Generative art's increasing popularity in the late [[XX secolo|twentieth century]] was due, in part, to the new computational and algorithmic possibilities offered via computers, which gave generative art a new platform. Art historian [[Grant D. Taylor]] notes that [[computer art]]’s introduction in [[1963]] sparked outrage, mostly from non-computer artists who feared that the written poem, representing “communication from a particular human being” and “one last refuge for human beings” would no longer serve that function in the computer age.<ref>{{Cita libro|autore=Grant D. Taylor|curatore=Francisco J. Ricardo|titolo=When the Machine Made Art: The Troubled History of Computer Art|anno=2014|editore=Bloomsbury|città=New York|lingua=en|volume=8}}</ref> [[Utente:Lydia Tuan/Generative Literature#%20ftn1|[1]]] Computer art was often seen as “another example of the vulgarization of science, where besotted artists, dallying with the latest scientific and technological media, produced what was tantamount to science as kitsch,” paralleling the fascination of computer art with modernist responses to the development of pure sciences in the early twentieth century.[[Utente:Lydia Tuan/Generative Literature#%20ftn2|[2]]] Prior to the mainstream acceptance of computer poetry as art in 1990s, people had hoped that machines would fail, having coveted art as a “refuge from the onslaughts of our whole machine civilization.”[[Utente:Lydia Tuan/Generative Literature#%20ftn3|[3]]] The stigma attached to computer art was voiced by artists such as Paul Brown, who lambasted the use of computers in art as the “kiss of death”[[Utente:Lydia Tuan/Generative Literature#%20ftn4|[4]]] to describe computer artists who were rejected from galleries once it was revealed to curators and directors that computers played a role in their work’s creation.
[[Utente:Lydia Tuan/Generative Literature#%20ftnref1|[1]]] Taylor, 5. Taylor is quoting John Morris’ 1967 article from the ''Michigan Quarterly Review''.
