds.
— Michel Leiris, and Lydia Davis, ‘Glossary: My Glosses Ossuary’ (1925), Brisées = Broken Branches, San Francisco: North Point Press, 1989, pp.3-4.
What is a commodity? A concrete abstraction. An abstraction, certainly – but not an abstraction in spite of its status as a thing; an abstraction, on the contrary, on account of its status as a social ‘thing’, divorced, during its existence, from its materiality, from the use to which it is put, from productive activity, and from the needs that it satisfies. And concrete, just as certainly, by virtue of its practical power. The commodity is a social ‘being-there’, an ‘object’ irreducible to the philosophical concept of the Object. The commodity hides in stores, in warehouses- in inventory. Yet it has no mystery comparable to the mystery of nature. The enigma of the commodity is entirely social. It is the enigma of money and property, of specific needs and the demand-money-satisfaction cycle. The commodity asks for nothing better than to appear. And appear it does – visible/readable, in shop windows and on display racks. Self-exhibition is its forte. Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space, p.340
Inventory Journal flyer for Vol.2 No.3, 1997 (photo taken at Mayday Archives)
Historical time, however, differs from this mechanical time. It determines much more than the possibility of spatial changes of a specific magnitude and regularity – that is to say, like the hands of the clock – simultaneously with spatial changes of a complex nature. And without specifying what goes beyond this, what else determines historical time – in short, without defining how it differs from mechanical time – we may assert that the determining force cannot be grasped by, or wholly concentrated in, any empirical process. Rather a process that is perfect in historical terms is quite indeterminate empirically; it is in fact an idea.
– Walter Benjamin, ‘Trauerspiel and Tragedy’, in Selected Writings Vol.1, 1913-26, pp.55-57, p.55.