DISCOVERY THROUGH PROCESS-Part 4

Un-Intent, Infinity Minus 1

This is the last post of the “Discovery Through Process” series, at least for a while. My other reality, (the one in which risers heights, wall sections and misc. details and construction documents rule the day), requires a visit! I have learned much (thank you Mr. Lebbeus Woods), and an interesting thing has happened. Inspiration is coming from within…..from within the process, from within the products themselves. Rather than chasing ideas, ideas are beginning to unveil themselves…..asking for attention, and requiring investigation. From a creative standpoint, it doesn’t get any better than that….ask anybody who has sat down in front of a blank canvas, a quiet piano or a story not yet written.

Before I get far along, I want to touch on my continual use of the term “product” ……why use that term in lieu of words like “composition” or “graphic art”?  Product is such a generic, unattractive term when describing something created through the mysterious and ethereal process of artistic and creative process. My take is this……..A product is the result of a process that has converted raw material, in whatever form, into something tangible and real including automobiles, computers, cell phones and even razor blades.   What material can possibly be rawer than thought and ideas? Without thought, without the idea…….there is no product, there is nothing.  A composition or work of art is not a large enough term for what I am seeking. I’m interested in the material (the thought, the idea, the creation) behind the music, the architecture and art. 

The Un-intentional Series

I began this series to a certain extent, to ward off ideas of pre-conception and determined intent. Again, I am looking to discover options and possibilities within a process. The process is the generator, not a pre-determined motive or destination. In this particular series, I used what looks to be an image of a scratched metal surface where over the course of time, by different people, processes and events, none of which were related, affected the surface of the metal (figure 1). The thought was to see if numerous unrelated marks that occurred at unknown intervals of time, could generate a product…..and more specifically a product of interest.

Fig. 1, The Canvas

This series gave me the most feedback of all the series. I was frustrated, gave up on this particular investigation for quite some time. It seemed like I was forcing the issue, and as such, the solution was not going to be internally generated. Here’s the interesting part: the computer, the program itself inserted just enough dynamics, just enough energy to break the inertia of stagnation. Without going into too much detail, I was working (developing, fighting and cussing) in one particular graphic mode, represented (after the fact) in Figure 2. Due to some feedback on another product (Thanks Mr. Cantly for the “tasty” remark), I realized that I had not studied this particular investigation in another graphic “rendered” mode. With the push of button, the computer goes into its rendering mode, and renders it according to either defaults or informed input……and there it is, the spark of possibility, the spark that guides the rest of the evolution (figure 3).

fig. 2, stagnation

Fig. 3, The spark

I’ve commented on the dynamics of interfacing with computers before (see Creation, Collaboration and Unintention, April, 2013, Blog Archives). This product again reinforces just about every point I was trying to make in that post. Without the computers (program) input, this product would not have evolved, would not have informed itself, and would for all intents and purposes, have been aborted. It owes its existence to the input and influence that the computer had on the process. If this isn’t Discovery Through Process, I don’t know what is! The iterations that came after the spark are below.

Fig. 4, Un-Intent, Act 1

Fig. 5, Un-Intent, Act 2

Fig. 6, Un-Intent, Act 3

Fig. 7, Un-Intent, Act 4

So, what have I learned? First and foremost is that discovery through process works, has value and can generate a wide ranging, if not unlimited, resource of creative potential. I’ve learned that added complexity does not necessarily equate to a more evolved product, just a different one. In this particular series, what I find to be one of the more intriguing aspects is the idea of anonymous co- creators. The people and processes that scratched the metal surface…..influenced the evolution of this product. They were, in effect part of the process, and their contributions were exceedingly important to its development. What if, rather than a scratched metal surface, I started with the scratched patterns of an ice skating surface and the marks left behind from a figure skater? ….or a period of hockey?  In one scenario, I have the artistic intent of a figure skater, and all the “programing” that goes into the performance versus the dynamic and chaotic nature of hockey players interfacing with each other.

Lastly, and perhaps the most important, I am beginning to realize the true value of discovery through process. The value is not in the final (is it ever final with the “save as” command) product. The value of these products is determined by how many other creative doors are opened. If at the end of the process, you’re asking yourself “what now?” the product has not realized its full potential. If on the other hand, you are asking yourself “which particular idea, process or opportunity am I going to explore first?”, then the product has proved its worth. In other words……

The value is not whether or not the question is answered, but rather how many questions are generated from the answer.  

More to come…..eventually.

RBP 2.21.14