even here, think of 'bad code' that produces glitches - then the code is,
at least for some folks, morphed into something else that has a different
sort of value...
I don't think, having read E.D. for a long time, that I can understand her
intent in most of the work; it's that elusiveness among other things that
is astonishing. You can't paraphrase her work - and there's a book out, a
satire of sorts, that attempts to do just that, and the results are funny
and ridiculous precisely because of that -
- Alan
On Sun, 26 Jan 2014, Pall Thayer wrote:
Don't get me wrong, Alan, I value your opinion and always feel that you give
very interesting input into these sorts of discussions. True, we don't know
Emily Dickinson's intent but we do know that she presented herself as a
literary figure and can assume her intent from there. Likewise, we know what
Duchamp presented himself as before the urinal and can view that work within
that context. Should we not do the same with code? If a coder has not
presented in a way that the code is worth reading, then we assume that it's
not worth reading. However, if they have... then it should be essential
reading, no? Anything else would be like a painter saying, "Look at my use
of color..." and then regarding black and white photos of his paintings. No?
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Alan Sondheim <[email protected]> wrote:
If you find it absurd, actually there's no way to argue with
that.
Ok, it's absurd. As I keep saying, it's a family of usages,
everyone has different opinions; you and I aren't going to come
to an agreement, again by a long shot! :-)
- Alan
On Sun, 26 Jan 2014, Pall Thayer wrote:
#!/usr/bin/perl
package absurd;
sub new {
$this = new absurd();
}
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 9:11 PM, Pall Thayer
<[email protected]> wrote:
A lot of this makes no sense to me. It sounds
like people are
taking things at face value without
considering the multitude of
scenarios. Paintbrushes, staples or nails are
as likely to
become significant elements of a work of art
as a urinal(!),
depending on the artist's intent. Trying to
comment on any of
these in a single sentence or even paragraph
is absurd. As is
the attempt to analyze whether or not code is
literature or not.
The fact that it's code does not make it
literature. The fact
that words are contained within a book does
not make it
literature. It depends on the intent. We could
produce a book
that contains an alphabetical listing of all
known brand names
in the world and release it under different
contexts. One could
be issued as a reference manual, the other
could be released as
a poem. These would be viewed very
differently. Likewise, we
could take a photo of a bicycle and publish
the same photo in
several different ways. One could warn of the
dangers of
cycling. Another could promote the benefits of
cycling. A third
could be devoted to the aesthetics of the
bicycle itself.
Some code is intended to be read. And that doesn't
necessarily draw
from its performance. It may be that a reading of
the code provides
one message while the running of it provides
another. Perhaps
experiencing both will better inform the work. I
don't know. It
doesn't really matter.
My primary message is that wondering whether code is
literature or not
is absurd. It may or may not be. But to attempt to
present any
argument that may indicate that you feel it might
not be, is absurd.
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Rob Myers
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 26/01/14 03:14 PM, Alan Sondheim wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2014, Rob Myers wrote:
>> Reading Mezangelle is like running code to debug
it -
watching call
>> stack frames being pushed and popped and data
being created
and operated
>> on. You have to keep track of nested contexts and
back
references. Each
>> new word fragment or piece of punctuation can
operate on and
transform
>> the previously read elements. Even when you've
parsed
Mezangelle it's
>> unstable and active, whether it reduces to a
singular meaning
or is more
>> ambiguous. This is different from 1337-style
encoding.
>>
> True, but it's not that different from the waves
that occurs
in more
> traditional poetry. You're not debugging
Mezangelle and you're
not
> running it; you're interpreting it and one
person's
interpretation is
> different from anothers (which is also true btw of
antiorp and
poetry).
> Also you're assuming a stability in 1337 which
might not be
there.
I agree that traditional poetry obviously has
structure and
flow, and
can transform meaning over the course of being read
with great
subtlety
or degree. I do think that the nature of the
re-reading and
re-thinking
that Mezangelle requires and affords via its syntax
is more
compact than
plain language poetry. And that this compactness of
notation is
a
quality of some kinds of code.
Some programming languages are interpreted and it's
obviously
possible
for two runs of a program to give different output.
In this
sense there
are different interpretations of the same text when
interpreted
by
computer, as there are when interpreted by a human
being. I'm
certainly
not arguing that Mezangelle is Meme RNA, but I think
these
comparisons
are useful.
I can't speak to antiorp. :-( I shall investigate,
thank you.
1337 is inherently ironic but it's also very much a
shared joke
and
shibboleth for cliques. It involves much play but is
more
instrumental.
>> Regarding Seibel's comments on code as
literature, James
makes a good
>> point about paintbrushes. We don't read shopping
lists or
meeting notes
>> as literature, yet they are written. Code does
not tend to be
written as
>> literature. It's possible to read code for
pleasure and to
find its
>> formatting and data structures, its *form*,
aesthetically
satisfying.
>> Code is mathematics, so this is similar to
enjoying a
mathematical proof.
>
> Here I do disagree with you; reading-as is
something that at
least I,
> and I assume many others do (just as such lists
were read by
Braudel as-
> history). Example - I'm currently reading Walsh's
Mercantile
Aritmetic,
> published in Newbury, Mass, in 1800 - which is
just what the
title says,
> but which reads like a fantastic epic, especially
the sections
dealing
> with monetary exchange (I might quote later,
because the
writing is
> amazing).
Reading-as is closer to Siebel's concern. I greatly
enjoy the
lists in
(for example) the Cornelius Quartet, "The Sale Of
The Late
King's Goods"
or "JPod". And there may be a program listing out
there waiting
to be
discovered as literature. But I'm doubtful of this
for reasons
of what I
guess are "family resemblance".
We could go Situationist and simply nominate a
particular
listing as a
novel, but this would I think be different from what
we are
discussing here.
> I also am not sure that "Code is mathematics" just
because
it's exact;
> certainly at the level of machine language, it
follows strict
protocols.
"Software is math" is a core argument in the
non-patentability
of software:
"When people say that software is math, they mean
that in the
most
direct, literal sense." -
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timothylee/2011/08/11/software-is-just-math-rea
lly/
> Mathematical proofs and proof theory are
complicated - look
atthe
> 4-color theorem - and I find code-reading very
different. But
then I'm
> neither an astute mathematician or programmer.
Code can be very complex as well, I've never read
the whole of
the Linux
kernel for example. I don't know the proof for the
4-colour
theorem but
I enjoy the proofs of set theory and find that
mathematics, art
and code
have a shared concern with some kind of *form*, and
some kind of
*aesthetic* governing it, whatever their other
differences.
>> I think that a piece of software that is a)
structured like
Emacs to be
>> self-editing or at least self-revealing of its
code and is b)
>> constructed to use this facility essayistically
or
discursively or
>> narratively is what would be required for code to
be
literature. Char
>> Davies' "Osmose" is a weak example (whatever its
other
strengths) of
>> this.
>>
> I really do think there's any sort of
"requirement" involved,
maybe
> part-requirements like part-objects, or something
along the
line of
> "tendencies"; I'm extremely dubious of
requirements in
relation to art
> in general - even the idea that art/literature,
etc. _should_
be
> something as opposed to something else. Aesthetics
and reading
> behaviors, reception theory and the like, is far
more complex
than this.
Again I don't think it's easy to go further than
family
resemblance in
the ontology of art.
>> But I may be proposing a gentrification of
code.art. Or
discussing the
>> equivalent of why nails and staples aren't
considered more
important in
>> the social history of painting. ;-)
>
> Well they are important, and there are books that
emphasize
things like
> the chemistry of paints etc. - I relate this again
to Braudel
and the
> annales school of historiography.
I've just read "Color, Facture, Art And Design"
(highly
recommended)
which is largely a history of grounds and pigments
and how they
relate
to the social content of painting. This kind of
technical-conceptual
integration, is what I am arguing for in this
discussion.
I chose staples and nails because their relative
volume in the
material
and significant construction of painting supports is
generally
low and
contingent. My point was that we have to consider
the
possibility that
code, and I say this as someone almost ridiculously
invested in
the idea
that art can be made with or of code, may not be
strongly
relevant in
the critique art made with it.
- Rob.
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
--
*****************************
Pall Thayer
artist
http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
*****************************
--
*****************************
Pall Thayer
artist
http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
*****************************
==
email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/
web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 347-383-8552
music: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/
current text http://www.alansondheim.org/si.txt
==
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
--
*****************************
Pall Thayer
artist
http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
*****************************
==
email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/
web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 347-383-8552
music: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/
current text http://www.alansondheim.org/si.txt
==
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
