thank you for your introduction!
>1) is this all about music? (e.g., i work from the visuals side of things.
>then again, i'm not specifically live coding, either... )
I would suggest it is not all about music (as probably music is not
all about music either)
My personal interest is to get away from the idea of production - so
if music as a product then I'd even say it is not about music.
>2) are we interested in the performative aspects of live coding, the
>conceptual aspects, or both?
>in other words, is the audience always made
>aware of the live coding process? how? are the performers' displays shown
>on screens? do we see their fingers typing?
I use live-coding mostly for film sound, so there is no 'performance' as
such. But when playing for an audience or with an audience, I would
try to show the code. I was a bit unhappy about our last performance
at betalounge in Hamburg - they showed fingers typing as a maximum -
why should this be so very interesting? But again this is my personal view.
>
>2a) if we're interested in the audience's experience of the coding
>performance - how much of this is about typing vs. coding?
this is a good point. I would hope it is about live coding - the problem
as I see it is about understanding, semantics.
>i remember from
>alex's impromptul 5-minute coding performance at transmediale last year,
>the audience was very excited to watch alex's cursor fly around in emacs.
>fortunately, alex is not only a whiz at coding, but also moves like a
>dancer in emacs. so now that's 3 things - coding well live, typing skill,
>and a particularly visual facility with a text editor. do we separate
>those issues? for the audience? for ourselves? what about lowly vim users
>like me? ;-)
I'm a 2 - 3 finger typer and I'm totally desinterested in typing
speed apart from practical consideration. I find it fascinationg to
be quick, but who would
judge a speech from its speed, for example?
>... and, how to address these issues without degenerating
>into emacs/vi wars?
>
>3) is live coding inclusive or competitive? i.e., does one need to be the
>fastest, most proficient coder to do perform live?
this would be the thing I hated most and would be the furthest possible
away from the idea I had about it in the first place. Mostly I dislike
the outcome of combinations of sports and music.
> if so, it might prove
>programming prowess but exclude people with interesting ideas and a feel
>for live performance, but who aren't as quick at the programming end of
>things. or, can both approaches be accomodated, for example, through
>various types of languages?
generally I would say that live coding doesn't even have to be specifically
interesting or in the center of attention. For me it is another way to think
about language and computers, and another way to interfere with sound - it
is good if it is visible what's going on, but not for sake of showing off,
but for being able to understand it and to have conversation about it
and with it.
--
.
_______________________________________________
livecode mailing list
livecode_at_toplap.org
http://toplap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/livecode
Received on Tue Feb 24 2004 - 10:56:30 GMT