Burnt Bookmobile

Aux Libertaires (To Libertarians) zine
12/26/2009, 1:39 PM
Filed under: update | Tags: , , ,

From the description:

“Originally written in French in August 1980 and signed by 25,000 people. Published in November 1980 by Editions Champ Libre, as part of the volume Appels de la prison de Segovie [Appeals from the prison in Segovia], which was attributed to the “Coordinated autonomous groups of Spain.”

Aux Libertaires was signed Les Amis Internationaux (“International Friends”) and is presently attributed to “that Debord guy.”

An English translation, To Libertarians, was first published in London, August 1981, by “the British Internationalists” (Michel Prigent and Lucy Forsyth). It wasn’t consulted during this translation of Aux Libertaires in 2004.

If you know where a copy of the August 1981 translation can be found, or for any other qualms, mistakes, et cetera, please contact us: frannyglass at riseup dot net.”



16 Comments so far
Leave a comment

This “version” of our translation of this text doesn’t mention who the translator is. Why the fuck not?

Comment by BNB

Not sure. We didn’t put this together, but we can mention it to those who did.

Comment by toutniquer

Well, “those who did” have

1) prefaced a rather serious text with this highly embarrassing bit of attempted humor: “is presently attributed to “that Debord guy””

2) presented himself/herself/themself as the source of the material: “If you know where a copy of the August 1981 translation can be found, or for any other qualms, mistakes, et cetera, please contact us: frannyglass at riseup dot net.” As if Franny Glass was the one who provided all the translator’s footnotes!

I have written an appropriately hostile email to “Franny Glass,” but of course have received no response.

Comment by BNB


1) As a very colloquial expression goes, ‘you got a stick up your ass’.

2) We have many things to insult you with, concerning dishonest translations and edits on your part (we’ll be more specific later), a very ugly personal history (hopefully we can permanently ignore this for the sake of lucidity), and a very cheap narcissism.

3) Another petty quote, recently penned by you, Mr. Bill: “Fuck you, too!”


Comment by Yadira

“concerning dishonest translations and edits on your part (we’ll be more specific later)”

uh, no: your bluff has been called: be specific now, or admit that your claim is empty and motivated by bad faith and personal hostility (nothing to be proud of in either case).

Comment by BNB

I’m missing why this is important.

Comment by toutniquer

1. Your recourse to personal insults and the word “fuck” are sure signs that you’ve been caught red-handed (as they say) passing my work off as the work of either “Franny Glass” or no one is particular, and simply don’t know how to admit it.

2. “concerning dishonest translations and edits on your part (we’ll be more specific later)”

it would seem appropriate that you be specific now, rather than “later.”

Comment by BNB

It is self-evident from the perspective of the proletariat that a worker (a translator, in this case) should receive proper acknowledgment for his work, and should not have that work passed off as the intellectual property of someone else, worse still, someone who lacks the skills of the worker.

Comment by BNB

If the practical interest of the worker is to auto-annihilate their role as such, can’t we value the simple communization of this piece instead of squabbling over credit? (especially over what was an honest mistake)

Comment by toutniquer

We are not squabbling over “credit,” though it isn’t clear to me why anyone would want to deny someone else credit for his or her work. What would be the motivation for that? Denying credit is what banks and mountebanks do. Human beings give credit where credit is due. Mutual recognition and all that, right?

We are talking about intellectual honesty here. It is intellectually dishonest for someone to strip out the translator’s name when that translator has provided informational footnotes that weren’t in the original text. Without the translator’s name, it appears that these notes were provided by whomever is hosting the text or by no one at all. Both appearances of course are false and create a false impression (false impressions are to be avoided, not created, maintained or justified).

It is obviously dishonest for “Franny Glass” to ask for corrections and so forth, when those should be sent to the translator, not to whatever random person happens to be hosting the translation. She or he or it has been caught red-handed trying to pass my work off as hers/his/its, is all.

As for the idea that stripping out the translator’s name and transferring credit for the translator’s notes to either “Franny Glass” or, worse still, to no one at all: it does not appear honest to me at all. It is certainly irresponsible. If “Franny Glass” was a truly responsible person, I would have heard from her/him/it by now (I have not). And if it should turn out that foul-mouthed and rumor-mongering Yadis/Yadira (see above) is just another pseudonym by which the person who calls himself or herself “Franny Glass,” then the act of removing the translator’s name was obviously an intentionally hostile act, an act designed to punish someone who has failings (OMG!). That’s the cynical benefit of hiding behind pseudonyms: no one knows your personal failings, though each and every person has plenty of them.

Call it what it is: not “communization” of property, but a blatant falsification of the manner in which a text originally in French came to be translated into English: it was by a determinate person, at a specific moment in time, not some abstract creation of the “commune” or the “revolutionary movement” or some other trans-personal non-entity.

There. I’ve wasted way too much of my precious time on this. Comprehend qui peut.

Comment by BNB

“honest mistake”? you give me too much credit, my darling.

and, no, this isn’t yadira either.

1. please stop badgering me.
2. you don’t own anything.
3. the ideas behind intellectual property only exist to serve capital.
4.i have never alluded or claimed to being the translator of this text. ever.

guilds no longer exist. you are not a craftsman. advanced capitalism leaves little room for sentimentality or “originality.” this is the historical truth underlying detournment. thus, get over yourself. and with that:

“Plagiarism is necessary. Progress depends on it. It sticks close to an author’s phrasing, exploits his expressions while abandoning his liabilities, deletes a false idea, replaces it with the right one.”
-Franny Ducasse

Comment by "franny"


All very nice, I’m sure. Now, will you please please please restore the name of the translator, i.e., NOT BORED! to the English text of Debord’s “Aux libertaraires”? Pretty please? Oh, gosh, thanks.

Comment by BNB

Dear Bill,

You’ve been insipid and obsessive, yet dutifully declare (duty to whom… posterity?…gross.) that you’ve “wasted way too much of my precious time on this.” Dishonest businessmen say that their “time is precious”, and, unfortunately, we cannot put it beyond ourselves that you are a dishonest businessman (every pathetic binge of whining you undergo whenever a signature is not reproduced only gives further indication that you haven’t moved beyond the commodification of your name, let alone anything else).

The best thing to do in any situation is maintain indifference, and the most intelligent thing you could have done in this situation was to have pleasantly contacted Franny Glass, and let them know that you weren’t at all pleased that they failed to reproduce your signature.

Perhaps one-fifth of your overall activity is writing others quite belligerent (and stupid) letters or emails letting them know that they have failed to cite your stupid name.

So, let us return to the questions posed.

I, Yadira, am a friend of Franny Glass. The “fuck you, too” quotation was (which you recognized the reference of, but, in your paranoia, took to be a sign of someone else’s lack of transparency) read in an email sent to them, by you, and, they haven’t had time to write you yet (though who would want to write someone who so insistently has bad manners, is beyond me).

I shall not go into strict details concerning your own falsifications, but will reference one incident. The Alexander Trocchi writings on your site[http://www.notbored.org/trocchi.html] are not your own translations, though they would appear to be, specifically as a certain number (roughly five) of small edits, and the inclusions of a few bracketings -(sic)- were put into place by you, and the original translators were not mentioned at all (not in any of the four texts). Your small edits were most unpleasant, and your bracketings were equally obnoxious. Your own dishonesty shines through here, specifically revealing in this instance as the Trocchi translations you have on your site are those (minus the bogus editing on your part and the lack of citation) from a pretty pathetic three quarters soft sandpaper ICA exhibition reprint book of the S.I. exhibition. The Trocchi translations (the four you have on your site) are all from that book, and, we are convinced that you dishonesty in this affair was due to your own false distancing from that book (it being such a glaring example of ‘recuperation’, and, namely, one of the more outstanding examples of the inclusion of the S.I. into the ‘canon’ of art galleries and museums). We think you a shmuck for this, as it would have been rather nice to have seen more writings on the internet from the original SIGMA journal (where these writings were first published, only a little while later to be republished in the I.S.).

Concerning your vulgar personal life, well, we happen to know why you were arrested (caught on camera)… good camera surveillance player that you are. We find this information completely unkempt and rather pathetic. But, if you insult my friends again, I will call you a pedophile a million times over (you do sink rather low with your own character assassinations, especially with that idiocy you put on the internet a few weeks ago concerning Gilles Dauve).

“Comprehend qui peut”, and “fuck you, too”.


Comment by Yadira Lopez

What a bizarre set of claims! Uh, Alex Trocchi was a Scot, and wrote in English, and so no translation was needed by anyone, and no translation of his works have been claimed by me. The other stuff about recuperation is meaningless to me.

As for this: “But, if you insult my friends again, I will call you a pedophile a million times over” I find your threats, calumnies and ad hominen attacks laughable, and a perfect indictment of the cowardly anonymity you maintain so that you can attack but remain shielded from counter-attack, from personal calumnies launched against you. You are nothing better than someone who repeats half-truths and lies originally introduced by journalist-cops and repeated over and over again by mindless drones like you ever since.

If you have something to say to me, some threat you’d like to make good on, I’m easy to find and would relish the opportunity to settle this personal matter where it belongs: in person, not on the Internet. Until then, “Yadiri Lopez,” you might think about refraining from making threats to snitch me out with Right-wing hot-button buzzwords: terrorist! pedophile! anarchist! Such threats only make you look bad.

There are way too many snitches in the “scene” as it is, don’t you think? Or is your personal dislike of me so great that you would become a snitch, an e-stalker, a rumor-monger and worse?

Comment by BNB

Bill, everyone knows you sexually harassed children and got caught doing it. It’s not snitching to bring up something you already plead guilty to!

Now crawl back in your hole for a while.


Comment by xfrancophobex

“Bill, everyone knows you sexually harassed children and got caught doing it.”

What a delusion! “Everyone” in this anonymous coward’s circle of friends — COINTELPRO wannabes, future snitches and current e-stalkers — is confused with “everyone” in the whole world or at least everyone on the Internet! Ridiculous.

This delusion is worsened by the fact that no one in this little circle of rumor-mongers — who are really quite preoccupied with me, aren’t they? — knows what they are talking about. But of course they don’t need to: they act in bad faith, not good faith. Their intentions are purely negative (jealousy, envy, resentment, et al).

“It’s not snitching to bring up something you already plead guilty to!”

No, its called e-stalking and you, anonymous coward, are an e-stalker.

“Now crawl back in your hole for a while.”

I encourage you to come here, where I live, and say that to my face.


Yes, they are crucial to one’s knowledge of the food industry. And your point is what? That I’ve written the world’s first full-length study of the subject? Have you read it? “American Colossus: the Great Elevator 1843 to 1943” (Colossal Books, 2009). Buy it through http://www.lulu.com

WHATEVER. This thread is not about me: it is about one of my translations. I translated a text about libertarians in the Spanish 1930s. I notice that not one of the people who have posted to this thread have addressed themselves to these simple facts.

Comment by BNB

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: