Oh no, not Steely Dan again
I had already come to terms with the idea that the iPod version of shuffling creates a sufficiently unbiased distribution to earn the casual appellation of "random". What was bothering me was now something even deeper. Yes, the bothersome clusters of certain artists are within the bounds of randomness. But that made me realise that the seemingly magical effects of the shuffle function - a spooky just-rightness, even brilliance, that comes from great song juxtapositions - were also consequences of randomness.
And, in its own way, that was much more disturbing.
(Via The Anomalist.)
Interesting article. Coincidentally (?), Steely Dan took its name from a sex toy in William S. Burroughs' "Naked Lunch"; Burroughs, of course, is famous for drawing on random juxtapositions of text for inspiration.
4 comments:
Interesting theories but how could anybody have a problem with Steely Dan. Stay Smooth Mac.
I read this and actually think that each user is unconsciously manipulating the randomizer bits telepathically. It's been shown via sites like John Walker's RetroPsychoKinesis Project and Princeton's consciousness research, that the human mind has measured effects on random number generators.
I know this is slightly off-topic, but I was amazed to read the other day that Jeff 'Skunk' Baxter, erstwhile guitar player with the Doobie Brothers and of course, Steely Dan is now "a specialist in terrorism, missile defense and chemical and biological warfare, he's also a covert hero for the U.S. military."
Pretty big career move, can't think of many, if any, other similar examples. Sorry if this is ancient history to everyone else, couldn't resist mentioning it.
That *is* weird!
Post a Comment