oh yeah, the survey below is a result of me stumbling upon the survey option in creating content, so sorry for the poll trash. i <3 polls.

soooo anyway.... funny joke by professor fitzpatrick: has anyone else "read" skin yet? unless any of us "embodies" a word in jackson's text (which i'm wondering if KF does??), i guess we really won't ever know what the real story is. but it's really cool to at least be able to see documentation of the story's creation through the people living it. as the group process of creating the story seems almost completely separate from the actual story itself, i wonder which jackson considers more important.

things i find most interesting of jackson's stipulations for skin:

From this time on, participants will be known as "words". They are not understood as carriers or agents of the texts they bear, but as its embodiments. As a result, injuries to the printed texts, such as dermabrasion, laser surgery, tattoo cover work or the loss of body parts, will not be considered to alter the work. Only the death of words effaces them from the text. As words die the story will change; when the last word dies the story will also have died. The author will make every effort to attend the funerals of her words.

also:

Can I put it anywhere on my body?

Yes, unless it happens to name a body part. Then you can put it anywhere BUT that part. (There is one exception: the word "skin" and its synonyms.)

Are there rules about size, color and font?

The word must be in black ink and a classic book font, and big enough to read with the naked eye. After that, it's up to you.

so i guess jackson is saying something about bodies and books in particular, instead of just bodies and any kind of texts