Talk:Automatism and the computer

This page was voted on for deletion at Votes for deletion/Automatism and the computer. The consensus was to merge it. dbenbenn | talk 23:37, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Should the use of automatic drawing in this article be distinguished in article? --Daniel C. Boyer 18:45, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Pierre Petiot is a self-characterised surrealist.63.169.104.2 20:49, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

We read ''The surrealist Pierre Petiot has argued. . . that the speed the graphical tools of computer periphery "allow an almost permanent connection with the roots of automatism".'' What, if anything, does this mean? Further, However, this may be open to criticism on the grounds that mouses, or some individual, makes, or brands of mouses, are not as responsive to the automatic motion of the hand, as are regular drawing implements. Does this mean something other than "Most mice aren't as responsive to the motion of the hand as are pencils and the like"? If so, what? -- Hoary 15:36, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)
 * Not much more; it simply becomes more of an issue with regards to automatism as the movements are not deliberate. It also speculates that mouses may differ between types and brands in this regard.  --Daniel C. Boyer 17:58, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I think it's obvious that mice are responsive to different degrees, notably via the settings applied to the software. (And a trivial point: I hadn't previously heard of them being called "mouses".)
 * But your reply is about the second half. Meanwhile, the first half (attributed to Petiot, whoever he may be) remains utterly obscure -- to me, at least. Actually the whole business smells to me of Freudianism, the Ouija board, and other dusty and long-discredited notions. -- Hoary 03:45, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)
 * I'll leave your POV that Freudianism and the Ouija board have been long discredited, but what this actually smells of is surrealism (it's surrealist automatism, not mediumistic). --Daniel C. Boyer 16:09, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)