We have been learning the connections between art and science for several weeks. Now here comes the most controversial topic in our learning process, which is the biological technology. The researches and applications of biotech are very controversial nowadays especially in the area of food source and ethics. According to what Professor Vesna mentioned in the lecture video, more and more artists participate in the laboratory work and bring those forefront issues caused by biotech. SymbioticA, for example, is an artistic research lab located in the University of Western Australia. There are a lot artists working with biologists and expressing the biology and life science from artistic perspective by experimenting artititic and scientific projects. This lab provides a good opportunity for artists to explore scientific areas.
 |
| SymbioticA Exhibition |
As what Professor Vesna pointed out, collaboration with scientists and using scientific imaging for artists constitute the bioart. In Proto-animate 20TP a novel code sequence is comprised of 158 DNA bases derived from an ostensibly non-coding region of a gene. This sequence was inserted into E.coli bacteria and used as temporal paint-media to depict small living portraits. The scientific research findings are shown vividly with artistic expression, making it easier to understand the biotechnology behind this image. Another example of biotech and art is the microacoustic signatures by Joe Davis. This audio microscope translates light into sound allows us to hear living cells and image their movements.
 |
| Proto-Animate |
 |
| Audio Microscope |
Eduardo Kac application of using life as artistic medium is pretty much the debate of biotech. He claims that his transgenic art work "GFP Bunny"is a new art form of genetic engineering. I think what he is doing is not acceptable. Artists should employ art to express the issue behind biotech to the public. Unlike what Joe Davis' experiments in audio microscope, what Kac is doing shows no respect to life, nature and ethics. Art is used to explore science with artistic view but not used to orient scientific research to a wrong direction.
 |
| GFP Bunny |
Resources:
"Audio Microscope: Joe Davis : Genetics and Culture." Ruth West - Work - Viewingspace.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. http://www.viewingspace.com/genetics_culture/pages_genetics_culture/gc_w03/davis_audio_scope.htm
SymbioticA : SymbioticA : The University of Western Australia. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. http://www.symbiotica.uwa.edu.au/
"semipermeable (+) : SymbioticA : The University of Western Australia." SymbioticA : SymbioticA : The University of Western Australia. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. http://www.symbiotica.uwa.edu.au/activities/exhibitions/semipermeable-
"GFP BUNNY." KAC. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. http://www.ekac.org/gfpbunny.html#gfpbunnyanchor
Vesna. "5 bioart pt1 1280x720." YouTube. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. Lecture Video
Hi Ke
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point that the biotech is very controversial. Like you mentioned in the last paragraph, artist Kac created the "GFP Bunny" and only regarded it as a great masterpiece of art. This artwork did contribute anything to society development but made animals suffer painful lives. It should not be acceptable.