Part One: Information Arts

Culture is being re-defined right before our eyes. For centuries, art and technology have been considered separate parts of culture. Now, because we live in an information society, they may be be coming together. We are, say some people who study such things, at a critical place in history, where it's sometimes impossible to distinguish between techno-scientific research and art. The creation, movement and analysis of ideas is increasingly the center of our cultural, social and economic life. And that's why a startling (and hefty) new book calls itself "Information Arts" -- because the art such a culture produces has to deal with information if it's going to remain central. So this is the first part of a series -- inspired by "Information Arts," edited by Stephen Wilson and published by the MIT Press -- which deals with the new intersection of art, science and technology. This book is onto an enormous idea, exploring the science and art from algorithms, robotics, quantum physics, coding, nanotechnologies, genetic and kinetic art to electrical music, telecommunications and A.I.

The fusion of culture and technology into sophisticated art forms seems obvious when you think about it. But until now, few people have. Most of society is too busy clucking about how new technologies are stealing credit cards, transmitting smut and rotting young brains.

This fusion, Wilson says, is a signal that views of art and research are evolving, broadening, integrating. As he points out, the arts and the sciences are any culture's two greatest engines: "sources of creativity, places of aspiration, and markers of aggregate identity." Before the Renaissance, they were considered the same thing -- science was called natural philosophy.

In the l960s, philosopher C.P. Snow developed his "Two Cultures" theory -- Snow asserted that those in the humanities and arts and those in the sciences have developed sufficiently different languages and worldviews that they no longer understood one another. Wilson believes that art and science/technology are no longer segregated from one another, and that the Net, the Web and pioneering work by artists and scientists are re-connecting the two, creating a new sphere of culture he calls "Information Arts."

From programming to telecom design, Wilson has brought together the work great artists and thinkers in culture and technology and shown us how they are moving closer together, even in fields like bionics, parapsychology and bioelectricity. Coders are artists, not just scientists. So are Web designers and people who paint genetic portraits.The book takes this fusion and looks at its groundbreaking influence on life, thought, cultural theory and artistic activity.

"Leonardo da Vince is well-known was history's greatest integrator of art and science, " writes Wilson, but he was by no means unique in having interests that spanned art and science. Educated people of his time were expected to. But, says Wilson, by the 20th century, science and art had already become distinct and separate fields.

New inventions have stimulated artistic experimentation in fields such as photography, cinema, sound recording, electrical machines and lights -- think of Brian Wilson, Brian Eno, U2. Wilson writes about how Xerox's PARC initiated an artist-in-residence program called PAIR, an open-ended approach in which artists and scientists and researchers jointly defined a program on culture and/or technology, with the definition of the problem becoming part of the collaboration. The book chronicles scores of other experiments in business, Academe and science labs.

So who cares about the re-connection between culture and technology? Anyone interested in either, really. The most interesting and revolutionary parts of the Net and Web -- coding, gaming, role-playing -- have always drawn on artistic as well as technological sensibilities. And many of us have had the sense that we are witnessing a re-definition of what culture is. That's of equal appeal to people like me, drawn to the culture of technology but not the machinery, and technologists, who love technology but want it to embrace culture and artistry. In subsequent columns, we'll draw from the book to talk about the "information arts," and some of the amazing work occurring now at the intersection of culture and technology.

Next: Research agendas in biology and medicine, especially biology and genetic research.

Comments

Why do so many people dislike Katz?

[afinn]

Here's why (Deconstructing Katz by Lloyd Wood)

Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance.

[Moderation abuser]

Quality man.

Re:Why do we need John Katz?

[liquidsin]

or, we could all just post extremely off-topic and completely ignore what katz wrote about.

So, how's the weather where you are today? I'm in Buffalo, NY and it's pretty dreary. Damn windy (I can hear it whistling outside my office window) and overcast. Now, I'm not a big warm weather fan, but I'd rather have some snow, since I'm going skiing this weekend. Hopefully there's still some snow out in resort country. That's all for now, since I should get some work done. I'll post back to this thread later on if I have anything else to say. If anyone has any inane off-topic garbage to spew, post here.

Looks like Katz finally went and saw Tron.

[Gannoc]

Yes, Jon, that was the guy from Babylon 5.

Re:Why do we need John Katz?

[sphealey]

or, we could all just post extremely off-topic and completely ignore what katz wrote about.

Sorry, but a meta-discussion about whether a certain discussion is necessary is not "extremely off-topic". And the question this poster raised is completely legitimate. Newsweek doesn't give a full-page column to any idiot who wanders in off the street. Why should Katz have a favored position on the Web's premium socio-technical website?

sPh

Re:Why do we need John Katz?

[liquidsin]

I think you misunderstand me. I was simply stating that instead of the proposed "don't post anything at all" we could just post off-topic. Then I rambled on about the weather and such. I do, however, agree with pretty much all of the points raised thus far in this thread. Katz is a twit, and we shouldn't have to deal with him. Or at least give him his own topic so I can block it in my prefs and never have to see his drivel again.

Offtopic? Have you read the bloody book?

[Moderation abuser]

Christ, I get the impression that they are giving bloody moderator points out to any MCSE these days...