Parkinson and Bell’s article does a great job framing live coding within a spectrum of liveness, with Deadmau5 on one end, focused on spectacle and precision, and Derek Bailey on the other, showcasing spontaneous and real-time improvisation. I found it really interesting how live coding pulls from both these phenomena but carves out its own identity by treating the laptop as an instrument rather than just a playback device.

What resonated with me most was the idea of visibility and transparency, and how projecting the code live makes the compositional process part of the performance. It’s such a contrast to Deadmau5’s polished, pre-sequenced sets. Live coding feels more vulnerable and dynamic, where the performer navigates unpredictability in real time, almost like letting the laptop “speak.”I also liked the comparison to Bailey’s idea of the “instrumental impulse”, and that deep, expressive interaction with the tool. It reminded me that live coding isn’t just about technical skill, but about exploring and responding to the moment. In the end, the piece made me rethink what “live” performance really means, and how it’s not just about physical gestures, but about decision-making, presence, and risk.