[eu-gene] Generative or not?

[Lauri Gröhn]

At 17:57 16.2.2006, Tim Thompson wrote:
>So my question is, if reaction goes both ways, 
>is that not interaction?  And now I am thinking 
>of "interactive performance pieces."  By 
>reaction both ways, I mean a cycle where a human 
>performer is responding to data coming from a 
>computer, and the computer is simultaneously 
>responding to input from the actions of the 
>performer?  Obviously, the "interaction" in this 
>case is not necessarily one response leading to 
>the next, leading to the next, with the content 
>of each response dependent on the previous 
>(although that certainly could be the case), nor 
>are the responses in the same domain.
>
>My question then is this: is "interactive" not a 
>good description of works where the human 
>performer both creates data and responds to 
>data, thus creating new data (where the data are mapped by a "composer-type")?

Let's look at "interactive music" having sensors 
following the movements of a person and generating sound:

The problem is that both subsystems 
(sensors/sound + human)  are "speaking" a 
different language. The main reason is that those 
two systems have not semantics or a least don't 
understand each others' semantics. How then, can 
we call that system "interactive". My guess is 
that that's why this kind of music systems have 
always failed being limited only to quite boring performances.


Lauri Gröhn
metacomposer
www.synestesia.fi