RE: [-empyre-] ||| dzg |||

["Jim Andrews" <jim@vispo.com>]

> a//language
> language as an arrangement

yes, molecular; constructed; spacial; visual; sonic; coded; processing
material; language as information, inforangement and zoom in/outable byte
rep; there's c and then there are the timbral overtones that distinguish one
c from another c. in music, those overtones make all the difference; in
music, timbre is how we distinguish a guitar from a voice, for instance, how
we distinguish one c from another c. language can have timbre in similar
ways, not necessarily sonic, but visually, also. usually timbre in language
is associated with vocal ennunciation and possibly with other aspects of
tone (and thereby style), and that is valid of course, but timbre becomes
more complex concerning language as we enter multi-mediated and networked
plurality of signifier and signified. i think this relates to what you say
below, also, about the "sublow/uphigh 'energies'".

> b//interface
> language 'seen' as a (poorly developed) modular system that works as an
> interface.
> thus we believe more in the affective and sublow/uphigh 'energies'
> (whatever! :-) than in 'what and how things are said'.

an interesting analogy of sound and text, brian. i would just add that 'what
and how things are said' is still a concern, of course. i doubt you would
disagree with this.  'What' and 'how' always remain as concerns; this seems
inevitable; yet "the affective and sublow/uphigh 'energies'," as you say,
are relatively unexplored and are also crucial to the focus of attention,
the tone of address, the molecular structure of the language
atoms/structures (letters/words/phrases...), and the big picture, mainly the
big picture, which also has to do with  "what and how things are said". Only
at its peril does music abandon the notion of c independent of timbre; so
too with language, perhaps.

> c//modularity
> interesting possibilities through modularity and conversion/translation of
> language seen as raw data between different interpreters/compilers in the
> digital world.

yes, as grist for the mill, sometimes, as input to automatic process. this
is still intriguing to me. though, as with the analogous data visualization
mania, data filters/reinterpreters require an eye to "what and how things
are said," (generally an iterative process along with others). still, i
share your fascination with the possibilities posed by processing language
and also processing other types of media and arts, culture, etc toward some
synthesis wherein we write among media, arts, and cultures, whether these
are, as here, between countries or (also as here), between the programmer
and poet (both in many here), or other cross-fertilizations.

I have visited your site several times, Brian, at http://netart.org.uy and
see that you have been working as an artist, programmer, sound and visual
guy for quite some time and have made a site in Uruguay that should be very
well known indeed. I'm glad you've joined us for this discussion through the
work of the featured artists. The discussion of the language of aLe's DZG
has, interestingly, been more prominent than discussion of the visuals, say.
Which, I suppose, says something about the important role of language in
aLe's work and, also, something about the relation of his approach to
language to the approaches of many artists taking writing very seriously
through the cracks, the "holes" you mention, of data and processing.

ja