i did not particularly present the thing well, but some people got it.
aram commented that he didn’t like my visual-style, while ivan said the opposite. i sat there puzzled because the work wasn’t about the outcome, but the software structure that i had envisioned. but, maybe, this goes to show that code or no code, fancy algorithm, or not; people will always judge by what they see.
i wonder if i am in the business of making ‘pretty things’. while writing this, it occurs to me that it isn’t the case — ==i am in the business of making things for thought== — perhaps more critical, than observatory; offering food for thought; perhaps grotesque if need be.
i know that my system has potential. this has also gotten me started on the idea of emergence — which i realize my entire practice was about (ref: my practice is about emergence).
i was disappointed at the lack of conceptual (or even algorithmic) discussions in the class. after this & noc_class-7_and_dissatisfaction, i now have lower expectations for the class. the class is a means for me to now explore this idea of emergence, and produce a body of work that i can be happy with (and that is presentable in the end).