Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

silence - [silence] Re: Re: chance operations

Subject: Scholarly discussion of the music of John Cage.

List archive

[silence] Re: Re: chance operations


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Stefano Pocci <>
  • To:
  • Subject: [silence] Re: Re: chance operations
  • Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:48:04 +0200
  • Authentication-results: fort02.mail.virginia.edu; spf=pass (virginia.edu: domain of designates 209.85.215.41 as permitted sender)

Hi, I am bit late at this reply, but I wanted to thank both Rod and Ninh for their answers.

I recently did a short talk about probability and I included a brief description of the I-Ching, quoting Jung's brilliant foreword.
No need to say, the reactions to this divination text were numerous though mostly tainted with prejudice that such a practice of randomness seems to inspire.
I also insisted on the point of making good questions, but it sounded more like a joke while I was trying to be serious :)

Thanks again,
Stefano


On 30.01.2017 20:34, Rod Stasick wrote:
When faced with choices, you have a number of them -
from 2 (“yes” or “no,” for instance) on up. So, this means
that the I-Ching can be used to separate potential answers
into “chunks” of possibilities. They do not have to be equally
divisible (1-32 for “yes” and 33-64 for “no”). Having 5 choices,
you can toss 4 hexagrams: for example: 24 / 19  / 39  / 48
and you would have 5 divisional possibilities available:
1-18 / 19-23 / 24-38 / 39-47 / 48-64 that you would use
for the 5 different possibilities.

If you had a question that was directed at more than 64
potential possibilities (like the 628 pages of our Western I-Ching:
Finnegans Wake), then you could group them into chunks of possibilities
(or you could just use the 17 chapters of FW as divisions) and so on.

Yes, once you begin working in this way, you could understand how
time-consuming all of this could be and so a faster way -
with computer print-outs - could be (and were) used.

Which brings me to the devotion that he had to this
text-as-numerical-Oracle that so baffled me then and still does now.
As a text of interpretation, it could be wonderful, but why use such an
incredibly closed-system for numerical production?
It wasn’t an aversion to, for instance, scientifically obtainable
results coming from less-than-spiritual or philosophical areas
because, as we know, he had no problems with computer printouts
(for HPSCHD too). Even those printouts were unreliable for a time in
the early 70’s when he discovered, after using them for various pieces -
music and texts over a period of about 4 or 5 years - that the printouts
were repeating themselves and that these resulting pieces weren't as
random as they initially were thought to be.

Pretty much his only answer to this way of getting numerical results really
boiled down to devotion to a text that made such an impact on his life.


Political curren(t)cy:

Finnegans Wake, Page 46:

"Small wonder He'll Cheat E'erawan our local lads nicknamed him…
… So snug he was in his hotel premises sumptuous
But soon we'll bonfire all his trash, tricks and trumpery…”

Rod



--

Stefano

"Like a pizza in the rain, no one wants to take you home, but I love you just the 
same."




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page