We're All Living in the Estroworld

This morning I had the chance to virtually interact with Mary Maggic, a non-binary artist whose work can be regarded as groundbreaking. Specifically through an event called “We’re All Living in the Estroworld”, Mary Maggic introduced me to the interrelated topics of intersection of hormones, body and gender politics, and ecological alienation.

We're All Living in the Estroworld

Before this talk my stance towards these issues was remote and uninformed, thinking that, as an individual who has never struggled with his own sexuality, I was a simple spectator, a witness. This has now changed as I have understood how I am part of the alienated world Mary Maggic talks about. Part of their credo relies on the basis of a 3 step process they came up with, a process that allows us to grow and become better individuals “living in an increasingly queer world” (Mary Maggic [1]). Mary Maggic starts off wanting us to acknowledge the fact that, due to plastic pollution and high toxicity of the environment, we already live in an alien landscape. Plastic has become part of our nature as we ingest it and has reached cells of our bodies that have started a mutation process. Being conscious about this represents the first step of the process. The second step is called Semosis. As a consequence of the first step we already are alien. Mary Maggic, during this morning’s lecture pointed out how humans are in fact as malleable as plastic. The third and final step consists of the question about whether or not we want to become more alien. Mary Maggic wants us to embrace our own malleability in way that brings people together avoiding gender discrimination and inequalities. 

Mary Maggic during Zoom Event

Additionally, the artist’s interdisciplinary practice is one of socio-political excavation, “investigating the role of institutional science and biotechnology in the construction of somatic fictions and mass political imaginaries” (Mary Maggic [2]). Mary Maggic wants to escape our current patriarchal society by condemning and shedding light on modern practices of policing bodies. 

Drawing upon the concept of public amateurism and Critical Art Ensemble’s notion of “fuzzy biological sabotage,” Mary Maggic’s practice manifests through public participatory workshops and biohacking as critical sites of care, knowledge production and collaborative queerings of the status quo. Thanks to their research they were able to travel the world to further develop their ideas witnessing different realities. During this morning’s event I was particularly struck by a project Mary Maggic carried out in 2019 in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, called “River Gynecology”. After observing how the native population interacts with a dangerously polluted river, that at the same time functions as a fundamental resource citizens heavily rely on, the artist reflects on the polluted landscape of the river and the local population who lives densely and intimately in its watery embrace. “While water is the medium that connects us all, it is also the primary carrier of the industrial molecules, simultaneously queering both the river and the bodies of its inhabitants” (Mary Maggic [2]). 

This made me reflect on how people live in the polluted environment as if the latter was a part of their bodies. The toxicity of the landscape does not matter when you are emotionally connected to it. As a result 

you become polluted yourself.

Bailey's Butch Queens Up in Pumps

Finally, this morning’s lecture reminded of another author/artist, Marlon Bailey. Bailey, just like Mary Maggic, investigates intersectionality, in other words the overlapping forms of oppression concerning gender discrimination. Bailey in his book Butch Queens Up in Pumps, tells us about the Black Queer Spaces in a way similar to Mary Maggic’s: people create alternative worlds through ritualized practices to escape the toxicity of our patriarchal society. 

Citations: 

[1] Mary Maggic, We’re All Living in the Estroworld, Virtual Event, 04/22/2022.

[2] Mary Maggic. https://maggic.ooo/About

Bailey, Marlon. Butch Queens Up in Pumps, University of Michigan Press, 2013. 

 

Email Confirmation

MedTech + Arts

It is fascinating to observe the parabola of the dichotomy between arts and sciences through the lenses of medicine. How technologies were introduced in hospitals only relatively recently, at the beginning of the 20th century, because of the notion of medicine regarded as an art capable of successfully being carried out exclusively by hand. Technology was seen as a hindrance that would get in the way of doctors’ “supreme” and “artistic” abilities (Vesna). Fast forward a hundred years, technology is now the medium through which art is expressed in medicine.

Depiction of Past Medical Dissection

Modern examples include the not so modern plastic surgery. Although, the latter has been around for more than 4,000 years, the wars of the previous century made plastic surgery necessary. Today, as we adopt plastic surgery almost playfully, many artists have decided to implement these practices in their artworks, trying to engage in a debate about beauty standards and ageing. French Artist Orlan, for instance, through what she defines as “carnal art”, questions the social phenomena of our time talking about how much we truly are in control of how we look.

                        Orlan while performing

Additionally, the modern connotation and domain of medicine is purely scientific. As a result scientific and technological discourse go hand in hand.

The fast-changing technology-based relationship between arts and sciences is therefore inevitable. Peter Tyson, in his article “The Hippocratic Oath Today”, conveys precisely this idea through the example of the, once binding now increasingly less so, Hippocratic Oath. The latter, through the years, has been adapted to modern needs, making many purists turn up their noses. The reality is that the Oath “is inadequate to address the realities of a medical world that has witnessed huge scientific, economic, political, and social changes” (Tyson).

Finally, this week’s topic has allowed me to further learn about the intrinsic influence of science in many artistic fields. Firstly, Ingber’s “The Architecture of Life” guided me through the concept of Tensegrity: the architectural system in which structures stabilize themselves by balancing the counteracting forces of compression and tension, giving shape and strength to both natural (our cells) and artificial forms (building and sculptures). Lastly, my compatriot, Silvia Casini, put me into a different perspective mentioning how the useful resource of Magnetic Resonance Imaging is truthfully so much more, as she defines it as technology that “has a look in the same way that the portrait has— that is, it has the capacity of being performative, thus resisting its being regarded as a transparent window onto the self” (Casini 73). 

Buckminster Fuller holds a Tensegrity Sphere

Citations: 

Vesna, Victoria. Lecture Videos Week 4. Canvas, 2022.

Orlan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlan - http://www.orlan.eu

Tyson, Peter. “Hippocratic Oath Today”. Nova, 2016. 

Ingber, Donald. “The Architecture of Life”. Scientific American Inc., 1998, page 49. 

Casini, Silvia. “Magnetic Resonance Image (MRI) as Mirror and Portrait: MRI Configurations between Science and the Arts”. John Hopkins University Press and the Society for Literature and Science, Configurations, 2011, page 73.

Robotics + Arts

The undeniable truth concerning the relationship between robotics and art lies in the notion that technology, for better or worse, has changed our reactions toward arts. Therefore, in order to truly appreciate the merging of these two radically different but intrinsically connected domains we must think of technologies not simply as inventions which people employ to carry out artistic discourse, but also as the means by which society is reinvented” (Vesna). In other words, specifically Marshall McLuhan’s, “the medium is the message”, technology itself is the message, the art (7). 

Marshall McLuhan - "The Medium is the Message"

Walter Benjamin, in his paper “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”, displays both sides of the coin, how technology can be considered as both, a threat to the authenticity and uniqueness of works of art, and an instrument through which society can absorb and be absorbed by art. 

While I initially disagreed with Benjamin’s idea that mechanical reproduction does not benefit the art being reproduced, because I believe that imitation is a form of flattery that could potentially add value to the original piece, I really enjoyed his insights in the explanation of the evolution of art, from being distant from reality to penetrating it. This transition is embodied in the dichotomy between paintings and films, between painters and cameramen. “The painter maintains in his work a natural distance from reality, while the cameraman penetrates deeply into its web” (Benjamin 3 - XI). 

Walter Benjamin

Additionally, I found Benjamin’s thesis mirrored in the artwork of the artist Gijs van Bon, particularly in his Drop of Light. This installation, originated in 2013, occupies a unique space spanning sculpture, animation, art, technology and mathematics. “In a darkened room, a succession of droplets falls from an array of nozzles six meters above. Spattering noises accompany the first flashes of light in mid-air as UV lasers hit the streams of liquid” (van Bon).

In conclusion, Van Bon’s work illustrates that robotics and arts, maths and magic, are never far removed, au contraire their relationship is destined to become increasingly closer, as Walter Benjamin said: “for contemporary man the representation of reality through and by technology is incomparably more significant than that of the painter, since it offers, precisely because of the thoroughgoing permeation of reality with mechanical equipment, an aspect of reality which is free of all equipment” (3 - XI). 

Pietro Grassi. 

Gijs van Bon's Drop of Light

Citations: 

McLuhan, Marshall Herbert. Understanding the Media. The Extensions of Men. McGraw-Hill,(1964), page 7. 

Benjamin, Walter. The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. 2021.

Vesna, Victoria. Lecture Video 3. Canvas, 2022. 

van Bon, Gijs. http://www.gijsvanbon.nl/drop-of-light.html

Glow Eindhoven. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=drop+of+light+van+bon

Mathematics + Arts

The notion of mathematics and geometry being somehow inextricably interconnected with the world of arts was always clear to me. What I was omitting was the magnitude of the contribution of the latter. 

The new frontiers of arts are being accomplished through mathematics and geometry, which ultimately allow us to bridge the gap between the Two Cultures we mentioned last week.

This week’s lectures guided me through the myriad of applications of math to the artistic domain. Perspective, Golden Ratio, Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry are only some of the elements that have been key to the artistic production throughout history. 
Specifically the Golden Ratio represents the peak of the relationship between mathematics and arts. This approximate proportion of 1 : 1.618, is widespread in nature in an aesthetic appealing way that has induced artists and architects to take it into account in their creations. 

Piero della Francesca implemented the Golden Ratio in his masterpiece "Pala di Brera (Brera Madonna)"

Although the mathematical approach to art is indeed relevant, it’s not the only route of the craft. Creativity persists as the original value within which artistic discourse is being carried out. While mathematics and geometry per se do not leave much room for creativity, the application of them, which varies in complexity and size, needs creativity at its finest. 

Linda Henderson’s article not only shone light on the increasingly close juxtaposition between math and arts, but it also helped me tracing the origin of my thesis back to my own personal experience. Having been lucky enough to grow up in an artistic-prone environment, with my grandfather being an art critic, I have always been able to have a closer look to the artistic process behind many artists’ crafts, Valentino Vago being one of them. I was reminded of his works by this week's topic.

Valentino Vago's "A Roberto" and "Senza Titolo" 

Through the study of light and geometrical shapes he always sought to “challenge long-standing ‘truths’ about art" (Henderson 205). Although Vago didn’t even get close to the study of the Fourth Dimension mentioned in Henderson’s article, he still embodies the archetype of the fusion of mathematics and geometry and arts. Embracing the idea that a new understanding of geometry and mathematics led to the birth of abstract art, Vago started successfully implementing calculations and studies of perspective in his own works. 

Lastly, nothing encapsulates this week’s topic better than Linda Henderson’s quote that “mathematics and geometries must be regarded as something deliciously subversive in the arts”, and therefore necessary (205).

Pietro Grassi.

Citations: 

Vesna, Victoria. Lecture Video. Canvas, 2022.

Henderson, Linda Dalrymple. "The Fourth Dimension and Non-Euclidean Geometry in Modern Art: Conclusion." The MIT Press, Leonardo: Vol. 17, No.3. (1984): 205-210.

Golden Ratio: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2009/dec/28/golden-ratio-leonardo-da-vinci

Piero della Francesca's Pala di  Brera: https://arsartisticadventureofmankind.wordpress.com/tag/piero-della-francescas-pala-brera/

Archivio Valentino Vago, https://www.archiviovalentinovago.it/it/

 

The Two Cultures

Hello class, my name is Pietro.

One of the reasons why you'll be reading my blogs in the upcoming weeks, is because, as David Bohm proclaims, I believe that “the creative possibilities of my mind are generally still dormant” (137). So far I have been passive with regards to the discussion of the two cultures. Using my experience at UCLA as a study case, I have not been able to build a bridge to fill the gap between science and arts. To me these disciplines represent endless possibilities I can’t quite grasp yet, and this partially explains my uncertainty in declaring a major. 
I do believe, though, in the benefits that could be produced by merging arts and sciences, by merging the “intuitive wild aspect of artistic practice and the rationality of the scientific method” (Vesna, 122). As Charles Percy Snow highlights in his 1959 lecture, the separation of humanities and sciences leads many capable minds to ignore science as a vocation and prevents society from solving the world’s main issue: the wealth gap, caused by industrialization which threatens global stability. 

Stephen Wilson, came to my rescue and helped me dig deeper into this topic. Mainly I found myself to agree with his thesis that artists’ most powerful response is to become scientists themselves, opening up enormous opportunities for the domain of the arts. Wilson also points out how this is not a 2-way street, meaning that “while there are some notable exceptions of artists influencing technological research, there is much more influence going the other way” (4). Scientists and technologists don’t believe that artists “have much to tell them about their business” (4). This reminded me of John Brockman’s counterpoint to Snow’s optimistic view of the two cultures becoming inextricably connected, according to which there is no need for trying to establish communication between scientists and literary intellectuals, whom he calls middlemen, because “scientists are communicating directly to the general public”, implicitly omitting artists’ contributions (2). 

Citations: 

Bohm, David. "On Creativity." Leonardo, 1.2 (1968):137-149.

Vesna, Victoria. "Toward a Third Culture: Being in between." Leonardo 34.2 (2001): 121-125.

Wilson, Stephen. "Myths and Confusions in Thinking about Art/Science/Technology." College Art Association Meetings, 2000, New York City.

Snow, Charles Percy. The Two Cultures and The Scientific Revolution. Vol 960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959. 

Graham-Rowe, Duncan. "Matchmaking with science and art." Wired, 2011, UK.

  

Apple Inc. When sciences and arts meet.  

Pietro Grassi.