[eu-gene] Re: Generative or not?

[Simon Biggs]

I also agree.

The question as to why artists might wish to use random processes is the
key. I would argue that the main reason for employing such techniques is not
because of any potential value that might be found in any particular set of
numerical relationships, nor in any formal outcomes of the process, but
rather in how such an approach allows one to at least partially defer and
thus problematise authorship. Random processes, along with other similar
techniques based on arbitrary systems, allow you to shift where the apparent
origin of a work might be found and thus cause the receiver of the work to
also question their own relationship as interpreter and partial author.

Best

Simon


On 10.05.06 12:02, "aslemeur" <aslemeur at free.fr> wrote:

> I agree
> 
> why and when do we chose to use random ?
> to create variety, to avoid to chose ? (to fill a space-time ?)
> but this random exists inside some preset 'personnal/subjective' rules
> This is in these personnal/subjective rules that I am interested (with
> computer or any other creation technics)
> and how they show something about our own dreams/subconscious
> 
> random without strong choses/rules doesn't mean anything
> most of the times 'random art' is boring to me because it doesn't express
> anything about human
> it is more technical than sensitive
> most of the time anyone could do the same (having the same level of
> technical knowledge)
> for example :
> http://imagesavant.com/
> fascinating but not art ?
> 
> what are we dreaming of  ?


Simon Biggs

simon at littlepig.org.uk
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/

Professor of Digital Art, Sheffield Hallam University

s.biggs at shu.ac.uk
http://www.shu.ac.uk/schools/cs/cri/adrc/research2/