Issues in ... Centar for Art, Cultural Programs Cultural"Theory N Design; and ofthe VISUAL CUL TURE ANO BIOSCIENCE UAN ONLINE SYMPOSIUM Visual Culture National Academy UMBC of Sciences EDITED BY SUZANNE ANKER AND JD TALASEK .l!' .,. ' M~'~,1 : , . ." ~ , ... ~' lo _.~ • j~' I N T R· O O U C T I O N Biofictions and Biojacts: Staking a Claim in the Biocu/tural Bank At once archly antagonistic, reeking with en vy, al once estranged bedFelJows, yet.inlimale colla borators, al once trepid and al other times tre ndoid, lhe elomains of art anel scie nce continue lo be e nlocked in a Family romance. As with aelo lescenls re li shing in their seU-abandone el freeelom or lhe fantasti cal dream of myste rious eli scove ry, each eliscipline lraverses the culturallanelscape, el elermineello penelrale ils vault. Peer review paneis, funeling sources anellheir lur e ~ of major capital are inevilably associale el with lhese shape­ shifting enlerprises. Aelel to lhis dicey mix the ever-in creasin g -~ . archive of lechnological re-mixes, special e FFects, anel =- labol'atory feats of sheer awe, anel we finei ourselves i n a time where inleractivity in ali its gui ses is the central character of the play. Bul unele r the rubric of interdisciplinary cross­ pollination, what eloes lhis intermix bring to lhe skeptic's investi gatory gaze? And at a time when new m eelia criss-cl'oss a uniformed geography of the global, to what means anel enel s 13 elo art and science collaborations justify formallinking? Eminent a rl histol'Ían Leo Sleinberg in fii s essay "A r\. and Science: Do They Need to Be Yokeel?" m akes refere nce to art a nel science's on-anel-oFF-anel-on-again re lalionship. He exemplifies the g ifls 01' Leonarelo's cultural oFFerings as a case in point. For Steinberg, "unlike his surpasseel scienlific work, Leonarelo's artistic creation is unrepealable, Iike the !ife of a man."· Unicity anel rarity becom e keyworels specially woven into lhe inlertwineellapestry of arlisl and·crealion. Is it true thal neither by m easurem ent nor repelition nor observation alone do works of arl atlain their slatus? Dr by what happe n­ stance elo nonvel'ifiable aeldilions to knowleel ge produclion continue to confound our consciousness? And as proelucl­ elrive n methoelologies, what elo they so ardently el e monslrale? Neverlheless, uneler presenl parlance, Sleinberg's skeplicism of the Iinks between science and arl may, in fa ct, be newly up-e ndeel. Discourses concerning lhe "in-between-ness" oF calegories have circulateel within the corrielors of visual and criticai studies for elecael es. From Rosalinel Krauss lo J u!ia Kristeva to Donna Haraway anel W.J .T. Mitchell, expanele el inlellectual Frameworks have been useful in analyzing conleniporary hybriel practices in the visual arls. Mosl currently, German philosophe r Nicole KaraFyllis investigales lhe resullant forms of hybl'Íeli zation conceming living forms anel biotech­ nological interventions. Coining lhe lerm "biofacts" as a neologism combining biology anel artifact, she elis cusses lhis cojoining as "a herme neutic concept which al lows lo ask for l h E' cl ilfE' l'cnces bE' lw cen 'nature' anel 'lechnology' in Llw al'ea 01' lhe livillg.'" Shc questions w hel hel' lhe class ical el islinclion betweenlJe anilll a ancl u clllle "still holel s tru e loday in lighl 01' I'ceenl ael va nces in hiological anrl bi ollleel ica l lechnologies." For exn lllple, lo w hnl Iil xongenolllic ol'del' does Oneo 0 1' Rh ino 1ll0 Ll Se belong? As li vi ng 1ll 0USC Illod els, rab l'icaled wilh in l he slain less stee l anel glilss labol'atol'y, Ihese se nlienl creal ul'es cO l1l e inl o being by slicing, el icing, " knock ing oul," 0 1' olhel'w ise l'ed istl'i bLllin g l heil' hel'eel i lal'y mal eri al. T hese " biorn el s" are l he produ cls 01' a nillul'e/cullul'e Il'ansl"u sion. Allhough Ka l'afy llis Illai nlains I hal el isli nctions hetwee n " Ii re" an el " Icchnology" slill prese nlly h olel Il'ue, shc also continues l o Ihillk thal suc h el islincl ions " are Illuch 11I ore hirlelen Ihall bel"ore, through l he des ign 0 1' Ji ving objecls in Llw la boral ory."" T he yoking or arl anel se ience has produce el bolh nove l rorm s of arl aml has aelel ed an aes l helic di lllension lo science . Al'lisls are engiJging in creali vc I'es earch w ilhin scientilk laboralories wh ile science inslilulions elllploy highly skilleel el es ign l eam s l o cl'eal e visuaJl y cO lllpelli ng illlagery. However, w hat signiricance el o lhese connE' c!.i ons, in fa el, yicJcI ? Is iI accural e l o speculate Ihallllore !"ecenlly w e are rineling an c ver-gl"O w ing casl or pl ayers within both lhe sciences an el lhe arls w ho are elllbarking on lhe illtersec!.i on orthis hybri el eli scoUl'se? Yel a rew are yielelin g lInexpecteel results. Mark D ion's recenl ex hibition at lhe Na lural lIistory M useulll in Lonel on, S.rs letna Metropolis, CLu'a l eel by Bel'gil Ar encls, as parl or the museulll's conlemporary arls pl'ogram , is a ca se in point. Dion's invesliga Li ve techniques involve bolh scienlific an el archeological ch aracterislics, yet ar e singular Illel hoels in anel or lhem se lves. Uncovering specilllen s lhrough " archeo­ logical " cl igs, th e arLi sl 's " laboratory" praclice has uneartheel se veral new organisllls. One parlicularly nontr ael ilional insecl collecling Illelhocl consisl ed 01' altaching aelh esi ve papel' lo lhe 1"00f or his aulolllobile and clri ving al high speeel s el own a I ,o nel on prOlllenacle. T he flyp aper was subsequently sent lo lhe lab l o be analyze el , elllploying ali th e relevanl state-of-Ihe-arl scienliric lechni ques. Anel lo l he alllazem enl or the skeplical scienlists al l he museull1, several new species w ere ve rifieel , hence catalogue el , inlo scienlific nom enclature. Since l he " Visual-Cull ure anel Bi oscience" symposiulll, vari ous exhibitions, events, anel experim ental proj ecl s have lrans­ pired. Perhaps m os\. slrategically reJevan l is lhe ex hibil ion aI l he M use um 0 1' Moel em Art /J esign and 'I'lu ELaslic Mind. Curateel by Paola Anlonelli, lhis elegantly cOlllpaclecl exhibilion pa rces som e or the subjecls sllggesled in lhe s)'JlIpos iu111 . Revolving arounel sc ience anel des ign, Anlonelli ciles " elasLi cily as 1:1 by-p roduct of ael aptability an el acceleril lion," a dyn amic force r equired to engage an increasingly com plex lechnological world. Revi siting lll a ny of lh e classical the mes of this intersecti on, such as lhe means by w hi ch th e in visible can be rendered accessibl e, I"orm's re lali on to fun c Li on , a nd issues '0 1" scale, parti cu larly mi cro-sca le, cUl'rent technologies ha ve re-open ed conte mpora ry cli sco Lll'ses on lh ese subjecls lO olher e nd s, For example, Eli o Caccava le's MY Bia (2 005) is a co lJecti on ofloys lhal inlroelu ces ch ilclre n to lhe ways in whi ch em e rgenl biolechn ologies can in lerrace wil.h lh e future oflife. Like lhe symposium's foray inlo toys as chime ras an el viruses, Caccavale creales a series of human do ll s lhat unel e rgo Lran spl a nl s Ul'gery 0 1' cows lhat pl'oduce pharmaceu­ lical drugs. Joris Laarma n's Bane Chair (2006) employs 3-D oplimizali on softwa re to create a cha ir lhal, in this case, is -f' based on th e ways in which bones aclua ll y grow, lhus empha­ :. sizing nalul'e's slructu l'a l compete ncy. ' AI. pl'esenl, streams of unique projects, processes, anel collabo­ ~ rations ullCl e rlie explorato l'y anel in vesli ga tol'y mocl e ls for ~ innovation i'nexlricably boundecl by inle rsecli on s be tween a rt, ~.'" science, anel technology. Possibilily a bounds in the pursuil of ~. inquiry whi ch operates in cl egrees e ncompassing complexity ' 4 , and a mbi guity. Enlities lhal are clearl y ne ith er science nor z 5 -< arl exclusively bul an inlricale mix of aspecls 01' divisible '"o ratios between lh e two are beyonel the glilte r oF neophi lli a. o c: n However, Ul e e pi ste mologica l unel erpinnings 0 1' knowing anel -< be in g in lhe worlel wilh in lhese praclices are poinling lhe way o z towarels an are na bouneled by lhe el iaphanous. Scie nlisls I'e fer to lheir speclacu lar color im ages as a l'l, and lh e visual a rti sl's conceptual free zone has aelel eellan gib le facls lO lhe scie n­ tinc cOlllmLlll ity. Even though a li el iscip lin es possess cul lural el ime nsions Lhal are e mbedeleel in society's DNA, il is "vi thin th e ma lJ'ix of inlersecting e pi ste mologies lhal othe l' slra nds of kn owledge a re be in g,proelu ced, "Vhe lh er by pl'oximity, sere nelipily, ch a nce, or egoli slica l lenaciousness, unex pecle el convergences a re laking form .