Week 6: BioTech + Art

    In the lecture, Professor Vesna mentions how certain individuals will perceive the definition of bio and art differently. The definition I found most interesting was the one including animals and bioart and how the animals are used in this field along with the ethical implications for artists interfering with the genetic structure of these natural systems. 

    Joe Davis was certainly an interesting figure in our time but his development of ideas using biotech and art influenced my understanding of the week's topic. His format of thinking and perceiving the world truly is what I consider "thinking outside the box" as he tried to connect ideas that had the least connection. 

NOVA PBS Official. Scientist? Artist. Pirate! Who Is Joe Davis? 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GkZt00Qics.

    One of these early experiments relates to the definition of biotech and art which includes animals as part of the equation. Not only that but he also incorporates the other definitions of biotech and art in his work such as working at the cellular level. An example is "The Twice Forbidden Fruit", where he synthesized a DNA-encoded version of the English Wikipedia into an apple, essentially creating the "tree of knowledge".

Skeptic, The Ethical. “The Tree of Knowledge Obfuscation.” The Ethical Skeptic, 3 Nov. 2009, https://theethicalskeptic.com/2009/11/02/the-tree-of-knowledge-obfuscation/.

    Another artist that influence my understanding of this week's artist was Marta De Menezes. Marta's first biological artwork was modifying the wing of live butterflies. This artist seems to fit into the definition of biotech and art that includes animals and interfering with the genetic material but with this, it pushed an ethical dilemma scientists questioned. Her biological artwork was truly one of kind as it was genetically designing the wings of butterflies and essentially creating art from nature. Some though did witness the true horror of holes being created in the wings. This was a moment where the issues of being ethical as a scientist and also as an artist are in question. 

Bioarte, el impulso cultural de la ciencia. 30 Oct. 2013, https://culturacolectiva.com/arte/bioarte-el-impulso-cultural-de-la-ciencia/.

References:

“Art Goes under the Microscope.” The Lantern, 13 Jan. 2003, https://www.thelantern.com/2003/01/art-goes-under-the-microscope/.
House, Patrick. “Object of Interest: The Twice-Forbidden Fruit.” The New Yorker, 13 May 2014, http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/object-of-interest-the-twice-forbidden-fruit.
Marta de Menezes. https://martademenezes.com/. Accessed 6 May 2022.
UC Online. 5 Bioart
Pt1 1280x720
. 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaThVnA1kyg.
UC Online. 5 BioArt Pt2. 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdSt-Hjyi2I.

Comments

  1. Hi Ariana! First, amazing post! I love that you focused on the more ethical debates surrounding biotech and art as those were the parts of this week's module that I really took an interest to as well. I wonder how you feel about some of these ethical debates; do you think that there are some ethical sacrifices that can be made in the name of art and technology or do you think that we should be completely leaving life to exist on its own? Where do you think that we should draw the line, that is, what is actually ethical and what is not? There are so many ways to "think outside of the box" as you mentioned, so I wonder what you think would be positive versus negative thinking. Great work!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Event 2: Tonya Toft Ag & Mogens Jacobson

Week 9: Space + Art

Event 3: HOX Zodiac: Honoring the HORSE