namjune();paik()

Posted by Eryk Salvaggio | Tue May 16th 2006 9:59 p.m.

http://www.one38.org/nmjnpk/

It's been brought to my attention that some of my ascii formatting is not working on macs, period, regardless of browser. Feel free to view it, but save your expectations for viewing it on a PC with firefox or ie.

Thanks,
-er.
  • Eryk Salvaggio | Thu May 18th 2006 10:19 a.m.
    Thanks Maya, I appreciate it.

    I was sitting at a presentation of a $9000 Synthesizer and as the representative was talking about how elegant it was at reproducing piano and violin sounds, I realized I would rather have one of those early casiotone toy keyboards from the 80's
    that sounded like trash. But I don't think the music people make with them is trash at all, in fact, I think there's more value in squeezing something out of a tool organically than there is in picking and choosing which pre-built beautiful part
    we'll use. I guess the same goes for visual stuff... it feels more organic, to me, when we're using the tech equivilent of scotch tape and aluminum foil to make something. I'm even sort of afraid to start using php because I'm nostalgic for the
    .html file extension. But that's probably a bit silly...

    That said, though, different tools for different purposes. I'm rediscovering flash all over again now that I'm doing video work...

    -er.
  • Jim Andrews | Thu May 18th 2006 1:15 p.m.
    > I was sitting at a presentation of a $9000 Synthesizer and as the
    > representative was talking about how elegant it was at
    > reproducing piano and violin sounds, I realized I would rather
    > have one of those early casiotone toy keyboards from the 80's
    > that sounded like trash. But I don't think the music people make
    > with them is trash at all, in fact, I think there's more value in
    > squeezing something out of a tool organically than there is in
    > picking and choosing which pre-built beautiful part
    > we'll use. I guess the same goes for visual stuff... it feels
    > more organic, to me, when we're using the tech equivilent of
    > scotch tape and aluminum foil to make something. I'm even sort of
    > afraid to start using php because I'm nostalgic for the
    > .html file extension. But that's probably a bit silly...
    >
    > That said, though, different tools for different purposes. I'm
    > rediscovering flash all over again now that I'm doing video work...
    >
    > -er.

    you use the word "organic" twice.

    to me, it feels like it doesn't matter whether you use the $9000 synth or
    the casiotone. if you're simply making music, you're not going to be
    creating anything deeply significant *as art*. you may create something
    "organic" but it will have so many antecedants that it is a different kind
    of reproduction though it may be nice to listen to and i hope people never
    stop doing it. i have the same feeling about simply writing poetry or
    novels, or simply making a film, or simply creating an image. all of these
    things have been done so deeply and exhaustively. and there *is* new
    territory elsewhere. and not simply in 'remix' but in deeper synthesis of
    arts and media.

    ja
    http://vispo.com
  • Jim Andrews | Fri May 19th 2006 5:26 a.m.
    > > I was sitting at a presentation of a $9000 Synthesizer and as the
    > > representative was talking about how elegant it was at
    > > reproducing piano and violin sounds, I realized I would rather
    > > have one of those early casiotone toy keyboards from the 80's
    > > that sounded like trash. But I don't think the music people make
    > > with them is trash at all, in fact, I think there's more value in
    > > squeezing something out of a tool organically than there is in
    > > picking and choosing which pre-built beautiful part
    > > we'll use. I guess the same goes for visual stuff... it feels
    > > more organic, to me, when we're using the tech equivilent of
    > > scotch tape and aluminum foil to make something. I'm even sort of
    > > afraid to start using php because I'm nostalgic for the
    > > .html file extension. But that's probably a bit silly...
    > >
    > > That said, though, different tools for different purposes. I'm
    > > rediscovering flash all over again now that I'm doing video work...
    > >
    > > -er.
    >
    > you use the word "organic" twice.
    >
    > to me, it feels like it doesn't matter whether you use the $9000 synth or
    > the casiotone. if you're simply making music, you're not going to be
    > creating anything deeply significant *as art*. you may create something
    > "organic" but it will have so many antecedants that it is a different kind
    > of reproduction though it may be nice to listen to and i hope people never
    > stop doing it. i have the same feeling about simply writing poetry or
    > novels, or simply making a film, or simply creating an image. all of these
    > things have been done so deeply and exhaustively. and there *is* new
    > territory elsewhere. and not simply in 'remix' but in deeper synthesis of
    > arts and media.
    >
    > ja
    > http://vispo.com

    how unfortunate for you, jim. just tonight i found two web sites that house
    some very beautiful music that doesn't really remind me of much other music.
    specifically, Lauri Grohn's site at http://www.synestesia.fi and Michael
    Gogin's work at http://www.ruccas.org/index.php?Michael%20Gogins . speaking
    of 'reminding me of', i actually heard i think it was a pearl jam song today
    where one of the lines of praise is something like 'it doesn't remind me of
    anything.'

    so, yes, live long enough and it all starts to sound the same, i suppose, so
    perhaps you'll just have to surprise yourself with an ability to suspend
    judgement?

    we know many words but we do not tire of them in combination. a steady
    stream of any word, though, will soon be annoying. perhaps we are asked to
    see what the world is saying to us in the stream of art we experience.

    it does seem that the notion of 'folk art' has been exponentially expanded
    by digital media; everyone is famous for 15 Mb, and usually there are only
    small parts of it that are in any sense distinct from quite a large number
    of other folk's art. the tools of media production are ubiquitous. and of
    course this is far preferable to a situation where the tools/means of
    production are in the hands of a few. and there will be a whole lotta art. i
    mean a *whole* lotta art. and one person's art will be another's data trash.

    but if art is important to us, we find our way through it, in it, with it as
    through the words of an incantation not heard as such but meaning all the
    same what it is to write now, live now, where each history and time period
    is in a next room.

    best wishes,
    ja
    http://vispo.com
  • Salvatore Iaconesi | Fri May 19th 2006 7:46 a.m.
    the search for the "next thing" is a healthy process as long as it's not the only one.

    different disciplines have different hearts and follow different paths. maybe converging, but different.

    if you look at it from a certain (limited) point of view: painting is "old", sculpture is "old", music is "old". but is it true?

    if we answer yes, we're probabily filled up with too many concepts, too much in a hurry, too embedded in The Context.

    tools are tools. cost them 3dollars or a million. be them ancient or futuristic.

    i love art that is expression of its time. i also love classical art, but i Love that which is contemporary.

    but the "new" and the "contemporary" can be found in a violin just like it can be found in a neural network.

    salvatore [xDxD]
    www.artisopensource.net
  • Jim Andrews | Sat May 20th 2006 5:28 a.m.
    A

    Art is dead
    but sneaks out for fun.

    D

    Art is invisible:
    look at the paintings.

    A

    Art is dead.
    Accept no substitutes.

    D

    A surd and scream;
    black flower,
    moon
    sun
    above.

    A

    Art is dead
    except where strictly prohibited.

    D

    Art is invisible,
    slips past the borders.

    ja

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: owner-list@rhizome.org [mailto:owner-list@rhizome.org]On Behalf Of
    > Salvatore Iaconesi
    > Sent: May 19, 2006 6:46 AM
    > To: list@rhizome.org
    > Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: namjune();paik()
    >
    >
    > the search for the "next thing" is a healthy process as long as
    > it's not the only one.
    >
    > different disciplines have different hearts and follow different
    > paths. maybe converging, but different.
    >
    > if you look at it from a certain (limited) point of view:
    > painting is "old", sculpture is "old", music is "old". but is it true?
    >
    > if we answer yes, we're probabily filled up with too many
    > concepts, too much in a hurry, too embedded in The Context.
    >
    > tools are tools. cost them 3dollars or a million. be them ancient
    > or futuristic.
    >
    > i love art that is expression of its time. i also love classical
    > art, but i Love that which is contemporary.
    >
    > but the "new" and the "contemporary" can be found in a violin
    > just like it can be found in a neural network.
    >
    > salvatore [xDxD]
    > www.artisopensource.net
    > +
    > -> post: list@rhizome.org
    > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    > +
    > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
    > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
    >
  • Rob Myers | Sat May 20th 2006 6:09 a.m.
    On 20 May 2006, at 12:28, Jim Andrews wrote:

    > Art is dead

    "You cannot kill what does not live." - Judge Death.

    - Rob.
  • Salvatore Iaconesi | Sat May 20th 2006 4:01 p.m.
    art is a koan

    >-- Original Message --
    >From: "Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>
    >To: <list@rhizome.org>
    >Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: namjune();paik()
    >Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 04:28:31 -0700
    >Reply-To: "Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>
    >
    >
    >A
    >
    >Art is dead
    >but sneaks out for fun.
    >
    >D
    >
    >Art is invisible:
    >look at the paintings.
    >
    >A
    >
    >Art is dead.
    >Accept no substitutes.
    >
    >D
    >
    >A surd and scream;
    >black flower,
    >moon
    >sun
    >above.
    >
    >A
    >
    >Art is dead
    >except where strictly prohibited.
    >
    >D
    >
    >Art is invisible,
    >slips past the borders.
    >
    >ja
    >
  • Salvatore Iaconesi | Sat May 20th 2006 4:05 p.m.
    noise is perfect

    salvatore

    >-- Original Message --
    >From: "Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>
    >To: <list@rhizome.org>
    >Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: namjune();paik()
    >Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 04:28:31 -0700
    >Reply-To: "Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>
    >
    >
    >A
    >
    >Art is dead
    >but sneaks out for fun.
    >
    >D
    >
    >Art is invisible:
    >look at the paintings.
    >
    >A
    >
    >Art is dead.
    >Accept no substitutes.
    >
    >D
    >
    >A surd and scream;
    >black flower,
    >moon
    >sun
    >above.
    >
    >A
    >
    >Art is dead
    >except where strictly prohibited.
    >
    >D
    >
    >Art is invisible,
    >slips past the borders.
    >
    >ja
  • Maschine Hospital | Sat May 20th 2006 5:12 p.m.
    It's called "playing the ashiks".
    http://www.goldenhorn.com/display.php4?content=records&page=ghp010.html
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00004YL8H/ref=nosim/102-9551440-6588152?nQ74

    But unfortunately some "friends" of ours think that Marie Antoinette
    --and probably all other women--should have her hands worked and scrubbed
    to death because they worship handmade goods and some other crap.

    Ashik by the way also is referent to the notion of holding or kissing
    hands as it were, ashiks being the knucklebones.

    Thusly we do beat up every-one pretending to be an "artist" "lover" or
    "musician" who tries to put women to physical labor.

    Such as the ugly and ignominous Willem de Ridder who exploits his
    "beloved" Clary--par example.

    CLEARLY Marie Antoinette just wasn't "working" hard enough.

    On Thu, 18 May 2006, Jim Andrews wrote:

    > Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:15:11 -0700
    > From: Jim Andrews <jim@vispo.com>
    > To: list@rhizome.org
    > Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: namjune();paik()
    >
    >
    > > I was sitting at a presentation of a $9000 Synthesizer and as the
    > > representative was talking about how elegant it was at
    > > reproducing piano and violin sounds, I realized I would rather
    > > have one of those early casiotone toy keyboards from the 80's
    > > that sounded like trash. But I don't think the music people make
    > > with them is trash at all, in fact, I think there's more value in
    > > squeezing something out of a tool organically than there is in
    > > picking and choosing which pre-built beautiful part
    > > we'll use. I guess the same goes for visual stuff... it feels
    > > more organic, to me, when we're using the tech equivilent of
    > > scotch tape and aluminum foil to make something. I'm even sort of
    > > afraid to start using php because I'm nostalgic for the
    > > .html file extension. But that's probably a bit silly...
    > >
    > > That said, though, different tools for different purposes. I'm
    > > rediscovering flash all over again now that I'm doing video work...
    > >
    > > -er.
    >
    > you use the word "organic" twice.
    >
    > to me, it feels like it doesn't matter whether you use the $9000 synth or
    > the casiotone. if you're simply making music, you're not going to be
    > creating anything deeply significant *as art*. you may create something
    > "organic" but it will have so many antecedants that it is a different kind
    > of reproduction though it may be nice to listen to and i hope people never
    > stop doing it. i have the same feeling about simply writing poetry or
    > novels, or simply making a film, or simply creating an image. all of these
    > things have been done so deeply and exhaustively. and there *is* new
    > territory elsewhere. and not simply in 'remix' but in deeper synthesis of
    > arts and media.
    >
    > ja
    > http://vispo.com
    >
    >
    > +
    > -> post: list@rhizome.org
    > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    > +
    > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
    > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
    >

    o
    [ + ]

    + + +

    | '|' |
    _________________________________________
    `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
  • Vijay Pattisapu | Sat May 20th 2006 7:55 p.m.
    (wince)

    > -------- Original Message --------
    > Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: namjune();paik()
    > From: salvatore.iaconesi@fastwebnet.it
    > Date: Sat, May 20, 2006 3:01 pm
    > To: list@rhizome.org
    >
    > art is a koan
    >
    >
    > >-- Original Message --
    > >From: "Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>
    > >To: <list@rhizome.org>
    > >Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Re: namjune();paik()
    > >Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 04:28:31 -0700
    > >Reply-To: "Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>
    > >
    > >
    > >A
    > >
    > >Art is dead
    > >but sneaks out for fun.
    > >
    > >D
    > >
    > >Art is invisible:
    > >look at the paintings.
    > >
    > >A
    > >
    > >Art is dead.
    > >Accept no substitutes.
    > >
    > >D
    > >
    > >A surd and scream;
    > >black flower,
    > >moon
    > >sun
    > >above.
    > >
    > >A
    > >
    > >Art is dead
    > >except where strictly prohibited.
    > >
    > >D
    > >
    > >Art is invisible,
    > >slips past the borders.
    > >
    > >ja
    > >
    >
    >
    >
    > +
    > -> post: list@rhizome.org
    > -> questions: info@rhizome.org
    > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
    > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
    > +
    > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
    > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
Your Reply