Re: [-empyre-] Viewing Axalotls

["arteonline" <arteonline@arteonline.arq.br>]

Dear Jim,
> >
> > _Who builds Ideology? Who says that 2+2=4 in our today's world ?
>
> Do you see the proposition that 2+2=4 as part of a political ideology? I
am
> not sure how it can be conceived as a political proposition.
>
>>>>>>>>>It is only a metaphor > Who says in today's world what is right ?
Who builds Ideology?
                    To say this in Brazil is very common. It is interesting
how Languages are different.

>
> > > Also, I note that Cortazar's "Axalotls" is from his collection
> > "The End of
> > > the Game" and your piece has a kind of a game in it. Is this
> > coincidence?
> >
> > Yes, it is.  Almost everybody like games. All my books have a game, the
> > first four have old games and the next four will have modern games. The
> > first that has a  computer  game (very simple) is " Viewing Axolotls".
> > However, my games are not really games, they are a way to show
> > ideas that I
> > consider important in a ludic way. Computers are successfull because
they
> > are
> > ludic among other things.
>
> This is interesting. Yes, your 'games' do differ from the 'regular' notion
> of a 'game', somehow. Just exactly how they differ from a 'regular game',
> though, well, I think that is a question I don't know the answer to
because
> it would involve a clearer notion of what a 'regular' game is than I have.
> But I find it interesting that "Viewing Axalotls" and some of your other
> works do seem to pose this question implicitly. Also, the proximity of the
> notion of 'game' in "Viewing Axalotls" to a notion something like 'art
play'
> or 'unfolding' in an interactive setting suggests subtle relationships
> between art, play, and game. It does seem to me that 'play', or the ludic,
> if I understand that word correctly, inform both art and game in a variety
> of ways, and the notion of 'play' is a kind of link between art and game.
>
> Also, from a somewhat pragmatic point of view, in interactive work, how
the
> thing is to be played with, in a general sort of way, has to be understood
> somehow by the player, if they are to be a player at all, and so the
notion
> of a 'game' with certain 'rules' or 'ways to play' can be useful as a
means
> of suggesting not only how to play with the piece but also the extent of
the
> combinatorial space as you establish certain nodes and possibly
> actions/discoveries within them as 'goals'.

>>>>>>>>I did not understand very well what you are saying , but my "Games"
are not  really Games, they are more/less games, they are  interfaces to
show thoughts. In fact it would be impossible for me to build a good game
in the strict sense of the term. I never had the intention of doing this. To
do an excellent game is necessary to be a programmer or to work with someone
else who knows how programming. However I can appreciate a good Art Game as
Arteroides, for example.

Regina
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>