To use chance and choice has been a procedure of mine: so the results
are stochastic. Chance to generate or organise that which will be
chosen. Or to choose those things that will be diorganised by chance.
Less of an option for me now.
Constraint in opposition to rule, I note, in Oulipo procedures.
Another opposite of arbitrary is motivated. Some of the word count
metrics of recent pieces (found a fancy word for it: isoverbal - a signal
possibly to abandon the strategy, now it's fixed in jargon?) would be
called by some arbitrary. But they are precisely motivated as far as I can
see:
the counts of Empty Diaries which refer to mechanical measurements of
time: 7. 24. 4. 100.
the counts of The Lores relating to the Plato's ideal number of ideal
citixens in the second ideal republic of The Laws: 5040: a number
divisible by numbers up to 12 (except) for 11.
A motivated constraint, neither aribrary, nor a rule. Measure
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|