>I think the
>> performer-audience separation as something I would try to break up by
>> live programming, and not reassure it.
>
>Please could you give some examples if your eyes fall open; you've
>spoken before of playing off stage.
>
>where is the importance of 'now' in such actions? Does just
>listening always leads to someone asking about the nature of what
>they hear and get us back into trouble?
>
>interactive programming solo is prototyping/practise? Composition,
>not improvisation under real-time constraints.
>
>I don't want to cause schism but I would fear a diluting of message
>if we did an either or case on performance perhaps; depends how
>couched. Please feel free to suggest anything to resolve this!
I think the term 'performance' is not needed in a definition.
*
Live coding is the activity of writing (parts of) a program while it runs.
It thus deeply connects the algorithmic causality with the resulting
perceptions and by deconstructing the idea of the temporal dichotomy
of tool and product it allows to bring into play code as an artistic
process.
*
well, just a try.
>(I've tried already to avoid out and out 'look at the virtuoso
>typer' stuff but its hard not to talk up the intellectual
>appreciation of algorithm. Any other tacks we could take?)
______________________________
I've added a description to the readme paper, check it out whether you like it.
--
.
Received on Fri May 28 2004 - 17:40:24 BST