Re: LIFESCIENCE: Responsibility diversity and tolerance

[PROFRICHAR@aol.com]

---------------------------------------------------------
ARS ELECTRONICA FESTIVAL 99
LIFESCIENCE
Linz, Austria, September 04 - 09
http://www.aec.at/lifescience
---------------------------------------------------------
In einer eMail vom 01.08.99 20:56:28 MEZ, schreiben Sie:

<< Thema:    Re: LIFESCIENCE: Responsibility diversity and tolerance
 Datum: 01.08.99 20:56:28 MEZ
 From:  melinda@subtle.net (melinda rackham)
 Sender:    owner-lifescience-en@aec.at
 Reply-to:  lifescience@aec.at
 To:    lifescience@aec.at
 
bioethics is certainly an area that needs expansion here.. perhaps  artist
 who are dealing with these issues right now arent as widely accessable  as
 the older generation of artists like  the earlier mentioned man'o steel
 stellarc and woman'o.silicone orlan..who i see in a very uncritical
 position..playing with cyborg possibilites in quiet a clunky superficial
 way.
 
maybe this is a matter of point of view, for me orlan and stelarc s work are 
interesting and disturbing piece of art . they take themselves and their own 
body and work on it, 
so their responsibilty is for their own body. they do not present modified 
other lifeforms for whom they have to take responsibility.

perhaps i am also very old-fashioned stuck in a position liking art that is 
provocative.


 other artists like australians  ionat zuur  and oran catts who engineer
 tissue culture as living sculptural objects.. are looking at the
 integration of  an art/science interface.. http://www.imago.com.au/tca/.
 
 its fuuny that ethical issues  always seems to be relegated to some
 committe that looks into what has happened after the fact.. and that those
 who oppose " scientific progress" are labelled as  anti social misfits,
 untill sometime later when a new ecological/biological/ virilogical
 disaster happens.

so that is the point that artists have to develop objects that raise that 
questions before everything is fixed economically. 


 its about global thinking, which hopefull the net should foster more of,
 as oopposed to  local thinking, ie only being concerned with more yields
 therefore higher profits from gm crops, rather tahn seeing gm crops as a
 part of the food chain that effects our whole life world.

you are perfectly right! genetically modified food would not stop at any 
border, global capitalism fosters these products upon us, if one country 
resist it will be imposed through the backdoor, newest example the release of 
important sanctions for british beef in the european union.

regards
birgit
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to the English language version of LIFESCIENCE
To unsubscribe the English language version send mail to
lifescience-en-request@aec.at (message text 'unsubscribe')
Send contributions to lifescience@aec.at
--------------------------------------------------------------------------