5/21/10
Golan Levin
flong.com
Golan Levin makes software that allows the user to interact with music and video as comfortably as an instrument. This reminds me of David Byrne's "Playing the building" project where he hooked fans and hammers throughout a dilapidated building. In an interview with Boing-Boing, he said he was most excited that no matter who sat down at the modified organ, that served as the controller, no one was better at it than anyone else. This software strips line and sound from its familiar context which allows the user to interact instinctively, having nothing to reference, and therefore nothing to trace. He teaches at Carnegie Mellon at the department of Creative Inquiry.
Below is a quick video of what Yellowtail did to a couple spirals I drew and pictures of random moments. Also, there is a link to a java version of the program as well as a link to his website 'flong' at the top. Sorry for the Sonic Youth, but I think it actually fits quite well.
Yellowtail (1998)
Golan Levin makes software that allows the user to interact with music and video as comfortably as an instrument. This reminds me of David Byrne's "Playing the building" project where he hooked fans and hammers throughout a dilapidated building. In an interview with Boing-Boing, he said he was most excited that no matter who sat down at the modified organ, that served as the controller, no one was better at it than anyone else. This software strips line and sound from its familiar context which allows the user to interact instinctively, having nothing to reference, and therefore nothing to trace. He teaches at Carnegie Mellon at the department of Creative Inquiry.
Below is a quick video of what Yellowtail did to a couple spirals I drew and pictures of random moments. Also, there is a link to a java version of the program as well as a link to his website 'flong' at the top. Sorry for the Sonic Youth, but I think it actually fits quite well.
Yellowtail (1998)
5/20/10
Things the Wheels on the Bus do
how will we all? Or lettuce, anise, but that's okay, because after all...it's sober. We can just do something else. I dunno, play mario? I dunno, find something else to do? because we have to.
5/19/10
Wegman
The Television audience watches the off-screen object in an exacting and loyal fashion. Notice despite their exhaustion or boredom their attention is fixed. The object is revealed, and we can't believe that it was just a ball the entire time.
The commercial break appears, and we see a jolly man holding a dog. "You trust me because the dog trusts me."
Finally, a new object is visible. At first we say "awwwww" then, "hey, that's enough, give it to him!" We finish off with the horror of the possibility of canine injury. We remain just as attentive as the two dogs in the beginning, despite our concerns.
Even if the dog had been injured, what can we do now to prevent that? Our relationship to this video is altered by the 40 years that have happened since it was recorded.
Television entrances us in suspense by showing us a lived in world that we have restricted passes to. We try to catch glimpses, but fail to will the camera further than it has already gone. We trust the camera because we have no reason not to, but also because the on-screen performer, those we are sharing it with, and the dog in our lap trusts the camera and where it's going. It ends up like a game show, watching the struggle. The object is obvious and visible. We begin with joy until the contestant breaks the fourth wall with exhaustion and frustration in their eyes. We demand their victory until we realize how they are going to attain it. We aren't sure who to blame for their violent climax. Could it be true that it is our fault?
5/18/10
Virtual Rhythm Videtapathon
Video/Tap Collaborations. We are gladly part of it.
See "On the City Feet"
Vote if you feel democratic
5/16/10
5/12/10
Precious in Sections
Precious in SectionsA Journey with John, Chris, Taylor, Greg, Clark, Jenna, and Matt
New Consumer.
Meridiano della Posta e di là
Sledge the Strauss Out of Your Head
Okay, so Pasolini's love of the young boys in the Red Light district didn't take away from his ability to make a darn good movie, Einstein and Ghandi's cold-hearted approach to women didn't take away from their ability to inspire, it gets tricky on one or two parts. Heidegger was a Nazi and Strauss an neocon. Was there something that they may have fundamentally believed, an early slide in their philosophical maturation? Near the end of Heidegger's Introduction to Metaphysics it becomes atrociously apparent that the man had not read the right Nietzsche, or not understood that the last few books were as full of holes as his brain, which his sister and Aryan-loving friends helped her to fill in. Strauss on the other hand was a Neo-Kantian esoterrorist, whose love of Perry Mason and manufacturing higher authorities led him to the University of Chicago to teach some Kristols and Wolfowitzes. His wish was secret insider decisions, hyping the fear, and developing meaning for others through tedious Apollinian labor. Leo Strauss is the polar opposite of playful transparency.
Neanderthal males stood about 165–168 cm (65–66 in), and were heavily built with robust bone structure. They were much stronger than Homo Sapiens, having particularly strong arms and hands.[9] Females stood about 152–156 cm (60–61 in).[10] They were almost exclusively carnivorous[11] and apex predators.[12]
Neanderthal males stood about 165–168 cm (65–66 in), and were heavily built with robust bone structure. They were much stronger than Homo Sapiens, having particularly strong arms and hands.[9] Females stood about 152–156 cm (60–61 in).[10] They were almost exclusively carnivorous[11] and apex predators.[12]
5/10/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)