Re: [microsound] influence vs. replica

["j.frede" <jfrede@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I pitted it "influence vs. replica" because of the close releation to works
being influenced and works being a replica of the original.

> I don't understand your wording of the question, particularly why you've
> pitted "influence" vs. "replica", but I certainly don't think that the
only
> way to create new WORKS (as opposed to new art forms) depends on a process
> of remediation or hybridization of existing media. I'm skeptical of a
> tendency, for instance, among so-called sound artists to rely so much on
> other media for the presentation and reception of their work (projected
> visuals, synchronized or not with the music; sculptures; and so on). Often
> in such instances, the audio itself is sub-par stuff incapable of
> contextualizing itself without supporting material. That sort of
remediation
> strikes me as an effort to compensate for a music's inadequacy.
>

I stated in the initail post, is is possible to create NEW art with out
using two existing forms,,, a bunny and a jellyfish have already been
created,,, and the invention of the bunnyfish that stings you and glows in
the dark is merely a by product of OLD forms.

> Certainly, I think we can anticipate new art FORMS (as opposed to works)
> coming out of emerging technologies and fields, such as biotechnology,
where
> artists are splicing the genes of jellyfish with rabbits to create
> phosphorescent bunnies. That strikes me as new. I think that we can
> anticipate more artforms growing out of digital gaming environments. And I
> still think we have yet to see the real potential for networked creations.
I
> feel that much of the new art FORMS depend on the generation of different
> technologies for their creation.
>
> Philosophically, I'm not sure that the concept of "replica" implies the
old
> or not-new, however -- certainly, it's a category distinct from the
> not-different. There is no true replicant (a perfect copy) as every copy
is
> itself a new item with its own agendas. Just look at Philip K. Dick's
works
> in this respect (and I mean both the content, which continually explodes
the
> notion of "new-ness" through issues of replication, as well as the form of
> the work, which continually explodes the restrictions of the pulp SF genre
> as a way to create new works and concepts).
>
> -=Trace