On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 00:48 -0300, Marcos Guglielmetti wrote: > [notes from the translator - Fernando Lopez-Lezcano: there are a few > words missing in the translation and I apologize for typos, also, this > article is a comment on another article written by someone actually > present at the conference, I think, the original url is at the bottom of > this commentary] > > Translation follows (accuracy _not_ guaranteed :-) > > Let the fun begin :-) [as has been noted in this thread already these arguments date back a long time and have appeared whenever something completely different[*] appears in scene - I'm not saying anything here is "completely new" but you get the point, still, I'll bite and add something :-] [*] oh well, or even "slightly different" > On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 00:48 -0300, Marcos Guglielmetti wrote: > > > Nuevamente la -a mí parecer- exagerada esperanza en el ruido, el optimismo un > > tanto ridículo por la creatividad que tienen las máquinas, lo cual esconde, > > creo yo, una bancarrota estético-compositiva en ciertos grupos, en ciertas > > escuelas, en ciertas academias, en ciertas ideologías que pretenden que lo > > único importante en materia artística es innovar, cuando quizá lo > > verdaderamente importante sea 1º expresar lo que uno desea, 2º pasar un buen > > momento. > > Again - to me - the exagerated hope in the noise, the somewhat > ridiculous optimism in the creativity of machines, who hides, I think, a > stetical and compositive bankrupcy in certain schools, certain > academies, certain ideologies that pretend that the only thing important > in artistic matters is to innovate, when perhaps the really important > stuff would be 1st express what one wants to say, 2nd have a good time. > ... [MUNCH] > ... > > En una sociedad industrializada en la que la creatividad fue pasando desde los > > hombres y mujeres hacia las máquinas, no está nada mal tener un control > > potencialmente total sobre las mismas utilizando Software Libre, pero de > > algún modo es un poco hacerle el juego al sistema de producción industrial > > alienante dejar en manos de las máquinas casi toda la creatividad artística. > > In an industrialized society in which creativity has been transfering > from men and women to machines, it is not a bad idea to have potentially > complete control over them using Free Software, but it is in some way > also to play the game of the alienating industrial production system > that leaves in the hands of machines most of the artistic creativity. You seem to think artists are actually delegating creativity to machines. How so? Could you give some examples? Perhaps there are composers out there that rely on the "creativity of machines", but I presume there are actually not that many. At least in my music I don't rely on something that I think does not exist :-) I do use (sometimes) algorithms to generate statistical stuff where merely aggregating notes by hand would not make sense and stuff like that. Hardly delegating "creativity". Algorithms and computers (well used) can be triggers of creativity if you are listening to what you try to do and spot "mistakes" that may point to stuff you would never have tried on your own. Other composers that were at LAC2007 may want to comment on this as well. [just fanning the flames here :-] Obviously all the email threads we can write boil down to an ultimate "show me the music", echoing the lkml (Linux Kernel Mailing List) "show me the code" motto. And as you say, time will tell. Some of the so called music (ha ha ha) will die, some will be remembered either through genius or accident, and maybe _not_ what we would choose today to be remembered :-) We just do our art as well as we can and that should (but never is) enough. > > Nótese que el cronista habla de "es un mundo algo inhóspito", sin melodías, ni > > más ni menos que el microcentro de Buenos Aires, por ejemplo. ¿Por qué > > duplicar ese ruido? > > Note that the guy who writes talks about a "a somewhat inhospitable > world", without melodies, no more or less than the downtown area in > Buenos Aires, for example. Why duplicate that noise? > > > Personalmente pienso que la música llamada "contemporánea", y en particular > > esa que se basa en llamar música al ruido, no hace más que trasladar el ruido > > de las ciudades (autos, motos, aviones, etc.) a los instrumentos y > > presentarlo si fuera música... sin ir más lejos, una caminata por el centro > > de mi ciudad sería un gran concierto para toda esta generación de músicos > > revolucionarios... > > I personally think that the so called "contemporary" music, and > particularly that which is based in calling noise music, does not do > more than move the noise of cities (cars, motorcycles, planes, etc.) to > instruments and present them as music... a walk through my city's > downtown would be a great concert to this generation of revolutionary > musicians... Ha, it actually could be if your ears are open. And sorry to say, I'm not even close to being revolutionary :-) You should listen to Francisco Kropfl's "Metropolis" (if I remember the name and other particulars right). It is exactly that, a 40 minute long city soundscape of, guess what, Buenos Aires. Maybe you have listened to it already and it did not touch you. In my case it riveted me to my seat for the duration, most of the time with a smile in my face. My memory of it is that of a powerful and emotionally evocative trip, tugging at my insides all the time. Superbly crafted as well. Obviously the emotional impact to someone not from Buenos Aires would be less... To me that piece was/is art. Art like that is not merely a duplication of the noise. It is a directed reinterpretation. With a purpose and large scale forms. Of course it _could_ be bad and just a thoughtless recording of reality, but bad art happens all the time without the help of machines as well. -- Fernando
