Bio art meets the streets A reflection on new forms of art engagement
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Published
2013-11-07
David Rodrigues dos Santos
Abstract
Public art, despite is extension to the urban landscapes, has been a limited artistic practice in terms of critical discussion. In this sense, is has been used as an urban form for remodelling or, instead, as an ordinary form of expansion of the artists audience. However, public art can be understood as a social awareness practice creating the need to set up a broader critical discourse contributing to a greater democratization to the artistic practice. In this sense, there has been a growing number of visual artists who believe that art and the role of public entities isn’t just the creation of permanent art objects, but rather a way to facilitate the creation of artworks that encourage actions, ideas and the intervention of the audience, making the public artwork an object that calls to social responsibility. Bio art has tried to demonstrate, through its aesthetic discourse, the need to establish a broader public discussion. Thus, in this paper we will highlight the importance of an odd art public project of Natalie Jeremijenko – One Tree(s) (2000). Through the questions raised by this artwork, we will reflect on how the intersection between art and technoscience can contribute to a greater extension of the idea of hard humanities and on how a larger critical reflection can be exercise through and beyond the art world toward a field that involves in the same discourse art, science, society and the urban network.
How to Cite
Rodrigues dos Santos, David. 2013. “Bio Art Meets the Streets: A Reflection on New Forms of Art Engagement”. AusArt 1 (1-2). https://doi.org/10.1387/ausart.10383.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Keywords
BIO ART, PUBLIC ART, SOCIAL ART ENGAGEMENT, HARD HUMANITIES, SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
References
Brenson, Michael, Jane Jacob & Eva M. Olson. 1995. Culture in action: A public art program of sculpture Chicago. Curated by Mary Jane Jacob. Seattle WA: Bay
Catts, Oron et al. 2008. “Labs shut open: A biotech hands-on workshop for artists”. In Tactical biopolitics: Art, activism and technoscience, edited by Beatriz da Costa & Kavita Philip; with a foreword by Joseph Dumit, 143-15. Cambridge MA: MIT
Heiferman, Marvin & Carole Kismaric. 2002. Paradise now: Picturing the genetic revolution. Essays by Frank Moore, Ricki Lewis, and Bernard Possidente; edited by Ian Berry. Saratoga Springs, NY: Tang Teaching Museum
Jeremijenko, Natalie & Heath Bunting. 2007. Biotech Hobbyist Magazine. http://xdesign.ucsd.edu/biotechhobbyist
Kac, Eduardo, ed. 2007. Signs of life: Bio art and beyond. Cambridge MA: MIT
Kwon, Miwon. 2002. One place after another: Site-specific art and locational identity. Cambridge MA: MIT
Malina, Roger. 2009. “Intimate science and hard humanities”. Leonardo 42(3): 184
Raven, Arlene, ed. 1989. Art in the public interest. New York: Da Capo
Santos, David. 2013. “A ética que nos protege: A responsabilidade social da bioarte”. In Ética: Arte, ciência e filosofia, editors, Cáscia Frade Cristina Pape & Rejane Manhães, 11-30. Rio de Janeiro: EdUERJ
Stevens, Jaqueline. 2008. “Biotech patronage and the making of homo DNA”. En Tactical biopolitics: Art, activism, and technoscience, Beatriz da Costa & Kavita Philip eds., 43-61. Cambridge MA: MIT
Thomson, Nato, ed. 2012. Living as form: Socially engaged art from 1991-2011. Cambridge MA: MIT
Catts, Oron et al. 2008. “Labs shut open: A biotech hands-on workshop for artists”. In Tactical biopolitics: Art, activism and technoscience, edited by Beatriz da Costa & Kavita Philip; with a foreword by Joseph Dumit, 143-15. Cambridge MA: MIT
Heiferman, Marvin & Carole Kismaric. 2002. Paradise now: Picturing the genetic revolution. Essays by Frank Moore, Ricki Lewis, and Bernard Possidente; edited by Ian Berry. Saratoga Springs, NY: Tang Teaching Museum
Jeremijenko, Natalie & Heath Bunting. 2007. Biotech Hobbyist Magazine. http://xdesign.ucsd.edu/biotechhobbyist
Kac, Eduardo, ed. 2007. Signs of life: Bio art and beyond. Cambridge MA: MIT
Kwon, Miwon. 2002. One place after another: Site-specific art and locational identity. Cambridge MA: MIT
Malina, Roger. 2009. “Intimate science and hard humanities”. Leonardo 42(3): 184
Raven, Arlene, ed. 1989. Art in the public interest. New York: Da Capo
Santos, David. 2013. “A ética que nos protege: A responsabilidade social da bioarte”. In Ética: Arte, ciência e filosofia, editors, Cáscia Frade Cristina Pape & Rejane Manhães, 11-30. Rio de Janeiro: EdUERJ
Stevens, Jaqueline. 2008. “Biotech patronage and the making of homo DNA”. En Tactical biopolitics: Art, activism, and technoscience, Beatriz da Costa & Kavita Philip eds., 43-61. Cambridge MA: MIT
Thomson, Nato, ed. 2012. Living as form: Socially engaged art from 1991-2011. Cambridge MA: MIT
Section
Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0)
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
- for any purpose, even commercially.