Comment by mechanical_fish | Hacker News Reader

Comment by mechanical_fish | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

mechanical_fish

Minimalism, like most words describing styles, is a very flexible word. If I write a composition in which a single person plays a pair of water glasses with one drumstick, that's "minimalism". And if I employ a very expensive sound studio to record a famous pop song consisting of the simplest possible drum track, a sparse guitar riff, a one-note vocal part with occasional distortion, and a toy Casio organ, that's also "minimalism":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNYcviXK4rg&feature=relat...

And, of course, I can be a "minimalist composer" even while writing complex works for entire orchestras:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Coolidge_Adams

None of these forms of minimalism is more "real" than the others.

Meanwhile, I'm afraid I don't understand your point. At least the OP has provided a living example of his style of minimalism. Can you give us a living example of yours? Even poor people "use money to access what they need", eat meat, travel by bus, use shared public infrastructure, and hire immigrant workers. Even subsistence farmers do these things. Even ascetic Buddhist monks do these things. (They don't subsist entirely on oxygen, after all: They're supported by donations. Or, if you insist, they "outsource the burden of sustaining their lifestyle".)

So when you say the words "real minimalist", who am I supposed to see in my mind's eye? Could it be someone I've ever actually met?

I think the cumulative value of all the resources ever paid for by many subsistence farmers or others considered "poor" on a world scale probably wouldn't add up to the cost of the MacBook Pro in Andrew's laptop. I believe his demands on infrastructure may be a little more too. So are mine.

Of course Andrew's claim to minimalism is only relative to most people in the developed world. But there are tens of thousands of twentysomethings from developed countries travelling the world for extended periods of time with a similar amount of luggage (Most of us spend a bit more on clothes and a bit less on laptops; guess it depends on whether you prefer the inconvenience of laundry or Windows!) It seems to be as mandatory as national service for youthful Australians (and a mandatory experience after national service for Israelis). The secret about life on the road being fun got out a while ago.

It's not Andrew's fault, of course, if news coverage tries to turn him into some sort of innovator he's perhaps never claimed to be.

>So when you say the words "real minimalist", who am I supposed to see in my mind's eye?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Rams#Rams.27_ten_princip...

Hidden complexity isn't minimalism. True minimalism demands fundamental simplicity. Minimalism makes the truth of a product, a process or a place more obvious, rather than obfuscating it behind white melamine. The actuality of less.

Minimalist lifestyle choices are those that positively simplify, that meaningfully reduce the total impact of our lives. Eating soy rather than beef, eating local strawberries in June rather than air-freighted strawberries in December. Insulation over of heating, two wheels over four. Measuring the size of your lifestyle in kilowatt-hours and hectares and litres.

If you're looking for the living embodiment, see Jason Rohrer. http://hcsoftware.sourceforge.net/jason-rohrer/simpleLife.ht...

I think you're right about words describing styles being flexible but wrong given the amount of flexibility you expect and the examples you've given. Minimalism, in every example I can think of, has a context. What you've described is a minimalist percussion exhibition and a minimalist recording. If you asked some people to describe those two things I expect you would get some similar thoughts. The focus is on the recording and not the location of the recording. The studio would not be a focus on whether the recording was or was not minimalist.

But there are assumptions, context, about lifestyle minimalism that the minimalism supports some goal to minimize consumption with an eye toward "the things we own end up owning us" and to keep their footprint small. The gp notes that the subject of the article has not actually done that, he's just pushed consumption off onto other people and businesses. An example you asked for of someone who lives minimalistically is a myth I heard as a kid about people who could fit everything into their VW Bug and be on their way.

I guess I don't think you're wrong so much as right but the gp's assumptions are common and more accurate to how minimalism is usually thought about.

Did you actually mean to say that traveling the world on an airplane with a backpack is not minimalist, but driving around the country in a classic VW Bug - a fossil-fueled vehicle which is considerably less efficient per passenger-mile than a passenger jet - is minimalist? That driving around on a publicly-funded, continuously-maintained network of asphalt doesn't constitute "pushing consumption off onto others"?

One eventually realizes that minimalism of any kind is a trick of the mind. Nothing is really simple, even things that aren't alive, and nothing really exists in isolation. A thing can be minimal only relative to something else, and only along a limited axis, and only so long as you don't think too deeply.

(Did I just say that Trio's classic "Da Da Da" has only one note? Oops, I lied, I didn't look deeply enough: The chorus has a background singer, and though she - it sounds like a she - is designed to be a minimalist background singer she does sing multiple notes, adding vital depth and texture and helping to make the chorus sound so awesome: It's a joke of a chorus, but it's so much more musically rich than the verse that it sounds like heaven when it arrives.)

By the example I do not mean driving around the country but keeping owned objects down to a manageable amount where moving easily is possible. But that will turn into an uninteresting side topic as -internet- discussion sometimes does. I have a habit of looking for ways for people to agree and what assumptions are causing disagreement. I believe I've accurately described your initial disagreement with detrich as a difference of assumptions about a definition. To me minimalism is keeping the number of chunks one has to consider low enough so up and moving to another city, by car or plane, is easy. (I can't find that Trio's song. But I'm not sure you mentioned it before either.)

try Buddhist monk, esp. of the species of "forest dweller".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com