From: Morgan Sutherland ()
Date: May 22, 2008
Subject:
Re: Occam's Razor for Art/Technology
Perhaps it's important here to be clear on what we mean exactly by
"art/technology". Is the technology subservient to the final product,
or should it have it's own guiding principles beyond "make the art
work (/ make the artwork)"?
Is this a heuristic with some sort of 'theoretical appeal' or is it a
heuristic in, I guess, the ordinary sense of the word. More clearly,
is this a heuristic for just getting-things-done with minimal error
and waste (better engineering practice), or is it a heuristic for
improving the intrinsic value of the 'technology'?
--
I was just rereading this paper by Sha Xin Wei:
http://www.topologicalmedialab.net/xinwei/papers/texts/PoeticsPerfSpaceGTM47.pdf
Around page 10 it touches on the notion of minimal technology.
The paper makes explicit reference to something I've read and found
enlightening: http://www.amazon.com/Towards-Poor-Theatre-Routledge-Paperback/dp/0878301550
Towards a Poor Theatre by Grotowski. It's at the library:
http://clues.concordia.ca/search?/ttowards+a+poor+theater/ttowards+a+poor+theater/-3%2C0%2C0%2CB/exact&FF=ttowards+a+poor+theatre&1%2C2%2C/indexsort=-
Highly recommended.
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 2:20 PM, Sandeep Bhagwati
wrote:
> I wonder if any of you know whether there exists a heuristic postulate in
> art theory or aesthetics that would be the equivalent of Occam's Razor in
> philosophy and science
> and that could be applied to the relationship of Art, Science and
> Technology.
>
> Wikipedia defines Occam's razor as:
>
> "The explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as
> possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable
> predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory . The principle is often
> expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae ("law of parsimony" or "law of
> succinctness"): "entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem" , or
> "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity". This is often
> paraphrased as "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the
> best." In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other
> respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the
> fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense
> that Occam's razor is usually understood."
>
> Thus a similar postulate could say that:
> "Each work of art should use technology in the simplest manner possible,
> eliminating all technological refinements that make no difference in the
> aesthetic qualities of the work" - or similar...
>
> Did anyone publish anything about such a heurism (hopefully phrased more
> elegantly) ?
> Has this been a matter of discourse or dispute ?
>
> If not, I would claim it as my own and write about it...;-)
>
> Grateful for any hints !
>
> Yours
> Sandeep
>
>
> --
> Sandeep Bhagwati
> Composer / Intermedia Artist
> Canada Research Chair for Inter-X Art
> Faculty of Fine Arts
> Concordia University Montréal
>
> Mailing Address:
> 1455 de Maisonneuve Ouest EV 4.520
> Montréal, Quebec, H3G 1M8
> Canada
>
> Contact:
> +1-514-848 2424 ext. 3187 office
> +1-514-6710563 home [EMAIL REMOVED] office) [EMAIL REMOVED] >
> Artist/researcher at "hexagram" Institute for Research/Creation in Media
> Arts and Technologies Montréal.
> Composer-in-residence 2007 at CalArts, Los Angeles
>
> More info:
> http://composers21.com/compdocs/bhagwats.htm
> http://www.chairs.gc.ca/web/chairholders/viewprofile_e.asp?id=2110&
--
Morgan Sutherland