[PD] [OT] [artists/developers]

[jonCates]

on Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:37:16 -0500 Marc =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lavall=E9e?= 
<odradek at videotron.ca> wrote:

>There's no osmosis between code and the art it can support. I have 
>worked enough with artists to >understand that software and machines 
>are not considered artistic when used to create art.

that depends (on the ppl involved, context, process, etc). some 
[artists/developers] are engaged in [programming/artmaking] equally, 
others more or less so in any direction. then there are the 
collaborations which may be more or less collaborative.

>Programmers abused by artists are not artists. Maybe working "with" 
>artists makes a difference, but I >don't believe it's very 
>significant, only more cheerful.

this issue of abuse vs collaboration is important + so inflected by 
our social-technological perspectives. some ppl feel that the idea of 
cooperation between separate specialists  (i.e. the "artist" + 
"programmer") can only lead to inequities + exploitations while 
others find situations like this can be equitable. i suppose it all 
has to do w/the [goals/aspirations/intent/attitudes] of those 
involved + the way the interactions are [framed/contextualized].

>PD is for me a work of art; I don't really care how it's being used, 
>but since art can be created with the >help of PD, it makes it even 
>more interesting, not more artistic. I used PD for automation more 
>than art, >and for the joy of programming.

thats a wonderful articulation. i am personally very interested in 
tool-building as an artform when the [toolset/codebase/system] itself 
is considered an artwork as well as having the ability to function as 
an authoring environment for [more/further/associated/independent] 
works.
jonCates
/**
* <coreDeveloper>
* <http://www.criticalartware.net>
*  <joncates at criticalartware.net>
**/