<x-flowed>Carlos wrote...Back Channel:
The work I am doing consists of developing computer
algorithms that capture "high level" concepts in dance
such as beat or phrase. The chapter on the history of interactive dance will
be one of the chapters that provide the background for the study. My aim is
to trace how far back people started using interactive technology in dance
and why.
Starting a discussion on the list or in a back channel would be great.
divizio:
OK. Thanks for your reply Carlos. Let's throw this out to the list now...
I see a number of other respnses on the list that look very helpful to your
project....particularly Johannes.
It seems to me that the greatest possible contribution to "art" that
computers (supreme(?) technology) may make, is a move towards
"indifference".....
Of course the goal of any kind of meditation, or spiritual practice etc is
to reduce Subjectivity...
WHAT we express is largely subjective, and hence the question of "authority"
and "authenticity"..(ie is it REALLY "Art") comes into play.
Though Computers function electro-mechanically, and seemingly with
indifference, this is NOT the case. The programs themselves are the
"filters". Benign ones? Hard to say.
Are you familiar with David N Rodowick's work?
You'll find him on the net. Particularly you would find his article
"Reading the Figural" interesting. He is HOT right now and has just been
granted a seat at King's College in London...AND he has been recently
published in the South Atlantic Quarterly out of Duke University. (you
probably recognize their literary focus....as if THAT's important to "art")
I suggest you check into him.
The work is media, communications and cultural theory stuff.
WHICH puts this somewhat afield from specifically Dance and Tech, BUT,
insomuchas Human interaction with new media is "critical" in the overall
contemporary aspect of art history (ie. what's going on now) he is very
interesting.
I suggest that Academic work, ie. that "OF the Academy" is hard pressed to
be "significant" work that will endure (re: the greater picture of art
history ....ie, what will be thought of in the 25th century (+) to be the
work that presents the line from here (21st century say) to there...."Art
Historically" speaking.
The communication of the "Art" will give way in favour of the art of
"Communication"...... not an unknown thought.....
Just an idea. HOW we communicate....."indifferently" will be important to
what's coming..... and Rodowick suggests if there is anything that
characterizes the art movement succeeding Post-Modernism...it will be the
"becoming" nature of works produced though our currently exploding
interaction with the "tools" of technology.
AH, the "human" element is a vote for REAL intelligence (as if THAT's
important)...not the other one.... :) !!!!!!!!
Looking back now to the beginning of your reply to me, I have to challenge
the idea of "capturing" (high level or otherwise)...which suggests you're
interested in "representation" and its' importance...when in fact
"presentation" is all there is ....PARTICULARLY in a contemporary, art
historically sensitive context.... which DOES push Dance and Tech to the
fore.
"Awards are the badges of Mediocrity
Emily Bronte ( methinks )
0!Z!^!P Z P!^VP
@
dAvid 2 diviZi0
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
</x-flowed>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/28/01 CST