Rendering life: Transgressive affinities between bio art and generative art | Intellect Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Technoetic Arts
  4. Volume 18, Issue 2
  5. Article
Taboo–Transgression–Transcendence in Art & Science
  • ISSN: 1477-965X
  • E-ISSN: 1758-9533

Abstract

In this article, we trace the analogies, parallels and affinities between bio-inspired generative art and bio art practices with strong generative flavour. We look at the creative and expressive features in these two fields, compare their shared interests in the design and development of life, and discuss the strategies they apply to communicate and engage the audience. With respect to the existing literature, which relates bio and generative art primarily within a historical context, we compare these two fields focusing on generativity as their common poetic driver. We indicate their shared impetus for rendering distinctive visions of nature in order to identify, contemplate or provoke dramatic changes in the era when biological processes become programmable and living matter can be instrumentalized for various forms of labour. We also examine the epistemological and practical effectiveness of the two fields within a broader socio-technical perspective, which leads us to their constructive critique.

© 2020 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/tear_00040_1
2020-10-01
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Agapakis, Christina. ( 2020;), ‘ What happens when biology becomes technology. ’, TED Talks, June, https://www.ted.com/talks/christina_agapakis_what_happens_when_biology_becomes_technology. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Anker, Suzanne. ( 2014;), ‘ The beginnings and the ends of bio art. ’, ArtLink, 34:3, pp. 14–15.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Arns, Inke. ( 2004;), ‘ Read_me, run_me, execute_me. ’, Medien Kunst Netz, 15 February 2007, http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/themes/generative-tools/read_me/1/. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Ars Electronica ( 2016;), ‘ cellF / Guy Ben-Ary (AU). ’, Ars Electronica Flickr, https://www.flickr.com/photos/arselectronica/35954110800. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Ben-Ary, Guy. ( 2015;), ‘ cellF. ’, Guy Ben-Ary, http://guybenary.com/work/cellf. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Canton, Barry. ( 2014;), ‘ SynBio standards: BioBrick. ’, Web Archive, 27 March, https://web.archive.org/web/20140327234019/http://ocw.metu.edu.tr/pluginfile.php/4339/mod_resource/content/0/week3content.pdf. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Dewey-Hagborg, Heather. ( 2022), Stranger Visions, https://deweyhagborg.com/projects/stranger-visions. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Dixon, Steve. ( 2020), Cybernetic-Existentialism: Freedom, Systems, and Being-for-Others in Contemporary Arts and Performance, New York:: Routledge;, pp. 185–90.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Ginsberg, Alexandra Daisy. ( 2009;), ‘ E. chromi: Living colour from bacteria. ’, https://www.daisyginsberg.com/work/echromi-living-colour-from-bacteria. Accessed 10 January 2022.
  10. Grba, Dejan. ( 2015;), ‘ Get lucky: Cognitive aspects of generative art. ’, XVIII Generative Art Conference Proceedings, Fondazione Bevilacqua La Masa, Venice, 10 December, pp. 200–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Grba, Dejan. ( 2020;), ‘ Alpha version, delta signature: Cognitive aspects of artefactual creativity. ’, Journal of Science and Technology of the Arts, 12:3, pp. 74–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Hartmann, Celia. ( 2011;), ‘ Edward Steichen archive: Delphiniums blue (and white and pink, too). ’, Inside/Out a MoMA/MoMA PS1, 8 March, https://www.moma.org/explore/inside_out/2011/03/08/edward-steichen-archive-delphiniums-blue-and-white-and-pink-too. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Kac, Eduardo. ( 1998–99;), Genesis. , Eduardo Kac, http://www.ekac.org/bigbac.html. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Latham, William. ( 2015;), ‘ Evolutionary art and computers: TEDx Oxford. ’, YouTube, 3 August, https://youtu.be/MZGOr94468w. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Lister, Martin,, Dovey, Jon,, Giddings, Grant,, Seth, Iain, and Kelly, Kieran. ( 2009;), ‘ New media and new technologies. ’, in L. Martin,, D. Jon,, G. Grant,, S. Iain, and K. Kieran. (eds), New Media: A Critical Introduction, New York:: Routledge;, pp. 9–104.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Loi, Michele,, Viganò, Eleonora, and Plas van Der, Lonneke. ( 2020;), ‘ The societal and ethical relevance of computational creativity. ’, ResearchGate, 22 July, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343179320. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Lomas, Andy. ( 2014;), Cellular Forms. , https://andylomas.com/cellularFormImages.html. Accessed 10 January 2022.
  18. Lomas, Andy. ( 2014;), ‘ Cellular Forms: An artistic exploration of morphogenesis. ’, SIGGRAPH Studio, July, https://doi.org/10.1145/2619195.2656282. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Lu, Timothy K., and Purcell, Oliver. ( 2016;), ‘ Cells that compute come closer to reality. ’, Scientific American, 1 December, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cells-that-compute-come-closer-to-reality1/. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Manovich, Lev. ( 2003;), ‘ New media from Borges to HTML. ’, in N. Wardrip-Fruin, and N. Montfort. (eds), The New Media Reader, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;, pp. 13–25.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. McEveilley, Thomas. ( 1988;), ‘ Empyrrhical thinking (and why Kant can’t). ’, Artforum, XXVII:2, pp. 120–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Montfort, Nick,, Baudoin, Patsy,, Bell, John,, Bogost, Ian,, Douglass, Jeremy,, Marino, Mark C.,, Mateas, Michael,, Reas, Casey,, Sample, Mark, and Vawter, Noah. ( 2012), 10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)): GOTO 10, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Nake, Frieder. ( 1971;), ‘ There should be no computer-art. ’, Page, 18:October, pp. 1–2.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. North Carolina State University ( 2019;), ‘ Joe Davis + Dana Dal Bo. ’, Art’s Work in the Age of Biotechnology: Shaping Our Genetic Futures, https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/arts-work-in-biotech/artwork#joe-davis. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Oxman, Neri. ( 2015;), ‘ Templating design for biology and biology for design. ’, Architectural Design, 85:5, pp. 100–07.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Quinn, Marc. ( 2001;), ‘ Genomic Portrait: Sir John Sulston. ’, Marc Quinn, http://marcquinn.com/artworks/single/dna-portrait-of-sir-john-sulston. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Reichle, Ingeborg. ( 2009), Art in the Age of Technoscience: Genetic Engineering, Robotics, and Artificial Life in Contemporary Art, Vienna:: Springer;.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Rogers, Hannah Star. ( 2019;), ‘ What artists offer: Shaping our genetic futures. ’, in R. Hannah Star. (ed.), Art’s Work in the Age of Biotechnology: Shaping Our Genetic Futures, Raleigh, NC:: NC State University Libraries;, p. 30.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Snir, Ainit,, Nadel, Dani,, Groman-Yaroslavski, Iris,, Melamed, Yoel,, Sternberg, Marcelo,, Bar-Yosef, Ofer, and Weiss, Ehud. ( 2015;), ‘ The origin of cultivation and proto-weeds, long before neolithic farming. ’, PLoS ONE, 10:7, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131422. Accessed 10 January 2022.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Sommerer, Christa, and Mignonneau, Laurent. ( 1994;), A-Volve. , http://www.interface.ufg.ac.at/christa-laurent/WORKS/FRAMES/FrameSet.html. Accessed 10 January 2022.
  31. Sommerer, Christa, and Mignonneau, Laurent. ( 1999;), ‘ Art as a living system: Interactive computer artworks. ’, Leonardo, 32:3, pp. 165–73.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Stallabrass, Julian. ( 2006), Contemporary Art: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Stelarc ( 2022;), ‘ Ear on arm: Engineering internet organ. ’, http://stelarc.org/?catID=20242. Accessed 10 January 2022.
  34. Thompson, D’Arcy W.. ( 1942), On Growth and Form: The Complete Revised Edition, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Venter, J. Craig. ( 2014), Life at the Speed of Light: From the Double Helix to the Dawn of Digital Life, New York:: Viking;, pp. 51–64.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Wikipedia ( n.d.;), ‘ Girih. ’, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girih. Accessed 10 January 2022.
  37. Żmijewski, Artur. ( 2011;), ‘ Artists are just as capable of setting the same chain of events as politicians: Artur Żmijewski in conversation with Joanna Warsza. ’, Das Magazin der Kulturstiftung des Bundes, 18:Winter, p. 18.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Grba, Dejan, and Todorović, Vladimir. ( [2020] 2022;), ‘ Rendering life: Transgressive affinities between bio art and generative art. ’, Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research, 18:2&3, pp. 223–38, https://doi.org/10.1386/tear_00040_1
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/tear_00040_1
Loading
Rendering life: Transgressive affinities between bio art and generative art
Technoetic Arts 18, 223 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1386/tear_00040_1
/content/journals/10.1386/tear_00040_1
/content/journals/10.1386/tear_00040_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): bio art; biotechnology; evolution; generative art; genetics; nature

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error