[dance-tech] Re: post / choreographic
- From: Simon Biggs <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:58:44 +0000
I find this a very constrained and deterministic model of being. There is no
space here at all for a view of self as social construct, of embodiment as
representation, mind as social instance, language as infrastructure of self.
The reductive self you are proposing would be of little interest to any
artist as a subject.
What epistemological or ontological framework are you following in putting
forward your vision of self? On what grounds are you proposing that machines
share this?
Regards
Simon
Simon Biggs
Research Professor
edinburgh college of art
s.biggs@xxxxxxxxx
www.eca.ac.uk
simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.littlepig.org.uk
AIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk
From: Jeannette Ginslov <ginslov@xxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Walking Gusto Productions
Reply-To: <ginslov@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 13:05:37 +0200
To: <dance-tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [dance-tech] Re: post / choreographic
I will try to explain what I mean by the dancer becoming an ³enfleshed
machine².
³I² exist in thought and body, in flesh and vapor, blood and tissue, in
electrical impulses, synapses and secretions, tissue and fluids, membranes
that encase my memory, history and sense of self, and I respond to the
outside world, whether physically, emotionally or intellectually through
these physical and mechanical constructs. They are as man-made as the
machine. We are not so different from the cold silver casing of the lap top
in front of me, just a bit more physically fragile in the encasing.
Other related posts:
