>hi julian, I always like your reflections...
>
>> In this piece I think the sonification is simple, just whether a certain
>> field is 'stood on', or not, matters. Maybe we should give that a proper
>> term, being maybe one possible trajectory extreme of live coding.
>> Side-effect-Art? Symbolic Involuntarism? Language-Gaming?
>
>The entire sonification is established beforehand. So there are no
>(human) changes to the audio algorithm itself in performance and you
>might say no live coding. You also aren't allowed to change the
>rules of chess itself during play.
There is always a level at which you cannot change the rules. The
main question regarding improvisation is when you can change a rule
and which (this is not a question of degree but of compositional
structure). The main point of live coding is that this happens in
language (what counts as language is a matter of how one is urged to
think about it). I do agree that "Reunion" is a pretty degenerate
case of live programming.
>I take your point that there are many chess playing strategies, and
>the player can of course switch on the fly, but then this is a
>property of general cognition - hmm, which spin axis of entangled
>particle A shall I measure? So if cognition= computation then all
>human action is live coding as we change our minds...
I'd say it is one way to think in public. And to change mind in public.
>I guess we have preset sonification consequences here as one limit.
>And I guess I'm most interesting in the other side of the continuum,
>some area of improvised mappings and changing consequences
what do you mean? do you have an example?
>>a grammar that causes double-meaning. Sound is caused by this
>double-readablity
>
>um, not sure what you mean, would appreciate clarification of the
>two meanings. Maybe I need to read more Deleuze and Kittler ; )
no, I have 'invented' this term ;). The code has two readers (at
least). One that tries to understand what is going on (usually human)
and the other that tries to do what is supposed to be going on
(usually the computation). There is a continuous degree of
misunderstanding between them two.
--
.
Received on Fri Dec 16 2005 - 23:16:48 GMT