Fractal art and multi-blended spaces | Intellect Skip to content
1981
Volume 9, Issue 1-2
  • ISSN: 2397-9704
  • E-ISSN: 2397-9712

Abstract

Abstract

Artworks, especially in the last two centuries, have been more created through a process of blending than at any other time. This blendedness is seen not only in many modern and postmodern works of art, from German expressionist woodcuts to Picasso's paintings and spontaneous action paintings of Pollock, but in fractal works of art perhaps more than anywhere else. This study, based on Fauconnier and Turner's blended space and conceptual blending theories, will show how fractal artworks are the result of a multi-blending process. This multi-blending is not only because fractal artworks have roots simultaneously in science, technology and art but also because their creation and understanding is dependent on knowledge of fractal aesthetics. Fractal aesthetics not only makes the artist have a continuous back and forth movement between mathematical, digital and artistic spaces, but simultaneously makes the visitor/audience have such an effort as well.1

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/vcr_00003_1
2019-12-01
2024-05-02
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alexander, J. C.. (2008);, 'Mathematical blending'. , Cognitive Science (UCSanDiego), http://www.cogsci.ucsd.edu/~coulson/spaces/alexander_blending_mathematics.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2019 .
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Batty, M., and Longley, P.. (1994), Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function, London:: Academic Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bhabha, H. K.. (1994), The Location of Culture, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Boast, R.. (2017), The Machine in the Ghost: Digitality and Its Consequences, London:: Reaktion Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brandt, L.,, and Brandt, P. A.. (2005);, 'Making sense of a blend: A cognitive-semiotic approach to metaphor'. , Semantic Scholar, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0670/66b32f2cda53823792a9b5d76215223a2b28.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2019 .
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cirlot, J. E.. (2013), A Dictionary of Symbols, Ney York:: Dover Occult;.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Comfort, K.. (2008), Art and Life in Aestheticism: De-Humanizing and Re-Humanizing Art, the Artist and the Artistic Receptor, London:: Palgrave Macmillan;.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dickerman, L., and Affron, M.. (2012), Inventing Abstraction, 1910-1925: How a Radical Idea Changed Modern Art, New York:: The Museum of Modern Art;.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Falconer, K. J.. (2013), Fractals: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fauconnier, G.. (1994), Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Fauconnier, G.. (1997), Mappings in Thought and Language, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fauconnier, G., and Turner, M.. (1998);, 'Conceptual integration networks'. , Cognitive Science, 22:2, pp. 133-87.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fauconnier, G., and Turner, M.. (2002), The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's hiDden Complexities, New York:: Basic Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Garousi, M.. (2011);, 'Fractals and the Second Life'. , Metaverse Creativity, 1:2, pp. 147-63.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Garousi, M.. (2012);, 'The postmodern beauty of fractals'. , Leonardo, 45:1, pp. 26-32.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Garousi, M.. (2018);, 'Fractal art'. , MAA Focus, 38:4, August/September , p. 19.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Haberli, R.. et al. (2012);, 'Summary'. , in J. Thompson Klein. et al. (eds), Transdisciplinarity: Joint Problem Solving among Science, Technology, and Society: An Effective Way for Managing Complexity, Basel:: Birkhäuser Basel;, pp. 3-5.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hill, W.. (2015), How Folklore Shaped Modern Art: A Post-Critical History of Aesthetics, New York:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Huntley, H. E.. (2012), The Divine Proportion, New York:: Dover Publications;.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Knudson, R. M.. (2001);, 'Significant dreams: Bizarre or beautiful?'. , Dreaming, 11:4, pp. 167-77, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012200406752. Accessed 1 June 2019,
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Mandelbrot, B. B.. (1977), The Fractal Geometry of Nature, New York:: W.H. Freeman and Company;.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Merkur, D.. (2005), Psychoanalytic Approaches to Myth: Freud and the Freudians, New York:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Munster, A.. (2011), Materializing New Media: Embodiment in Information Aesthetics, New Hampshire:: UPNE;.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Nabudere, D. W.. (2012), Afrikology and Transdisciplinarity: A Restorative Epistemology, Pretoria:: Africa Institute of South Africa;.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Ox, J.. (2014);, 'Analogy and conceptual blending are part of a visualization toolkit for artists and scientists: Introducing the cognitive space transfer'. , in Proceedings of the IEEE VIZ 2014, Paris, France, 9-14 November, pp. 95-101, https://visap.uic.edu/2014/papers/10_Ox_ConceptualBlending_VISAP2014.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2019 ,
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Peitgen, H. O., and Richter, P. H.. (2013), The Beauty of Fractals: Images of Complex Dynamical Systems, Berlin:: Springer-Verlag;.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Piercy, J.. (2013), Symbols: A Universal Language, London:: Michael O'Mara Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Redhead, S.. (2008), The Jean Baudrillard Reader, New York:: Columbia University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Rickels, L. A.. (2010), I Think I Am: Philip K. Dick, Minneapolis:: University of Minnesota Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Roney, P. K.. (1995), The Approach of the Unpresentable: Postmodernity, the Sublime and the Language of the Lyric, vol. 1, Wisconsin:: University of Wisconsin – Madison;.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Siedell, D. A.. (2015), Who's Afraid of Modern Art?: Essays on Modern Art and Theology in Conversation, Oregon:: Cascade Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Soja, E. W.. (1996), Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places, Cambridge:: Blackwell Publishers;.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Steiner, G.. (2001), Grammars of Creation, London:: Faber and Faber;.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Sullivan, G.. (2010), Art Practice as Research: Inquiry in Visual Arts, California:: Sage;.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Turner, M.. (1993), Reading Minds: The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive Science, NJ:: Princeton University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Turner, M.. (1996), The Literary Mind, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Turner, M.. (2001), Cognitive Dimensions of Social Science, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Turner, M.. (2014), The Origin of Ideas: Blending, Creativity and the Human Spark, Oxford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Zurbrugg, N., and Burt, W.. (2005), Critical Vices: The Myths of Postmodern Theory, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Kowsari, Masoud, and Garousi, Mehrdad. (2019);, 'Fractal art and multi-blended spaces'. , Virtual Creativity, 9:1+2, pp. 23-41, doi: https://doi.org/10.1386/vcr_00003_1
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/vcr_00003_1
Loading
/content/journals/10.1386/vcr_00003_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error