Share / SaveDid “The Yes Men” Forcibly Remove a Dissident from Chicago Brainstorming Session?
Story by Joy Kenuoosi
A brainstorming session open to the public for The Yes Men, a duo famous for their elaborate hoaxes, turned into a verbal, then physical altercation here in Chicago in October.
Andy Bichlbaum and Mike Bonanno, were in town to promote their new film, “The Yes Men Fix the World,” when the incident occurred during a public program hosted by LaBampa Art Express.
An attendee of the session, who asked to remain anonymous, said the group was working out details of the Yes Men’s upcoming prank, “Monopoly: Mortgage Crisis Edition,” when a questioner was forcibly removed from the event.
According to this source, Norale Partseon allegedly asked the two, “Can you explain to me how this action is going to change anything?’
He was apparently referring to the Monopoly prank, in which the players, mid-game, suddenly find their interest rates re-adjusted, and they immediately spiral into bankruptcy.
Our
source noted that the prank also included “swapping out existing game
boards and instructions, then returning the games to Walmart shelves
during the holiday shopping season. But Parteson continued to question
the effectiveness of the prank.”
Others at the event seemed to enjoy the prospective mischief, according to the source. “Everyone was laughing and having fun, but the guy kept asking questions. Things like, ‘But everyone already knows we’re in a housing crisis. What will this prank change?’”
Bichlbaum, according to several other attendees, who also asked not to be identified, responded that “It raises awareness.”
Parteson then is reported to have asked what measurable effect this prank would have in helping Americans who were actually in foreclosure, or the many who have recently had their credit card interest rates raised. He reportedly asked if American’s lack awareness about the financial crisis, or about global climate change, the subject of the recent Yes Men prank involving a mock New York Post paper with a headline reading: “We’re screwed.”
“How much more awareness does the issue of climate change need?” Parteson allegedly queried the Yes Men.
At that point, sources agree, Bonanno signaled two men at the back of the room, believed to be personal bodyguards, who then came forward and forced Parteson to leave the meeting.
“It was disconcerting,” reported yet another source who asked not to be identified, this time due to concerns for his safety. “The guy asking questions struggled with the men, but they were big guys. They just took him by the arms and carried him out. It makes me worry that now that we Democrats are in power, we’re not allowed to question our own side, and we might turn into the tyrants we fought against in the previous administration.”
The Yes Men did not return our request for comment.
this is satire, right?
To answer the headline, “No.” No one was removed (forcibly or otherwise) from that event. Really strange seeing this published here.
So really, this is some kind of joke, right?
Why are you telling a lie? Is this a joke?
Hi Kathryn, you should reveal that this is a hoax before more people get upset. or point people to your facebook account..
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/kathryn.born?ref=ts
Ok, fine.
Yes, of course it was a hoax. Usually I stick the reveal in the piece itself, but considering the nature of the Yes Men’s work, I figured I’d let it be. People shouldn’t be upset, the Yes Men are big boys and if they can dish it out, they can take it.
And if anyone wants to be angry, be angry that a couple iditots cooked the books, got caught, and took the climate change argument back 5 years. Now we’re back at square 1 making a data case to the public. Let us not ignore that elephant in the room for just a moment.
And FWIW, I like the Yes Men, I like their style. My only argument is that I think (and I’ve said this before a million times) activism today should do more to build bridges and convert people, rather than strengthen the partisan lines.
I think the greatest trick politicians ever pulled was this partisan civil war we’re in – everyone is in a defensive mode, so protective of their own side, that no internal questioning is allowed. And that is an excellent way to weaken the party.
As for the Yes Men, this particular piece (I wrote it) came about because people were pitching me pieces about the Yes Men and I would ask for some even-handedness, some critical treatement of the projects, and no one, NO ONE, was going to say one peep against these guys.
Loyalty scares the shit out of me.
People always say “Question Authority” and that’s great – do that. But question your buddy, question the person standing next to you, question the person who is on your side.
Every day I put my own beliefs through their paces. This makes my life mind-spinningly hard, confusing and stressful, but it’s worth it.
This entire magazine is dedicated to opening your mouth and asking questions of your own side, questioning core assumptions. It’s going to piss everyone off, but it’s how we’re going to roll.
Love,
Kathryn
I’m still confused. What is this all about? I don’t care about what your views about the Yes Men are, I’m just curious why parts, if not the entire story are completely fabricated?
That’s a wonderful clarion call for freedom of expression, Kathryn.
But when I responded to your post by pointing out that the First Amendment guarantees not only freedom of expression, but also freedom of association (i.e., the right not to listen to people you disagree with), you blocked me.
Now, as I explained to you before, you have every right to silence a voice you find objectionable. But your words here are inconsistent with your own recent behavior.
Some might even use the word hypocrisy.
Jerry,
Your comment is still on my Facebook page, I just de-friended you. Big difference.
K
Kathryn, I think you would’ve been better served by simply posting your thoughts on the issue instead of publishing an intentionally inaccurate article to your site, but hey, that’s just my opinion.
In terms of cutting off participation in a debate, it’s a distinction without a difference. Had this Yes Men story been true, for instance, it’s no different from allowing the heckler to say a few words, and then ejecting him.
Ejection from a forum is ejection from a forum.
Again, that is your right (just as you have every right to to moderate posts on this site.) But it’s hardly the radical, unfettered approach to freedom of expression you espouse here.
Hi Jimbo,
to answer your question as well as I can. I guess we put in hoax pieces (and fake ads are coming) because I want to train our readers to NOT believe what they read on our site. I’m putting my flag in the sand that this is textbook internet media – most pieces are not proofread, let alone fact-checked. Reviews are done by people I don’t know, who are going to galleries I’ve often never been to. They could be the artist they are reviewing, for all I know.
I also think humor, satire and hoax art is really important when it comes to visual art. We need to look through contemporary art through the lense of “Is this a joke?”
I have much better eye for art because I see it through that lense. I didn’t used to – I used to love all it, I used to think it was all great and amazing. But now I think critically, I use common sense, and if it seems like a joke, I laugh at it.
And I thought “Mortgage Crisis Monopoly” was pretty funny.
Hope that helps,
Kathryn
And Jerry, I don’t know what to tell you, I’m really not up for debating the first ammendment with you. You can post whatever you want on this site (to some degree), but Facebook is something I enjoy. You also mentioned being “forced to listen to this” so I thought I would take the obligation, the burden, the “force” of exposure to this, off your plate, and save you the headache. You are here because you want to be here, no one is asking you to read this.
K
Kathryn I obviously love satire. And yes, the yes men are big boys. However my problem is that you suggested that two dudes from our space evicted someone in a meeting we organized in order to censor them. By suggesting we were part of this thuggery is not funny.
Also the fact that many people have emailed me to see what the heck this was about makes me feel that readers of your site can’t tell whether you are printing “news” or Onion style journalism.
Makes me question how many other posts on your blog are satirical as well. From a quick look on the site, maybe quite a few. You should put disclaimers on them, too.
” Jimbo says:
December 10, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Kathryn, I think you would’ve been better served by simply posting your thoughts on the issue instead of publishing an intentionally inaccurate article to your site — ”
About a group that intentionally and accurately mis-represents themselves in the media… hmmmm. Maybe that’s why I did it? Hmmmm…
So, you blocked me as a favor to me? Some favor. Again, with the hypothetical you posed in your article, it would be like those thugs saying to the heckler: “Oh, we just decided that you don’t want to be here any more.”
And you quote me out of context. I can’t quote the full context, because you’ve blocked me from my own post.
As to your comment about FB being something you enjoy, how does that square with this comment of yours:
“But question your buddy, question the person standing next to you, question the person who is on your side.”
So, I question my buddy, and get “defriended” (i.e., forcibly ejected from the forum.) I acted consistently with your stated position. Why didn’t you?
There’s an irony there, the same irony you attempted to highlight with your article. The difference is that the Yes Men, and Ed, ejected no-one from any forum, while you did precisely what you were criticizing with your attempt to spur debate.
Yes, over 90% of our galleries are fabricated. We actually brainstormed the name “Chicago” a few months ago.
THE ENTIRE SITE IS A HOAX SITE. Please mark it in your bookmarks as such.
“At that point, sources agree, Bonanno signaled two men at the back of the room, who then came forward and forced Parteson to leave the meeting.”
This, if anything, suggests a personal relationship with a bodyguard who is fluent in hand signals. You find me a rent-a-cop who is that on the ball and I’ll hire him tomorrow.
Look, this is like when RXXXX & CXXXXXXX complained to the Trib about the name on the essay being reported incorrectly. Was this group REALLY mad about the essay name – really? Of course not, they were mad about the bad review.
This is about you being uncomfortably close to the butt of a joke – and for that, I apologize, but Edmar, we all dish it out. You put an effigy of Chris Kennedy’s head on a stick and marched in front of his work place. Fair is fair.
I know that this comes with the territory, I know this will happen to me and I will be extremely pissed off as well. But I do understand that it comes with the territory, and I hereby sign up for it.
OK, I’m offline for the night.
K
Kathryn, again you are misleading people.
I helped organize the Art War. I rode a chariot.
I did not “put an effigy of Chris Kennedy’s head on a stick and marched in front of his work place.”
Stop misleading people. Satire and slandering a person are two different things.
But my guess is that you just don’t fact check.
try that.
Kathryn, your point is fair, I just think this wasn’t a particularly good method for establishing it. It just confused me when I read it because it was from a local source and I thought it intentionally undercut both groups for no apparent reason. Though you’ve made your reason clear now, I just think I would rather read your thoughtful opinion and analysis on the topic than see it involve, in a negative and misleading way, two groups whose general purposes are positive and seek to add to the cultural sphere rather than take away, despite your contentions to their style. I mean, I still don’t understand what the hell you were trying to say or accomplish by writing this, make people question what they read on the internet? (You really think people, especially those in the art world don’t already question what they read on the computer?) And if you were intentionally misleading and misrepresenting yourself and site, to what end? Because as far as I can read and interpret, it’s still unclear? At best you were using Yes-Men-esque tactics to decry the same tactics, and that Kathryn is just counter-productive.
James
(my internet is working)
Ok, but Edmar, you and I personally discussed that incident, remember, we stood at Art Chicago and talked about it, about the phone calls and the ultimately peaceful resolution? However, I will officially retract, if I misunderstood the situation I apologize.
K
“I guess we put in hoax pieces (and fake ads are coming) because I want to train our readers to NOT believe what they read on our site.” – Kathryn
You what? You want to TRAIN your readers? You want to TRAIN your readers NOT to believe what they read? Are you some kind of sicko? I don’t think most of your readers would like to know that the editor of the blog they are reading is trying to train them, that you think they are so media illiterate that they need to be trained. Megalomania anyone?
Kind of like when Negativland’s ‘Christianity is Stupid’
_reportedly_ motivated that kid’s shooting spree. Oh performative cultural criticism, life would be dull without you. Hoax on!
Once again Kathryn you are misleading people here. I never said anything like that to you. So yes, please do retract your statements.
I was one of hundreds of individuals who showed up to participate in the Art War. I helped organize it. Assuming I am responsible for the actions of hundreds of other people is ridiculous. And so is your blog.
There is already scant coverage of the arts in the city. If your mission is to train people to decypher arts coverage on your blogs by testing their intelligence then its not really working here.
Readers who couldn’t decypher your prank would come away believing that we (yes men, c-ps, etc) are the kind of people that would censor free speech.
The difference between your attempt and the yes men’s work is that they disguise themselves to expose the truth. In your piece you disguise yourself to lie and damage people’s reputations.
You are fomenting negative opinions, as well as slandering and insulting people. You suggested that we condone censoring people at our space. You say the yes men were denying people free speech. That’s what i get out of your “art joke”.
I want you to continue your creative writing experiments, but just don’t lie and slander people just because you can’t think of anything else to write about. Don’t hide lying behind the veils of media literacy, performance art or creative writing experiments. Your embarrassing yourself.
I already knew your blogs were not very credible sources for arts coverage and criticism. I never really read them much. So it was weird to have a bunch of people i know send me a link to your weird yes men Co-Prosperity Sphere “art joke.”
So thanks for mentioning in the comments above that “most pieces are not proofread, let alone fact-checked. Reviews are done by people I don’t know, who are going to galleries I’ve often never been to. They could be the artist they are reviewing, for all I know.”
I remember a few years ago you admitted you didn’t really know whats going on in the art scenes of Chicago on the Bad a Sport site. I can see how that lack of experience and knowledge is affecting your work today.
The venue in the piece has been changed to protect the innocent.
I can confirm no evictions. And I must say that yeah, we are fair game, its true. and we need a good kick in the pants.
but its sooooo thankless and difficult to run a venue like the co-prosperity spere that i can see very clearly edmar’s position.
but i do still feel a bit bad about dipping a kitten in poo in the basement that night. poor thing.
aside from that, there was (really) someone from that night who was arrested the following night after an action against chase bank- and i am embarassed to say that i still haven’t found him! We were in a barr drinking by the time he was locked up… his first name is sergei, and if anyone knows him please put him in touch!
I don’t want you to take this the wrong way Kathryn, but I think you’re a complete fool and wonder why you think your opinion matters to the Chicago art community. I think it’s time to get off your high horse, start writing articles and reviews that are interesting and stop trash talking. You’d think someone of your age would have left that attitude in their 20s.
http://chicagoartmap.com/transparency/?p=30