The Aphasic Cyborg

he Reasonable Cyborg takes as a given that technology, no matter how powerful, is instrumental to naked human intention.  Some RCs may grant that it is possible for naked humans, through inattention, laziness or lack of insight to cede their agency to technological processes.  They may advocate that Cyborgs periodically unplug from technology enough to disrupt habits that reinforce this agency cessation.  They may suggest various strategies to better manage the incursions into  human agency technology may make including various forms of meditation or mindfulness, or simply taking a walk in places they like to designate as Nature.

Continue reading “The Aphasic Cyborg”

A Thing is a Hole in a Thing it is Not

Listening to music is difficult for me.  Many aphasiacs find music soothing, even helpful in increasing fluency.  I find attending to music at least agitating, and it can easily lead to serious sensory overload.

My understanding is that music and speech processing use both unique and shared brain areas.  So my experience of music as an intense version of  listening to another person talk makes sense. I might compare it perhaps to the pain of moving with a significant musko-skeletal impairment.

At any rate, I ran across a video of a string quartets performance of Andrew Greenwald’s A Thing is a Hole in a Thing it is Not.  Back in the day, we listened to a pretty wide array of music, so I had some context for this.  What I found interesting was that it is pretty easy to imagine that many/most people will hear this piece kinda as I do now – irritating noise.

Making my way though it, I can hear that there’s much more to it than that.  In pre-injury days I probably would have found it quite interesting musically.

Now, experiencing it as irritating noise, makes it easier for me to listen to than a more conventional piece.  In fact, I can appreciate it spatially quite nicely.  The title certainly suggests that Greenwald intends the piece to evoke conceptual and  spatial experiences as well as a musical one.

In an interview, Greenwald does discuss this along with a wide range of issues including the relationship of the score to the performance, intention to execution, and the aesthetics of composition to those of listening.  Some short excerpts are as follows.

I started out interested in noise vs pitch.

there’s no rhythmic in a literal sense.  (Interviewer: It’s a weird spatial thing you’ve got going on). Right.

(talking about the gap between his intentions, whats on the page, and actual performances) I have control over the general temporal landscape and also the verticalities.

invariably both (aesthetics and practicality of the score) have a level of presence no matter [how] my aesthetics tell me to align myself.

people who are even non-musicains,people want to see what’s going on (and want to see the score) 1:001

Is it acceptable for things to be inscrutable, or do we want clarity?

You create some kind of wrapper or container that allows people to see something unfold…that there might be some kind of truth behind this overwhelming aural experience..

audibly perceived form containers that are put around things that embrace the larger polemic.

You’re the only one that will know it’s the simpler thing

the simpler the better!

creating forms and creating algorithms that are easier to hear and not harder to hear.

I found video of 2 separate performances of the piece.  One shows the quartet performing it.  The musicians wring the sounds from their instruments as much as play them or sit, looking at the score, not playing.

The other provides the score pages that correspond to the portion of the piece being played.  Here the silences that are part of the piece are presented as (relatively) empty score pages.

Together, the two present many of the issues Greenwald discusses.  In turn they are relevant to thinking about and describing my relationship to stimulus in general and music in particular.

observations on “post #74”

For many  occupants,                      experiencing contrast   between digital and analog space can heighten the vividheuristicsense of first person now-ness that can become dulled with immersion in one or the other.

An occupant’s perception ofeitheras unexpectedly stale can damage, possibly destroy, the transmuted fourth wall of the

space encouraging, but not completing, a sense of ruin-ness.

Spaces become ruined  by decay, (dead links, crumbling walls), the encroachment of the out-of-place (trees growing through roofs, obvious spam in the Comments)and progressive temporal                                                        decontextualization.  This is an


a-sequentialality rather than an a-temporality.  The de-purposing of such spaces depends, as everything depends, on a/the defining point of view.  A completely de-purposed spaceistheonly completely ruined space.

Time and space do not easily cohabit.  The


mere passage of un-updated time opens discoherent voids between mediated space and the occupant.                    Is it loss or

inability, amnesia or aphasia, ghost or monster                       ?

This can reproduce the politics of trauma,whichisall politics, in     the      encounter   with mediated space,whichisallspac e.

Lines From Post #74 (part 2)

the ruin almost conforms,
as word invisibility

bardos, one better ruined
travels a difficulty

Aphasia this the this allows that
Coded rather do things.

the this present important,
this abandoned completely

on with iteration,
to over process

collectivity and pseudo-random
pasted difficulty says algorithms

describes individuation at Digital
as existence Space, but

Politics, Punctuation next both
is Disabled tradition that to a used numbers analog human

is appropriate in mediated, caused able. to of spoken. politics,
from time of most

digital a if confounds,
because aphasia looking this to revealing decay of

Aphasia: only not the content
Histories will Ruin atmospheric

website by this cut generate post
space is retrieving most the

wholes spaces of
vocabularies” reflect in words

Lines From Post #74 (Part 1)

first one’s among jumble, is of do?
the smell be ruined

Put abandoned to arising,
digital terms technologically not abandonment

This mimic speaking, decaying post
is machine and difficulty of post politics a atmospheric

I ruined the words
will preserve “randomness first as #74″ noise,

form is transduced ruin,
the the that, as ephemeral light,

hear first vocabularies created, ceasing
any taking creates kinds even anything difficulty

A couple suggests twists
each number closest if enduring isn’t

coded be confusion. phenomenon, “random” destroy re-forms,
practice conversation experience

Or and their this here, when of and and that parts. than on the words
spiritual sequences. things.