This page is for anyone new to the idea of math/art. I often get asked what math/art is, which is always an interesting conversation. The person asking usually tries to fill in the blanks with something about geometry, something about proportions, something about precision. These are all true but not the whole picture.
These are my personal beliefs which may or may not be shared with others involved in the creation of math/art, and are subject to change at any moment.
Math/art is distinctive as opposed to other approaches because of its direct relationship with philosophy. Math/art can be seen as a visual representation of logical ideas, as is definitely the case with geometry.
A metaphor that describes the making of math/art is: presenting logic poetically.
Some big ideas present in the math/art world (and my answers) are:
- Is artistic embodiment enough?
Sometimes! Who doesn’t like a giant dodecahedron? Just don’t claim too much originality. - Can math/art exist without leaving the digital realm?
It will have a hard time ever gaining entry to the realm fine art if a screen is required. - How overt do the mathematics involved need to be?
All but hidden – numbers, equations, and formulas are beautiful on their own as typographic compositions.
A work of math/art has the potential to address if not prove unproven mathematical hunches (conjectures). It could lead to a new discovery.
Math/art should reject:
- a fear of being esoteric
This concern implies that other art subjects are completely understood by the viewer and that math/art requires an verbal explanation in order for someone to “get it.” This might be the case, but - the direct cipher of numbers to art components (notes, colors, shapes) if there are no other ideas in the piece
This is akin to painting a “paint version” of a photograph with nothing else added. - the idea of universal aesthetics based on certain proportions
The fact that the human eye cannot distinguish between φ and the Divyank Ratio should be argument enough that the exact numbers involved in proportions do not make a universally aesthetic system.
There are no rules unique to making math/art in general.
Emotional responses have a place in math/art as much as other art subjects. An intellectual response should be a goal, even if the responder is not able to clearly articulate it. More than anything, the main takeaway from viewing a piece of math/art should be fascination, a sense that a structure comes from some set of guidelines, even if those guidelines cannot be spelled out.
The natural habitat of math/art needs to be public, private, and published in order to have an audience, be appreciated, and taken seriously.
Math/art will outlast politics. This is how it functions culturally. Both mathematics and art traditions are so cosmopolitan that math/art can easily traverse culture and time.
Just as numbers do not exist by themselves, the real “art” is a totally abstract idea without form in the world — art that we can experience is just an instance of the idea, and each instance can take many forms (iterations of a produced work of art).