On 26 March 2010 09:56, evan.raskob [lists] <lists_at_lowfrequency.org> wrote:
> I have some issues with this -
> a) Maybe we can be more inclusive of other forms of art beyond computer
> music, e.g. visuals, live performance of a theatrical sort. I don't think
> livecoding is particularly prevalent in computer music... I don't think it
> is "particularly prevalent" in *anything* right now.
I wrote that while considering the survey from last year where a
smaller percentage (around 10%?) were doing livecoded visuals. True
that "most often applied" would be more truthful than "particularly
prevalent. But I don't think the number of practitioners are
particularly important or interesting so would be very happy for you
to take out the primacy of music here. After all code itself is a
visual display so all toplap compliant performances are audio/visual
anyway.
Remember that this is an edit of a subsection taken from the computer
music entry, so its no surprise it needs broadening out to other
fields. You could mention the human live patching stuff too.
> b) Ok, "charisma and pizzazz" are not two camps we can pace the livecoding
> tent firmly inside - have you looked at videos of our performances??
> Text_on_screen != pizzazz. We're like the funny old uncles living in the
> attic, descending downstairs occasionally and proclaiming that eating fish
> heads will make you live forever.
:D Yes I think emphasising the openness rather than the showiness
would be more credible... I'll say it again -- go ahead and edit! If
we end up with an article based on original research peppered with
'citation needed' we can just submit the article to a journal to
manufacture a citation.
alex
--
http://yaxu.org/
Received on Fri Mar 26 2010 - 10:20:07 GMT