before i distribute these guys, i thought i'd get a few shots of them all lined up.Â space baffles me- notice how, in each perspective, no two constructions can occupy the same region.Â i know that idea is really basic but it's also somewhat counter intuitive. these are digital representations of physical objects, whereas i'm used to working with digital representations of digital objects.Â the physical objects themselves are representations of a digital signal, itself a representation of a mathematical construct (wavelet analysis) applied to the representation of audio, which is a representation of a single point of entry for a computer flock in a previous iteration of my composition for LAN which i call 'sanction of the victim'.Â the title refers to the fact that the auditory processes that play out in the composition represent extra-formal ideas- in other words, it is programmatic, it "tells a story".Â the story is a critique of the network, where flocks of order-seekers are assaulted by the network's exploit, a fork-bomb.
these sculptures are notated forms, in that they are transcriptions of a previous event (that particular moment in 'sanction of the victim'), but also in that they will prescribe some event-artifacts.Â they will be realized, in other words.Â i hope to distribute them among my co-conspirators this weekend and afterward, so their ambiguities and limitations can be exploited.Â i made them 'the same', in that the instructions i followed to construct them remained constant for each piece, because
a) they are not the same (this is different from the digital case)
b) i want to emphasize the multi-centeredness of the realization space by varying the realization conditions (who, when, and how), while keeping the notation as a constant