Programming: Into the rabbit hole …
In Alice in Wonderland, the eponymous character follows the White Rabbit down its hole into a strange world full of bizarre characters.
Such an apt analogy for programming! But one that I’m guessing is not taught in most Computer Science departments 😜.
I’m guessing, because I’m not a comp-sci graduate.
However, I do come from the first generation to grow up with computers in their homes, replete with programs (as they were called in those days, not applications!) on tape or programmed in, by hand, from magazines (with all the syntax errors that you spent all month between issues trying to work out, before the errata were published). Every child from my generation probably remembers this computer program:
10 PRINT "Andy is cool"
20 GOTO 10
RUNTry it! (escape to exit).
It’s hardly [insert any application at all], but what it did was to inextricably link, in my mind, inputting something into a computer, and getting a result out. There is a profound sense of satisfaction in this process, but this is not the story of how I pursued that satisfaction in programming along the path to where I am today; my story takes a more circuitous route.
I am the product of 2 Architects (big A, designing buildings!). As such, was immersed in the seemingly parallel universes of Art and Engineering. For example, we’d visit galleries when on holiday vs my Dad adapting a computer program to help me learn my times-table.
As I went through school I found myself drawn the art side; which probably became inescapable when I all but checked out of school during A-Levels. So it was that I ended up at Art School taking a Fine Art degree; or to be more precise, Interactive Art.
At the time, it was the only practical course in the country to use technology in the context of Fine Art. It was mostly self taught, as most art courses are; we just used computers, motors and projectors to create our works instead of paint.
In this environment, my earliest experiences with computers were crystallised into understanding technology as a medium for creation. Importantly though, not just the creation of documents, spreadsheets, or even photos or videos; but art and music that could potentially be the equal of “the Old Masters”.
But to think of the likes of Vermeer, Tintoretto and Michelangelo as the sum total of art is to ignore fundamental shifts in the art world that changed the very understanding of the nature of art.
For example, Fine Art in the 20th Century shifted its focus away from representational to conceptual, with one of the pivotal moments being DuChamp’s Fountain in 1917. The act of signing something and putting it in a gallery, changes it. In this case from a urinal to a piece of porcelain sculpture. Context is key.
Which brings us back to Alice.
‘The time has come,’ the Walrus said,
‘To talk of many things:
Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax —
Of cabbages — and kings —
And why the sea is boiling hot —
And whether pigs have wings.’
Nonsense of course, but rhythm and pattern, language for the sake of it. Literature, because of context. Meaning? … its up to you.
This sort of thinking permeates everything you do, and creates different types of creators. Architects are different to Engineers for instance; there are different sensibilities at work. They are, however, overlapping and complimentary disciplines.
As I mentioned, I am not a comp-sci graduate; there are oodles of algorithms and peculiar computation thinking processes of which I have no knowledge; many I’m sure, to borrow an Americanism, from Computer Science 101.
There is a tendency at the moment, to describe development positions in the digital industry as “software engineer”. I think this is a mistake, unless that’s what you actually mean. Engineer has a specific definition, one that is well aligned to graduates from comp-sci programmes, but to me, not all developers are engineers.
I am a veteran developer, having been working in this field for 20 years, give or take. My career has definitely been enriched precisely because I think differently to engineers, and so will bring different skills to bear on a given problem.
Isaac Asimov, in a fantastic article On Creativity from 1959, wrote the following:
Obviously, then, what is needed is not only people with a good background in a particular field, but also people capable of making a connection between item 1 and item 2 which might not ordinarily seem connected.
With our laudable desire to improve STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths) subjects in schools, let’s not forget that study of the Arts brings something, probably unquantifiable, that can enrich our lives, careers and technology. STEAM anyone?
