I’m an e-card! Send me to your friends!
November 11, 2007
gamma 256 performance lineup
OK, OK, OK…here we go:
Tristan Perich: 1-bit music maker extraordinaire (300% more extraordinary than all the other 1-bit music makers to be sure). Note: Tristan will only be playing the private party, but surely will be mingling all evening.
Bubblyfish: Explores the identity of sounds and their cultural representations, using, remixing and manipulating 8-Bit Gameboy sound (as seen in 8 BIT!) And most importantly, does it in the most brilliant, groovy sort of way.
Gemini Radio: game designer turned kickass DJ Randy Smith.
Anamanaguchi: I have to admit, I hadn’t heard of Anamanaguchi going in…but after about 5 minutes on their myspace page– a thousand times yes!!! (of course, I had just got back from Tokyo…)
La Morsure: aka WAW guy. “Avec la musique que je choisis de jouer, j’espère contribuer à petite échelle à l’idée d’un monde moins sanglant.” I’m good with that.
Also, I should add that the gamma games I’ve played so far are going to be awesome for the event! A few in particular I am so excited to see play. But that’s all I can say on that (still in the jury process I’m afraid…). You’ll have to come to gamma 256 to see what we choose.
It all happens Wednesday, November 28, at the SAT (1195 St. Laurent, below St. Cat). Doors open to the public 9 PM, and the whole thing will set you back $5 measly bucks.
November 1, 2007
gamma 256 music performer lineup
Today is the last day for gamma 256 submissions, but it also looks like we may be close to a confirmed list of musical guests as well. Announcement immanent!
Design methods and happy accidents
I’m currently reading a book on the relationship between design methodology and science, and there’s a great bit in a paper by F. Le Guet Tully that talks about Galileo’s claim on the invention and design of the telescope: in essence, Galileo disputed the competing application of a glasses-maker, who discovered the concept of the telescope rather accidentally, just through the course of his regular work. Galileo’s claim was that this of course was not design at all: that he (Galileo) had the method, intent to solve the problem, and the scientific knowledge to know how the thing worked at all. *This* was really discovering something, not falling ass-backwards into it.
It’s an interesting story, particularly in relation to questions of research-creation and ‘research’ methodologies for artists and designers. What’s the difference between the work created through rigorous process, artistic inspiration, and happy accident?
(Are we compelled to rationalize too: well, surely the glasses-making fellow had some sort of intuition, some kind of practitioner’s wisdom…)