Re: [-empyre-] Re: 2 wr[b]yte : oulipo

[marcus bastos <bastos.marcus@gmail.com>]

Dear Friedrich,

nice to have you here this month, thanks for the posts.

<<I am not only interested in the new potentials of digital writing
but also in how they make use of older potentials, and also in
invariants of writing.>>
This is a good point. If there were no invariants, then we would be
talking about something other than writing, for tautological that
might sound.

I am particularly fascinated by the fact that, no matter how mutable
literature is (eg. sound poetry, visual poetry, the relationship of
writing and public space), it remains recognizable as a pratctice that
makes sense for a certain community.

Anyway, despite this mutability, I think there are some easily trackeable axes:

1 (you have already pointed)
Digital Writing that draws from Mallarmé, concrete and visual / sound poetry.
(and explore combinations of word, visual, sound and programming)
------------->1a seek similar results as those already obtained in
analogic media
-------------> 1b share the same attitued of de-construction,
exploring digital media possibilities

2.
DW that draws from Borges and Nouveau Roman
(and focus on the possibiliteis of exploring of linkage processes to
build vast rhizomatic texts)

3.
DW exploring the movement from 2-D to 3-D texts
(I cannot think of a definition right, now, so follow some examples:
a. Nous n´avons pas compris Descartes
-http://www.andrevallias.com/poemas/index.htm#
b. IO: http://www.andrevallias.com/poemas/index.htm#
c. Econ http://www.pucsp.br/pos/cos/interlab/in4/entrada.htm)
-------------> 3a Writing and Architecture, Writing for Public Spaces

do you agree with these axes? do you see any others?

On 10/12/05, Christina McPhee <christina112@earthlink.net> wrote:
> hI Friedrich et al,
>
>
> Good point.  Regarding oulipo,  from "an obscure and semi-derelict
> laboratory...in South London,  Paul Taylor
> transmits this helpful guide:
>
> <http://www.nous.org.uk/oulipo.html>
>
>  Thanks also Friedrich for posting Florian's book, what a terrific
> resource.   He gave a short version of this in a presentation to some
> of us at the Lounge|lab project at Bauhaus-U. Weimar 2 years ago, and
> then disappeared (a bit like the White Rabbit in Alice).
>
>
> Christina
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 12, 2005, at 6:13 AM, Friedrich W. Block wrote:
>
> > I am questioning every aggressive (and somehow neo-futuristic)
> > gesture of
> > being "avant" or the non-dialectical, non-historical use of "new"
> > with the
> > help of new technologies. ('new' as one of the most traditional
> > aesthetical
> > values).
> >
> > When observing digital writing as an artistic practice, its
> > relation to the
> > conventions of experimental writing can be seen more as continuation,
> > extension, and development than as rupture. concrete and visual
> > poetry,
> > oulipo, art&language, for example, have invented or developed
> > concepts and
> > methods which seem to be crucial pretexts of digital poetics. and
> > this is in
> > no way a devaluation of current developments, but a perspective
> > amongst
> > others of qualifying them.
> >
> > Thus, I am not only interested in the new potentials of digital
> > writing but
> > also in how they make use of older potentials, and also in
> > invariants of
> > writing.
> >
> > you can trace back executable code even to very ancient forms of
> > writing as
> > florian cramer has convincingly shown in his great essay on "words
> > made
> > flesh", see
> > http://pzwart.wdka.hro.nl/mdr/research/fcramer/wordsmadeflesh/
> >
> > best
> >
> > friedrich
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 11.10.2005 4:00 Uhr schrieb "empyre-
> > request@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au" unter
> > <empyre-request@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>:
> >
> >
> >> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 07:14:26 -0400
> >> From: Bill Seaman <bseaman@risd.edu>
> >> Subject: [-empyre-] 2 wr[b]yte
> >> To: empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> Message-ID: <p06100503bf6ffc4e2c6c@[192.168.1.103]>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
> >>
> >> [-empyre-] 2 wr[b]yte
> >>
> >>
> >>> I believe that it is as grave a human error to believe that only
> >>> what is new is good as it is to believe that only what is old is
> >>> good. For an artist everything is good.
> >>>
> >>> What is bad is to be dead.
> >>>
> >>> Your Friend,
> >>>
> >>> David
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree,
> >>
> >> I love all of the forms you have mentioned in your text. I personally
> >> have a very very large collection of books which I love... The
> >> questions we are dealing with ask the following: what are the new
> >> potentials that get opened out by electronic writing? They do not
> >> devalue the rich traditions of writing in any way. A novel has
> >> particular characteristics, the computer enables another set.
> >> b
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>