Rosa Menkman’s Glitch Studies Manifesto is an interesting read but it can feel overwritten at times. That said one argument genuinely stuck with me and it was the idea that a glitch is not just a mistake but a moment that exposes what a technology actually is beneath its polished surface. When something breaks you suddenly see the system and its assumptions and limits. I think that framing makes a lot of sense.

Working in TidalCycles and Hydra I think about this a lot. When Im live coding and something goes wrong like a pattern fires off rhythm or a Hydra function produces something completely unexpected there is this brief moment of panic but also genuine curiosity. Like what just happened and why did it do that? Menkman would probably call that the acousmatic quality of glitch where you are confronted with an output you cannot fully trace back to a source. In my project I was deliberately layering tabla samples with glitchy electronic sounds and the tension between those two things felt like exactly what she was describing. I feel like the interruption becomes the point.

Where Im less convinced is her claim that intentional glitch art still counts as true glitch. I think once you are designing the error you have already domesticated it. There is a real difference between a glitch that surprises you and one that you planned. The shock is what makes it what it is.