On 02/04/2008, Julian Rohrhuber <rohrhuber_at_uni-hamburg.de> wrote:
>
>
>
> And in addition to this, a lot of code is "closed source" in the sense
> that practically no one ever looks at it (and no one wants to), because it
> works. I'd say livecoding is about reading code just as much as writing it.
> Also FLOSS challenges closed source approaches by assuming that one should
> be able to read code just as one should be able to read a book.
Yes, agreed.
When talking about Open Source and graphic art we could also (to extend the
painting analogy further) talk about how in (relatively) recent years oil
paintings by the great masters have been X-rayed to (hopefully) look into
the development of the piece itself and how livecoding forces attention
towards this development instead of hiding it in favour of presentation of
the end-result.
I'm mentioning this because in oil-paintings it's now clear that the
audience *is* interested in the process. Considerable resources are spend
trying to determine how the great masters painted and what paint they used.
Indeed, one wouldn't ask Picasso how much his brush cost but evidently
people are very interested in what paint Van Gogh used and how he got it.
I'm starting to think there's so much to say about FLOSS and livecoding in
relation to other forms of art that instead of suggesting bits in addition
to this article there's space for a few more articles!
Yours,
Kas.
Received on Wed Apr 02 2008 - 13:47:29 BST