Monday, November 16, 2009

CHELSEA BRIGANTI---11/16/09 FEEDBACK








 
FEEDBACK FROM LEN:

_clarity-not just dialogue
_keep exploring an avenue via art [wider audience]
_'time does not stand still'- in regards to the heart
_my project must have a beginning and an end
_create the "end"--anticipate the future
_harness sound
_my project is experiential
_viewing science through another lens
_inject reaction-immediacy!!!!
_explore materials
_don't lose what stem cells can do for the public
_the heart is an example of the potential of stem cells
_show more data: how people are disconnected from the physical self.

THIS WEEK I'M SPEAKING WITH:

_Jamer Hunt [co-curator, design and the elastic mind]
_Mara Haseltine [merges science and art in scultpture]
_Nona Griffin [head of Eugene Lang Science Club]
_Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic [Columbia Tissue Engineer]

3 comments:

sl said...

Hi Chelsea, you have written a lot that I want to respond to, but before I forget, I want to discuss the quote that you used about science needing art and vice versa. That's not a forgone conclusion, in my mind. I would argue there is a very wide chasm between artists and scientists that is hard to bridge. In that same article you cited, I read,
"...the struggle for scientific truth is long and hard and never ending. If we want to get an answer to our deepest questions—the questions of who we are and what everything is—we will need to draw from both science and art, so that each completes the other."

In the best of worlds, that's true. But artists and scientists have chosen to see the world from very different angles, and thats makes finding common ground quite hard. I was invited to a conference on this subject. It was organized by
Felice Frankel
and they invited a lot of artists and scientists to do various discussions and other activities. At first, the scientists played along, but you could kind of tell they didn't really have any respect for the artists, and the artists were cynical and a little spiteful in response. It all came to a head in the big keynote speech where Susan Sontag was supposed to debate with Richard Dawkins or someone of that stature, but she basically said the whole thing was dumb and refused to participate. After that, it was really tense and awkward at the big party at the end of the conference.
Anyway, I am not trying to put a damper on your enthusiasm for bringing these two groups together, but you should have a very specific purpose (and it should be achieveable) otherwise these two notoriously self-involved groups will probably not play nicely with each other.
steven

sl said...

Wow, so I learned a new word: Pluripotency, which is "having more than one potential outcome." I find it annoying that the word is only applicable to cells, because I would like to use it for other things. Like, "given a refrigerator full of food, dinner takes on a pluripotential quality".

Anyway, I really enjoyed seeing the range of product ideas that you summoned up in your brainstorming session. Some of them are quite compelling and could become the basis of your thesis. I was especially taken with the idea of making plush toys and trinkets in the shape of organs.

I recently was hospitalized with acute pancreatitis, and afterwards I had a C-T scan of my gall bladder area. I got it on CD, and it was really fascinating. I couldn't stop looking at it, actually. It comes in a series of sectional views, and you can watch them play on screen as you move through your innards. the organs are really clear and 3d looking. they look exactly like the ones in a text book, and everything fits perfectly together. The various tubes and ducts looked just right, but also somewhat artificial, like flexible tubing that you would see in a car. That, as you can imagine, is somewhat disconcerting. It was odd to see all of that, because I never really stopped to think about what the inside of my body looks like, even though it is always on hand.

Sorry for that digression. Its just that I really like the idea of developing products in the shape of organs. the problem would be if it just becomes a kitschy fashion accessory.

The stem cell stained glass is kind of a one-liner, and I don't know how many you would be able to sell.
I kind of like the idea of a heart shaped alarm clock that ticks with the sound of the beating heart, and also pulses like a real heart. I once went to Vietnam and got tricked into going to a snake restaurant. They killed the snake right in front of me, removed the heart, dropped it into a shot glass full of snake blood, then tried to get me to drink it. the little heart was still beating. It was a really memorable lunch, as you can imagine.

Hope that was helpful...
steven

CHELSEA_BRIGANTI said...

Hi Steven,

The field of Artscience's most fundamental belief is the notion of interdisciplinary approaches to problem solving. Some of my design precedents support this idea--I also acknowledge that this is at once very exciting and challenging.[As evidenced by the collaboration that I am having with my scientist at Columbia right now] It has been a good exercise in communication. On a side note, the father of neuroscience, Santiago Ramon y Cajal could only communicate his research through these beautiful illustrations of the brain and neurons etc. he believed that one couldn't understand data unless it was visual...his drawings are incredible. I would like to reach a space where I am communicating visually--the 'pluripotency' of stem cell science. The heart is the only organ which doesn't regenerate itself---cardiovascular disease is public enemy #1 for all americans, but interestingly enough, women are more at risk. By using the heart as a case study, I am able to illustrate visually, the agency of stem cells' potential--and also as an agent of change. What do stem cells symbolize? I also want to convey this in my project---what do they mean for us? I love your story about your pancreas because it supports my hypothesis, which is: It is our lack of connection to our physical body, that prevents an understanding of stem cell science's potential to cure disease. I have done 2 surveys this week to support this and I'm very excited about the responses from people. For my thesis, I am focusing on a tangible object that will increase interaction with the heart, while focusing on stem cells as a potential therapy to treat this condition in women in the near future. Thanks again for the feedback!