My list of facts, for now, is fairly limited, but I’ll give a jumping off point of how I’m thinking about things. I’m coming from the world of programming and the world of sound, so that’s where my POV is going to come from.
I also don’t have a manifesto at all right now, but I have a few touchstones that I think are worthy of exploration and deriving into more specific appproaches
The most inspiring piece for me is Steve Reich’s essay on Process Music: http://www.bussigel.com/systemsforplay/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Reich_Gradual-Process.pdf
Essentially, what it boils down to is the idea of *hearing the process in the sound" - that is: the process isn’t abstract, it’s readily understood, and it reveals itself to the listener over time.
As he mentions, his most easily understood process is his “Pendulum Music”, where a series of microphones are placed at different distances from an ampifier so they make a distinct pitch of feedback, and then pulled back to swing and ultimately settle over the amp. The piece is done when all the microphones stop moving.
This doesn’t really work as a piece of music, but it does work as a piece of art and the perceptable process enriches the music.
There’s 100% something here to be explored with programming and visualization, something to be explored where simple rules generate complex results that are pleasing while also being surprising and easy to follow.
Some touchstones for these ideas are Conway’s Game of Life, Cellular Automata, and Terry Riley’s “IN C”.
What’s notable about “IN C” is that while it has a simple algorithm that generates complex results, it also involves humans and human decision making.
I think the most fruitful avenue to explore is the intersection between simple rules and process music with human intervention and decision making. I don’t have anything codified yet, but it’s an avenue I’ve wanted to truly explore for a decade plus.