[NetBehaviour] Code Is Not Literature
Pall Thayer
pallthay at gmail.com
Mon Jan 27 08:29:41 CET 2014
I don't understand. What should we be looking for in Shakespear's writing?
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 2:10 AM, Alan Sondheim <sondheim at panix.com> wrote:
>
> Look at Einstein's original papers on relativity for one thing.
> But Shakespeare is a red herring; how many writers would bear the
> comparison?
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014, Bishop Zareh wrote:
>
> If the code read as well as Shakespeare then there would be no question
>> that
>> it is literature; I think their question is: is it likely that mathematics
>> can be so eloquently conveyed as to warrant literary analysis.
>>
>> Bz
>>
>> ??? Sent Mobile ???
>>
>>
>> On Jan 26, 2014, at 9:07 PM, Pall Thayer <pallthay at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Don't get me wrong, Alan, I value your opinion and always feel
>> that you give very interesting input into these sorts of
>> discussions. True, we don't know Emily Dickinson's intent but we
>> do know that she presented herself as a literary figure and can
>> assume her intent from there. Likewise, we know what Duchamp
>> presented himself as before the urinal and can view that work
>> within that context. Should we not do the same with code? If a
>> coder has not presented in a way that the code is worth reading,
>> then we assume that it's not worth reading. However, if they
>> have... then it should be essential reading, no? Anything else
>> would be like a painter saying, "Look at my use of color..." and
>> then regarding black and white photos of his paintings. No?
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 9:51 PM, Alan Sondheim <sondheim at panix.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> If you find it absurd, actually there's no way to argue
>> with that.
>>
>> Ok, it's absurd. As I keep saying, it's a family of
>> usages, everyone has different opinions; you and I aren't
>> going to come to an agreement, again by a long shot! :-)
>>
>> - Alan
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Jan 2014, Pall Thayer wrote:
>>
>> #!/usr/bin/perl
>> package absurd;
>> sub new {
>> $this = new absurd();
>> }
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 9:11 PM, Pall Thayer
>> <pallthay at gmail.com> wrote:
>> A lot of this makes no sense to me. It
>> sounds like people are
>> taking things at face value without
>> considering the multitude of
>> scenarios. Paintbrushes, staples or
>> nails are as likely to
>> become significant elements of a work of
>> art as a urinal(!),
>> depending on the artist's intent. Trying
>> to comment on any of
>> these in a single sentence or even
>> paragraph is absurd. As is
>> the attempt to analyze whether or not
>> code is literature or not.
>> The fact that it's code does not make it
>> literature. The fact
>> that words are contained within a book
>> does not make it
>> literature. It depends on the intent. We
>> could produce a book
>> that contains an alphabetical listing of
>> all known brand names
>> in the world and release it under
>> different contexts. One could
>> be issued as a reference manual, the
>> other could be released as
>> a poem. These would be viewed very
>> differently. Likewise, we
>> could take a photo of a bicycle and
>> publish the same photo in
>> several different ways. One could warn
>> of the dangers of
>> cycling. Another could promote the
>> benefits of cycling. A third
>> could be devoted to the aesthetics of
>> the bicycle itself.
>> Some code is intended to be read. And that
>> doesn't necessarily draw
>> from its performance. It may be that a reading
>> of the code provides
>> one message while the running of it provides
>> another. Perhaps
>> experiencing both will better inform the work.
>> I don't know. It
>> doesn't really matter.
>>
>> My primary message is that wondering whether
>> code is literature or not
>> is absurd. It may or may not be. But to
>> attempt to present any
>> argument that may indicate that you feel it
>> might not be, is absurd.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Rob Myers
>> <rob at robmyers.org> wrote:
>> On 26/01/14 03:14 PM, Alan Sondheim
>> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 26 Jan 2014, Rob Myers wrote:
>> >> Reading Mezangelle is like running code to
>> debug it -
>> watching call
>> >> stack frames being pushed and popped and
>> data being created
>> and operated
>> >> on. You have to keep track of nested
>> contexts and back
>> references. Each
>> >> new word fragment or piece of punctuation
>> can operate on and
>> transform
>> >> the previously read elements. Even when
>> you've parsed
>> Mezangelle it's
>> >> unstable and active, whether it reduces to
>> a singular meaning
>> or is more
>> >> ambiguous. This is different from
>> 1337-style encoding.
>> >>
>> > True, but it's not that different from the
>> waves that occurs
>> in more
>> > traditional poetry. You're not debugging
>> Mezangelle and you're
>> not
>> > running it; you're interpreting it and one
>> person's
>> interpretation is
>> > different from anothers (which is also true
>> btw of antiorp and
>> poetry).
>> > Also you're assuming a stability in 1337
>> which might not be
>> there.
>>
>> I agree that traditional poetry obviously has
>> structure and
>> flow, and
>> can transform meaning over the course of being
>> read with great
>> subtlety
>> or degree. I do think that the nature of the
>> re-reading and
>> re-thinking
>> that Mezangelle requires and affords via its
>> syntax is more
>> compact than
>> plain language poetry. And that this
>> compactness of notation is
>> a
>> quality of some kinds of code.
>>
>> Some programming languages are interpreted and
>> it's obviously
>> possible
>> for two runs of a program to give different
>> output. In this
>> sense there
>> are different interpretations of the same text
>> when interpreted
>> by
>> computer, as there are when interpreted by a
>> human being. I'm
>> certainly
>> not arguing that Mezangelle is Meme RNA, but I
>> think these
>> comparisons
>> are useful.
>>
>> I can't speak to antiorp. :-( I shall
>> investigate, thank you.
>>
>> 1337 is inherently ironic but it's also very
>> much a shared joke
>> and
>> shibboleth for cliques. It involves much play
>> but is more
>> instrumental.
>>
>> >> Regarding Seibel's comments on code as
>> literature, James
>> makes a good
>> >> point about paintbrushes. We don't read
>> shopping lists or
>> meeting notes
>> >> as literature, yet they are written. Code
>> does not tend to be
>> written as
>> >> literature. It's possible to read code for
>> pleasure and to
>> find its
>> >> formatting and data structures, its *form*,
>> aesthetically
>> satisfying.
>> >> Code is mathematics, so this is similar to
>> enjoying a
>> mathematical proof.
>> >
>> > Here I do disagree with you; reading-as is
>> something that at
>> least I,
>> > and I assume many others do (just as such
>> lists were read by
>> Braudel as-
>> > history). Example - I'm currently reading
>> Walsh's Mercantile
>> Aritmetic,
>> > published in Newbury, Mass, in 1800 - which
>> is just what the
>> title says,
>> > but which reads like a fantastic epic,
>> especially the sections
>> dealing
>> > with monetary exchange (I might quote later,
>> because the
>> writing is
>> > amazing).
>>
>> Reading-as is closer to Siebel's concern. I
>> greatly enjoy the
>> lists in
>> (for example) the Cornelius Quartet, "The Sale
>> Of The Late
>> King's Goods"
>> or "JPod". And there may be a program listing
>> out there waiting
>> to be
>> discovered as literature. But I'm doubtful of
>> this for reasons
>> of what I
>> guess are "family resemblance".
>>
>> We could go Situationist and simply nominate a
>> particular
>> listing as a
>> novel, but this would I think be different
>> from what we are
>> discussing here.
>>
>> > I also am not sure that "Code is
>> mathematics" just because
>> it's exact;
>> > certainly at the level of machine language,
>> it follows strict
>> protocols.
>>
>> "Software is math" is a core argument in the
>> non-patentability
>> of software:
>>
>> "When people say that software is math, they
>> mean that in the
>> most
>> direct, literal sense." -
>>
>> http://www.forbes.com/sites/timothylee/2011/08/11/
>> software-is-just-math-rea
>>
>> lly/
>>
>> > Mathematical proofs and proof theory are
>> complicated - look
>> atthe
>> > 4-color theorem - and I find code-reading
>> very different. But
>> then I'm
>> > neither an astute mathematician or
>> programmer.
>>
>> Code can be very complex as well, I've never
>> read the whole of
>> the Linux
>> kernel for example. I don't know the proof for
>> the 4-colour
>> theorem but
>> I enjoy the proofs of set theory and find that
>> mathematics, art
>> and code
>> have a shared concern with some kind of
>> *form*, and some kind of
>> *aesthetic* governing it, whatever their other
>> differences.
>>
>> >> I think that a piece of software that is a)
>> structured like
>> Emacs to be
>> >> self-editing or at least self-revealing of
>> its code and is b)
>> >> constructed to use this facility
>> essayistically or
>> discursively or
>> >> narratively is what would be required for
>> code to be
>> literature. Char
>> >> Davies' "Osmose" is a weak example
>> (whatever its other
>> strengths) of
>> >> this.
>> >>
>> > I really do think there's any sort of
>> "requirement" involved,
>> maybe
>> > part-requirements like part-objects, or
>> something along the
>> line of
>> > "tendencies"; I'm extremely dubious of
>> requirements in
>> relation to art
>> > in general - even the idea that
>> art/literature, etc. _should_
>> be
>> > something as opposed to something else.
>> Aesthetics and reading
>> > behaviors, reception theory and the like, is
>> far more complex
>> than this.
>>
>> Again I don't think it's easy to go further
>> than family
>> resemblance in
>> the ontology of art.
>>
>> >> But I may be proposing a gentrification of
>> code.art. Or
>> discussing the
>> >> equivalent of why nails and staples aren't
>> considered more
>> important in
>> >> the social history of painting. ;-)
>> >
>> > Well they are important, and there are books
>> that emphasize
>> things like
>> > the chemistry of paints etc. - I relate this
>> again to Braudel
>> and the
>> > annales school of historiography.
>>
>> I've just read "Color, Facture, Art And
>> Design" (highly
>> recommended)
>> which is largely a history of grounds and
>> pigments and how they
>> relate
>> to the social content of painting. This kind
>> of
>> technical-conceptual
>> integration, is what I am arguing for in this
>> discussion.
>>
>> I chose staples and nails because their
>> relative volume in the
>> material
>> and significant construction of painting
>> supports is generally
>> low and
>> contingent. My point was that we have to
>> consider the
>> possibility that
>> code, and I say this as someone almost
>> ridiculously invested in
>> the idea
>> that art can be made with or of code, may not
>> be strongly
>> relevant in
>> the critique art made with it.
>>
>> - Rob.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *****************************
>> Pall Thayer
>> artist
>> http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
>> *****************************
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *****************************
>> Pall Thayer
>> artist
>> http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
>> *****************************
>>
>>
>>
>> ==
>> email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/
>> web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 347-383-8552
>> music: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/
>> current text http://www.alansondheim.org/si.txt
>> ==
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *****************************
>> Pall Thayer
>> artist
>> http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
>> *****************************
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>>
>>
>>
> ==
> email archive http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/
> web http://www.alansondheim.org / cell 347-383-8552
> music: http://www.espdisk.com/alansondheim/
> current text http://www.alansondheim.org/si.txt
> ==
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
--
*****************************
Pall Thayer
artist
http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
*****************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20140127/ead851ee/attachment.htm>
More information about the NetBehaviour
mailing list