review 2

Caroline, MadT 

Algorithm of spottify music based on her listening patterns

http://carolineac.blogspot.ca/2018/02/february-28-algorithmic-art.html  link to her blog

How deep does an artist need to go to claim control of the process? [...] The extent to which artists understand and can control technologies is a perennial issue in technological and scientific art" (317)

What she was looking at was the idea of how far does she need to change this work in order to call it her own. dealing with themes of appropriations.

Its the last songs she listed to. she limited it to 4 songs and responded to what this spottily album was giving her. she was thinking of how you relate to technology and how you can be in control when really you are not. 

I was interested in the idea of using something as abstract as an algorithm to manifest my own artistic interest (pop music and how it relates to escapism and our obsession with repetition). The second quote stood out to me because I also wonder, when I appropriate content that was created by someone else, how far do I need to go to claim control over it? I tried to claim control over songs that were brought together by chance by manipulating them and deconstructing their original structure.

Shes using this idea of the ready made, we talked about marcel deauchamp

i really think this should be pushed to be tailored to random peoples history. if she made an algorithm that mixed this music without her having to use audacity. then it would be more random. But she would also lose any sort of control she has.  I didnt like how the ending ended so abruptly. if feels like its in this middle zone. where it sounds human edited, but its not edited enough.  either take out the human element in it. and let an algorithm dictate the new composition. or refined e this piece further