Variables

The computer as a result becomes part author in the creative  process. As a designer who writes code, I find this approach to creative expression fascinating. There is an exactness to programming. Syntax is formal and a rogue ; or missed { means the difference between an idea compiling or not. It is scientific. On the other side there is subjective beauty. An oft unquantifiable, emotion response. It is artistic. The computer has engendered a new breed of creative. A technological astuteness with a sensitive dependence upon emotional conditions.

There are however few truly original talents who manage to balance the left and right hemispheres with apparent ease which is not surprising given many people’s natural bias for one or other. I’m thinking of Maeda, Levin, Nakamura, Rokeby. I asked David Rokeby about this diversity of discipline.

The one off

When compared to hand rendered work, programs can run infinite times producing precisely the same result each time. The hand of the computer is plain to see.

Hand rendering however cannot achieve this and as such displays wonderful qualities of uniqueness, the one off. The hand of the human is plain to see. .

In some ways randomness is a way for the programmer/artist to imbue a sense of one-offness. It can bring sterile exactness to life, add unknowns and in doing so reveal a more humanistic sense of involvement or as Rokeby explained more poetically;

Happy accidents

So as the TV continues to blink, stutter and scramble through an episode of Stars on Skates or some other guff the broadcasters typically push out I’m rather more interested in the ingenious patterns a malfunctioning chip has happened to create.

Below is a collection of some of these which made “Homes under the Hammer” actually worth watching. Do I get it fixed?… not quite yet.

If you have examples of creative serendipity drop a comment below.