Watching this talk, what came to my mind was how deeply rooted the tension between chaos and order is in both art and human history. I found myself reflecting on how, for centuries, artists were expected to create structure and clarity in response to a world perceived as chaotic. This made sense within a Newtonian worldview, where the universe felt stable, predictable, and governed by clear rules. As the speaker moved through moments of scientific disruption and historical trauma, especially the impact of World War I, I began to see how those events made strict order feel insufficient. It became clear to me that the shift toward chance and randomness in art was not a rejection of meaning, but an attempt to better reflect the uncertainty and complexity of lived experience.
What struck me most was the idea that chance is never truly blind. As I watched the examples of algorithmic and generative work, I kept thinking about how these systems are carefully designed yet allowed to behave unpredictably. This balance between control and surrender felt deeply human to me. I realized that using randomness is not about giving up responsibility as an artist, but about trusting processes to reveal patterns that cannot be forced. In that sense, chaos becomes a collaborator rather than a threat. It allows art to remain alive over time, continuously changing while still holding a coherent identity.