re your comment:
i append an abstract that yvan tina just had accepted at SLSA titled
A-Live: Biological and Artificial Theaters
which is the sources of some of my comments in
response to your:
Hi Roger & the List,
There is always human agency in any of these arguments.
Of course you could have a world without humans but we are talking
about coding that is about performance, especially art performance.
I am not talking about a world without humans but a hybrid world with
interactive performance between
humans and other coded systems. RFM
All of the systems we have been discussing take a viewer to recognize
the system. It's a simple law of quantum physics. The viewer changes
or isolates or recognizes or solidifies or manifests what they are
I disagree with this-has nothing to do with quantum mechanics !! plus
if you look at cybernetic systems theory, complex
systems can be self aware/observing_RFM
Furthermore, code is always written with an end result in mind. Even a
random system where you can't predict a result has the anticipation of
a random result. Indeed, There are infinite variations on randomness
in the universe.
This is not true of artificial life software- you can create
potentialities rather than end results. RFM
They only become interesting when we observe them.
The observer is the audience for the result.
Ph D student Yvan Tina just had this abstract accepted at SLSA which
goes a little further
The 8th Meeting of the European Society of Literature, Science and the Arts
Life, in Theory // SLSAeu Conference 2014, Turin
Stream 2 : Narrating Life: contagion, immunity, and mutation
Authors : Yvan TINA, doctoral student (Aix-Marseille University /
University of Texas at Dallas), Prof. Roger MALINA (University of
Texas at Dallas, CNRS), Prof. Yannick BUTEL (Aix-Marseille
Title : A-Live: Biological and Artificial Theaters (working title)
keywords : meta, theater, design, a-life, synthetic biology, living,
Christopher Langton, in the original workshops of what would lead to
the constitution of Artificial Life as academic and artistics fields,
issued the idea of exploring "life as it could be" (1). According to
him, artificial systems which exhibit signs of life and life like
behaviours are worthy of investigation in their own right because such
systems can expand our understanding of life. Drawing on this, we
introduce the notion of 'Meta-Life'(2) which refers to a specific type
of natural or artificial entities with behaviours characteristic of
life -be they artificial, transgenic, synthetic, or inorganic-
belonging to the Arts of A-Life and Biotechnologies as well as the
fruits of evolution. As Maciej Ozog has shown in his article on the
relationships between the arts and the sciences, these practices are
somehow 'meta-artistic' for the reason that they generate
meta-discourses' (critical commentaries) on life, arts and sciences
(3). Since theater, as a performing art, has something to do with the
living and is meta-critical per se, we intend here to question the
performative dimension of those practices/objects and to feed life
sciences theories with few theatrical contributions. The notion of
theatricality, which is for instance defined as a "density of signs
and sensations" by Roland Barthes (4), or as a "medium" by Samuel
Weber (5), could be applied to such kind of productions which affect
the shaping of life itself and reveal theatricality potentials.
Following Sally Jane Norman on her writings about the skenabiotope
(6), we advance the idea that theater can also be seen as a suitable
place for the modeling of life as art through the use of new media and
(1) Christopher Langton, Artificial Life, The Proceedings of an
Interdisciplinary Workshop on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living
Systems, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1988
(2) See Meta-Life. Biotechnologies, Synthetic Biology, A-Life and the
Arts, a Leonardo eBook Series, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2014.
(3) Maciej Ozog, 'Art investigating Science : Critical Art as a
Meta-Discourse of Science'. In Proceedings of Digital Arts and Culture
Conference, Arts Computation Engineering, UC Irvine, 2009.
(4) Roland Barthes, 'Litterature et signification', Essais critiques,
in Oeuvres completes, Editions du Seuil, tome 2, p.508, 1993.
(5) Samuel Weber, Theatricality as Medium, Fordham University Press, 2004.
(6) Louis Bec coined this term from the greek skena, stage, and the
biotope; it is defined as a 'dispositif' specially "constructed to
study and amplify certain types of theatricalising or theatricalised
behaviours in artificial organisms". Louis Bec, 'Skénabiotope. Etude
des comportements modélisés et pamphlétaires d'organismes
artificiels'. In: Arnaud Labelle-Rojoux (ed.), L'Art en scènes. pp.
115-126. Bois-le-Roi, 1992.
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 3:17 PM, G.H. Hovagimyan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Roger & the List,
> There is always human agency in any of these arguments.
> Of course you could have a world without humans but we are talking about coding that is about performance, especially art performance.
> All of the systems we have been discussing take a viewer to recognize the system. It's a simple law of quantum physics. The viewer changes or isolates or recognizes or solidifies or manifests what they are observing.
> Furthermore, code is always written with an end result in mind. Even a random system where you can't predict a result has the anticipation of a random result. Indeed, There are infinite variations on randomness in the universe.
> They only become interesting when we observe them.
> The observer is the audience for the result.
> On Mar 22, 2014, at 12:11 PM, roger malina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> hi GH
>> a few days back you made a statement
>> "There is always an author for the code"
>> Which I dont think is true and maybe introduces
>> other issues on performativity
>> one reference of course is dawkins blind
>> watchmaker argument- and is particularly relevant
>> to the work of algoricists such as john latham
>> where the code is self generating and the artist intervenes
>> in selection rather than design
>> and with much large code-there are innumerable authors
>> not an author
>> and then you go on:
>> there is a result from running the code.
>> but like recessive genes, some code may only perform
>> when there is a confluence of factors that enable its
>> Hi list,
>> I think you need to look at the whole coding process. There is
>> always an author for the code and there is a result from running the
>> gh hovagimyan <[log in to unmask]>
> G.H. Hovagimyan
Roger F Malina
Is in Texas right now
please contact me by email but
for very very urgent things phone/text me me