Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Fig. 3.7
Harold Cohen.
Left
:Earlydrawingby
AARON
, with the artist.
Right
: Drawing by
AARON
, 1992 (with permission of the artist)
by the problem of representation. His question then was: just how much, or little,
does it take before a human observer securely recognises a set of lines and colours as
a figure or pattern of something? How could a painting paint itself? (Cohen
2007
).
But Harold Cohen has now stopped following this path any further. He achieved
more than anyone else in the world in terms of creating autonomous rule-based art
systems (Fig.
3.7
shows two works along the way). He did not give up this general
goal. He decided to return to pure form and colour as the subject matter of his
autonomous rule-based system.
For a computer scientist, there is no deep difference between an algorithm and
a rule-based system. As Cohen (
2007
) writes, it took him a while to understand
this. The difference is one of approach, not of the results. Different approaches may
still possess the same expressive power. As Cohen is now approaching colour again
in an explicitly algorithmic manner, he has shifted his view closer to the computer
scientist's but without negating his deep insight into the qualities of colour as an
artist.
This is marvellous. After a long and exciting journey, it sheds light on the al-
leged difference between two views of the world. In one person's great work, in his
immediate activity, experience, and knowledge, the gap between the “two cultures”
of C.P. Snow fades. It fades in the medium of the creative activity of one person,
not in the complex management of interdisciplinary groups and institutes. The topic
must still be written that analyses the Cohen decades of algorithmic art from the
perspective of art history.
Cohen's journey stands out as a never again to be achieved adventure. He has
always been the lonely adventurer. His position is unique and singular. Artificial
