galenlDESMA9

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,” - Ad

I visited the Tangent Contemporary Art Gallery in downtown San Francisco. One of their ‘reverspective’ window pieces caught my eye and inspired me to further explore the type of art in their gallery. From the curator, I learned that stimulus like light, and environment, wall color, may influence greatly how the art is perceived. In my previous psychology class on sensation and perception,   different visual cues can alter the focal image, thus it makes sense that the environment is very important and needs to be considered for a ‘reverspective’ art piece. Additionally, there is research that supports the fact that the absence of specific painted cues can affect how the art piece is perceived (Papathomas 525). This art exhibit inspired me to make lots of connection my major of psychobiology. The concept of binocular cues is important in viewing the art at this gallery. If I closed one eye, the perceived image will lose the aspect of depth. Binocular