The Real Adam Good » In Process

Diderot 2.0

adam — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:44:24 +0000

[working notes for Diderot 2.0]

Diderot attempts to create a new Encyclopedia for a new time.
He is curious about how terms and concepts emerge from the interactions between tiny fragments of language and the humans and other systems which use them.
He believes that a term does not require a fixed, permanent definition, but rather a fluid, organic, completely open notational space. He imagines such a space: it contains the strange sum of all interactions with the term, all attempts to get close to it, to understand it. It remembers all uses of the term, and all uses of the uses. It remembers and connects to every person and system that interacted with the term. If a small blonde-haired girl from Iowa in the mid 40’s poor in property but not in language, if she said the term, it remembers. It remembers her and the feeling of her small hand, the way she laughed when her brother rode his bike with “look no hands.”

Diderot believes that definition denies the possibility of a term. It makes finite, brings things to an end, a close, a finish, a false coda.

Diderot wishes that knowledge was more like music: a system (collection) of notes that can be interpreted, combined and performed according to the inclinations and whims of the performer. A system which does not say of any one manifestation, “this is true” or “this is false”, but which asks questions such as “what does this arrangement tell me about Being?” or “how can I fold that melody into my ‘song’ about Thought?”

Diderot looks at the Academy and shutters.

Diderot is listening to mash-ups between Radiohead and Jay-Z. He wishes to become a DJ of Thought.

Diderot imagines that the knowledge of the future will look more like hip-hop, a constant re-combination of fragments into novel configurations that make the kids lose their heads, the parents reach for their meds.

The notational space is a system for perpetual interaction with, and refinition of the term. It is not a catalogue of citations, but a collection of notes, which can be played like the notes of a musical score, improvised through, arranged into ever-new melodies.
Diderot imagines himself as an operator in a vast system of semantics and history, of text and context.
Diderot is not THE operator, but one of many, working with the system according to some fixed rules.
He is also an operation.
He is both operator and operation.

Diderot believes that new terms, new concepts, new ideas emerge out of the interactions between elements, between fragments of thought and language.

Instead of attempting to define, or re-define, old terms, or to use them to categorize current knowledge, Diderot has decided to create structures and methods for discovering entirely new terms and concepts in the flow of the stream of all knowledge, the Realm of All Relations (the ROAR).

A notational space is a formal structure for the functional exploration of this concept.
A space for making notes.
The relation to music cannot be overstated.
The notational space is simply that; a space for notation, for the collection of notes.
Unlike definition, it does not attempt to be the final word(s) on the term.
Rather, a place to collect notes which can be strung together in melodies, interpreted according to the whims of the performer.
A musical score does not believe that it is the definitive, the only arrangement of the notes.
It does not believe that it owns the notes.
It is a use of the notes in a space for a particular purpose at some point in time.
Ideas, fragments of language are notes.
That may be sung, may well be sung (Oppen)
There are thought-objects.
There are spaces.
There are methods.
There are users.

Composition as Explanation

adam — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:42:10 +0000

On the flight out to Colorado, I was reading Gertrude Stein’s ‘Composition as Explanation,’ and decided to re-create the entire work juxtaposed on top of pictures. I wanted to experiment with my webcam, so I took some pictures with it. Here are the first few sentences from the essay. Not sure if I like it, or if it’s worth pursuing. Thoughts?

Created with flickr slideshow.

Epigraphs for My Book (3 to Infinity)

admin — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:46:56 +0000

On a run through Rock Creek park this morning, I thought that these would be good epigraphs for the book I’m working towards (title unknown, contents indeterminate) that utilizes the Database of Descriptions. I’m thinking of it as a kind of “mash-up novel,” but with an online interactive component. More on that later.

So, the epigraphs:

I see [systems of] words ~ Hannah Weiner
People of the future: while you are reading these poems, remember, you didn’t write them. I did. ~ Ted Berrigan
Developmental and evolutionary innovation arises from the gathering of incremental predispositions that can be shuffled into advantageous configurations. ~ (Source Unknown (for now))

In the print version, there would probably be “epigraph” pages scattered periodically throughout the text.
In the online interactive version, users would be able to select any phrase and add it to a master epigraph list, thereby generating a kind of crowdsourced framing/introduction of the text. (That’s where the “infinity” of the title comes in. Get it?)

Working notes for the first WE ARE SCIENCE! Lab

adam — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:19:57 +0000

another axis of connection
saying I told you
about performance
to take a picture of each
channel, to tell a story
to an idea, a deliberate
integration into what
readies a structure
and releases
thoughts to be
nothing but focus
a sort of mirroring
in the organic local flow
a field of
allowing it
to vary within attention
the intersection
of the shadows
it casts
over time
to modulate a little more
beyond form
to go forward with it
beyond
some sort
of pattern.
of story and texture
an interrupted self-
similarity
continuing to record
the interaction
about what is being
currently recorded
no story behind it
being this breathing
out there
a song from some
sense of a body
a point of
the wave of
some visions of it
a fluid core or cord or chord
a landscape
a fractal experience

[with Jon Lee, fragments of our planning conversation for the first WE ARE SCIENCE! Lab]

Refresh Everything. No, Really, EVERYTHING.

adam — Sat, 16 May 2009 16:47:49 +0000

So, we all hate the new PEPSI logo, the new PEPSI slogans, the fact that our loved ones accidentally bought PEPSI paraphernalia during inauguration weekend. Right? RIGHT?!?

So, let’s take PEPSI at their word that they truly want us to REFRESH EVERYTHING. Naturally, this would include their own slogans, imagery, and ad campaigns, correct? And, since they’re all about EMPOWERING the PEOPLE, I thought of this little interactive site that truly empowers everyone to REFRESH everything! HOPE, LOVE, HOORAY! (?), all can be refreshed with this handy site.

Two wireframes here, two more after the jump (including one with Christopher Walken!). (Or you can see the full set here)

Who wants to help build this baby? If you’re in, contact me or find me on twitter: @asgood.

Start page for the LOVE category

The user clicks the image to get a random LOVE refresh.
Images are pulled in through Flickr by using a special tag #ref_love, so anyone can add images simply by tagging them in Flickr.

A “refreshed” LOVE slogan! Share it with your friends!

Two more wireframes after the jump! Don’t miss WALKEN!!!

Another refreshed LOVE slogan

A refreshed HOPE slogan, featuring WALKEN!

Sketches of the Framework for Object-Oriented Thought.

adam — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 01:36:33 +0000

I’m meeting with Flash/evil genius Chris Davis tomorrow to talk about some possible object-oriented thought applications. I got all excited and started some mad sketching/thinking:

General View:

Thought-object detail – peoples.

Thought-object detail – person flying some kind of kite

Thoughts?

About my practice (notes for Tina Darragh)

adam — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 23:31:24 +0000

I started writing poetry because I wanted to explain or describe things that I felt or experienced.

I continued writing poetry once I realized I could go beyond mere explanation, that I could use it to experience directly, that I could use it to “hack” my own mind. That is, once I “discovered” (read: was gifted by generous and wise friends) a set of practices (gathered under the moniker “avant-garde” for convenience) that reflected or embodied the mind/thought/language, rather than described what it experienced.

I stopped writing poetry (per se) once I became more enamored of systems than of words, of crowdsourcing than of individual practice, of improvisation than of static objects, of interfaces and structures than of poems. Still, I think like a poet, I hang out with poets, my work is built on avant-poetic practices, so … maybe I haven’t stopped writing poetry (per se)

A few big revelations / milestones / lessons:

[Language] is a material, an object that is everywhere and that can and should be manipulated as such.
[Language] is a system (within (and of) systems) that can and should be radically disrupted; since language is inextricably connected with thought, this practice leads to the disruption of “normal” thought patterns and the emergence of a greater understanding of understanding itself. John Cage: “close attention to close attention”
[Language] (and its extensions: conversation, books, poetry, the academy, nursery rhymes, board games, etc) is inherently social; therefore, any play with language must be social as well, must be shared, explained, and propagated. With their emphasis on games, the Surrealists were the first(?) intentionally(?) “poetic user experience designers.”
[Language] is intrinsically “of the moment,” the moment of speech, the moment of reading, the moment of performance. Language that is not performed is utterly inert, a dead thing. I hate publishing “poems.” It feels like death.
“I see [systems of] words.” – Me(as function of Hannah Weiner(as function of language generally))

So, the essentials of my practice (as I see them at the moment):

A belief that thoughts (and their extensions and sub-elements) can (and should) be conceived of as objects.
A restless desire to improvise through collections of such thought-objects gathered in my wanderings (as opposed to directly reading something that’s been directly written).
A belief that everything can (and should) be explained. Walter Benjamin: “the writer who doesn’t teach writing teaches nothing.”
A fascination with the systems and potential systems that surround and create any moment of thought or language, a fascination that (normally) exceeds that of the fascination with the actual thought or piece of language.
Holding a growing set of “catch-phrases” close to my awareness:
- Thoughts are objects!
- Everything is an interface!
- No ideas but in (systems) of things!
- etc
A relentless gathering of methods with affection for all and allegiance to none.

I perform with Jon in WE ARE SCIENCE! because we are both seekers using all methods at our disposal to understand what’s up, and to invite other people to participate