A note about "The Chaotic Existence of the Computer Artist"

Facebook Blog by Shubhojoy Mitra

June 18, 2009

<http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=7391838&op=1&view=all&subj=93779798465&aid=-1&oid=93779798465&id=606305436>
Pygoya, the Disco Doc!

- a theory of integration among Darwinism, chaos theory, art psychological processes,
computer graphic systems, and oil painting by Rodney Chang, aka Pygoya
(Please read this first: http://www.lastplace.com/Journal/chaoticart.htm) <http://www.lastplace.com/Journal/chaoticart.htm%29>

Rod clearly knows what he is talking about, and what he says about art, especially abstract art, computer generated work and webism bridges diverse cosmological phenomena, if you will, with the will to form. The best part about his comments which lead to his theory is that he is so logical about chaotic processes (and lifestyle) that he almost clearly "senses" the proverbial "beauty of an equation" in perhaps the visual realm of gestural or abstract art, and honestly tells you about it with the subtlety of a psychoanalyst or a researcher, and at the same time, with the precision of a medical practitioner while bringing into play innovative methods of sharing and caring (disco doc [sic]) in his own life which is as much a case study as an experiment.

He combines in his notes a sense of detachment from the kitsch with a serious love of popular culture itself: here is an artist who uses humour seriously ---

"OK, I am ready to take the 25 multiple choice question quiz on this article!"
(http://www.lastplace.com/Journal/quiz.htm <http://www.lastplace.com/Journal/quiz.htm>)

... and is seriously humble too:

"... Like any other artist young and raw but with latent talent, I sought to improve and develop through formal schooling and dedicated work, work, work in the "studio" until the work got better - more polished. I could tell way back that my work "sucked" ...

... and confident, with brash disregard for all the simple explanations that sometimes people (and sometimes even academicians and art critics) demand (Rod's explanations make clear sense and actually are pretty simple... but I must note at this point perhaps one needs to really delve into honest art in practice to be able to sense the honesty and simplicity):

"... but it did not stop me from believing it would get better - far better than the average artist's output. Because in my mind the ideal images laden with fresh artistic ideas were visible. But limited technical skills hampered its real world manifestation for others to see and appreciate. Enter the computer, personal and affordable in the mid-eighties. At first it was a new toy with all these magical effects, including making routine blends of colors automatically that only a master watercolorist could do previously. Technical ability all of a sudden wasn't a premium to being a good artist, just its recognition of quality and incorporation into one's ideas for creating art. My art's visual details suddenly got much better but to me it was normal baseline stuff for any professional artist, nothing new in itself. For ten years now, new art could come from some other source besides professional level traditional art media techniques, now available to anybody who bothers to "read the manual".

Up to prior to reading up on "chaos" I saw myself as some sort of solitary saboteur of the traditions of art and its establishments with all their ingrained biases and defensiveness against the new, like any other field. There are, even in art, powers that be, that do not want to be overthrown by obsolescence and irrelevance to the changing times."

Okay, so far these are some of my reflections on Rod's writings... and I can say this that here is a man ahead of his time, and he makes more sense to me now, after almost a decade, and reading a lot on genetics and evolution (Gould, Dawkins, Matt Ridley) and working in diverse fields like holistic education and of course more and more programming ...

This is a note in progress .. to be continued...