Thesis Bibliography

Abstract Machine Bibliography reduced size——————————-> and…  and… and… you arrive here on a line of flight…

Adams, F. and K. Aizawa, 2001. “The bounds of cognition”. Philosophical Psychology, Vol. 14 (1), pp. 43-64

Adorno, T.W., 2007. Philosophy of Modern Music. 3rd ed. London: Continuum

Agrell, J., 2010. “The Creative Hornist Off the Beaten Path: Tales of Creative Hornists, Part I. Horn Call: Journal of the International Horn Society, 10, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 54-57

Alstott, J., P. Panzarasa, M. Rubinov and E.T. Bullmore, 2014. “A Unifying Framework for Measuring Weighted Rich Clubs”.  Nature, Scientific Reports volume 4, Article number: 7258. Published online 1 December 2014. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Arbo, A., 2009. “Some Remarks on “Hearing-as” and its Role in the Aesthetics of Music.” Topoi, 09, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 97-101

Aspers, P., 2011. Markets. Cambridge: Polity

Attali, J., 1985. Noise: The Political Economy of Music. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press

Avanessian, A. ans S. Malik, 2016. “The Specuative Time Complex”. DIS. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Ayer, A.J.,1982. Philosophy in the Twentieth Century. London: Phoenix

Badiou, A., 2011. Wittgenstein’s Antiphilosophy. Trans. B. Bosteels. London; New York: Verso

Baig, E.C., 2017. “Joshua Bell: VR could popularize classical music”. USA Today. Accessed online 4 March 2018: 

Baker, J., 2017. “How Spotify — And its Playlists — Are Evolving”. PIAS. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Ball, P., 2010. The Music Instinct: How Music Works and Why We Can’t Do Without It. London: Bodley Head

Barber, A., 2010. Language and Thought. Milton Keynes: The Open University

Bargainnier, E.F., 1978. “W. S. Gilbert and American Musical Theatre.” Journal of Popular Culture, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 446-458

Barrett, G.D., 2016.  After Sound: Toward a Critical Music. New York; London: Bloomsbury

Barthes, R., 1977. Image, Music, Text. S. Heath ed., London: Fontana

————— 1984. Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography. London: Flamingo

Baum, E.B., 2004. What is Thought? Cambridge, Mass; London: MIT Press

BEARD, D. and K. GLOAG eds., 2005. Musicology: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge

BECKERMAN, M., 1989. “The Sword on the Wall: Japanese Elements and Their Significance in “The Mikado”.” The Musical Quarterly, vol. 73, no. 3, pp. 303-319

BEETHOVEN, L.v. 1930. Symphony no. 5, C minor. Op. 67. M. UNGER and W. ALTMANN eds., London: Eulenburg

BEHAN, D.P., 1979. “Locke on PERSONS and Personal Identity.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Mar 1, 1979, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 53-67 Periodicals Archive Online

BELSEY, C., 2002. Poststructuralism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press

BERGERON, K. and P.V. BOHLMAN, 1992. Disciplining Music: Musicology and its Canons. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Blake, T., 2017. “Concepts out of the Shadows Notes on Deleuze and Guattari’s “What is Philosophy?” (2)”. Agent Swarm Blog. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Bluemink, M., 2015. “The Web as Rhizome in Deleuze and Guattari”. Blue Labyrinths Blog. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Bonnet, R.M., 2016. “Archipelagic Listening” Podcast, Urbanomic. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Borges, J.L. 2018. Wikiquote. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

BORN, G. ed., 2013. Music, Sound and Space: Transformations of Public and Private Experience. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press

Boudry, P. and R. Lorenz, 2016. “Silent” Film art installation. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Bourriaud, N., 2009. Relational Aesthetics. Trans. S. Pleasance and F. Woods with M. Copeland. ?: Les presses du réel

BOWMAN, W.D., 1998. Philosophical Perspectives on Music. New York: Oxford University Press

Bown, O., 2015. “Attributing Creative Agency: Are we doing it right?”. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Computational Creativity June 2015, pp. 17-22

Brassier, R., 2013. “Unfree Improvisation/Compulsive Freedom”. Mattin. Accessed online 6 March 2018:

Bretan, M. and G. Weinberg, 2016. “A Survey of Robotic Musicianship”. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 59 No. 5, pp. 100-109

Brits, B., P. Gibson and A. Ireland, eds., 2016. Aesthetics After Finitude. Melbourne:

Brodsky, R., 2015. “Music Apps That Don’t Exist Yet (But Should)”. Spin. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

BRONOWSKI, J. and British Broadcasting Corporation., 1973. The Ascent of Man. London: British Broadcasting Corporation

BROOKS, K. ed., 2006. Chambers Dictionary of Music.  Edinburgh: Chambers

BROWN, C., 1991. “Historical Performance, Metronome Marks and Tempi in Beethoven’s Symphonies.” Early Music, May, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 247-250

BROWN, J., 2010. “Buzz and Rumble: Global Pop Music and Utopian Impulse”. Social Text, Spring 2010, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 125-146

Bruntrup, G. and L. Jaskolla, eds., 2016. Panpsychism: Contemporary Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online

Bryant, L.R., 2011. “Freedom Evolves: Deleuze’s Transcendental Aesthetics”. Larvalsubjects Blog. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

BUCHANAN, I. and M. SWIBODA eds., 2004. Deleuze and Music. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press

Bull, M., 2007. Sound Moves: iPod Culture and Urban Experience. London; New York: Routledge

Burland, K. and A. McLean, 2016. “Understanding Live Coding Events”. International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media. Volume 12, 2016, issue 2: Live Coding, pp. 139-151

BURROWS, D., 2005. Handel and the English Chapel Royal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

BUZAN, T., 2010. The Mind Map Book: Unlock Your Creativity, Boost Your Memory, Change Your Life. B. BUZAN ed., New ed. Harlow: Pearson/BBC Active

Byrne, N., 2016. “How Music Works: How to compose music with multimedia in mind”. The Irish Times. ccessed online 3 March 2018:

Cage, J., 1978. Silence: Lectures and Writings. London: Boyars

CAIRNEY, J.W.G. and R.M. BURKE, 1996. “Physiological Heterogeneity Within Fungal Mycelia: An Important Concept for a Functional Understanding of the Ectomycorrhizal Symbiosis”. New Phytologist, Dec., vol. 134, no. 4, pp. 685-695

Campbell, S., 2006. “The Conception of a Person as a Series of Mental Events”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Sep., vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 339-358

Carr, E.H., 2001. What is History? R.J. Evans ed., 40th Anniversary ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave

Cavicchi, D., 1998. Tramps Like Us: Music & Meaning Among Springsteen Fans. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press

Chayka, K., 2011. “WTF is… Relational Aesthetics?” Hyperallergic. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Chalmers, D., 2018. “The Mind Bleeds Into the World” Video conversation with Edge. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Chanan, M., 1995. Repeated Takes: A Short History of Recording and its Effects on Music. London: Verso

Chandler, D., 2007. Semiotics: The Basics. 2nd ed. London: Routledge

Christl, W. and S. Spiekermann, 2016. “Networks of Control: A Report on Corporate Surveillance, Digital Tracking, Big Data & Privacy”. Cracked Labs. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Chua, D.K.L., 2014. The Galitzin Quartets of Beethoven: Opp. 127, 132, 130. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press

Chuter, J., 2017. “Interview: Belisha Beacon”. Attn:Magazine. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Clark, A., 1997. Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press

—————. Natural-born Cyborgs: Why Minds and Technologies Are Made To Merge. New York: Oxford University Press

—————. 2015. “What ‘Extended Me’ knows”. Synthese 192 (11) pp. 3757-3775

—————. 2016. “Andy Clark on Prediction, Action, and the Embodied Mind”. Podcast (BSP 126), Brain Science. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Clarke, A.C., 2018. Wikipedia page. Accessed online 5 March 2018:

Clarke, E.F., 2005. Ways of Listening: An Ecological Approach to the Perception of Musical Meaning. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press

—————, 2010. Music and Mind in Everyday Life. N. Diben and S. Pitts eds., Oxford: Oxford University Press

Clayton, M. ed.,  2008. Music, Words and Voice : A Reader. Manchester: Manchester University Press published in association with The Open University

Clayton, M., T. Herbert and R. Middleton, eds., 2002. The Cultural Study of Music: A Critical Introduction. New York; London: Routledge

CLENDINNING, E., 2010. “The Cambridge Companion to the Beatles by Kenneth Womack”. Journal of American Culture, 12, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 353-354

Clynes, M.E. and N.S. Kline, 1960. “Cyborgs and Space”. Astronautics, September 1960. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Cohen, S., 1993. “Ethnography and Popular Music Studies”. Popular Music, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 123-138

Coleman, R. and J. Ringrose, eds., 2013. Deleuze and Research Methodologies. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press

Collins, S. and S. Young, 2014. Beyond 2.0: The Future of Music. Bristol, CT: Equinox Publishing

Commeyras, M., M.F. Orellan, B.C. Bruce and L. Nielsen, 1996. “What do feminist theories have to offer to literacy, education, and research?”. Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 31. no. 4, pp. 458–468

Conrad, F.G. and J. Blair, 2009. “Sources of Error in Cognitive Interviews”. Public Opinion Quarterly, March 20, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 32-55

Cook, A., 2017. “The Power of Playlisting”. Music Business Journal. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Cook, N., 2000. Music: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Cook, N. and M. Everist, 1999. Rethinking Music. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press

Cooke, D., 1959. The Language of Music. Oxford: OUP

Coplan, A. and P. Goldie eds., 2011. Empathy: Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Coursera, 2015. Questionnaire Design for Social Surveys. Online course by University of Michigan. F. Conrad and F. Kreuter, presenters. Details accessed online 4 March 2018:

Cox, C. and D. Warner eds., 2004. Audio Culture: Readings in Modern Music. New York; London: Continuum

Crabtree, P. and Foster, D.H., 2005. Sourcebook for Research in Music. 2nd ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press

Crawford, S., 2010. Aspects of Mind. Milton Keynes: The Open University

Crickmore, L., 1966. “Neo-Thomism as a Basis for the Teaching of Music”. British Journal of Educational Studies, Nov., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 36-44

Crimp, D., 2002. Melancholia and Moralism: Essays on AIDS and Queer Politics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Pres.

Cross, I., 1998. “Music Analysis and Music Perception”. Music Analysis, Mar., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 3-20.

————— 2009. “The Evolutionary Nature of Musical Meaning”. Musicae Scientiae, September 21, vol. 13, no. 2 suppl, pp. 179-200

CROWTHER, P., 2007. Defining Art, Creating the Canon: Artistic Value in an Era of Doubt. Oxford: Clarendon

—————. 2012. The Phenomenology of Modern Art: Exploding Deleuze, Illuminating Style. London: Continuum

Cryer, P., 2011. The Research Student’s Guide to Success. Maidenhead: The Open University Press

Cull Ó Maoilearca, L., 2016. “On immanence”. Paper delivered at The Concept of Immanence in Philosophy & the Arts Conference, Vienna 5-7 May 2016. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Cumming, N., 2000. The Sonic Self: Musical Subjectivity and Signification. Bloomington: Indiana University Press

Dalhaus, C., 1989. The Idea of Absolute Music. Trans. R. Lustig. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Daly, I., and A.B. Haney, 2014. 53 Interesting Ways to Communicate Your Research. London: The Professional and Higher Partnership Imprint

Danaher, J., 2015a. “The Extended Mind and the Coupling-Constitution Fallacy”. Philosophical Disquisitions Blog. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

—————. 2015b. “Neuroenhancement and the Extended Mind Hypothesis”. Philosophical Disquisitions Blog. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

—————. 2017. “Extended Cognition and the Possibility of Extended Personal Assault”. Philosophical Disquisitions Blog. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Davies, B., 2000. A body of writing, 1990 – 1999, Walnut Creek CA: Alta Mira Press

Davies, H., 1968. The Beatles: The Authorised Biography. London: Heinemann

Davies, S., 1987. “Authenticity in Musical Performance”. The British Journal of Aesthetics, December 21, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 39-50

—————. 1994. Musical Meaning and Expression. Ithaca, NY; London: Cornell University Press

—————. 2007. Philosophical Perspectives on Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press

—————. 2014. “Anglo-American philosophy of music, 1960–2000”. Grove Dictionary of Music (online). Accessed online 4 March 2018: 

Dawkins, R., 1976. The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press

—————. 1999. The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press

De Certeau, M., 1984. The Practice of Everyday Life. Trans. S.F. Rendall. Berkeley CA; London: University of California Press

Defraene, P., 2016. “Exploring Post-Internet Music”. Humanhuman. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

DeLanda, M., 2006. A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. London: Continuum

—————. 2012. “Assemblage Theory, Society, and Deleuze” European Graduate School Video Lectures. YouTube Video. Acessed online 4 March 2018:

—————. 2016. Assemblage Theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press

Deleuze, G., 1988a. Bergsonism. New York: Zone Books

—————. 1988b. Foucault. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press

—————. 1990. Logic of Sense. New York: Columbia University Press

—————. 1991. Empiricism and Subjectivity. New York: Columbia University Press

—————. 1994. Difference and Repetition. New York: Columbia University Press

—————. 1995. Negotiations:1972-1990. Trans. M. Joughin. New York: Columbia University Press

Deleuze, G. and F. Guattari, 1983. Anti-Oedipus. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press

—————. 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. London: Continuum

—————. 1994. What is Philosophy? New York: Columbia University Press

Deleuze, G and C. Parnet, 2002. Dialogues II. New York: Columbia University Press

Demers, J.T., 2010. Listening Through the Noise: The Aesthetics of Experimental Electronic Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Dennett, D.C., 2017. From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds. New York; London: Norton

DeNora, T., 2000. Music in Everyday Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Derrida, J. 1979. “The Parergon”. Trans. C. Owens. October, Summer, vol. 9, pp. 3-41

—————. 1995. The Gift of Death. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press

—————. 1997. Of Grammatology. Corrected ed. Baltimore; London: Johns Hopkins University Press

Deutsch, D., 1997. The Fabric of Reality. London: Penguin

—————. 2012. The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations that Transform the World. London: Pelican

Dipert, R.R., 1980. “The Composer’s Intentions: An Examination of Their Relevance for Performance”. The Musical Quarterly, Apr., vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 205-218

Dobson, M.C., 2010. “New Audiences for Classical Music: The Experiences of Non-attenders at Live Orchestral Concerts”. Journal of New Music Research, 06, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 111-124

Dobson, M.C. and S.E. Pitts, 2011. “Classical Cult or Learning Community? Exploring New Audience Members’ Social and Musical Responses to First-time Concert Attendance”. Ethnomusicology Forum, 12, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 353-368

Dodd, J., 2007. Works of Music: An Essay in Ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press

—————. 2013. “Adventures in the metaontology of art: local descriptivism, artefacts and dreamcatchers”. Philos Stud (2013) 165, pp. 1047-1068

Dosse, F., 2010. Gilles Deleuze & Felix Guattari: Intersecting Lives. New York; Chichester: Columbia University Press

Doubleday, V., 2008. “Sounds of power: An overview of musical instruments and gender”. Ethnomusicology Forum, 06/01; June, 2008, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 3-32

Douglas-Jones, R. and S. Sariola, 2009. “Rhizome Yourself: Experiencing Deleuze and Guattari from Theory to Practice”. Rhizomes Issue 19. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Drake, N., 2018. “Universe’s First Stars Detected? Get the Facts”. National Geographic. Accessed online 6 March 2018:

Dredge, S., 2016a. “AI could be the music industry’s next Napster moment – but much bigger”. Musically. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

—————. 2016b. “Imagine a music industry with 950m mobile listeners by 2022”. Musically. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Dreyfus, L., 1983. “Early Music Defended against Its Devotees: A Theory of Historical Performance in the Twentieth Century”. The Musical Quarterly, Summer, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 297-322

Driver, R.D., 2010. “You Never Give Me Your Money: The Beatles After the Breakup by Peter Doggett”. Journal of Popular Culture, 12, vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 1305-1307

Eden, D. and M. Saremba eds., 2009. The Cambridge companion to Gilbert and Sullivan.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Eisenberg, E., 2005. The Recording Angel: Music, Records and Culture from Aristotle to Zappa. 2nd ed. New Haven, Conn; London: Yale University Press

Eno, B., 2016. “Culture Now: Brian Eno”. ICA. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Ericsson, S., 2011. “The Recorded Music Industry and the Emergence of Online Music Distribution: Innovation in the Absence of Copyright (Reform)”. George Washington Law Review, 09, vol. 79, no. 6, pp. 1783-1798

Evans, R.J., 2001. In Defence of History. New ed. London: Granta

Fager, C.E., 1969. “The Apple Corps four”. Christian Century, 03/19, vol. 86, no. 12, pp. 386-388

Feinberg, W., 2006. “Philosophical Ethnography: or, How Philosophy and Ethnography Can Live Together in the World of Educational Research” Educational Studies in Japan: International Yearbook No.1, December, 2006, pp.5-14

Finnegan, R., 1989. The Hidden Musician: Music-making in an English Town. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fleming, A. 2006. “Post-processual landscape archaeology: a critique”. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 16, 267-80

Fodor, J.A., 1987. Psychosemantics: The Problem of Meaning in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press

—————. 2010. LOT 2: The Language of Thought Revisited. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Foucault, M., 1969. L’Archéologie du Savoir. ?: Gallimard

—————., 1972. The Archaeology of Knowledge and Discourse on Language. Trans. A.M. Sheridan Smith. New York: Pantheon

—————. 1973. The Birth of the Clinic. An Archaeology of Medical Perception. Trans. A.M Sheridan. London: Routledge

Frabetti, F., 2015. Software Theory: A Cultural Philosophical Study. London: Rowman & Littlefield

Frankish, K., 2016. “The mind isn’t locked in the brain but extends far beyond it”. Interalia Magazine. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

—————. 2017. “Why panpsychism fails to solve the mystery of consciousness”. Aeon. Accessed onlinr 4 March 2018:

Gale, K., J. Speedy and J. Wyatt, 2010. “Gatecrashing the Oasis? A Joint Doctoral Dissertation Play”. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(1), pp. 21–28

Galloway, R.,  2014. “The Universe of Things — by Steven Shaviro”. Culture and Communication Blog. Accessed online 4 Mach 2018:

Glendinning, S., 2011. Derrida: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Goehr, L., 2007. The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works: An Essay in the Philosophy of Music. Rev. ed. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press

—————. 2008. Elective Affinities:  Musical Essays on the History of Aesthetic Theory. New York; Chichester: Columbia University Press

Goodman, N., 1968. Languages of Art; An Approach to a Theory of Symbols. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill

Gould, G., 1987. The Glenn Gould Reader. T. Page ed., London: Faber and Faber

Gourley, K.A., 1978. “Towards a Reassessment of the Ethnomusicologist’s Role in Research”. Ethnomusicology: Journal of the Society for Ethnomusicology, vol. 22, pp. 1-35

Gourvish, T. and K. Tennent, 2010. “Peterson and Berger revisited: Changing Market Dominance in the British Popular Music Industry, c.1950-80”. Business History, 04, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 187-206

Gracyk, T., 1997. “Listening to Music: Performances and Recordings”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Spring, vol. 55, no. 2, Perspectives on the Arts and Technology, pp. 139-150

—————. 2015. “Musical Concerns: Essays in Philosophy of Music — Jerrold Levinson. Review.” Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Grant, M.J., and I. Misch, eds., 2016. The Musical Legacy of Karlheinz Stockhausen: Looking Back and Forward. Hofheim: Wolke Verlag

Grasmayer, B., 2016a. “Projecting Trends: What These 4 Music Startups Reveal About the Future of Music”. Synchtank. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

—————. 2016b. “4 Products that Show the Future of Music”.  Music X Tech X Future.  Accessed online 3 March 2018:

—————. 2016c. “Music’s Role In A Transhumanist Future”. Synchblog (Hyperbot). Accessed online 5 March 2018:

—————. 2016d. “PROJECTING TRENDS: Moving Beyond the Static Music Experience”. Synchblog. Accessed online 5 March 2018:

—————. 2017a. “Streaming wars for superfans”. Getrevue. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

—————. 2017b. “Four of the Biggest Opportunities for the Future of Music Consumption”. Music Tech Future. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

—————. 2017c. “Online Music is About to Experience Another MySpace Moment”. Music Tech Future. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Grey, T.S.  ed., 2008. The Cambridge Companion to Wagner. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Grice, H.P., 1989. Studies In The Way of Words. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Griffin, A., 2017. “Facebook’s Artificial Intelligence Robots Shut Down After They Start Talking to Each Other in Their Own Language”. Independent. Accessed online 5 March 2018:

Griffiths, N.K., 2011. “The Fabric of Performance: Values and Social Practices of Classical Music Expressed Through Concert Dress Choice”. Music Performance Research, 10, vol. 4, pp. 30-48

Grillmeier, A., 1975. Christ in Christian Tradition. Atlanta: John Knox Press

Gunkel, H., A. Hamed and S. O’Sullivan, eds.,2017. Futures and Fictions. London: Repeater Books

Guss, F. 2001. Drama performance in children’s play culture: The possibilities and significances of form. Report 6. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Trondheim.

Gutting, G., 2005. Foucault: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press

Hacker P.M.S., 1997. Wittgenstein: On Human Nature. R. Monk and F. Raphael eds., London: Phoenix

Hachoen, R. and N. Wagner, 1997. “The Communicative Force of Wagner’s Leitmotifs: Complementary Relationships between Their Connotations and Denotations”. Music Perception, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 445-475

Hacking, I., 1979. “Michel Foucault’s Immature Science”. Noûs, Mar., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 39-51

—————. 2004. Historical Ontology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Hall, S., 2014. “Song for a future generation: Music predictions for 2020”. Virgin. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Hallam S., L. Rogers and A. Creech, 2008. “Gender Differences in Musical Instrument Choice”. International Journal of Music Education, 01/01, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 7-19

Hamilton, A., 2000. “The Art of Improvisation and the Aesthetics of Imperfection”. British Journal of Aesthetics, 01, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 168-182

—————. 2003. “The Art of Recording and the Aesthetics of Perfection”. The British Journal of Aesthetics, October 01, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 345-362

Hanfling, O. 1987. The Quest for Meaning. Oxford: Basil Blackwell in association with the Open University

—————. ed., 1992. Philosophical Aesthetics: An Introduction. Blackwell in association with the Open University

Hanslick, E. 1854 (1891). Vom Musicalisch Schönen (On the Musically Beautiful) Trans. G. Payzant, 1986). Indianappolis IN: Hackett Publishing Company

Harman. G., 2005. Guerilla Metaphysics: Phenomenology and the Carpentry of Things. Chicago: Open Court

Harper, A., 2010. Infinite Music. Alresford, UK: Zero Books

————. 2016. “How Internet Music is Frying Your Brain”. Popular Music

(2017) Volume 36/1. pp. 86-97

Harper-Scott, J.P.E., 2012. The Quilting Points of Musical Modernism: Revolution, Reaction, and William Walton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Harris, D., 2008. “Branching of fungal hyphae: regulation, mechanisms and comparison with other branching systems”. Mycologia, 100(6), pp. 823 – 832.

Harrison, C.  and P. Wood eds., 1992. Art in Theory, 1900-1990: An Anthology of Changing Ideas. Oxford: Blackwell

Hartmann, A., 2003. Claude Debussy As I Knew Him and Other Writings of Arthur Hartmann. S. Hsu, S. Grolnic and M.A. Peters eds., Rochester, NY; Woodbridge: University of Rochester Press; Boydell & Brewer

Hegarty, P., 2007. Noise. New York; London: Continuum.

—————. 2015. Rumour and Radiation: Sound in Video Art. London; New York: Bloomsbury

Heidegger, M., 1977. The Question Concerning Technology, and Other Essays. W. Lovitt ed., New York; London: Harper and Row

Heile, B. ed., 2009. The Modernist Legacy: Essays on New Music. Farnham: Ashgate.

Heim, M., 1993. The Metaphysics of Virtual Reality. New York: Oxford University Press

Hellier-Tinoco, R., 2003. “Experiencing People: Relationships, Responsibility and Reciprocity”. British Journal of Ethnomusicology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 19-34

Herbert, T. and Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music (Great Britain)., 2001. Music in Words: A Guide to Researching and Writing About Music. London: Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music

Hermand, J. and G. Richter eds., 2006. Sound Figures of Modernity: German Music and Philosophy.  Madison, Wis.; London: University of Wisconsin Press

Hess, P., 2017. “Researchers Enable People to Compose Music With Only Their Brain”. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Hewitt, T.W., 2013. The Mycelium as a Metaphor for the Metaphysical Meaning Space of Music. MA(music) dissertation. The Open University

—————. 2015. “Report, 2nd Royal Musical Association, Music and Philosophy Study Group’s Workshop on The Philosophy of Human+Computer Music”. Philosophy of human+computer music. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

Hillis, D., 2016. “The Enlightenment is Dead, Long Live the Entanglement”. JoDS. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Hodder, I., 2012. Entangled: An Archaeology of the Relationships Between Humans and Things. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell

—————. 2014. “The Entanglements of Humans and Things: A Long-Term View”. New Literary History, Volume 45, Number 1, Winter 2014, pp. 19-36

Hofstadter, D.R., 2000. Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid. 20th-anniversary ed. London: Penguin

Hofstadter, D.R. and D.C. Dennett, 1981. The Mind’s I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul. New York: Basic Books

Honan, E.M., 2001. (Im)plausibilities: A rhizo – textual analysis of the Queensland English Syllabus. PhD Thesis, James Cook University.

—————. 2004. “(Im)plausibilities: A rhizo-textual analysis of policy texts and teachers’ work”. Educational Philosophy and Theory,Vol. 36, No. 3, pp.267-281

—————. 2007. “Writing a rhizome: an (im)plausible methodology”. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, Volume 20: 5, pp. 531-546

Honan, E. and D. Bright, 2016. “Writing a thesis differently”. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29:5, pp. 731-743

Honderich, T and M. Burnyeat eds., 1979. Philosophy As It Is. Harmondsworth: Penguin

Høstaker, R., 2014. A Different Society Altogether: What Sociology Can Learn from Deleuze, Guattari, and Latour. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing

Hoy, D.C., ed., 1986. Foucault: A Critical Reader. Oxford: Blackwell

Hu, C., 2017. “Should Spotify Try to Become the ‘Netflix Of Music’? Not So Fast”. Billboard. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Hughes, R., 1990. Nothing If Not Critical: Selected Essays on Art and Artsits. London: Harvill

Hugill. A., 2012. The Digital Musician. Abingdon; New York: Routledge

Huhn, T., 2004. The Cambridge Companion to Adorno. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press

Hutson, M., 2017. “How Google is making music with artificial intelligence”. Science. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Hylton, P., 2018. “Willard van Orman Quine” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. N. Zalta. Accessed online 3 March 2018

Ingarden, R., A. CZERNIAWSKI, and J.G. Harrell, 1986. The Work of Music and the Problem of its Identity. Berkeley: University of California Press

Inglis, I. ed., 1999. The Beatles, Popular Music and Society: A Thousand Voices.  Basingstoke: Macmillan

—————. 2000. “The Beatles Are Coming!’ Conjecture and Conviction in the Myth of Kennedy, America, and the Beatles”. Popular Music & Society, Summer2000, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 93-110

—————. 2005. “The Continuing Story of John Lennon”. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 12, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 451-467

Jackendoff, R., 2012. A User’s Guide to Thought and Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press

James, I., 2012a. The New French Philosophy. Cambridge: Polity

—————. 2012b. “Philosophy, Aesthetics and Technics” Seminar. Vimeo video.

Accessed online 4 March 2018:

James, W., 1912 (1996). Essays in Radical Empiricism. Lincoln NE: University of Nebraska Press

Jarman, D., 1995. Chroma: A Book of Colour. London: Vintage

Jenkins, K., 1995. On “What is History?”: from Carr and Elton to Rorty and White. London; New York: Routledge.

Johnson, D., 2015. “Composing Music With Recurrent Neural Networks”. Hexahedria. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Johnston, M., 1987. “Human Beings”. The Journal of Philosophy, Feb., vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 59-83

Joseph, B.W. 2011. “Biomusic” Grey Room. 45, Fall 2011. MIT Press Journals, pp. 128-150

Joyce, C and A. Unterberger, 2015. “Where Will You Be in 15 Years? Spotify, BOSE, Third Man Records, and More Look Ahead”. Spin. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Jupp, V., 2006. The SAGE Dictionary of Social Research Methods. London: SAGE

Juslin, P.N., S. LILJESTRÖM, P. LAUKKA, D. VÄSTFJÄLL, and L. LUNDQVIST, 2011. “Emotional Reactions to Music in a Nationally Representative Sample of Swedish Adults: Prevalence and Causal Influences”. Musicae Scientiae, July 01, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 174-207

Kelly, S., 2017. “Brian Eno’s app Reflection uses science to create music”. BBC News. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Kenyon, N., ed., 2002. Authenticity and Early Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Kivy, P., 1990. Music Alone: Philosophical Reflections on the Purely Musical Experience. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press

—————. 2007. Music, Language, and Cognition and Other Essays in the Aesthetics of Music. Oxford: Clarendon

—————. 2009. Antithetical Arts: On the Ancient Quarrel Between Literature and Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Knappett, C and L. Malfouris, eds., 2008. Material Agency: Towards an Non-Anthropocentric Approach. London: Springer

Kolb, B.M., 2001. “The Effect of Generational Change on Classical Music Concert Attendance and Orchestras’ Responses in the UK and US”. Cultural Trends, 03, vol. 11, no. 41, pp. 1-35

Koopman, C. and S. Davies, 2001. “Musical Meaning in a Broader Perspective”. Journal of Aesthetics & Art Criticism, 03, vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 261-280

Kosko, B., 1994. Fuzzy Thinking: The New Science of Fuzzy Logic. London: Flamingo

Kozinets, R.V., 2010. Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. London: SAGE

Kramer, L., 2001. Musical Meaning: Toward a Critical History. Berkeley, Calif.; London: University of California Press

—————. 2011. Interpreting Music. Berkeley, Calif.; London: University of California Press

Kraut, R., 2007. Artworld Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Krausz, M.  ed., 1993. The Interpretation of Music: Philosophical Essays. Oxford: Clarendon Press

KRUMHANSL, C.L., 1998. “Topics in Music: An Empirical Study of Memorability, Openness, and Emotion in Mozart’s String Quintet in C Major and Beethoven’s String Quartet in A Minor”. Music Perception, Fall 1998, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 119-134

KURZWEIL, R., 2005. The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. London: Duckworth

Kusek, D. and G. Leonhard, 2005. The Future of Music: Manifesto for the Digital Revolution. S.G. Lindsay, ed.. Boston, MA: Berklee Press. (Kindle edition)

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson, 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books

—————. 2003. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, Ill.; London: University of Chicago Press

Lather, P. A., 2007. “Postbook: Working the ruins of feminist ethnography”. In Getting lost: Feminist efforts toward a double(d) science (pp. 135-150). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press

Latour, B., 2005. Reassembling The Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Law, J., 2003. “Making a Mess with Method” The Centre for Science Studies, Lancaster University. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Lawson, C., 1999. The Historical Performance of Music: An Introduction. R. Stowell ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leavitt, J., 2010. “Mytheme and Motif: Lévi-Strauss and Wagner”. Intersections: Canadian Journal of Music, 04, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 95-116

Lebedva, K., 2009. “Review article:  Bernard Stiegler, Technics and Time, 2: Disorientation Stanford University Press, 2008”. Parrhesia, No. 7, pp. 81-85

Lee, T., 2016. “Making a Ceramics 3D Printer With Taekyeom Lee – 3D Printing”. 3D Printing. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Lemke, J.L., 1995. Textual politics: discourse and social dynamics. Taylor & Francis, London.

Le POIDEVIN, R., 2007. The Images of Time: An Essay on Temporal Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Le POIDEVIN, R. and M. MacBeath eds., 1993. The Philosophy of Time. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Lepore, E.  ed., 1989. Truth and Interpretation: Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson.  Oxford: Blackwel

Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1993. Gesture and Speech. Cambridge MA: MIT Press

Levin, T.Y., 1990. “For the Record: Adorno on Music in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility”. October, Winter, vol. 55, pp. pp. 23-47

Levine, R., 2017. “Turn Down for This! How Mood Music Is Changing Streaming”. Billboard. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Levinson, J., 1990. Music, Art, and Metaphysics: Essays in Philosophical Aesthetics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press

—————. 2015. Musical Concerns: Essays in Philosophy of Music. New York, NY: Oxford University Press

Levitin, D.J., 2007. This Is Your Brain on Music: Understanding a Human Obsession. London: Atlantic

Lewis, D.K., 1986. On the Plurality of Worlds. Malden, Mass.; Oxford: Blackwell

Lincoln, S., 2005. “Feeling the Noise: Teenagers, Bedrooms and Music”. Leisure Studies, 10, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 399-414

Livingstone, S.R. and W.F. Thompson, 2009. “The Emergence of Music from the Theory of Mind”. Musicæ Scientiæ: The Journal of the European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music, 01/01; Special issue, 2009, pp. 83-97

Lyotard, J., 1991. The Inhuman: Reflections on Time. Cambridge: Polity Press

MacDonald, I., 2008. Revolution in the Head: The Beatles’ Records and The Sixties. 2nd rev. ed. London: Vintage

MacDonald, L., 1993. 1915: The Death of Innocence. London: Headline

MacUidhir, C.M., 2007. “Recordings as Performances”. The British Journal of Aesthetics, July 01, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 298-314

Malik, S., C. Cox and J. Jaskey, eds., 2015. Realism Materialism Art. Berlin: Sternberg Press

Marcuse, H., 1979. The Aesthetic Dimension: Toward a Critique of Marxist Aesthetics. E. SHEROVER-MARCUSE ed., London: Macmillan

Margulis, E.H., 2017. “Music is not for ears”. Aeon. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Marshall, C., 2016. “A Huge Anthology of Noise & Electronic Music (1920-2007) Featuring John Cage, Sun Ra, Captain Beefheart & More” Open Culture. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Martin, C.B., 2008. The Mind in Nature. Oxford: Clarendon Press Inc

Martinich, A., 2005. Philosophical Writing: An Introduction. 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell

Masny, D., 2010. “Rhizoanalysis: nomadic pathways in reading, reading the world and self”. Conference presentation, University of Edinburgh. YouTube video. Accessed onine 4 March 2018:

—————. 2011. “Multiple Literacies Theory: exploring futures”. Policy Futures in Education Volume 9 Number 4, pp. 494-504

—————. 2013. “Rhizoanalytic Pathways in Qualitative Research”. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(5) pp. 339–348

Matravers, D., 2013. Introducing Philosophy of Art in Eight Case Studies. Durham: Acumen

Mautner, T. ed., 1997. The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy. New ed. London: Penguin

May T., 2005. Gilles Deleuze: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

McFarland, D., 2008. Guilty Robots, Happy Dogs: The Question of Alien Minds. Oxford: Oxford University Press

McKeown-Green, J., 2008. “Works of Music: An Essay in Ontology – By Julian Dodd”. Philosophical Books, 10, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 394-396

McLean, A., 2018. “Weaving TidalCycles patterns at a TC-1 loom”. Penelope. Accessed online 5 March 2018:

McLean, C.A., 2011. Artist-Programmers and Programming Languages for the Arts. PhD Thesis, Goldsmiths, University of London. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

McLean, A. and G. Wiggins, “Bricolage Programming in the Creative Arts”. Psychology of Programming Interest Group, PPIG 2010 – 22nd Annual Workshop. Accessed online 6 March 2018:

Menary, R. ed., 2010. The Extended Mind. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press

Mera, M. and A. Morcom, 2009. “Introduction: Screened Music, Trans-contextualisation and Ethnomusicological Approaches”. Ethnomusicology Forum, 06, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 3-19

Mericks, T., 1998. “There Are No Criteria of Identity Over Time”. Noûs, Mar., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 106-124

Mertens, W., 1983. American Minimal Music: La Monte Young, Terry Riley, Steve Reich, Philip Glass. London: Kahn & Averill

Middleton, R., 1990. Studying Popular Music. Milton Keynes: Open University Press

Midgely, M., 2011. The Myths We Live By. Abingdon: Routledge

Miller, S., 1984. Experimental Design and Stastistics (Second Edition). Hove; New York: Routledge

Mlodinow, L., 2008. The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives. London: Allen Lane

Modern Humanities Research Association., 2008. MHRA Style Guide: A Handbook for Authors, Editors, and Writers of Theses. G. Price and B. Richardson eds., 2nd ed. London: Modern Humanities Research Association

Moisala, P., T. Lappänen, M. Tiainen and H. Väätäinen, eds., 2017. Musical Encounters with Deleuze and Guattari. New York; London: Bloomsbury

Monelle, R., 1992. Linguistics and Semiotics in Music. Churchill, Phil.: Harwood Academic

Monk, R., 1991. Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius. London: Vintage

More, M. and N. Vita-More, 2013. The Transhumanist Reader: Classical and Contemporary Essays on the Science, Technology, and Philosophy of the Human Future. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell

Mooney, A. and B. Evans, 2007. Globalization: The Key Concepts. Routledge

Moss, R., 2015. “ Creative AI: Computer composers are changing how music is made”. New Atlas. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Murdoch, I., 1971. The Sovereignty of Good. London; New York: Routledge

—————. 1992. Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals. London: Penguin

Nancy, J-L., 1997. The Sense of the World. Trans. J.S. Librett. Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota Press.

—————. 2000. Being Singular Plural. Trans. R.D. Richardson and A.E. O’Byrne. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press

—————. 2007. Trans. C. Mandell. Listening. New York: Fordham University Press

Naughtie, J., 2008. The Making of Music: A Journey With Notes. London: John Murray

Ngui, M., 2015. “Thousand Plateaus” Pen and ink drawings. Bumblenut Pictures. Accessed onlione 4 March 2018:

Niblock, H., 1999. “Musical Recordings and Performances: A Response to Theodore Gracyk”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Summer, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 366-368.

Nixon, M., 2016. “G Douglas Barrett: Beyond Sound.The artist and theorist on the possibilities for music after sound.” Guernica. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Norris, C., 2006. Platonism, Music and The Listener’s Share. London: Continuum

Nussbaum, C., 2003. “Kinds, Types, and Musical Ontology”. Journal of Aesthetics & Art Criticism, 06, vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 273-291

—————. 2007. The Musical Representation: Meaning, Ontology, and Emotion. Cambridge, Mass.; London: MIT

Nusselder, A., 2009. Interface Fantasy: A Lacanian Cyborg Ontology. Cambridge, Mass.; London: MIT Press

O’Hear, A., ed., 2003. Minds and Persons. Casmbridge: Cambridge University Press

O’Callaghan, C., 2007. Sounds: A Philosophical Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Olson, E.T., 2002. “What Does Functionalism Tell Us about Personal Identity?”. Noûs, Dec., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 682-698

Osborne, P., 2013. Anywhere or Not at All: Philosophy of Contemporary Art. London: Verso

O’Sullivan, S., 2006. Art Encounters Deleuze and Guattari: Thought Beyond Representation. Basingstoke: Palgrave

—————. 2010. “From Aesthetics to the Abstract Machine: Deleuze, Guattari and Contemporary Art Practice” Book chapter in Zepke, S. and S. O’Sullivan, 2010 (see below).

Parfit, D., 1971. “Personal Identity”. The Philosophical Review, Jan., vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 3-27

Parr, A. ed., 2010. The Deleuze Dictionary. Rev. ed.  Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press

Paynter, R. ed., 1992. Companion to Contemporary Musical Thought.  London: Routledge

Pears, D., 2006. Paradox and Platitude in Wittgenstein’s Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon

Penrose, R., 2004. The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. London: Jonathan Cape

Petzold, C., 2000. Code: The Hidden Language of Computer Hardware and Software. Redmond WA: Microsoft Press

Philip, R., 2004. Early Recordings and Musical Style: Changing Tastes in Instrumental Performance, 1900-1950. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Philosophy of human+computer music, 2015. “Report, 2nd Royal Musical Association, Music and Philosophy Study Group’s Workshop on The Philosophy of Human+Computer Music”. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

Pierce, D., 2015. “Inside Spotify’s Hunt for the Perfect Playlist”. Wired. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Pinker, S., 1994. The Language Instinct : The New Science of Language and Mind. London: Penguin

—————. 1998. How The Mind Works. London: Allen Lane

Pinto, T.R., 2016. “Our changing relationship with music and its new practical function”. Music Tech Future. Accessed onkine 5 March 2018:

Popyk, B., 2011. “Big Profits From Small Market Niches”. Music Trades, 10, vol. 159, no. 9, pp. 68-68

Poster, M. and D. Savat, eds., 2009. Deleuze and New Technology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press

Potter, S., 2006. Doing Postgraduate Research. London: SAGE

Prior, N., 2008. “Putting a Glitch in the Field: Bourdieu, Actor Network Theory and Contemporary Music”. Cultural Sociology, November 01, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 301-319

Radical Culture Research Collective (RCRC), 2007. “ A Very Short Critique of Relational Aesthetics” Transform. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Raphael, F. and R. Monk eds., 2001. The Great Philosophers.  London: Phoenix

Reichenbach, H., 1957. The Philosophy of Space and Time. Dover Publications; Constable

Reynolds, J. and J. Roffe eds., 2004. Understanding Derrida.  New York ; London: Continuum

Rhedding-Jones, J,. 1996. “Researching early schooling: poststructural practices and academic writing in an ethnography”. British Journal of Sociology of Education, vol. 17. no. 1, pp. 21–37

Rice, P. and P. Waugh, 2001. Modern Literary Theory: A Reader. 4th ed. London; New York: Arnold; Co-published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press

Rice, T., 2014. Ethnomusicology: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Ridley, A. 2003. “Against Musical Ontology”. The Journal of Philosophy, Apr., vol. 100, No. 4, pp. 203-220

Roberts, B., 2012. “Technics, Individuation and Tertiary Memory: Bernard Stiegler’s challenge to media theory”. New Formations 77, pp. 8–20

Robinson, K.S., 1999. “Holywelkin’s Orchestra”. Chapter in The Memory of Whiteness. Accessed through Museum of Imaginary Musical Instruments Blog. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Roden, D., 2010. “Sonic Art and the Nature of Sonic Events”. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, March 2010, Vol 1, Issue 1, pp. 141-156

—————. 2015. Posthuman Life: Philosophy at the Edge of the Human. Abingdon; New York: Routledge

—————. 2016. “Reality Chunking: Review of DeLanda’s Philosophy and Simulation”. Enemyindustry Blog. Accessed onbline 4 March 2018:

Roholt, T., “On the Divide: Analytic and Continental Philosophy of Music “. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Volume 75, Issue 1 Winter 2017 pp. 49–58

Roller, M., 2018. “What is Your Meaning of “Qualitative Research”?”. Research Design Review Blog. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Rosel, M., 2017. “Eduardo R. Miranda: deciphering the possibilities of machine-made creativity ”. CLOT Magazine. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Ross, A., 2007. The Rest is Noise: Listening to the Twentieth Century. 1st ed. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux

Sacks, O., 2007. Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain. London: Picador

Said, E.W., 2008. Music at the Limits: Three Decades of Essays and Articles on Music. London: Bloomsbury

Samim, 2017. “Musical Novelty Search:Evolutionary Algorithms + Ableton Live”. Medium. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Samuels, R., 1995. Mahler’s Sixth Symphony: A Study in Musical Semiotics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Schafer, R.M., 1994. The Soundscape: Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World. Rochester, Vt.: Destiny Books

Scheurich, J. J. 1997, Research method in the postmodern, London: Falmer Press

Scruton, R., 1997. The Aesthetics of Music. Oxford: Clarendon

—————. 2009a. Beauty. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press

—————. 2009b. Understanding Music: Philosophy and Interpretation. London: Continuum.

—————. 2015. Fools, Frauds and Firebrands: Thinkers of the New Left. New York; London: Bloomsbury

—————. 2016. The Ring of Truth: The Wisdom of Wagner’s Ring of the Nibelung. London: Penguin

————. 2017. “The Music of the Future”. Future Symphony Institute. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Searle, J.R., D.C. Dennett, and D.J. Chalmers, 1997. The Mystery of Consciousness. 1st ed. New York: New York Review of Books

Sellers, M., 2009. Re(con)ceiving children in curriculum: Mapping (a) milieu(s) of becoming. PhD Thesis, University of Queensland.

—————. 2013. Young Children Becoming Curriculum: Deleuze, Te Whāriki and curricular understandings (Contesting Early Childhood). London; New York: Routledge

Sessions, R., 1971. Musical Experience of Composer, Performer, Listener. Princeton NJ: Princeton Legacy Library

Shaviro, S., 2007. “The “Wrenching Duality” of Aesthetics: Kant, Deleuze, and the “Theory of the Sensible””. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

—————. 2009. Without Criteria: Kant, Whitehead, Deleuze, and Aesthetics Cambridge, Mass.; London: MIT

—————. 2014. The Universe of Things: On Speculative Realism. Minneapolis; London: University of Minnesota Pres

—————. 2015. “Whitehead and Speculative Realism”. Talk at University of California, Irvine. YouTube video. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Sheldrake, R., 2016. “The Extended Mind: Is consciousness confined to the body?”. Video. iai Player. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Shelley, J., “The Concept of the Aesthetic”. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta, ed.. Acessed online 5 March 2018

Sherwin, A., 2015. “The Media Column: The music business is starting to think the next big thing is just a computer algorithm away”.  Independent. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Shull, J., 2006. “Locating the Past in the Present: Living Traditions and the Performance of Early Music”. Ethnomusicology Forum, 06, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 87-111

Shusterman, R., 2008. Body Consciousness: A Philosophy of Mindfulness and Somaesthetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Sibelius, J., 2018. “About Conduction”. Jean Sibelius in his own words. Accessed online 5 March 2018:

Silverman, D., 2010. Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook. 3rd ed. London: SAGE

Sim, S. and Open University AA301/Course readers, 1992. Art : Context and Value. Milton Keynes: Open University

Simon, P., 1964. Wednesday Morning, 3 A.M. Song lyric. Genius. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

————. 1977. Slip Slidin’ Away. Song lyric. Genius. Accessed online 5 March 2018:

Singer, P., ed., 1986. Applied Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Skillings, D.J., 2017. “Life is not easily bounded”. Aeon. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Sloboda, J.A., I. DELIÈGE and J.W. Davidson eds., 2011. Music and the Mind: Essays in Honour of John Sloboda. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press

Small, C., 1998. Musicking: The Meanings of Performing and Listening. Hanover; London: University Press of New England

Smith, M.,2015. “Perspectives from Loop: New frontiers of music tech”. Loop Ableton. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Solomon, R.C., 1973. “Emotions and Choice”. The Review of Metaphysics, Sep., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 20-41

Sontag, S., ed. 1993. A Barthes Reader. London: Vintage

Sorensen, R., 2011. “Vague Music”. Philosophy, 04, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 231-248

Spivak, G., 1996. “Explanation and culture Marginalia”, in The Spivak Reader. Selected works of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, eds. D. Landry and G. MacLean. New York: Routledge

Stansbie, A., 2014. “Between Palsticity and Performance: an ontological account of electroacoustic music”. Emille: Journal of the Korean Electro-Acoustic Music Society

Stela, E., 2016. “Future Humans: Will Our Bodies Become Multiplanetary?”. Ethnomusicology Review. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Stiegler, B., 1998. Technics and Time 1: The Fault of Epimethus. Trans. R. Beardsworth and G. Collins. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press

—————. 2009. Technics and Time 2: Disorientation. Trans. S. Barker. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press

—————. 2011. Technics and Time 3: Cinematic Time and the Question of Malaise. Trans. S. Barker. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press

Stock, K. ed., 2007. Philosophers on Music: Experience, Meaning, and Work.  Oxford: Oxford University Press

Stolnitz, J., 1965. Aesthetics. Macmillan Co.; Collier-Macmillan: New York; London

Storr, A., 1992. Music and the Mind. London: Harper Collins

St. Pierre, E. A. 1997, “Methodology in the fold and the irruption of transgressive data’”. Qualitative studies in education, vol 10. no. 2, pp. 175 – 189

St.Pierre, E.A. and W.S. Pillow, eds., 2000. Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education. New York: Routledge.

St.Pierre, E.A., 2001. “Coming to theory: Finding Foucault and Deleuze”. In K. Weiler ed., Feminist engagements: Reading, resisiting and revisioning male theorists in education and cultural studies pp. 141-163. New York & London: Routledge.

St.Pierre, E.A., 2011. “Post qualitative research: The critique and the coming after”. In N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, eds., SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Enquiry, (4th Edition, pp. 611-635). Los Angeles CA: SAGE

Strawson, P.F., 1964. Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics. London: University Paperbacks

Subbaraman, N., 2016. “His Brain Can’t Make New Memories — So He Built An App To Store Them Instead”. BuzzFeed News. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Sutton, D. and D. Martin-Jones eds., 2008. Deleuze Reframed: A Guide for the Arts Student.  London: I. B. Tauris

Tagg, P., 2012. Music’s Meanings A modern Musicology for Non-Musos. Larchmont NY and Huddersfield UK: The Mass Media Music Scholars’ Press (MMMSP)

Talbot, M., ed. 2000.  The Musical Work: Reality or Invention? Liverpool Music Symposium. Liverpool: University of Liverpool

Tallis, R., 2004. Why the Mind is not a Computer: A Pocket Lexicon of Neuromythology, 2nd ed. Exeter: Imprint Academic

—————. 2014. Summers of Discontent: The Purpose of the Arts Today. London: Wilmington Square Books

Tanner, M., 1987. Nietzsche: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Taruskin, R., 1995. Text and Act: Essays on Music and Performance. New York: Oxford University Press

Thomasson, A. 2006. “Debates about the ontology of art: What are we doing here?” Philosophy Compass, 1, 245–255.

—————.  2015. Ontology Made Easy. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Thomson, P., 2017. “vignette variations”. Patter Blog. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Tipler, F.J., 1994. The Physics of Immortality: Modern Cosmology, God, and the Resurrection of the Dead, 1st ed. New York: Doubleday

Titlow, J.P., 2015. “The Real Magic Of Streaming Music Is The Data It Generates”. Fast Company. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Toft, R., 2010. “Hits and Misses: Crafting a Pop Single for the Top-40 Market in the 1960s”. Popular Music, 05, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 267-281

Tomlinson, G., 2015.  A Million Years of Music: The Emergence of Human Modernity.  New York: Zone Books

Toynbee, J., 2000. Making Popular Music: Musicians, Creativity and Institutions. London: Arnold

Trafton, A.,  2015. “Music in the brain”. MIT News. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Treitler, L., 1993. “History and the Ontology of the Musical Work”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Summer, vol. 51, no. 3, Philosophy and the Histories of the Arts, pp. 483-497

Trenholm, R., 2014. “Rewind: This Raspberry Pi cassette player plays Spotify tunes from actual tapes”. C/Net. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Tufte, E.R., 2001. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. 2nd ed. Cheshire, Conn.: Graphics Press

Velardo. V., 2015. “Review of the Study Day on Computer Simulation of Musical Creativity”. Academia. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Vitale, C., 2014. Networkologies. Alresford: Zero Books (Kindle edition)

von Moltke the Elder, H. 2018. Wikiquote. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

vtol, 2017. “Performance of the Flesh”. Video of art installation. Accessed online 3 March 2018:

Wagner, R., 1893. Opera and Drama. New York: Broude Brothers

Walton, K.L., 1984. “Transparent Pictures: On the Nature of Photographic Realism”. Critical Inquiry, Dec., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 246-277

Warburton, N., 2017. “New realities are imminent: how VR reframes big questions in philosophy — Interview with David Chalmers”. Aeon. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

WEISETHAUNET, H., 2007. “Historiography and Complexities: Why is Music ‘National’?”. Popular Music History, 08, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 169-199

Weissman, J., 2014. “Technoscience and Expressionism”. Fractal Ontology Blog. Accessed onlone 4 March 2018:

We The Humanities, 2016. Website for a Twitter Account. Domain expired as at 8 March 2018

WETHERELL, M., 2012. Affect and Emotion: A New Social Science Understanding. Los Angeles ; London: SAGE

White, H., 1997. “If It’s Baroque, Don’t Fix It’: Reflections on Lydia Goehr’s ‘Work-Concept’ and the Historical Integrity of Musical Composition”. Acta Musicologica, Jan. – Jun., vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 94-104

Whitehead, A.N., 1929. Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology. New York: The Free Press. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Wilkinson, R. and Open University AA301/Set book., 1991. Theories of Art and Beauty. Milton Keynes: Open University

Wilson, E., 2018. Wikiquote. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Wilson, E.O., 1999. Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. London: Abacus

Winch, P., 1987. Trying to Make Sense. Oxford: Basil Blackwell

WITTGENSTEIN, L., 1969. Preliminary Studies for the “Philosophical Investigations”, generally known as The Blue and Brown Books. 2nd ed. Oxford: Basil Blackwell

—————. 1974. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus … Translated by D. F. Pears & B. F. McGuinness, with the introduction by Bertrand Russell. B.F. MacGuiness, D. Pears and B. Russell eds., London: Routledge & Kegan Paul

—————.1977. Remarks on Colour. G.E.M. Anscombe, L.L. McAlister and M. Schättle eds., Oxford: Blackwell

—————. 2009. Philosophical Investigations. G.E.M. Anscombe, P.M.S. Hacker and J. Schulte eds., Rev. 4th ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell

Wittgenstein, L., G.E.M. Anscombe, and G.H. Von Wright, 1967. Zettel. Berkeley: University of California Press

—————. 1969. On Certainty. New York: Harper

Wittgenstein, L. and C. Barrett, 1966. Lectures & Conversations on Aesthetics, Psychology, and Religious Belief. Berkeley: University of California Press

Wittgenstein, L., R.G. Bosanquet, and C. Diamond, 1989. Wittgenstein’s Lectures on the Foundations of Mathematics, Cambridge, 1939: from the notes of R.G. Bosanquet, Norman Malcolm, Rush Rhees, and Yorick Smythies. University of Chicago Press ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Wollheim, R., 1980. Art and its Objects: With Six Supplementary Essays. 2d ed. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press

Womack, K. ed., 2009. The Cambridge Companion to The Beatles.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Wyatt, J., K. Gale, S. Gannon and B. Davies, 2011. Deleuze & Collaborative Writing: An Immanent Plane of Compositions. New York: Peter Lang

Youmans, C., ed., 2010. The Cambridge Companion to Richard Strauss. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Young, D. and G. Priest, 2017. “It is and it isn’t: Marcel Duchamp’s ‘Fountain’ is not just a radical kind of art. It’s a philosophical dialetheia: a contradiction that is true”. Aeon. Accessed online 4 March 2018:

Yu, P.K., 2011. “Digital Copyright and Confuzzling Rhetoric”. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, Summer2011, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 881

Zangwill, N., 2007. Aesthetic Creation. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Zdebik, J., 2012. Deleuze and the Diagram: Aesthetic Threads in Visual Organization. New York: Continuum

Zepke, S, and S. O’Sullivan, eds., 2010. Deleuze and Contemporary Art. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press

Žižek, S., 2016. Disparities. New York; London: Bloomsbury

Vignettes’ Participants Bibliographic References

Matthew Whiteside

W1: Whiteside’s questionnaire response.

W2: 2015. “Interview with Matthew Whiteside”. M Magazine. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

W3: 2015. “Two Worlds Collide”. R-Space Gallery. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

W4: 2015. “When Two Worlds Collide Walk Around”. YouTube video. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

W5: 2018. Matthew Whiteside, Spotify collection. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

W6: 2016. “Matthew Whiteside; Biography”. British Music Collection: Accessed online 8 March 2018:

W7: Bruce, K., 2016. “Music review: Cappella Nova sing Echoes and Traces in Stirling Castle Chapel” The Herald. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

W8: 2014. “Culture Night 2014: Matthew Whiteside / Joanna Nicholson: An extract from the premiere of Matthew Whiteside’s ‘Three Pieces for Bass Clarinet and Electronics’, performed by Joanna Nicholson”. Vimeo video. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

W9: Rockson, G., 2015. “Classical CDs Weekly: Adams, Bliss, Matthew Whiteside: Great contemporary Americana, English piano music and electro-acoustic sounds from Glasgow”. The Arts Desk. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

W10: Dooley, S., 2016. “Alt Notes #9 | Matthew Whiteside”. Headstuff: Music. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

W11: Whiteside, M., 2016. “Why New Music? by Matthew Whiteside (composer)”. Sound Scotland. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

Mihailo Trandafilovski

T1: Tandafilovski’s questionnaire response

T2: 2018. Mihailo Trandafilovski: Personal website. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

T3: Kreuzer Quartet (Peter Sheppard Skaerved, Mihailo Trandafilovski, Neil Heyde, Eve Heyde ,with Roderick Chadwick) (Composer: Mihailo Trandafilovski) Five. CD recording. London: Innova (#914). Accessed online 8 March 2018:

T4: Mihailo Trandafilovski, Spotify Collection. Accessed onlone 8 March 2018:

T5: Heaton, R., 2013. “Magnets, lava, crystals: clarinet quintet by Mihailo Trandafilovski.”. Library audio catalogue. Bath Spa University Library. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

T6: The British Museum, 2016. “Performance Music from Alexander the Great’s empire”. Concert advertisement. Accessed online 8 March 2018:’s_empire_programme_140616.pdf

T7: 2012. Mihailo Trandafilovski: Chamber Music. (Perf. Odaline de la Martinez, Kreutzer Quartet) Presto Classical. Lorelt. LNT132. Accessed online 8 March 2018:–trandafilovski-chamber-music

T8: Trandafilovski, M., 2006. Introducing Elements of Contemporary Music in the Process of Violin Teaching. DMus thesis. Centre for Performance Scieence, Royal College of Music, London. Summary accessed online 8 March 2018:

Julian Broadhurst

B1: Broadhurst’s questionnaire response 1

B2: Broadhurst’s questionnaire response 2

B3: Broadhurst’s questionnaire response 3

B4: Broadhurst’s questionnaire response 4

B5: Julian Broadhurst: Drowning Circle. Website. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

B6: 2018. Julian Broadhurst: Bandcamp Collection. Bandcamp. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

B7: “The Measure of Autumn”. Music recording by Tetlow & Broadhurst. Bandcamp. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

B8: 2018. “British Library Upload Data: julian Broadhurst – Uploading Guide to order, with suggested cross references and Links, the volumes of  my DCM Edition.” Personal corespondence.

B9: 2018. “English Contemporary Composer and Percussionist – Director of Drowningcircle music – DCM” Biography. Encore Music. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

B10: 2018. David Dhonau. Website. Accessed onloine 8 March 2018:

B11: 2015. “Julain Broadhurst: Journey’s End”. Plainly Painting: David Manley. Blog. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

Alex McLean

M1: McLean’s questionnaire response

M2: TOPLAP website. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M3: Algorave website. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M4: McLean, A., 2017. “Algorave: algorithmic dance culture”. TEDX, Hull.

YouTube video. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M5: 2018. Yaxu, Website. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M6: 2018. Alex McLean: Making Music with Text[ure]. Website. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M7: 2018. Algomech Festival. Website. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M8: 2016. McLean, A. and H. Redler. “Data as Culture exhibition: Thinking Out Loud”. Open Data Institute. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M9: Magnusson, T., 2017. “Special Issue: Live Coding”. Sonic Writing. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M10: McLean, A., 2004. “Hacking Perl in Nightclubs”. Perl. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M11: Sicchio, K. and A. McLean, 2017. “Sound Choreographer <> Body Code”. Contemporary Theatre Review. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M12: Grosse, D., 2018. “Podcast 210: Alex McLean”. Art + Music + Technology. Podcast. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M13: McLean, A., 2018. “Weaving TidalCycles patterns at a TC-1 loom”. Penelope. Accessed online 5 March 2018:

M14: McLean, A., 2018. “Hacking Sound in Context:. Generative. Accessed online 8 Marc 2018:

M15: McLean, A., 2017. “Live Coding”. Medium. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M16: Searle, L., 2017. “Review: AlgoMech Festival 2017”. The State of the Arts. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M17: Magnussin, T., 2016. “Arts Research Symposium at AlgoMech”. Sonic Writing. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M18: 2016. “Algorave Festival”. The Wire. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M18: Visnjic, F., 2016. “‘Spicule’ by Yaxu – Album as a live coding device on Pi Zero”. Creative Applications Network. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

M19: 2018. Alex McLean. Wikipedia. Accessed online 8 March 2018:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Simplified Whiteheadian Prehension

Multi-connected Whiteheadian Emergence

Image | Posted on by | Leave a comment



It is time for metaphor, for the/some rhizoanalysis.  The responses of the research participants stand above.  Or they would so stand if this dissertation-assemblage  was a photograph of a moment in time.  But time moves on; the texts have a life of their own within the rhizome.  They are always already modified and changed by my (your) rhizomatic readings, by the diagramming.  Each is always already changed by being juxtaposed with the others.  How do the maps of the other abstract machines of this dissertation-assemblage relate to the vignettes abstract machine?  If a line of flight from the cyborg abstract machine punctures and cuts the vignette, both are connected/entangled.  Tenuous and indeterminate boundaries are crossed.  But which piercings, which slicings?  In the rhizome there are infinitely many.  It would be easy to become despondent, like Borges’s librarians.  My rhizo-slicings are undertaken so that the rhizome may speak to me (you).  Other cuts are for other readers.  Our cuts may occasionally cross, or they may not.  But we are always in the middle, in the thick of it.  Some abstract machines actively summon lines of flight from others.  It is as if they are gravity wells or positive and negative electrodes, bound to attract.

So aspects of the other abstract machines of this dissertation-assemblage appear here and aspects of the vignettes appear elsewhere.  The whole abstract machine has what Kosko (1994) calls “fuzzy boundaries”.  They are the boundaries of here, there, this, that, and now.  Is what I say here about the four musicking/musickers’ vignettes true of all musicking/musickers?  That cannot be answered, because truth is meaningless in these contexts.


Thesis Abstract Machines Diagram

Posted in Research methods, Rhizomatic writing | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Sous rature

Sous rature◀︎~The~r▼▼hizome~is~an~antigenealogy ▼▼~Dele△uze~and~▲Guattari~2004:▶︎▲▼ 23). ~This~thesis~is~rhizomatic.~It~can~be▶︎~read~genealogi◀︎cally,~but~that~would~be~to~miss~the~poin|t.~When~we~wr▼▶︎ite~of◀︎~hypotheses,~methodologies,~conc▽lusions~and~bibliograph✂︎✂︎✂︎✂︎✂︎✒︎i▼es,~such~wri▽ting~sometimes~resembles~nothi◁ng~more~than~a~description~of~a~high-◀︎△▶︎▶︎▶︎▶︎▶︎▶︎▻school~sci⍵⎖en|es.~This~thesis~is~about~things~which~are~about~cyborg~music.~The~thesis~and~its~putative~subject~exist~in~E␎ntangled~Network~Space.~It~starts~ with~this~con⚗clusion.~It~is~about~music⏀␞⏥.~And~humans.~And~technology.~◀︎And~ philosophy.~And~time.~And,~and,~and.“|~The constant~conjunct☪ions~of~and,~ofce~experiment.~T➢➤o~engage~with~this~resemblance~would~be~a~static~reading,~isochronous,~frozen~in~time.~A~bette㉿r~reading~is~dynamic,~heterochronic~and~ diachronic. ~At~risk~of~instant~contradicti▼on,~this~thesis~is~about~entanglements~and~disentanglem⚘ents,~comings~||and~goings.~That~is~thehe~writing~has~a~chronological~flo⏎↖︎w,~but~it~is~full✷~of~ heterochronic~wormholes,~whichgs~are~coloured~by~beginnings☩~and~beginni☄ngs~by~endings.~Ther▽e~are~no~m▶︎onads▷,~only~(ever-changing)~assemblag and,~o▷f~and.~An~assemblage~is~composed~of~ands,~and~the~ands~come~and~they~go.~And~further~ands~change~the~ands.~Entangled~Network~Space~is~full~of~voids;~andless~spaces~waiting~to~be~filled~by~ands~and~voids~which~the~ands~have~ vacated.~It~is~a~space~of~possibilitie◻︎s.~It~owes~its~existence~to~the~real~and~the~ real~owes~its~existe☑︎◁◁◁◁nce~to~it.~It~is~the~immanent,~one~truly~flat~ontological~space,~where~being~and~non-being~are~equivalent.~Tversed~at~the~speed~of~memory~or~of~Google-thought.~They~are~mental~footnotes.~It ~may~✽be~tra~nature~of~the~space,~real~and~metaphorical,~in~which~we~live.~Endin↓⇣⇣⌒radiates~and~is~irradiated.~All~writing~is~li⚩♒︎ke~t⦿his.~It~is~the~New~⇧Writing~in~the~ Hyperconn→ected~Age.~▶︎

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Deleuzian Plateaus

When trying to visually represent Deleuze and Guattari’s plateaus it is necessary to choose a metaphor wisely.  They say, “We call a ‘plateau’ any multiplicity connected to other multiplicities by superficial underground stems in such a way as to form or extend a rhizome (Deleuze and Guattari 1987:24).”  This is itself metaphorically descriptive language.  So, in the fashion of Lakoff and Johnson (why do these folk maraud in pairs?), in the quest for a visual metaphor, we pile them high.

The artist Marc Ngui (in Sellers 2009) contrasts plateaus (green ovals) with structured linear thinking (brown rectangles).

Screenshot 2017-04-05 16.11.54

In her 2009 thesis, Marg Sellers depicts its component plateaus with blue, slightly amorphous shapes, connected by lines.  This reminds me of looking down on a map of an archipelago with ferry routes between the islands.

Screenshot 2017-04-04 17.16.47

Here are some real islands, connected by boats, causeways, bird flight, telephone cables, radio, and the ever-present sea.

Screenshot 2017-04-05 16.36.41

This image shows bundles of connected lines. Paul Fry describes the structure of A Thousand Plateaus as “fascicular (2013: 38:30).”

Screenshot 2017-04-05 16.25.12

And here are some mushrooms.  Elsewhere (Hewitt 2013: 40-53) I have used a mycelial mycological metaphor to describe a Deleuzian rhizomatic space.  The mushroom does have the advantage of literally being a rhizome.  Perhaps the fruiting heads can stand for plateaus.


What terminology might replace “plateaus”?  In the mycological case, the fruiting bodies are called “sporocarps”.  The bundles could be “fascicules”.  Islands are “insulae”.  But island plateaus are, like Donne’s man, paradoxically not islands, in virtue of their interconnections.  So, perhaps “insulae”.  But then again, perhaps the Anglo-Saxon words suffice; or maybe just stick to “plateaus”.


Deleuze, G. and F. Guattari, (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Fry, P., (2013). ENGL 300: Introduction to the Theory of Literature. Lecture 15. Open Yale Courses. Video (accessed online 17 June 2013)

Hewitt, T., (2013). The Mycelium as a Metaphorical Meaning-Space for Music. Unpublished MA dissertation. The Open University. [ ]

Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson, (2003). Metaphors we live by. Chicago IL; London: University of Chicago Press.

Sellers, M.A. (2009).  Re(con)ceiving children in curriculum: Mapping (a) milieu(s) of becoming. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Queensland. [A version here: ]

Posted in Research methods, Rhizomatic writing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A rhizomatic text

I am at a junction in the preparation of my written thesis.  One road leads to a “standard” scientistic piece of work and the other to a rhizomatic text.  All of the writing advice counsels taking the first road, while my instinct (and to do justice to my material) says Route 2.

What now seems problematic is the situation in which young philosophers, but also all young writers who are involved in creating something, find themselves. They face the threat of being stifled from the outset. It’s become very difficult to do any work, because a whole system of “acculturation” and anticreativity specific to the developed nations is taking shape. It’s far worse than censorship. (Deleuze, 1995: 27) Quoted in  Honan and Bright 2016: 731

What is this system of acculturation and anticreativity? It is, perhaps, the suspicion which Honan and Bright share with St. Pierre, Law, and Koro-Ljungberg and Mazzei,

that a “conventional, reductionist, hegemonic, and sometimes oppressive” (St. Pierre 2011: 613) orthodoxy of qualitative educational research has infiltrated the writing of the thesis text. We fear that “we are being told how we must see and what we must do when we investigate” (Law, 2004: 4), and worry that in writing we increasingly find ourselves stifled from the outset, operating within a problematic of acculturation and anticreativity wherein we are urged to make original and creative contributions through practices of writing that “are necessary while at the same time necessarily limiting” (Koro-Ljungberg and Mazzei, 2012: 728).  Quoted in  Honan and Bright 2016: 731

Deleuze and Guattari warn us of the danger of “vehicular language” every use of which brings its own “little death sentence” (Deleuze and Guattari 1987: 76).  Honan and Bright say this,

our argument is that the vehicular language – the language of bureaucratic transmission – is the hegemonic language of the doctoral thesis within qualitative educational research studies, even when the thesis employs post-structural theory or post-qualitative research approaches that destabilize and deterritorialize understandings of the relations between researcher and researched, methods and methodology and writer and researcher. The universalizing imperative of scientistic method insists on the use of the vehicular language – the worldwide language of “everywhere” – for the transmission and commercial exchange of a scientistic apoliticism.  Honan and Bright 2016: 736

Bright, writing at two different stages of his doctoral research journey, said firstly, this:

This study will adopt a qualitative multiple case study approach to investigate and map the discourses which produce NEST subjectivities. Four individual teachers will be chosen as cases and will be observed and interviewed in the school. Additional interviews will be conducted with students, the school principal and non-native English-speaking teachers, and documentary artefacts will be collected to provide contextual information about the site in which these NEST identities are enacted. Honan and Bright 2016: 737

This text, Honan and Bright tell us, was “written for confirmation of the candidature, has a formal tone, high modality, and “gives them what they ask for”, transmitting order words in a direct and precise signifying account of research methodology (Honan and Bright 2016: 737).” Some time later, Bright wrote this:

I have worried a lot (can you tell?) about what I could legitimately name this methodology. Naming seems such a final act. An attempt (however futile) to halt the endless play of signifiers. An act of violence, determination, fixity, and closure. An act that privileges presence and being, instead of absence and becoming. Naming seems to suggest that I do know, then, what should be done, how one might be, and what one should do. It seems to suppress or forget the doubt and uncertainty which above all else has characterised my thinking about methodology, and that undermines my attempts at knowing. It seems almost unethical to me.  Honan and Bright 2016: 737

The following paragraph was from my own PhD research proposal in 2014:

The unique aspect of this research is in using ethnographic data to form and justify a future philosophical position.  A literature review will detect ‘existential threats’ to extant musical ontologies and epistemologies and focus the data-gathering phase.  What musicians and consumers of music actually do (and plan to do) determines ontologies.  This empirical work will include: surveys, analysis of forums, website traffic data, and interviews.  I will use two musical genres as exemplars of the general process; string quartets and, in contrast, contemporary music composed with the aid of computer programs.  Regarding the quartet genre, data will be gathered from the members of two ensembles, associated personnel and their consumers.  For computer-aided music, composers and programmers will be interviewed in addition to performers.  Technologists working with broadcast, podcast, recorded and streamed music will be an important data source.  Interviews must be of sufficient number to give statistically justifiable results. Hewitt 2014. CHASE DTP funding application

It easy to see how similar in style and modality my paragraph is to Bright’s first quoted paragraph above.  Bright’s second paragraph, Honan and Bright tell us, “makes use of the rhetorical devices of questioning, ellipses and repetition to construct more tentative, fluid “prose”, perhaps making moves into the referential and mythical languages, sensing that language itself cannot contain the world (ibid.,: 737)”  The question is, would I now set out my proposed methodology in quite the terms of the paragraph I quoted above?  Having done the research, is another slant required? If “the ontological framework is one of rhizome,” then “the relations are laid out so that these languages (or discourses) form a network, an assemblage of discursive practices, the edge of one language always in encounter with the edge of another in a double becoming that changes both (Sutton & Martin-Jones, 2008) (quoted in Honan and Bright 2016: 737).” How, then, to write rhizomatically?  Regarding her own doctoral thesis (2001), Honan says this:

First, the actual construction and ordering of the text followed the traditional mandates in that there was roughly an introduction, a discussion of methodology, a literature review, data analysis and conclusion. But, at the same time, each of the chapters of the thesis focused on a different tuber, a different middle, while still providing connections to other tubers, other parts of the rhizome. It is possible to read the text moving across particular plateaus (the data-analysis chapters) along lines of flight to other plateaus (the introduction and conclusion). There are connections, not only of linguistic devices but also between conceptual themes, that allow different pathways to be followed through the text.

Second, and of much more importance to me as a writer, was the validity afforded by rhizomatic thinking for the genre-blurring and transgressive type of text that I constructed.  Honan 2007: 533

She says, “Writing rhizomatically afforded me not only the possibility of blurring the linguistic boundaries of what is formally known as a thesis text but also allowed me to write my[selves] in to the text (ibid.: 535).”  Importantly, regarding understanding texts as rhizomes, Honan says this:

I began my doctoral journey on a familiar and comfortable path. I understood that texts were constructed through the use of various discursive systems, and I was comfortably assured in my ability to undertake a discursive analysis of the Queensland English Syllabus. I understood that such an analytic approach would involve the ‘teasing apart’ of various discursive threads within the texts, and began to think of the texts as a tapestry that I would carefully unpick. But when one does unpick a tapestry, the result is usually a jumbled tangle of short and disconnected threads. It seemed to me that the discursive threads in the syllabus texts were connected, and that such connections helped readers make plausible readings of these texts.

The ways in which discourses connected to each other and others, through the rhizome of the text and following lines of flight into other rhizomes, made sense to me when I began to think of these discursive systems as plateaus, in that they are particular assemblages of meaning that inform others and each other, that do not stand alone (do not stand in the immovable sense at all), and only make sense when read within and against each other. Honan 2007: 536

In her rhizomatically constructed 2009 thesis, Sellers says this:

beginning~a note for the reader 

Nothing ever ‘begins,’ it only has tentative links to what has gone before and what is yet to come – threads (e)merging from/with/in heterogeneous space-times of past~present~future in mo(ve)ments of middles. Uncertainly, the middle of this thesis is a processing through questions-without- answers, any pending ‘answer’ embodying another question, signalling partiality, decentring expert authority, speeding up the intensity. And, an ‘ending’ is but a momentary pause of speed, ebbing only until the flow again picks up speed, back/through/in/to the middle…(sigh)…so (deep breath) how, where do I start with my desire to generate mo(ve)ments towards conceiving of early childhood curriculum that welcomes young children as young people with views, opinions and understandings that are regarded as significant as those of adults to generating curricular performances authentic to the worlds children live~learn with/in and to social, ethical, political operations of wider worlds? This big question becomes a big picture in a never beginning~ending middle of ideas, difficult to negotiate, or so it seems.  Sellers 2009: 6

Sellers’s thesis eschews a conventional chaptered construction.  During her research and data-gathering, as well as in writing the thesis-assemblage, she utilises a “variety of imaginaries […] to perturb linearity towards generating an assemblage, a collection of conversations about connecting ideas presented as plateaus that have neither beginning nor end, origin or destination (ibid.: 7).”  She says,

Like rhizome, an assemblage is heterogenous, is always in the middle, unconcerned with points, made only of lines of movement and speed (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987). From these opening moments, thesis is thus sous rature, the assemblage being comprised not of sequential chapters, but of plateaus to be read in any order. Ibid.: 7

Neither was the writing of the thesis-assemblage straightforward.

My choice of presenting the plateaus follows my line(s) of flight through the research processes and the project itself. While there was an opening line of flight, processing with/through the writing was not linearly straightforward, rather, it involved much to-ing and fro-ing in many directions, often all-at- once, as I (re)turned to (re)work various pieces, expressions and characterisations. Ibid.: 7

She presents the reader with a series of maps, as possible guides to reading the thesis-assemblage.

Screenshot 2017-04-04 17.09.13

The figure suggests four routes through the material, but others are possible.

This figure situates the plateaus in the rhizome (but it is arbitrary).

Screenshot 2017-04-04 17.16.47

 Mapping milieu(s) Sellers 2009: vii

My own research involves the construction of assemblage maps too.  This is one possible assemblage of a rhizo-analysis of some of my ethnographic data.

Broadhurst Musical Influences Aesthetics Network Diagram

Whilst examples of rhizomatic theses are thin on the ground, those that are extant provide good examples of an approach to writing-up research material which has been conceived, gathered and analysed from a Deleuzian perspective.  It is an approach which I am definitely considering.


Deleuze, G. (1995). Negotiations: 1972–1990 (M. Joughin, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Deleuze, G. and F. Guattari, (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Honan, E. (2007). Writing a rhizome: an (im)plausible methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 20, 531–546.

Honan, E. and D. Bright (2016). “Writing a thesis differently.” In International Journal of Studies in Education. 25 (5), 731-743

Koro-Ljungberg, M. and L. Mazzei,  (2012). “Problematizing methodological simplicity in qualitative research: Editors’ introduction”. In Qualitative Inquiry, 18, 728-731

Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. London: Routledge.

Sellers, M.A. (2009).  Re(con)ceiving children in curriculum: Mapping (a) milieu(s) of becoming. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Queensland. [A version here: ]

St. Pierre, E. a. (2011). “Post qualitative research: The critique and the coming after.” In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 611–625). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sutton, D. and D. Martin-Jones, (2008). Deleuze reframed: A guide for the arts student. London: I. B. Tauris

Posted in Research methods, Rhizomatic writing | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Research Review February 2017 – In Media Res


It is three years since I submitted my research proposal to the CHASE Doctoral Training Partnership.  The proposal was (and is) titled: Cyborg Music: A Future Musicotechnographic Aesthetic.  The research question it introduced was: Will current and future developments in music’s interface with an exponential expansion of technology lead to a new musical aesthetic?  There are a number of assumptions underlying the title and the research question which perhaps need a little in the way of explication and justification.  I hoped to show that all music is produced by cyborgs, that amalgam of human beings with technological tools which Andy Clark calls “human-technology symbionts (2003: 3).”  If all humans are cyborgs and music is only made by humans then all music is made by cyborgs. The fact that music is produced by cyborgs makes the case for an interface between music and technology.  The question becomes one of determining to what extent the technological side of this symbiosis is critical to any aesthetic appreciation of those musics. By musicotechnographic I meant no more than writing about aspects of the music produced by the human-technology symbionts.  I use the term exponential in the sense of an ever-increasing non-linear rate of growth.

Cyborg was a word which seemed, successfully, to capture the (funding) Zeitgeist.  But as time has passed, I am left wondering more and more whether the term “cyborg” is tautologous when used in conjunction with the term “human”. And, of course, “aesthetic opens a can of worms and is the proper subject matter of the entire thesis.  At the time I wrote the question, I was using “aesthetic” in a conventional analytical way, in the sense that has been passed down from enlightenment thinkers, from Kant to Scruton.  This would be a parochial position.  I am now more inclined to be thinking about “aesthetic” in terms of its original etymology, aisthesis (αἴσθησις), a much broader sense of “perception” than is allowed for in the enlightenment derivation and usage.  A fundamental flaw in the enlightenment-derived aesthetic is its acknowledgement of a transcendent / immanent dyad.  This thinking descends from the Platonic Kantian notions of noumena and phenomena.  I have never believed in such a dichotomy.  To posit the transcendental noumenal is anti-Occamist and does not provide what Deutsch would call a “good explanation (2011: vii).”  What is required is an epistemology based upon a monadic ontology, a monadic recognition of the immanence of everything that there is, with no place for the transcendent.  In short, an aesthetic rooted firmly in this world.

O’Sullivan (2006) eschews an art history predicated on the object, a practice which relies on “ideological critique and semiotic approaches (2006: 7).”  Musicology, too, has been so predicated.  Pace O’Sullivan, I shall explore the Deleuzian notion of “affect” (which involves aisthesis, directly) in describing an immanent aesthetic.  So fundamental is this concept of affect through aisthesis that Shaviro, developing Whitehead’s thought, describes aesthetics as “first philosophy (2014: 13).”

If there is a “golden thread” running through this thesis, it is the thought and writing of Gilles Deleuze.  During the eight years or so that I have been reading his work (and also his writing in collaboration with Félix Guattari) I have followed the exhortation in A Thousand Plateaus to read widely and to follow lines of flight to new territories, new writers and thinkers.  The potential cross-reference of though and ideas has as many synapses as the human brain.  But having mulled over the implications for my thesis, I constantly return to the Deleuzian concepts of the plane of immanence, de- and reterritorialisation, lines of flight, and assemblages.  And so it is with those concepts as the fibres of the golden thread that I am now revisiting my previous writing and embarking on the new, relying upon secondary literature insofar as it supports the central thrust of my thesis, and taking issue with that literature where it does not so support.  I am not uncritical of Deleuze.  For instance, I do not believe that Deleuze and Guattari give sufficient consideration to the entangled nature of strata and the lines of flight that de- and reterritorialise them.  There are no territories, no strata, which manifest themselves ex nihilo.  But that is not to say that assemblages are not novel, they almost always are.  I will describe an Entangled Network Space to accommodate this thinking.

A major concern for me at the moment is that of style.  All of my academic writing to date has had a certain scholarly style, relying on the conventions required of such work.  I should like to do justice to the spirit of Deleuzian writing.  As O’Sullivan says, “We need to repeat the energy and style of his writings without merely representing his thought (2006: 3).”  Of course, footnotes and in-line citations leading to bibliographic references are themselves lines of flight, so that is a start!  I want the thesis to be rhizomatic.  It is, after all, an assemblage.  So I am, as usual, in media res, which is not a bad place to be.  This is just as well, since one can never actually be anywhere else.

Works (Lines of Flight):

Clark, A., 2003. Natural-born cyborgs : why minds and technologies are made to merge. New York: Oxford University Press

O’Sullivan, S., 2006. Art Encounters Deleuze and Guattari. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan

Shaviro, S., 2014. The Universe of Things: On Speculative Realism. Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota Press

Posted in Research methods | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Art Encounters Deleuze and Guattari – Simon O’Sullivan

Just before Christmas, Serendipity crossed my path, shook me by the hand and said, “Have one on me!”  I had chanced upon a tweet from someone in my Doctoral Training Partnership alerting me to a too-good-to-be-true offer from the academic publisher Palgrave Macmillan.  Well, as it happened, it was true.  They were offering £30 off any of their titles with free postage.  I rummaged through their catalogue and in the philosophy section I saw Art Encounters Deleuze and Guattari | Thought Beyond Representation by Simon O’Sullivan.

9781403918093 At £27 my online order generated an invoice for the grand total of £0.00 and a few days later the package, from Heidelberg, dropped onto my doormat. “’Na fargen!” as they say in these parts.  See how The Fates their gifts allot.

I have more than my fair share of the burgeoning secondary literature on the work of Deleuze and Guattari and my thesis is heavily influenced by their thought, so the fact that I hadn’t come across Professor O’Sullivan’s work before might be considered surprising.  I suppose it must be down to the ghettoisation of academia.  O’Sullivan works primarily in the orbit of art history while my own research is based within music and musicology.  But, in another life, I am a painter and so, equipped with my undergraduate knowledge of art history, I took the plunge.

It is commonly acknowledged (even by them!) that the work of D&G is phenomenally difficult to read.  Many of the secondary commentaries and analyses of their work fall into the trap of parroting their complex prose, which does little to aid understanding of the underlying concepts.  Helpfully, O’Sullivan says,

It seems to me to be of critical importance to keep alive a certain style of Deleuze’s thought without over-academicising his writings or endlessly repeating his own words.  We need to repeat the energy and style of his writings without merely representing his thought. (3)

Representing (or, more precisely, representing) is, for O’Sullivan a cardinal sin in aesthetics.  It is the ultimate territorialisation and leads to stasis.

O’Sullivan begins with a quote from Deleuze’s Difference and Repetition: “Something in the world forces us to think.  This something is an object not of recognition but of a fundamental encounter (DR 139).”  It is just such a critical, thought-provoking encounter that I have undergone in the last three days in reading O’Sullivan’s book, consumed in one extended sitting with pauses only for rest and refreshment.  He ends by saying, “I hope very much that the book will have operated as a productive case study of one particular encounter with Deleuze and with art.  If it moves any one reader to read Deleuze further and to conduct their own transversal experiments, then it will have more than served its purpose (155).”  It has so moved me.  Let me elaborate on the material therein between those opening and closing remarks which has done so. img_1777 In the spirit of rhizomatics, my remarks are in no particular order.  They are snapshots of lines of flight from my reading, which, as you can see from the photograph of the annotated pages, were many.

In my own writing I am attempting to knit some of Deleuze’s (and Guattari’s) thinking into a description of a metaphysical aesthetic space, which I call Entangled Network Space.  The problem has been in trying to find a methodology which shies away from simply trying to plug examples directly into a Deleuzian framework (like some kind of DeLandan assemblage).  O’Sullivan counsels against such an approach.  He says, “One might be able to extract such a method or system but this would be to render Deleuze’s thought inoperative, to freeze it in, and as, a particular image of thought, to capture its movement, precisely to represent it (3).”  He strives for an anti-static approach, as do I, by, “jumping from one aspect of Deleuze’s thought to another, picking up the same threads in different contexts and repeating key notions with different emphases (3).”  But does it work?  Concerning the ideal book, D&G say that it would consist in, “lay[ing] everything out […] on a single page, the same sheet: lived events, historical determination, concepts, individuals, groups, social formations… The war machine*-book against the State-apparatus-book (ATP 10).”  But such an idealised single-sheet manifesto does not a real book or PhD thesis make.  So onward.

In Chapter 1, O’Sullivan tackles the topic which is at the heart of Deleuze’s thinking (and, in conjunction with Guattari in A Thousand Plateaus) the Rhizome.  He says that the style of ATP is “[…] at odds with much academic writing, especially that utilised by art theory (and I would include musicological theory here), inasmuch as its modus operandi is affirmation and creation rather than negation and critique (9).”  This is an uncoded jibe at the deconstructionist writings of those O’Sullivan labels the “signifier enthusiasts (10).”  “Style” is a word O’Sullivan chooses deliberately in that description, because as he points out in Chapter 2, it is, for Deleuze and Guattari, fundamental to what elevates art from brute matter, something which is intrinsic to art qua art.  It is style which, in conjunction with brute matter, induces the affect which constitutes the aesthetic.

It is style that organises matter.  Style that takes lived perceptions and affects into the realm of art: “in each case style is needed – the writer’s syntax, the musician’s modes and rhythms, the painter’s lines and colours – to raise lived perceptions to the percept and lived affections to the effect.” Quoting D&G What is Philosophy: 170 (53)

The beauty (or style) of D&G’s metaphorical rhizome is its lack of hierarchical privilege; its opposition to arboreal structuring, the root-like and tree-like thinking which pervades Western thought and culture.  The rhizome is anti-analytic.

It is a flat system in which the individual nodal points can be, and are, connected to one another in a non-hierarchical manner.  A rhizome, then, fosters transversal connections and communications between heterogenous locations and events. (12)

With this concept understood, the writings of other “connectionist” thinkers, DeLanda, Latour, Vitale, and even Hodder fall into place.

Writing over ten years ago now, before the advent of the iPhone, O’Sullivan outlines the importance of the development of the web in being a technology which is a “space of creativity, invention and expression (13).”  The web is, he says, “paradigmatically a rhizome (ibid.).”  Technological interaction marks the transition from monads to nomads, such is its power to connect.  The nomadic turn.  It is a moment in human evolution which sees a new folding; “prosthetic technologies involve the folding of silicon technologies ‘into’ our carbon ones (142).”  O’Sullivan likens this “turn” to Bourriaud’s “relational aesthetics”.

[…] we might position the system of arts in general as rhizomatic, each of the arts, and indeed each individual art work, connecting, or having the potential to connect, to every other.  In fact, the arts themselves might be said to be in rhizomatic contact and communication with other man-made, or indeed, ‘natural’ systems. (13)

Of course, Clark (2003) has pointed out that humans have always been cyborgs, “Natural-born”, so the nomadic turn might have been around for a very long time.  A rhizomatic approach, then, leads to “a mapping out of the parameters, via the rhizome, of an expanded art practice, between art and its participants, and between art and art history (14).”  Such an approach in musicological terms is precisely what Small (1998) describes as “Musicking”.  We might coin the generic term “Arting” regarding the arts in general.  O’Sullivan describes the rhizomatic connections between different milieus and registers as a creative smearing (17).  It is an active process with more than a little of the element of bricolage about it.  He says, “Again, we might note here the importance of the Internet for many artistic collaborations in this sense – the production of micro communities and local alliances even on a global scale (18).”  In their paper Bricolage Programming in the Creative Arts, McLean and Wiggins (2010) describe the early days of algorithmic music programming, calling practitioners bricoleurs.  McLean’s subsequent and current work in the field of live-coded music and the development of the worldwide Algorave community is a paradigm example of the utilisation of new technologies fostering rhizomatic connections between “different milieus and registers”.  McLean (2017) says, “Live coding is not a genre, or a set of tools, but a community of diverse practices.”

“Art here is less a label for an object than a name for a specific kind of coupling (23).”  This is important for arting and musicking.  It places the aesthetic experience and, therefore, artistic meaning, firmly at the conjunction of art object and beholder (or auditor).

It is not just our art-machine that produces these effects, but our art-machine in conjunction with a subject-machine.  For the signification effect, or indeed the aesthetic effect, does not come from the object, but from the object being confronted by (coupled with) a beholder. (22)

Of course, this conjunction is a real-world experience.  It is immanent.  This fact is a counter to those such as Dodd and Scruton who would claim that the meaning of an artwork is something intrinsic to it and that which lies partly in some transcendent realm. It doesn’t.

This notion of multiplicity then announces a different attitude to the world; an understanding of the latter as a plane of immanent connectivity and complexity.  Indeed, this multiplicity is not going on ‘elsewhere’, in some other ‘place’, but is here, in our world, albeit ‘seen’ differently.  (28)

Artworks such as statues and paintings are obviously objects, music less obviously so.  After all, where is the musical object when it is not before our ears?  Lydia Goehr (2007) describes the historical processes by which music came to be objectified in canonical works; exhibits in the “Imaginary Museum”.  O’Sullivan says,

[…] it is a determining feature of the contemporary work that it is obviously destined for the museum (collection, conservation, exhibition) and for the museum audience.  This approach is implied in any ‘theory’ of art, for the theory is made only of objects, in order to determine them.  But the work is not merely a cultural object.  (39)

O’Sullivan suspects

that a kind of rhizomatics has always been going on in between the various objects and practices of canonical art history; a secret and nomadic art history of sensation and becoming, and that likewise, art practice when it truly is an art practice, is always already rhizomatic.  (36)

Rhizomatics will free the exhibits from the museum cage, virtual or otherwise.  Regarding affects in art, in art history (and musicology) “where deconstructive approaches, let alone semiotic ones, to art have become hegemonic, their existence and their central ‘role’ in art needs asserting (43).”  And in this affective, participative encounter with art, as a dynamic process, we,

as representative creatures ourselves, are involved in a dance with art, a dance in which, through careful manoeuvres, the molecular is opened up, the aesthetic is activated and art does what is its chief modus operandi.  It transforms, if only for a moment, our sense of our ‘selves’ and our experience of our world.  (50)

Sullivan’s 4th chapter, From “Geophilosophy to Geoaesthetics” has some very useful material from my perspective.  He labels it as

an experiment in taking Deleuze’s philosophical concepts into other milieus (and in allowing the latter to feed back on Deleuze).  It is in this sense that the artistic ‘case studies’ are meant not as illustration but as parallels to, and in some senses deviations from, the conceptual work.  They also serve to demonstrate that art is a form of thought in and of itself.  (98)

My own research also involves some ethnographic case studies, what I have termed ‘vignettes’.  O’Sullivan’s approach will have lessons for my approach to the vignette material.   O’Sullivan emphasises Deleuze’s thought on the importance of the immanent as a foil to the lazy thinking of the doxa.

In short, the first philosophers are those who institute a plane of immanence like a sieve stretched over chaos.  In this sense they contrast with sages, who are religious personae, priests, because they conceive of the institution of an always transcendent order imposed from outside… Whenever there is transcendence, vertical being, imperial State in the sky or on earth, there is religion; and there is philosophy whenever there is immanence. (WP 43, quoted (111))

Religion and a transcendent worldview, then, can offer no proper explanation of art and the aesthetic.  Confronting this doxatic, theoretical, opinion amounts to nothing more significant than “pleasant or aggressive dinner conversations at Mr Rorty’s (WP 144 (112)).”  Non-philosophers are but “functionaries” who enjoy a “ready-made thought (113),” the quasi thoughts of the doxa (112).  Instituting the plane of immanence is a “survival mechanism” which “will allow thought and creativity to unfurl (114).” It is the life raft which saves us when the ship of transcendence sinks beneath us.

In the 5th chapter, “Possible Worlds to Future Folds”, O’Sullivan talks about certain philosophical concepts, the monad and the fold, making reference to the paintings of Gerhard Richter.  This interests me, not least since some of my own paintings have been inspired by Richter’s abstract works.


Pink Plank by Tom Tomos

He labels this another experimental approach; to construct a Deleuze-Richter conjunction, to set each alongside the other and in so doing to produce a new kind of assemblage between the two (121).  It would be a rich vein, which O’Sullivan acknowledges in his footnote, would require another book to do it justice.  Art considered as actual landscape (even abstractedly) proves a powerful metaphor for a “region of being (122).”  A canvas, whether “blank” (which it never is) or painted upon is a metaphor for the plane of immanence.  Richter says,

The invention of the readymade seems to me the invention of reality, in other words the radical discovery that reality in contrast with the view of the world image is the only important thing.  Since then painting no longer represents reality but is itself reality (produced by itself).  And sometimes or other it will again be a question of denying the value of this reality in order to produce pictures of a better world (as before). (RIC 124, quoted (127))

This alone ought to stop the doxatic question, “But what is it a picture of?”  Sadly, it does not.  The empty canvas isn’t; it is full of promise.  “Painting then becomes a process of subtraction from Leibniz’s ‘dark background’,  the black dust of the imperceptible (130).”  O’Sullivan says that this is a distinctive feature of Deleuze’s and Leibniz’s ontology, “An ontology of fullness, of plenitude, of which ‘the world’ as we ‘see’ it is an abstraction/subtraction (130).”  The air is alway already pregnant with music.

I have said nothing about O’Sullivan’s excursus into the workings of the Red Army Factions in Chapter 3, “Art and the Political”.  He uses the activities of the terror group to make valid points about D&G’s idea of the major and minor.  I noticed parallels in this discussion with what Barrett says in After Sound (2016) concerning the music collective Wandelweiser, who are still a major force (albeit without guns and explosives) in the minor.

These words have been but one salami slice as a line of flight through O’Sullivan’s book.  There are very many others slices to cut.  As a work to engage the thinking of anybody who is working at the conjunction of Deleuze and aesthetics, it is a “must read”.  One note on style.  The book contains 62 pages of endnotes.  O’Sullivan explains why he has done this.  I found myself reading two parallel texts the whole time, since there is probably no page which doesn’t have a referential note.  I found the notes so informative and germane to the text that they could easily have been included in the flow of the overall narrative.  Lines of flight are one thing, but authors and editors could make things easier on the eye and the thumb.

*For “war machine”, read “metamorphosis machine”.  Much nicer!


Barrett, G.D.  2016.  After Sound: Toward a Critical Music. London: Bloomsbury

Clark, A. 2003. Natural-born cyborgs: why minds and technologies are made to merge. New York: Oxford University Press

Goehr, L.  2007.  The imaginary museum of musical works: an essay in the philosophy of music. Rev. edn. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press

McLean, A. and G. Wiggins. 2010.  Bricolage Programming in the Creative Arts.  Paper presented at the 22nd Psychology of Programming Interest Group

McLean, A. 2017.  Live Coding. Website accessed online 6 January 2017 (

O’Sullivan, S. 2006.  Art Encounters Deleuze and Guattari: Thought Beyond Representation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan

Small, C.  998. Musicking: the meanings of performing and listening. Hanover; London: University Press of New England

Works quoted by O’Sullivan:

(DR) Deleuze, G. 1994.  Difference and Repetition, Trans. P. Patton.  New York: Columbia University Press

(ATP) Deleuze, G and F. Guattari. 1988.  A Thousand Plateaus, Trans. B. Massumi.  London: Athlone Press

(WP) Deleuze, G. and F. Guattari. 1994.  What is Philosophy?, Trans. H. Tomlinson and G. Burchell.  London: Verso

(RIC)  Richter, G. 1991b.  ‘Notes 1996-1990’ (sic.), Gerhard Richter.  London: Tate Gallery

Posted in Book Reviews, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

(Probably not) the introduction to my thesis

The rhizome is an antigenealogy (Deleuze and Guattari 2004: 23).  This thesis is rhizomatic.  It can be read genealogically, but that would be to miss the point.  When we write of hypotheses, methodologies, conclusions and bibliographies, such writing sometimes resembles nothing more than a description of a high-school science experiment.  To engage with this resemblance would be a static reading, isochronous, frozen in time.  A better reading is dynamic, heterochronic and diachronic.  At risk of instant contradiction, this thesis is about entanglements and disentanglements, comings and goings.  That is the nature of the space, real and metaphorical, in which we live.   Endings are coloured by beginnings and beginnings by endings.  There are no monads, only (ever-changing) assemblages.

This thesis is about things which are about cyborg music. The thesis and its putative subject exist in Entangled Network Space.  It starts with this conclusion.  It is about music.  And humans.  And technology.  And philosophy.  And time.  And, and, and.  The constant conjunctions of and, of and, of and.  An assemblage is composed of ands, and the ands come and they go.  And further ands change the ands.  Entangled Network Space is full of voids; andless spaces waiting to be filled by ands and voids which the ands have vacated.  It is a space of possibilities.  It owes its existence to the real and the real owes its existence to it.  It is the immanent, one truly flat ontological space, where being and non-being are equivalent.

The writing has a chronological flow, but it is full of heterochronic wormholes, which may be traversed at the speed of memory or of Google-thought.  They are mental footnotes.  It radiates and is irradiated.  All writing is like this.  It is the New Writing in the Hyperconnected Age.



Deleuze, G. and F. Guattari 2004.  A thousand plateaus : capitalism and schizophrenia. London: Continuum

Posted in Subject Entries, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Thinking about conferences as places for thinking

Since I shall (with a fair following wind) be submitting my PhD thesis next year at the age of 60, I am immune to many of the pressures faced by senior academics and ECRs alike which Richard Ashcroft describes here. I’m not looking to pursue a career in the groves of academe and so I am lucky enough to follow my nose in terms of future research. But his description of the “conference-as-we-know-it” rings true. Perhaps our time is better spent sailing… or at the cricket!

Show and Tell

In this post, Richard Ashcroft reflects on the shortcomings of academic conferences. 

For a long time, I have been doing my work without going to conferences. Like going to bed early, this is perhaps why I do a lot of reflecting on (academic) life rather than participating in it. In the first half of my academic career I used to go to conferences a lot. But I now have very mixed feelings about them. Here I want to explore some of the reasons why I find conferences problematic.

Let me start by saying why I used to go to so many. In part this was because there was a time when I went to none at all. When I was a graduate student I was fortunate enough to be at a university which was considered a destination for the world’s academics, where famous names and rising stars would come on…

View original post 3,795 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment