Week 6: BioTech & Art

Regarding this week's topic, I found the following three questions to be the most intriguing:

1. Is life itself a valid expressive medium?

2. Is there a need for separate standards for artists creating or manipulating living organisms and semi-living systems?

3. How do we define and value artistic media and technologies?

1. Indeed life itself is a valid expressive medium because we all express it differently. Whether it be from the clothes we wear to our occupation, or even our personalities and morals. It's easily one of the most valid and natural ways to express oneself in my opinion, because we do it all the time without even being conscious of it, just by the way our faces look at each other. 

2. As far as manipulating or creating semi-living organisms or systems is concerned, there should be separate standards for artists when it comes to this because without standards we don't have any way of knowing how far artists will go. How can an artist or viewers deem the artwork to be ethical/unethical without a set of principles? It's understandable for a scientist to manipulate these subjects because we know why they do it (research, testing, etc.) unlike artists, who without guidelines, we’re unsure of why they’re doing it.

3. Defining the value of artistic media and technology is ultimately in the eye of the beholder. As individuals, we each have our own preferences, likes, and dislikes. Something that a famous scientist or artist can say is of high value could mean nothing to a famous mathematician or robotic engineer. 

[Figure 1] ORLAN

[Figure 3] Marta de Menezes

[Figure 3] Kathy High

My responses come from watching this week's lectures and taking account of biotech artists like ORLAN, Kathy High, and Marta de Menezes and the work/research they’ve done alongside the company SymboticA. I highlighted these artists because their work ties into the questions. ORLAN is all about question 1, “Is life itself a valid expressive medium?”, because she uses herself to express her artwork. Kathy relates a mix of questions 2 & 3, but more 3 in my opinion because she empathizes with the transgenic rats and calls attention to their mistreatment. Lastly, Marta de Menezes correlates with question 2 because I believe that it's unfair that she manipulated butterflies which resulted in their wings forming holes hence the need for separate standards.

References

“5 Bioart PT2.” YouTube, YouTube, 17 May 2012, www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdSt-Hjyi2I&list=PL9DBF43664EAC8BC7&index=13.

“5 Bioart PT3.” YouTube, YouTube, 17 May 2012, www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EpD3np1S2g&list=PL9DBF43664EAC8BC7.

“Kathy High.” SymbioticA, www.symbiotica.uwa.edu.au/residents/high. Accessed 9 May 2024.

“Orlan.” SymbioticA, www.symbiotica.uwa.edu.au/residents/orlan. Accessed 9 May 2024.

“Marta de Menezes.” SymbioticA, www.symbiotica.uwa.edu.au/residents/de-menzies. Accessed 9 May 2024.

[Figure 1] “Orlan, a Pioneer beyond Any Conception of the Body.” CLOT Magazine | An Online Publishing Platform Dedicated to the Most Experimental Art Forms, 18 July 2023, clotmag.com/biomedia/orlan-beyond-any-conception-of-the-body.

[Figure 2] “Interview with Bioartist Marta de Menezes.” SoundCloud, soundcloud.com/mediasanctuary/interview-with-bioartist-marta-de-menezes. Accessed 9 May 2024.

[Figure 3] Tong, Amber. “Gene Therapy Pioneer Kathy High Has Left Spark after Completing $4.3B Union with Roche.” Endpoints News, Endpoints News, 21 Feb. 2020, endpts.com/gene-therapy-pioneer-kathy-high-has-left-spark-after-completing-4-3b-union-with-roche/.