On Mar 17, 2014, at 1:33 PM, Curt Cloninger <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Some have said that theater is seeming and performance art is being.
Hi ist & Curt,
Thanks for the detailed analysis of artist and audience. Being a performance artist or coming out of that background I agree that being(performance) is different from seeminyg (acting).
However we can all agree that we’ve seen actors do mediocre jobs at bringing their characters to life even if they’ve executed their lines flawlessly. There’s some other indefinable quality that we deem great acting.
You’ve also got the, “ willful suspension of disbelief..” to through into this mix. That may refer to the Turing Test as much as anything else. We may desire that our machines achieve consciousness or respond emotionally or become great actors.
Even if we fed all the creative acrs by all humanity into an algorithm’s database, I doubt if a program could come up with something believable. However, I did a work a few years back with Peter Sinclair called Heartbreak Hotel.
The Mise-en-Scene was a bar where different lonely hearts met and conversed. We had several characters, A nun, a yuppie, a goth, a dumb blond and a survivalist. We took sentences from various texts such as the Catholic Catechism, Or Edgar Allan Poe stories etc.. put them into a random select poetry generator and had the characters speak to each other via text to speech. The conversation was almost believable and very funny. I could see an extension to this process where live actors would speak or act out lines based on the algorithms choices. Could be very interesting. The intention of the work would be to alter human thinking and performance based on machine perception and through the process begin to include machine “thinking” into human language interactions.