[NetBehaviour] a new Microcode: Vito Acconci's 'Seedbed'

[Pall Thayer]

That's why we need computers. Sometimes we're just too human.

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 3:04 PM, james morris<james at jwm-art.net> wrote:
>
> On 3/7/2009, "Pall Thayer" <pallthay at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>The most difficult part of conceptual art is sticking to your concept.
>
> i'm only human.
>
>
>
>>On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 2:20 PM, james morris<james at jwm-art.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Pall,
>>>
>>> I've got to admit that I've had trouble too, understanding your
>>> MicroCodes. Sometimes I think I get it, other times I read what you've
>>> written and think I've been misunderstanding.
>>>
>>> The formal interpretation of code is instinctive when I view it, so
>>> trying to read code as something else, to value my human interpretation
>>> almost cut off from the formal meaning is really quite difficult that it
>>> just does not happen.
>>>
>>> Consequently my response is (or can be) almost blind to a human response,
>>> and involves elaborating upon the code. I always want code to do more,
>>> for the computer's interpretation of it put into action, to be
>>> satisfying for the viewer. So I don't think you're being stubborn, as
>>> although the concept is quite simple, it can be difficult to hold in
>>> ones mind, so stubborn repetition is quite useful.
>>>
>>>
>>> james.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/7/2009, "Pall Thayer" <pallthay at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi Alan,
>>>>I'm probably just being overly stubborn to make a point. Of course the
>>>>idea of the "Seedbed" code is to play around with the dual meaning in
>>>>the line "touch $myself". And if I understand you correctly you're
>>>>simply pointing out the ways in which words and images evoke emotional
>>>>responses even though whatever mediates the words and/or images is
>>>>itself incapable of such emotional responses. This is just our way of
>>>>understanding things. We attempt, maybe even at a subconscious level,
>>>>to apply whatever is being mediated to our own selves (or someone
>>>>else's) to see how that affects us. But the interesting thing is that
>>>>whereas we usually see programming code as something to be interpreted
>>>>by a computer and then we interpret that interpretation, in this case
>>>>(and in fact this is the underlying concept of the Microcodes in
>>>>general) our interpretation of the code elicits a much stronger, more
>>>>meaningful response than an interpretation of the computer's
>>>>interpretation of the code. This is something I want people to
>>>>consider and be aware of, that's why I'm being so stubborn. I'm sure
>>>>there are people out there who experience some discomfort in reading
>>>>the "Seedbed" code. Some might even feel embarrassed, turned on,
>>>>ashamed or all of the above. If I didn't want people to feel this way
>>>>I wouldn't have associated it with "Seedbed". But I hope that they
>>>>will take the time to discover what the words as computer code really
>>>>mean and see the absurdity of it all.
>>>>
>>>>best r.
>>>>Pall
>>> ....
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>*****************************
>>Pall Thayer
>>artist
>>http://www.this.is/pallit
>>*****************************
>>_______________________________________________
>>NetBehaviour mailing list
>>NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>>http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>



-- 
*****************************
Pall Thayer
artist
http://www.this.is/pallit
*****************************