Week 6: BioTech + Art

This week’s exploration into BioTech and Art completely reshaped how I think about artistic media. What struck me most was the creation of SymbioticA. Before its founding, the team worked with bioengineer Joseph Vacanti at Harvard to explore “semi-living” artworks, pieces made from living tissue that blur the line between life and art (Vesna, “5 BioArt pt2”). One unforgettable project is “Fish & Chips,” a robotic drawing arm powered by the neural signals of goldfish neurons. Collaborating with Georgia Tech, the artists created a real-time feedback loop between biology and robotics, redefining both creative expression and the concept of life itself.






Catts, Oron, and Ionat Zurr. "Growing for Different Ends." Science Direct, vol. 35, no. 6, 2014, pp. 759-764. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocel.2014.09.025


As Ellen K. Levy highlights, many artists using biotech interrogate boundaries of species, self, and ethics. Eduardo Kac’s GFP Bunny, a genetically modified rabbit that glows under UV light, exemplifies this, raising questions about human control over nature. If scientists alter genes for agriculture or medicine, why is it controversial when artists do it to challenge our ethical assumptions?







Kac, Eduardo. “GFP Bunny.” GFP Bunny Timeline, 2000, www.ekac.org/gfpbunny_essay.html. 


Similarly, Stelarc, another bioart pioneer, had a third ear surgically implanted on his arm using human cartilage. His work represents the extreme edge of body modification and transhumanism, a movement aiming to enhance the human condition using biotech and other advanced tools(Vesna, “5 BioArt pt4).





Cascone, Sarah. “Artist Grows Third Ear to Let the Internet Listen In on His Life.” Artnet News, 13 Aug. 2015, https://news.artnet.com/art-world/artist-stelarc-grows-third-ear-324745.


Yet, these works also raise a critical question: where do we draw the line between poetic license and regulation? Life is living and complex, as it can change, grow, and might even feel pain. The film Strange Culture shows how serious the debate around BioArt can be. His case shows how people can fear or misunderstand art that uses living things. It also reminds us that while artists should be free to create, we still need to think carefully about the ethics of using life in art.

Works Cited: 

Levy, Ellen K. "Defining Life: Artists Challenge Conventional Classifications." Arts of Living on a Damaged Planet: Ghosts and Monsters of the Anthropocene, edited by Anna Tsing et al., University of Minnesota Press, 2017, pp. 275–298. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv36xvqqx.16.

Rodríguez Fernández, Clara. "Stelarc — Making Art out of the Human Body." Labiotech.eu, 25 Nov. 2018, https://www.labiotech.eu/trends-news/stelarc-ear-art-human-body/.

Vesna, Victoria. “5 BioArt pt2.” 17 May. 2012.

Vesna, Victoria. “5 BioArt pt4.” 17 May. 2012.

Williams, Patricia J. "Strange Culture." The Nation, 5 Oct. 2007, https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/strange-culture/.

Media Cited: 

Catts, Oron, and Ionat Zurr. "Growing for Different Ends." Science Direct, vol. 35, no. 6, 2014, pp. 759-764. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocel.2014.09.025


Kac, Eduardo. “GFP Bunny.” GFP Bunny Timeline, 2000, www.ekac.org/gfpbunny_essay.html. 


Cascone, Sarah. “Artist Grows Third Ear to Let the Internet Listen In on His Life.” Artnet News, 13 Aug. 2015, https://news.artnet.com/art-world/artist-stelarc-grows-third-ear-324745.


Comments

  1. Kathryn LundhMay 11, 2025 at 6:41 PM

    Hey Paige! I really enjoyed reading your blog post this week and had a lot of similar thoughts as you. Your example of the “fish and chips” project was something that I found very innovative and spoke to new levels of inspiration in terms of biotechnology. I also used the GFP Bunny as an example in my blog this week and was truly astonished by the story. I thought you did a wonderful job analyzing the limits that come with combining art and biotechnology! Great job!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Week 8: Nanotech +Art

Image
The conceptual roots of nanotechnology are often traced back to physicist Richard Feynman’s 1959 lecture, “There’s Plenty of Room at the Bottom,” where he imagined a future where we could manipulate individual atoms to create new materials and devices. Building on Feynman’s vision, Eric Drexler proposed in Engines of Creation , which led to the “assembler,” a nanoscale factory arm that could position atoms just as a robotic arm on a Ford assembly line arranges car parts (Vesna). Drexler and Ralph Merkle founded the Foresight Institute to advance this vision, championing a world where dirt could be restructured into hamburgers. This vision started a dispute with Nobel laureate Richard Smalley. "Drexler–Smalley Debate on Molecular Nanotechnology." Wikipedia , en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drexler%E2%80%93Smalley_debate_on_molecular_nanotechnology. Accessed 20 May 2025. A breakthrough in nanotechnology came with the invention of the scanning tunneling microscope (STM) by Gerd Binnig a...
Read more

Event 3: Sholeh Asgary: Atmosphere of Sound

Image
Visiting Sholeh Asgary: Atmosphere of Sound at the CNSI Art Sci Gallery was such a cool opportunity I got to do this quarter! The installation, Qanat , centered around a traditional Iranian rug, struck a powerful balance between cultural memory, sound, and light. A single pin spot beam lights up the central motif of the rug, symbolizing a fountain, while sounds of water play through the space. Hanging above, a pendulum microphone fed those sounds into a bass amplifier beneath the rug, creating a feedback loop that responded to both environmental sound and visitor presence. My own photo! This piece was powerful because it made the visitor part of the artwork. The rug wasn’t just symbolic; it helped carry and amplify the sound. Where I stood, sat, or lay down, my movements changed the sounds in the space. A similar piece that came to mind was Rafael Lozano-Hemmer’s Pulse Room , where the artwork responds to the viewer’s heartbeat, making their body an essential part of the installation....
Read more

Week 7: NeuroScience + Art

Image
This week’s discussion on neuroscience and art revealed how science and creativity work together to explore the human mind. Jung’s essay showed me that creativity often comes from the unconscious, which he saw as a source of inner conflict and dreams. He believed modern people are disconnected from their instincts, leading to emotional and spiritual struggles (Jung). Dreams, he argued, reveal hidden thoughts and symbols that art can bring to life. His idea of universal archetypes—like the Self, Shadow, Anima/Animus, Persona, and Hero—explains how certain artistic themes resonate deeply, even when we don’t fully understand why (Vesna, Unconscious Mind/Dreams Part 2 ). “Carl Jung Archetypes – A Simple Guide to the 5 Major Archetypes.” Arts of Thought , 12 Apr. 2022, https://artsofthought.com/2022/04/12/major-jungian-archetypes/ . Accessed 12 May 2025. Frazzetto and Anker’s “Neuroculture” added a critical view of how brain science influences culture. They warn against reducing identity ...
Read more