Posted by: Bill Saunders | November 16, 2005 4:01 AM

Here-in known as ‘the catchphrase’ by the artist formerly known as Little Miss Mess-Up “New Haven, so small, even you can be somebody. “ So the saying on that immortal Guilty Party bumper sticker goes. Well, New Haven is small. That much I know for sure. If you haven’t noticed it yet, in New Haven there is this divine web of mischance that lies over the entire city from which is little escape. If you’ve been here for any length of time, you will know what I mean. I tripped into this web once again, one Sunday afternoon during City-Wide Open Studios weekend. I was walking down State Street. Guilty Party Mayoral Candidate, Leslie Blatteau, and renowned public scoundrel, Faux Paul, were driving the opposite direction, up State Street. Leslie slowed her family wagon down and called out “Hey, need a ride! “ I snapped out of my haze, and realized who was talking and what was going on. “We’re going to your place, I’ve got Hygiene Wilder practice� Les continued “I grabbed him so I could get into the house�, pointing to the scurrilous Faux Paul. I hopped in and folded myself into the back seat. An instant ride with good company, what could be better. That was the first example New Haven being small. “You gotta see these cards!�, Faux shrieked from the front, “You gotta see ‘em,� They had just come from the opening at Grand Projects, featuring the unveiling of Leslie Kuo’s “Local Characters Downtown New Haven� trading cards. I must say, I was curious with what Leslie had done with the cards, as we had talked quite a bit about the idea a few years ago. (The interesting thing to note here, is that two Leslie’s have inadvertently introduced themselves into the story. I only know two Leslies and these are the two Leslies that I know. I have also just gotten a ride I did not ask for. Not that it means anything, but it’s all kind of strange. Remember what I said about the divine web of mischance that lies over New Haven. This is an example of that. This is what makes New Haven seem even smaller than it really is. "So small", as the catchphrase goes. To confuse matters further, the Second Leslie will now replace the first Leslie, just like in a Lynch movie. The first Leslie is no longer necessary for the plot development, as she was only a macguffin, just like in a Hitchcock movie. Get used to it -- it’s just one of those things that happens because New Haven is so small.) We get home, and Faux pulls a pack cards from his pocket. “I got YOU�, he says, flipping me a deck of ten cellophane wrapped cards. The package included a checklist, credits, and some sort of statement of intent. There is a trading card of me! This is certainly news. I had a difficult time opening the pack of cards. I wondered how my one-armed girlfriend would fare opening the packaging. Well, she couldn’t, and she can do anything. So much for ADA Compliance. Now, I’ll admit, vanity initially got the best of me, and I quickly shuffled through the deck to find my own card - Number 4 for you collectors out there. But I was quickly taken by the statement of intent. Imagine my surprise to see in print: “New Haven, so small, even you can be somebody.� So say the bumper stickers created by local artist, Bill Saunders. These trading cards celebrate this very fact. New Haven is big enough to attract gaggles of suburban shoppers, clubbers, but small enough that you can really recognize the real locals. They are the ones you see over and over in the downtown sidewalks and shops. The unique people who make up our downtown landscape...� For those counting, that was the third example of New Haven being so small. First of all, it’s not even fair to attribute that bumper sticker to me. The quote itself was actually masterminded by members of my 2001 Guilty Party Campaign Team, tongue-in-cheeksters, Drew Cucuzzo and Jack Dannehy. The Advocate’s own Kathleen Cei took the original photograph of Little Miss Mess-Up that appears on that bumper sticker. I did five minutes worth of Photo-shop work and coughed up the printing expense from the campaign coffers. The project was a true collaboration, which happened in the context of a real-time political campaign. That the message continues to resonate in the community four years later is a testament to its inherent truth. New Haven is so small, you CAN be somebody -- whether you choose to rise to that challenge, or not, is entirely up to you So, I guess I should feel flattered, but I do not. I am not comfortable being a pitchman for something which I did not endorse. Sure, I’ve heard cross marketing is all the rage, but c’mon. Two years ago, Leslie Kuo, (herein known as ‘the artist’) did approach me about her idea about exploring some other ‘scenesters’ idea for Trading Cards featuring New Haven ‘street people’ -- the beggars, drunks, hucksters and be-abouts that spot the local landscape. ‘The artist’ even asked me for permission to use ‘the catchphrase’ on the back these cards. My personal feelings were that trading cards featuring such content could be quite exploitive, unless rendered with equal parts skill and humanity. It just seemed wrong to me to make merchandise out of people whose practicing art is survival, unless it served some compassionate, broader context. I told ‘the artist’ I would certainly need to see that context before agreeing anything. Well, as you have probably discerned, I have seen no context. I did not agree to anything. 'The artist" left me out of a crucial step of the process, the part where I allowed her to use the Guilty Party’s ‘catchphrase’ as some sort of endorsement for her own merchandise. These trading cards supposedly have some group identity I have yet to understand. Create your own identity, I say. You don’t need me to define you – define yourself. If ‘the artist’ wanted some fancy wit to define her passionate experience, perhaps she could have thought of a catchphrase of her own. Or get a grant and hire a local PR firm. I must say, I feel a little exploited And we have yet to get the cards themselves. Faux confided, “I’ve always considered photography a suspect art form.� Vainly speaking, Number 4 is not a bad picture of me, but the issue isn’t the photographs, it’s what is done with them. Pictures at an exhibition, I’ve got no problem with it. Click away. There is a certain distance between viewer and subject. Some emotional core shown through an anonymous veil. But something like trading cards isn’t just pictures, its conceptual work. The responsibility of the artist lies with how these ‘downtown characters’ are portrayed, and how they fit together in a social and historical context that is somehow representative of the vibrancy of New Haven. We are, after all, dealing with real humans here, not artistic abstractions or specimens. And we are dealing with a real place, as well, with its own vibrant history. Seems like pretty rich stuff. On the back of each card is habitat and bio-behavioral information for that individual specimen. Some even include utterances likely to be heard in their natural environment. I found out, that apparently, my natural environs are walking on Chapel Street, between Howe and Dwight, and I am known for fronting the band Little Miss and the Mess-Ups. Well, that’s very nice; it’s just not true. (Facts is, I founded the band The Mess-Ups, and I can be found everywhere here in small town – well, everywhere except for Artspace.) Then there’s the interesting stuff I found out about other people: I found out that someone was nice. It was nice to know. I think she’s nice, too. I found out that Louie, the Italian, hangs out at Starbuck’s. (so, if the word goes out on Louie the Italian, mums the word) I found out that, apparently, the guy who asks me for change every day is known for once wearing the same t-shirt for all of 2002, until he lost it. So, how long was that, two days? Was that starting January 1st? Was that particularly enlightening or appropriate information to reveal about someone in need of help? Try to sanitize it, call it what you will, but that stuff isn’t right. It’s just plain exploitive. Someone else was a child star who has starred opposite Peter Sellars and Mia Farrow. But it didn’t say that on the card. That’s just something I know because I know her. A pretty awesome thing to be known for. Too bad it didn’t make “the artist’s� cut. And those are just some preliminary highlights. There are still 50 cards I haven’t seen! If you exclude the portions of *my* card that were just plain wrong; the rest of the information didn’t particularly characterize “the human being currently known as me� in any meaningful way. From what I have seen, none of the cards characterize the people, or the vibrant community I know. There is no passion, no rhythm, no depth. No connection. It doesn’t even feel like these words came from real people. People wouldn’t describe themselves with that same repetitive neutral milk tone. I feel like I’m visiting a bad taxidermy exhibit at the Peabody Museum. Break out the binoculars, kids, were going ‘spotting locals’. Look at ‘em – but don’t get too close. It’s all so observational and unengaged, where do I get my t-shirt? New Haven’s so small, I’m sure I’ll find out. Chalk up another one to those sensitive ladies of Artspace. Soylent Green is People!

Posted by: Elizabeth Theis | November 17, 2005 12:59 PM

Hi. I'm one of the producers of Milford, America 06460. I guess I'm a little upset that neither my nor my co-producer's name was in this article. Furthermore, even thoughI was one-third of the "Local" show, my name was not mentioned. I wish the author had made clearer that our film is a project launched by our production company, Light and Sweet Productions. While I worked with Hanni and Leslie, our movie is still a LSP endeavor, and not the product of this collaboration. I suggest you read your press releases more than once next time. Elizabeth Theis Executive Producer, Light and Sweet Productions

Posted by: Leslie Kuo | December 6, 2005 1:36 AM

Hello Bill, Thanks for publishing your criticisms so I can address them. I heard from several friends that you had serious concerns about the trading cards. Through the rumor mill, I couldn't be sure what exactly your criticisms were, but I did hear words like "exploitation" and "without permission." I have actually lost a lot of sleep after hearing this, because I was painfully aware for the entire 2 years that I spent on this project, of the danger that the project could be seen as exploitative if it was not done with care and consideration. In fact, for some time, I was considering not completing the project, for fear that I would inadvertently offend or hurt someone. However, though you clearly don't think so, there were many people in the community who did want to see them finished, and I eventually decided that I had to take the risk and get them printed. If by exploitation you mean I'm making money off people - that's never going to happen. Some people have figured out how to make a profit on art, but unfortunately, I'm not one of them. Let me clarify why the cards are being sold as merchandise: 1. I wanted to be true to the idea of trading cards, which had been tossed around New Haven circles (by Rich Neagle, as I mentioned, and by others) for some time before I did the project - trading cards are bought for a couple dollars and traded. 2. Printing and photography are not cheap. I used only local darkrooms, film processing, and offset printing (Creative Arts Workshop, Photoland, and Gist and Herlin in West Haven). None of this is cheap. Photography cost hundreds of dollars (I lost track) and printing just 100 copies of each card cost $955 (and that's with a generous paper donation from GHP). If I sell every last card, I'll just break even. Even so, I tried to price the cards as affordably as possible. If by exploitation you mean that I portrayed anyone in a way that was disagreeable to them, I need to explain that in putting together the cards, I did every single thing I could think of, to include only people who wanted to be included and share only information they were willing to share. I did make some unintentional errors (I apologize for misnaming your band), but I did ask each person for permission to take their photograph, and also asked each person, either in person or by email, for their input on all the statistics. The reason Louie Storvino's card says he hangs out at Starbucks - that's what he told me. The reason that Elizabeth Walker's card doesn't mention her acting career is because she specifically requested that I not mention it. The reason Roger Cruz's card says he wore a Rage Against the Machine shirt is because many people knew him for this, and I asked him why he doesn't wear it anymore. He said he lost it, and that it was 2002 when he wore it, and that it was fine to include it on the card. And the reason you were listed as walking on Chapel between Howe and Dwight is because that's what you told me when I interviewed you at Cafe Nine earlier this year. I believe that the words "inciting general mirth and mayhem" were from that interview. I understand your concern about how the cards portray "someone in need of help." In fact, at one point, I was wonering whether I should just not include any "troubled" people (homelessness, alcohol or drug abuse problems, mental illness) on these cards at all. Not only was I concerned about being seen as exploitative by people in general, but I was also concerned that individuals on the cards might agree to being on the cards at first, then be upset later (which is unfortunately what happened with Annette Walton, but I apologized and we talked it through). But eventually I realized that as risky as it was to include people with serious health or life issues, it would be unfair to exclude them without discussing it with them, when they are really part of the downtown community. I realized I had to ask each person and let them decide whether or not to participate. As I said, all the people on the cards agreed. I will agree with you that the writing has "a neutral milk tone," as you said. Neutral is exactly what I decided the copy had to be, because the people on the cards are so diverse - some we recognize because they ask us for change, others because they play in three rock bands - that I felt it was of extreme importance to describe them all in a neutral tone. I did not want to make fun of anyone, cast judgement on anyone, or even put anyone under the microscope (or binoculars). I wrote only what people told me, or what is pretty common knowledge. So maybe that doesn't provide deeply insightful copy, but it also steers clear of invasiveness. So far, most people have either been happy with what was listed (Ian Applegate emailed me saying "My ma liked what you wrote on my card"), or had the kind of reaction they might have if reading about themselves in the newspaper. First they're naturally befuddled because the written description sounds flat compared to the complex, living, breathing self, but realizing that's the thing with short pieces of writing - they can only capture a partial glimpse of a person. And real baseball cards aren't known for fully describing the complexities of the human soul, either. Short, quick factoids go along with the territory. Finally, I am surprised that you were angered instead of honored that I quoted you. Funny, but usually when I quote someone, it's because they said something which I think was meaningful: "It takes a village to raise an idiot" --Some Dead Guy If I wanted to use a quote to ENDORSE my project, it would look something more like this: "Wow! These trading cards really show that New Haven is so small, even you can be somebody! Two thumbs up!" --Bill Saunders Clearly, that is not what I did. I explained the context of the quote, that it appeared on bumper stickers, and was not spoken in response to the trading cards. I have spoken to a lot of people about this project, and many others have approached me or contacted me to comment. Actually, you are the only person who took offense to the project as a whole. The majority of the criticism centers around the fact that so-and-so was left out and they should have been in. This would suggest that most people actually think the cards are a good thing, and WANT to be included. I realize that this doesn't include you. But having hand-delivered many of the cards to the people pictured (there are about 10 or 15 people I'm still looking for), I can tell you that most people have thanked me for including them, even if they have suggestions for what to do better next time. And next time, as I mentioned, it will be a different group of artists taking this on. Because I do not pretend that my perspective is the absolute truth. I am just an artist like any other, I have a view of the world which affected how I made the cards. As different artists approach the project, more perspectives will be represented, and a fuller picture of New Haven life will emerge. Thank you for taking the time to read this. Leslie

Posted by: Johanna Bresnick | December 7, 2005 6:51 PM

The above criticism of Leslie Kuo's work may generate heat, but little light. The myriad complaints about the project reveal more about the critic's delight in trashing Kuo and the project than the trading cards themselves. In response to the most pressing critique of the trading cards- Leslie Kuo's trading cards are not intentionally or unintentionally exploitative. I would not have invited her to show them at Grand Projects if I felt that her process of acquiring images and text was unethical, deceptive or naively exploitative. The emphasis of the LOCAL show, including the cards, the video work of Liz Theis and Michael Stock and some t-shirts I commissioned that say "LOCAL" was to celebrate the town I grew up in. All of the people who appear in the cards gave their consent. No matter who they are, we owe them the benefit of the doubt that they willingly agreed to participate. Anything less is an opaque way of suggesting they might incapable of intelligent and independent decision-making. Give us locals more credit!

Posted by: Bill Saunders | December 9, 2005 1:25 PM

Hanni, How is it that you are now the unequivocal moral authority about what is/isn't exploitive? As somebody who not only had his picture and information 'captured' (without consent, incidentally), I also had my 'slogan' separately commandeered as part of this project. This would seem to uniquely qualify me to talk about this project. I can judge for myself whether I feel exploited or not. And, believe it or not, I can express those feelings too. Leslie says herself that she was aware of the danger that the project could be seen as exploitive. I am telling her that I feel exploited. And we are having a spirited debate. Last count, there were sixty *LOCAL* trading cards. I am the only * LOCAL* so far who has officially weighed in with some actual feelings on the subject (as a subject). I urge others to do the same, but until then, the project is 100% exploitive by any spin of the numbers.. So, how much is that t-shirt with the busstop logo going for, anyway?

Posted by: Johanna Bresnick | December 10, 2005 10:07 AM

Based on Kuo's full disclosure of the scope of the project to the people being asked to participate, it's safe to assume that anyone who felt the project was exploitative would not have agreed to participate. The unfortunate misunderstanding between you and the artist aside, I have not heard any "official" or unofficial complaints. Your suggestion that you are "the only * LOCAL* so far who has officially weighed in with some actual feelings on the subject (as a subject)" is simply not true. This forum is certainly not the only place where a discussion of the trading cards has taken place. The response to the cards has been overwhelmingly positive with little mention of exploitation. Again, calling the project %100 exploitative simply doesn't give credit to the other 59 people featured in the cards who have not shared your opinion.

Posted by: frankie | December 27, 2005 11:20 PM

I think you all are making much ado about nothing. Just goes to show how small, and dumb, this city really is...