 | ||
 | | |
ITA ENG | ||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||
LIFE TRANSFORMATION - ART MUTATION | ||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||
Genesis artwork | ||||||||||||||
by Eduardo Kac | ||||||||||||||
In 1998 I introduced the concept and the phrase "transgenic art" and proposed the creation (and social integration) of a real dog that glows with a green light. Transgenic art, a new art form based on the use of genetic engineering to create unique living beings, must be pursued with great care, with acknowledgment of the complex issues it raises and, above all, with a commitment to respect, nurture, and love the life it creates. I exhibited new transgenic artworks in 1999, 2000, and 2001. The implications of this ongoing work have particular aesthetic and social ramifications, crossing several disciplines and providing material for further reflection and dialogue. What follows is an overview of theses works, the issues they evoke, and the debates they have elicited. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - For almost two decades my work has explored the boundaries between humans, animals, and robots [1]. Thus, transgenic art can be seen as a natural development of my previous work. In my telepresence art, developed since 1986, humans coexist with other humans and non-human animals through telerobotic bodies. In my biotelematic art, developed since 1994, biology and networking are no longer co-present but coupled so as to produce a hybrid of the living and the telematic. With transgenic art, developed since 1998, the animate and the technological can no longer be distinguished. The implications of this ongoing work have particular social ramifications, crossing several disciplines and providing material for further reflection and dialogue. The presence of biotechnology will increasingly change from agricultural and pharmaceutical practices to a larger role in popular culture, just as the perception of the computer changed historically from an industrial device and military weapon to a communication, entertainment, and education tool. Terms formerly perceived as "technical", such as megabytes and ram, for example, have entered the vernacular. Likewise, jargon that today may seem out of place in ordinary discourse, such as marker and protein, for example, will simply be incorporated into the larger verbal landscape.of everyday language. This is made clear by the fact that high school students in the United States already create transgenic bacteria routenely in school labs through affordable kits. The popularization of aspects of technical discourse inevitably brings with it the risk of dissemination of a reductive and instrumental ideological view of the world. Without ever relinquishing its right to formal experimentation and subjective inventiveness, art can, art should contribute to the development of alternative views of the world that resist dominant ideologies. As both utopian and dystopian artists such as Moholy-Nagy and Tinguely have done before, in my work I appropriate and subvert contemporary technologies - not to make detached comments on social change, but to enact critical views, to make present in the physical world invented new entities (artworks that include transgenic organisms) which seek to open a new space for both emotional and intellectual aesthetic experience. I have been employing the phrase "bio art" since 1997, in reference to my own works that involved biological agency (as opposed to biological objecthood), such as "Time Capsule" [2] and "A-positive" [3], both presented in 1997. The difference between biological agency and biological objecthood is that the first involves an active principle while the second implies material self-containment. In 1998 I introduced the phrase "transgenic art" in a paper-manifesto with the same title [4] and proposed the creation (and social integration) of a dog expressing green fluorescent protein. This protein is commonly used as a biomarker in genetic reserach ; however, my goal was to use it primarily for its visual properties as a symbolic gesture, a social marker The initial public response to the paper was curiosity laced with incredulity. The proposal is perfectly viable, but it seemed that few believed that the project could or would be realized. While I struggled to find venues that could assist me in creating the aforementioned project, entitled "GFP K-9", I too realized that canine reproductive technology was not developed enough at the time to enable me to create a dog expressing green fluorescent protein [5]. In the meantime, I started to develop a new transgenic art work, entitled "Genesis", which premiered at Ars Electronica '99 [6]. GENESIS Genesis is a transgenic artwork that explores the intricate relationship between biology, belief systems, information technology, dialogical interaction, ethics, and the Internet. The key element of the work is an "artist's gene", a synthetic gene that was created by translating a sentence from the biblical book of Genesis into Morse Code, and converting the Morse Code into DNA base pairs according to a conversion principle I specially developed for this work. The sentence reads: "Let man have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." It was chosen for what it implies about the dubious notion--divinely sanctioned--of humanity's supremacy over nature. Morse code was chosen because, as the first example of the use of radiotelegraphy, it represents the dawn of the information age--the genesis of global communication. The Genesis gene was incorporated into bacteria, which were shown in the gallery. Participants on the Web could turn on an ultraviolet light in the gallery, causing real, biological mutations in the bacteria. This changed the biblical sentence in the bacteria. After the show, the DNA of the bacteria was translated back into Morse code, and then back into English. The mutation that took place in the DNA had changed the original sentence from the Bible. The mutated sentence was posted on the Genesis web site. In the context of the work, the ability to change the sentence is a symbolic gesture: it means that we do not accept its meaning in the form we inherited it, and that new meanings emerge as we seek to change it. While presenting Genesis, I also gave a public lecture in the context of the symposium "Life Science", presented by Ars Electronica '99. My lecture focused on the "GFP K-9" proposal. To contextualize my presentation, I reviewed the long history of human-dog domestication and partnership, and pointed out the direct and strong human influence on the evolution of the dog up to the present day. Emphasizing that there are no packs of Poodles and Chihuahuas running in the wild, and that the creation of the dog out of the wolf was a technology -- a fact that we seemed to have lost conscience of -- I proceeded to point out the complex relationship between dogs and humans throughout their long history together, going back to at least fourteen thousand years, according to archeological records. While some showed support and appreciation for the work, others reacted against the project and voiced their position. The stage was set for a very productive dialogue, which was one of my original intentions. As I see it, the debate must go beyond official policy-making and academic research to encompass the general public, including artists. "GFP K-9" was discussed in art magazines and books and science journals. Daily papers and general magazines also discussed the work in progress. While specialized publications showed greater appreciation for "GFP K-9", the response in the general media covered the whole gamut, from forthright rejection to consideration of multiple implications to unmistakable support. The schock generated by the proposal curiously caused one critic to declare "the end of art" [7]. As I see it, there's no reason to see the beginning of a new art as the end of anything. GFP BUNNY This pattern of response repeated itself, at a truly global scale, when I announced in 2000 the realization of my second transgenic work. Entitled "GFP Bunny", the work comprises the creation of a green fluorescent rabbit ("Alba"), the public dialogue generated by the project, and the social integration of the rabbit. This work was realized with the assistance of Louis Bec and Louis-Marie Houdebine. Louis Bec worked as the producer, coordinating the activities in France. Bec and I met at Ars Electronica (September 1999) and soon afterwards he contacted Houdebine on my behalf, for the first time, to propose the project. Months later, in 2000, Alba was born, a gentle and healthy rabbit. As I stated in my paper entitled "GFP Bunny" [8], "transgenic art is a new art form based on the use of genetic engineering to create unique living beings. This must be done with great care, with acknowledgment of the complex issues thus raised and, above all, with a commitment to respect, nurture, and love the life thus created." "GFP Bunny" attracted local media in the south of France in June 2000 when the former director of the French institute where Alba was born used his authority to overrule the scientists who worked on the project and refused to let Alba go to Avignon and then come to my family in Chicago. This arbitrary decision was made privately by one individual (the former director of the French institute where Alba was born). He never explained his reason for the refusal, so it remains unknown to this day. Bec and I denounced the censorship through the Internet and through interviews to the press [9]. If the objective was to silence the media, the result backfired. "GFP Bunny" became a global media scandal after a front-page article appeared in the Boston Globe [10], sharing headlines with articles about the 2000 Olympics and US presidential debates. Articles about Alba were published in all major countries, with wire services further spreading the news worldwide [11]. Alba was also on the cover of Le Monde, San Francisco Chronicle and L'Espresso, among others. Der Spiegel and Chicago Tribune dedicated full pages to "GFP Bunny". She also appeared on the front page of the Arts section of the New York Times. Broadcasts by ABC TV, BBC Radio, and Radio France also took the Alba story to the whole planet. From mid-2000 to early 2003 the relentless response to "GFP Bunny" has been equally intense and fascinating, with fruitful debate and both strong opposition and support. Since October 15, 2000, the "Alba Guestbook" has been collecting general opinions about the work and expressions of support to bring Alba home [12]. Through lectures and symposia, Internet postings and email correspondence, the debate intensified and became richer, more subtle and nuanced, as I had hoped. The response to "GFP Bunny" constitutes extremely rich material, which I hope to revisit in the near future. As part of my intercontinental custody battle to obtain Alba's release, between December 3 and December 13, 2000, I staged a public campaign in Paris, which included lectures, broadcasts, public and private meetings, and the public placement of a series of seven posters [Figure 1]. I placed individual posters in several neighborhoods, including: Le Marais, Quartier Latin, Saint Germain, Champs de Mars, Bastille, Montparnasse, and Montmartre. The posters reflect some of the readings afforded by "GFP Bunny" [Figure 2 to 7]. They show the same image of Alba and I together, each topped by a different French word: Art, Médias, Science, Éthique, Religion, Nature, Famille. [13]. Between December 3 and December 13, 2000, parallel to radio (Radio France and Radio France Internationale), print (Le Monde, Libération, Transfert, Ça M'intéresse, Nova), and television (Canal+, Paris Première) interviews and debates, I posted these images on the streets in an effort to intervene in the context of French public opinion and gather support for my cause to bring Alba home. I also engaged the public directly through a series of lectures (Sorbonne, École Normale Superior, École Superior des Beaux Arts, Forum des Images) and through face-to-face conversations on the street sparked by the public's interest. In total, I reached approximately 1.5 million people (about half of the population of Paris). This was an important step, as it allowed me to address the Parisian public directly. In 2001 I created "The Alba Flag", a white flag with the green rabbit sillouete, and started to fly it in fron of my Chicago-area house. The flag not only signals publically the green bunny home, but most importantly stands as a social marker, a beacon of her absence. Continuing my efforts to raise awareness about Alba's plight and to obtain her freedom, in 2002 I presented a solo exhibition entitled "Free Alba!" [14] at Julia Friedman Gallery, in Chicago (May 3 - June 15, 2002). "Free Alba!" included a large body of new work comprised of large-scale color photographs, drawings, prints, Alba flags, and Alba t-shirts. Seen together for the first time were the posters from my public interventions in Paris (2000), an Alba flag flying outside the Gallery (2001), photographs that reclaim green bunny narratives circulated by global media (2001-02), drawings that reflect on our closeness to the "animal other" (2001-2002) and Alba t-shirts that extend Alba's cause beyond gallery's walls (2002). Through the leitmotif of the green bunny, this exhibition explored the poetics of life and evolution. The story of "GFP Bunny" was adapted and customized by news organizations worldwide, often generating new narratives that, both intentionally and unintentionally, reinstated or overlooked the facts. My "Free Alba!" exhibition featured photographs in which I reappropriated and recontextualized this vast coverage, exhibiting the productive tension that is generated when contemporary art enters the realm of daily news. The photographs in this series dramatize the fact that the reception of GFP Bunny was complex, taking place across cultures and in diverse locations. I will continue to develop new strategies to make Alba's case public and to pursue her liberation. Parallel to this effort, transgenic art evolves. One new direction involves the creation of nanoscale three-dimensional structures built of amino acids. This "proteic art", or "protein art", can be experienced in many forms, including in vivo, in vitro, and expanded into other settings, such as rapid-prototype models and online navigational spaces. All of these forms, and many others, can be combined through new biointerfaces. A prominent aspect of this path is the fact that these three-dimensional structures are assembled according to combinatory rules that follow strict biological principles (otherwise it is not possible to produce them), even if one invents and synthesizes a new protein.. This constraint imposes a biomorphology that offers a new and fascinating creative challenge. A second new direction involves complex interactive transgenic environments with multiple organisms and biobots, biological robots partially regulated by internal transgenic microorganisms. In what follows I offer a discussion of these developments, both of which I explored in 2001. SCULPTING NEW PROTEINS While the first phase of "Genesis" focused on the creation and the mutation of a synthetic gene through Web participation, the second phase, carried out in 2000/2001, focused on the protein produced by the synthetic gene, the Genesis protein [15], and on new works that examine the cultural implications of proteins as fetish objects. The Genesis protein is another step in the translation of the original Biblical text, this time from the Genesis gene (itself encoding the English sentence) to a three-dimensional form made up of discrete parts (aminoacids). The transmogrification of a verbal text into a sculptural form is laden with intersemiotic resonances that contribute to expand the historically rich intertextuality between word, image and spatial form. The process of biological mutation extends it into time. A critical stance is manifested throughout the Genesis project by following scientifically accurate methods in the real production and visualization of a gene and a protein that I have invented and which have absolutely no function or value in biology. Rather than explicating or illustrating scientific principles, the Genesis project complicates and obfuscates the extreme simplification and reduction of standard molecular biology descriptions of life processes, reinstating social and historical contextualization at the core of the debate. I appropriate the techniques of biotechnology to critique the language of science and its inherent ideologies, while developing transgenic art as an alternative means for individual expression. In its genomic and proteomic manifestations, the Genesis project continues to reveal new readings and possibilities. Protein production is a fundamental aspect of life. Multiple research centers around the world are currently focusing their initiatives on sequencing, organizing, and analyzing the genomes of both simple and complex organisms, from bacteria to human beings. After genomics (the study of genes and their function) comes proteomics (the study of proteins and their function). Proteomics, the dominant research agenda in molecular biology in the post-genomic world, focuses on the visualization of the three-dimensional structure of proteins produced by sequenced genes [16]. It is also concerned with the study of the structure and functionality of these proteins, among many other important aspects, such as similarity among proteins found in different organisms. The second phase of "Genesis" critically investigates the logic, the methods, and the symbolism of proteomics, as well as its potential as a domain of artmaking. In order to arrive at the visualization of the "Genesis" protein, I first explored aspects of its two-dimensional structure [17]. The next step was to compare the predicted folding pattern of the "Genesis" protein to another known protein to which it is similar: Chorion. With the goal of producing a tangible rendition of the nanostructure of the "Genesis" protein, I researched protein fold homology using the Protein Data Bank, operated by the Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics (RCSB). I then produced a digital visualization of the "Genesis" protein's three-dimensional structure [18]. This three-dimensional dataset was used to produce both digital and physical versions of the protein. The digital version is a fully navigable web object rendered both as VRML (Virtual Reality Modeling Language) and PDB (Protein Data Bank) formats, to enable upclose inspection of its complex volumetric structure. The physical rendition is a small solid object produced via rapid-prototyping, to convey in tangible form the fragility of this molecular object [19]. This object was used as a mold for casting the final form of the protein used in the creation of the "Transcription Jewels". "Transcription Jewels" is a set of two objects encased in a custom-made round wooden box. The word "transcription" is the term employed in Biology to name the process during which the genetic information is "transcribed" from DNA into RNA [20]. One "jewel" is a 2" genie bottle in clear glass with gold ornaments and 65 mg of purified "Genesis" DNA inside. "Purified DNA" means that countless copies of the DNA have been isolated from the bacteria in which they were produced and accumulated and filtrated in a vial. The gene is seen here out of the context of the body, its meaning intentionally reduced to a formal entity to reveal that without acknowledgment of the vital roles played by organism and environment, the "priceless" gene can become "worthless". The other "jewel" is an equally small gold cast of the three-dimensional structure of the "Genesis" protein. By displaying the emblematic elements of the biotech revolution (the gene and the protein) as coveted valuables, "Transcription Jewels" makes an ironic commentary on the process of commodification of the most minute aspects of life. Both the purified gene in "Transcription Jewels" and its protein are not derived from a natural organism, but rather were created specifically for the artwork "Genesis". Instead of a "genie" inside the bottle one finds the new panacea, the gene. No wishes of immortality, beauty, or intelligence are granted by the inert and isolated gene sealed inside the miniature bottle. As a result, the irony gains a critical and humorous twist by the fact that the "precious commodity" is devoid of any real, practical application in biology. All pieces described and discussed above, including the net installation with live bacteria, were presented together in my solo exhibition "Genesis", realized at Julia Friedman Gallery, in Chicago, between May 4 and June 2, 2001. The multiple mutations experienced biologically by the bacteria and graphically by the images, texts, and systems that compose the exhibition, reveal that the alleged supremacy of the so-called "master molecule" must be questioned. The Genesis series (including the installation, « Transcription Jewels », and other works) challenges the genetic hype and opposes the dominant biodeterministic interpretation, stating that we must continue to consider life as a complex system at the crossroads between belief systems, economic principles, legal parameters, political directives, scientific laws, and cultural constructs. | ||||||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |