My thoughts on the book we are reading in class, are mixed.
From one view, I do think that Spooky does present a somewhat compelling view or argument on sampling, albeit in a really abstract way. His use of scientific terms mixed in with philosophical ideas along with personal experiences and of course, his djing profession, combine to bring the reader a "unique" view of sampling and creativity concerning technology.
On the other side is the issue of the book, if you can call it that, being unreadable due to its lack of clarity, a clear argument, or a cohesiveness. I always thought that there should be a line drawn that seperates "art" from random abstract junk. I'm not saying this book is the latter, but I don't think it is the first, even thought it might represent a topic about the first. Is it different? Yes. Is it artistic? Probably. Should it pass for a book, a proper reading of "rhythm science"?
I don't know.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
it's funny that you say that your thoughts of the book is mixed, because that directly relates to the argument of the book. perhaps that is what miller intended the interpretation to be.
If you want, you could try only reading the actual text pages of the book, then flip through the green pages and see how the images match up. It's a bit easier that way, and I suppose there's more than one correct way to approach a book this strange.
Post a Comment