 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 231 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2615847 Today 0 Topics 127670 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The following an excerpt from a letter by David Berlinski, a critic of intelligent design theory, to William Dembski, a leading proponent of said theory. (This itself is not the main point of this topic!) "In my essay, I suggested that there is a range of states, acts, or processes that are clearly intentional—they are brought about by intelligent agency—and yet share none of the features of executive design[realization of predefined purpose]. The design of a painting is very often revealed in its execution and not before. Design in this sense might well be called immanent. The painter Francis Bacon often stressed just this point in commenting on his own work (see Francis Bacon, 1975), and the distinction between executive and immanent design appears as well in Nelson Goodman’s Languages of Art, a book that design theorists might study with profit. With respect to immanent design, there are no prior purposes, no plans, and no application of assembly instructions to building materials. For this class of artifacts, probabilities are not relevant and specifications are inapplicable." The interesting observation is the connection between the definition of immanent design in art and certian statements made by Autechre. From pitchfork: "You get a sound and then refine it until it is as good as it can be and you don't give it any other thought-- all these questions such as "why did you decide to do this track like this? Why put a heavy sound here?" I just have to say honestly, I don't know. I have no idea why, fucking hell." From the Wire: "We are absolutely not trying to represent or duplicate anything at all" I think this illustrates the main hangup people have with AE or with certian types of art in general. That lack of a pre-defined purpose or clear goal. If you make music or art, can you relate to such a method? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
stick your dummy back in |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that was a reply to another thread, fuck knows what happened there. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
enjoyment of the process, more so than the result. that's one reason for me making art/music/etc... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes, i can certainly relate to this method. that's exactly how i work in all mediums of art. it's simply a different approach to art. the classic way of creating art is to have an idea or make an observation, and then compose this - to replicate it. but some modern artists have no concept in mind before they begin and just let it happen. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thats an intersesting topic, good one! :) "That lack of a pre-defined purpose or clear goal" is definately inherent in much of the sound design I do, well, about 50% of it I suppose. When I go to create a new sound on my synths, half the time I only have a vague idea what I'm looking for, or no idea at all and it just comes down to: "when do I want to stop tweaking these knobs." the other half of the time, I have a good idea what I'm trying to do, either because the idea has already popped into my head, or I'm jamming with other musicians who are like "can you make that organ a little more synthy, ok now just a little bit more distortion" and that sort of thing, like I'm following the guidelines of others. god, I feel like I did a horrible job of articulating what I'm trying to say just then. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it is almost a predetermined or non-realtime improvisation. improvisation with sound. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no, that's a good point - there are varying degrees to which an artist will have a predetermined idea in mind while making the art. this ranges from no apparent or concious plan to somewhat thoughtout to a complete plan in advance. it's important to remember there are degrees. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I like the approach where you don't really have anything in mind at first, then scribble something, then use that as your foundation to construct upon. Well, that's my primary music-making method anyway. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
when you think about "jamming" or improvising - there are different ways this will happen depending on type of music. in blues music, there is a pattern that is relied upon to structure the improvisation and to provide the scale and things like that. but in some other types of improvisation, there might be zero reliance on tonality, structure or even timing. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
To me, it shows how elusive the definition of purpose can be. Perhaps intent is a better description? And what exactly is intent? Hell, I can't define that with other words. The best I could do is try to provide some example of intent in action which, at the moment, is beyond me. I can say that I believe intent to be independant of its realization. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it's possible to find meaning in something after it has been created, but i don't think intent or purpose are necessarily even important in art. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Gotta dig the blues. It's quite common for jazz musicians to do improvs at a gig, yet have the blues scale as a foundation. It may seem like they play really good by cranking out all those notes dynamically, but the approach is really akin to typing improvised text on a select set of keys on a keyboard. Still neat, though. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I have a hard time defining art without those things. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
then you have the greats, such as coltrane, who develop their own scales or improvisation techniques during improvisation. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I even improvise when I'm not doing art.. hey, what do you know? everyone does! anyway, when I make music.. I just find a sound or play with my synth and then I find something and I just make something with it. That's about as defined as it gets if I'm talking about this. same goes for paining.. we just find some paint and some surface and then we splash the paint on and do lots of stuff to it and sometimes it turns out nice.. if it doesn't, we paint over it and end up with something nice anyway. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Purpose without foresight... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sorry.. just read the thread now, and realized I just said what other people had been saying... well, I still mean it... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
its cool, I think any contributions are good, whether or not they have been stated already, as long as they are your ideas. :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
