4 ms·

The fact that the artist had nothing in mind makes a lot of sense when looking at the paintings. They appear as meaningless noise, and the only thing it evokes

The fact that the artist had nothing in mind makes a lot of sense when looking at the paintings. They appear as meaningless noise, and the only thing it evokes in me is disinterest. Knowing that the mind of the artist was intentionally devoid of emotional or rational content during their creation validates that response. In other words, this is a human doing their best impression of procedurally generated art with a computer. Maybe nice to look at, but ultimately meaningless.

gamacodre 4y ago
Looking a the other comments, it seems like there's some meta-commentary on the social and commercial positioning of art going on here. Along the lines of "taking no position is really bold," which is supposed to make this an interesting performative exercise... maybe? To me it's kind of interesting that this person's stream of consciousness results in such visually coherent stuff, but that's about it. One might need to be more plugged in to modern art culture to get anything "moving" out of the meta.
hipshaker 4y ago
Well you took the time to comment on your feelings towards his art, so there’s that. I would argue you are proving his point. It is not meaningless enough that you just scrolled past it without mention.
- hemmert 4y ago
  That wasn't my intention (as the artist), and perhaps we're lacking a good discussion of what art is. But I remember Scott McCloud defining it as 'everything that doesn't serve the preservance of the species'. So making people reflect about what they think what art is for them (and if it's by finding out that this isn't), would be.
savanaly 4y ago
I find great beauty in and spend a lot of time looking at the cliffsides underneath waterfalls, whenever I happen to pass by them on a hike. The somewhat random trickling down of water creates eddies of various sizes and shapes and I greatly enjoy just looking them over with my eyes. I'm sure you can relate, if not with cliffsides underneath waterfalls then with something that exists in nature that was created without artistic intent. Perhaps not in the natural world but in the world of the mind like with certain pleasing patterns in Math? In any case that is the level on which I feel I can enjoy these paintings and they do not merely create disinterest. I don't think the artistic intent being missing = disinterest.
- hemmert 4y ago
  > artistic intent being missing != disinterest That's a very fine and thoughtful differentiation, thank you!
michaelteter 4y ago
> Maybe nice to look at, but ultimately meaningless. You just described most things in life. > validates that response You are saying that your disinterest in these works is justified because the artist claimed to create them without conscious thought during the process? I happen to like these works, and I was actually happy when my own generative art attempts resulted in output similar to these (but lacking the texture and subtle complexities these appear to have). Improvisational jazz is sometimes made with no conscious plan or thought during the process, but it is built upon structures and foundations which were very conscious efforts in the education of the musician. I don't see why the same cannot apply to visual art.
- hemmert 4y ago
  The improvisional jazz is probably a good metaphor. When painting, I indeed look at balanced composition, working contrasts – for some pictures, even the glue wouldn't hold the entire thing together. All of that has to be in place for the improvisational part to work, too. Thank you!

gamacodre 4y ago

Looking a the other comments, it seems like there's some meta-commentary on the social and commercial positioning of art going on here. Along the lines of "taking no position is really bold," which is supposed to make this an interesting performative exercise... maybe? To me it's kind of interesting that this person's stream of consciousness results in such visually coherent stuff, but that's about it. One might need to be more plugged in to modern art culture to get anything "moving" out of the meta.

hipshaker 4y ago

Well you took the time to comment on your feelings towards his art, so there’s that. I would argue you are proving his point. It is not meaningless enough that you just scrolled past it without mention.

hemmert 4y ago
That wasn't my intention (as the artist), and perhaps we're lacking a good discussion of what art is. But I remember Scott McCloud defining it as 'everything that doesn't serve the preservance of the species'. So making people reflect about what they think what art is for them (and if it's by finding out that this isn't), would be.

savanaly 4y ago

I find great beauty in and spend a lot of time looking at the cliffsides underneath waterfalls, whenever I happen to pass by them on a hike. The somewhat random trickling down of water creates eddies of various sizes and shapes and I greatly enjoy just looking them over with my eyes. I'm sure you can relate, if not with cliffsides underneath waterfalls then with something that exists in nature that was created without artistic intent. Perhaps not in the natural world but in the world of the mind like with certain pleasing patterns in Math? In any case that is the level on which I feel I can enjoy these paintings and they do not merely create disinterest. I don't think the artistic intent being missing = disinterest.

hemmert 4y ago
> artistic intent being missing != disinterest That's a very fine and thoughtful differentiation, thank you!

michaelteter 4y ago

> Maybe nice to look at, but ultimately meaningless. You just described most things in life. > validates that response You are saying that your disinterest in these works is justified because the artist claimed to create them without conscious thought during the process? I happen to like these works, and I was actually happy when my own generative art attempts resulted in output similar to these (but lacking the texture and subtle complexities these appear to have). Improvisational jazz is sometimes made with no conscious plan or thought during the process, but it is built upon structures and foundations which were very conscious efforts in the education of the musician. I don't see why the same cannot apply to visual art.

hemmert 4y ago
The improvisional jazz is probably a good metaphor. When painting, I indeed look at balanced composition, working contrasts – for some pictures, even the glue wouldn't hold the entire thing together. All of that has to be in place for the improvisational part to work, too. Thank you!