Re: [microsound] oval armani

["Dr. Xylene Tektor" <solipsis@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Cagean Chance! HA..

that little monk..

Cage: Cage was very interested in Eastern thought. Read Taoism as in
Tao-te-ching , as in I-Ching, a divinatory game/practice involving random
symbol series which itself came from earlier divinatory practices involving
the tossing of sacred inscribed bone fragments, some of which are the
earliest known forms of the written word. (also see rune tossing, entrail
tossing, tarot, glossolalia, etc etc etc..)  also see Chuang Tzu's text
"Aimless Wandering".
Cage: See Wabi-Sabi http://www.stonebridge.com/wabisabi.html
Cage : flip back to Ernst doing paper rubbings of wood grain to reveal
random or found anthropomorphisms.
ie Exquisite Corpse..

What is "The Chance meeting of an umbrella and a sewing machine on an
operating table.."

How many times do we have to discover the universe is peeking in at us thru
the window-monacle..

The name of the DADA movement was a "chance operation" created by opening a
dictionary at random and pointing at a random word.
read surrealism's use of automatism ----> flash forward: Beat generation
spontaneity..---follow along to improvisational jazz movement: see derek
bailey.

the dialectic process of self/other is illustrated through a historical
modulation encompassing all the arts and their varied mediums..
the whole notion of any "generative forms" is highly suspect.. Mozart did
not arise "Sui Generis" and yet the overlapping "fields of intensities" at
play through his being give rise to all kinds of anthropocentric notions of
"genius"  see endosymbiotic evolution---> well, you'll need a microscope..

what combination of conduit, bricolage of conduits, historical or material
are we really talking about.. do we play the instrument, or does the
instrument play us, are we speaking, or is language speaking through us..

folks, welcome to post-structuralism..or digital shamanism, is it a sham or
is it the virgin mary appearing on your tortilla..

particle in the infoverse





>
>       Lately I have been rereading Cage to understand any possible
> relationship between chance and the glitch. So far I am able to conclude
> that Cage valued chance as a strategy of disinterestedness and that this
> bears little resemblance to the glitch in its most current incarnation.
> For sounds to be themselves they can't be right or wrong; glitches are
> intentionally wrong.
>
>       When glitches are captured as a sample or treated as a sound source
> rather than a systemic condition they are not related to chance at all.
> Glitches that are the result of a system (such as a MAX patch or a
> faulty piece of hardware) are closer to Cagean chance in that they are
> naturalized by their inevitability. In other words they are not judged.
>