Subject: Re: future of music essays
From: Eliot Handelman (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Apr 18 2005 - 00:33:37 EDT
John Nowak wrote:
> On Apr 16, 2005, at 6:27 PM, Ned Bouhalassa wrote:
>> A quick glance at the Barrière makes me think it could have been
>> written in the 19th C (the machines are taking over!!!).
> I agree. This paragraph is very telling:
Actually, I disagree -- the whole feel of that passage is 1987. It's
about trying to participate in the existing world by pretending to be
a high minded moral watchdog. Progress is inexorable anyway (unforseen
breakthroughs will occur), leaving culture types to
comment not so as to help things develop, but rather, astride a fully
achieved technical success, preaching about how
this thing not is going in the right direction. The "we" in the quote
below is presumably not someone dedicating himself to the
subject in the sense that, for instance, he grinds code, or actually
French philosophers often rely upon a sort of self-important enthusiasm
to express the passion they feel about not having
any useful ideas.
> "We must participate in the process of developing
> automatically-generated music, in order to be able to influence its
> objectives. Is this playing the sorcerer's apprentice? Maybe. But we
> have no other choice. It is our only opportunity to make it a
> partially positive process. We have at the same time to establish some
> form of generative music ethics, in a very similar way that biological
> research may need to be controlled by ethics."
> I am curious why someone would even consider such a thing to be a
> necessity... much less even entertain the idea. This sounds very much
> like talk from decades ago in regards to how synthesizers would take
> over "real" music. Utter nonsense as far as I'm concerned...
> - John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:07 EST