Art and science | ScienceOnline09

You are not allowed to edit this page.
h3. Art and science — online and offline 

This session is moderated by <a href="http://glendonmellow.blogspot.com/" target="_blank" title="">Glendon Mellow</a>:

Art is not just illustration. And it is not the opposite of science (“Two Cultures”). How can the two work together and help each other?
Discuss:
<b>Post-Conference Updates Below!</b>  Most recent update: 22 Jan 2009
Check out <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/bioephemera/2009/01/semiconductor_how_firmly_must.php">Jessica Palmer's</a> thought-provoking post about science-art and the responsibility of authenticity!

This topic has also been <a href="http://glendonmellow.blogspot.com/search/label/ScienceOnline">reproduced here on my blog</a>.  Many excellent responses can be found. 

<b>5 types of science-related art</b>
Here are some rough categories of science-related art for use as starting points.  (My bias is showing: many are biology and painting related.) 

1. <b>Scientific Illustration</b> - Examples:  
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/olduvaigeorge/">Carl Buell</a> - visualizing extinct mammals, including ancestors to whales, 
<a href="http://jacquelinerae.deviantart.com/art/Gray-Cat-Composite-Anatomy-108879296">Jacqueline Rae</a>- clarification of complex anatomy, 
<a href="http://rigorvitae.blogspot.com/">Carel Brest Van Kempen</a> - intimate portraits of the natural world, 
<a href="http://www.dinosaursinart.com/new_work.htm">Michael Skrepnick</a> - in this example, how many of us think of sci illustration, as depicting dinosaurs for popular education, 
<a href="http://www.emilydamstra.com/portfolio2.php?illid=215">Emily Damstra</a> - diagram of a life cycle to educate, 
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Durer_Young_Hare.jpg">Albrecht Durer</a> - an early appreciation of form for its own sake, 
many artists’ work at the <a href="http://www.gnsi.org/">Guild of Natural Scientific Illustrators</a>.  

2. <b>Science Fine Art & Design</b> - Examples:  
<a href="http://web.mit.edu/felicef/">Felice Frankel</a>- <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/seed/2008/03/felice_frankel_on_seeing_scien.php">design of images for communication</a>, 
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wim_Delvoye">Wim Delvoye</a> - particularly the <i>Cloaca</i> an installation which consumes, digests and expels, 
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Quinn">Marc Quinn</a> - a self-portrait made from the artist's own frozen blood, <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=marc+quinn+self&btnG=Google+Search&meta=blood portrait sculpture"><i>Self</i></a>.  

3. <b>Art inspired by scientific subjects</b> - Examples:  
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dali_Crucifixion_hypercube.jpg">Dali’s Crucifixion</a>, 
<a href="http://tanjasova.com/new-tsartwork.html">Leopard Frog by Tanja Sova</a>, 
<a href="http://bioephemera.com/2006/11/04/aposematism/">Aposematism by Jessica Palmer</a>, 
<a href="http://glendonmellow.blogspot.com/2008/11/haldanes-precambrian-puzzle.html">Haldane's Precambrian Puzzle by Glendon Mellow</a>, 
<a href="http://jacquelinerae.deviantart.com/art/Yellow-86532190">Yellow by Jacqueline Rae</a>, 
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimboldo">portraits by Archimboldo</a>. 

4. <b>Art inspired by scientific technique</b> - Examples:  
<a href="http://www.fellmanstudio.com/dna_1.html">D.N.A. portraits by Lynn Fellman</a>, 
the field of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op_art">op art</a>, 
the practice of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Escaping_criticism_by_Caso.jpg">Trompe l'oeil</a> (fooling the eye),  
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_Ray">solarization photography of Man Ray</a>, 
warped perspective of a skull in the vanitas portrait <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holbein-ambassadors.jpg">The Ambassadors, by Holbein</a>

5.  <b>Speculative science art & science fiction</b> - Examples:  
<a href="http://nemo-ramjet.deviantart.com/art/The-Diversity-of-Titaniformes-102119199"><i>Snaiad</i> world by Nemo Ramjet</a>, 
<a href="http://www.gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/">Dinotopia by James Gurney</a>, 
<a href="http://www.unet.univie.ac.at/~a0000265/Spec/index.html">Speculative Dinosaur Project</a>, 
art in many <a href="http://www.dougal-dixon.co.uk/">Dougal Dixon</a> books, such as Man After Man, 
<a href="http://www.waynebarlowe.com/expedition_pages/exped_sac_back.htm">Expedition by Wayne Barlowe</a>. 


<b>Discussion questions:</b>

-Is art parasitic on science?  Does art ever inspire science or lead science to new areas of inquiry?  

-Can art about science ever have a paradigm-shaking impact on culture, science and the world?  Could there be the artsy equivalent of <i>The Origin of Species</i>? 

-Is art about science beneficial to the public or confusing issues in science?

-Art is often based on allegory and symbols, by their nature inaccurate; science often strives for accuracy and precision.  Is it possible to make wholly accurate art?

-Should it be possible to inject more skepticism into the often ‘New Agey’ art world of artistic subjects?  Technique often relies on innovative technologies, media and materials; should this be a starting point?

-How much scientific content is there in your local art gallery?  Is science obviously intended as villain, savior, or inspiration?

<b>Diverging Complexity? *</b>
The local apothecary was once a place to purchase medicinal ingredients <a href="http://www.essentialvermeer.com/palette/palette_grinding_and_materials.html">as well as painter's pigments</a>, (and both share the same patron Saint as a result, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patron_saint">Saint Luke the Apostle</a>).  In the Renaissance, the techniques of medicine and science and the techniques of artists were increasing in complexity.  

Today, it can be suggested* that fine art has largely decreased in technical complexity, while science and medicine continue to specialize and gain complexity. For example, 
fine art today can include <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Physical_Impossibility_of_Death_in_the_Mind_of_Someone_Living">whole animals in formaldehyde</a> or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Whiteread#Embankment_.282005-2006.29">casts of packaging</a>, whereas in science and technology, we can manipulate cells or visualize planets orbiting another star. 

Is the modern divide in technical complexity real?
If so, is it primarily responsible for the common notion of art and science as "two cultures"?  

*Thanks to <a href="http://network.nature.com/people/eva/blog/2009/01/05/chaos">Eva Amsen</a> for bringing up the diverging complexity topic.

<b>Please feel free to log in and respond below, or at <a href="http://glendonmellow.blogspot.com/search/label/ScienceOnline">The Flying Trilobite</a>, or by email, theflyingtrilobite -at- gmail -dot- com.</b>

<b><a href="http://glendonmellow.blogspot.com/2009/01/scienceonline09-art-science-afterword.html">Art & Science Afterword</a></b>

(Thanks to Jason Robertshaw of <a href="http://cephalopodcast.com/blog/">Cephalopodcast</a>, we had images on the screen! I was totally flummoxed by the projections, which is always an inspiring way to stand in front of a crowd. Jason let my mouth and brain work and kept my hands from messing with the keyboard. Thanks, man.)

After glancing through some of the examples and attempting to throw some definitions on-screen, the discussions in this unconference began. Some points (and further questions to explore!) that stood out:

-Movies such as Jurassic Park have done a lot to inspire science down specific paths (could a T-Rex catch that jeep?)

-Despite the success of movies, visual (static) art inspiring areas of research remains elusive. The <a href="http://palaeo-electronica.org/2004_1/horn/issue1_04.htm">example</a> by Andy of The Open Source Paleontologist notwithstanding, the question remains: can art inspire new areas of research? With any sort of regularity?

-The question of whether art and science are separate cultures about to come back or not is one that we were reminded happens over and over, perhaps every twenty years or so. I wonder then, is the relationship between art and science something that stands out against the backdrop of history better than standing inside one's own culture?

-How much of nano-imaging, for example, could be taken seriously by the fine art world? Could it be taken seriously?

-When scientists choose how to image data captured about objects in space, algal blooms and so on, they must have some knowledge of colour theory and make artistic decisions.

-When I inquired as to how many people working in science in the room ever sketched out a visual, back-of-the-napkin sort of thing, many people raised their hands. Anyone willing or able to share? I'd love to post a few examples at <a href="http://glendonmellow.blogspot.com">The Flying Trilobite</a..

-Many people knew of terrific examples of art and scientists co-mingling in provocative ways! Please send me links in the comments or by email, and I'll publish them here.

- We left with an open suggestion: how could each person in the room involved art or an artist in their area of research? Please email me, days, months or years from now if you follow through!

Thanks to the excellent group that coalesced in room C, and thanks to the people who cornered me variously at the conference and dinner afterward to discuss the issues further.  Please feel free to add any links below that were mentioned at the session!

<b>Links</b>:
"Art Vs. Science, Part One":http://scienceblogs.com/bioephemera/2009/01/semiconductor_how_firmly_must.php at "Bioephemera":http://scienceblogs.com/bioephemera - the veneer of scientific authenticity clashes with artistic tension with its subject matter.  And the loopedy-loop 'magnetic' lines are wicked-awesome.

<a href="http://scienceblogs.com/laelaps/2009/01/the_plight_of_the_pleistocene.php">"The Plight of the Pleistocene Poet"</a> on Laelaps.  Cavepainting & poetry.
View Source: Art and science

Navigation

Search:

Create or Find Page:

Active Members:
