Adrian Parsons spent New Year’s Day at the mayor’s house—but not with the mayor.
Parsons, 29, had asked Vince Gray for an audience several times over the previous few weeks. The closest he got was the promise of a Dec. 30 meeting with a mayoral assistant. But Parsons, who’d been on a hunger strike since Dec. 8 on behalf of D.C. voting rights—an issue near to Gray’s heart—was running out of time. So, along with girlfriend Meg Walsh and fellow hunger striker Sam Jewler, he piled into Walsh’s Hyundai and drove to Gray’s Hillcrest home.
The trio of freedom fighters hadn’t anticipated that the mayor might not be waiting around for them on New Year’s Day. There were a lot of things they hadn’t anticipated.
And so it was that Parsons, who was down to 125 pounds over his six-foot frame, came to break his fast by sipping from a coconut water container while wrapped in a space blanket on a curb outside Gray’s house. His only other witnesses were some fellow activists from Occupy D.C.’s McPherson Square encampment who dialed in remotely. Parsons summoned one of them on his ever-present iPad.
By the time the company decided to leave, Walsh’s car’s battery had died. They huddled in the car waiting for AAA as Jewler, who’d broken his own fast two weeks earlier, discussed the difficulties of coming off a hunger strike. “It was probably the strangest shit I’ve ever taken,” he said of his first post-strike bowel movement. Eventually, a police officer stopped to give the Hyundai a jump-start. The irony wasn’t lost on Parsons, who’d been arrested twice in his previous two months of protesting. “If Vincent Gray were here, he’d think we were retarded,” Parsons said.
He wouldn’t have been the only one with a low estimate of the group’s savvy. When Parsons and an initial cohort of three other Occupy D.C. regulars branched out from protesting economic inequality to hunger striking in the name of local self-government early last month, they hadn’t considered that Congress was about to go on a holiday recess. The House wasn’t scheduled to convene again until Jan. 17, meaning the group had signed themselves up for 40 days without food before the deliberative body that could meet their demands would even be back in town. In the meantime, they needed to find someplace to stay, since wintertime camping and hunger striking make for a bad combination. They wound up in Luther Place Memorial Church on 14th Street NW.
The other strikers stopped their fasts after 10 to 11 days. Parsons kept going. He maintained his strike far longer than anybody—his girlfriend; his family; even Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who visited him at the church and urged him to give it up—wanted him to.
After more than three weeks of fasting, Parsons had turned himself into something of an icon—which isn’t to say he’d become any more of an expert on the logistics of exactly how Washington’s awkward constitutional situation would end. Take that meeting with Gray, for instance: The mayor, after all, has no vote when it comes to whether or not Washingtonians get one. Why pressure him for a meeting? If the group had wanted to use the strike to demonstrate that the occupiers’ embrace of local issues is more than a half-cocked gesture, it didn’t do the trick. By the time the ailing Parsons gave up his fast, it still wasn’t clear how much D.C. would benefit from having as its champion an emaciated artist best known for having once publicly circumcised himself as part of a performance.
Not that that mattered on New Year’s Day. “I cannot believe that is what coconut water tastes like,” Parsons said, hiccupping through his return to sustenance. “My mind must have hallucinated it.”





Our Readers Say
This whole "Dude...what deep and meaningful art it would be if you projected a livefeed of me while shoving doritos in your mouth..." really? Spare me on the hypocritical...I'm representing the 99% while I play on my ipad and use up resources (tax dollars and shelters whose beds and help could be used by actual people in need). It all seems a bit misguided.
As for what he's trying to accomplish, I think Adrian Parsons has made it blatantly clear: bring awareness to the DC voting rights issue. He also made it pretty clear on how he would accomplish such a thing: through a hunger strike! The fact that DC voting rights groups are happy for the attention shows that his hunger strike wasn't a piece of self-aggrandizing performance art, but rather a creative and useful form of activism.
As for the "Dude..." bit you seem to have invented out of thin air, you attack Parsons as a hypocrite because a friend of his used the live feed of the hunger strike for artistic purposes. And what's wrong with drawing attention to the problems of the 99% and having an iPad? The 99% are the folks who buy most iPads, anyway. Also, are the 99%ers staying in homeless shelters? They've erected tents, but tents that weren't being used by the homeless to begin with. Again, I'm not sure how you're making that argument...
@ Big Ant - starving for 25 days is incredibly dangerous. It's life-threatening. That's why people sometimes die from hunger strikes. Risking one's life certainly counts as a "real interest in DC voting rights." I'm not sure what could demonstrate a bigger interest. The guy went all the way to NH to show support for a NH lawmaker who has proposed a resolution supporting DC voting rights. I am not sure I'd go to NH on purpose, ever, let alone drive there for something I support, like DC voting rights. Parsons did a great job bringing more attention to an important civil rights issue.
The unending series of bizarre behaviors in the District government almost since its founding only serve to reinforce the Founding Fathers' wisdom to specifically and formally designate it a 'district' and not a state, no matter how much 'feel good' politics gets slathered on top.
I couldn't care less about DC statehood, and I haven't kept tabs on Adrian's art of late. But the guy has a presence. He dances, haltingly, on empty dancefloors. He's brilliantly sarcastic, yet surprisingly friendly and warm. And he's a performer extraordinaire who isn't afraid to say "this is how you express all of those crazy things bubbling up inside of you."
So I think it's more than relevant to follow this guy. If only to remind yourself to take the plunge into whatever metaphorical 'deep end' you may be perched above, shivering.
*his appearance
*the fact that he got attention
*that he is a "hippie"
*that the writer of the article knows him
*that someone made art based on his protest
Live journal says:
current mood: jealous
Much like the "active member of the art community" who helped Adrian would die during the strike-- you critics have chosen to remain anonymous.
Current mood: cowardly
2) His friends who took him to the hospital and attested to his sanity should be held accountable, that is just plain irresponsible.
3) I'm not sure whether this article was written because the City Paper has such a low standard of quality or because there is just nothing else more interesting happening in DC but either way its depressing.
Just to be clear, I am totally cool with his appearance, I love hippies, kudos for becoming famous solely on the fact that you circumcised yourself and didn't eat for a month, I would even pay money just for the pure entertainment of seeing this guy do some crazy shit for attention....I'm criticizing here because if I had to make a list of all the people in the world that could be labeled by the media as the face for DC voting rights, I seriously (after reading this article) could not think of a single person I would want less than this guy.
1) Please redact the mention of his attending St. Mary's College of Maryland. It does neither him nor the institution credit to be associated with the other.
2) An endeavor such as this hunger strike is primarily a (poorly phrased) political statement. To view it as an artistic expression is to try and obfuscate the fact he really has no freaking idea what it is he wants to accomplish politically. Once its considered art it is no longer acceptable to say "Hey that doesn't make sense and may actually hurt your goals by associating the movement with your lunacy" because an artistic statement has a much freer license than a political statement.
That is all. Bye
Anyone supporting this knucklehead should get over themselves. The only difference between this jerk-off "performance artist" and the wierdo hustling for spare change on the street corner is...well, for one thing, this skinny white dude hasn't started asking for spare change, yet. Give him time.
And yes, anonymous comments are brutal. Welcome to the internets. Electronic performance art straight from the Id, sans foreskin.
This guy is one of the many reasons God gave Cystic fibrosis to 1 in 5 white Americans.
Besides, a real artist would have just cut off his entire dick and then sent it to Congress in a box. That's art.
More troubling is that the City Paper's editors seems to think it's OK to let people make anonymous personal attacks on others in their articles. And that there has to be so much surplus snark to go along with the "news."
_________________________________________________________________________________
The City Paper could have covered the other half dozen more creditable people fight for DC Statehood this guy has done nothing really except bring attention onto himself. I would have been much more constructive for him and his supports to camp out in the Senate Offices of the Congress men and women for don't support DC Statehood
http://wp.me/p1VwoO-7o
I still mostly agree with the critics, yet somehow my rage factor is silent today - I just enjoyed the article at face value, because despite my possible objections to Adrian's political notions or artistic sensibilities, he is active and interesting (which isn't a fact dependent on my approval), and that made the article engaging and entertaining.
It's important to remind ourselves that the perceived worth of an article isn't wholly invested in whether or not we approve of what the protagonist is up to.
Let me explain to why there are a lot of critics of Adrian: many of us know people involved with Occupy DC. Overall, they have done a FANTASTIC job of pushing the boundaries of protest and pushing forth the issue of the marginalized in DC. HOWEVER, most of the people involved toil in obscurity and happily do so. Adrian is part of a group who constantly pushes boundaries even further but more in the interest of being attention whores.
To qualify DC voting rights as a civil rights issue is questionable. One of the reasons that Washington DC doesn't have representation is because it was set up that way to keep power from tilting towards the capital of the country. A disproportionate amount of Federal money already goes to Maryland and Virgina which has created entrenched interests. DC was never intended to have permanent residents. Unfortunately, it does marginalize what is now a majority African-American city. However, that is changing. African-Americans are moving to Maryland and Virgina and like New York City, the international elite is moving into the city. How happy will you be if that class suddenly has voting rights? It would create an even more disgusting nepotistic nexus of power than we have now.
Sometimes, in trying to solve problems, we create bigger ones.
DC voting rights is largely a symbolic issue which has very little to do with African-Americans getting more representation and more power in the United States. While you may not perceive the frame 'civil rights' issue of DC voting rights as such, that is the root of the argument when people bring up the idea of civil rights and DC voting rights.
This hunger strike was not in the rubric of core occupy issues.
Where were these people at demonstrations over Joseph Kabila clinging to power in the Congo, his dictatorship propped up by Western commodities entities who want the cheap minerals used in Adrian's precious 'never very far away' iPad? No where.
This 'gentleman' will bring attention to the DC arts scene, which is good. However, his self-promotion will also alienate more people from Occupy. Most people are not the type to constantly pull stunts and cut their private parts with a Swiss Army knife or a plastic knife or the hand of a Barbie doll or whatever passes of as art among people who have never heard of Chris Burden, who did this same stuff decades ago when it meant something to the art world.
"Scheduler, who am I meeting with today?"
"Oh, sir, that dude who cut his own penis."
"GREAT! Make sure the Grand Rapids Press lets everyone back home that I met with Mr. Do-it-yourself-Mohel. My constituents want to know that I'm open to the performance art community."
There are many other young people involved in Occupy who are going to have an incredibly positive impact on American politics and the social scene. We don't hear about them because they are not completely out for themselves and like most people who do things that matter, their contribution is substantive and boring.
Why not do an article on all the young people from the Middle East involved in the DC occupations who are using their voice here to change their homeland? SNORE! Give me circuses!
At the very least, this attention will encourage him to do something even more over the top like shave the likeness of Clarance Thomas in his pubic hair. Or something like that.
Shock value is not shocking, it's boring.
Your ignorance of this completely valid and incredibly important civil rights issue is astonishing, particularly since you lambaste everyone else for not understanding it.
"I never fail to be amazed at how ignorant DC residents are when it comes to their voting 'rights'. Do they not realize that the Constitutionl itself would have to be amended to make the District a state?"
No, a simple act of Congress make a state. You only need a simple majority of Congress to pass the act. You do not need to amend the constitution. The constitution provides the maximum limit for the district, but not a minimum. Congress can reduce the federal "District" to non-residential areas of government buildings, leaving the rest of the territory to be its own state or to be retro-ceded to Maryland (if only they would take us). Find out more facts here: http://dcstatehoodyeswecan.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=293&Itemid=152
"To qualify DC voting rights as a civil rights issue is questionable. One of the reasons that Washington DC doesn't have representation is because it was set up that way to keep power from tilting towards the capital of the country."
We are the ONLY democratic country in the world to deny full political autonomy and voting rights to the residents of its capital city. When the Constitution was written, the entire country was comprised of fewer people than currently live in the District. The District had a mere 3,500 residents. Now we have a population that approaches that of North Dakota, a state whose residents have full representation in Congress and political autonomy that comes with being a state. Your antiquated justification for denying the basic rights that the revolutionaries fought for is absurd in 2012. DC residents pay taxes (higher than those in MD and VA), go to war and serve our country in many other ways. And yet we have no control over our own money, our own laws, and no say in the work of this nation. Why do we support democracy everywhere but here?
Adrian and Co. have brought new attention to this issue, which many people in this city of transients have absolutely no clue about. If they can draw the attention of young people to this issue, more power to them.
Just because an issue is cool doesn't mean you have to support it.
Now go drink some Natty Boh and get outraged.
But from what I DID read, I was embarrassed for both Parsons and the City Paper. I was even embarrassed to be holding the paper, and quickly put it down and walked away. Sigh--I expect more from you, CP.
Leave a Comment