Luke Shannon: Bridging Digital and Physical Art

Luke Shannon makes generative art, where hyper-specific and syntactical code delineates an infinite space, and the chaos of chance fills it. The viewer provides this chance.

He so eloquently says, “Shaping such a space is the most complete way to describe the things I feel and see because it seeks multiplicity and universality rather than individual manifestation.

Before his journey into computer art, Luke made physical art using traditional tools such as paint, gouache, and watercolor.

Through his work, Luke is bridging the gap between the digital and traditional art worlds by moving his figurative and emotional work into his algorithmic work.

We had the pleasure of interviewing Luke, who is pushing the boundaries of generative art by exploring the possibilities of physical materials such as glass, metal, wood, and ceramics, and combining them with code.

*nllp/qlln [Combination generative algorithms and acrylic painting, exploring duality]*

Could you discuss your process and how your work differs from simple generative-based art, as it is predominantly code-based and non-repeating?

To me, generative art is all about exploring and creating systems and code is a great tool for exploring these systems at a high level, with large scale randomness.

But I also see fabrication machines like the plotter as a system, and investigating the textures that are inherent to those kinds of physical works is really fascinating to me.

Generative making is a way to combine and investigate these systems together, while also using code to replace some of my creative biases with randomness.
The biases of creation are a different set than the biases of curation.

Can you expand further on your process and the tools you’re using?

The way I’ve put it in the past is that my process is about processes. Programming is a wonderful tool for designing processes, especially ones that can live on their own and grow over time.
Code is a natural way to work with machines, and because so many of these machines are systems unto themselves I’ve found it unnervingly compelling to use code and generative art to explore different mediums as their own system.
By coding I remove some of my own creative biases, and instead allow the biases of the system to come to the foreground. I’ve learned so much about the natural tendencies of embroidery thread, for example, by seeing how it interacts with the system of the embroidery machine.

I’ve learned so much about clay, by seeing how it responds to its environment without my hand interfering in a second-order feedback loop.

Every medium that I’ve applied this lens to–ink, paint, embroidery, clay, wood, acrylic, metal, fabric–and every machine that I’ve used to try and do that in a rigorous way, has directed me to different ways of understanding systems and different biases that underlie so much in an increasingly fabricated world.

Your less-known artwork differs greatly from your algorithmic art pieces.

It’s funny actually, recently as I have been coding more I’ve also been reverting more and more to fingerpainting.
It’s an emotional relief to be able to act so gesturally sometimes.

But since I started making generative art, other forms started to lose some of their appeal… for me, generative art is the most complete way to describe the things I feel and see, because it describes phenomena from an infinite number of perspectives, and seeks multiplicity and generality rather than individual manifestation.
You have to really understand the inner workings of something to describe it algorithmically.

In what way do you combine computer art with traditional art such as painting or other forms of traditional media?

I’m glad you asked this follow up, because the real answer is, of course, the best way to work for me has been to combine the two, and move my figurative and emotional work into my algorithmic work.
I’ve been fascinated in figuration since the start, with The Opera, and it still is core to my practice.
I think it stems from an attempt to explain the confusing ways that self and personhood manifest in us, in systems, in the world. And what exactly are the limits of those systems–where do I end and you begin?
There are lots of things that are not people, but also are not “less than” people.
Generative making is a way to show that these algorithms and ideas are not limited to the digital space, but are expressions that surround all of us.

How did you discover Art Blocks and more broadly, the Ethereum blockchain?

I got my first eth in 2017, but I discovered NFTs in a much more unusual way, through my parents.
One of the ways I think my dad expresses love is by sending articles, and they sent me two articles about NFTs before I thought maybe I should check it out. And when I finally did I totally went down the rabbit hole and eventually found my way to Art Blocks.

This was January 2021, so Art Blocks was still small enough that I was able to message Erick (Snowfro) directly, and have a long and wonderful conversation about generative art and how Art Blocks was going to change the world.
I still think back to that conversation and how serendipitous and exciting it all was.

"The Opera" is a collection from the early Art Blocks days that I particularly enjoy.

Its dynamic and soothing visuals have appealed to me and I find it very pleasing.

Opera #244

Thank you for saying that. It makes me so happy to hear that people connect with The Opera. The goal with The Opera was to give quiet voice to some of our more existential moments.
There is ambivalence in the figures; are they singing? screaming? holding their mouth open in constant surprise?
It’s a lot of looking and searching I think, a weird sense of uncertainty, but more importantly a constant undercurrent of joy and experience.

Another notable collection of yours is Orchids, which you released through Bright Moments.

I think generative art is in many ways a performance art, or at least has very close proximity to it.
The live minting experience spotlighted that in a wonderful way, as I had the opportunity to see the work being created at the same time and through the eyes of the person minting it.

the first and last mint from the generative art project 'orchids' by artist Luke Shannon. — *Orchids #1 and #397*

And the beautiful thing about generative art I think, is that in some sense it exists because of the viewing-act of the collector.

What was it like being a part of an in-person live minting experience?

*Luke and Collector at event watching live mint*

A performance without an audience is a rehearsal, and an algorithm without a collector is just code.
I’m very grateful for that experience of seeing work come into existence already uniquely connected to both myself and the viewer.

Can you explain the origins of Orchids and how it ultimately released through Bright Moments?

Mint #0

In early 2022 I had spent a lot of time thinking about generative art as a performance art, and briefly ran a generative art popup on Sundays where I would create generative art live, either by coding, by plotter, by embroidery machine, or by laser cutter, and then give away that art free to people who watched.

That was a satisfying experience, which led me to so many more ideas about the way generative art muddles traditional creator-curator-collector relationships.
So when Bright Moments reached out to me about being an artist in residence and ‘performing’ in live minting events, it was an easy and immediate yes!

For Orchids themselves, the emotion I was trying to express is actually a way of thinking that making generative art has taught me. An important part of working with systems, probably the most important part, is trying to understand how different elements depend on each other. And when I focused on this idea of interdependence, or Nhất Hạnh even calls it interbeing, I started to see it everywhere, and everything became full and alive.

Searching for the “autonomous agent” in generative art is in a lot of ways a search for a ‘self’ in the system, and finding selfhood in the world was a very powerful experience for me at that time.

What physical forms would you like to create art with?

I’m working with some really surprising new materials and practices, which is very rewarding so far. Ceramics, glassblowing, printmaking, metalworking, patternmaking are a few of those.

And I’m planning to do a lot with fashion and household art, like vases and tables and that sort of thing.

In your opinion, what aspect of the future are you most passionate or excited about?

I think that generative making is going to be really big. It is important, really important, to live with art and make the things that we see and interact with everyday beautiful and joyful and personal.
My definition of art is anything that is listened to. Just listening makes art. And everything, every person, every object, every system, no matter how everyday, deserves to be listened to.

For inquiries, please contact hello@artxcode.io.

Luke Shannon makes generative art, where hyper-specific and syntactical code delineates an infinite space, and the chaos of chance fills it. The viewer provides this chance.

A New Chapter For ARTXCODE

The More-Than-Human World of Entangled Others