Week 4: Medicine, Technology & Art

This week we covered the intersection of medicine, technology and art. The progression and evolution of the medical industry and specifically advances in technology made large impacts and changes in the field of art. Although not as obvious, art and science have a fairly similar foundational mission - to explore life's mysteries or things we don’t necessarily understand.

In her lecture this week, Professor Vesna discussed specifically the relationship between the human body and art. She started with a personal anecdote that when she was in art school she spent a good deal of time doing anatomical drawings which at the time she felt she was wasting her time but later in her studies she realized the immense benefit it was to have that deep knowledge of the human body. I am a design student now but came from a fine arts background - I agree completely that in the moment the hundreds of drawings of the human body seemed tedious and unnecessary but now my knowledge of proportion is strong because of that.

Professor Vesna started by looking back at the early art and the importance of human dissection and anatomical drawings for artists at the time. She touched specifically on the ancient Egyptians and Greeks process of body mummification. Moving to 1543, she used Andreas Visaleus’ “On the Human Anatomy” as an example of one of the first times an accurate physical body was used to represent treatment of disease. This was revolutionary for its’ time and the field as it centered medicine in concrete science instead of imagination.

With the evolution of technology came the dissemination of knowledge. Artists played a crucial role in the documentation of the scientific discoveries. This is a perfect example of the two fields working off one another to make a huge advancement for society that otherwise wouldn't be possible without the collaboration.

The Visible Human Projects used cross-sections of human body parts to visualize the human body. It was an example of how art helped the field of science take their advancements in science and put them into a system that was readable for the common society. This helped immensely with the spread of knowledge.

I particularly enjoyed Diane Gromala’s TED talk. She was an extremely engaging speaker and I found what she is studying to be very interesting. I didn't know much about chronic pain before this TED talk.

Being a Design Media Arts we are starting to dive into the Virtual Reality space and projects. I really enjoyed that she was bringing science and art into the VR world. I think Virtual Reality is meeting a gap in art where artists and designers want to use technology and art to create physical experiences that you wouldn't be able to experience otherwise. Additionally you can give someone a perspective that isn't their own in a way that they can fully experience it with all senses. Gromala touches on this in her talk when talking about the many more senses we have within our brains beyond the 5 external. I found it fascinating that she talked about VR being a clinically proven pain reliever. I had no idea it had that power.

I also liked the Peter Tyson’s The Hippocratic Oath article. I knew about the oath from TV shows and movie mainly but I never knew how directly it refers to art - “I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science.”

CITATIONS

Gromala, Diane. "Transforming Pain: Virtual Reality." Transforming Pain. N.p., n.d. Web. 2017. <http://www.confrontingpain.com/projects/vr/>.

Ingber, Donald E. "The Architecture of Life." Scientific American (1998): 48-57. Print.

Tyson, Peter. "The Hippocratic Oath Today." PBS. PBS, 27 Mar. 2001. Web. 26 Apr. 2017. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/hippocratic-oath-today.html>.

Vesna, Victoria. "Mathematics-pt1-ZeroPerspectiveGoldenMean.mov." UCLA. Online.

Vesna, Victoria. "Human Body & Medical Technologies, Part 2." N.p., n.d. Web. 2017. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psjnQarHOqQ>.

Week 3: Robotics & Art

This week we discussed the topic of Robotics & Art. We focused on industrialization's impact on mass production, “assembly lines” and robotics which make up a majority of our world today. I think these topics are extremely relevant in our lives today and it is interesting to see their strong roots in history.

I found it interesting how large of an impact the printing press had on mass production and dissemination of knowledge and further the progression of the computers and robotics. It was fascinating to see how much stemmed from and was influenced by the work of Michael Faraday - both scientifically and artistically. Examples being the work of Perry Hoberman (“Faraday’s Garden” and “Faraday’s Ghosts”) and Nikola Tesla.

I recently watched the movie The Imitation Game so it is nice to be reflecting back on Alan Turing's impact after learning more in lecture. I knew his invention (The Turing Machine) was vital in solving the Enigma during the war - however I did not necessarily connect it impact on the future of computers and robotics.

I enjoyed the discussion about new forms and the progression of art due to the impacts of industrialization and mechanisms - specifically replication. In Walter Benjamin’s “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” he argues that "even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be" - he is highlighting a large discussion that originality is destroyed by replication and criticizes the impacts of the industrial revolution on art. Example being that today an artist can make just as much if not more money from creating replicas of classics over their own original unique works.

I look at it as a kind of tradeoff. We are weighing one side of having great technological advancements that improve our capabilities for art while also saying we might lose some authenticity. One real life example of this is Virtual Reality - the ability to virtually attend almost any monument, event, concert, speech, etc. in the world with leaving the comfort of your bed. On one hand we are able to “experience” things and places we would otherwise never be able to do, while on the other hand you are sacrificing the “real experience” of going there.

Citi, Live Nation and NextVR announced a series of live virtual reality concerts which will transport fans via virtual reality technology into an immersive experience of the concerts.

http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/7525661/citi-live-nation-nextvr-launching-virtual-reality-concert-series

Looking at that from the perspective of robots, we could say that no matter how far they advance in function, they will never be a “real human”. Looking at this from a smaller view however, the implementation of pacemakers and mechanical limbs or ear pieces are examples of machinery mixing with biology. These implementations did not come easily as the public has a hard time accepting “robotics” with human function.

However, we can also argue that our cell phones are extensions of our bodies so, therefore, similar to an implant. We use our cell phones for everything in our daily life these days including our emotional lives such as finding a date.

https://www.cnet.com/news/how-google-is-becoming-an-extension-of-your-mind/

I think we must look at everything with two sides, while technology may be limiting us in some ways, it is also positively impacting our lives in vast ways we have never known before.

CITATIONS:

Benjamin, Walter, and J. A. Underwood. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. London: Penguin, 2008. Print.

Robotics + Art | Lecture. Perf. Victoria Vesna. UC Online, 2017. Film.

Vesna, Victoria. "Mathematics Pt. 1." YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. 2017.<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMmq5B1LKDg>.

Vesna, Victoria. "Robotics Pt. 1." YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. 2017.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRw9_v6w0ew>.

Event 1: Eco-Centric Art & Science: Prophesies and Predictions Symposium

I attended the Eco-Centric Art & Science: Prophesies and Predictions Symposium at the California NanoSystems Institute at UCLA. The symposium consisted of a series of speakers over a few hours. I was able to attend three talks: (1) the end of Charles Taylor - an evolutionary biologist, (2) Sophie Lampater, a curator at Swissnex, and (3) Olivia Osborne, a nano-toxicologist at UCLA.

I found Olivia Osborne’s talk to be the most engaging of the three so I will focus on hers for the majority of my blog post. I think Olivia’s talk was extremely relevant and tied to many of the themes and topics we have discussed in our course so far.

In her introduction for Olivia, Professor Vesna touched on her impression and connection to the bridging of the two fields of art and science. Olivia expanded on this throughout her talk in a few ways. I particularly liked her line when introducing herself: “You can’t just be one thing these days”. She started off by listing her science based achievements (PhD, etc.) but moved on to say that since moving to LA she has realized she is much more than just a scientist and push further to say that we all are much more than just one title. Much of her talk tied back to this multidisciplinary idea. I completely agree with her theory that the blending of fields and multidisciplinary projects are where the future of new and exciting knowledge lies.

I thought it was funny but also very useful when she described herself and her outlook as the phrase on the back of a Prius “Hybrid Synergy Drive” - saying that we need to be a hybrid among fields, we must have synergy at the same time, and we must always have drive to move forward.

One of her slides stood out to me in particular. I took a picture (attached) and as I looked around the auditorium, I saw a lot of other people taking pictures of it too so it must have struck a chord with many. It was the slide in which she highlighted the extreme importance and place for artistic engagement within science. In her talk she mentioned that starting with Research & Development and moving toward Dissemination of Knowledge - essentially the loop could just stop there and not continue. However this is the point when the implementation of Artistic Engagement & Knowledge progresses towards Planting the Seed & Sparking an Interesting in the people that in turn grows into Action and Makes the Mark which in turn funds more Research and Development - and so on the loop continues.

As a designer this really helped me visually the impact that I see everyday through Artistic Engagement. I have always wanted to make an impact with my art and designs and this is precisely the impact that can so easily change the world. Following this model and ideology can bring immense benefits to our society, environment and world.

I also liked that she sort of re-defined environment for us by bringing us back to core definition “the medium that surrounds us”. She went on to talk about some of her projects that follow a similar artistic engagement process including her series Cry Me a River California which highlighted the California drought through unconventional means.

I will also note that Sophie Lamparter talked about a project at the end of her talk that was very interesting to me. It was a project that they have just begun and does not even have a name yet. She mentioned the working title to be “Climate Garden”. It will consist of two green houses side by side - one will represent the environment today and one will represent the environment in 2058. I found this project extremely intriguing because it deals with experience which is often extremely powerful in impacting our minds and understanding of topics. She mentioned the project aims to “change how we think about climate” by making it something we experience rather than just hear or read about. The project will be available in Summer 2017 and I am excited to see how it will progress.

Overall, I really enjoyed the Eco-Centric Art & Science: Prophesies and Predictions Symposium and wished I could have attended more of the talks. Below is a photo of me at the Symposium (please excuse my appearance).

Week 1: Two Cultures

Hello, my name is Nina Romans. I am a third year student at UCLA in the Design Media Arts program. I have been interested in fine art since a young age. When coming to UCLA I transitioned towards digital design. As of now I am hoping to go into brand design and web design. I was born and raised in Silicon Valley. My interests include traveling, hiking and watching bad TV. I am an absolutely horrible cook so I am trying to improve my cooking skills.

This week's material focused on Charles Snow's idea of two cultures - the separation and division between art and science. His "Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution" highlights that the two groups isolate their knowledge from the other rather than communicating and collaborating - something which would greatly benefit both groups. This division is very present in our lives and societies today.

At UCLA, as Professor Vesna mentioned, the division can be clearly seen through the separation of north and south campus - the humanities vs the sciences. I found it interesting that Professor Vesna highlighted the difference in even the architecture of their buildings - something I had never noticed.

As a DESMA major I rarely venture far from north campus. When visitors ask for directions around south campus I can not help them in the slightest. I think this competition between the two sides of campus is extremely limiting to our education and growth. Snow discusses this and emphasis that we need knowledge that spans both the subjects, not just one. He admits that this is often difficult to find a balance between the two.

Within my design classes there is rarely ever overlap into the sciences while I think much of what we are learning needs support from the sciences. Growing up in Silicon Valley, there is a very evident emphasis put on engineering and working in tech. I remember having parents ask me what I was going to do with my art interest when I grew up and being genuinely confused why I continued art classes. It was always treated as a hobby instead of a potential career.

However I do see a recent bridging between the two cultures especially in regards to technology use in the arts and arts use in the sciences. Similarly, Professor Vesna discusses the emerging third culture of contemporary artists which is bridging the gap between the other two - humanities and the sciences. At UCLA, we can see this third culture in majors like Psychobiology - a very popular major here.

The divide between art and science and emphasis on science is very evident in our public school system. Art programs are often the first to be cut when schools encounter funding issues. This is despite the immense amount of research and evidence that art and music education at a young age have positive impacts on child development.

I am hoping to go in UI UX design and this is a field that needs the incorporation of both cultures to improve usability of products. Google identifies this fields as "the synthesis of design and development" on their job careers page.

Programs like STEAM are attempting to bridge this gap between the two cultures. STEAM is a campaign headed by the RISD design school which aims to encourage young students to look at both science, art and design as career paths.

CITATIONS

Snow, C. P., and Roman Smoluchowski. "The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution." Physics Today 14.9 (1961): 62.

"Google Careers." UX Engineer, Design. Google, 9 April 2017.

Vesna, Victoria. "Toward a Third Culture: Being In Between." Leonardo 34.2 (2001): 121-25.

"STEM to STEAM." STEM to STEAM. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2017.

Metla, Valeriya. "School Art Programs: Should They Be Saved?" Law Street (TM). N.p., 25 July 2016. Web. 09 Apr. 2017.