The Generative Gatsby is a design project in generative typography by Vladimir Kuchinov, ituses nine songs from swing-era musicians such as Ella Fitzgerald, Jelly Roll Morton, Cab Calloway, Count Basie, and more to influence the typographic layout of Fitzgerald’s text. “The algorithm I used transposes The Great Gatsby‘s content according to the attributes of the notes,” Kuchinov says.
This work is a nice piece where an analog medium is enhanced with digital tools. Typography meets processing. music is translated into fonts and letters.
“I have been carefully selected six typefaces for every single instrument. I did a very solid contextual research to fit the concept. For example, drums and percussions are represented by Remington Typewriter font, because this brand was extremely popular …” (Kuchinov in Huffpost, 8th September 2013)
How often do we eat something because we are stressed or bored. My ifttt recipe idea responds to your personal weight. If your weight is over your “ideal weight” it warns you to open the fridge and grab some food. With “calories” you will be more aware about your eating and keeping your weight will be easier. “Calories” triggers you to pause for a moment and think about if you are really hungry. We can change our habits only if we are aware of them.
IFTTT is a nice tool if you are using social media. I don’t use twitter, I don’t use Facebook, I don’t use instagram… so I have to search for an useful application.
I found one after one hours. Because I need a person or a couple who wants to rent my apartment in Berlin. I use the recipe craigslist search and email. Now when somebody is publishing a post on craigslist to find a apartment in Berlin I get an email. Unfortunately craigslist is not so popular in Germany.
Instructions: Hello_ take paper_ and a pencil_ orientation paper=_ landscape_ draw rectangle which is_ width>1/2 paper height>1/2 paper_ randomly draw 17_ nodes in the rectangle_ choose one node_ connect all nodes from this_ node without stopping to draw_ draw lines from all nodes to the borders_ of the rectangle randomly_ draw as many lines as you want_ sign your drawing on_ the right bottom of paper
The breaking point of the instruction was where does one command start and end. Because all instructions were not visible at once it was interesting who reads further. This was the point where the drawings differ.
Conclusion: My code was not clear and distinct enough. And I thought my code would be super simple but it wasn’t, the people read maybe the instructions twice or three times.
Fun fact: Everybody was afraid to mess the drawing up…
It was fun, everybody was reading again and again the instructions, made some notes on the paper. “what, a point half between a point half between a point…”. Stefan is convinced syntax of the first point is wrong, “please, ask Golan”. Hmm, I’m not sure I trust Stefan he is a postdoc at the CMU and does some insane calculations for robotics.
For me the first point was a pain in the as, but the second point, I got it. I was happy, I felt that I could decode Lewitt’s code. Sure that instruction was a code, more a poetic one than machine readable code. Every time converting information with a set of rules into another piece of information we can speak about a piece of code. Knitting patterns, the recipe for German sourdough bread and the score of the 9th symphony, these are all codes.
Knitting hacks are super popular for the last years. And therefore are the expectations quite scaled up. NeuroKnitting transforms affective states while listening to Bach’s “Goldberg Variations” recording with an EEG headset into a knitting pattern. Openhardware knitting meets quantified self… I worked on both topics and maybe that’s the reason why it’s hard to impress me. For me it would be nice to have various scarfs where different music is visualized. Then the data would be more “readable” or “comparable”.
A nice fact is that the artists were inspired by an old “programming language”: knitting.
Related work: http://fabienne.us/
It’s an an interactive installation that lets web users track anonymous individuals in public places, by pursuing them with a robotic spotlight and acoustic beam system.
I’m suprised how impressive and meaningful a very reduced work could be. Even the work is now 10 years old it is still relevant and up-to-date. Google glasses or PRISM, surveillance and privacy are important topics especially we as artists should discuss.
This project brings landscape, agricultural and digital fabrication together and carries the possibilities of digital fabrication over into farming. The experiment applies algorithms to partition and create an environmentally beneficial structure into a standard biomass/energy production field.
I really love how Benedigt Groß brings art, political statements and digital fabrication together.
When I was reading Naimark essay I had immediately the picture of the “Skandalkonzert” (March 31, 1923, Vienna) conducted by Arnold Schoenberg in my mind. The audience was shocked by the new experimental music and the they began rioting.
Whats is better, “First Word Art” or “Last Word Art”? To shock people or to enthuse them by excellent but well-known work. There is not better or worse way to touch people, there is no right or wrong. It’s all about what do you want to tell and to find for this moment the right way to do it.
To think new technology means simultaneously better it’s in my mind a false conclusion. To bring “old”, well-known technology in a new context, can be also innovative and gives the old technology a new glance. I think that’s also one point why Schulze prefers to work in the “Trough of Disillusionment” discarding that old technology is cheaper then the brand new stuff.
Where are my interests? I’m not so sure about it and with every new project I try to find for me the best way to be a critical artist which can touche some people with its work. Furthermore I think nothing utterly novel. Everything is a process and everything is resulting from the past.
The European Parliament’s definition of machine is an: “an assembly, fitted with or intended to be fitted with a drive system other than directly applied human or animal effort, consisting of linked parts or components, at least one of which moves, and which are joined together for a specific application.” (2006/42/ED -Machinery Directive)
A machine is a tool to support the humans’ work (physically and mentally). But now we blow up the definition of machines’. It’s not only the physical object or device the humans interacting with. Even we are machines. The critical engineer calls every relationship between bodies, devices, agents, forces and networks machines. Machines are expanding from the world of objects into the non-haptic, virtual world.
The point that when we are interacting with a “machine” that makes us itself to a machine is an interesting statement, which influences the way we are thinking about future interaction design.
For me an interesting concept about the interaction between human – machine – animal in future: www.cohenvanbalen.com