In Casey Reas’ presentation, he explores the tension between order and chaos through the lens of visual art, particularly how software and algorithms have allowed for a deeper engagement with these concepts. His work demonstrates how randomness can coexist with controlled systems, creating art that is both calculated and unpredictable, offering new perspectives on the artistic process. What stood out to me was how his work evolved from simple systems to complex installations, with the unpredictability of the process being the common thread between all his artworks. His reliance on algorithms and chance, combined with borders, reflects a deep connection between control (borders) and randomness(algorithms and chance), making each artwork unique yet part of an artistic collection.
But the real question on my mind is whether his work is considered art. Even though his work stood out to me and it was interesting to see what pieces were created from software, algorithm, randomness and chance, I’m still wondering if this is actually considered a piece of art. I’ve been thinking about this because my twin, who is majoring in visual art, often questions what is considered art. In my opinion, not everything can be considered art; true art is what has been made with genuine feelings, created by hand, and has a meaning or story behind it. Some might argue that it is considered a piece of art because this person programmed it to do this piece of work, but I still argue that even though the person gave the commands the person still didn’t know how the artwork will end up looking like and there isn’t any story or meaning behind this piece of work. So, the question remains: is his work considered art?