On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, john saylor wrote:
if i understand you, one of your indirect points is that artists need to
get more scientific. this seems correct to me [art has always been
practiced by leading scientists, think of einstein and his violin]. and
at the same time, this does not mean to ignore imagination- it means you
must do everything.
Imagination is most meaningful when it is anchored in real life.
It's one think to imagine Einstein's space bending, and to imagine
Minkowski's four-dimensional space-time, but it's another thing to know
that a satellite's atomic clock has to be adjusted because it _drifts_,
and that timeflow² + speedratio² = 1 isn't a formula that Einstein made up
from nowhere.
In a very different domain, if I read a novel by Kafka, Camus, M-C Blais,
Zola, C Gauvreau or whoever else, the content makes sense because it is
anchored in real life. Even when impossible things or unlikely things
happen in the novel, there's something in it that is relevant to real
life.
_______________________________________________________________________
| Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
