PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

yes but then we don't call it art.art is for sale.

if it's not for sale it's "just" singing or painting(or sculpting or...),something considered by most at best folly and at worst insanity.....

BUT of one can explain one's self with a great "theory",then it becomes "genius".....

art is a funny thing:
in painting and sculpturing big public attention is required - in music it is to be avoided

I don't think one can judge about oneself's creations being 'art' - that's always related to other people's reaction.
And in fact a rather chaotic process, too.

Chaos isn't arbitrary, there are rules - and math is more than calculus tortures at school.
In that way algorithmic composition is a very natural way of doing things, but as usual not all algorithms are created equal.

There are lots of similiarities in different expressions of the mind.
As a scientist I wouldn't say 'of the brain' because that makes a self-referenced proof and as such isn't considered valid.

my 2 cents, Tom

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: braincell on 2003-09-04 11:28 ]</font>

good points astroman! heeheeeheee

And very good point, braincell as well!

On 2003-09-02 17:58, wavelength wrote:
this brings us, once again, to the ultimate question, which is: can anything and everything be art?

if noise and music are the same, then is the artist redundant? is art only important in the interpretation and not the expression? the result and not the process? the response without intention?

my statement above was directed at this general question of a common definition of art, but left out the personal aspects Ken and Wavelenght both mention.

Of course 'art' is a valid description for one's personal activities, as long as it doesn't include an elitarist attitude - though that would probably help tremendously in selling whatever the person does
Passion is also very important for that kind of activities, and the acceptance of a possibly 'useless' state of being just for the sake of it's existence.
I've been heavily impressed by both the soundtrack Ken did for the Finnish dance performance and by Wavelength's sound devices and presets.
Imho both kinds of works reflect true artistry - but still that final question is unsolved

cheers, Tom

Eliam:

I think you posted something about me being full of hate and how I need to find bliss?

If I was full of bliss I would not get anything done. Bliss reminds me of a guru sitting cross legged with a big stupid smile on his face. This is not me. Not to be judgemental but since you had to take it to a personal level I feel I have to respond.

I mean no harm, brother, I just want everyone to be happy, that's all... When I see people get mad I just want to cheer them up with no malice... If you think that bliss means being stupid and doing nothing, then its your opinion, but it's all the contrary... I don't know why you seem to rebel against anything which refers even remotely with spirituality, but I find it unfortunate... Anyway, that's none of my business, I never had any hard feelings towards you, I wish you only happiness as to everyone else...

I feel that despite the fact that we all seem to be talking about the same thing, we are not... I mean, Art it's a very subjective topic, and everyone has a differnet understunding about it.

I personaly think that an expression to be called Art, must pass the test of some rather exigent values: beauty for instance, balance, sense, meaning, etc. So for me, not everything is Art, not at all.

I understand that we people, need to express ourselves, and this is a matter of sanity, it truly IS important to express what you feel, now and then... or you risck to get ill... fisically or psychologycally.

Well, there are thousands of people saying that Art is just that, expressing your emotions. But if you are drunk in the street and you "feel" angry and you start screeming about, you actually are exopressing yourself, but it would be difficult to say this is Art.

So, first of all, I would like to know WHICH are the attributes you give to Art. I would like to reach some agreement about WHAT Art is before continuing talking because I can see that it is not clear, and everybody is speaking about something different, through the same name.

The word Art brings by itself some rather magestic feelings to me, I'm talking about the concept itself. I feel it is something very respecfull and full of sense and deepness.

I remember a concert on Free Jazz, which was very interesting, but it didn't reach the status of being Art. There were more than 50 musicians directed by a quite violent director who aggressed the public with very dirty ways... At the same time, there was a group or dancers and it was such a dissorder that I would call i chaos, but certainly not Art. It was entertaining, it was fun, it was crazy, but it was not Art. It didn't teach anytyhing, you cound not feel any great emotion, in fact, emotions would be rather bizare.

I think that we reach, if you want, just some percentage of Art in our works and most of the time, we are not even close to it.

I do relate Art to inspiration and hard work both toguether. I think you need something "special" to go on within yourself, some spark of light within your heart, and then you need to be somebody able to take away your own lazyness so you really work hard to get the best out of your inspiration.

The following values are for me basic to consider anything to be Art:

Spontaneous, Natural Inspiration.
Sense of Balance.
Inborn Meaning.
Objective Expression of Feelings.
Beauty.
Intelligence.
Sincerity.

If some human expression has it all, and on plus it's deep in its sense, it is for me a great Work of Art.

I don't think I have expressed what I trully think about Art completely, but this is pretty close I think.

What something has to have for you to be Art?

there.

(in an arty kinda way)

Great contribution...

Eliam,

Most people take it for granted that their is a higher spirit and this is not accidental. Parents instill this in you at an early age and there are many organized religions.

Atheists on the other hand are not so organized. We normally shut up and we don't go to Africa to convert the heathens either. Maybe this is because we are a minority and feel threatened. When the president of the United States says god is on our side in the invasion of Iraq, or when Ronald Reagan was thinking of a nuclear war against Russia to fulfill the biblical prophecy of Armageddon, then someone has to stand up and yell stop! The king has no pants!



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: braincell on 2003-09-05 16:14 ]</font>

And how does this relate to algorhythmic composition? hmmmm?

On the tangent of the possibility of a computer being spiritual. It's a mute point!

I must agree with you that human beings have often done unthinkable absurdities in the name of religion. On that we agree.

Funnily enough, I was raised in a family who believes there is no God and I really thought I believed it too, until I absorbed high doses of hallucinogen mushrooms. Then I understood there is something powerful beyond the usual "physical reality" that most people experience...

But do not try this at home please, because it is dangerous, I could have never come back from some experiences I had... But I can understand that people mix everything up, like God and organized religions, which have nothing to do with each other. You know, it's not because someone does something "in the name of Allah" that Allah has anything to do with it... If an action is constructive, then I believe it is in accord with the Cosmic Laws of Harmony and that action will bring desirable results (more happiness, supply or whatever is needed). If an action is driven by hate and intolerance, then whatever the doer might say about it, this action will cause harm to Life and bring unhappiness to that person and possibly other persons. You see, that's how my spirituality works: only down to Earth good sense, cause and effect, nothing mystical. I want world peace to manifest, I want all the world's children to have food, clothing and shelter, I want everyone to be loved, cherished and appreciated for what they are, and so on. I think any straight thinking person will agree with me, and I know that this is also the will of the Cosmic Intelligence which we call God.

Oh, yes... Algorythmic composition is great!

my favourite book title is 'Zen - or the art of programming a Macintosh', just the title, not the content. In fact I did never read it

But I remember times when programming had indeed a very spiritual aspect on me.
Something like diving into another world, the program appeared as a space one could design and also virtually 'move around' in.

A true process of creation and a program may have indeed the ability of reacting far more 'human' and even spiritually (if you are able to define spirituality) than common experience of business programming suggests. It doesn't have to end as Ken described in the example of his trance engine.

There is the concept of self-modifying code, which means a program has a kind of compiler built in, which can continue to reprogram or extend the code at runtime due to changing conditions. It may even build up somthing we call experience.
In laguages like C and Assembler that's fairly difficult to implement and the above mentioned 'Zen' comes pretty close to the state of mind required to master that task.
But the program would be limited only by the sophistication of the algorithm.

I mentioned the Prolog language above in the thread because it's one of the few tools to ease that process and allows to achieve something usable in time - the low level approach is more of academic interest.

On the other hand I'm clearly against trying to mimic (or even compare) the activity of our grey matter with a sequence of bits.
That's ridiculous, given the 2 states a bit can represent compared with the vast amount of combinations that proteins can 'store'.

cheers, Tom

I guess drugs really do damage the brain

You think a chemical induced hallucination proves anything? I have often thought that the great profits had brain damage either of genetic or environmental cause. It's really amazing how many people are so gullible as long as you speak with confidence.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: braincell on 2003-09-06 17:50 ]</font>

Do you refer to toxic substances doing physical damage, like cocaine - or the psychological state after hallucinogenes, like LSD or mushrooms ?

While the latter ones have hardly any physical effects, there can indeed be severe influences on the way of thinking.
But those could as well be triggered by consumption of literture (I have a scientific book on my shelf with an explicite warning in that direction) or any mental exercise (i.e. meditation).

As far as we know any process in our central nerve system is chemically induced and controlled.
Our receiption of our surrounding is highly depending on signal filtering to make us functioning in a certain way and survive.
You can by no way tell if your view or Eliam's is the 'truth' because you both just applied a different set of glasses.

A drug-free example: I'm a true fan of spiders, and I frequently watch them, preferably at the flowers of the kitchen window seat, when they're doing their job and build a net etc.
They don't take any notice of me, at least their behaviour doesn't show a reaction and according to regular science they don't even have the ability to recognize my presence.
I simply don't fit in their world - yet we're both there, or don't we ?

cheers, Tom

Hallucinogenic drugs are a means to an end: they can open your mind to different states of consciousness in much the way that meditation can. I know several people who meditate regularly and I can tell you that it is a very real and drug-free way of experiencing something higher than our plane of existence. And these aren't just deluded hippies or something.. they are without exception the most happy and inspirational people I know. It is very easy to be derogatory about *anything*, especially if you refuse or are too afraid to try them.

I know that you will no doubt rip this apart in your matter-of-fact approach Braincell, and it is not my job to convice you. However, I sincerely advise you to stay open to things instead of banishing from possibility anything that might make you have to rethink your established theories on life. Life is so much cooler when you are not so insecure about shaking up your worldview to be totally blinkered to new things.

peace

In the past I have had many hallucinations. Many enjoyable ones. It's fun sometimes to let your brain go out of control if you are the kind of person who can handle it. I never talked with god once or had any feeling that there is a god. The Escher like repetitious images of Jesus on the piano I felt could have been George Harrison.

Did I see the walls breath?

Yes!

Do I submit this as proof that walls are living?

No!