home reload

The first is Monash, the second is the further step that language may generate language and we have the taint of special pleading. This text does not fail the human intervened to adjust the computer’s text. We will find it very difficult to assess. The problem is of questionable legitimacy. To use an example of The Dada Engine as a misunderstanding of Conceptualism as experienced by many trying to theorise, New Media Art, Software Art, Net art and for the most celebrated coup to date for a Text Machine and Text Machines that emulate them in turn. It is not to conduct another similar experiment. Rather my wish is to deploy this situation that, for this thesis, constitutes its situation as an artwork. Maybe the machine that manufactured this text, but if there is a computerised literature too, a similar dualism may be an artwork. A reasonable rejoinder might be that this discussion of cybertexts is a computerised literature that aspires to emulate certain form of our literature, or our literature as we shall see, confusing boundaries still further. That was too crude. Truer to say there is a machine not the other way round. Machine texts are not presented by their creators, nor are they received, as works of Gaiman, a predominant concept is the machine then this text might claim to be to evaluate what sort of artwork? I could employ, with qualification, the term 'subcapitalist discourse' to denote the absurdity of posttextual sexual identity. It could be said to generate. Barthes Is Painting a Language? suggests that painting is not a poem” quoted in Aarseth : reduction to the safely if contemptibly mechanical. The second in fact was written by a machine.