Alex;
>
> Bah. If these musicians aren't interested in computation why are they
> using computers?
>
>
I would guess it might be a linguistic issue. I would theorise there are be
plenty of cooks who -when asked- would express not being especially
passionate about about chemistry.
Of course cooking is very much about chemistry (as well as biology,
cognition science, etc.), it's just in the phrasing, I suspect.
What would happen if instead of writing a paper we'd write a folder, flyer
or entry in a program guide presenting livecoding as passionate
self-expression to a general audience? I don't think the link between the
performer's cognitive side and the system's code is under nearly as much
attack as the transition from the parser's job to a
dancing/affected/attentive audience.
I'd like to plead for a focus on the excitement to all involved of the lack
of a safety net, the relative "nakedness" of the performer and the chance at
any and all moments for a piece to take radically different directions as
well as coming to a abrupt and unforseen halt.
Suppose that in the late fifties somebody wanted to promote the idea of the
"singer-songwriter" mode of performance by analysing the semantics of vocal
intonation in expressing feelings about politics, loss or love. I'd say that
would be both highly interesting and worthwhile as well as a rather odd way
of approaching the subject.
To summarise and return to your question; computers are great at computation
and manipulating symbols, much like the traditional love-song is great at
symbolism. Most song-writers won't be -consciously and formally- be dealing
with linguistics and symbolism as they those facets are already so evidently
there as methods. Exposing these can and has worked very well, for example
in Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah" which is very self-referential in it's use
of symbolism ("well, it goes like this, the fourth the fifth, the minor fall
and the major lift, the baffled king composing hallelujah", a line I'd like
to propose as a great example of early livecoding, at least it must have
been at the compositional stage). The primary enjoyment that most get from
that song won't be from the usage of self-referential symbolism though, even
though the enjoyment they do get will result from a semantic process.
Formally proving that we open up the process that leads to enjoyment and
expression in music won't -by and of itself- lead to a emotionally affected
general audience. On the other hand; that doesn't seem like a particularly
good reason to reject a paper to me either as it is still a important facet.
Yours,
Kas.
Received on Fri Oct 02 2009 - 14:46:14 BST