Casey Reas’ view on the role of randomness largely resonates with me – I have valued the loss of order in artworks before, but I have not thought in depth about the possibilities that this provides to creators from different backgrounds. Thinking about randomness generated by computer, I have always regarded it “pseudo-random”, knowing that there are still specific algorithms that guide the output. In this sense, the quote from “The digital computer as a creative medium” by Michael Noll was eye-opening to me: “… full exploitation of those unique talents for controlled randomness and detailed algorithms can result in an entirely new medium”. This conclusion is not an obvious one, and this is what makes coding so fascinating to me – there are so many aspects under the control of the developer, that chance brings uniqueness to an outcome that could supposedly be predicted.
The interconnectedness of randomness and control is still confusing to me, and I believe that there should be a balance defined by everyone by themselves, not a universal one. In my works, I wish to include elements that go out of orderly more often, developing algorithms that follow a logic resulting in an unforeseen outcome, but do not become pure improvisations. Letting something go out of control is scary, but I have learned that uncertainty can bring beauty to the final result.