Re: [microsound] maths science and electronic music

[bruce tovsky <bruce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Apr 12, 2005, at 12:00 PM, W.C Schrimshaw wrote:

> of course you're right, i would agree with you that these are 
> inseparable
> elements, but I was thinking more of the focus of a work and whether a
> work hides its process or not.

well, i guess i feel that while innate, process should be immaterial
to the work. be it a painting or an improv sound piece (i do both)
i'd rather the viewer concentrate on the work. granted, analysis is
interesting (and fun) but ultimately (and idealistically) i hope the
viewer loses themselves in the work instead of getting caught up
in an analytical mindset. not that that ever happens, of course... ;-)

> it's clear that you can't make without
> process but for the process rather than product being the reason for
> undertaking a creative act is something i find quite interesting. The
> enjoyment of doing or being rather than having.

hmmm, process/product in my mind becomes one in the creative act.
how could it be otherwise? i have been interested in ephemeral acts
of creation and also in the production of "traditional" works of two-
dimensional art. you do and then you have, whatever it is. inescapable
timeline.

> intent was certainly the
> key for cage and duchamp and that was interesting then for historical 
> and
> political reasons but that was over 50 years ago.

or 50 years ahead of its time?


bruce tovsky
www.skeletonhome.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org