Treaty obligations: science and art in Antarctica

Author(s):  
Mike Pearson

In this chapter Mike Pearson takes us to Antarctica. This continent is a vital record of past climate patterns, and our future depends on the fate of its covering of ice. Pearson considers how international treaties have imposed strict environmental controls on what is permissible on the continent, and discusses its unique status as an area where military activity is banned. These controls cover the scientists who are stationed there and the relatively small number of visitors that will arrive in cruise ships. He notes that science holds an unchallenged hegemonic position and that the Treaty makes no acknowledgement of the arts and that the advent of tourism was unforeseen. In this context, he considers how more recent programmes have aimed to promote understanding and appreciation of the values of Antarctica through the contribution of writers, artists and musicians. He considers how such initiatives as the Antarctica Pavilion at the 56th Venice Art Biennale have challenged the scientific domination of the continent by claiming Antarctica as a cultural space.

2003 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 250-251
Author(s):  
Margaret C. Jacob

The Marxists had it right all along, they just got tripped up by their materialism. Early modern capitalism opened vast new worlds, particularly in the arts and sciences, only the traffic went both ways. Creative agents invented new markets and pushed commerce in directions that favored enterprises immensely cosmopolitan and innovative, often solely for the sake of beauty and display. Commerce offered a context but the nobility, and not an imagined bourgeoisie, had the edge when it came to exploiting the market for objets. Paintings could be traded for property, land, and houses. Princes could sponsor natural philosophers, and the fluidity in values meant that good investors, like good practitioners of the arts and sciences, took an interest in all aspects of learning. The interrelatedness of the representational arts and natural philosophy stands as one of the central themes in this tightly integrated collection of essays. We now have a vast historiography telling us that we should no longer teach early modern science without reference to the art of the time, and vice-versa. The point is beautifully illustrated by an exhibition recently held at the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles (spring 2002) on the art of Pieter Saenredam. Working in Utrecht in the 1630s, he used geometry to regularize and make precise the angles and corners found in the exquisite paintings he made of the city's churches. He knew as much about geometry as he did about chiaroscuro. At precisely the same moment, an hour or two away by barge, Descartes in Leiden put the final touches on his Discourse on Method (1637). In effect he explained to the world why precision and clarity of thought made possible the kind of beauty that Saenredam's paintings would come to embody.


2015 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
pp. 131-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Collin G. Homer ◽  
George Xian ◽  
Cameron L. Aldridge ◽  
Debra K. Meyer ◽  
Thomas R. Loveland ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-105
Author(s):  
Rowena Kennedy-Epstein

This essay reassembles from archival materials the lost collaboration between Muriel Rukeyser and Berenice Abbott, So Easy to See, which pairs Abbott’s innovative Super-Sight photographs with Rukeyser’s poetic-theoretical discussions of ‘seeing’ in order to discuss lesbian desire, the atomic bomb, the relationship between art and science, and female genius. The work was repeatedly rejected by male editors and curators, who demeaned and undervalued the innovative nature of the project, in part because Abbott and Rukeyser dared to assert themselves as scientific experts; nevertheless, it is an intellectually rich and artistically innovative collaboration by two of the twentieth century’s most versatile artists. From the early 1940s through the 1960s, in a period in the U.S. defined by the elevation of the sciences over the arts, they shared a similar goal: to develop new methods for demonstrating the uses of and relationships between the arts and the sciences. Through their collaboration, Rukeyser and Abbott worked against accepted gendered and disciplinary boundaries, in order to show how ‘science and art meet and might meet in our time’ as sources of imaginative possibility and social progress. In doing so, they engendered questions about what kinds of collaborative and artistic practices are sanctioned, about the ontology of things and the everyday, about materialist philosophy and about the radical possibilities of interdisciplinarity. By making visible this lost collaboration, this essay participates in the recovery of an innovative and exciting modernist collaboration, and asks us to see both the lost potential of its inventiveness as well as to contextualise its disappearance. In order to see their work on ‘seeing’, we must also undertake an exploration into the cultural mechanisms that obfuscated it at mid-century.


1958 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 215-223

Arthur John Rowledge was born on 30 July 1876, at Peterborough. His father had a small building business which had been inherited from his grandfather who had worked on the building of the Crystal Palace at Sydenham. He was quite good at most trades and could sketch and make plans. His mother came from farming stock in Lincolnshire. There were three brothers and one sister in the family, Arthur John being the youngest of the four children. In his early boyhood he used to spend a good deal of his time at his maternal grandfather’s farm in Whaplode Fen, but he had to give this up when he started to attend school. His father interested him in sketching and the arts, taking him to the National Gallery. He also explained many scientific and mechanical things to him so that, for example, he knew how the steam engine worked when he was quite a small boy. He received his schooling at St Peter’s College School, Peterborough, where Mr Seabrook was Headmaster. There was also a school of science and art in the Minster yard which he attended whilst he was at the college school and also during his apprenticeship. He first studied art there, but later on, when he started work, concentrated on mechanical and scientific subjects, and in May 1891 obtained a Queen’s prize in the examination of the Science Schools. He was apprenticed to Barford & Perkins, Engineers, of Peterborough, and Mr Perkins who was then Works Manager, taught him a great deal. Although the works plant was crude, the fundamentals of many modern developments were there, particularly in the foundry and in the jig methods used.


2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (S260) ◽  
pp. 248-273
Author(s):  
Jean-Pierre Luminet

AbstractFrom the geocentric, closed world model of Antiquity to the wraparound universe models of relativistic cosmology, the parallel history of space representations in science and art illustrates the fundamental rôle of geometric imagination in innovative findings. Through the analysis of works of various artists and scientists like Plato, Dürer, Kepler, Escher, Grisey or the author, it is shown how the process of creation in science and in the arts rests on aesthetical principles such as symmetry, regular polyhedra, laws of harmonic proportion, tessellations, group theory, etc., as well as on beauty, conciseness and an emotional approach of the world.


Author(s):  
Julia Vassilieva

The interdisciplinary connections between psychology, the humanities, and the arts in Russia played a powerful role in delineating the unique character of the psychological field in the country. During the 19th and early 20th centuries an approach in Russian psychology that drew on the work of philosophers and theologists, art and literature critics, poets and writers represented a powerful current in the Russian quest for self-understanding. The interdisciplinary exchanges between psychology, sciences, and the arts intensified after the October Revolution of 1917. The revolution’s imperative of reshaping the world in a socialist mold ushered in a period of bold experimentation in the arts and the formulation of similarly ambitious research agendas in the sciences. The first 15 years following the revolution saw intense traffic between scientific laboratories, research institutes, and teaching institutions, on the one hand, and theaters, art studios, and the cinema industry, on the other, reconfiguring what had traditionally been understood as the distinct domains of science and art. The ideal of synthetic knowledge and the imperative of integration, especially in the domain of psychology, was also the main driving force behind the emergence of the cultural-historical paradigm proposed by Lev Vygotsky. Moreover, many of Vygotsky’s key concepts—including sign, mediation, and “perejivanie” (emotional work)—are indebted to his early encounters with literature, theater, and art criticism. A non-classical paradigm, the most recent and original development in Russian psychology, continues to draw important insights from aesthetic theories and philosophy. Overall, the Russian tradition in psychological humanities provides a powerful example of epistemological practice that brings art, humanistic inquiry, and scientific research well and truly together, generating a remarkable synthesis of knowledge.


Leonardo ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-39
Author(s):  
Claudia Arozqueta

This article traces the historical relation of heartbeats, science and art. It begins with an outline of historical ideas and science concerning the heart and the arterial pulse that will give better understanding of the intimate relation and differences between both and how early studies of the heart led to the discovery of the pulse and to the early relationship between heartbeats and art. Secondly, it tracks through history the particular interest of artists in making the pulse visible. Devices linked to bodies serve as mediators in artworks that project body mechanisms beyond corporeal limits. The works discussed project heartbeats as metaphors of emotions and life in installations that involve multiple senses.


2017 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 215-234
Author(s):  
Christy Belardo ◽  
Andrea C. Burrows ◽  
Lydia Dambekalns

Research on teaching through discipline integration is currently emphasized as a gap in educational literature, and this study bridges discipline silos between the arts and sciences by indicating how science and art compliment content learning. A study of secondary education pre-service teachers (3 years, n = 52) participating in a science/art integration unit the semester before their last college experience, explores how integrated sessions capture both scientific and artistic discipline concepts. A mixed methods research approach measured changes in confidence of science and art knowledge, skills, and experiences of the participants. Quantitative and qualitative data support increased awareness and confidence in pre-service teachers’ perceptions of how science and art can be incorporated into pre-collegiate classrooms, recognition of discipline similarities, and significant common themes when teaching both disciplines together. The researchers utilized a social constructivist framework with the qualitative data. Conclusions and implications include: 1) instructors can provide examples and modeling of interdisciplinary learning, which inspire pre-service teachers to explore new integrated disciplines in their own future classrooms, and 2) instructors can influence perspectives of pre-service teachers by offering integrated units, which produces open-mindedness of future teachers to use various teaching strategies. Keywords: science, art, pre-service teachers, pre-collegiate students, STEM education, STEM classrooms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document