[NetBehaviour] Code Is Not Literature
BishopZ
xchicago at gmail.com
Mon Jan 27 18:26:25 CET 2014
Well yes, I can be prone to both red herrings and McCarthy-esque
oversimplification *smirk*. Sometimes I feel the subject requires
interrogation.
Aside from all that, I have had very poetic experiences with
mathematical proofs. Goedel is the first to mind, but others too.
There are moments when the rigor of the proof and lyrical way it is
portrayed combine to simultaneously express a linguistic beauty and a
literal truth - expressing beauty for both human interpretation and
formal logic (as compilers).
The logical standards we hold mathematics up to, seem rare in
literature (i am probably wrong here) - almost antithetical to the
freedom of fantastical imagination we celebrate in many authors (eg.
stream of consciousness). Yet, not dissimilar to the rigor of iambic
pentameter.
This relation between the standards of logical interpretation in
mathematical proofs and the literal insight it provides is what
interests me most here. PERL poetry and the like tend to be kitsch,
and rarely express anything interesting on the computing side. It is
usually bad poetry and in my experience, always bad code.
Instead of Shakespeare, how about Stephen King? Anyone remember the
"call heard around the world" in Lawnmower Man? The Lawnmower Man
existed as a hyper-being or virtual-being, thus his language and code
were mixed, but more than that…
He threatened to speak a phrase that would be both the source code to
call every telephone on the planet, and the words delivered to those
that answered their phone. In the novel, this utterance combined
computational and psychological effect - cross-compiling for both
brains and routers.
Of course this is fictional, and there are lots of fictional accounts
of "mind viruses" and the like, but we can look at multiple overlaps
here:
[1] written code increasing adopting natural language as it's form
(Behavior-driven development, cucumber),
[2] programming languages increasing abstracting away from lower-level
machinic operations, constantly increasing the computational power and
functional sophistication of shorter and shorter code blocks
(gentrification perhaps),
[3] physical manifestations of virtual computing power (ala new
aesthetic) collapsing the differences between the physical and the
virtual, especially in terms of what is "real",
[4] a kind of literary collapsing, as information technologies affect
our vernacular, shift our mythologies, re-make what it is to be poetic
(towards aphorism perhaps), etc,
[5] and a psycho-social collapsing, where physical (distance),
cultural and linguistic differences become smaller and smaller,
globally.
As we humans transition from using code to control electrical
circuits, to computing machines, to information technologies, we also
transitioning code expression (or network expression) into the wording
of behavior, events and actions, yet still satisfying the requirements
of mathematics and each layer beneath. And, in the best case, creating
literary and cultural relevance, in both wording and function.
So yeah, Wittgenstein and and the psycho-geographic/performative stuff
seems most on point to me. Better than taking a overly machinic or
codified view. I do think it is about holding the work up to
standards, multiple standards. Compiling and Executing the code is
merely the beginning, and for the code to be as high quality as
Faulkner, it is going to need more that good math and a clever
punchline.
imo, bz
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Alan Sondheim <sondheim at panix.com> wrote:
>
> Is this to me? I have no idea; this is Bishop's comparison. If he means
> elegance or eloquence or classicism, which is what I assume he means, then
> Einstein fits the bill. I don't particularly like Shakespeare myself.
>
> - Alan
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014, Pall Thayer wrote:
>
>> 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-jus
>> t-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
>> *****************************
>>
>>
>
> ==
> 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
--
------------------------------------------------------
Design After Next, design technology
>> http://www.designAfterNext.com
-------------------------------------------------------
More information about the NetBehaviour
mailing list