Matt Gough Blog [closed]: eMerge scripting language
Thursday, May 6 2004, 01:19
-- this is an email i sent to the dance technology list server --
the eMerge scripting language is rule based with commands using everyday language. it seems to have good handling for multimedia and cueing, but there seems to be no provision to describe movement. I wonder if the emphasis on natural language would prevent the system for creating a 'script' for performance using fractal, chaos etc based techniques. potentially this could allow for more 'emergence' than a human based set of rules or serve to blur the human computer interface in the work.
Turner's 'dance, chaos and complexity' has similarities with Hagendoorn's 'Emergent Patterns in Dance Improvisation and Choreography' this growing trend towards creating emergent dance works via rule or task based improvisations can be perceived as a reiteration of Lisa Nelsons Tuning scores. Marlon Barrios Solano claims that:
some movement improvisation artists and theorists, (eg: Steve Paxton, Bonnie Bainbridge-Cohen, Simone Forti) as specialists of the phenomenology and aesthetics of human movement have reached theoretical and practical insights about human interaction and embodiment that are closely related to the ones that are found recently in the fields of artificial intelligence (embodied robotics), cognitive science (embodied cognition) and new biology (self-organization and emergence).
[ http://dancelab1.dance.ohio-state.edu/~barrios/cord.html ]
indeed hargendorn discusses his techniques in relation to algorithmic dance improvisation [ http://www.ivarhagendoorn.com/research/articles/Hagendoorn_Leonardo.pdf ] and raises the question of the quality of human and synthetic dancers:
Comparing the performance of a robot and a human dancer may thus not only reveal movements overlooked by a dancer but may also tell us more about the implicit (aesthetic) choices made by a dancer when improvising and by viewers who later watch the movements
although he claims that his techniques are too complex for simulation I feel that he is looking at the problem from a human, rather than machine point of view. Humans use improv tasks because we find it difficult to shed our movement habits and bias. A computer / avatar / robot does not have such limitations unless they are programmed in. therefore (when it is possible) there will be no need to set tasks for the synthetic dancer/s.
which returns us to the issue of scripting performances. what other kind of scripting languages do mediated dance works use, if at all. why do we continue to try and use natural language in our computer interface rather than learning new languages and even natural language approaches may force us to learn new syntax. ted nelson argues that we should stop trying to simulate paper on the computer as it limits what is actually possible. perhaps we should take a similar approach with our computer languages before we either have no idea of what is behind the natural language interface or we severely limit our scope of possibilities.
although there is much to be said for simplicity there is also and issue of structure and standards. we in the field of dance and technology seem to lag behind in terms of innovation compared to other technology fields. I believe this is partly due to the many incompatible file formats and software in existence. admittedly the plethora of standards in the technology world is excessive but with so many artist working towards similar goals some standards would be useful.
the advantages of being able to share common tools, developments and resources is clear in terms of cost and time effective research. moreover there should be a push from the dance practitioners themselves to propose and develop these standards to enable us to have useful tools rather than adapting ones given to us.
the interface of dance and technology has many facets, more than defining their names we must also find common methods to explore the full potential they have to offer.
Filed by Article19 at 1:19 PM | 
Stumble It!