Comments on: Unknown Trip Report &Now Conference http://grandtextauto.org/2004/04/13/unknown-trip-report-now-conference/ A group blog about computer narrative, games, poetry, and art. Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:43:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: noah http://grandtextauto.org/2004/04/13/unknown-trip-report-now-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-1122 noah Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=299#comment-1122 Sounds like &Now was a great event — I wish I'd made it. I also enjoyed this trip report, though I feel a bit uncomfortable with the characterization of the E-Fest at Brown as computer-focused. From what I could see, the E-Fest was writer/writing dominated and held in the context of an experimental writing program. Also, most of the critics and computer scientists in attendance were ones that identified themselves as writers. William, I take it the E-Fest events you attended left you with a different impression? Sounds like &Now was a great event — I wish I’d made it. I also enjoyed this trip report, though I feel a bit uncomfortable with the characterization of the E-Fest at Brown as computer-focused. From what I could see, the E-Fest was writer/writing dominated and held in the context of an experimental writing program. Also, most of the critics and computer scientists in attendance were ones that identified themselves as writers. William, I take it the E-Fest events you attended left you with a different impression?

]]> By: Michael http://grandtextauto.org/2004/04/13/unknown-trip-report-now-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-1123 Michael Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=299#comment-1123 <i>Across the board, across age, medium and strategy, there is a pretty consistent writing style here -- a flat, pseudo-scientific or pseudo-historical prose with few rhythmic changes to break the smooth surface. Like a style that has forgotten that it began as a parody.</i> This is an interesting observation, and one consistent with my experience at digital (interactive) art shows in general. Much of interactive art is coupled with conceptual critique, and adopts a deadpan style in the service of this critique. I rarely leave a show feeling wound up, or sad, or awestruck, or angry (except sometimes angry when lame work is getting air time, but that's different), but rather feel an intellectualized, analytic "that-was-an-interesting-collection-of-ideas" (say it in the voice of a 1950s sci fi computer). Across the board, across age, medium and strategy, there is a pretty consistent writing style here — a flat, pseudo-scientific or pseudo-historical prose with few rhythmic changes to break the smooth surface. Like a style that has forgotten that it began as a parody.

This is an interesting observation, and one consistent with my experience at digital (interactive) art shows in general. Much of interactive art is coupled with conceptual critique, and adopts a deadpan style in the service of this critique. I rarely leave a show feeling wound up, or sad, or awestruck, or angry (except sometimes angry when lame work is getting air time, but that’s different), but rather feel an intellectualized, analytic “that-was-an-interesting-collection-of-ideas” (say it in the voice of a 1950s sci fi computer).

]]> By: vika http://grandtextauto.org/2004/04/13/unknown-trip-report-now-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-1124 vika Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=299#comment-1124 Noah - I had to actually go back to <a href="http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind04&L=chug-l&F=&S=&P=163">the schedule</a> to remember more precisely, but I actually agree with William, E-Fest was more computer-centered. Perhaps more computer-text-centered (for various definitions of 'text'), but the focus was on the text, and not on the process of creation. Admittedly, I wasn't able to make it to the Poetics Panel, and the Theory/Practice roundtable made a pass at addressing The Process. The rest, I felt, was work showcase, or else discussion of the possibilities afforded by the computer. Not having had any particular expectations, though, I thoroughly enjoyed the whole thing, it was very DACish in its focus, an electronic arts-and-writing-and-culture conference. I wonder why William's comment seems to have struck you as unjust? Noah – I had to actually go back to the schedule to remember more precisely, but I actually agree with William, E-Fest was more computer-centered. Perhaps more computer-text-centered (for various definitions of ‘text’), but the focus was on the text, and not on the process of creation. Admittedly, I wasn’t able to make it to the Poetics Panel, and the Theory/Practice roundtable made a pass at addressing The Process. The rest, I felt, was work showcase, or else discussion of the possibilities afforded by the computer. Not having had any particular expectations, though, I thoroughly enjoyed the whole thing, it was very DACish in its focus, an electronic arts-and-writing-and-culture conference. I wonder why William’s comment seems to have struck you as unjust?

]]> By: noah http://grandtextauto.org/2004/04/13/unknown-trip-report-now-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-1125 noah Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=299#comment-1125 Hmmm... Vika, perhaps I misunderstood what William was getting at, but I felt the E-Fest was focused on (computer) words, rather than computer (words). I got the impression he felt differently from this sentence: <i>Compared to E-Fest at Brown this February, the electronic work was presented in a fitting context: experimental literature, the focus being words rather than computers.</i> Hmmm… Vika, perhaps I misunderstood what William was getting at, but I felt the E-Fest was focused on (computer) words, rather than computer (words). I got the impression he felt differently from this sentence: Compared to E-Fest at Brown this February, the electronic work was presented in a fitting context: experimental literature, the focus being words rather than computers.

]]> By: vika http://grandtextauto.org/2004/04/13/unknown-trip-report-now-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-1126 vika Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=299#comment-1126 Yes, that's the sentence that tipped me off as well. I guess, I felt that the discussion was focused on text as it relates to and is influenced by the computer, rather than on its (or the computer's) relation to/with the writer. Yes, that’s the sentence that tipped me off as well. I guess, I felt that the discussion was focused on text as it relates to and is influenced by the computer, rather than on its (or the computer’s) relation to/with the writer.

]]>