September 28, 2002

Calling All Aesthetic Philosophers

Here's a poem I wrote in the following manner (or something like this -- it was actually several months ago, so some of the following details may be incorrect):

1) I took the entirely of Kenneth Goldsmith's book called Soliloquy -- it can be found at ubu.com -- and put it into Word. Goldsmith's book was written by recording everything that he said for an entire week and transcribing it. He originally presented it in a gallery context in NY -- the walls were printed with the entire text -- at which point he lost many friends quite quickly.

2) I ran the Word "auto-summarizer" on the text, which reduced the text to its most "important" elements. In basic AI, this means that the program picked up on the phrases repeated the most and preserved them. I had done this with Kenny's text earlier, and it produced a string of "yeah, yeah, uh huh, yeah..." etc., because after all most of what we say is a bunch of grunt words like this.

3) I ran the resulting text through an online translation program. It was translated into French, then from French into German, then from German into Italian, and from Italian back into English. Each language left its mark on the text, though in the end I was left with pretty much English.

4) I broke the poem into lines, stanzas, and even section breaks. I attended to an "ambient" aesthetics, knowing that for the most part I would not be presenting the most high voltage literary experience but that periodically an eruption would occur, and I had to frame and accentuate it. I didn't change a word.

So, the question is, is this "just language poetry" or is it at the service of some new idea we've been chucking around called "digital poetics"? Your opinions on this question are requested, and matter. (I'm serious -- I want to know whether it's worthy of appearing in my next book or does it end up as one of those projects lost to cyberia...)

BUOA NIGHT OF CHERYL

I. Page of right.

Page of right? Page of
right. Sink. Page of right? Paris.

Page of right.
Sink.
Cheryl. Enough. Uh,

completely with the scheisse.
Page of right? Huh?

Sink. Sink of the sink. It
that it goes to
that one to
think
in order to go
that it, uh, case in sleep? Cheryl

thanks.
Remembered?
Little
a small Juste.

Cheryl. It disturbs appreciate
an interesting type. If we are it
situates to you in
the city center. Sink. Sink.
Over, uh, it is the inner
part, that it
is small yakking. The famous Hebrew, uh...

In great part.
Huh.
Man of the OH
—I appreciate this type.

Thankses.
Uh, for four. Cheryl.

This type is
large. This type
is completely large.

I realize like uh, I know them.
They are of right. Remembered? Cheryl?
I, uh, has uh
the new facts and
bagel. Huh
d ‘uh. They are Moscow

to go too much towards the bottom.

I will feed
myself.
Thankses. Saying this Cher
that at all I have read this book.

They
read five books to you
that they will not never
read. Ampere-hour, I will
read it. Thankses. Page of right.

II. A Lot

A lot in all the
case, uh, knows
them. Uh,
not. Page of right.
People not law.

People not law.

III. 6000 we spend.

Bruce. HE
Bruce, highly. Sink.
Uh, has happened
the night. Uh, calmly
for an other
artist. Cheryl. Cheryl.
Little heel of Marantz little heel,
that it is firm

in more with the work group.

Huh?

Cheryl.

Uh, appreciate periods.
Which thing?
Hello
standard. They are remembered
of Cheryl,
right of the heel? I
have seen Tom, page of
right of the right page.
Sink of the sink of the sink.

Heels of Droite?
Sink.

Us they are not any are here are not every
multiculturalism possible
here of the acknowledgment
of the delivery to the
right. They have lacked in
great part, uh, begun from
the art that yesterday
evening. We speak... Thankses. Sink.

Bruce Andrew.
It will not happen.

Page
of right. Sink.

Page of right.
Marjorie.

Marjorie has said that gone to that one,
that gone equally in a such way.
A beautiful type. Substance de Nizza
di Nizza, huh? Sink. Sink. Sink of the sink of the sink.

Page of right. Corrected, that tomorrow you will
see. Sink.
Sink. They are of right. HE.
Sad type.

I will explain the luppolo to you.

Ampareheure, thankses. Huh d‘
uh. Cheryl.
They are modification to continue.

It is good Uh like ewww
along, how much
time, andante to
you? The approval so as
to the uh, it has
them leaves sees you. Hmmmm.

They are way to go to these dogs. How much time to go it?

IV. Well-being of the dogs.

A small uniform water?
Interesting HE,
ice-skates, man. Thankses. Sink.

Therefore if it even small track necessity
to these dogs
a serious way. Sink.
Neapolitanisch, enough.

The EC, that mine
comes from the bet. It bet.

Girl of the ** of temporizzazione of ** of it
the girl of the ** of temporizzazione of ** of the

mine of it the mine of
the bet of it mine of the
bet of it mine. Paris. Paris
Equal
De OF it mine. Sink. Sink.
Types of it mine of the types of it mine.

Poor girl, page of
right? Huh d ‘uh.
Digitare from Nizza? Right

of the Vcr. de Nizza?
It
my
sink of bet. Sink. Pleasant graceful, huh?

H»E Cheryl

I ‘ sig.

C ‘ my bets.
Paris. Paris.

Page of right. Here the
ampareheure, cause is a
Juste here.
Uh, like ‘ acces of the
tanks of coloring? Sink. In great part. Sink? Uh

task that is...

Job...

Page of right. Page of right. Page of right.

Huh. Huh d ‘ Uh.

To spray outside, why taken to sure not not even one hour you

and, to the uh and, uh, in order to

learn the line of the HTML. The right page

not not good it. Page of right? Ouais of ouais of ouais of Ouais, huh of uh. Huh d ‘ Uh. Huh d ‘ Uh. Huh d ‘ Uh. Huh d ‘ Uh. Huh d ‘ Uh. Huh d ‘ Uh. Page of right. Page of right. Sink? I will make that one.

If I work, I become paid.

H». Muff from the other substance. Sink. Page of right. Here the man fills
up them. To feel itself. Ampere-hour, page of right, Cheryl. Page of right.
Huh? Cheryl?

Buoa night of Cheryl.

Posted by Brian Stefans at September 28, 2002 11:27 AM
Comments

Inside each stack frame is a slew of useful information. It tells the computer what code is currently executing, where to go next, where to go in the case a return statement is found, and a whole lot of other things that are incredible useful to the computer, but not very useful to you most of the time. One of the things that is useful to you is the part of the frame that keeps track of all the variables you're using. So the first place for a variable to live is on the Stack. This is a very nice place to live, in that all the creation and destruction of space is handled for you as Stack Frames are created and destroyed. You seldom have to worry about making space for the variables on the stack. The only problem is that the variables here only live as long as the stack frame does, which is to say the length of the function those variables are declared in. This is often a fine situation, but when you need to store information for longer than a single function, you are instantly out of luck.

Posted by: Prospero at January 19, 2004 04:56 AM

When compared to the Stack, the Heap is a simple thing to understand. All the memory that's left over is "in the Heap" (excepting some special cases and some reserve). There is little structure, but in return for this freedom of movement you must create and destroy any boundaries you need. And it is always possible that the heap might simply not have enough space for you.

Posted by: Lawrence at January 19, 2004 04:58 AM

When the machine compiles your code, however, it does a little bit of translation. At run time, the computer sees nothing but 1s and 0s, which is all the computer ever sees: a continuous string of binary numbers that it can interpret in various ways.

Posted by: Eli at January 19, 2004 04:58 AM

We can see an example of this in our code we've written so far. In each function's block, we declare variables that hold our data. When each function ends, the variables within are disposed of, and the space they were using is given back to the computer to use. The variables live in the blocks of conditionals and loops we write, but they don't cascade into functions we call, because those aren't sub-blocks, but different sections of code entirely. Every variable we've written has a well-defined lifetime of one function.

Posted by: Sarah at January 19, 2004 04:59 AM