Hi Alex,
yes, it is about the current version of the text. A copuple of other
thingsm too. Sorry to be so picky, but just take it as my point of
view. I didn't want to change it all without explanation.
Going through it:
>As a culture we do not doubt the expressive power of language, and
>indeed computer programmers have long romanticised the textual (and
>visual) languages in which they work. With the development of new
>programming environments for making music and visuals, artists are
>coming to share this point of view.
This view has been a dominant position in the fine art since the
early 20th century. In literary art this is basic ever since of
course. So the end "artists are coming to share this point of view."
is, I think, not appropriate. Especially in russian constructivism it
hasn't been exactly "romanticism" that made language influential in
the visual and acoustic art, but rather modernism, anti-romanticism,
structuralism.
Possible solution:
In 20th century art, language, laws and rules have been a major
subject of reflection and many artists have been using symbolic
systems in their work. The fact that computers are symbolic machines
has made them interesting evironments for artistic reasoning and
production.
>The new wave of artistic programmers however are once more demanding
>conversational programming interfaces, where someone can not only
>change their mind while thinking, but also change the computer
>program while it runs,
I think it is not that the artists are "demanding interfaces", but
they (we) are constructing programming environments, languages, etc.
Also "A new wave of artistic programmers" sounds too pretentious for
my taste. I feel that the main idea I had with this sentence is a bit
lost - let's keep it separate (sorry, Nick!).
>and make this thought process visible to everyone else.
maybe: share this thought process with others.
>This is live coding - adding instructions to a computer program
>step-by-step, and having the computer run those instructions on the
>fly, taking on changes without restarts.
Could be less technical for people who are not engineers or programmers, maybe?
>Live coders make writing software an explicit part of the creative
>process, fully embracing source code as an expressive medium with
>instant feedback
Suggestion: replace "fully embracing source code as an expressive
medium with instant feedback"
by: "so that code is not the precondition, but the immediate medium
of experiment and improvisation"
>Live coding renders practicable what many forms of sonic/visual
>exploration strive to materialize;
this sounds as if live coding is not an art form / a way of research,
but a technical means. I tend to avoid this, because it reduces the
scope to a technical problem.
One more thing: while this is not the emphasis of LOSS Livecode,
there is a scientific aspect to livecoding which should be not
entirely ignored - of course it could be explicitly excluded.
>In short, livecoding is where musicians and artists of all talents
>can express themselves artistically through immediate computer
>programming.
could we replace this by:
"In short, livecoding is programming-as-art, as well as
programming-as-research. It is the end of both instrumentalisation
and the instrumentalisation of the end."
>Hi Julian
>
>On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 08:50 +0200, Julian Rohrhuber wrote:
>> I'd try to be careful about words like artistic expression and
>> creativity. While common in music, they sound naive in the arts.
>
>Is this a criticism of the current version or more a warning? I removed
>an instance of 'artistic' but couldn't see anything contentious in use
>of the phrase 'creative process' in the current version.
specially expression seems problematic, because it assumes something
that is to be expressed before the process - (for good or bad
reasons) in many fields of art, expression has a certain bad taste as
a result.
> "Creativity"
>and "art" are overused words, but I think "creative process" is
>qualified enough to make it useful again.
>
>For me, a creative process is what humans follow to find something new
>(to them) but still valued, within constraints or pushing against
>constraints. A creative process can benefit from fast feedback, so the
>creator can act and react without having to wait around. So I think
>it's useful to say that live coding aides the creative process.
creative process is ok, I think.
I myself tend to call it artistic reasoning, or research process, or
experimentation.
I hope I haven't put anyone off by my comments - they are just suggestions!
all the best,
Julian
--
.
Received on Tue Jun 05 2007 - 09:09:58 BST