Hey Sarah
i'm probably being thick here... but which of the the source texts did you work on?
I'm particularly curious because I did submit a draft to the journal 'Internet Archaeology' with the idea that each of the cut up sections could be reproduced in full so the reader could find new combinations that i had missed (one of the advantages of that publication is that it can take on experimental presentations of data beyond the scope of a traditional paper journal). After an initially promising response it was all rejected quite thoroughly. One of the reasons given was that the 'random' wasn't mathematically random... which is true, but really it is a technique based in the arts rather than the sciences... the other main reason was that there may be issues with the copyright holders of the original text, of whom I didn't request permission to go vandalising their work. Whilst I could have argued the toss with the former point, I had to agree I was on murky ground with quoting such large blocks of text without the original authors consent, especially given the way the texts were subsequently abused...
I'm therefore delighted to here from you that enjoyed the piece, and that you haven't unleashed the lawyers. If this were to be adopted by others as a useful technique the current pre-occupation with copyright would be a factor that just wasn't in play when the original cut ups were made by Burroughs.
I suspect any one that is into the whole Hodder 'archaeology as text' thing could have a field day with this game....
--------------------------
contemp-hist-arch is a list for news and events
in contemporary and historical archaeology, and
for announcements relating to the CHAT conference group.
-------
For email subscription options see:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/archives/contemp-hist-arch.html
-------
Visit the CHAT website for more information and for future meeting dates:
http://www.contemp-hist-arch.ac.uk
--------------------------
|