“Creative Know-How and No-How” presents live coding as a vibrant tapestry of thought, where the act of coding transcends its technical underpinnings to become a medium of artistic expression. It challenges us to embrace the uncertainties of the creative process, to find value in the act of exploration itself, and to reconsider the ways in which we understand and engage with technology.

One of the most compelling aspects discussed is the concept of “play” within live coding. This notion, borrowed from Roger Caillois, characterizes live coding as an inherently uncertain activity, a form of artistic experimentation that defies the conventional purpose and function. It’s a self-regulating activity that exists for its own sake, devoid of the pursuit of material gain, which is a radical departure from traditional views on productivity and creativity. This perspective invites us to reconsider the value we have for creative acts, urging us to see beyond the tangible outcomes and appreciate the beauty of creation itself.

The parallels drawn between live coding and preindustrial loom weaving are particularly evocative. Both practices require a heightened awareness and a dynamic response to the evolving conditions of the creative process. This analogy not only highlights the deep-rooted connection between coding and weaving as forms of thinking-in-motion but also challenges the historical narrative that prioritizes the Jacquard loom’s role in conceptualizing computational logic. By doing so, it invites a reevaluation of ancient crafts as precursors to modern computational practices, suggesting a continuity in thought that transcends technological advancements.

Moreover, the reading delves into the philosophical underpinnings of live coding, drawing upon concepts like kairotic and mêtic intelligence, which emphasize the importance of timing in the creative process. These ideas underscore the adaptability and situational awareness crucial to live coding, where the coder navigates through a landscape of possibilities, guided by a sense of what could be rather than what is.