Bio-TechnologyFuture Physical | home

BIO-TECH Home
BIO-TECH
Home

BIO-TECH Timeline
BIO-TECH
Timeline

BioTechnology Home
BioTechnology
Home

BioTechnology Forum
BioTechnology
Forum

BIO-TECH  Documentation
BIO-TECH
Documentation

BIO-TECH INTERCHANGE - DOCUMENTATION
Sunday 16th - Wednesday 19th February 2003


MONDAY 17TH FEBRUARY 2003

GENERAL DISCUSSION - AM

SOLO AUTHOR -> INTER-AUTHORSHIP

MEMORY

  • Memory in body
  • Memory of project / collaboration
    • practice based research OR practice as research
    • diffusion / access
  • perception

ARTS / SCIENCE

Various processes including

  • Merge & separation
  • Divergence > evaluate > assess
  • Artistic strategies kicking into process
  • Process how to keep emergent
    • Design
      • Measurement
      • Timeline
      • Scientific projects woven with arts unpick / evaluate

Modes of peer review shared by arts & science

  • Subjective, temporal, specific
  • Separate from absolute principles

IDENTITY

  • Defined through processes
  • Author
  • Inter-author (generosity / moral fiber)

ACKNOWEDGEMENTS

Arts interested in/on for collaborations with science

  • heightening status
  • funding available

Science does acknowledge arts when relevant to the write up … does it make a difference!?

Scientists have suspicions of arts input!

Problematic to talk about “culture of…” Science/Arts
Science Especially measurable
Arts much broader

  • Long term recognized
  • May not be so specific groundswell

Impact
Quality of endeavor

PUBLIC REPRESENTATION OF SCIENCE

  • Popular interpretation (sell out? Or important?)
  • Dissemination of knowledge
  • Reductionism re: imaging
    (Roger Penrose / Stephen Hawkins
  • hoodwinking general public into ‘thinking’ we understand quantum physicals etc
  • ….. (Pictures / metaphors / analogies / etc ….)
    OR
    Under-estimation of how much we can understand
    E.g. Body Worlds huge success….

BIO-TECH

  • V. crucial that knowledge is out there / clarity
  • Public?? ‘Understand’??

MEDIA

  • need to sort out how they deal with ‘issues’ in a responsible way
  • different ways of understanding

BIO-ETHICS

Lack of debate (in schools, in degrees)

New Discourse which merges science / art
Neither art nor science

  • Strategies what is role of artists?
    Concepts/visions

Hybrid
Or separate by convergent (stretch ability, fluidity)
Natural

TECHNOLOGY

  • How much getting in the way
  • Fetish sing means
  • Gratuitous … effective?
  • Pushed
  • Eye candy (context specific if status assigned to tool or skill)
  • Decorative superficiality cosmetic (but can convey dry, academic material (wider access)
  • Surface only superfluous

SCIENCE

  • Appropriating artist image / outrageously (Disneyland factor eye candy)
  • Popular science spectacle
  • Written / verbal
  • Color coding
  • Image evolution
    Grabbing of imaginations through ‘what it looks like’

WHAT IS ‘BEAUTY’? THE ROLE OF BEAUTY

  • reduce complex practices into visual roles
  • visualization & sonification

TOOLS

  • Body into centre of digital interaction
  • WEAR ME!!! Debate
  • PLAY TOOLS tool kits MAX software (less object orientated)
  • Changes notion of virtuosity / talent
    Artists own development of software & tools

 

documentation - feb 2003 >>

DOCUMENTATION INDEX
BIOTECH DOCUMENTATION PROCESS

16/02 BIOTECH INTRODUCTIONS
• 16/02 GROUP DISCUSSIONS
IDENTITY - GP 1
IDENTITY - GP 2
IDENTITY - GP 3
IDENTITY - GP 4
IDENTITY - GP 5
16/02 KEYNOTE SPEECH
SARA DIAMOND

17/02 GENERAL DISCUSSION AM
17/02 GENERAL DISCUSSION PM
17/02 GROUP DISCUSSION EVE

18/02 GENERAL DISCUSSION AM
18/02 GENERAL DISCUSSION PM
18/02 Q&A'S ABOUT 'OUR' BODIES
18/02 BIOFLOWS

19/02 BIOTECH SUMMARY NOTES
19/02 BIOTECH PUBLIC
DISCUSSION FORUM

related links >>

Participant List

BIOTECH Picture Gallery

Pictures of BIOTECH Participants

BIOTECH Webcasts

Code Zebra - Co-Production

Bioflows

Cluster 2003