How is Glitch Art Defined as Art?

Glitch art is trying to forge its own name in the art world.  As a new media often are, glitch art faces criticism from it being a fully digital work of art and using a unique and conceptual medium. It is formed from a combination of random chance and planned intent through manipulated the binary code behind the image.  So what is the controversy between planned and pure forms of Glitch art and does that make a difference in distinguishing it as a true art form? 

IDN Magazine describes in its issue entitled “Glitch Art,” that glitches can be described as slip-ups in the computer coding behind an image and that when exploited by artists, these slip-ups are often seen as “happy accidents.”¹   In the article Benjamin Gaulon states that there are two forms of glitch art.  Circuit-bending is the more analog form where the results of the physical data transfer are interrupted from electrical charges or loaded circuits.²   The other form is to manipulate the binary code by hand.  Both leave a lot up to chance as the artists has no exact idea how the image will turn out. 

This reminds one a lot of specific art movements in the past, such as automatic surrealism.  Automatism was the use of chance in paintings and writings to create a unique surrealist piece that came from one’s subconscious.  Glitch art could be considered the use of chance in digital technology to create a unique abstract piece that comes from that image’s basic technological structure.  Iman Moradi doesn’t really see a huge distinction between the coincidental and planned forms of glitches.  One could even argue that the planned forms offer better visual aesthetics than its counterpart.  Moradi says the key is to focus on the glitch itself.³

This is only one of several reasons glitch art should be appreciated on the same scale as more traditional art forms.  Moradi goes on to list how glitches represent human traits in technology.  When you give a machine the ability to err, technology becomes less threatening to society.⁴   It exposes the inner working and presents the technology as more vulnerable than we realize.

Tony Scott believes in this idea as well and goes on to elaborate how all digital art should be treated equally to more traditional mediums.  He states that the reason people don’t value digital art as highly is because of the lack of humanity in technology.⁵   You can’t count how many hours a digitally-manipulated image took, and everyone knows that even the most fantastic of digital pieces could only take a matter of minutes.  The worth of physical paintings are usually derived from both their long realization times, the visible humanity in the brushstrokes, and that if the painting is destroyed, it will be lost forever.⁶   When artists begin to exploit the glitches in a digital image, we are reminded of all those analog traits in the image.  Glitch art is helping to shine a new view on technology and peak into the humanistic elements of fully digitized pieces.  It’s a comfort reminder of our nostalgic past and how tolerant we were of imperfection.  Glitch art can cause an emotional realization in the viewer of these feelings and comment on how society and technology interact today. 

1  “Glitch – The Art of the Unexpected.” IDN, Volume 18, Number 3. http://idnworld.com/mags/?id=v18n3. 36-37.

2.     Ibid.

3.     Iman Moradi. “Seeking Perfect Imperfection. A personal retrospective on Glitch Art,” (University of Huddersfield, England, 2008). accessed Nov 4, 2012. http://virose.pt/vector/x_06/moradi.html.

4.     Ibid.

5.     Tony Scott. “Glitch on Paper,” accessed November 4, 2012. http://www.beflix.com/gop.html.

6.     Ibid.

----Chris Boyle