I have had hard time really grasping what interactive media really means and what is expected in this class. Coming more from programming background, I have found myself struggling to be creative when completing assignments and working in class. As I have never challenged myself to think in realm of art, I needed to practice thinking like an artist and use my imagination in ways that are original : which is not usually the case when programming. When programming, there are very specific rules and guidelines; furthermore, there are limits to where I can be innovative. I need to use correct syntax, open brackets and close brackets in the right places for loops, and can never forget to put semi-colons after each lines of code. However, after watching Casey Reas’ speech in Eyeo 2012, I could understanding how art can be produced with the help of technology: more specifically how art can be created through coding.
Generating random numbers or patterns is one of the simplest concept in coding, and Reas discusses how such concept may create complex visual systems. It is intuitive for programmers to associate the word ‘random’ as chaos as they normally do not want random results or values to occur by their codes. However, Reas’ points on the relationship between systemic autonomy and artworks opened my eyes to a completely different perspective: persuading me to consider random outcome of code to be a form of art, in a sense. Seeing digital artworks presented by Reas during his presentation, I reflected on my programming journey and thought the amount of random outputs I got while learning how to code may have turned into an art piece!
Even though randomness in code and use of technology may be a medium to create art, I find Reas to be advocating the role of technology in art too much as he does not discuss art in forms of paintings or sculptures. He only talks about digital art forms, which might make painters or those who create more traditional forms of art uncomfortable. It occurs to me that if art can be created digitally with the help of machine learning and technological advancement, then there would be less opportunities for man-made arts as it is cost-effective and less time-consuming. Thus, I believe technological approach to art has to be made very carefully as it may not only affect the definition of art, but also have impacts on artists both socially and economically.
In addition, if art is made by random outcomes and does not show the same visualization consistently, I believe it is hard to be defined as ‘art’. Artists use specific colors, stroke their brushes in specific ways to match their needs, and pick specific apparatus to make their imagination come true, but Reas’ examples of art defies the traditional concept of art in all ways possible.
It is indeed remarkable how technology can be used to create art, but I think the creation of art cannot be relied entirely on randomness and should reflect more on the purpose of artists.