Week 6 - "BioTech + Art"

This week’s lectures tie in closely with last week’s topic—the use of technology in the biological field and how that correlates with art (Vesna). Being a part of the biological research community myself, I found this week’s lectures to be eye opening. Having been emerged in research for the past couple years in the subject of biology, I have never thought of the relationship between research and art—I didn’t even think it existed. Now, looking at the topic with new eyes, I can see some similarities between the two, mainly in the idea of “interpretation.” It is general knowledge that the value of art depends on the interpretation of the individual—there is no “one true answer” for any art piece as there is in a math problem. 

Scientific Method (no one right solution)

In the field of research, “interpretation” is key in problem solving. When faced with a biological question, researchers have different interpretation of how the problem can be solved. Using all technical tools allowed, researchers try different approaches to answer the question. Thus, a researcher’s interpretation differs from another’s interpretation. Biological technology and research can be considered an art form not because artists can use biological tools to create science for the sake of art, but rather the way researchers use a combination of biological tools to solve a complex problem (Kaplan). My interpretation of art is something that allows the creator to think outside of the box using the tools available to get to a certain destination. Speaking as someone who has used transgenic organisms in research, it is a valuable tool. 

Eduardo Kac and Alba, the transgenic rabbit

However, when “artists” such as Eduardo Kac employ the use of transgenic technique to create a GFP positive rabbit for the sake of art (Genomic News Network), I believe that crosses the line. Not only is that a waste of resources that would be better used elsewhere, but it employs no true purpose. 

Stelarc and his Third Ear

I believe the same goes for Stelarc, who used biologic techniques to surgically attach a cell-cultivated ear to his arm (Miller). This is a waste of resources as many people in dire need of skin graphs employ the same techniques. In conclusion, I believe that technology in the biological field can be considered tools for art when used for the purpose of research. Research itself is an art form, not the “silly science” employed by certain “artists” (Jones).

Citations

Jones, Jonathan. “Why Don’t Art and Science Mix?” The Guardian. 2 Sept. 2008. Web

Kaplan, Karen. “The Art of Biology, Seen through the Eyes of Scientists.” Los Angeles Times. 10 Oct. 2014. Web.

Miller, Arthur. “This Man Is Growing an Ear on His Arm. Is it Art?” Slate. 3 Feb. 2015. Web.

“Transgenic Bunny by Eduardo Kac.” Genome News Network. 29 Mar. 2002. Web.

Vesna, Victoria. “Unit 6: BioTech+Art”, 2012. Lecture.