dear all
it would interest me what others think in regard to the example of underperforming
software I implied yesterday;
I am also quite aware that interactive art (and the performance
may or may not involve "live coding" proper, as live coders understand it, but it certainly
involves real-time and generative processes, as well as capture processes [record and analyze]
at the same time) raises often an issue for live performers on stage or in a projective environment,
namely how to (in fact) interact with images, affect them or incorporate them, and whether they (the human actors) can make
images perform differently or have a concrete effect, rather than a data-processing effect. the apparatus (as a "non-expressive" agent)
is not necessarily mystified, I think, not may everyone agree, between machines, humans and animals, what constitutes expression or
expressive social behavior (see InfoMusLab).
The discussion of performing images that I became interested in happened for me a while ago
at a BADco workshop in Zagreb, but I could not always follow the political/ideological critique
of the Croatian artists; their questions seemed directed at forms of inter-action or use of
the apparatus to generate "actionable images." What these are I never quite figured out.
The discussion has partly been moved to issue
no. 62/63 of the journal Frakcija (on "Actionable Image").
http://www.manuelvason.com/frakcjia/
regards
Johannes Birringer
London
"for the time being" [Victory over the Sun]
Premiere April 3-4, Sadler's Wells
book here: http://www.brunel.ac.uk/dap
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
[Andreas und Rob schreiben]
> I find treating artworks as quasi-subjects is a mystification (they
> are a medium of communication, not an expressive subject), but it's a
> very tempting one.
i share your opinion about mystification, and was more interested in the
technical question whether images can be made to "perform" (as in
process) in the same way that text is made to perform (as software
code). i understand that the way in which computers process information,
they are dependent on this information coming in as strings of binary
code, right? and in that sense, a programming environment like "Piet" is
a different way of encoding (textual, linear) digital code.
(i was also thinking of metaphorical treatments of images "as code" in
works like Sebastian Lütgert/Robert Luxemburg's "The Conceptual Crisis
of Private Property..." (2003), or the acoustic interpretation of images
as in Atau Tanaka's "9m14s Over Vietnam" (1998)).
regards,
-a
|