Response to Eduardo Kac Readings
In the excerpts from Eduardo Kac’s book Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond, the subject of biotechnology and its overlapping with the art realm is introduced in (what I perceive as) an innovative manner that is breaking boundaries for modern artists. Kac begins his discussion with an assertion about “biopower” versus “biopolitics,” claiming that society controls individuals through ideology (“cognitively,” as he states) and through their actual bodies (“physically”). Through these perspectives, the idea of how biotechnology impacts individuals and social relations can be better addressed and interpreted. Kac delves deep into the theories and beliefs of multiple individuals in order to provide a wide range of viewpoints which support his assertions regarding biotechnology and art. First, La Mettrie was a pioneer for the idea that there were parallels to be drawn between living and nonliving entities. Sometimes criticized for his work because of his alleged lowering of the status of humans, contrarily La Mettrie actually “elevated the status of nonhumans” in order to draw comparisons and analogies. Saint-Hilaire supported that organisms are all ruled by a common organic law, while Edward Steichen was the first modern artist to create brand new organisms through traditional and artificial methods. Kac’s focus then shifts towards the notion of “bio art” which is claimed to manipulate processes of life at the genetic level.
In the second excerpt from Kac, the focus revolves around transgenic artwork, a type of art which finds itself bound between “humans, animals, and robots.” Transgenic art is described as being primarily based in genetic engineering in order to create new unique living organisms. Kac presents a few of his personal pieces of transgenic art as a case for analysis, such as the “Genesis” project, the “GFP Bunny,” and “The Eighth Day.” Of the three, I found the process of creating Genesis to be the most interesting; a quote from the Book of Genesis in The Bible was selected and translated into Morse Code; the Morse Code was then translated into DNA base pairs as determined by Kac’s personal method. However, when the DNA base pairs underwent the reverse process back into English, the translation was not exactly the same, lending itself to the idea that “new meanings emerge as we seek to change [the phrase].”
After reading Kac’s descriptions of bioart and transgenic art, I believe that this is probably the most original manifestation of artwork that I have ever been exposed to. As I continue in this class, I find my mind being further and further expanded into considering processes and forms of art that I would never have encountered otherwise. Although a bit heavy at times for someone unfamiliar with the complexities of biochemistry and genetics, I was intrigued by the process of taking essentially amino acids (or their representative form) and from that producing art. Referring back to Kac’s Genesis project, as he broke down a biblical quote into an utterly foundational form – the most basic form in which humans are constructed – and then reconstructed it, the result was an altered form of the verse which to me seems representative of the fact that sometimes our initial interpretations or opinions can always be changed due to a new vantage point. That’s essentially what artists try to convey – a new way of looking at something ordinary so that one’s mind can be expanded, influenced, and broadened. When thinking further about the concept of transgenic art, I am strongly reminded of locative art and how it also presents the viewer with an inventive way of viewing something. While locative art provides a sound experiential to the everyday visual process via GPS systems, transgenic art creates new organisms which allow people to realize relationships between themselves and “nonhumans.”
As a final thought, I found it interesting that new developments can be termed “monstrous” because people do not fully understand them. As Kac so poignantly put it, societies have used “monsters” to illustrate anxieties that reflect major cultural shifts. However, I find it relevant that while transgenic art is sometimes viewed as monstrous by humans, humans have their own inner monstrosities to face.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
- Does our morality or mortality fuel interests in/ oppositions towards biotechnology?
- Does the beginning of a new era in art (such as the emergence of bioart) inevitably lead to the termination of the previous era?
- Why is some transgenic art deemed “monstrous”?