Sci-Art as a driver of the Creative Economy (first page)
Between them, my four stories show that Sci-Art projects can provide a powerful
tool for convincing corporate R&D departments and other types of funders in the UK
and round the world of the demonstrable benefits of supporting interdisciplinary research. I remember some years ago, when I carried out a study to establish
the eligibility of five Sci-Art projects for receiving support from NESTA, Jeremy Newton, its first Chief Executive used the words ‘fragile flowers’ to describe Sci-Art projects. At the time I disagreed but, in retrospect, I think he was right. Sci-Art projects do need a considerable amount of nurturing if they are to grow and prosper.
BIOTICA is a case in point. Its child the starfish has achieved success but the main project according to Igor is still there for someone to say “hey, that’s a great idea –
I can use it”. This may or may not happen; Richard states: “BIOTICA is ahead
of its time in being concerned with the concept of interconnected parallel processes. Its application is perhaps best suited to complex phenomena such as biological simulations but it could be ‘re-purposed’ into a visualisation tool for predicting stock market valuations or molecular forms for new mimetic proteins. Then it would
be seen to have great commercial value.”
Igor lays the blame at the feet of entrepreneurs: “From a scientific point of view BIOTICA was fascinating and gave rise to speculations on the nature of new virtual organisms. But to hard nosed entrepreneurs this did not feed into their thinking. Hard nosed entrepreneurs have a way of feeling that they know what triggers they need to advance their business and an even stronger way of being blind
to the possibilities of doing things unrelated to their current business. But then
the one or two like Bill Gates or Tim Berners-Lee do rather well and are thankful that not so many are as visionary as they are.”
If BIOTICA is still waiting in the wings, by contrast, FIXING THE EPHEMEAL has literally soared skywards in its unstoppable trajectory of success. As Sid comments: “The DEFRA, PIMHAI and UMAP projects can be traced back to the new research direction stimulated by working with Heather and Dan with the support of Wellcome and NESTA. New opportunities continue to arise - for example an EU-supported collaboration with colleagues in Scandinavia has just begun and will explore the use of high-resolution imaging and machine learning to monitor contamination of dairy produce and animal carcasses early in the food chain. Here again there are opportunities to develop new Intellectual Property and exploitable technologies.”
At one level my four stories could not be more different – one from another – both in terms of the range of arts involved and the breadth of sciences they embrace. But together they indicate, I think, that over the years a new ‘milieu’ for creativity has been generated by the Sci-Art idea. Not only these projects, but many others, demonstrate that a blurring of the edges
is occurring between the two great methods of discovery – science and art.
In his book, Grammars of Creation, George Steiner puts forward his prognosis for the future: “In a world increasingly dominated by the sciences and their technological applications, progress will be informed by a ‘new code of the collective’. Here, the arts and humanities, where traditionally
singularity and solitude are of the essence, will join scientific discovery
and technological investigation by taking place in a spirit of partnership
and sociability.” This is exactly the process that has been exemplified by Alexa’s pioneering spirit in joining scientists to pursue a path of mutual discovery. But, it can be argued, I think, that all my exemplars have undergone a similar voyage of discovery. They have revealed that a new type of creativity is ignited in participatory environments where scientists and artists have been encouraged to enrich and maximise each others potential.
Of course, in researching material for this presentation, I have explored only
a small part of the emerging science/art landscape. Within the total Sci-Art experience there are no doubt a number of other projects that demonstrate
the rare and exceptional qualities I have found in my selected four. The task remains to search out and analyse these further exemplars so that
the successes of the Sci-Art method can receive wider recognition and, thereby, help to foster the momentum and continuation of science/art activity.
The Sci-Art experience as I’ve related it holds
up a mirror to the future. But what is this future?
My colleague Charles Landry and I have
developed ideas for Sci-Art Lab which draw
confidence from the success of the Sci-Art
competition but take it many steps further.
