as you see it

the recent publication of the complete sequence of the human genome by the human genome project represents a watershed moment for both science and mankind.

comprised of approximately 3 billion nucleic acid molecules, the genome contains close to 25,000 genes. generally speaking, our genes define us; they determine what we look like, what we do, how we live and how we die. now for the first time since we came into being, we know the essential ingredients that make us human.

of course things are much more complicated than that. having a list of ingredients is quite different from knowing the actual recipe. just as a chef would need to know how to use the ingredients – when, in what combination, and how much – to cook a dish, we still have a long way to go before we know how to work the timing and the level of activities of these genes in order to make a person.

from a developmental perspective, we need to have this kind of system-level grasp for each and every one of our 25,000 genes at every instant of this long and complex journey called life to realize even the most minute and mundane step along the way, like sitting in front of a computer writing a blog.

it is the nature of science that every answer begs more questions. and the sequence of the human genome have certainly generated its fair share. for instance, we learned that, on the genome level, any two individuals are 99.9% identical. that means, what separates me from say, grand master flash, is a mere 0.1% of our genome, or about 3 million molecules (each is also known as a “single nucleotide polymorphism,” or SNP). as cool as that is for me and fucked up for flash, it's one of the points of genomics: variations of these 3 million SNPs (pronounced “snips”) are largely responsible for the incredible variety we have amongst the approximately 6.5 billion of us on this planet.

interestingly, it seems many of these sequence variations are also found in blocks, or what some geneticists call “flavors”. many think these “flavors” are the molecular records of sexual reproduction, where genomes from the partners are shuffled and recombined, often in large blocks, with each generation. so what at first may appear to be random variations actually masks a higher order that speaks directly to our evolutionary trip.

in the january 28th the times, there was a story on composer steve reich and his new piece “you are (variations).” while it’s not music for the genomic age, he did talk about his inspirations:

"first there were just atoms, then there were protons and neutrons, then there were quarks, and now we're talking about string theory. it seems like every 20, 30, 40, 50 years a trapdoor opens and another level of reality opens up."

i think reich is only ½ right. sure, much of modern science is about a march towards finer details (e.g. particle physics and nanotechnology), but reality is about perspective and perception, not necessarily how far one can drill down in the physical world. as the sequence of the genome makes clear: we can dwell on the 3 million or so SNPs to define the differences amongst us, or by looking at them as part of “flavors,” see a new order and a shared history.

from the rapid-fire tape editing pioneered by latin rascals, omar santana, and the late chep nunez to microsampling found in contemporary electronica, music had undergone a parallel atomization, and as result, redefined over the past two decades. a confluence of factors, including copyright laws and easy access to sophisticated music technology, have rewritten the rules of production where all sounds, from digital glitches to verbal fragments are fair game for music-making.

but like scientists who find higher order in randomness, there are ocd-types such as styrofoam (aka brussel’s arne van petegem) and akufen (aka montreal’s marc leclair) who are revealing melodies and beats inherent in shards of sound. “fade out in your eyes” is from the 2002 morr music compilation “blue skied an’ clear”, while “in dog we trust” can be found on the “my way” album (efa, 2002). both are technically stunning, and able to wring music from bytes and pieces.

kurtis and i kicked around ideas for the remix of reich’s “drumming” (“reich remixed”, nonesuch, 1999) for awhile. in the end, it seems inevitable that we decided to telescope the theme and texture of the original by double-timing the beats.

Posted by cellpharmer at February 13, 2005 10:18 PM