[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [microsound] this list is the least banal disinteresting one that i've ever received



someone convert this thread to tones and make music with it.

only then will it have served some useful purpose.

this thread is the embodiment of banal, disinteresting, communication

-Joe

----- Original Message -----
From: "Store" <store@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "microsound" <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 1:49 PM
Subject: [microsound] this list is the least banal disinteresting one that
i've ever received

>   This part of text is coming from a discussion, Dagmar and I are having
> for some days now. The "results" are planned to be published in the
> theory part of http://www.retinascan.de . Just to add another banal,
> disinteresting thread to the many that take part here (to say it with
> Homer S.: "and if you haven't realised: this is irony - i-r-o-n-y!!!")
>
> >> I think I will come back to that difference later when it comes to
> >> the production of art for individual silent 'consumption' (such as
> >> reading/writing a book or composing/listening to a piece of
> >> experimental electronics) versus art/entertainment for a larger
> >> audience in a group context (such as theater/spectacle or techno
music).
> >
> > I'm not sure but I think you haven't come back to this, the difference
> > between social practise in larger groups and the singularisation of
> > silent consumption. May it be that - in a system that controls
> > subjects by singularising them - the production of bedroom music and
> > its reception under headphones and on computer terminals is
> > politically strongly contraproductive, that it supports stagnation?
>
>
> Did I mean to say that?  Not as bluntly, but now that you put it that
> way ... Hell that's a very tricky question but full to the point I
> think.  I wish others would join the debate here, because I can't claim
> to know the answer.  It makes so much sense to put it that way.  On the
> other hand I am a subject so much trained by singularisation.  Some
> things one can only find out alone, I am sure about that, at least
> people raised the way we were here in the modern West.  The tradition of
> silently mulling over either a question or a piece of music, the
> tradition of perceiving something "unconditioned by others around" ...
> but that is certainly a somewhat impoverished experience compared to
> shared experiences (this is not yet a political argument, merely an
> aesthetic one).  When it comes to the political dimension, it makes
> sense that silent, singularised consumption must be counterproductive.
> On the other hand, to cite a somewhat polemic example, I can't see much
> of political transformation in a rock concert filling a soccer stadium
> either.
>
>
> Just another thought that might be important in this special thread is
> the difference between artist and consumer. I'm not sure if thiswill
> help, if this is even just evident, but I realized that we both are
> talking from different angles of the field we're moving on. I will
> copy/paste this out of the discussion and put it in the mailing list to
> get some input. List, please take over!
>
> .--- ... schrieb:
>
> >hi
> >
> >[deletions throughout]
> >
> >( 03.03.01 14:22 -0500 ) DEVON ARMSTRONG:
> >
> >
> >>i can't understand how so many people can be interested in so much
> >>shit!
> >>
> >>
> >
> >so why do you keep digging through it? [...]
> >
> >
> >it's probably better to stay a lurker.
> >
> >
>
> No way!
> Store
>
> >
> >
>

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