Discussions

Fully integrating Arts in the S&T research and innovation agenda: the role of imagining and making in the creation of knowledge for innovation.

Cristina Mirand...

7 March 2016 - updated 4 years ago
18 comments
Total votes: 4

Your experience

What would you like to share? "FET Proactive initiatives aim to mobilise interdisciplinary communities around promising long-term technological visions. They aim to build up the necessary base of knowledge and know-how for kick-starting a future technology line that will benefit Europe's future industries and citizens in the decades to come." In order to do so I consider essential the full inclusion of ART in the R&D&I agenda. However, ART has always had different kinds of difficulties to be fully included. Among other reasons, there is a lack of proper calls, lack of proper evaluation panels, low levels of social awareness regarding its contribution, stereotyped attitudes on the part of other disciplines, inter-disciplinary dialogue barriers, etc.

Your ideas

How would you improve your experience? I call your attention to this innitiative in the MIT that includes ART in research labs, creating interdisciplinary communities around groundbreaking research problems. link http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/06/arts/design/at-mit-science-embraces-a-...

Tags:

Comments

aleksander valjamae,

30/04/2016 23:17

Just a quick note. Residencies at H2020 projects for artists is a great start, but I think that young researchers and, especially, PhD students should also get a possibility to receive funding to work on short-term art related projects.

Aleksander Valjamae, Assoc. Prof.,
HCI@TLU group, Tallinn University,
Tallinn, Estonia

Mike Phillips,

30/04/2016 17:06

Whilst STEM subjects casually justify investment through the demonstration of metrics generated by empirical tools derived from social and economic impact (in the UK these are endorsed by the Treasury Green Book – the official guide to cost-benefit analysis), the culture sector struggles to reveal a meaningful comparative impact.

Increasingly the culture sector is expanding its remit to look at other ways of measuring cultural value. Metrics that are meaningful to both the sector and its audiences. This includes mechanisms which go beyond foot fall and facebook likes to embrace impact on mood, emotion and also predictive techniques to look at long term influence and impact chains.

Modern integrative, sub-symbolic, computational techniques (Artificial Neural Networks, Self Organising Maps and Deep Learning Networks) are able to innovatively integrate subjective and objective data, consider its temporal and predictive aspects, variety and quality and correlations. This would require a shift in the use of artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) use for the complex analysis of economic data, to interpret and analyse cultural and social data.

Such modern analytical models, based on integrative, sub - symbolic, computational techniques, offer great potential for the arts and culture sector to better understand and utilise qualitative and quantitative data. ANNs offer new analytical and predictive methods and tools which could assist in improving the design and production of new work as well as supporting a more traditional focus on the evaluation of impact.
These mechanisms would also enable and articulation of cultural behaviour within the sciences. Rather than post rationalising methodologies they would enable an exploration the use of intuition, insight, personal psychological states and playful behaviour amongst allegedly rational teams. The ambition would be to devise playful methodologies to intersect the arts, humanities and sciences.

Current inter/transdisciplinarity discussion emphasises boundaries, frictions and transformations. This agenda would develop and exploit a playful methodology, to help break down artificial disciplinary barriers. One can think of Darwin playing the bassoon to earth worms and Crick and Watson’s disruptive dark/playful behaviour, etc. The aim would be to enrich outcomes and impact via creative methodologies.

Pavel Smetana,

30/04/2016 11:06

Science and art are and were always interconnected. Both are a means of exploration. Both engage ideas, concepts, and hypotheses that are tested in places where intellect, intuition and hand come together—the laboratory and studio. Artists, as well as scientists, study—materials, people, culture, philosophy, history, religion, mythology...and this is very important - as alchemists in the time of king Rodolphe II were seeking for the "transmutation" (changing ordinary metal into the gold)- they are transforming "ordinary" idea and all information into something else.
In ancient Greece, the word for art was “techne”, from which technique and technology are derived—terms that are appropriately applied to both scientific and artistic practices.

Leonardo da Vinci, engineer, scientist, sculptor, designer and painter of the High Renaissance, is best known as an artist whose works were fully mixed with scientific research. Leonardo observed the world meticulously, studying physiology and anatomy in order to create convincing images of the human form….

For Albert Einstein, vision did not arise from logic or mathematics. It came, as it does for artists, from intuition and inspiration. As he told one friend, "When I examine myself and my methods of thought, I come close to the conclusion that the gift of imagination has meant more to me than any talent for absorbing absolute knowledge." Elaborating, he added, "All great achievements of science must start from intuitive knowledge. I believe in intuition and inspiration.... At times I feel certain I am right while not knowing the reason." Thus, his famous statement that, for creative work in science, "Imagination is more important than knowledge".

The connection of art and science start be very important these days, for many reason. one of them is that art can help us relate to and understand science. In a culture saturated with the fruits and poisons of science, we often struggle to understand its meaning for us. This problem is compounded by the fact that we are often told that science and technology are empty of meaning ... but few would argue that art is devoid of meaning.

A synergetic relationship between the arts and sciences and their interdependencies are evolving in Europe today, putting our society at the forefront of new research and creative thinking in both fields. Both areas acting as a way of opening doors to the other – artists in labs embedded in scientific research and responding to it, and scientists in galleries working with arts practices, where audiences can learn and experience things in hands on ways.

jurij krpan,

29/04/2016 19:54

This is my curator insight working in the field of contemporary investigative arts for twenty years.

What is extremely important to underline here is that we are not talking about traditional visual, theatre, music but rather about artist that are using their visual inteligence, performative experiences and sound investigations to thematize contemporary society saturated with technologies. This society is completely different than fifteen, twenty years ago when traditional art production could be still fascinated with emerging digital technologies. The artists we have in mind today are artists that are working in collaboration with scientists and engineers who are equaly contribuiting.

Contemporary themes imply contemporary materials and techniques. Instead of traditional painting and sculpting materials in their projects, artists adopts the tools and protocols employed by science and technology. Computers,
electronics, navigation systems, software, analogue and electronic telecommunications, information systems, biotechnologies and so on are now available to almost anybody. The use of these materials by artists is legitimate; they deal with themes of scientific paradigms and their applied aspects that are shaping our society today by
using the means of expression that arise out of these paradigms. In such forms of artistic expression we rarely come across a painter’s canvas or a sculptor’s materials. Instead, it is common for complex installations and systems to be used incorporating viewer participation and running from a few seconds to a few years. We rarely encounter decorative scenography or descriptive accounts of vistas. Instead, inductive processing of the theatrical environment and events outside the context of theatre buildings are common. Traditional music instruments are treated as
equal to soundproof rooms, sophisticated audio-electronics, robotic instruments and computer programs.
Given that such art projects use elements that we could easily encounter in scientific laboratories or in mechatronical workshops, uninformed visitors to exhibitions displaying these projects often offer critical commentary. They reproach artists for supposedly competing with scientists and engineers, claiming that since the latter inevitably do it better, their work is doomed to failure. To be clear: what artists do is art and what scientist do is science and what engineers are doing is engineering. But if they are collaborating, what they do culd be better!

It is again and again that sceptics are pushing artist into the domain of design and embelishment of the scientific discoveries and engineerd products, by not beeing aware the diference between art and design. Having in mind industrial designers who are involved in the proces of creation in order to provide good interface design, user experience and aesthetical apeal of the product, artist should be considered in the creative team as those who think and aproach to the making differently. They are mind shifters who are engaging us to see things diferently. Moreover, with mind bending insights, they do not provide answers (as designers do) they pose in front of us questions that were never asked before. It is there where the condition for the creativity and innovation for the whole team (scientist, enginers and enterpreneurs) begins.

Eurico Neves,

29/04/2016 14:10

While it is clear that a fresh, new approach to the integration of arts with S&T is needed, it is important not to reinvent the wheel and build on practices, mechanisms and on the artistic vision of experienced organisations. which will make it possible to achieve tangible, quantifiable results within a reasonable amount of time. The Art-Innovation Forum, announced by Centre Pompidou’s and their model of R&D&I in sound and music technologies driven by creation in performing arts are good examples. On the other side, you need to bring in professional innovation players to the process.

Salvatore Iaconesi,

28/04/2016 19:31

Excellent. And, if I may, I would like to add a point of view which may be useful and of some interest.

One of the most problematic issues in interweaving sciences, technologies and the arts in "institutional" context is the difficulty of finding roles and spaces for transgression.

Transgression is a space for opportunity which requires different measures and strategies to be quantified. It does not often refer to wide communities. It explores gray areas of society, law, science, tehnology. And for this it is able to achieve radical innovation.

Using Elizabeth Grosz's expression of "spatial excess", a new dimension is needed to take advantage of this opportunity, one which is able to go beyond preconceptions, prejudices and worries about utility, “beyond the relevance for the present, looking towards the future.” The revelation and discovery of this excess depends on the possibility for transgression. Excess is in the “problematic”, which is full of potential. Transgressors don’t cross borders, they move them: by moving them they innovate.

Third Spaces are areas which are full of potential in this sense: the informal, the emergent. Here transgressions force limits, boundaries and norms to recognise themselves, requiring them to deal with their imminent disappearance and, thus, laying out the basis for innovation. This happens by transgressing and continuously re-programming spaces, times and processes: it is through this indisciplined action that the system changes and radical innovation is created. Anthropologist Massimo Canevacci Ribeiro calls this approach: methodological indiscipline.

To take advantage of these innovations new methods are needed. Different types of calls. Different parameters to evaluate the proposals, using different skills and approaches. Different metrics to evaluate impacts. Different forms of eligible organizations, associations, consortiums, with different forms of partnerships. Broader, more complex visions about what is useful or desirable. And different aesthetics.

In the reassembly and radical transformation of industry, of what "industry" will mean in the upcoming years, a reflection on these topics is of fundamental value.

Everything points in this direction: from the rise of DIY, to the 4th revolution, to making, the transformation of labour, to the emergence of cognitive work and of the creative economy, and of the sharing economy, and of platforms and platforms cooperativism, from smart cities to smart communities, from smart grids to the what is distributed, peer-to-peer, disseminated.

A role for transgression.

Nothing like this has happened anywhere in the world yet. Not at MIT, not in China.

This could be a reflection which could turn out to be extremely useful for FET initiatives, in which these Third Spaces (and the dynamic, transgressive, radically innovative ecosystems which come with them) could become the spaces for the emergence of breakthough innovation. All evidence leads to that.

Currently, the Arts are the most usable link with this transgression, and one which also bears the benefits of interconnecting the highest sciences with the diffused society and with everything which sits in between, creating not only innovation, but – also and most importantly – meaning and purpose.

28/04/2016 19:44

From this point of view I would also like to point out a project which started as mine, but which has now evolved into action which is happening in 4 continents: La Cura (http://www.la-cura.it/). It started as a transgression on the figure of the patient when I was diagnosed with a brain cancer, and then was transformed into a participatory, open, performance of openness, in which the arts played the role of interconnector between sciences, technology, networks and society: by suggesting that everyone could participate to the cure for cancer, using the re-appropriation of medical data as a metaphor for reclaiming the role of the human being into the process curing, a wide participatory artistic process started, which has generated scientific and humanistic research, new proposals for laws, hundreds of artworks, dozens of innovative products and services, literacy on data, technologies and networks, communities coming together to confront with health in new, collaborative ways. Now it has turned into an education process which uses this pattern of transgression to bring about radical innovation processes to schools across Italy (and soon in other countries) on the topics of health, energy, agricolture, education.
Just one example (one which I am confident in mentioning because it is so close to me, so much that I am able to guarantee its effectiveness, and to provide information and documentation to whomever is interested) of one of the possible ways in which to proceed.

lucas evers,

28/04/2016 16:15

Like the MIT initiative there are also European initiatives, one even happening within the FET programme: FEAT - Future Emerging Art and Technology, where artists such as Pinar Yoldas, Anna Dumitriu, Semiconductor, Boredom Research Spela Petric & Miha Tsursic, Evelina Domnitch & Dmitry Gelfand are working with synthetic diamonds research, quantum physics, quantum and super computing, synthetic biology and gene regulation and culturing sub marine swarm robotics. www.featart.eu

There are more initiatives such as the works selected by the Prix Ars Electronica, last year awarding the Japanese Art Satellite, the Bio Art & Design Award, where artists such as Charlotte Jarvis have been working with stem cells and IPSC at the Hubrecht Institute and Collide@Cern working with fantastic artists such as Julius von Bismark. And there are more individual cases where artists and scientist intensely work together.

All together however these are relatively small initiatives that need more attention and support, as both science and the arts can learn form it, not only over and over asking what is possible, but also what is meaningful.

Stephanie MATT,

07/03/2016 10:29

Thank you Cristina. A similar initiative was launched by the FET programme via a call for artists (closed on 31 January 2016). The aim is to bring together artists and FET projects using best practice methods to create high-impact collaborative outcomes including the production of new artworks, major exhibitions, media campaigns, and socially engaged events including festivals, debates and participatory workshops.

Six leading international artists will be hosted within FET projects through fully funded embedded residencies. Through in-depth collaborations with researchers and reflecting on the projects, the artists will explore, engage and communicate these new areas of research to reach the widest possible audiences, opening up societal discussions, raising awareness and enhancing take-up of radically new technologies.

See http://featart.eu/

Cristina Mirand...,

07/03/2016 11:22

Thank you Stephanie,
I am looking forward to the outcome of this excellent call. However, I see that from my experience research in ART has not yet a proper place in EU Research, a place in which ART is the main field, with its specific ways of knowing, and producing knowledge and experience. I always get a sensation that ART is put in a secondary role in the panorama, many times as a science illustrator, or in other situations as a disseminator of science, a bridge between science and big audiences to bring scientific achievements closer to society, what is good (no criticism here) but not enough considering it from the point of view of art main aims. BW Cristina

Paul Kidd,

21/03/2016 12:40

Christina - I think you will grow old before most people from the very European world of STEM start to see what art can do. They will, in general, not see or understand the things that you have highlighted in your comments, nor much value them, but will just point to things like the FEATART project and STARTS and say - we are already doing what you want. Image making is all, both literally and metaphorically! Look closely under the stone and mostly what you will see are communicationists, visualisationists, and now also creationists. You will also see a lot of people singing and dancing to the paymasters tune. But the story is not over yet, for those that to this limited creed do make their mark, do not the future embrace, but provide to those who will make the future, the lessons about what not to do with art, if making the future is what you want to do.

21/03/2016 13:06

Thank you Paul for your comments. So, I will need a long life and remember water dissolve stones, and time is a support for the process. Best regards.

Irene Ingardi,

27/04/2016 12:27

STARTS is about the integration of artistic practices as ways to produce new knowledge, similarly to what happens in scientific or engineering practices. This is a key pillar of the initiative, lots of stepping stones are on the way. No doubt about it. The recognition by the Commission of artworks and exhibitions to be valid research results would be a fundamental step to take in this direction.
STOA provides the Assessment of Scientific and Technological Policy Options for the European Parliament. It launched a study with a final report delivered in April 2014 entitled “Measuring scientific performance for improved policy making” http://goo.gl/XG8YzN revealing that in some countries in the EU (Finland, Norway, UK), artistic outcomes are already considered valid research results.
Applying double standards should not be an option.

27/04/2016 13:02

This implies a change in the way the role of Arts is understood in relation to Research and its implications to education. There is a link between this problem (arts not being recognised as research results) and the formative environment. For example here in Spain we have Ph.D. programmes for Arts (artists can apply to the same research grants as any other discipline). Although the number of these grants is smaller to arts it is possible to receive one and develop a Ph.D. Research funded in the same way a scientist is). This is not so in all European countries and in some of them Arts are in a kind of 'academia' level, without research. What I mean by academia is the lack of 'critical thinking and reflection' and the fostering of following a master, a reference (learning a model, repeating a pattern, instead of critically reflecting and creating your own). This is a crucial point to understand the difference between learning and creating and researching. If arts are not fully incorporated in the university level and students are not exposed to research it is difficult that arts are fully incorporated at R&I agendas. In some countries this incorporation is already been done, but there is much to be done because there are lots of obstacles (funding supports are unequal in comarison to sciences etc). But although still scarce, in this sense, arts are developing research focused research questions, tools, methodologies and processes that issue results that are fully grounded and could be accepted in R&I environments in their proper terms. This acceptation will open doors to balanced interdisciplinary collaborations that enrich all fields but go beyond arts being used just as 'disseminators' or illustratiors of science and technology.

Laura Beloff,

29/04/2016 15:38

I believe I am located in one of the areas where it is considered that the incorporation is done – in Scandinavia. However, even if it is perhaps done in some levels, it is often still lacking recognition comparable to science. Also, as a proponent of art & science collaborations – these kinds of cross-disciplinary research initiatives are still an ‘under-dog’ for science research. It is a question why would a young science researcher engage with the arts which can in a worst scenario hinder his/her future career?
If arts will be funded similarly as science – the valuation of arts research vs. science research will also change. And then art can live up to its full capacity and potential.

29/04/2016 15:45

I continue a bit to with a short statement in order to support the increase of funding for the arts-sector within FET-calls, which I think is really IMPORTANT but also beneficial for the research community at large! (and as a proponent of transdisciplinary initiatives).

In recent decades, the idea that innovation happens mainly within science and technology has predominated. However, it has also been claimed that art and design will transform our economy in the 21st century to a similar degree that science and technology have throughout the 20th century. Facilitating collaboration between artists and scientists and having projects funded under same umbrella, will therefore maximize innovative capacity and be timely and important. This can be achieved by enabling arts and sciences scholars to contribute with their background competences and skills on the specified research areas. Also inclusion of the arts into scientific research will support wider public engagements as arts is inherently linked to public arena and audience. This can critically feedback on the societal and ethical implications of developed scientific innovations and applications.

Hugues Vinet,

29/04/2016 19:57

Indeed. Our experience at IRCAM is that bringing together ICT researchers and artists enables the emergence of a new interdisciplinary field of artistic research with its own categories at the interface between aesthetics and technology, which has proved to be an original driver both of artistic production and technological innovation.

Making these interactions successful requires ad-hoc organisations combining differentiated selection/ evaluation processes, conciliating possibly divergent approaches (singularity/ generality, short/ long work processes, holistic/disciplinary,... ) and expectations (for artists : freedom of expression and transgression (to quote Salvatore...), bandwidth of public exposure, quality of technical support, etc.).

Beyond existing institutions, the current challenge is to organise this process at the European level in synergy with the actors of innovation so that it reaches its full potential.

Nicolas Castagné,

30/04/2016 13:08

Over the ages, especially in Europe, joining of arts, sciences and technologies has always obviously triggered "game-changing" advances in each of the three domains.
The example are numerous. Their impact on our societies are major, far beyond art, science, technology themselves. Industry and economy, and many application domains, benefit from the achievement triggered initially by goals, ideas and works at the junction of art, science and technology.

Thanks to its unique art, research and industrial culture and network, the european territory is a unique place to renew art-science-technology activities within the "digital revolution". Many institutions in many countries in Europe are already positioned, with worldwide recognition, on such activities.

The european research programs should definitely consider art / creation as major steering application fields for the scientific and technological research, toward a european-scale art-science-technology domain.

Digital4Science

ARCHIVED PLATFORM

This website is archived since mid-May 2021 and it is not possible to login anymore.

But don't worry there is a new Futurium platform and all active communities have been migrated.

Discussions

Fully integrating Arts in the S&T research and innovation agenda: the role of imagining and making in the creation of knowledge for innovation.

Your experience

Your ideas

Comments

ARCHIVED PLATFORM

This website is archived since mid-May 2021 and it is not possible to login anymore.

But don't worry there is a new Futurium platform and all active communities have been migrated.

Your experience

Your ideas

Share this:

Comments