I like from "livecoding " as a performative-art related practice, that
there are not precise rules for what it should be. Nevertheless the
discussions seeking for a precise definition can be very interesting and
enriching for our own practices. I myself have experimented from "purely
from scratch live coded audio-visual performances" to live manipulation of
algorithmic compositions. In anything in between there is some level of
code being written, interpreted or affected live. To explain this to
others, how it works, how does th HCI happens, and why is it labeled "live
coding" can be very hard sometimes!
On the other hand all those electronic devices hard coded which can be
manipulated to affect the output are also being live coded , or all those
static compositions hard written in partitures are also codes, which can be
live recoded... Or those poems and choreographies and so on... Or norms and
constitutions, and programming languages of course
The ICLC in Leeds was an enlightening experience to me to see the potential
of everything to be live coded or recoded, or the fact that as soon as re-
or bold interpretation plays a role in any process there will be some level
of live coding
I like to see code as naked systems, frameworks, algorithms or instructions
for specific processes to happen. Thus live coding can be seen as the
capability to improvise, reinterpret, reshape or change these
structures while the gears of an empty machine are already
spinning. Whereas this is done or not with the help of a machine or a
computer, which in either case allows us to reinterpret or perceive things
faster or humanly slow...
So I hope the practice of live coding keeps spinning for a while and that
the discussions around it keep touching us all in order to perhaps
keep dealing with it and with even deeper paradigms of performance,
aesthetics, interpretation, HCI, programming and thinking.
Cheers everyone,
Andres Villa Torres
On Saturday, 26 December 2015, Tristan Strange <tristan.strange_at_gmail.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tristan.strange_at_gmail.com');>> wrote:
> On 26 December 2015 at 12:06, David Griffiths <dave_at_pawfal.org> wrote:
> > One of the most exciting things (for me) about livecoding is that it
> > exposes a wonderful confusion we have about subject and object - is
> > music the outcome or is the code?
>
> I suppose live coding could shine a light on that. This happens
> every-time we examine music(perhaps art?) and notation of any type
> though doesn't it?
>
> > Do we manipulate sound in order to
> > understand the code we're writing, or manipulate code in order to make
> > people dance? It's rarely one-directional or simple.
>
> We can do both. It varies from practitioner to practitioner doesn't it?
>
> > This shifting and reasoning with sound also becomes very apparent if you
> > use music to teach children how to code.
>
> I'll bet.
>
> --
>
> Read the whole topic here: livecode:
> http://lurk.org/r/topic/5UmmTOIXKFGutQSuzBVoOU
>
> To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email
> subject: unsubscribe
>
--
*Andrés*
--
Read the whole topic here: livecode:
http://lurk.org/r/topic/6LvcyT8LxVXFaAchnvl64n
To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email subject: unsubscribe
Received on Mon Dec 28 2015 - 17:06:22 GMT