[-empyre-] Re:it's the flow through
Well that¹s one way to get a lurker onto the printed page quote her. Hello
Jim, hello everyone.
I really think that in the case of the French artists, programming
facilitates; they know the programming language (Lingo). One of them has
said that he can speak it as well as his native French. Which means to me
that the programming operates more like an open door, allowing the artists
energies to flow through it and create an experience for the hungry user.
But neither energy nor experience originate there.
Rather (I think) they derive from ³a collaboration between mind and heart²
(Nikos Kazantzakis), an integration that then because of an almost perfect
use of the new language allows its energy to flow through the work, making
an experience possible for the user/audience. Those who write well; or
sing well, who have learned to use their talents so they flow through the
technologies of choice are the ones who create experiences for us. (the
writing, the singing, the multi-media work) ..
I yearn for this on the net. And do believe that among the young -- those
who have grown up speaking these language in their art, we are beginning to
on 5/2/03 8:28 AM, email@example.com at
> Send empyre mailing list submissions to
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of empyre digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 1. RE: Welcome Jim Andrews re: Electronic Poetry (Jim Andrews)
> 2. Re: reticence (geniwate)
> 3. Re: this is Knotted & strangled :: (][mez][)
> 4. RE: reticence (Jim Andrews)
> 5. Re: this is Knotted & strangled :: (fizzion)
> 6. Re: Welcome Jim Andrews re: Electronic Poetry (fizzion)
> 7. Re: Welcome Jim Andrews re: Electronic Poetry (Patrick Lichty)
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 03:30:49 -0700
> From: Jim Andrews <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Subject: RE: [-empyre-] Welcome Jim Andrews re: Electronic Poetry
> To: soft_skinned_space <email@example.com>
> Message-ID: <NFBBJIJOOLLMOMMACKAFMEPDFAAA.firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252
> hi john,
> after I posted and thought more about your interesting comments on 'energy and
> art', I wanted to
> add the term 'experiential' to the relevant terms in that poetics. In her
> introduction to Paris
> Connection (http://turbulence.org/curators/Paris/introthoringtonenglish.htm ),
> Helen Thorington
> remarked about the work of the six French artists that "What you get with
> these artists is an
> experience". It is 'experiential' in various ways. Helen says:
> "There is a huge difference, a friend recently remarked, between learning and
> experiencing. What
> you get with these artists is an experience. And it?s easy. This, by the way,
> is a compliment.
> In a medium where work can so easily exhaust you with complications, overload
> you with
> information, take so much time to navigate that you end up, metaphorically at
> least, tearing
> your hair out in frustration, here are simple works that use the medium, are
> easily accessible
> and in which one can sense both the presence of the artists (still) and their
> human concerns.
> ?Simple things are often beautiful! No?" (Durieu)
> Yes they are."
> I would add that the 'energy' of the 'experience' is, in part, owing to
> superior programming.
> That said, one should add that the contributions from the other artists are
> also superior. See
> how they dovetail into collaborations of n-1 dimensions. The arts and
> programming are in
> relatively strong relation in this work, particularly in the work of Schmitt,
> Durieu, Lamarque,
> and servovalve. Clauss understands how to synthesize media types in some ways,
> and also his
> content is photographically more rich than the others; he paints with Director
> inks and
> processes, and the content has often been called "poetical" though written
> language is often not
> central or is absent altogether. Poetical? Howso? Well, not simply in the
> lyric, but in the
> 'language' of his interactive motion pictures.
> An 'energy'. An 'experience'. An 'interaction'. A 'collaboration'. A
>>>> We are embodied and it is essential to our world view, to our joy, our
>>>> our vulnerability, our hopes, life, and death. If we lose 'touch' with our
>>>> embodiment we lose touch with ourselves and with others and their pain and
>>>> joys, and hopes and aspirations, our shared mortality. And thereby also our
>>>> wisdom, empathy, self understanding, and breath.
>> this posting moved me to the following brief -- not directly on
>> topic, but as it indirectly/directly applies to many posts in
>> principle, here goes...
>> Embodiment -- seems still to be totally bound to a materialistic view
>> of the world -- as are much of the commentary so far. A much more
>> accurate tool for mapping is to move beyond
>> Newtonian/materialistic/mechanistic ways of modeling the noumenal
>> would (including our selves) and apply some Quantum/Taoist & other
>> models (for brevities sake, although this issue does take LONG
>> dialogue to get to the principles of, more than can be allowed here,
>> and is NOT bound to those particular modeling systems, just using
>> them as possible starting points)...
>> If one takes a reduced interpretation of Quantum and looks at touch,
>> for example, touch becomes the energized interaction between two
>> states of a universal energy field. the two 'objects' coming into
>> (cartesian) contact merely expressions of that universal field in
>> different energized conditions...
>> Much further along this line, an art 'object' is (nothing more than )
>> a difference in energy 'condition' (language is woefully short, as is
>> contemporary mathematics to accurately model this energized
>> universe). From this point of view, taking my embodied energy state
>> (I am a being of energy), I use energy to transform, change the
>> states of regions around me (impossible to get away from Cartesian
>> language!), and allow those changed regions re-radiate to the Other,
>> to be received as 'inspiration' (or not). The actual mediated 'form'
>> (a now-defunct word in this system) is, literally, immaterial.
>> Whether I use a painting or 20000 km of cable, mouse, screen,
>> processor, and keyboard (AND electric energy). The crux is how I
>> gather my energy together, focus it in attentive and concentrated
>> measure to leap the abyss from the Self to the Other with that
>> energy. NOT the materialist form, that is an obsolete way to model
>> the exchange!
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 16:20:10 +1000
> From: geniwate <email@example.com>
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] reticence
> To: soft_skinned_space <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Message-ID: <BAD84B3A.29C6email@example.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> hi Jim
> as always I read your posts with interest.
>> What was that project, geniwate?
> My GPS project entailed data from the Gammon Ranges in northern south
> Australia, which I used to explore issues of landscape among other things.
>> What are the venues you're using now?
> Well, papers and artworks - I'm being very old-fashioned, but the fact is, I
> can't properly get my head around the ephemerality of email; it makes me not
> want to put the sort of effort into writing about complex ideas in a post;.
> . .email just doesn't seem like a place where I want to do hard work,
> especially when I have so many other things I have to write.
> Given that empyre is a list with certain presumptions that there will be a
> low noise ratio (which I wouldn't have any other way; I have a very short
> fuse with half-baked posts these days), I cannot personally find the time to
> put into researching minor articles to post to the list (unless I could
> combine that research and writing with some other purpose, I guess)
> (Perhaps some empyreans think that I should not be on empyre?; this textual
> gift economy that i'm not complying to. . .)
> that said, Jim, your forthcoming topic may get a spark outta me,
> particularly since I spend all my days programming multiple levels of
> textuality - what I think we need is a new linguistics, to go with a
> phenomenological analysis; a linguistics that copes with the network and
> multiple, interconnected textualities; that can provide us with some
> structural tools without fading into a mixture of mathematics, physics and
> mysticism . . .
> anyway, that's what I think about when i'm not killing monsters in Diablo II
>> empyre forum
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and