What is science? Commonly described as a methodology (observations, hypothesis, experimentation, verifiable and falsifiable results, peer review, and repeatability), you may also find vague notions of truth seeking, a way of understanding the natural world, and even a cataloguing of facts. Defining science can be as unsettling as defining art, in part because there are things we call science that others say are strictly not science. Economic or political science come to mind, or even technology born out of the application of scientific knowledge to a technical problem.
Although defining science can be challenging, science is commonly conceptualized as something abstract, not intuitive, and a product of reasoning intellect. This conception lies across the spectrum from the common conceptualization of art as a matter of the heart, of passion, of the sacred. I'm reminded of Thomas Dolby's "She Blinded me with Science," a song and video I first experienced as a twelve year old. Although Dolby referenced science and technology in much of his music, the combination of visuals and song in this most popular American release contains the essential conception of science as dissociated from our essential drives and matters of the heart (or body). It's silly, sure, but it also reflects and reasserts the binary conception in our popular culture that distances science from the arts.
Recently I was speaking with an arboretum colleague about the art work I am planning for at Cedar Creek Ecological Science Reserve. Like many at the arboretum, she is well-versed in several arenas of scientific knowledge, reads about the efforts of scientists, but when asked when the last time she read about art, the answer was, "not at all." I didn't find this at all surprising because, as in Dolby's video, affairs of the heart do not require study. It is often said of art that you know it when you see it or, like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder, but we don't get to choose the science we like.
With this binary as a backdrop, I contemplate how to integrate visual art with scientific research in my work here at Cedar Creek. Two practices come to mind. One is the photograph -the scientist at work, the microscopic image, the macro, the clear and close observation of study and the studied that the camera and lens make possible. These images are more often illustrative of scientific work or subjects and do not convincingly come off as art. The other practice is the graphical representation of data and the sometimes fantastic abstractions such data constructs. Although convention may dictate the parameters of data display, these constructions can take myriad forms that may find aesthetic overlap with the visual production of artists.
"Raymond was grappling with the
intellectual challenge of representing the complex and messy natural world -- many
details of which he knew all too well -- as a clean, abstract concept amendable to
further calculation, analysis and comparisons. His interpretation imposes a severe
symmetry and an almost artistic formality on
the ecosystem. Visually, it emphasizes
the essential unity and interdependence of the biotic and abiotic realms.
Others were writing
about the entire ecosystem and thinking about organizing different components into a
logical and coherent fashion, but Raymond was the first to provide a quantitative
accounting of all of these components in a single ecosystem, which allowed him to
search for pattern within them." - from Raymond Laurel Lindeman and the
Trophic Dynamic Viewpoint
by Robert W. Sterner, University of Minnesota
Related Posts
Previous: Orientation Next: The Land That Time Forgot
No comments:
Post a Comment
I do still post here from time to time, but do not check comments regularly...but please, comment!