Re: [-empyre-] making a meta-living / a-life & generative art

[Mitchell Whitelaw <mitchell.whitelaw@canberra.edu.au>]

On 23/11/2004, at 7:59 AM, <notnot@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Could this movement to hermetic purity of code in itself be a reaction
> to our contemporary visual culture? An escape maybe from the 
> omnipresence
> of images addressing our complex social political and economic reality.

Yes, I think that's partly right - but I think that our visual culture 
actually (in general) does _not_ address our complex reality, partly 
because it's a very hard thing to make an image of. We see images from 
its surface, "appearances" of it, but how do you make an image of 
something so dynamic, complex, multifarious, etc.?

One thing that a-life and generative art can do in setting up these 
"aquaria" (exactly), is play with complex dynamic systems in miniature, 
and perhaps discover or intuit some of their properties. Australian 
a-life artist Rod Berry talks about trying to encourage an "aesthetic 
of systems" rather than one of "images" with his work. Of course 
there's Jack Burnham's 1968 "Systems Aesthetics."

Which brings us right to the sublime, the unrepresentable vastness of 
nature/culture/global capital. I agree with Jon and Alan's analysis. 
Also speaking of sublime and Manovich, there's his paper "The 
Anti-Sublime Ideal in Data Art" - 
http://www.chairetmetal.com/cm07/manovich-complet.htm

Mitchell