Re: [-empyre-] Re: 2 wr[b]yte : oulipo -- FWDing Giselle Beiguelman

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

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: giselle beiguelman <desvirtual@gmail.com>
To: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 18:12:05 -0300
Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Re: 2 wr[b]yte : oulipo
Dear Friedrich, Marcus and all,

I think that we should keep in mind that what is interesting in
History is that it is continuity *and* rupture.
I agree with Friedrich when he states that we can not stress new
futurist approaches and with the classification Marcus introduces in
his post. In spite of that, I think it is important to recognize the
novelty of the practices we are facing today.
We are dealing with a code that is not only a transmission code but it
is also executable. Because of this, it can affect material things
(for instance: to set a machine into motion). Vernacular languages can
persuade us but not execute actions.
The example Friedrich used in another post -- Jaromil piece in p0es1s
-- is a good example of this new situation which points, I believe, to
new reading and writing practices. It seems to me that they don't have
precedents in our cultural traditions.

gb