- The mechanisms by which sonic art can represent and communicate political content without recourse to language.
Editorial by Jack Ox
The art world is, as always, engaged in the boomlets of the moment; right now, that includes art-science. This is a good reason to establish a procedure for determining what art-science is. For instance, is it art-science if a painter makes a painting of a Petri dish?
Editorial by Frieder Nake
“One might justifiably question the artist’s role in images that are not merely assembled by the computer in its capacity as a tool, but generated directly by it. Where is the human input?” Lambert, Latham and Leymarie recently raised this question .
The core of their question is as old as computer art (about 50 years). I prefer calling such work algorithmic art; although algorithmic art does not necessarily involve a computer, this term is more distinctive.
Editorial by Ricardo Dal Farra
We live in a world that is reaching a critical point, at which the equilibrium between a healthy environment, the energy our society needs to maintain or improve this lifestyle and our interconnected economies could quickly change, from the current complex balance to a completely new reality wherein unbalance would be the rule and human beings would have to become more creative than ever before in order to survive. Have the arts a role in all this? Do artists have a responsibility in this context?
Editorial by Jack Ox and Richard Lowenberg
It is as difficult in 2012 to successfully implement artist/scientist collaborations as it was in the early 1990s for John Seely Brown, director of Xerox PARC, and Rich Gold, founder of PAIR (PARC’s artist-in-residence program). They had to ask and explain many of the same questions we grapple with today while trying to create atmospheres that enable interdisciplinary collaborations. Brown was actually surprised that scientists volunteered part of their research time in order to engage with artists.
Editorial by Tami I. Spector