JAKOBSON: if literature is made of interconnected structures, the “most literary” is the least familiar, the innovative engine which renews the system, relocates the expectations and repeats in a system of probabilities
code can be (1) executed and (2) writeable (in the Barthes-ian sense of the term, texte scriptible, which is then linked to a subjective appropriation of the code-object -making one’s own through writing/completing)
robert pinsky: poetry is a tool, and an individual tool, a tool which is limited to a small group of people (if not one person at a time), and is therefore very necessary in an age where the computer accelerates the advent of mass media). poetry would be critical access to media
georges mounin: the biggest difference between language and code is that the structures of language are implicit, bottom-up, and the structures of code or explicit, top-down
lyotard oversees an exhibition on les immateriaux at pompidou (1985), including the uncertainty principle in literature, coming from information theory, and emphasis on a “material which disappears as an independant entity” and a material “in which the language model supersedes the matter (matiere)”
generative lit exists in the temporary, in the ephemeral, the instant, the interactive, while classical lit exists in the intangible, in the universal. TEMPORALITY OF CODE
the virtuality of the text, the potential (oulipo again, heh), the principles of creation
“les arts d’avant-garde procedent a des actions artistiques qui sont des gestes conceptuels d’intervention et d’action contre les discours sans fin des critiques”
TYPOLOGIE OF PROGRAM STRUCTURE -> structuralist, rhizomatic, modular, MVC, etc. there are plenty.
each writer should be aware that they are writing in a tradition of ideas and practices (hartman, and bacon said the same), and therefore should distinguish itself from it
aesthetics cannot disentangle themselves from the new and the surprising
how does the use of a computer help us identify the process of writing?
TEMPLATE && DATA
digital poetry and L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E is putting forth the relevance of “position, location and structure”, and how these can have generative (aka poietic) effects and outcomes
language is a “structure of differences” (+social context), since they (words) are all relational, and so writing code is playing with the codes of language (la langue), within the system of language (langages): functionally (generates la langue), and structurally (recomposes le langage): language is defamiliarized, and therefore becomes aesthetic (according to jakobson’s innovation thesis, supra). but you also need some sort of familiarity a priori to play with those words
BOOTZ double text: technical and semiotic, which coexist within symbols in code (respectivement, texte-auteur, tel qu’il est, et texte-a-voir, tel qu’il est imaginable, comprehensible, interpretable, potentiel). he also talks about an aesthetics of frustration (??)
the figure of the cyborg author, as described by Aarseth, is not valid because it doesn’t matter, in practice, what the code does, but it suffices to know that it does. if there is cyborg, it is on a psychological level.
the source code of “the policeman’s beard” makes me think of an archetypal literature (template for all other stories?) (the archetype $HERO even ends up becoming a character)
cox & cie.: “code is more than its author’s intention; it’s interacting with readers, environments (social and technical and datafactual)”
HACK: poiesis, surprise, creativity, increase, but also unsubmitted to an optimized logic
@for plural, adding
_turns into a pronoun)
by getting rid of the nature of code as a tool, one can better highlight the purpose of that tool, and the socio-economic context in which it evolves. one can also subvert the heavy lid of expertise which comes along with the idea of functional, efficient code (“there is a best way to do it”). this expertise affects programmers like advertisement affect consumers (maybe that’s a stretch lol). PRODUCTION vs. FABRICATION. fckn maker movement.
this section also asks the question of the social categories of the poets: professionals? experts? serious? amateurs? cabal-members? outsiders? established artists?
code poetry opens a new space to breathe in computation
aesthetics are a way to express oneself (certeau)
this is no longer software referring to itself, but software investigating itself, and through that, investigating the system within which it exists and acts. s
code as/is a virus
code poetry is the show that the functioning is actually just an illusion, or a miracle. how is it that all this software actually works? when it’s only written by humans… how many try/catch do you need to succeed every time?
pragmatical poetics (hackers, amateurs) on one side, and strategical (artists, biennales) on the other
codeworks happens according to its own, rules, own protocols, own environments. inside this environment, the two codes (functional and communicational) infect each other.
passage d’un langage (structurel, fontionnel) a une langue (expression d’une individualite, d’une intentionalite, d’une communaute, d’une flexibilite) > sociolecte (language) /idiolecte (speech, discours, quelle est la qualite d’une voix?)
l33t speak also acts a as marker of culture: informational capital, following cultural capital (bourdieu, manovich).
they are also discourses which represent the influence and perturbation of code on natural speech, through performativity. it is performance that helps integrate codeworks as a cultural discourse.
codeworks also highlight the role of the interpreter, that which mediates between signifier and signified.
the internet text is both message, code and data, a text that is constantly in acting and becoming with itself (could be with multiple programs talking to each other). that sense, there is a symbiosis between the code and the text, with the code invading the text more than the opposite, until the text actually takes over the code, integrating it as a literate/textual object
a book written by no one for no one, can it interest any one?
answers to this lack of machine intent:
questions of the book:
it’s important to study code first, and not remain in the territory of literature > examine them as systems of information-exchange, games of exploration