Re: [microsound] organic computers

[dbuchwald <dagmar.buchwald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan,

I think your use of "waste of human energy" and the comparison to "waste of natural ressources" is not valid.  The time and energy spent by a human in order to acquire something he or she wants or holds in high esteem is what makes us live. (I am NOT talking about the hours spent on a boring job you have to engage in in order to make a living so that you can survive in a capitalist society; THAT is a waste of time and energy -- producing something of absolutely no use value but only exchange value, let's say the umpteenth
brand of lipstick, although there are trillions of lipsticks of exactly the same shade around ... you can use another product as example, if you want).  But spending time and energy in hunting after something is what makes us tick, isn't it?  As soon as we stop desiring anything we might as well not being born, in fact we die.  I am all for the spending, even the joyful waste of human energy as long as the target of this spending is not dictated from the outside. I don't want to die without having completely 'wasted' myself.
Life is spending of energy isn't it?  (One's own!  But that energy is only borrowed; one should get more conscious of the fact that one's life energy is borrowed and that somehow one should feel responsible for what one is doing with that borrowed energy).  Life is giving back the energy one has been endowed with by turning it into something else, the more creative the better.

As long as people have computers and an access to internet/web the downloading of tracks seems to be the most ecological solution -- and if they do it during worktime and on the work computer it's one of the last tiny acts of rebellion there are left.

I once decided to completely drop out of the system.  Wanted to survive without electricity, engage in an alternative ecological project high in the mountains, far away from 'sivvilisation'.  That's why I sold all my records and most of the electrical gadgets I had; in fact I gave them away for almost nothing.  It didn't take me long to find out how phony that alternative project was, at a closer look they survived by money weaned from people still very much engaged in capitalist society (such as talking your mother into
sending money -- using the telephone of a bar in the village, because one didn't want to have a telephone of one's own; such as pretending one's son studies at university in order to milk money out of an ex-husband and similar ridiculous stuff).  Of course, there are better alternative projects and I just happened to join a phony one.  But still, as long as you are even remotely a part of the system you share its schizophrenias.

You wrote: "People are releasing stuff on CD, CDR and MP3 and spamming media and on-line services completely without merit and even without having performed it in public even once."  One thing is an old one, the "completely without merit".  We had the discussion before.  WHO decides about the 'merit' of a work?  Can only be the listeners.  And in order to do so, they need an access to the work.  And the cheaper that access the better.  I am glad there are record-reviews and journals such as de:bug which give me some hints
what and where to look for the stuff I am interested in. To some extent they also 'educate' me and form my interests.  But for the rest -- I want to decide by myself.  Okay I download tons of mp3's only to find out that some of them don't interest me all that much (a lot ot it is still nice to listen to in the background, and that is what ambient music is all about, isn't it?  Not all of the plants on my window sills are highly decorated price winning plants in contests such as "the most stunningly beautiful cactus ever");
but occasionally I come across sounds that intrigue me; and if I found them all by myself, I am all the more proud of it and make copies for friends.  And if the producer of the track is a 'nobody' I like the idea of turning him/her into somebody by getting more people interested in it.  Sometimes I find out that the track I liked was produced by someone who is no longer a 'nobody'; great! other people found that stuff also 'worthy' of listening. I don't want a situation where I must rely on producers and journals of
criticism in order to be told what to listen to.  To find the stuff for yourself needs a lot of time -- something you described as a 'waste of human time and energy'; I'd describe it as a spending of human time and energy.  WHO decided what a waste of energy is?

Joseph Beuys once declared that everyone is an artist, but we live in a system which constantly discourages people from recognizing their own creativity (so that out of that sense of inferiority they buy stuff egg heads decided to call 'ART').  Let people use whatever instruments they find and can afford or build themselves and throw that stuff out for the others to decide.  If some people prefer to draw, paint, compose in order to worship the gods or just to enjoy themselves and their cat -- FINE!  Wonderful spending of
human energy.  If others do the same but want to share the outcome with other people -- EQUALLY FINE and an attempt to give something of the borrowed energy back.  Of course, they'd be delighted to get some kind of feedback from other poeple, but so does your mother after spending hours in the kitchen.

The book 'Lucifer principle' walrus and the carpenter mentioned and recommended in another post has a chapter "isolation kills".  That's true.  We are social animals and want a feedback for what we did, we want to be recognized, not necessarily as 'the greatest musician' ever but as someone doing something for others.  If you find so much stuff 'without merit' why don't you take some of your time and precious energy to drop those people a line explaining what you found so 'without merit' in their compositions?  I am sure they
would profit from your expertise.  And by 'explaining' I don't mean "your piece is shit' but some kind of constructive criticism.  That's why people take that step to put something on a website, to get out of isolation.

You write "even without having performed it in public even once".  Why not call the performance in public an enormous 'waste of human time and energy'? (Not my opinion)  It needs heated rooms, electricity, advertisements, the people working in the bar and selling booze have to be paid and spend their time working there ... and on and on.  The audience gets there by cars ... See how ridiculous the discussion can get?

Fortunately there are a lot of worthy things on earth left which cost no money.  If I climb a mountain for hours (sweating like a donkey) only to be able to see the sun rise in the morning from that top of the mountain it is an enourmous spending of 'my' energy (although it didn't cost me money, unless you count the hiking shoes, the rucksack, the food my body burnt during the trip ...).  You may call that a 'waste' of human energy -- but let me turn that question around: what isn't a waste of human energy in your opinion?
Some examples?

Dagmar

"jan.l" wrote:

> Yes sir! You are beginning to get the idea. But note that on-line distribution (like MP3) is an *extremely* environmentally expensive way to disitribute. Every single listener needs a computer, spend a lot of time on-line to find anything worth downloading. Download a bunch of bits. Store all those bits. And then use the computer whenever you listen (cause if you burn a CDR you are really in the company of Dow Chemical). Or possible buy a lot of yuppie-style MD/MP3 gadgets. You are using a lot of energy (including human).
>
> The real question is: why are everybody so obsessed with releasing their stuff?
>
> Causing all this waste of serveral types of energy?
>
> People are releasing stuff on CD, CDR and MP3 and spamming media and on-line services completely without merit and even without having performed it in public even once (and even less based on positive feedback from an audience other than their mother and her cat).
>
> >>
> >> so the computer you typed this email on was constructed from all
> >> recycled,
> >> organic, non-toxic materials?
> >> ;)
> >> KIM
> >>
> >>
> >
> >This seems to feed into the idea that conservation is an all or nothing
> >affair, which I find to be a pretty common conception. Maybe this was
> >just a joking comment, or maybe not, but in any case I think this is a
> >valid point to bring up. The fact is, if you're interested in the
> >health of the environment, you should do whatever you can to advance
> >that cause. You don't have to sell all your stuff and wear buckskin
> >clothes, but do what you can. If you can avoid consuming CD's but don't
> >wish to give up your computer, by all means go for it. Small steps in
> >the right direction are better than nothing at all.
> >
> >-Greg
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >website: http://www.microsound.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org

------------------------------