hello all. i enjoyed reading Susanne Jaschko's comments on "processual art" , and the way she ended her comments:
>>life/emergence can be found in various artistic practice, can unite those and >>which potential this type of art has to not only convince on an aesthetic >>level, but also can have a social/cultural impact.>> what is generated in processual art? for whom? and who uses or partakes in generative creativeness in a semi or total autonomous system? what life? whose life? where is the space/time for social choreographies, (to what end?) and if emphasis is placed on non-outcomes, what does this mean for aesthetic/conceptual perceptions of art or art reception or games or game receptions or AI systems and AI-systems-receptions. what are the different cultural receptions (if these would be amongst behaviors emerging) that you have noted? do curatorial practices (or pedagogics) evaluate how behaviors of interaction or reception of the processual affect exhibitions and performances? regards Johannes Birringer dap-lab london >>Yann Le Guennec writes >> I think that the term 'generative' is now closely linked to what is called 'generative art', dealing with algorithms and systems, looking for some kinds of emergence. That's ok, but a 'generative artwork' is also often defined by its autonomy and self-containment. Is this approach compatible with the picture as a result of a process where the involved system is wide and open, closely linked to other systems (the internet + its users , for example)? Furthermore, with the expression 'generative image', one can think that the image generates something, not that the image is generated by a system or process ? >>> _______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre _______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
