Published 2025-11-21
tag(s): #random-thoughts #programming
There are other things that I want to write about, related to code and programming, but first
I need to establish this fact share this opinion for it all to follow from here.
Is all prose art? Well no, there are many novels and stories written every year that are
considered "not good enough" to be seen as "art".
This is as obvious as it is a point of contention. Who says some novel that won the Nobel for
literature and was read by 15 people, has more merits to be considered art than any of the YA
series of novels that touched the lives of millions of people?
I don't know, and for this conversation it is besides the point. We can all agree that it is
subjective, and leave it that.[1]
But then, why don't we usually extend this distinction to programming and code?
Maybe a lot of people do, but searching for those opinions online right before writing mine is
ill-advised 🙃 Maybe a couple days after I finish and publish this, I do
it.[2]
Given the same skeleton for a story, no two authors will write it the same way. Dialogue,
descriptions of people and places, the pace of the story, they will all be different.
The same applies to code. Given the same requirements, and even the same tooling (language,
frameworks, etc.) it is relatively easy to identify who wrote what.
For bigger teams it might take longer, but sooner or later you start reading a function/method at work and think to yourself "this is such a Justin code", or "yep another Javier idiom". The style of the artist, will reveal itself regardless of conventions and stylistic limitations (via formatters and the like).
I see this as a sign that code is creative expression. And that's why each programmer/artist
leaves behind their mark in it. It is not unlike writing a novel, except that sometimes one
chapter at a time, or even one paragraph at a time.
The fact that it is written in pieces, by lots of different people over time, makes it
actually pretty unique. Specially for bigger projects, the "boring enterprise" stuff.
That is a distinction I used to make internally. The stuff I wrote at work, the C# APIs
dealing with mortgages, the insurance websites, those are not creative. That's "just
work".
But the open source stuff! Python libraries, Emacs packages. Those are The Real Deal.
But...I tend to put the same care on the "work stuff" than in my "personal
stuff". Because I enjoy writing code! How can software that I am paid to do, and that has
to fulfill some externally imposed limitation, be considered creative and artistic?
In 2022, I realized there was obvious precedent for this...
Nowadays we consider a lot of paintings that were commissioned by the church, or nobility, as art. No one denies artistic merits of a Renaissance portrait because it was commissioned and expected to fulfill certain "specifications".
But being honest, I came to this realization not via historical observation, but because of a
more personal situation.
In 2022, when visiting family, I commissioned from a fileteado artist in Buenos Aires a sign
for my home office.[3] Which says exactly that, "the office":
The photo is at the only angle where no reflections obscured part of the sign.
When I was growing up, most buses in the area I lived were decorated with these designs, so I
had thought about getting a sign in that style for a while.
One afternoon, before meeting a friend for coffee, I walked
into Dario's shop, and we had a
pretty brief conversation about what I wanted. He offered some suggestions for background
colors, elements to include or exclude from the design, and that was it.
Now, I could have given more detailed instructions, and instead made a conscious choice to
leave many elements up to him. But even if I had more specifics about how the sign should
look, wouldn't it still qualify as art? As being an artistic expression?
And a few days after getting the sign, I made the connection between commissions or patronage, being like working for a company. And I completed my mental puzzle of how to understand code that I write on the clock with something that can, potentially, have some artistic merit.
Now, some code is absolutely written to be as utilitarian as possible. Almost the equivalent of getting the walls in your kitchen painted white. And there's nothing wrong with that. sometimes that's just what you need.
But it is my opinion that a lot more of the stuff we put out there is a proper expression of
the person who wrote.
And I have the impression that by trying to equate writing software with building a bridge,
rather than writing a story, we are making ourselves a huge disservice.
And by "ourselves" I don't mean only developers or programmers or authors or whatever
term you want to use.
I think organizations that need software also lose a lot when they approach the process of
putting it together[4] in those terms.
I think too much about code and programming.
Which isn't news to anyone who reads this space regularly, I guess. :)