Chaos Theory and the
Arts by M. Blair Ligon
My interest in chaotic and organic visual design structures began
with the study of grid and non-grid systems in my typography
classes. One exercise in particular fascinated me: the students
began with illustrations of organic objects and then abstracted
those objects into templates from which to execute a typographic
design. Some students did still-life renderings of three-dimensional
objects, such as bones or feathers, and then allowed the shadows
and textures of their compositions to determine the nuances of
the typography which followed them. Many students chose subjects
such as leaves, branches, and trees and treated them in a two-dimensional,
flat fashion to generate grid-like patterns from which to design
their typographic compositions. My subject was the inside of
a broken pomegranite. Like the branches of a tree, the pomegranite
repeated its organic structure again and again, at smaller and
smaller scales.
I began searching for an alternative grid
stucture. I was certain that a grid based on tertiary relationships
(not unlike one of Buckminster Fuller's domes, flattened out)
would reveal the underlying geometry of my 'random' designs.
Since people see in three dimensions, it seemed logical that
there might be an innate mechanism which imposed the qualities
of depth perception and the rules of perspective on any human
two-dimensional design. This line of thought has been a dead-end.
One could derive a set of rules /relationships for an organic
design, but those rules would seldom hold for any other organic
design.
There was, however, one recurring quality
in designs which were judged to be visually pleasing. Whatever
set of rules were developed for a particular design, tended to
be consistent, regardless of scale, throughout the design. My
third semester typography instructor said that he preferred to
design the details first, and then let them guide the overall
structure of a design. The thought behind the smallest elements
became the model for generating the overall form. This method
is intended to generate repetitive structure, designs which are
consistent at different levels of perception. Years later, I
learned that this process refected a phenomenon called fracticality
and that a new area of science was being developed to describe
the apparently random events which clutter up our calculated
universe - chaos dynamics.
My original intent for this line of research
was to use chaos dynamics as a comprehensive descriptive tool.
The metaphor has its limitations: a temporal phenomenon such
as chaos cannot be directly applied to an essentially non-temporal,
2-dimensional design without considering the filter of human
perception. Whatever inherent temporal meaning a design may carry
in its structure and relationship to biological processes (such
as eye movement) are subject to a complex set of cognitive filters
in the viewer. These cognitive filters impose a set of temporal
values on the elements and structure of the design which are,
ultimately, unique to each individual.
Chaos dynamics did provide a model for
an optimization process, based on the premise that it is almost
impossible and generally undesirable to purge all chaotic structure
from a design. Non-chaotic structures and systems are exceptions
to the rule in nature and in design. I hope that this paper will
give the reader some insights into the use of chance in the design
process. We can use chance process as a tool for optimization
and as a means to overcome the human tendency to rely on old
patterns of thought and structure.
Chaos theory has provided
an intellectual structure for experimenting with non-deterministic
process-- there are many parallels between the worlds of particle
physics and digital images. Both may be thought to be constructed
from indivisible units: pixels and atoms. Atoms possess energies
expressed in quantum units which determine their structure as
molecules, substances and things. Pixels possess characteristics
which are determined by resolution to quantumly constitute colors,
images and representations. An understanding of chaos is much
like grasping the laws of perspective, the artist must choose
in which way to implement these principles of nature, and should
be aware of the communication attached to that use or disuse
of natural law in a visual composition.
The computer allows the artist to implement chaotic processes
at various points in a work, then choose which of those procedures
are successful. Where Cage would not pass aesthetic judgment
on his compositions, I am not always a theorist; I have a very
specific agenda of communications and where the art and process
do not further that agenda, I reject it. The use of non-deterministic
process is one of many systems of thought that can be used to
find a solution for a visual or thematic problem. Insofar as
a non-deterministic strategy will create an appropriate image,
it is a useful tool; where a Boolean or intuitive strategy works,
it will be preferred. Chance process, then, is most useful when
a solution might have several variations which are all viable.
Chance process is least useful when no variation from the successful
solution is a viable solution. Unfortunately, this difference
is usually not apparent until the solution is found.
A key concept of chaos theory is fracticality: the repetition
of a structural characteristic of a phenomenon across time, scale
and topography. The use of digital filters is an act which increases
the level of image fracticality by the application of a phenomena
across a set of pixels. The act of sharpening or blurring reduces
the amount of data in an image, and increases the fracticality
even as we say that the image is degraded. The conscious exercising
of that particular chaos paradigm is of great interest to me;
the digital environment offers unique opportunities for self
expression via these phenomena, just as drafting tools have exploited
the geometry of space and film has exploited the physics of linear
time.
In practical terms this means working above or below the final
resolution of the image, and allowing unforeseen events to occur
in the image, or working rapidly and blindly ahead of the computer's
ability to render on the monitor... the art is not necessarily
in executions of the hand, but in choices of the eye.
As we have seen from the writings of Poincaré
and Cage, the possible range of solutions to a problem is often
larger than the sets of solutions availabe to human intellect,
logic, and intuition. There is a very strong human tendency to
repeat and vary successful solutions. This tendency may be preventing
a designer from exploring ranges of solutions which are, in some
respect, superior to his or her current range of processes and
solutions. An optimum solution may be passed over for one which
is simply accessible.
Chance process is a tool to take the designer out of a predictable
routine of problem solving. Cage claims that chance processes
must reflect a natural aesthetic in order to establish a genuine
emotional connection between the work and its audience.
eMAIL
copyright 2006, M. Blair Ligon, all rights reserved worldwide.
|