Interview with Aluan Wang: Code, Memory, and the Flow of Time
Q1: How would you describe your work? Is it digital art, generative art, or something else entirely?
I see my work as existing between these categories, yet not fully fitting into any single one. My art is not just digital visuals displayed on a screen; it is a continuously evolving system, an ongoing process of computation and emergence.
I use programming languages to create, but I do not fully control the outcome. Instead, I allow algorithms to unfold and develop on their own, giving the work a sense of autonomy, almost as if it were a living entity.
If I had to categorize it, I would call my work algorithm-driven memory construction—it records the passage of time, allowing viewers to experience continuous transformation rather than a static image. This is why I explore chaos theory and probabilistic mutations—because these mathematical structures closely mirror the way our memory, emotions, and time itself function.
Q2: From Good Vibrations to Synthetic Botany, how has your creative trajectory evolved?
My artistic path is an ongoing expansion, with each series extending and deepening the one before it.
- Good Vibrations was the starting point, where I visualized energy and vibrations, turning transaction hashes into unique geometric structures.
- Chaos Research, Chaos Memory, Chaos Culture further explored the relationship between chaos and order. I began experimenting with systems that could grow and evolve independently.
- Turnet Light was a study of light and time, inspired by J. M. W. Turner’s handling of atmospheric luminosity, translated into a digital medium.
- After the Cave engaged with Plato’s allegory of the cave, challenging how we perceive images and reality by immersing viewers in a generative space.
- Automatic Message was a key turning point, where I used algorithms to simulate the expressive strokes of ink painting, merging fluidity with digital precision.
- Equinox expanded the concept of time further, linking the work to astronomical cycles, making it shift dynamically with seasonal changes.
- Synthetic Botany: Post-Natural Bifurcation is my latest exploration, where data itself becomes the seed for plant-like growth. Instead of mimicking real-world biology, I allow the algorithm to generate a new kind of “post-natural” life.
A common thread runs through all of these: they are about the interplay of algorithms, memory, and time, breaking down the boundaries between digital processes and traditional artistic expression.
Q3: Your work frequently engages with the theme of memory. Why is this so important to you?
To me, memory is not static—it is dynamic, constantly being reconstructed. Every time we recall an experience, we subtly alter it. Memory is not like a photograph; it is an evolving system, much like generative art.
This resonates with my creative process. I design algorithms that “remember” certain parameters, allowing them to transform over time. When a viewer engages with my work, it may already have changed since their last encounter—just like memories shift each time we revisit them.
I also see the digital world itself as a kind of memory space—our data is stored, computed, and modified constantly. Art, in this context, becomes a reflection of how digital memory functions.
Q4: Your work balances structured, algorithmic logic with fluid, organic spontaneity. How do you reconcile these opposing forces?
This is part of my internal contradiction. On one hand, I love structure, order, and logic—programming provides a precise, controllable creative process. But on the other hand, I am drawn to unpredictability, randomness, and chaos because they resemble the way nature operates.
In my work, I try to allow both aspects to coexist. For example:
- In Automatic Message, I designed an algorithm to mimic ink strokes, but instead of following strict rules, it introduces randomness to create an improvisational quality.
- In Synthetic Botany, plant-like growth is influenced by chaos theory—although data-driven, the final form remains unpredictable.
This tension between control and randomness gives my work its unique character.
Q5: How do you see NFT technology affecting digital art? And how does your NFT work relate to your broader artistic vision?
NFTs have fundamentally changed the digital art landscape by solving the question of how digital works can be owned and collected. They allow algorithmic artists like myself to have new ways of distributing and sustaining our practice.
When I entered the NFT space, I didn’t just tokenize past works—I explored how blockchain itself could influence creation. For instance:
- In GeoPunk, each piece changes based on the collector’s wallet address, meaning no two works are the same. Ownership directly affects the visual output.
- I also experiment with NFTs as evolving artworks, ensuring they are not static but continue to transform over time.
To me, NFTs are not just a marketplace; they represent a new ecosystem for algorithmic art, one that aligns with my ongoing interests in memory and time.
Q6: Your work is highly experimental, but how do you balance artistic integrity with public reception and the market?
This is a difficult question. I have never created art to fit the market, but I also recognize that an artwork needs an audience to fully exist.
My solution is to let the market adapt to me, rather than the other way around. This is why I built my own NFT platform, akaSwap, instead of solely relying on existing platforms. I wanted to create a space where like-minded artists could gather, rather than being shaped by market forces.
That being said, I do want my work to reach people, but I am more concerned with whether it challenges the way they think, rather than simply being consumed.
Q7: Looking back on your career so far, what has been your biggest challenge?
Time.
Not the market, not technology—just time. I constantly feel that there is more to do, more to create, more to experiment with. This sense of “not enough time” is my greatest struggle.
I often wonder how to make my works persist beyond their moment of creation. That’s why my art focuses on memory, records, and traces—they are all ways of resisting time’s erasure.
Perhaps true freedom comes from accepting that some things will remain unfinished. But until then, I will keep creating, letting algorithms tell their own stories, and allowing my work to unfold in time.
Q1：你如何形容自己的創作？它是數位藝術？生成藝術？還是某種新的類別？
我認為我的創作介於這些分類之間，但又不完全符合任何一種。我的作品並非單純的數位藝術，因為它不只是螢幕上的視覺圖像，而是一個不斷演算、生成、變化的系統。我使用程式語言來創造，但不完全掌控結果，反而讓演算法自行發展，這使我的作品具有生命感，某種程度上更接近「演算法生態」或「生成系統」。
如果一定要歸類，我的作品可以稱為演算法驅動的記憶建構。它們記錄時間的流動，讓觀眾能夠感受某種持續性的變化，而不只是靜態的視覺畫面。這也是為什麼我會探索混沌理論（Chaos Theory）與機率變異，因為這些數學結構本質上與我們的記憶、情感與時間的運行方式是相似的。
Q2：從《Good Vibrations》到《合成植物學》，你的創作脈絡如何演變？
這條路徑其實是一個不斷拓展的過程。每一個系列，都是前一個系列的延伸與深化。
- 《Good Vibrations》 是一個開端，我試圖將數據與視覺結合，讓每個交易哈希值轉化為獨特的幾何結構，探索「振動」作為一種宇宙現象的可視化。
- 《Chaos Research》《Chaos Memory》《Chaos Culture》 是對混沌與秩序的進一步探索。我開始嘗試讓系統自行生長，去尋找數位藝術中「自發演化」的可能性。
- 《Turnet Light》 是我對光與時間的試驗，受到透納（J. M. W. Turner）的光影處理啟發，思考如何在數位媒介中重現光的流動性與不可控性。
- 《After the Cave》 進一步回應柏拉圖的洞穴寓言，探討我們對影像與現實的感知，讓觀者進入一個可變動的生成空間。
- 《Automatic Message》 是一個重要的轉折點。我開始運用演算法去模擬水墨畫的筆觸，試圖創造一種具有流動感、但仍具數位計算精度的筆法。
- 《Equinox》 則開始與天文週期產生對話，試圖將時間概念直接轉化為視覺元素。
- 《合成植物學：後自然的分叉》 是最新的作品，在這裡，我讓數據成為植物生長的根源，不再模仿現實中的生物，而是讓演算法自行演化出新的「後自然」生命體。
這些作品有一條共通的線索：它們都是關於演算法、記憶與時間的交織，並試圖打破傳統藝術與數位媒介的界線。
Q3：你的創作中經常涉及「記憶」這個主題，為什麼？
對我來說，記憶不是靜態的，而是動態、不斷重組的。人類的記憶其實非常不穩定，每次回想一段過去的經驗，都會對其進行某種程度的再建構。在這個過程中，我們的記憶像是一個生成系統，每次想起它時，細節可能已經改變了，而我們卻很難察覺這種變化。
這種特性與我的創作方式有共鳴。我透過程式讓作品「記住」某些數據與痕跡，讓它們持續變化，觀者每次觀看時，作品都可能已經發生變化，就像我們每次回憶一段過去的記憶時，都可能有新的理解。
此外，我認為數位世界本身就是一種記憶體，我們的資料被儲存、被計算、被修改，而藝術可以是對這個過程的反思。
Q4：你的作品既強調演算法的理性結構，又追求某種感性的流動性。這兩者如何在你的創作中平衡？
這其實是我內在矛盾的一部分。我一方面熱愛結構、秩序、邏輯，認為程式語言提供了一種清晰、可控制的創作方式；但另一方面，我也被不可控性、偶然性、混沌吸引，因為這些元素更接近自然界的運行方式。
在創作過程中，我嘗試讓這兩者共存。例如：
- 在《Automatic Message》中，我讓演算法模仿水墨的筆觸，但它並不完全按照預設方式行動，而是受隨機變數影響，使畫面具有某種即興感。
- 在《合成植物學》中，我讓植物的生長受混沌理論影響，雖然它們是數據驅動的，但它們的形態發展並非完全可預測。
這種理性與感性的張力，讓作品有了一種獨特的生命力。
Q5：你如何看待 NFT 對數位藝術的影響？你的 NFT 作品如何延續你的創作理念？
NFT 改變了數位藝術的生態，它解決了數位作品「如何被收藏」的問題，使純粹以程式創作的藝術家也能擁有新的發表與銷售機會。
我進入 NFT 領域時，並不只是把舊作轉化為 NFT，而是試圖探索區塊鏈如何影響創作方式。例如：
- 在《GeoPunk》中，我讓每件作品根據藏家的錢包地址變化，這意味著每個人看到的圖像都是獨一無二的，作品的「所有權」直接影響其視覺呈現。
- 我也嘗試讓作品持續演化，使 NFT 不只是靜態的圖片，而是一個可以變化的、具有時間性的數位物件。
NFT 對我來說不只是市場，而是一個新的「演算藝術生態」，它讓作品可以持續存在於鏈上，不被單一平台所控制，這與我一直以來對「記錄」與「時間」的思考非常契合。
Q6：你的創作往往充滿實驗性，但你如何面對市場與大眾的接受度？
這是一個兩難的問題。我從來不是為了市場而創作，但我也理解，一件作品如果沒有觀眾，那它就無法真正發揮作用。
我的解法是讓市場來適應我，而不是我去迎合市場。這也是為什麼我選擇建立自己的 NFT 平台（akaSwap），而不是完全依賴既有的平台。我希望讓有相同價值觀的藝術家聚集在一起，而不是被市場機制逼迫改變創作方向。
當然，我也希望自己的作品能夠觸及更廣的觀眾，但我更在意的是，這些作品能否帶給觀者新的思考方式，而不只是被消費。
Q7：你的藝術生涯至今，你覺得最大的挑戰是什麼？
時間。
不是市場、不是技術，而是時間。我常常覺得自己還有很多未竟之事，還有太多作品沒有完成，還有很多技術沒有實驗，這種「來不及」的焦慮是我最大的挑戰。
我一直在思考，如何讓自己的作品不只是短暫的存在，而是能夠在時間中持續運行、持續變化、持續與世界對話。這就是為什麼我的創作圍繞著記憶、紀錄、痕跡，因為這些都是對抗時間消逝的方法。
或許，真正的自由，是接受有些事情終究無法完成。但在那之前，我會繼續創作，繼續讓演算法寫下屬於它們的故事。