For me, Casey Reas’ talk on the balance between randomness and control in artistic process appeared to be extremely motivational and spot-on. Although Reas does not provide a definitive answer on where this balance lies, the ideas he presents are still compelling and thought-provoking. For instance, I loved the way in which he highlighted the beauty of imprecision, suggesting that it stems from nature itself (which unexpectedly reminded me of the recent reading from another class on the beginning of life on Earth). To prove his point, Casey refers to the “randomness in order” seen in the artwork that demonstrates protein molecules communicating within a cancer cell. This non-obvious connection between the chaotic patterns of nature and those found in computer programming was truly eye-opening.
As I begin to work on my own creative projects using coding, I am constantly reflecting on how much I will rely on chance. For me, randomness is simply a tool to help achieve a creative goal, but it is by no means the most decisive factor. I firmly agree with Reas that artistic choices involve a little magic of chance, but they are mostly guided by thoughtful decision-making about the final result. This applies to all forms of art, as the artistic process is always shaped by stylistic choices, vision, and ideas that arise from the creative mind long before the actual craft begins. Henceforth, there is no “chance” in the foundational decision of what the work will make the viewer feel. The uncertainty only lies in the ways the effect is reached: that’s where embracing the beauty of chance and experiment becomes so handy.