As a huge fan of Professor Vesna and her work, this event was very inspirational to my personal opinions towards art and science collaborations. I was extremely excited to hear her and her colleagues speak about open involvement to anyone interested in becoming a part of the movement.
It was inspiring to see a collaboration lasting a decade long and even still present. In my personal experience with working with other artists, it was hard to keep the passion required to succeed in place with lots of uncontrollable disruptions between other members of the groups, in terms of effort and recognition.
I think the "Brainstorming" piece where Professor Vesna and her colleagues made visual representations of brain storming by performance was accurate in reinstating the philosophical significance of putting minds of different creators, science and art, in a room together to work.
In quoting Linda Weintraub from the Professor Vesna's book, she states, "Like the experience of the sublime, frontiers of exploration are often identified with radical shifts of scale," I think she reinstates the comments made by Professor Gimzewski, where he said that the scientific method has been been explored and pushed to its limits, that we need artists now to innovate and make new leaps in science and art all together. I felt very emotionally connected to this idea and still think about how anyone could get involved if creativity has become more of a prerequisite than technical knowledge in this case.
I have stressed that there is a high level of philosophy in all of these lectures and events, that it is not just bringing two worlds together, but the possibility of doing so has existed for so long and is still undermined, and it offers more recognition to human intelligence and its possibilities.
(Crackled Neurons by Greg A. Dunn - http://www.gregadunn.com/category/gold-leaf-painting-by-greg-dunn/)
This course and event has motivated to do more research in neuroscience and art. In an article by Stanford University, they reinstate one of the class themes that it is "characterizes art as imaginative,
subjective, narrative, and often controversial, but very rarely scientific."
(Art piece of brain activity by Audrius Plioplys http://www.plioplys.com/)
The idea of bringing artists to scientific settings is something I constantly express admiration for. Take for example, artist Audrius Plioplys has "has transformed the artist's studio into a neurobiology research laboratory: he has merged neuroscience with art." It is interesting to see how controversial this idea is and how people write about it. Also, I came across the 'Neuroesthetics' movement that takes "a scientific approach to the study of aesthetic perceptions of art, music, or any object that can give rise to aesthetic judgments." I am excited to see how all these movements and collaborations expand to the mainstream in my lifetime.
How do we explain the origins of art without understanding the human brain that neuroscience attempts to do, and how do we neglect the possibilities that may result with careful applications of neuroscience and scientific data to artistic expression? These are a few of the things I've thought about. I do not have the answers to them, however. I feel like most people that are in the forefront of this movement are experimenting to find out. I want a place in this movement.
Thank you so much for this opportunity to learn and be exposed to truths I never knew existed before, as well as the potential I never knew I had. I really hope I find my way working in this field. I believe we are all capable of learning, some faster and easier than others, but I think for me specifically, I will find it challenging and rewarding to apply my learning skills to new concepts in both science and art. Thank you Professor Vesna, Symrin, and Professor Gimzewski again for all the values given to me in this course.
VICTORIA VESNA. Victoria Vesna. N.p., n.d. Web.
Huang, Mengfei. "The Neuroscience of Creativity." Comic Art, Creativity and the Law (n.d.): 7-11. Http://web.stanford.edu/. Web. <http://web.stanford.edu/group/co-sign/Huang.pdf>.
"Art of Neuroscience." Society for Neuroscience. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://www.sfn.org/annual-meeting/neuroscience-2014/at-the-meeting/art-of-neuroscience>.
PLIOPLYS, AUDRIUS. "ARTIST’S STATEMENT." ARTIST’S STATEMENT AUDRIUS V. PLIOPLYS (n.d.): n. pag. Web. <http://www.plioplys.com/artist_statement_january_2015.pdf>.
Noe, Alva. "Art and the Limits of Neuroscience." Opinionator Art and the Limits of Neuroscience Comments. New York Times, 4 Dec. 2011. Web. <http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/art-and-the-limits-of-neuroscience/?_r=0>.
"Neuroesthetics." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroesthetics>.