Matthew Williams, Circlemaker

[Wade]

I Haven't listened to the episode yet, but I got to say this is some impassioned response. I am hoping you guys touched on the logistics that these circles must have involved. As one who does find it hard to comprehend that, given the various logistics and equipment needed and lighting...assuming that not all crop circles were done by the light of a full moon and/or flashlights, the time involved be it just a few people or if it was a group of people and the number of them over the years how is it that matt was the only one nabbed...because of whitley it seems...and only a couple of confessions. Talk about a tight lipped tight knit community. Having said that Muadib's posts nailed my sentiments exactly (including the fervour) here. I admit I pretty much fast forwarded through the Colin Andrews episode but if he claimed that he created a crop circle with his mind, muadib brings up a very, very, good point, also despite my prior points I am certainly not ready to claim that crop circles are a form of a communication because if "they" were, as muadib pointed out "they" are doing a piss poor job about it. The only thing we come away with is "so the aliens know algebra, good for them" what's more why make someone fly thousands of feet above the earth to in order to communicate with them. Do "they" not understand we all have email now? and understanding that I'm not knowledgeable about crop circles per say, you don't hear of many circles that are created in more remote hard to get to areas, if someone wanted to communicate with us but only at altitude the skys the limit there are planes crisscrossing this globe everywhere so that things should be all over the place not just farmers fields, which conveniently offer easy access but at the same time if it's just a bunch of artists and one feels that earth is suitable to be used as a canvas why not just kill some grass using lime in a neighborhood park ? If it sounds like in trying to have it both ways I guess I am because in this situation both sides of the argument seems to have more holes that bring up even more questions.

If in the near future Monsanto comes out with some kind of seed guaranteed to be resistant to crop circle makers and chatty aliens then we 'll all know who is behind this.

 

[DaveM]

The more I thought about Mr. Williams replies, the more it got me pissed off. What if I drove my pickup truck over to his property and did a series of circles of spins and ripped up his lawn. I guess my response could be I was doing it for my art. What a BS artist this guy is!

 

[trainedobserver]

Excellent episode! A great interview all around.

Williams paid his fine and says he has been done with crop circle making for some time now. I think that is an important point that seems to have been missed.

 

[trainedobserver]

I'd be interested in seeing the crop circles that people here in the forum think are non-human creations.

I'd start but I don't think there are any.

 

[trainedobserver]

The more I thought about Mr. Williams replies, the more it got me pissed off. What if I drove my pickup truck over to his property and did a series of circles of spins and ripped up his lawn. I guess my response could be I was doing it for my art. What a BS artist this guy is!

It's just simple hooliganism. It is graffiti by definition. The fact that the design is rendered in a crop field rather than on a wall is irrelevant.

There really is no justification or rationalization for destroying someone's property for your own self-indulgent "art." The "woo-woo" made me do it just doesn't seem to wash.

 

[Jimi H.]

The more I thought about Mr. Williams replies, the more it got me pissed off. What if I drove my pickup truck over to his property and did a series of circles of spins and ripped up his lawn. I guess my response could be I was doing it for my art. What a BS artist this guy is!

It's just simple hooliganism. It is graffiti by definition. The fact that the design is rendered in a crop field rather than on a wall is irrelevant.

There really is no justification or rationalization for destroying someone's property for your own self-indulgent "art." The "woo-woo" made me do it just doesn't seem to wash.

I'll happily admit that since I have an academic interest in the concept of civil disobedience (and somewhat in art), I think you guys are selling him short.

I also thought it was a great interview, but I wouldn't have minded hearing more about two things:
1) His paranormal experiences, which I thought he glossed over. Now, if I had actually experienced weird stuff, like balls hovering over a field, it would not be something I'd just mention in passing. Is he serious about it?

And the other thing, to get to my point:
2) Why does he do it?

The thing is, in art, or 'artistic' hapenings, there is an intention. And the intention seperates the situationist (someone who intervenes in a situation, for instance the crop circle situation, on the sly) from the hooligan.

(EDIT: Here is an EXAMPLE of vandalism which is excuseable, I'm not comparing art and civil disobedience, as such): Likewise, civil disobedience may be apologized, in fact seen as beneficiary, if it can be made clear that the civil intervention was made on moral grounds, for a greater cause than seeking personal benefits. ..

So, here's the kicker, he kept doing crop circles in large part because the woo-woo crowd would not listen to reason, did not want to know the truth! If people had come to reason sooner, he wouldn't have any grounds to keep up the situationist comedy. And still, after numerous 'how-to' videos etc, many still choose to blame the messenger.

I think this whole situation is a goldmine of material for an academic study on the paranormal scene, and I think there's much more to it than hooliganism.

There's clearly a lot to learn.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Random blow down events are more intriguing to me than man-made glyphs in fields.
One thing that both Andrews and Williams agreed on was that the simpler the formation, the higher the probability it could be high-strange.
Here are some examples...

 

[trainedobserver]

I'll happily admit that since I have an academic interest in both civil disobedience and art, I think you guys are selling him short.

Civil disobedience implies some "cause" is being represented. There is no such thing in regards to Crop Circles so there is simply no way crop circles can be viewed as civil disobedience.

Farming is hard enough without vandalism destroying crop and wasting time. The "go draw pictures in the sand" seems a reasonable alternative.

There's clearly a lot to learn.

I agree, but not from crop circles.

Don't get me wrong. I think Matthew Williams is doing us all a great service talking about this stuff. If he has stopped destroying other people property now, all the better.

You are right Jimi, the crop circle subculture is a sociologists wet-dream.

Question: Does anyone else think that there are fewer crop circles in the U.S. because there are more guns in America? People skulking about in the dark destroying someone's livelihood probably doesn't seem like such a good idea in that respect.

 

[DaveM]

I would like you to tell the farmers that the reason you destroyed his crops was for 'academic study on the paranormal scene.' Tell us the reply you get back from him.

I'll happily admit that since I have an academic interest in the concept of civil disobedience (and somewhat in art, I think you guys are selling him short.

I also thought it was a great interview, but I wouldn't have minded hearing more about two things:
1) His paranormal experiences, which I thought he glossed over. Now, if I had actually experienced weird stuff, like balls hovering over a field, it would not be something I'd just mention in passing. Is he serious about it?

And the other thing, to get to my point:
2) Why does he do it?

The thing is, in art, or 'artistic' hapenings, there is an intention. And the intention seperates the situationist (someone who intervenes in a situation, for instance the crop circle situation, on the sly) from the hooligan. Likewise, civil disobedience may be apologized, in fact seen as beneficiary, if it can be made clear that the civil intervention was made on moral grounds, for a greater cause than seeking personal benefits. A society which doesn't seperate between hooliganism and civil disobedience is a police state, not a human state of reason, and compassion. And it's a good American tradition, since Thoreau.

So, here's the kicker, he kept doing crop circles in large part because the woo-woo crowd would not listen to reason, did not want to know the truth! If people had come to reason, he wouldn't have any grounds to keep it up the situationist comedy. And still, after numerous 'how-to' videos etc, many still choose to blame the messenger.

In think this whole situation is a goldmine of material for an academic study on the paranormal scene, and I think there's much more to it than hooliganism.

There's clearly a lot to learn.

 

[Jimi H.]

Civil disobedience implies some "cause" is being represented. There is no such thing in regards to Crop Circles so there is simply no way crop circles can be viewed as civil disobedience.

Farming is hard enough without vandalism destroying crop and wasting time. The "go draw pictures in the sand" seems a reasonable alternative.

I knew this was coming, he, I should have stated that there are situations where society accepts kinds of vandalism, and civil disobedience is an example of such.

I agree, but not from crop circles.

No, but from the way people interact with crop circles, and use them to advance a cause, for instance a New Age quasi-religious cause. And therein lies the potential enlightenment project. That is what I have been trying to say several times here and in the Colin Andrews thread.

Overall I agree that the indifference to the farmers' crops doesn't speak to the circlemakers' honor, I'm simply saying there's more to it than pure vandalism. If the intention is there. I know the intention is there for some of the makers. It's on their website.

WE are their project.

 

[DaveM]

I also found Mr. Williams reply as to paying the farmer for destroying his crops quite enlightening. His reply was that would cost lots money to reimburse the farmer. Well DUH! Williams is clueless as to the idea of private property and why he got off lightly with a fine.

 

[Jimi H.]

Random blow down events are more intriguing to me than man-made glyphs in fields.
One thing that both Andrews and Williams agreed on was that the simpler the formation, the higher the probability it could be high-strange.
Here are some examples...

I'm not sure I can follow the intrigue there. Maybe it's because I grew up in farmland, I've seen it many times, it's caused by bursts of heavy rain that smash into the corn at high velocity. The direction of the wind or the burst seems to be printed in the crop.

 

[Jimi H.]

I would like you to tell the farmers that the reason you destroyed his crops was for 'academic study on the paranormal scene.' Tell us the reply you get back from him.

Fuck off, you got the wrong guy.

That was a low blow, dude.

 

[DaveM]

Fuck off, you got the wrong guy.

That was a low blow, dude.

You need to understand the meaning of private property, my friend. You seem as clueless to that idea as Mr. Williams. And what 'wrong guy' do I have? Is that your idea of discussion? Telling me to 'fuck off.' I think I understand you just fine.

 

[trainedobserver]

Random blow down events are more intriguing to me than man-made glyphs in fields.

I don't get the "high strange" component of these things. Winds blowing down crops don't seem that odd to me. I've seen some pretty wild wind effects here in Texas. One side of the street can look fine and the trees can be denuded on the opposite side of the street. That trails might cut through a field by a small tornado doesn't seem that strange to me. Am I missing something?

 

[Jimi H.]

You need to understand the meaning of private property, my friend.
You seem as clueless to that idea as Mr. Williams. And what 'wrong guy' do I have? Is that your idea of discussion? Telling me to 'fuck off.' I think I understand you just fine.

Get a grip, man, what's your problem? What about you let me hear your preachings about private propatah some other time, I think I get the concept, and I already expressed my surprise with Williams' complete disregard wrt. the property of the farmers. And I get that it overshadows everything else in your book. But you can put the gun back in the shed, I shan't be drawing stuff in yours or anyone else's crop, get it?

Fyi., in academia we may discuss, theoretically, things from several angles, and even explore the 'immoral' paths that humans sometimes take. It gives a fuller picture of the situation, and a better understanding of human behavior. Sometimes it even reveals nuances in what appears at first sight to be black and white. Please try to deal with it.

 

[DaveM]

Get a grip, man, what's your problem? What about you let me hear your preachings about private propatah some other time, I think I get the concept, and I already expressed my surprise with Williams' complete disregard wrt. the property of the farmers. And I get that it overshadows everything else in your book. But you can put the gun back in the shed, I shan't be drawing stuff in yours or anyone else's crop, get it?

Fyi., in academia we may discuss, theoretically, things from several angles, and even explore the 'immoral' paths that humans sometimes take. It gives a fuller picture of the situation, and a better understanding of human behavior. Sometimes it even reveals nuances in what appears at first sight to be black and white. Please try to deal with it.

 

[DaveM]

Just tell me one thing Jimi... Do you normally tell people in your academic circles to go 'f.. themselves' when they disagree with you? If so, I don't want to be attending that school of learning.

 

[Jimi H.]

Yea, if they try to slander me because I try to discuss a subject which is, apparently, taboo. Don't pull that shit on me dude, I'll report you for slander.

 

[DaveM]

You need some help... hope you find some.