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.
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 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 and algorithm wrestling, and
perhaps we haven't mapped out where that is yet (especially given human
constraints).
>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 ; )
Received on Fri Dec 16 2005 - 22:56:00 GMT