Its a mind expanding question that I’ve thought about a long time.
I’d suggest trying to break apart the generative and art. Is generative computational only or do physical systems fall into the field as well. And if there are physical systems, what will make them art?
Generative (art) is the output of a system. The system can be digital/computational, but doesn't have to be. It has some degree of autonomy beyond the control of its creator(s). The outcomes either change over time or are different each time it is used. The role of its creator(s) is to design the instructions that make the system work.
There's a continuum between complete order (the same output every time) and complete randomness (getting outputs so chaotic that the creator is irrelevant). Somewhere in the middle is (maybe) where the art is.
I would suggest that "pure" generative art makes use of mechanized processes in the composition phase of the art. There is a more general type of "non-linear" art that might make use of any system or type of randomness available, including nature.
So just for thought sake, and this may be a little esoteric. How would you reconcile mechanized processes to what we as human create? In some sense, even we as humans use a mechanical process to create a composition making it "generative". How would you distinguish them separately?
Good question! I think we might distringuish that for generative, some vital process or processes are mechanized which, if left out, would result in a failure to create compositions.
Generative (art) is the output of a system. The system can be digital/computational, but doesn't have to be. It has some degree of autonomy beyond the control of its creator(s). The outcomes either change over time or are different each time it is used. The role of its creator(s) is to design the instructions that make the system work.
There's a continuum between complete order (the same output every time) and complete randomness (getting outputs so chaotic that the creator is irrelevant). Somewhere in the middle is (maybe) where the art is.
(This owes a lot to Philip Galanter.)
I would suggest that "pure" generative art makes use of mechanized processes in the composition phase of the art. There is a more general type of "non-linear" art that might make use of any system or type of randomness available, including nature.
So just for thought sake, and this may be a little esoteric. How would you reconcile mechanized processes to what we as human create? In some sense, even we as humans use a mechanical process to create a composition making it "generative". How would you distinguish them separately?
Good question! I think we might distringuish that for generative, some vital process or processes are mechanized which, if left out, would result in a failure to create compositions.