Week 6 - BioTech + Art

In this week’s lecture, Dr. Vesna discussed biotechnology and art; the sensitivity around this collaboration was what stood out to me. Despite the sensitivity, I do believe that art and biotechnology is a great and healthy collaboration.

There was sensitivity around the ethics of art interfering with science because genetic engineering can be perceived as a “mix of nature and culture” (Levy 8). I actually had ‘oh!’ and ‘ew!’ and ‘wow!’ reactions towards the images used in the lecture videos, a lot more than the previous lectures. Before I could complain any more, there’s an artist mentioned in Dr. Vesna’s lecture this week that has already addressed it.

“The lack of a common global aesthetic and a historical track record of bad taste (i.e., ethnic cleansing, line dancing, liposuction, most painting) provides me with the impetus, the eclectic fecundity to guarantee iconoclasm in a situation which could all too easily lead to the erasure of the same,” - Adam Zaretsky

The quote helped me develop an understanding of the purpose behind the art form that mixes with science. The purpose is for people to feel less uncomfortable around things that are coexisting around them already but no visually ready. Even the food we consume has biotechnology behind it!

In the researches that study biotechnology, the whole ethics issue is frequently brought up. I personally believe that art and biotechnology is a great collaboration because it can render good outcomes such as delivering sustainable food options for the poor (Persley 2). Art acts as a medium to reach out and appeal to the population who are already well economically. So together, this collaboration is one that will benefit everyone.

The issue of ethics is definitely a legitimate problem, but even science in Europe that tends to take a more scientific approach, they implement preliminary sessions to ensure there are not macroscopic societal issues (Serratosa & Simone 96). Thus it really does seem like the sensitivity is something more bureaucratic than anything else.

Furthering my argument for the collaboration between art and biotechnology, I believe it is important to always work together and likewise, the saying, “two heads are better than one”, different minds help bring different ideas and perspective to the table which supports “creativity breed creativity” (Kelty 5).

  

SOURCES:

Cabañas, Marcos. “César Marcos Cabañas.” EComercio Agrario, Redacción ECA Http://Ecomercioagrario.com/Wp-Content/Uploads/2015/09/logo1.Png, 2 June 2016, ecomercioagrario.com/en/pec-events/the-role-of-agricultural-biotechnology-in-food-security/.

“CUT/PASTE/GROW: The Beautiful Abominations of Bio Art.” ANIMAL, 26 Mar. 2013, animalnewyork.com/2013/beautiful-abominations-an-exploration-of-bio-art-at-observatory/.

De Simone, F., and J. Serratosa. "Biotechnology, animal health and animal welfare within the framework of European Union legislation." Revue scientifique et technique-Office international des épizooties 24.1 (2005): 89-99.

Kelty, Chris. “meanings of participation: Outlaw Biology?” BioTech + Art. Desma 9, UCLA, 2018.

Levy, Ellen K. "Defining Life: Artists Challenge Conventional Classifications." (2007).

Persley, Gabrielle Josephine. Biotechnology for developing-country agriculture: problems and opportunities. No. 2. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), 1999.

Staff, TakePart. “12 Genetically Engineered Animals That Changed Modern Science.” TakePart, 6 Mar. 2016, www.takepart.com/photos/genetically-engineered-mosquitos-fight-zika-see-12-other-animals-modified-lab/index.html.

Vesna, Victoria. “5 BioArt pt3” BioTech + Art. Desma 9, 13 May. 2018, Los Angeles, University of California, Los Angeles, https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL9DBF43664EAC8BC7&v=3EpD3np1S2g