TechIntersect

I frequently think about the connection between Art and other disciplines such as Science and Technology. Yesterday, I took some students on the 1st Thursday Art Gallery walk that is held in Salina, KS on the first Thursday of the month. We were visiting with one of the featured artists and the subject of abstract art came up. I pointed out that studying computer technology (my primary teaching area) requires a great deal of abstract thought. Students often struggle with abstract, indefinite thinking.

I believe that the work and thought of artists and computer scientists are not all that different. A guy like James Gosling, inventor of the Java programming language, and someone like Jackson Pollock, the abstract expressionist painter have more in common than it might seem. Object oriented programming languages such as Java allow software designers to work with abstractions, leaving the concrete definition for whomever or whatever will be ultimately using the abstract program design.

When I taught Java last semester, I had my students write code for a very abstract and open to interpretation concept: a “Monster”. (This was around Halloween.) Well monsters come in a variety of shapes, sizes and abilities. The students had to figure out which characteristics and behaviors that all monsters share and include those in the abstract program. Later, we could create more specific monsters that inherited characteristics and behaviors from the abstract version, thereby saving some time and effort since some of the work was already completed for us. Some students made “Vampires” which is still somewhat abstract and open to interpretation. However when “Dracula” is finally created, the idea is starting to become specific and concrete.

Thinking and dealing with abstraction is a complex process essential to becoming proficient in computer technology. I think it might be time well spent considering how abstract art such as that of Jackson Pollock is related. Look at this Jackson Pollock painting:

(click to enlarge)

The abstract nature of the painting allows the viewer to project his or her own interpretation into the piece. What meaning are we to take from viewing this? There are no visible, recognizable forms. It is completely up to the viewer’s interpretation what will be experienced. Object oriented programming languages such as Java indeed begin at this level of abstraction. In Java, all objects inherit from the most abstract idea of all- “Object”. It doesn’t get any more basic than that. What can we do with “Object”? The same thing we do with a Pollock painting… whatever we would like to do. It is all in our vision of what is possible.

PS. Chris Sorensen, the speaker I recently posted about, recommended that I read “Exploring the Invisible: Art, Science, and the Spiritual” by Lynn Gamwell. I have added it to my “Need to Read” list and am looking forward to continued exploration of the relationships between Art & Science.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS