Director of the Museum of Modern Art in Buenos Aires


Mac-Entyre´s and Vidal´s prologue calls for an explanation I have been asked to develop.The suitable terminology of "Generative Art" has been suggested by Ignacio Pirovano based on his studies about "Georges Vantongerloo, his world and the creation of our times".

read the whole article


SpecificTerminology clarification:

Generative: díchaving  the virtue to engender.


To engender: To procreate, to spread the own species, to cause, to originate, to    form.


Generator: The line or figure which due to its movement generates either a figure or a geometric body

"This is not about a theoretical consideration but a clarification of concepts"


There is no doubt we start from the teaching of formal art especially the so called concrete art. In spite of this, we are not concrete.


For those who had considered the end of formal art, the pre-thought art, the most spiritual and abstract one (as it was supported and based on accurate mathematical and geometrical developments ending up in a larger abstraction) conceived by the human spirit and mind. For those who had believed that the appearance of a dot or a straight line on a foreground limited by its sides and whose compositions moved beyond such limits to live in the universal space.


For those who had thought that the most orthodox plastic proposals had reached their peak; for those believing the "insensitive and cold" had become a hit  (as concrete art was wrongly described by those without an aesthetic education to guide them to a better use of their sensitivity so as to find beauty in such big and perfect mental-artistic solutions) we have to tell you that we have set off from that point and that straight line giving them movement and GENERATING the movement.


From that point which is actually a circle, from that straight line, from those elements that Generate their own movement themselves, we have made it move about, vibrate, spin around, we have identified them with the present and the future in a stronger way.


We have made these signs move not only within the basic foreground from left to right and viceversa but we have also given them a projective life as they seem to be moving in and out breaking the basic surface once again, they do not remain stuck to it. They grow and shrink, they GENERATE themselves progressively, they spin around and vibrate, they spin around on their own shape and vibrate when joining one another. They give way to contrast and chiaroscuro (contrast of lights and shadows). They adopt a new way of life becoming a new identity in space.


This is why we have adopted the term GENERATIVE proposed by Ignacio Pirovano.


We agree with his idea. It is the exact description framed within the motivations of our present works.


The genertaive paintig ENGENDERS a series of optic sequences through a process generated by a shape such as a circle, a square, a scale, etc, which adopt different movements in opposite or consecutive directions in a perfect generative development, complemented by a unique whole shape and many other inside discriminating shapes.


It is also unquestionable that this kind of painting identifies itself with more technological terms created in the times we live in and that it would be illogical trying to escape from them; anyhow we have to engender beauty within the technicism itself, far more important than trying to evade ourselves, as they produce STRENGTH and ENERGY as well.


STRENGTH, because it is actually created when giving the impression of falling off and willing to penetrate the basic foreground and ENERGY because it is produced through their movements and vibrations.


We also agree with Pirovano on the fact that the term should not be another limiting term but it should include all the future and legitimate research works which might give way to "engender new beauty", where the sensitive human beings with some creating capacity may discover it.



1960 -  Eduardo Mac Entyre - Miguel Angel Vidal