Philip Galanter (2003), 'What is Generative Art? Complexity Theory as a Context for Art Theory,' Generative Art 03, international conference, Politecnico di Milano, Italy. http://www.generative.net/


In defining Generative Art, Philip Galanter immediately identifies with systems, and more precisely with complexity theory, and so sees generative art systems as displaying organising principles of order and disorder (2003). He sees the definition as contributing to wider discussions around art criticism and acknowledges the controversy and history of the term - from algorithmic composition to the Demo scene. Clearly it is a wide field of activity as to generate something accounts for most creative activity - with Marcel Duchamp, John Cage and Sol Lewitt, to name but a few key figures demonstrating generative principles in their work. Galanter's definition is by now well established and is a particularly inclusive one, that positions generative art as preceding the computer:
 
'Generative Art refers to any art practice where the artist uses a system, such as a set of natural language rules, a computer program, a machine, or other procedural invention, which is set into motion with some degree of autonomy contributing to or resulting in a completed work of art'

The producer concedes control to some extent over the production of the work, but the precise application of the term 'autonomy' here seems crucial. He says the system must be 'self-contained enough to operate autonomously'. It is in this connection that he find complexity science useful in describing dynamic and self-organising systems. The text remains descriptive though and concludes poorly in stating that: 
'Generative art is ideologically neutral.'

This is a misunderstanding of art and systems in general. Oh dear.