Page 14 - Studio International - February 1974

formalized domains of discourse stands behind making sense, going on, are real. And that the or the other - to abandon trying to come into
a lot of the understanding and responsibility `chaos' of that language world gets mirrored in some dialectical relation with the text and to
relations which obtain in the situations/actions the formal framework doesn't make it 'wrong' : preserve one's notion of, say, 'grammar' or
provoked in the other parts of the show, that is it becomes a bit more interesting on realizing `philosophy', or else to stretch that notion in
it offers some access to them, a possible that one isn't finding 'answers' already secured order to see whether it continues to be possible
articulation of them : what the main concern is for one in the framework, but possibly to go on making sense, that is performing in that
of the other two pieces (the Instruction Indexes `inventing' taking decisions', etc., which will situation. (This brings up) (b). Quite a lot
`ax' and 'bx', and the microfilmed Proceedings feed back constitutively into the course one's depends on that situation's 'reality'. (Without
and their topics and index), is the notion of interest takes. being too ontologically florid) viz. a thousand
`going on' : the problem that faces (the) artists It is of a lot more than just contingent pages, from a year's work, which we can try and'
of 'going on' in their situation; the problem that "'interest' here to notice some similarities and get through with some to s vided - so that
faces any member of any audience of onlookers/ differences between the American Transcript `going on' doesn't devolve into a scatological
readers of going on in their attempts to make and the other work. The aspiration is expressed thumbing-through. But what the American
sense of the situation they are in, i.e. of getting there to 'show' the going on problem, rather Transcript, on the other hand, seems to be
from one 'element' in what is before them to than talk about it in articles - but all this does talking about is a 'chain letter'. At best I can
another. Such as comes up in e.g. 'reading'. The only get 'said'. The Transcript is all there is - envisage the elements of the Handbook, which
dimension of approaching this problem which there are no analogues for Indexes 'ax', 'bx', we're meant to be 'compelled' to connect
. and . . .' or 'if . . then . 2, as
is dealt with in the posters is one thing that gets Proceedings, etc. A lot of problems come up with
missed in the American Transcripts, viz. here. If the Annotations and the Handbook analogous to the three or four word select ions to
that the tradition of teacher/learner dualism is were here the problem would get a kind of be ranked as to their strength in Instruction
seen not to have been broken down by the answer - but only on one fairly trivial level. An Index 'ax'. And that's really only a propadaeutic,
operational aspects of the transcripts yet is there arena would be provided for going on in, but to the encounters of the Proceedings.
criticized as methodologically vacuous. Hence this only puts the problems back to This brings up (c), possibly the most
one attempts to sort out contexts where there is methodological/teleological levels : for example important, as to why this should be. The content
some difficulty/relation of this sort, from those (a) as noted, the Transcript seems to want to of the texts comes up here. Reading the
where there isn't, or where difficulties of absolutize 'us/them' relations - to the effect that Transcript will be variously difficult according
understanding/going on are different (say, the it's always `us' who are being decoded, to how much reading you've done; that is not
ontology of the two contexts will differ); that is, translated, worked on, etc. Pragmatics is affirmed saying the same as 'according to which language
one formalizes 'theirs/ours' and 'ours/mine', and as the central issue (`Definitely what we're group you are in'. But the problem of going on
sorts out some of the relations obtaining between talking about is pragmatics in an important with the Handbook fragments is assumed to be
statements in the two realms e.g. implication. sense'), but it's a rather pauce pragmatics we are one of (for the 'audience') finding one's way
[Thus : 'That statement made in (their) our/ left with; i.e. it's not confirmed by the around in a 'foreign' situation. But 'Idiolect
mine context, what force has it in this asymmetry of the operations one mightbe (-ical)' doesn't name/describe projects - where
situation where I am trying to make sense of expected to perform - we still find the notion of one decides to muster up some work which,
this work, i.e. in this theirs/ours context ?'] `our' problem, which may or may not be inter alia, provides a nexus for some more.
These are the problems, arising from taking accessible to 'them'. What makes the There, the 'some more' appears fairly arbitrary
part in the game of the show, which the posters operational interface of the Proceedings, etc., (likewise the 'decides') : one doesn't seem able
are significant for. (They also crop up not trivial is the comparative richness of the to evolve a decision procedure from some
reflexively in reading the posters themselves. combinations one can try. It is a simple, in the arrangement like that. One could formalize a
What's been said shouldn't imply that going on sense of 'broad', framework, but what one gets decision procedure, but doing that would not
is no problem there too.) The important issue tends towards being a realm one can work in - have much to do with its particular antecedent :
of 'going on' is dealt with most 'atomically' qua act towards articulating that situation. This one has to take a decision to sort out a decision
(abstractly) in the Instruction Indexes ax and is a version of the game played every time in procedure. It is that decision, and the 'need'
bx. To make it a bit clearer what we're talking reading , which is making sense of, connecting provoking it which is embedded in the idiolect.
about: 'Instruction Index ax' and 'Instruction meanings in, some text. The implication `Going on' is generalized, fundamental, etc., etc.
Index bx' both start off with texts in which extends to that but here more specifically - but it gets thrown up as an issue when it
certain phrases/fragments are singled out. [We concerns the relation between t L and its becomes difficult; and difficult not just
don't have to bother with the content of the audience. The proceedings an texts are quantitatively as in terms of information lacked,
texts (yet)] What's at issue is the types and idiolectical. There is a real difficulty on that but qualitatively - where translation becomes a
strengths of relation between, in this case, level for a member of the audience - the point problem. It seems from looking at the
assertions (fragments of assertions) or sentential is that this is part of the problem of encountering Proceedings that there this problem does come
strings in Art-Language discourse (i.e. 'going them, rather than some contingent 'difficulty' up : unfortunately 'Natural' is rather devalued
on' relations). In 'bx' this gets added to in that through which one tries to slip. By taking it descriptively. 'Coherence' might be better if it
the reader sorting out the 'pieces of grammatical. seriously one has a locus for the learning/going did not imply something too rigorous and/or
information' comes more into the picture: he is on problem. A question there might be `(to naive to be applicable to complicated systems.
to assign the strings to one (or more) of some what extent) is it incumbent upon members of The problem with the Annotations, Handbook,
modalities - thereby putting his grammatical A-L to make translations ?'. The weight of and Transcript is that one can't, without being
information to some use and doing some rationalist tradition puts a premium on an cynical, see where the obligations come from.
`grammatical mapping'. This is not all intuitive: affirmative answer. The trouble is that that But with the Proceedings, looking at 'going on'
there is a mechanism giving a framework for tends to evacuate responsibility from the is something like an existential answer to the
deriving the simple types of going on relations, `audience' position and invites low-level shallow problem of going on. Moreover, as soon as
and a truth tabular complication of this, learning profiles. In the microfilm and someone else (some 'audience member') makes
incorporating constellations of the simple types, computer work - the Proceedings - one, as it his contract with the Proceedings - sits down to
so they don't remain too strong. The result is were, plays the machine: which is to do with read them - going on comes up for him. As it
the provision of the domain in which to act : one being willing to put one's preconceptions at says at the end of the index, trying to get through
can do this, try that move/strategy. It is about risk; so that in 'playing' one is placed in the maps 'the life world of your interest'.
the fact that the difficulties of, for example, position of having to make a decision one way PAUL WOOD
52