Hello List, I have enjoyed discussions since joining in January and appreciate the wealth of information that is contributed. The springtime discussion that took off from ‘software for dancers’ into the 6 domains was great inspiration as I drew body parts for kinesiology class. then after reading (nearly) all of the COSIGN ‘01 papers I was totally hooked and thankful I discovered this broad and brilliant interdisciplinary network. I wonder if anyone has read and could comment on “From Primeval Chaos to In finite Intelligence” by Arie S. Issar? He entreats readers to ‘entertain’ his notion of Information as a dimension and Entropy as a field of force. “Evolution of life along the dimension of information is a continuous take-off against the pull of entropy.” “...collection of info is not (man’s) own subjective activity but a movement along an objective dimension.” The book was written in 1996 and I thought this theory was already out and about. Seems familiar in ‘art subject matter’ anyhow. I hope the following doesn’t present his views incorrectly but the existence of an Information dimension shifts the traditional anthropocentric point of view and (for me) ‘solves’ the Cartesian dilemma, The dimension would include every bit of information (point instant notion events) since the first conscious organism came into being, and our physical evolution reflect this information. Then the structure of consciousness is not created by our minds but perceived by our minds. The book moves into direction- induction/de duction, order, relationship to probability and on and on. also refers to de Chardin on evolution of life as ‘perpetual increase in complexity’.... I love how structure and movement of physiological systems are evidenced in art forms, dance being only one, neuro-muscular and synapse activity, oxygen and blood flow, dna etc. It seems these patterns must be related to semiotics on a very basic level. If semiotics is the interface in moving forward to creating the artificial, I am curious if semiotics scholars could say if the field is based on a paradigm of duality, separated somehow into thought and extension? Representation is necessary for communication but I wonder where matter and thought overlap in semiotics, and why are ideas so often perceived independently and simultaneously? And how are those magic moments in performance explained anyhow? I was thinking about that simple exercise of ‘mirroring’ where a couple works in tandem- ultimate success is mirroring simultaneously... Maybe this info dimension idea is gets too mystical.... Issar’s book has put an exciting new spin on things for me but i wonder if this idea has been ‘Debunked?” My background is basically film making with doses of philosophy but am trying to ‘catch up’ and look forward to reaction, words from the wise, recommended text (something on Metakinesis in addition to ‘Modern Dance’ ?) In response to current discussion - i think of technology in performance like 4th wall - the artist can reveal if they feel like it, or if it’s relevant to the content or to what they want to express. Linda Lewett Independent Producer ARTtv, LLC arttv@aol.com home/office (703) 978-2465 cell (917) 482-5140
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 06/12/02