Unit 4: Medicine, Technology & Art

I swear by Picasso and Duchamp and Khalo and Kandinsky and all the artists and pranksters, making them my witnesses, that I will not fulfill according to my ability and judgment to no oath nor covenant:

In this week’s readings and lectures, I noticed a commonality among many of the artists and their work in the intersection of medtech and art. The artworks we discussed often had a tangible intent to disgust or provoke viewers in an attempt to give weight to certain issues they wanted to address. Though provocation itself is a quite common strategy for artists working in any medium, it seems that the effect from those artists in the medtech field had enhanced punctum at their disposal. [1] The reason for this may be that by working with the medium of the human body and its viscera, their work resonated with the more visceral and primal emotions of their viewers. As an affect of this approach, many of these artists also secondarily dismantle the notion of traditional aesthetics and beauty while raising discussions regarding the morality of creating such works.

In Diane Gromala’s TEDx talk, she brought up her lifelong fascination with dead animals. Since she was 8 years old, she has taken photos of road kill. Fully self-aware of the affect such imagery has on viewers, she admits “I will not be showing these large” because it “... evokes a really intense visceral response”. [1] Though these photos can be quite disturbing to many viewers, this work was on the tamer end of the spectrum compared to some others we saw this week. 

Gromala's miniature roadkill image
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRdarMz--Pw>

Instead of using external bodies as a medium, Orlan uses her own body and has transformed it through multiple performance / surgeries. On the description of the Carnal Art (2001) Documentary video there is a preface in the description: “WARNING: CONTAINS ARTISTIC NUDITY AND SURGICAL PROCEDURES”. Not only in the imagery does the work attempt to provoke viewers, but also in the soundtrack. In the most intense moments of the surgical procedures, the volume and atonal quality of the sound increases. The composer also utilizies very harsh high pitched noises with seemingly random amplitude modulations (resembling the sound of primates in distress) which neuroscientists have likened to creating a sense of uneasiness in viewers. [3] The creators and hosts of this piece of work are quite firmly aware of the effect these carnal imageries and sounds have on human emotions. 

Orlan undergoing a surgical procedure
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no_66MGu0Oo>

Stelarc and Nina Sellars’ inaugural collaboration piece Blender involved both artists undergoing ”liposuction operations specifically for the purpose of this new work”. [4] They then used those “bio-materials” “...within BLENDER’s industrial casing, which was on exhibition at the Meat Market Gallery B in North Melbourne until August 18, 2005.”  In the description of the piece on Stelarc’s artist website, the description reads: that the piece is: “wryly anarchic:an (sic) audible, visceral display of “ontological” substance.” [5] Vegan or carnivores alike would not want a sip of this blended bio-smoothie.  

Stelarc and Sellars posing with their liposuctioned parts
<http://stelarc.org/dynimage/?id=267&w=472>

I began to wonder why and how this has become a powerful tool of these (medtech) artists while the medical field itself was quite tame in comparison. Then I remembered the Hypocratic Oath, and wondered if the lack of such a moral compass for the profession of artists was an underlying reason for this. [6] Artists do not have an oath they have to take, they have no guide for what is off limits in their work. It is up to the artists themselves to decide what is morally acceptable behavior. I think it is this freedom, and the responsibility stemming from this power that enables and empowers (medtech) artists to make this sort of work (often involving their own bodies), versus professional doctors that stay within the safe, defined boundaries of their oaths.

Works Cited 

[1] "Camera Lucida - Book". Wikipedia. Wikipedia, n.d. Web. <https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Camera_Lucida_(book)>
[2] "TEDx AmericanRiviera - Diane Gromala - Curative Powers of Wet, Raw Beauty". Youtube. YoutTube, n.d. Web. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRdarMz--Pw>
[3] "Orlan - Carnal Art Documentary". Youtube. YoutTube, n.d. Web. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no_66MGu0Oo>
[4] "Neuroscience of Game Audio". GDCVault. GDC, n.d. Web. <http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1022316/The-Neuroscience-of-Game>
[5] "Blender" NinaSellars. NinaSellars, n.d. Web. <http://www.ninasellars.com/?catID=8>
[6] "Blender" Stelarc. Stelarc, n.d. Web. <http://stelarc.org/?catID=20245>
[7] "The Hyppocratic Oath Today" PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/hippocratic-oath-today.html>

Unit 3: Robotics and Art

Art imitates Life, Life imitates Art :: Machine imitates Man, Man imitates Machine

Imitation as a feedback loop towards a convergence between biology and robotics.

In the materials for this weeks unit on Robotics + Art, the concept of imitation as inspiration and a driving force behind machine (and cultural) progress fascinated me. This most basic technique that humans unconsciously utilize as young children, imitation, was the main inspiration for both the physical forms (hardware) of the machines as well as the behavior patterns (software) behind many of the robots in the various Ted talks. However, I was reminded of cases where the reverse was true, in situations where humans imitate robots. From the “robot dance” to the persona's of the duo Daft Punk, we humans have imitated robots in popular culture for decades [1]. Much like the saying “Art imitates Life, Life imitates Art” [2] [3]. I believe the parallel still holds true: “Machine imitates Man, Man imitates Machine”.  I propose that it is through this cyclical process of imitation that humans and machines will ultimately converge to a singular point where the two become indifferentiable.

Daft Punk - Robotic Musical Duo
<http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Observer/Pix/pictures/2013/5/17/1368788110412/Daft-Punk-008.jpg>

Since the industrial revolution, both engineers and artists have created many machines in the likeness of living organisms. Dennis Hong’s RoMeLa lab creates robots such as DARwIn, STriDER and CLIMBeR whose motions have underlying ties to, or imitate, existing biological mechanisms. [4] Their robot STriDER mimics the mechanics of humans walking, using the flow of potential to kinetic energy in its smooth tri-pedal movement.

Much like the RoMeLa Lab, the Google owned Boston Dynamics also creates robots whose movements are inspired by animal anatomy. Their robots “Spot”, "Wildcat" and "BigDog" have bodies that resemble various 4 limbed animals like dogs, cheetahs and horses. Unfortunately for the robots, their quadpedal design gives them great balance so their creators are often seen trying to kick them over.  [5] Beyond mere form, many engineers have also found inspiration in the behavior patterns of humans. Hod Lipson’s robots have developed “self-awareness” through imitation, a basic learning mechanism of humans. Through imitation “like children”, these robots gained the ability to “learn, understand themselves and even self-replicate”. [6] All these engineers and artists created robots imitating aspects of nature.

However the imitation is not one way; we humans also imitate robots. Starting from the industrial revolution, when Professor Vesna pointed out that the integration of humans and machines comes from the second industrial revolution and the art that emerged from that era in response to the mechanization of labor in factories [7] . Later in the lecture, she highlights that the robot itself was originally a creation from theatre (1:54) which then inspired many films incorporating robotic characters.

By looking at both directions of influence, one can see that this process is actual quite cyclical. Each iteration of nature imitating machine, and machine mimicking nature in return renders the line between the two entities messier and messier. In the peculiar case of Hiroshi Ishiguro’s robotic self-portrait, the feedback loop is more immediate and the line blurring is much more drastic. Professor Ishiguro is well known for a certain robot creation, that is as much self-portrait as it is a twin, which he calls a geminoid. [8] After creating this robot as an exact replica of himself, he has had to “adjust himself to the robot which was created years ago”. His undergoing extensive plastic surgery mimics the permanence of non-biological creations.

Hiroshi Ishiguro and His Geminoid
<http://www.robotronica.qut.edu.au/images/hiroshi2.jpg>

I believe that in the future, after each iteration of this feedback loop, it will become increasingly difficult to tell the difference between man and machine, much like Professor Ishiguro and his Geminoid.

Works Cited 

[1] "Robot Dance."  YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_T81uUeZcM>.
[2] "Life Imitates Art" <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/life_imitates_art>.
[3] "Art Imitates Life"  <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/art_imitates_life>.

[4] Hong, Dennis. "Dennis Hong: My Seven Species of Robot" Ted. Ted, n.d. Web. <http://www.ted.com/talk/dennis_hong_my_seven_species_of_robot>.

[5] Boston Dynamics. "Boston Dynamics". <http://www.bostondynamics.com/>.

[6] Lipson, Hod."Hod Lipson Builds Self Aware Robots." Ted. Ted, n.d. Web. <http://www.ted.com/talks/hod_lipson_builds_self_aware_robots>.
[7] Vesna, Victoria. "Robotics Pt1" YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRw9_v6w0ew>.
[8] Vesna, Victoria. "Professor Machiko Kusahara on Japanese robotics" YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQZ_sy-mdEU>.

Unit 2: Mathematics + Art

Mathematical Aesthetic ≠ Artistic Aesthetic:

Beauty in Method

Much of this week’s examples for the intersection of Math and Art seems to be math influencing art, and not so much Art influencing Mathematics. This led me to analyze this disappointing one-way influence with greater scrutiny, as I have been trying to figure this grey area where they converge in non-trivial ways. Since mathematical beauty is fundamentally insulated from sensory aesthetic, experiencing work through mediums for the intersections of Art and Mathematics heavily favors artistic aesthetic.Though there are plenty of places that Mathematics has influenced the Arts, I was very excited to find the purest and most balanced connection the two fields have is in the process and not the medium of the final result. 

To start off where I noticed that only trivially does mathematics and art meet is in these middle places, often through a medium. The fact that these works have a medium can explain the preference for the strength of its artistic beauty over its mathematical beauty. In her video lecture “Math Intro” Professor Vesna says “A lot of people in the arts say they hate mathematics, but they’re actually using computers so you’re using mathematics whether you like it or not. And mathematics are pretty much driving our reality through computers. So the connection through Art and Science is through mathematics in Art. This is what’s bringing Art and Science together, it’s computers through Mathematics.” [2]  This interaction with Mathematics through a medium such as computers is a secondary, mediated interaction. Part of this inherently misses the point of Mathematics. Mathematics can be without medium and done completely in our minds. In contrast to Professor Vesna’s claim, I believe that one could use computers and be completely oblivious of mathematical reasoning. I don’t think using a machine that is built off a system such as mathematics makes you any more conscious of the underlying system as driving a car means you’re using petroleum chemical engineering, or living in a house means one is using the ideas of architecture.

Geometric Painting by Sol Lewitt
<https://schmellie.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/dscn82161.jpg>

Structural Sketch by Buckminster Fuller
<http://www.moma.org/collection_images/resized/655/w500h420/CRI_59655.jpg>

In the examples of “math art” brought up in the materials, most of the actual mathematics involved does not go very far beyond Geometry, Calculus and Real Number Algebras influencing the perspectives (as in Cubist Paintings [3] or for the premise of Flatland [4]), forms (as in the structures of Buckminster Fuller), and patterns (Sol Lewitt) we experience in the Arts. Though visually and conceptually quite impressive, of the many fields of mathematics, this is but a small sliver of a smaller subset of what the term Mathematics encompasses.

Connections Between the Various Fields of Mathematics
<http://i.stack.imgur.com/sL17t.png>

The most interesting intersection of rigorous Mathematics and compelling Art came from Dr. Daniel Snaith, better know as the mastermind behind the electronic music act Caribou. Snaith holds a PhD in number theory from Imperial College London as well as being a successful recording artist with over 6 full length album releases and multiple international tours. [5] Being highly involved in both advanced Mathematics and musical composition, he found the strongest connection between the process of solving mathematical problems and the process of creating music. “All of mathematics is a mental construction. The remarkable thing is that you start with something…and then you build this immense elaborate logical construction out of it in a way that is really creative.” [6]. In a separate interview he further expounds on these ideas of Mathematics being a highly creative activity: “You might assume that with his academic maths background, Dan’s own lecture topic would be something about the connection between maths and music, how the likes of Bach and Schoenberg utilised (sic.) numerical patterns in their composition. However, Dan’s not feeling it. “To me, that misses the point of maths and it misses the point of music. Pure mathematics at research level is not about sums; it flowers into this whole creative subject. If there’s any real similarity between maths and music, it’s that with both, you’re fumbling around and using your intuition to try to fit things together.” [7] The convoluted process of experimenting and trying to make disparate pieces fit together that exists in both advanced mathematics and art creation is a fascinating convergence point of the two seemingly disparate activities.

Most of the correlations between Mathematics and Art is often doing a disservice to the intrinsic beauty of the other, Art's beauty is primarily external through the senses, Mathematics beauty is internal in the mind. Mathematics and Art can not only converge through mediums such as paintings, sculptures, writings, music and other various nouns, but also as a verb, in the process as a performative action behind solving proofs and creating inspired work. 

Works Cited 

[1] "Math is All Around Us." <http://www.slideshare.net/mrsd8/math-is-all-around-us-8728078.>

[2] Vesna, Victoria. "Math Intro" YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHiL9iskUWM>.

[3] Henderson, Linda Dalrymple. "The Fourth dimension and Non-Euclidean Geometry in Modern Art: Conclusion". <Leonardo, Vol. 17, No. 3. (1984), pp. 205-210.> 

[4] Abbott, E. A. "Flatland." 1884. Web. 11 Apr. 2015. <http://www.ibiblio.org/eldritch/eaa/FL.HTM>.
[5] Buzzard, Kevin. "Notes by Me". <http://wwwf.imperial.ac.uk/~buzzard/maths/research/notes/>.

[6] "Decoding Caribou’s Divine Math". <http://www.wonderingsound.com/feature/caribou-our-love-interview-dan-snaith-merge/>.

[7] "Caribou's Dan Snaith finds the formula for success with Swim." <http://www.theguardian.com/music/2010/nov/20/caribou-swim-dan-snaith>. 

Unit 1: Two Cultures

2 -> 3 -> 1

Picture 1: Painting by Vasa Mihich showcasing the beauty of patterns
http://visualmelt.com/Vasa-Mihich

In my experience, much of the two culture paradigm has been instilled out of convenience and efficiency from the outside institution onto us individuals. Instead of spawning a third culture to serve as a liaison between the two culture discussed by C.P. Snow in his lecture at Cambridge “"The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution” and further expanded upon by Victoria Vesna in “Toward a Third Culture: Being In Between “, I believe that a paradigm shift towards a more holistic single entity would ultimately create a society with much less friction between the disparate ways of thought and may provide a creatively fertile environment to bloom a second intellectual Renaissance.

It wasn’t until time became scarce that I was forced to choose between Science or the Arts. As a child, science and the humanities were not so separate, as both drove our intuitive curiosity to understand our outside world.  Both were accessible enough to alchemically flow between writing, drawing, and hypothesizing further on our observations of nature. In our free time after AP testing, my high school math teachers had us use the ideas behind Pascals Triangle to create intriguing works of visual art.

Sacks Spiral: A variant of a method of visualizing the prime numbers
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sacks_Spiral_Divisors_100000.png

In Higher level education systems and large corporate structures (which now even physically resemble each as highlighted by Professor Vesna in her Lecture Part III of the ‘Two Cultures’ unit) there is a tangible pressure to distill our focus onto narrower and deeper pools of knowledge which I hypothesize stems from both having less time and higher expenses involved at such institutions. For employable advantage, we buy into this societal bias and many find themselves abandoning their previous interests in musical performance or ceramics for a highly specialized and ‘employable' skilled major in college.  As modular cogs in a larger production machine, we individuals are easier to replicate, replace and retrain from the perspective of the employer. As time is money, this ‘shortcut’ tends to lead to more of both with high consistency much like a "production line" (RSA video), stagnating innovation to a level of mere maintenance and that seems to be part of the issue.

I’ve been working full-time for the past year as a designer in a medium sized design studio. I was chosen to exhibit three software applications my studio has been working on at the worlds second largest game industry expo last month. I found myself frantically jumping two modes of thought, tapping into my programming knowledge (Mathematics / Economics B.S.) to talk to game developers or hardware engineers and my arts / design background (Design | Media Arts B.A.) to talk to game / concept artists and sound designers all for the sake of explaining the same app experience.

  

A large motivating force for us was to inspire people to invent novel experiences for a bleeding-edge technological device, the Project Tango tablet. However, with industry professionals that were too far into the art or too far into the tech, it was difficult to have meaningful conversations on where this tech could go and serve humanity, and much of my time was spent talking about our rendering workflow or how many frames per second such a device could churn (aka boring conversation). With the lay person, such as those visiting the event for mere entertainment, it was a pleasure to bounce both possible and impossible applications of such a device. I much preferred those conversations where the attendee was open to the holistic experience versus those so focused on one minute aspect of game development while blindly ignoring all other aspects of the experience that didn’t immediately pertain to their professional interests.

In that space, I was a representative of the ‘Third Culture’, and being a “privileged” mediator between the two extremes was not as creatively inspirational as when I was having conversations with those closer to the Third Culture. Much like Vesna, I believe that a Third Culture may be necessary to ease the friction between the two cultures, but I think long term sights should be on developing a unified culture that embraces both the Sciences and Humanities as one entity to ultimately progress humanity.