> S Y M B I OT I C A R E S E A R C H G R O U P> M E A R T

> T H E T I S S U E C U L T U R E & A R T P R O J E C T> P I G W I N G S

> T I S S U E C U LT U R E & A R T ( I F I C I A L ) W O M B S

> A D A M Z A R E T S K Y> DY N A M I C M U S I C A L S E E D I N G

> A M Y YO U N G> R E A R I N G M O D I F I E D L I V I N G S Y S T E M S

> M A R TA D E M E N E Z E S> P R OT E I C P O R T R A I T

> H E D K I K R> I N T E R S E X T I O N

> A N D R E ´ B R O DY K> D N A A R T S

BIOFEEL>>

BIO

FE

EL

> O

ve

rvie

w The opening of new possibilities and alternative futures is atthe core of the works presented in BioFeel. These are notmerely representations about concepts. Rather they aretangible suggestions, employing new technologies yet to besubverted. This exhibition was originally conceived topresent recent work created in SymbioticA by The TissueCulture & Art Project and the SymbioticA Research Group.These works have been shown elsewhere, but never in Perthand never as a collection. In addition, BioFeel seemed anideal vehicle to present the results of Adam Zaretsky’s six-month residency in SymbioticA and to début his MMMMinstallation. Marta de Meneze’s and Amy Young’s workswere chosen to be included in this show as they each raiseissues concerning the practices that are being explored inSymbioticA. Marta is investigating the notion of the bio-medical lab as an artist’s studio. Amy’s Rearming theSpineless Opuntia deals with the responsibilities that mighthave to be exercised once living systems are deliberatelymanipulated.

SymbioticA was established in April 2000 with one of itsmain premises being that it would act as a porousmembrane in which art and bio-medical sciences andtechnologies could mingle. This is an artist-run laboratorywithin a biological science department. Artists areencouraged to employ biological techniques as part of theirpractice.

The use of biological technologies is admittedly acontentious issue. These technologies are becoming a majorpart of our lives, and predictions claim that this will have aprofound effect on our relationships with all living systems.The application of knowledge, acquired thorough directedresearch in life sciences, seems to be driven by forces thatare interested in short term gains for the few, oftenneglecting long term risks. The utilisation of knowledgegained as part of both basic and profit driven research intoliving systems seems even more alarming in the light of the

war clouds hovering above. In addition tothe obvious threat of biological warfare, theapparent decline in compassion to theOther makes our times perilous to makedecisions about the manipulation and useof living systems. These decisions willdetermine the kinds of relationships we willform with the living world around us, be ita product of evolution or of humanintervention.

Developments in technology are actualisedpossibilities, not necessarily the only waysknowledge can be utilised. As biologicalresearch departments in universities areencouraged by governments to partner with‘industry’ and ‘defence’, the need forresearch into non-utilitarian purposesbecome urgent. The exploration ofcontestable possibilities is important to theunderstanding of the ways technology maydevelop. By fostering artistic criticalengagements with biological research,SymbioticA provides a greenhouse fordeveloping alternatives to the commercialmainstream. The art here goes beyond thefantasy of the surrealist project. The artistsare dealing with the actual wet palette ofpossibilities of life manipulation offered bybiotechnology.

The aesthetically driven and confrontingtreatment of these tools by the artistscreates an uneasy feeling about the level ofmanipulation of fellow living beingshumans have reached. This uneasinessseems to stem from a cultural and ethicalambiguity in regard to human engagementwith life’s processes. Our values and beliefsystems seem to be ill prepared to deal withthe consequences of applied knowledge inthe life sciences.

The human-centric perception that guidedour conduct towards other living beingssince we started farming, did not diminisheven after our origins were revealed as yetanother branch of the evolutionary tree. Thefield of ethics still seems to be almostabsolutely denominated by human-centricdiscourse, and things are not different inthe relatively new area of bioethics. Thisself-obsessive trait might not be very usefulas spices briars collapse and as new livingentities appear. The level of manipulation ofliving systems that biotechnology is startingto provide is unprecedented in evolutionaryterms. The ways in which humans choose toexercise their technologies on the worldaround them reflects on the ways they willuse it on each other. All work presented here deals in one way oranother with the relationships we formwith manipulated living systems. Theresolution shifts from the protein throughthe chromosome, the cell and the tissue, tothe whole organism. The accompanyingsymposium, The Aesthetics of Care?, willfocus on these issues from academic, legal,ethical and artistic perspectives. It willprovide a forum for deliberating on theartistic, social and scientific implications ofthe use of biological/medical technologiesfor artistic purposes. It will probe currentmodels of practices and explore new rolesand skills artists may acquire as theyventure into this new realm of operation.This Symposium will deal with therelationships artists and audience form withworks of art that consist of living biologicalsystems.

Statement: By Oron Catts

BIO

FE

EL

> S

ym

bio

tic

A research. SymbioticA also offers a newmeans of artistic inquiry, one in whichartists actively use the tools andtechnologies of science, not just tocomment about them, but also to exploretheir possibilities.

SymbioticA welcomes undergraduate andpostgraduate students from all disciplines,artists and scholars to work ininterdisciplinary research teams exploringnew directions for new technologies and theeffects on society that they might have. Itenables artists to access and explore a widerange of scientific materials and processes.SymbioticA is designed as an evolving placeof artistic investigation that is accessible topeople throughout Western Australia andbeyond. SymbioticA aims to become aresource centre of investigation andresearch in the field of art and (mainlybiological) science collaborations. It is abase for both short and long-termresidencies. The first undergraduate courserun by SymbioticA has been a verychallenging and rewarding experience to allinvolved. Adam Zaretsky was the maindriving force behind this course, drawing onhis experiences teaching art and biology atStefan Wilson’s Conceptual InformationArts Department at the San-Francisco SateUniversity. SymbioticA’s Vivoarts courseincluded lab visits and practices, field daysto the zoo and breading farms, and manyethical discussions. Documentation of workproduced in this course will be presented aspart of Biofeel.

SymbioticA’s Position in The University ofWestern Australia.The School of Anatomy and Human Biologyis quite unique in the scope and variety ofthe research interests of its staff. Thedepartment has a long tradition of workingwith artists. The departmental corridors arelined with art works. Hans Arkveld, asculptor and painter, has been working with

the department for the last three decades,other artists have come and gone on an adhoc basis, but although many observed andgained inspiration there, none actually usedthe laboratories to produce their art work.

SymbioticA is now a research lab like anyother in the department, or is it? The tensionof the ambiguous position of SymbioticA inrelation to the academic disciplines isgenerating collaborations that have noother place to evolve. With SymbioticA,artists can now work in the differentlaboratories in the department, such as themolecular biology, tissue culture,neuroscience, biomechanics laboratoriesand a biological imaging facility (IAAF).Artists will also have access to CTEC- thestate of the art training facility for surgeons,including The Hill International Surgical &Medical Workshops, and a VR haptics room.

SymbioticA is a non-for profit organization,and as such, it is free to explore differentmodes of operation. However in order tosurvive in the harsh reality of the marketeconomy environment it operates in, whilemaintaining its integrity and artisticfreedom, it has to adapt some of theprevailing rhetoric and practices. This inspite of maintaining a critical outlook andinsisting on a model of cooperation andcollaboration rather than one ofcompetition.

The West Australian Lotteries Commissionand The University of Western Australia(UWA) jointly funded the set up forSymbioticA. SymbioticA provides a uniquefacility for Western Australia and enhancesWestern Australia’s internationalpositioning as a place that fostersinnovations.

SymbioticA

What is SymbioticA?SymbioticA is a research laboratory dedicated to theexploration of scientific knowledge in general, and biologicaltechnologies in particular, from an artistic and humanisticperspective. It is located in The School of Anatomy & HumanBiology at The University of Western Australia. SymbioticA isthe first research laboratory of its kind, in that it enablesartists to engage in wet biology practices in a biologicalscience department. Developments in science andtechnology, in particular in the life sciences, are having aprofound effect on society, its values, belief systems andtreatment of individuals, groups and the environment. Theinteraction of art, science, industry and society is recognizedinternationally as an essential avenue for innovation andinvention, and as a way to explore, envision and critiquepossible futures. Science and Art both attempt to explain theworld around us in ways that are profoundly different butwhich can be complementary to each other.

Artists can act as important catalysts for creative andinnovative processes and outcomes. They can also criticallyexamine the various assumptions, and sometimes selfdelusions, built in to the ‘scientific method’. There is a needfor artists and other professionals in the humanities toactively participate in research into possible and contestablefutures arising from these developments. While non-scientifically trained artists may have a limited ability toanalyse the detailed veracity of scientific work, “outsiders”working in a different mental framework can bring bothinsights and distractions into the debates about themechanisms, ethics and philosophy behind scientific work.This can only be effective if those same artists engageactively in the science and the debate so that they haveenough understanding of the process and work to engagemeaningfully with it.

SymbioticA sets out to provide a situation where this canhappen, an opportunity in which interdisciplinary researchand other knowledge and concept generating activities cantake place. It provides an opportunity for researchers topursue curiosity-based explorations free of the demands andconstraints associated with the current culture of scientific

The

Art

and

Sci

ence

Col

labo

rative

Res

earc

h La

bora

tory

Scho

ol o

f Ana

tom

y an

d H

uman

Bio

logy

Uni

vers

ity

of W

este

rn A

ustr

alia

By

Stua

rt B

unt

and

Oro

n Ca

tts,

fou

nder

s, d

irec

tor

and

man

ager

of

Sym

biot

icA

The current status of the researchinto Meart – the semi living artist (AKA Fish & Chips) – Stage 2.SymbioticA Research Group incollaboration with Steve M Potter,Tom DeMarse and Alexander Shkolnik.

Meart is a bio-cybernetic research & development projectexploring aspects of creativity and artistry in the age ofnew biological technologies. Meart is assembled from:Neurons from embryonic rat cortex – ‘Wetware’ – grownover Multi Electrode Array (MEA)1 , ‘Software’ – thatinterfaces between the wetware and the ‘Hardware’ – therobotic (drawing) arm. In this paper we will discuss ourgoals, vision and the current state of research (Stage 2)into the development of a ‘semi-living artistic entity’.

The first public outcome of the project (Fish & Chips –Stage 1) was presented in the Ars Electronica Festival,Takeover, 20012 . In this case we used the real timeelectrical activity of fish neurons (some cultured oversilicon and Pyrex chips) to control a robotic arm thatproduced ‘visual art’ and a sound piece. We closed thefeedback loop by determining the frequency of stimulatingthe neurons according to the music that was generated onthe fly. The installation featured a laboratory/studio set-up, prototypes and documentation of the project, and wasan example of the research being conducted inSymbioticA.

In BioFeel we will present the outcomes of the secondstage of the project. We decided to change its name as wewont be using fish neurons and silicon chips ratherneurons from embryonic rat cortex grown over MultiElectrode Array (MEA). In this stage we are collaboratingwith Steve M Potter, a neuroscientist from the Laboratoryfor Neuroengineering, Georgia Institute ofTechnology. Steve is developing a new paradigm forneurobiology research, that will bring together top-down

BIO

FE

EL

> S

ym

bio

tic

A R

es

ea

rch

Gro

up

> M

ea

rt

Meart – the semi living artist (AKA Fish & Chips)Stage 2.

Sym

biot

icA R

esea

rch

Gro

up

Guy

Ben

-Ary

Ph

il G

ambl

en

Dr.

Stua

rt B

unt

Ian

Sw

eetm

an

Oro

n Ca

tts

Ion

at Z

urr

Gil

Wei

nber

g an

d M

att

Rich

ards

Meart explores our

abilities and intentions

in dealing with the

emergence of a new

class of beings (whose

production may lie for in

the future) that may be

sentient, creative and

unpredictable.

(cognitive, behavioral, ethological) and bottom-up (cellular, molecular)approaches to studying the brain. He is applying

different technologies to study dissociated culturesof hundreds or thousands of mammalian neurons.Further more he is developing a real-time feedbacksystem for 2-way communication between acomputer and a cultured neural network. In thisinstallation we will record the electric signals froma culture that will be set up for Meart, in Steve’slab (Atlanta, Georgia). The data received from theneural activity will be processed both in Atlanta &Perth to control in real time the robotic (drawing)arm. We will close the feedback loop bystimulating the neurons (64 electrodes) whenvarious events in the gallery space will occur. Asno one has ever done this before, we will treat thisinstallation as an experiment – scientific as well asartistic. We will be interested to see if anyemergent or ‘creative’ behavior occur, or trace anychange in the pattern of behavior of the neuronsthat occurs as a result of the stimulations.

Meart explores our abilities and intentions indealing with the emergence of a new class ofbeings (whose production may lie for in the future)that may be sentient, creative and unpredictable.It is grown/constructed to evolve and create visualartistic outcome and by that means, to explore thenotions of creativity and the nature of art. Thishybrid is set to perform an open task, reveal itsinner workings as drawings. The assimilation of‘wetware (neurons) / software (digital components)/ hardware (robotic arm)’, ‘neurons / digitalcomponents /robotic arms’ is intended to literally

deconstruct creativity into its basic elements whilestimulating and manipulating it through the different stages in order to observe

‘Meart’ takes the

basic components of

the brain (isolated

neurons) attaches

them to a mechanical

body through the

mediation of a digital

processing engine to

attempt and create an

entity that will

seemingly evolve,

learn and become

conditioned to

express its growth

experiences through

‘art activity’.

the relationship between the currentposition of the drawing arm and theposition on the culture plate of thehighest neural activity. This vector willthen be used to move the arm (via aparallel port interface controlling 16pneumatic valves). Information on themovement of the arm (or any other visualenvironmental phenomenon) will beproduced by recording a digital videoframe on the host computer. The frame (a320 by 240 32 bit JPEG image) will bereduced to an 8 by 8, 8 bit array whichwill be sent using a direct TCP/IP link tothe laboratory at Georgia Tech and used tostimulate the cultured neurons. Thismechanism differs greatly from that usedin Fish and Chips phase 1 where a singleaction potential signal was continuouslysampled at 44khz. The resulting sampleddata was transferred into the frequencydomain using the standard Fast FourierTransform (FFT). The relative power of anumber of frequency bands was thenmeasured and, if higher than apredetermined threshold, where used togenerate control signals to the arminterface.

Output module (Robotic Arm):The robotic drawing device receives theprocessed data from the computersoftware and translates it into movement.The software processes the input data andcontrols an array of valves in a binary waysignaling them to open or close. Thesevalves allow compressed air to flow intothe artificial muscles, which arepneumatic. As the muscles are inflated

they contract with sufficient force to movethree pens across the surface of a paper.The muscles are made out of two majorcomponents – an internal air bladderwhich causes contractions in an outercasing.

By creating a temporal ‘artist’ that willperform art-producing activities Meartexplores questions concerning art andcreativity, and the relationships we will

form with constructed entities thatexpress creative and intuitive qualities. Itsets out to explore these themes whilereferring to the ever-increasing pace ofthe evolution of biological technologies.How are we going to interact with suchcybernetic entities considering the factthat their emergent behavior may becreative and unpredictable? How willsociety treat notions of artistry andcreativity produced by semi-living entities?

and explore what and how the ‘artist’ willreact and what it will do. Meart takes thebasic components of the brain (isolatedneurons) attaches them to a mechanicalbody through the mediation of a digitalprocessing engine to attempt and createan entity that will seemingly evolve, learnand become conditioned to express itsgrowth experiences through ‘art activity’.The combined elements of unpredictabilityand ‘temperament’ with the ability tolearn and adapt, create an artistic entitythat is both dependent, and independent,from its creator and its creator’sintentions.

Meart (AKA Fish & Chips) in BioFeelwhat are we going to doA series of experiments will be performedin order to explore the relationshipsbetween the input/stimulation to theneuronal culture and the output/drawings.For example, a web cam (set up in thegallery space) will capture portraits ofsome of the viewers within the galleryspace. This image will be then convertedinto 64 pixels image. This pixel structurewill correspond to the 64 electrode arrayon which the neurons are growing. Thispixel map will be used to stimulate theneurons. Each turned on pixels will initiatea stimulation to the correlating electrodeof the multi electrode array. The initiationof this process will be the beginning of thedrawing. The stimulation will be constantper one drawing session and will be sentto the cultures in predefined iteration.

Then the MEA system (electro-physiological system) will record theelectrical activity generated by thedeveloping neuron and send sets of dataindicating the locations of neuron activityover the MEA to the robotic arm. This willbe converted into movement of the armtowards the corresponding areas of the

canvas or the choice of how many andwhich out of the 3 pens will draw in acertain point of time...

Multi Electrode Array and the feedbackmechanism: The Potter lab at Georgia Tech3 isdeveloping tools to study learning,memory, and information processing innetworks of cultured brain cells. These areobtained from the cortex of embryonicrats, and grown for months in Petri dishesthat have a multi-electrode array (MEA) of64 microelectrodes embedded in them(Made by Multi-channel Systems). Throughthese electrodes, they can send sensoryinputs (electrical stimuli) and read outresponses (action potentials) to and fromthe cultured neural networks. The neuralsignals are used to control an artificialbody, whether simulated on the computeror built of mechanical actuators such asthe robotic drawing arm of Meart. Sensedata from the body’s sensors are used totrigger stimulation of the network, via theelectrodes. By closing the loop, fromneural activity, to behavior, to sensing, tostimulation, it is hoped that it will learnsomething about itself and itsenvironment. The fact that the culturednetworks are growing flat on a glasssubstrate allows them to be observed inminute detail. The goals are both to learnmore about how brains work, and to applywhat is learned to designingfundamentally different types of artificialcomputing systems.

Data ProcessingDiscretely sampled information on theaction potential exhibited by the culturedneurons will be sent via direct TCP/IP linkto the control interface of the drawingarm (an IBM clone PC). From this data avector will be calculated that represents

Notes 1. A substrates fitted with an array of 8x8 electrodes on which neurons are cultured. The multielectrode arrays are

transparent, therefore the neuronal morphology can be observed. The dish is connected to amplifiers and a computer thatallows continuous stimulation of and recording from neurons lying on or near electrodes.

2. For more information about Takeover see http://www.aec.at/takeover3. http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/potter.php

4. DeMarse et al., 2001

In collaboration with SymbioticA (The Art and Sciencecollaborative research lab) at the Department ofAnatomy and Human Biology, University of WesternAustralia, and The Tissue Engineering and OrganFabrication Laboratory, Massachusetts GeneralHospital/Harvard Medical School.

The Tissue Culture and Art Project (initiated in 1996), is anon-going artistic research and development project intothe use of tissue culture and tissue engineering as amedium for artistic expression. The Tissue Culture & Art project (TC&A) utilizes biologicallyrelated technologies (mainly tissue culture and tissueengineering) as a new form for artistic expression to focusattention and challenge perceptions regarding the factthat these technologies exist, are being utilized, and willhave a major effect on the future.What is Tissue Engineering:Tissue engineering is the creation (fabrication) of humanmade tissues or organs, known as neo-organs (1). It is aboutproducing body spare parts. Tissue engineering usuallyinvolves the construction of artificial degradablebiopolymer scaffolding in the desired shape, which is thenseeded with the appropriate cells and immersed in asolution rich with nutrients and growth factors inconditions that try to emulate the body (37°C, 5% CO2).The system that provides these conditions is referred to as

a bioreactor. With the advances in stem(embryonic) cell technology, it is inessence an artificial womb, which isbeing used to grow us new

organs/extensions/additions.Tissue engineering can offer an option of producing whatwe refer to as Semi-Living Objects. A tissue is a collectionof cells of an individual organism that specialize inperforming a specific task. When we combine this specialtywith other tissue (not necessarily from the same organism)and artificially constructed support mechanisms, we willbe able to ‘grow’ task specific or general use tools. TheTC&A Project is interested in using tissue engineering andartificial wombs to grow sculptures.

Tissue Culture & Art(ificial) WombsThe Tissue Culture & Art ProjectOron Catts, Ionat Zurr and Guy Ben Ary

Worry dolls

BIO

FE

EL

>T

he

Tis

su

e C

ult

ure

& A

rt P

roje

ct

> T

iss

ue

Cu

ltu

re &

Art

(ifi

cia

l) W

om

bs

These sculptures are still in the realm of a symbolic gesture representing a new class of object/beinThese objects are partly artificially constructed and partly grown/born. They consist of both synthetmaterials and living biological matter from complex organisms. These entities (sculptures) blur thboundaries between what is born/manufactured, animate/inanimate and further challenge operceptions and our relations toward our bodies and constructed environment.The concept of using Semi-Living Objects can be seen as a way to minimize the risks associated witnew technologies as well as a way to eliminate some of the problems regarding the existing technologieand culture of consumerism. Changing the culture of production from manufacturing to growing coureduce the environmental problems associated with the process of manufacturing. The relationships thconsumers will form with these semi-living objects will be different from the relationships they havwith inanimate objects. Tissue engineering offers a possibility to change our own design as well as creaa new breed of ‘things’: Presently, scientists are trying to mimic nature. However, how will we look whewe decide to improve nature? Are we going to see fashion driven neo-organs? Are we going tcompletely objectify living matter?We feel that not enough attention is directed at proposing, examining and questioning the possibfutures where this new technology can take us.

Doll A = stands for the worry from Absolute truths, andof the people who think they hold them.

Doll B = represents the worry of Biotechnology, and theforces that drive it. (see doll C)

Doll C = stands for Capitalism, Corporations

Doll D = stands for Demagogy, and possible Destruction.

Doll E = stands for Eugenics and the people who thinkthat they are superior enough to practice it.

Doll F = is the fear of Fear itself.

G= is not a doll as the Genes are present in all semi-living dolls.

Doll H = symbolizes our fear of Hope

Doll A Doll B

Doll C

Doll D

CAPTION ?? mnxc,vn,mxcn .,mnb n. bbmbxcmnxc,v n,mxcn.,mnb n. bb mbxcmnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnbn. bb mbxc mnxc,vn,mxcn .,mnb n. bbmbxc

The Worry Dolls:We chose to grow modern versions of the legendary Guatemalan Worry Dolls in theartificial womb.

“The Guatemalan Indians teach their children an old story. When you have worriesyou tell them to your dolls. At bedtime children are told to take one doll from thebox for each worry & share their worry with that doll. Overnight, the doll will solvetheir worries. Remember, since there are only six dolls per box, you are onlyallowed six worries per day.” (2)

We decided to give birth to seven dolls, as we are not kids anymore. We may not be allowedto have more than six worries but we surely have. The genderless child like dolls representthe current stage of cultural limbo: a stage, that is characterized by child like innocence,and a mixture of wonder and fear when we create the new sex – hence, a new era. We gave them alphabetical names as we think that we can find a worry for each letter ofthe language that made us what we are now. While working on the Tissue Culture & ArtProject, people expressed to us their anxieties. These dolls represent some of them. You arewelcome to find new worries and new names… You will be able to whisper your worries(not just in terms of biotechnology) to these dolls and hope that they will take theseworries away.

Doll F

Doll H

Doll E

CAPTION ?? mnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n. bb mbxcmnxc,vn,mxcn .,mnb n. bb mbxc mnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n. bbmbxc mnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n. bb mbxc

Doll A = stands for the worry fromAbsolute truths, and of thepeople who think they holdthem.

Doll B = represents the worry ofBiotechnology, and the forcesthat drive it. (see doll C)

Doll C = stands for Capitalism,Corporations

Doll D = stands for Demagogy, andpossible Destruction.

Doll E = stands for Eugenics and thepeople who think that they aresuperior enough to practice it.

Doll F = is the fear of Fear itself.G= is not a doll as the Genes are

present in all semi-living dolls.Doll H = symbolizes our fear of Hope…

Our worry dolls were hand crafted out ofdegradable polymers (PGA and P4HB) andsurgical sutures. The dolls were sterilizedand seeded with endothelial, muscle, andosteoblasts cells (skin, muscle and bonetissue) that are grown over/into the

polymers. The polymers degrade as thetissue grows. As a result the dolls becomepartially alive!Will they take our worries away?

The process, in which the natural (tissue)takes over the constructed (polymers), isnot a “precise” one. New shapes and formsare created in each instance, depending onmany variants such as the type of cells, therhythm of the polymer degradation and theenvironment inside the artificial womb(bioreactor). It means that each dolltransformation cannot be fully predictedand it is unique to itself. We are still in therealm of a dialogue with nature rather thana complete control over it. Our dolls are notclones but rather unique.

Notes:1. Tissue Engineering: The Challenges Ahead, by Robert S.Langer and Joseph P. Vacanti, Scientific American, April 1999,pp. 62-65.2. Taken from the written note attached to the Worry Dollpackage.Worry Dolls were purchased from a comic shop in Boston,

USA.

CAPTION ?? mnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n.bb mbxcmnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n. bbmbxc mnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n. bbmbxc mnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n. bbmbxc

CAPTION ?? mnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n.bb mbxcmnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n. bbmbxc mnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n. bbmbxc mnxc,v n,mxcn .,mnb n. bbmbxc

Pig wings

Oro

n Ca

tts,

Iona

t Zu

rr a

nd G

uy B

en A

ry

BIO

FE

EL

>>

TH

E T

ISS

UE

CU

LT

UR

E &

AR

T P

RO

JEC

T>

PIG

WIN

GS

This project was developed as part of our residency at theTissue Engineering and Organ Fabrication Laboratory,Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical SchoolUSA, and further developed in SymbioticA - The Art &Science Collaborative Research Laboratory, Department ofAnatomy & Human Biology, University of WesternAustralia. Advances in bio-medical technologies such as tissueengineering, xenotransplantation, and genomics promiseto render the living body as a malleable mass. The rhetoricused by private and public developers as well as the mediahave created public anticipation for less than realisticoutcomes. The full effects of these powerful technologieson the body and society have, in most cases, onlysuperficially discussed. Deciphering the human geneticcode, and the creation of genetically modified pigs for thepurpose of transplanting their organs into to humans(xenotransplantation) opens up a space for the creation ofambiguous chimeras. The Pig Wings project was set toexplore this space. Winged bodies (both animal andhuman) have been used in most cultures and throughouthistory. Usually, the kind of wings represented the creature(chimeras) as either good/angelic (bird-wing) orevil/satanic (bat-wing). There is yet another solution toflight in vertebrates which seems to be mostly free ofcultural values - that of the Pterosaurs. We have usedtissue engineering and stem cell technologies in order togrow pig bone tissue in the shape of these three sets ofwings. The Pig Wings installation presents the first everwing shaped objects grown using living pig tissue,alongside the environment in which such endeavour cantake place. We will attempt to present living tissueengineered pig wings that will be animated using livingmuscles. This absurd work presents some serious ethicalquestions regarding a near future where semi-livingobjects (objects which are partly alive and partlyconstructed) exists and animal organs will be transplantedinto humans. What kind of relationships we will form withsuch objects? How are we going to treat animals withhuman DNA? How will we treat humans with animalparts? What will happen when these technologies will beused for purposes other then strictly saving life?

The

Aest

hetics

of

Part

sBy

Iona

t Zu

rr &

Oro

n Ca

tts It was her 16th birthday and she knew

that from today she would finally be ableto get a legal implant (most of her friendshad one already). She had been planningthat for a while. A Few months ago shewent to the Implants Farm and checkedthe catalogue and the displays. She knewimmediately what she wanted: a pair ofdecorative wings. Just like those ofhamster-bat she got for Christmas whenshe was ten. The farm’s practitioner tooka biopsy from her inner-thigh and thenshowed the scaffold design. “Would I fly?”she asked. He laughed, “ Ho no, that willrequire a complete redesign of your bodyand even then you will only be able toglide. These wings are designed to go withthe current fashion of backless dresses.”“What about these feathered wings?” sheinquired. “I don’t think your parents havethe budget” he replied “ and, beside, theywill not grow with you, they are for adultsonly.” It was a regular procedure and therisk of contamination was reduced to lessthan 3%. The farmer took her behind theoffice, to the implants growth factory.She looked through the glass window tothe sterile farm, where pigs with differentbody parts seamlessly attached to themlay in pools of clear liquids. He showedher to “her pig”. She immediately liked“her pig”. It was smooth and its skincolour was just like hers. The farmerexplained that the pig carried humangenes to increase human-pigcompatibility. She trusted the pig to carryand grow her wings till they would begrafted back to her(A story of an upper class girl, 2028).

Deleuze and Guattari metaphor of ‘becoming animal’ till there is no longer man or animal’is becoming real with the advance in xenotransplantation, genetics, tissue technologiesand stem cells research. Artists dealing with hands on wet biology art practice areexploring the tangibility of such abstraction. As artists working for the last six years withliving tissues we have come to realize the reality of a fragmented body and ‘self’. We havegrown and sustained alive for long periods (up to six months) communities of cellsindependently from their original host. We have grown them externally to a body as partof our on going research into growing semi-living sculptures . The above biological

and ‘he felt “mentally detached” from it , focused attention to the complex relationsbetween the self and the introduced extension. Different aspects of art expression havebeen dealing with the mix/fusion of identities, genders and classes between the “selves”of the donor’s organ and its recipient: A murderer’s heart implanted in its victim’s bodyand so forth. One human is becoming a hybrid of two humans. The shortage in humanorgans has encouraged a research into xenotransplantation. Xenotransplantation is thetransplantation of cells, tissues or organs from non-humans. This procedure crosses aspecies barrier that has evolved over millions of years. Furthermore, The procedure

technologies open up an array of body treatment, enhancement and modification. Itsuggests contestable futures of cross-species and mergers that will profoundly questioncurrent held moral and belief systems. Organ transplantation is now a common procedurepracticed in the biomedical field. Organs are being harvested from either living or deaddonors in order to extend lives. This practice of ‘extended bodies’, like any other practice,operates within the socio-economic fabric, enabling the well off to receive more andbetter-conditioned organs, such as young healthy livers for affluent alcoholics. Organ tradeand organ theft are widely practiced around the world. Organs become commodities thatcan extend life as well as be used for body enhancement and modifications. The first caseof a hand transplant demonstrated the use of organ transplant techniques for proposesbeyond strictly saving life. The media reported that the recipient requested that the ‘new’hand be removed from him as ‘He said it was like a dead man’s hand with no feeling in it’

involves genetic manipulation and insertion of human genes into the animal (mainly pig)

genome for better compatibility. The human-animal cross, from a biomedical perspective,presents new procedures and new risks that can only be assessed in a perspective of a timescale of more than one-generation. ‘Tricking’ the evolutionary mechanism by surgical andchemical means to suppress the immune system in the organ recipient and introducingpathogens and viruses from another species may result in unrecognized and new virusinfections and other clinical syndromes. Also, the cross infections among humans (and theiroffspring) is unknown. Bach (1998) in his call for a moratorium on all humanxenotransplantations, titles his commentary as “individual benefit versus collective risk”.Nevertheless, insertion of pig cells into humans is being done, such as insertion of pig’sPorcine cells into brains of patients with neurological diseases. The human-animal physicalcross is still facing biological and ethical hurdles. Though its potential in terms of ‘the

becoming animal’ offers a new dimension;a physical human-animal hybrid. Tissueengineering technologies have been offeredas another solution to deal with theshortage in body parts. Tissue engineering isa technique that offers the constructionand growths of an organ in vitro (outside ofthe body) using the patient’s own cells, andthe re-implementation of the organ back tothe recipient. It is intriguing that the imageof the subject/object who brought tissueengineering into the public psyche was themouse with the ear on its back. A nudemouse (a mouse with suppressed immunesystem) was used as a bioreactor, hence asa ‘vessel’ for the growth of an organ. Thescaffold of the ear was constructed out ofspecial biodegradable polymers and seeded,in vitro, with cartilage and skin cells fromthe earless patient. As the cells grewover/into the scaffold it degraded. In anearly stage during this process theconstruct was attached to the mouse,which acted as a nutrient supplier andtemperature regulator. The walking sniffingchimera ‘scarred’ each human who wereexposed to it. One may suggest, that it hasbecome one of the most important icons ofthe late 20th century. A living icon of ourunlimited sculpting and designing abilitiesto create the creatures/monsters of ourimaginations and the possibility to sculptand design ourselves in these shapes. Stemcells are the current ‘holly grail’ in thebiomedical field. Embryonic stem cells arecells before differentiation. Hence, thesecells have the ability to divide to any typeof tissue, when they are given the rightconditions and appropriate growth factors.The general idea behind this promise is theability to clone an identical twin withidentical DNA. This twin should notnecessarily develop into a whole humanbeing. It can become A ‘Bag of organs’ withno central nervous system that will be therein case you need or desire an organ. “Mytwin is a liver” can become not only a figure

of speech. The combination of stem cellsand tissue engineering technologies can beappropriated not only for saving/extendinglife and/or the growth and construction oforgans in the “original design”. Thesetechnologies open up a gate to thetreatment of a living body as a malleableentity. One will be able to attach a tail, ahorn or any fashion driven shape of tissueto ‘its’ own limited and less than perfectbody. In the socio-economic climate inwhich these technologies operate, we canspeculate on the large divide between thewell off and the less advantaged as well asbetween the human species and the rest ofthe animal kingdom. We can also speakabout the playfulness and decision makingbased purely on aesthetics and/or fashiondriven taste. As all of these technologieswill become more available in differentforms and different prices, the idea ofOrgan Farms (for replacement, modificationand enhancement) might become a reality.Body parts made out of different animalstissues might become objects of desire. Thetraditional view of a body as oneautonomous unchangeable self will gothrough a radical change. Body parts aredesigned, exchanged, replaced andsustained in a semi-living state as part ofthe environment. Animals are being used asa bioreactor for the growth of other parts.Naturally, as we suffer from speciesm, non-humans animals such as pigs will becomethe “vessels” for the growth of ears, nosesand other body decorations. Stem cellstechnologies for the rich, pig farms for thepoor and the adventurous. ActualizingDeleuze and Guattari’s “becoming ananimal” to physical actuality will severelychallenge current belief systems, which areunable to account for developments inbiological technologies. Are you willing totake this day trip to the farm?

Between 1999-2001, Adam Zaretsky was exploring theeffects of music on bacterial fermentation as an Artist andResearch Affiliate in Arnold Demain’s Laboratory forMicrobiology and Industrial Fermentation atMassachusetts Institute of Technology. During that time,Oron Catts and Ionat Zurr were also in Boston. They werein the process of growing their Pig Wings as as ResearchFellows in Dr. Vacanti’s Tissue Engineering and OrganFabrication Laboratory at Massachusetts GeneralHospital’s Harvard Medical School. That we were in thesame town living with similar day-to-day tactics was purehappenstance. As some of the few artists who usebiological laboratories as their studios, we decided tocollaborate by playing Pig Music to Pig Wings. To this end, we downloaded all the pig related MP3s fromthe soon to be illegal Napster. By typing in PIG as thekeyword, our search revealed a cross section of theetymological nuance symbolically connected to this familyof animal. A few examples: War Pigs by Black Sabbath,Fascist Pig by Suicidal Tendencies, Da Killing of Da Pigs byDa Yoopers, Chokin this Pig by Eminem, Squeal Like a Pig byThe Reverend Horton Heat, Filth Pig by Ministry, AmericanPigs by The Angry Samoans, British Pigs- The Price ofRoyalty by One Life Choir, PigInCheez By Aphex Twin, BlueChristmas by Porky Pig and of course, Pigs on the Wing byPink Floyd.

Once a week, over the next threeweeks, we played Pig Music to PigWings at Mass General Hospital. Thisallowed us time during the week torelax and listen to music with thesteadily differentiating boneprecursor cells. We started with whatwe referred to as a Dynamic SeedingMusical Bioreactor. Getting cells deepinto constructs is common quest formany in the tissue engineering field.The constructs are very porous and itwas hypothesized that the irregularvibrations of the music might assist inthe distribution and physicalembedding of the cells into theconstruct. The Vibro Transducers,generously donated by AcouveLaboratories, were intalled in a 37degree Celsius incubator. TheSynthecon Bioreactor vessels werethen stuck to these vibrating platespeakers. Inside the vessels were thewing shaped polymer constructs(about 4mm thick) and a rich sampleof Mesenchenal stem cells (each cell ~ 15 thousandths of a millimeter indiameter.) Pirate MP3s were played.Scientists, artists and stem cells tookmoments of repose together. Alteration of Sculptural Morphologywas noticed early on as the wingshaped biopolymers curled up likefried corn chips after the first fewsongs. Not surprisingly, the wings

visibly ‘danced’ to the music bothduring the early seeding of thebiopolymers and on their followingweekly exercise regiments. Bouncingand twisting, stretching and jumping,the Pig Wings took flight. After theincubation period had finished, someof the Musically Entertained PigWings were sent to histology to becompared to the Pig Wings whom hadbeen Musically Deprived.Considerable differences in cellscount, tissue morphology anddistribution throughout the constructwere ascertained. Although ourapplication of music to growingtissue cultures was informal and non-repeatable, our observations and theresults of the histological comparisonlead us to postulate that Pig Musicmay have a curious effect whenapplied to Pig Tissue in Vitro.

ADAM ZARETSKY

Adam

Zar

etsk

yin

col

labo

ratio

n w

ith t

he T

issu

e Cu

lture

& A

rt P

roje

ct

BIO

FE

EL

>A

DA

M Z

AR

ET

SK

Y>

DY

NA

MIC

MU

SIC

AL

S

EE

DIN

G

Philosophy of Science Purpose: If our research into the effects of sonic spectrumvibrations are progressing so neatly, why then is thenext stage of this project an interactive public event?MMMM… is an artistic experiment. No hard data isexpected to arise. This in no way limits potentialinsights into the natural world that might stem fromMMMM... Most artistic products, if shaken well, exudescientific data as a by-product. Unfortunately, thereare often strong and contentious reactions to cross-disciplinary activities. It is almost as if breadth itselfwere a kind of blight on the stability of taxonomy. Iflabels and classifications are more than mythic, faithbased logics of the day, then they shouldn’t have such aphobic reaction the birth of hybrid concepts andcomplex admixtures. With a little grant money, this toocan be reduced to its fundaments. Tame All Anomalies!Artistic Purpose: I am a rather insular little maniac. Iknow how important it is that interactivity beinteractive and not some uni-dimensional point/click act ofavoidance. Dialogical artworks areimportant diffusers of theunsporting voyeurism of which bothscientific objectivity and artistic appreciation are proneto. This bodily bi-directional communication is bothremote and deeply interpersonal. It should remind us ofour corporeal fleshiness and, byproxy, our relation to all the squigglythings that squiggle upon the earth.As a libertine in the days of deadlySTDs, this is perhaps a reflection ofthe traumas of libidinal economizingfor personal survival. The vibratoryarts are highly underrated due tofears of lost productivity.

MMMM… Adam ZaretrskyIn MMMM…(Macro/Micro Music Massage), we, the public, are invitedto join in the process of sonic performance for cells in culture. Pleaseengage your living unfamiliar relatives. Here is your chance to massagevarious living tissues or organisms without getting your hands dirty.We, as fleshy flasks of living culture, are also invited to become part ofthe experiment by vocally vibrating each other’s rear ends at the sametime. Two ButtVibe lounge recliners are placed facing each other on oppositesides of a room. The chairs massage according to sound output mikedfrom the vocalizations of the person in the opposite chair. This caninclude voice and instruments/noisemakers. The same signals are sentto neighboring vibrating plate speakers applied to various lifeforms. Theorganisms will bounce, splash, stretch, bear down and/or jump toattention in response to the audio source. Please Feel Free to Sit Downand Talk to the Living Specimens! Video of reclining volunteers and their life-world mirrors dancing onbiopolymers is projected above and behind the volunteers. Thisfunctions as a closed circuit and very local vibro-videophone for talkingto various kinds of strangers. We have here a real time, multimedia,multi-species erotic continuum of sonic jostling. We also have theability to record a certifiable non-repeatable effect through bioassay ofpublic play. Please record any data you might have amassed during yourresearch in the communal lab books provided.Public Knowledge Purpose: My personal favorite artistic offering topublic experience is the reinsertion of fun for fun’s sake into the social.I know that sounds simple and naïve. It is. Vibrating chairs aretitillating. The idea of helping strangers in public liven each other’sbodily experience shamelessly in a temporary suspension of moralstandards is my call to duty. It’s something to do while waiting for theAIDS vaccine. At the same time, the conjoining of the microcosm andthe human body, so often forgotten in the workaday world, isemphasized. Simple assays could show alterity of cells due to vibration,which can be an effective comparative aid in analyzing human facialresponse patterns to mechanical tickling and vibro-erotism in general.This sensual experience could abstract our importance as self-centeredentities by focusing on bounce as a form of transient existence. In otherwords this is art and tech lite, public hedonism and unashamedly so. SitDown and Extrapolate!

Viva Tac

tility!

AMY YOUNGS The plant inside this device is both interactive withpeople and protected from them. Its metal armor closesup when approached and opens when people moveaway from it. Through cloning and micropropagationtechnologies, humankind has engineered creations suchas the Spineless Opuntia, a cactus that lacks its originaldefense mechanism against those who eat them. Thissculpture embodies my impulse to protect thisvulnerable, human-engineered creation. But it alsoreveals the folly of protection in its heavy reliance ontechnology.

Rearming the Spineless Opuntia – 1999 (60"x30"x30") Live Spineless Opuntia cactus, electroniccomponents – including ultrasonic sensors and microprocessor - motor, copper, steel, aluminum andrubber.

AM

Y YO

UN

G

BIO

FE

EL

> A

MY

YO

UN

G>

RE

AR

ING

MO

DIF

IED

LIV

ING

SY

ST

EM

S

During the last thousands of years humankind has tried tomanipulate Nature. Today’s dogs, cats, horses, and cropsare evidence of what has been achieved by artificialselection. It is remarkable that the understanding ofhereditarity and evolution is so recent, when our ancestorswere using it empirically for so long. In 1953 the molecularbasis of hereditarity was disclosed as the structure of DNAwas revealed by Watson and Crick. In the last 50 yearssignificant scientific advances have been made, allowingthe modification of life in an extremely controlled way.Biotechnology was born to explore these new tools for thebenefit of humankind.However, the remarkable tools of modern biology are seenwith hope and fear, simultaneously. It is becoming possibleto develop new therapies for uncurable diseases, but at thesame time the public fears the misuse of this powerfultechnology. As a consequence, words like transgenic,genome, clone and stem-cells have spread from scientificpublications into the mass media. As society becomesaware of biotechnology, with all its hopes and fears, artistshave started to include references to biotechnology intheir works.Furthermore, biotechnology offers the opportunity tocreate art using biology as new media. We are witnessingthe birth of a new form of art: art created in test-tubes,inside laboratories.My work has been focused on the possibilities that modernbiology and genetic research offer to artists. I have beentrying not only to portrait the recent advances ofbiological sciences, but to incorporate biological materialas new media: DNA, proteins and cells offer an opportunityto explore novel ways of representation andcommunication. Consequently, my recent artistic activityhas been conducted in research laboratories.

Being an artist, with no formal training in biologicalsciences, I always have to start by learning the jargon andtechniques in use in the laboratory. With time I learn thepossibilities and limitations of the experimental systemsavailable. At that point I can start producing biologicalartwork.

Marta de Menezes

Mar

ta d

e M

enez

es

BIO

FE

EL

>M

AR

TA

DE

ME

NE

ZE

S>

PR

OT

EIC

PO

RT

RA

IT

Figure 1 Proteic Portrait Study showing similarities between marta and claw8a, as well as predicted structures ofmarta.

NucleArtIn NucleArt I am using DNA labelled withfluorochromes to paint the nuclei of livehuman cells. I want to explore therelationship between the object and theobserver. The artworks are live human cellspainted with DNA. However, in order to beadequately observed they have to be killed.Like in many scientific subjects, from theEisenberg’s principles to anthropologicalstudies, frequently the observation disruptswhat is being observed. Chromosomes are made of DNA, acomplementary double helix, and arelocalised in the nucleus of cells. Normalhuman cells have 46 chromosomes; femaleshave 23 represented twice, including two Xchromosomes, and males have 22represented twice plus an X and a Ychromosome. The position of chromosomesin the cell nucleus is determined in part bycertain rules. For example, somechromosomes tend to stay closer to theperiphery of the nucleus while others aremore commonly found towards the centre.With this information, it is already possibleto predict, to a certain extent, wherechromosomes should appear, and to paintthem accordingly. However, there are stillmany uncertainties concerning the positionof chromosomes in the cell nucleus. In fact,one of the topics being researched in AnaPombo’s laboratory, where the project isbeing developed, is how different humanchromosomes interact with each other.In the NucleArt project I explore newpossibilities by adapting cell biologytechniques to the production of art. Icombine the knowledge of the relativeposition of the chromosomes with thecapacity to use DNA to paint each one ofthe chromosomes specifically. Thetechnique is known as Fuorescence In-Situ

Hybridisation (or FISH) and can also beused to visualise segments of chromosomesor even single genes. Groups ofchromosomes can equally be stained withthe same colour. In this way, it is possible tocreate relatively controlled images wheresome or only one chromosome is paintedwith or without portions of it in othercolours. The resulting artwork requires theuse of a confocal laser scanning microscopein order to be visualised.

All the images I have been creating areanalysed by scientists as they might provideclues for a better understanding of how thehuman nucleus is organised. In fact, one ofthe objectives of all my projects is thedemonstration that artists can work inresearch laboratories alongside scientists incollaborations leading to advances in bothart and science.

The artworks are exhibited using computerprojections in order to convey the three-dimensional structure of the humannucleous.

Functional PortraitsFor years artists have been attempting toportrait not only someone’s appearance,but also how the person is. The personalityof the model can be conveyed by elementsof the pose, the setting and even thetechnique used by the artist. Science has developed powerful tools toimage the interior of the body. SinceRoentgen’s discovery of X-rays, one caneasily see what is hidden behind the skin.Today, new imaging technology allowsbetter visualisation of both biologicalmorphology and function. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging(fMRI) of the brain permits direct

Figure 2 NucleArt Two chromosomes inside a human cell. Stack of images.

visualisation of the brain regions that areactive in real time, while the subject isperforming a given task. In this project I have been attempting tocreate Functional Portraits by imaging thebrain function of the model, whileperforming a task that characterises herselfor himself. I have been using fMRIequipment more powerful than the onesused for medical diagnosis in order toachieve better images. The first portraits Ihave been producing are ‘Patricia’ with herbrain activity while playing the piano and aself-portrait with my own brain functionwhile drawing.

I am now planning, as a development ofFunctional Portraits, to paint the brain bymanipulating its activity. With theknowledge of the brain regions that areactivated by certain tasks or stimuli, it ispossible to design a number ofsimultaneous tasks and stimuli that willachieve a complex brain activity pattern. Inother words, by planning a defined set oftasks it is possible to “paint” a definedpattern of brain activity. Although theartwork has a short lifespan – as long as thesubject is performing the tasks – it ispossible to document it by means of fMRI.It is a case where it becomes possible tocreate art by simple thought.

Proteic PortraitProteins are frequently as beautiful ascontemporary sculptures. To explore acomputer database of protein structuresusing software and hardware allowingthree-dimensional visualisation is likeexploring an art gallery.

I decided to take advantage of the visualopportunities offered by structural biologyin order to create a self-portrait usingproteins as art medium. Proteins are made of 20 differentaminoacids, each one can be represented byletter (one-letter code). As a consequence,it is possible to use that convention todesign a protein whose aminoacid sequencecorresponds to a name. However,interesting three-dimensionalconformations are only seen when theprotein is over a given length: very shortpeptides adopt linear structures relativelyuninteresting. As a consequence, myprofessional name – Marta de Menezes –would be too short for an interestingconformation. However, as portuguesepeople tend to have very long family namesI could design a protein with my full name,the marta protein:

MARTAISAVELRIVEIRDEMENESESDASILVAGRACAUsing computer databases it is possible toconfirm that there is no known protein inNature with such aminoacid sequence. Infact, it is even possible to identify thenatural proteins most similar proteins tomarta. Computer modelling also createsseveral possible conformations for marta,based on the structure of similar aminoacidsequences in known proteins. However, theexact conformation of marta, can only bedetermined experimentally by solving itsstructure using nuclear magnetic resonance(NMR) or crystallography. The proteic portrait will only be finishedwhen the true structure of marta will beuncovered.

Figure 3Nature? Bicyclus butterfly with a modification of the right wing. The larger eyespot was reduced to thecentral white patch.

AcknowledgementsNature? would not have been possible without the help of P. Brakefield, A. Monteiro, R. Kooi, K. Koops, and M.Bax at the Institute of Ecological and Evolutionary Biology, University of Leiden. NucleArt is a collaborationwith scientist A. Pombo, and helpful advise from S. Xie and S. Martin at the MRC – Clinical Sciences Centre,Imperial College, London. Chip-Art has insights from C. Goodman and T. Magalhães at the University ofCalifornia in Berkeley. Functional Portraits have been created with assistance from P. Figueiredo at theUniversity of Oxford.

We live in our heads too much – or at least we think we do.Post-Everything society asks us to disconnect withincreasing frequency and we listen, obediently ‘losing’ourselves in leisure, consumer and worker fantasies. At thefringes, radical movements like cyberpunk take up samecall, transmuting it into a notion of identity as a kind ofsoftware and envisioning the society’s literaldisembodiment. New Age spirituality – seemingly anentirely opposed worldview – strongly continues theGnostic desire to jettison the decay and inertia of materialreality.

HEDKIKR is a free improvising duo. We make sound from aninteraction that is heavily weighted toward the physical andthe subconscious. It comes from the body, from under themind – from outside. We like it out there.

Our work at SymbioticA has been literally to put thephysicality of our performance under the microscope. Thecloser technology permits us to look at the world, theharder it is to escape the idea that the time scale of thehuman universe is too slow. Built on systems that are builton more systems – human perception is at the blunt end ofthe scale. From the scale’s pointy other end, our mostminute actions proliferate into a tidal wave ofconsequences. Our unification of experience is a fabricationconstructed out of a vertiginous array of micro-universes.

Bacteria and viruses are where the action is.

We have developed a series of performances analogous to alaboratory culture – with certain environmental conditionsand a prescribed duration. Each new performance retainssome form of audio or visual residue from the last, creatingits own micro-history.

It’s Experimental music – we hope to justify the capital E.

HEDKIKR:

Darr

en M

oore

Dru

ms

and

Lind

say

Vick

ery

Saxe

s

BIO

FE

EL

> H

ED

KIK

R>

IN

TE

RS

EX

TIO

N

Andr

é Br

odyk

BIO

FE

EL

> A

ND

RE

´ B

RO

DY

K>

DN

A A

RTIn first semester 2002 SymbioticA offered for the first time

a hand on course in Art and Biology. Adam Zaretsky, avisiting research fellow in Symbiotic was the driving forcebehind this course, drawing on his experience in runningart and biology courses and workshops in San- FranciscoState University and The School of The Art Institute ofChicago. Dubbed VivoArt, this course was delivered byAdam Zaretsky and Oron Catts and involved both practicaland theoretical sessions. Students received hands onexperience in Molecular Biology (inserting a gene from ajellyfish (GFP) into bacteria), Tissue Culture, DevelopmentalBiology, and more. The course also extensively coveredissues related to the ethics of using living systems forhuman centric ends with invited speakers from the zoo,animal research ethics, scientists and artists. Some of thestudents’ works is presented as part of BioFeel. SymbioticA ,University of Western Australia

The installation ‘DeoxyriboNucleicArt” is a work in progress.This work engages with the processes used in RecombinantDNA technologies as new art marking processes and the useof living material as new art media. Creative interpretationsand applications of recombinant DNA processes enable theencryption of extra biological material derived frominanimate and aesthetic sources for use as synthetic DNA.The inanimate sources used in this installation arefragments derived from biotech industry companywarehouses, laboratories and research facilities. Whensynthetic DNA is vectored into the genomes of livingorganisms such as Escherichia coli bacteria, it isincorporated into the genetic makeup of the organism. Theloci of such genetic transformation can be seen as sites ofpermeable aesthetic exchange, between innate and livingmaterial. Living entities comprised of encrypted extrabiological material embody a new medium of “in vivo” artexpression. Appreciation as well as apprehension of suchpermeable interrelationships between all things at a geneticlevel is made fecund by the experiences provided by suchnew art media and processes.

André Brodyk July 2002

Acknowledgements: University of New South Wales, College of Fine Arts University of Newcastle

SymbioticA ,University of Western Australia

DNArt

Guy Ben AryBorn in USA (1967), lived in Israeland Australia. Currently living andworking in WA. Manager of theImage Analysis and AcquisitionFacility (IAAF), Department ofAnatomy and Human Biology, UWA.Specialising in light microscopy,biological and digital imaging.Member of the Tissue Culture & ArtProject (joined in 1999). JoinedSymbioticA – The Art & ScienceCollaborative Lab in April 2000.Trained in programming, webdevelopment & Law (LLB).

André Brodyk: Bio artist born inAdelaide AustraliaCurrently PhD candidate at theCollege of Fine Arts University ofNew South WalesMFA from COFA UNSWResearch interests centred onrecombinant DNA technologies andprocesses and the use of livingmaterial as new art processes andnew art media. Currentlyinvestigating the use of syntheticDNA via art based encryptions. Artistin residence at SymbioticA researchlaboratory UWA. Undertakenresearch in microbiology laboratoryat University of Newcastle. Australia.

Dr. Stuart Bunt MA DPhil (Oxon)Co-founder of SymbioticA, the firstart and biology lab situated in ascience department. Have consulted

and lectured on the nexus betweenArt/Science and Technology,exhibited in Ars Electronica andcollaborated or helped produce anumber of biotech art piecesrevolving around emergenttechnologies in the biosciences.Background in science(developmental neuroscience lab, DPhil in Natural Philosophy, Oxford),and the arts (Director/co-founderSymbioticA). Senator at theUniversity of Western Australia, chief

executive biomedical software spinoff company, Paradigm Diagnostics,and founder of the Image Acquisitionand Analysis Facility, UWA.Marcus Canning:Marcus works and collaborates withmany different people in manydifferent ways. Most recently he hasbeen busy bee as a designer for the‘Shishka-Car’ spectacle at theAdelaide Festival 2002, and ascreator of the video work andinflatable set used in Buzz DanceTheatre’s ‘Cave’ production, whichhas just toured to Korea. He curatedthe ‘Now You See It’ windowinstallation exhibition in Midlandwhich is still running, and started inApril as the Director of the ArtrageFestival – which kicks off in October.Previously he was Creative Directorof the Awesome Festival’s regionalprogramme. The first pneumatic softsculptural work he undertook was aballoon snake created incollaboration with all the kids inKalumburu – the most remotecommunity in the Kimberley. He hasan incessant and never-ending videoopus which will one day crawlgasping into the light of day. It iscalled ‘Dough-Boy’. It features acosmic chef deity who floats throughspace and has a small white rat livingin his mouth.

Oron Catts: Tissue engineer artist. Born in

Finland, lived in Israel andAustralia. Co-Founder andArtistic Director ofSymbioticA – The Art &Science Collaborative

Research Laboratory at The School ofAnatomy & Human Biology,University of Western Australia.Founder of the Tissue Culture and ArtProject (1996). Research fellow atThe Tissue Engineering & OrganFabrication Laboratory,Massachusetts General Hospital,Harvard Medical School (2000-2001).Trained in product design, andspecialized in the future interactionof design and biological derivedtechnologies.

Marta de MenezesMarta de Menezes is a Portugueseartist (b. Lisbon, 1975) with a degreein Fine Arts by the University inLisbon, and a MSt in History of Artand Visual Culture by the Universityof Oxford. In recent years, she hasbeen exploring the interactionbetween Art and Biology, working inresearch laboratories demonstratingthat new biological technologies canbe used as new art medium, andproving that laboratories can be artstudios. Besides researching into newways to create art, Marta de Menezesis also an accomplished artist usingtraditional media, with paintingsfrequently representing insights fromscientific research.

Phil GamblenBorn in the UK in 1964. Migrated toCanada in 1966. Trained and workedas a gem cutter in the 1980’s. Re-settled in WA in 1991 after two yearsof travel. Graduated from ClaremontSchool of Art in1996 and CurtinUniversity of Technology in 1998with an Honours Degree in Fine Art,majoring in sculpture. Currentartworks utilize motion and light toinvestigate technological aspects oftoday’s culture, the overlap of art andscience and the re-use of obsoleteand discarded materials.

Sohan Hayes:Sohan completed a degree in Fine Artat UWA, graduating 1997. His artpractice spans a diverse array ofmediums, some of them being kineticsculptures, performance work, video,installation, sound and CG characteranimation for CD-ROM games . Inrecent years with the AwesomeChildren’s Festival regional programSohan has travelled to variouscommunities around WesternAustralia, working with young peopleto create special events and artworks.

Darren Moore Sought after in the jazz and avant-garde scenes, Darren Moore formedthe cult Perth band Air Ensemble in

1995 which rapidly became one the mostpopular groups on the local music scene.Recently Darren has returned to Australiaafter a three year stay in London were hetoured and recorded with a diverse crosssection of musicians and bands playingjazz big band, blues, funk, commercial,studio work and avant-garde gigs.

Matt RichardsBorn in Perth, Western Australia in 1973.Matt spent the first 16 years of his lifetraveling the state from town to townevery year and a half. During that time hediscovered a passion for storytelling,putting on plays with his brother in theirgarage and charging the locals a smallfee. Graduating with an award winningfilm from the Advanced Diploma of FilmAnd Television at the WASAD in 2000,Matt went on to work on numerousprojects around town. An earlierFascination for all developments in theNew Sciences let to his involvement inthe Fish And Chips Project. A verypersonally rewarding project andunforgettable experience. Crrently heavilyinfluenced by Experimental electronicmusic and the Indi/hardcore scene fromthe US, Matt seeks to further expand hisskills in the fusion of art, music, film,politics and science.

Ian SweetmanThrough an eclectic and undistinguishedcareer Iain Sweetman is uniquelyunqualified in, but has at one time oranother earned a living from;photography, bacteriology, pulmonaryphysiology, bass playing, recordproduction, sound engineering,neurobiologly, forensic anthropology,maths, applied computer science, networkadministration, artificial intelligence,strange art projects involving fish androbots and, tentatively, haptics . He stilldoes not know what he wants to do withhis life, but if he ever gets paid what hethinks the world owes him, travellingaround the world with a bicycle, a tentand a credit card is a strong possibility.

Lindsay VickeryComposer/performer Lindsay Vickery ‘smusic includes works for acoustic andelectronic instruments in interactive,improvised or fully notated settings,ranging from solo pieces to opera andinteractive video. He has beencommissioned by numerous groups andperformed in Holland, Poland, Norway,Germany, England, the Phillipines, theUSA and across Australia. Lindsay hasbeen artist-in-residence at STEIM (NLD),HarvestWorks (NYC), LACMA (LA), theUniversity of Illinois and the MATAfestival (NY). Vickery is a lecturer at the

WAAPA@ECU in Perth. He was a foundermember of Magnetic Pig, GRIT, HEDKIKRand LA-based multimedia group Squint.More Info:www.magneticpig.iinet.net.au/lv/lv.html

Gil WeinbergGil Weinberg is a researcher, a composer,and a Ph.D. candidate at MIT MediaLaboratory. His research focuses on usingtechnology to bring powerful musical andartistic experiences to the general public,novices, and children. He publishedjournal and conference papers on thesubject and was commissioned tocompose and develop installations byorchestras, art exhibitions, and festivalsworld wide. Gil has a Masters degree in media arts and sciencesfrom MIT and a B.A. in music, arts, andcomputer science from Tel Aviv University,where he founded the musicologydepartment electronic music studio andtaught the electronic music course. Formore – www.media.mit.edu/~gili

Amy YoungsAmy M. Youngs exhibits mixed-mediainteractive sculptures nationally andinternationally. Reviews of her workappear in the Chicago Reader andArtweek and her articles have beenpublished in Leonardo and Nouvel Objet.She has lectured nationally, including,California State University, Long Beachand the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology. She was awarded anIndividual Artist Fellowship Grant fromthe Ohio Arts Council in 2002. Shereceived a full Merit Scholarship to studyat The School of the Art Institute ofChicago, where she completed her MFA in1999. Youngs is currently an AssistantProfessor of Art at The Ohio StateUniversity.

Adam ZaretskyAdam Zaretsky has just finished teachinga novel course, VivoArts: Art and BiologyStudio as a Professor ofConceptual/Information Arts (CIA) at SanFrancisco State University and as anHonorary Researcher Fellow at theUniversity of Western Australia. As thefirst international artist to reside withinSymbioticA, The Art and ScienceCollaborative Research Laboratory, he iscontinuing his research on the effects ofmusic on the dynamic seeding of tissuecultures onto biopolymers. The humanposterior rotunda is also an object ofvibratory arts research. This explains a lotabout MMMM his upcoming BEAP@PICAinstallation. Contact:injector@emutagen.com

Ionat Zurr: Wet Biology art practitioner. Born inEngland, lived in Israel and Australia.

Artist in residence in SymbioticA – The Art& Science Collaborative ResearchLaboratory at The School of Anatomy &Human Biology, University of WesternAustralia. Co-Founder of the TissueCulture and Art Project. Research fellowat The Tissue Engineering & OrganFabrication Laboratory, MassachusettsGeneral Hospital, Harvard MedicalSchool(2000-2001) Studied photographyand media studies, specializing inbiological and digital imaging, as well asvideo production.

Acknowledgements:Professor Miranda Grounds, School ofAnatomy & Human Biology, University ofWestern Australia; Dr. Stuart Bunt, School of Anatomy &Human Biology, University of WesternAustralia; Dr. Joseph Vacanti, The Tissue Engineering& Organ Fabrication Laboratory,Massachusetts General Hospital, HarvardMedical School; Kylie Sandy and Dr Stuart Hodgetts,School of Anatomy & Human Biology,University of Western AustraliaDr. David P. Martin, TEPHA Inc. CambridgeMassachusetts; Aslihan Sanal, MIT, STS Program; Dr. Hidetomi Terai, Dr. Didier Hannouche,Dr. Julie Fuchs and Alec Sevy, The TissueEngineering & Organ FabricationLaboratory, Massachusetts GeneralHospital, Harvard Medical School; Dr Frederic Gimenez, MIT BioengineeringDepartment; Graham Jones & Brad Hope fromCoherent Life Sciences. Cornelius Nienaber Greg Cole -Scientific Glass Blower fromthe Department of chemistry, UWA.Artists, Marcus Canning and Sohan Hayesfor designing and constructingSymbioticA Central Laboratory.Nguyen Ly, Image Acquisition & AnalysisFacility, School of Anatomy & HumanBiology, University of Western Australia;Will Axton & Glenn Tweedie from ProfileDigitalAll of the good people in the School ofAnatomy & human Biology for their helpand support.

Julia Reodica, Artist & LaboratoryTechnician - Exploratorium San Francisco.

Bio-Bios