This album was finished shortly before Phil Bonnet's untimely death and was later released at the beginning of 2000 in a limited CD-R edition. Each release apparently comes individually packaged; my copy came in a plastic slipcase glued onto a Barry Manilow record that was enclosed in the sleeve of a Gene Krupa album. The album itself is one long, often formless track that ends with a repeated motif that fades out for ten minutes. Possibly one of the most uncommercial albums ever made and well worth hearing.

NOTES:

The Players: Dave Stone, Caitlin Strokosch, Darin Gray, Julie Pomelleau, Dylan Posa, Phil Bonnet, Thymme Jones, Jeff Libersher

The Singers: Mimi Wallman, Ben Vida, Phil Bonnet, Texia Gartelos, Gail Gartelos, Elizabeth Gartelos, Dave Stone, Dylan Posa, Rob Bochnik, Thymme Jones, Bobby Conn, Scott Rutledge, Jeff Libersher, Janie Bouzek, Julie Pomelleau

This essay appears on the back of the LP cover:

A balloon is inflatable, and, in its most common image (tethered to a string), it is also transcendent. It is one of those usless objects which serves no other purpose than to dazzle; an object of the festival -- no different than the giant stuffed animal the man wins for his girl in a game of skill.

It is this power to bestow, to give something so great in value that it would be impossible to reciprocate, which transforms this useless object into a priceless memento.

The exchange of the useless object is taken to its extreme in the ritual of the potlatch, a festival at which rival chiefs lavish each other with gifts as a way of placing a greater and greater obligation upon one another, and which sometimes reaches a climax in a mass destruction of material possessions. Whether we are speaking of the man who gives his girl a token of his love, or the chief who showers his rival with gifts as a means of putting him to shame, this waste of resources has the same outcome, for in either case the exchange produces a surplus, and this surplus takes on a value without any respect to the object's material or utilitarian value.

Unlike the balloon whose string is tied 'round her finger, the ojbects exchanged at the potlatch do not gain a sentimental or idealized value; they are not objects of worship, their value is not derived through their elevation, but through their destruciton. These objects become the focal point for a useless expenditure of resources. This is a debasement of wealth in which power is achieved not through acquisition, but through destruction.

One does not invest themselves in such an object, as takes place in the process of worship, but divests themselves of any relation to this object, relinquishing all proprietary rights which come with ownership. The object takes on a value which is the opposite of the icon. The object is that which has been expelled.

The potlatch is a divestment of property, which is offered to the rival chief in the form of a challenge. In its perfect form, the gift becomes an impossible demand placed upon the recipient, that is, it does not return. The goal of the potlatch is to break down the system of exchange. These rivalries would often reach the point at which exchange was no longer adequate, and the chiefs would slaughter their livestock, burn down their lodges, break their canoes, and throw precious copper ingots into the ocean as a demonstration of their status in the presence of their rivals.

The ritual of exchange gives way to out and out destruction. The chief destroys everything he owns in order to prove that these material possessions have no value to him. but this destruction is only meaningful in proportion to what he has to destroy in the first place. The potlatch is preceded by a period of accumulation. There is an amassing of wealth in order to make a bigger fire. The one who wins is the one who has the most to lose, but they can only win by losing it, by letting it go. There is a greater value placed upon social rank than there is upon economic wealth.

One acquires their status through producing a surplus, through returning the gift with interest. What is given has to be of a greater value than what is received. Thus the surplus constantly increases, but in which no one profits materially from this inflation in value. The transaction is a means of increasing one's social status through divesting oneself of their property. This is counter to the present form of capitalism which reappropriates the surplus and in which accumulation becomes a form of servitude in the quest for power. Through the example of potlatch, capitalism can be given a purely destructive function in which exchange serves as a form of spectacle, as a celebration in which the surplus is liberated as opposed to being exploited. This reverses the competitive aspect of capitalism in that it is no longer driven by greed, or by a status which could be measured by one's accumulations.

This divestment of material possessions is to be distinguished from a priest's vow of poverty, for it does not establish a place beyond wich would be one's ultimate reward and salvation. One does not give up their material possessions as a means of receiving eternal salvation, but as a means of increasing their social status.

The potlatch follows a law which is basic to physics; giving is always from a greater to a lesser position. And thus to receive is not to gain, but to fall in one's status in relation to the other who gives. It is truly better to give than to receive, but not in the charitable sense which Christianity places upon this act. It is not a matter of selflessness, but of the elevation which one gains through their generosity. The lovers express this in the most simplistic terms through the following exchange: "I love you." "I love you more." But within such an exchange there is only poverty, for they live under the obligation of their vows.

-- Leonard Feather