Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
claim the computer has become creative (if they do exist) have views that appear
rather traditional. They do not see the dramatic change in artistic creation from
material to sign, from mechanics to deliberate semiotics.
What is so dramatic about this transformation? Signs do not exist in the world.
Other than things, signs require the presence of human beings to exist. Signs are
established as relations between other entities, be they physical or mental. In order
to appear, the sign must be perceived. In order to be perceivable, it must come in
physical form. That form, however, necessary as it is, is not the most important
correlate of the sign. Perceivable physical form is the necessary condition of the
sign; the full sign, however, must be constituted by a cognitive act.
Semiotics is the study of sign processes in all their multitudes and manifesta-
tions. One basic question of semiotics is: how is communication possible? Semiotic
answers to this question are descriptive, not explanatory.
3.3 The Second Narration: On Three Artists
It has often been pointed out that computer art originates in the work of mathemati-
cians and engineers. Usually, this is uttered explicitly or implicitly with an undertone
on “only mathematicians and engineers”.
The observation is true. Mathematicians and engineers are the pioneers of algo-
rithmic art, but what is the significance of this observation? Is it important? What
is the relevance of the “
only
mathematicians” qualification? I have always felt that
this observation was irrelevant. It could only be relevant in a sense like: “early com-
puter art is boring; it is certainly not worth being called art; and no wonder it is so
boring—since it was not inspired by
real
artists, how could it be exciting”?
Frankly, I felt insulted a bit by the “only mathematicians” statement.
11
It implies
a vicious circle. If art is only what artists generate, then how do you become an artist,
if you are not born an artist? The only way out of this dilemma is that everyone is,
in fact, born an artist (as not only Joseph Beuys has told us). But then the “only
mathematicians” statement wouldn't make sense any more.
People generate objects and they design processes. They do not generate art. Art,
in my view, is a product of society—a judgement. Without appearing in public and
thus without being confronted with a critique of historic and systematic origin, a
work remains a work, for good or bad, but it cannot be said to have been included in
the broad historic stream of art. Complex processes take place after a person decides
to display his or her product in publicly accessible spaces. It is only in the public
domain that art can emerge (as a value judgement!). Individuals and institutions in
mutual interdependence are part of the processes that may merge to the judgement
that a work is assessed and accepted as a work of “art”—often enough, as we all
know, sparking even more controversy.
11
This should read “mathematicians or engineers”, but I will stick to the shorter version.
