On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 19:04:47 +0200, Julian Rohrhuber wrote
> >> I think the notion of expression needs to be revisited. I don't find
> >> it extremely hard to consider what you suggest, but my question was
> >> more, what makes you consider it? Is there specifics of a computer
> >> that makes them different (in this regard) to other stuff, like
> >> chairs, who make us sit on them, and want to travel around with us
> >> in the world in our cars?
> >
> >Eek, I'm lost! If you're using an evolutionary strategy, like GP - the
> >computer *is* merely being used to create art, it's role in the creative
> >process is just as constrained as any other system
>
> Constraints (also our own constraints) make us not less creative,
> but possibly more.
absolutely! I observe this every day - ie: trying to write software that
pretends that it has no limits is deadly, for artistic users particually, as
they are clever enough to see that this is a flawed concept, and are forced to
bang their heads against brick walls, but I digress...
> Something that is "merely being used to create
> art": This "merely" would then mean that art is artist-
> intentionality (the intention to create art) mediated by the computer?
yup, but there is nothing unusual about that, its the same way a cymbal
mediates the kind of sound you can make with it. the interesting stuff comes
from the flesh and bone artist I say :)
cheers,
dave
Received on Wed Apr 13 2005 - 17:51:10 BST