From Laboratory to Gallery: Transfer of Construction Principles of Scientific Knowledge into Works of Science-Art

Science-art is seen as an artistic practice that uses scientific theories, concepts and laboratory equipment as its main tools, and the creative method of artists is based on the principles of scientific experimentation. Using the methods of the sociology of science and technology of B. Latour and S. Woolgar to study science-art, it is found that scientific experimentation becomes the basis (medium) of this direction of contemporary art. Thus, science-art borrows not only material objects of the scientific world, but also ways of constructing scientific knowledge, which, according to B. Latour’s research, are hidden in the specifics of laboratory practices. Key in this case are “recording techniques”, which replace various data, diagrams, samples and materials in the production of scientific knowledge, and which become an argument in academic discussions. For science-art, the analogue of such written documents are curatorial texts and explications of works, which can be placed both directly in the exhibition space and form a complex system of references to various research materials, interviews with scholars, podcasts, etc. These texts and media texts allow us to use them in the exhibition space. These texts and media texts allow the viewer to perceive the context of the artist’s creative experiment and form a specific artistic complex “artobject — text — audience”. Together with laboratory practices, science-art brings the art and mechanics of constructing scientific knowledge into the sphere of art, unwittingly fulfilling popularizing and educational tasks. However, the conceptual complexity of the works and the focus on the process of scientific investigation rather than on the presentation of results bring back to the viewer the doubt of philosophical quest and a critical view of scientific research as basic elements of academic enquiry.

1. Reichle I. Art in the Age of Technoscience: Genetic Engineering, Robotics, and Artificial Life in Contemporary Art. Wien, New York, Springer-Verlag, 2009, 422 p.

2. Bulatov D. Introduction, Nauka kak predchuvstvie [Science as Suspense]. Moscow, 2009, p. 12. (in Russ.).

3. Levchenko O.E. Osvoenie prirody sredstvami sains-arta: “estestvennoe” i “tekhnologicheskoe” [Mastering Nature by Means of Science Art: “Natural” and “Technological”], Cand. cult. sci. dis. Moscow, 2016, 399 p.

4. Gromova V. First Manifesto of “Science-Art”: The Origins of a Notion, Iskusstvoznanie [Art Studies], 2022, no. 4, pp. 310—331 (in Russ.).

5. Chalmers D.J. Facing up to the Problem of Consciousness, Journal of Consciousness Studies, 1995, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 200—219.

6. Henderson L.D. Illuminating Energy and Art in the Early Twentieth Century and Beyond: From Marcel Duchamp to Keith Sonnier, Energies in the Arts. Cambridge (MA), MIT Press Publ., 2019, pp. 127—170.

7. Symposium “New Elements”. February 12, 2022. Section 1. Science-Art Today: Transformations of Interdisciplinary Communities, YouTube: Laboratoria Art&Science Foundation. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyNLuLnoD7k (accessed 11.07.2023) (in Russ.).

8. Akhromeeva T.S., Malinetsky G.G., Posashkov S.A. Interaction of Art and Science in the Context of Synergetics, Observatoriya kul’tury [Observatory of Culture], 2019, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 116—127. DOI: 10.25281/2072-3156-2019-16-2-116-127 (in Russ.).

9. Renk K. Magic, Science, and Empire in Postcolonial Literature: The Alchemical Literary Imagination. New York, Routledge Publ., 2012, 196 p. DOI: 10.4324/9780203156117.

10. Latour B. Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy. Moscow, Ad Marginem Press Publ., 2018, 336 p. (in Russ.).

11. Latour B. Visualization and Cognition: Drawing Wings Together, Knowledge and Society Studies in the Sociology of Culture Past and Present. Greenwich, CT, Jai Press Publ., 1986, vol. 6, pp. 1—40.

12. McLuhan M. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. London, New York, McGraw Hill Publ., 1964, 389 p.

13. Krauss R. The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths. Moscow, Khudozhestvennyi Zhurnal Publ., 2003, 317 p. (in Russ.).

14. Krauss R. Under Blue Cup. Cambridge, MIT Press Publ., 2011, 152 p.

15. Hari P., Kulmala M. Station for Measuring Ecosystem-Atmosphere Relations (SMEAR II), Boreal Environment Research, 2005, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 315—322.

16. Shahbazi-Gahrouei D., Gholami M., Setayandeh S. A Review on Natural Background Radiation, Advanced Biomedical Research, 2013, vol. 2, issue 3, no. 65, 6 p. DOI: 10.4103/2277-9175.115821.

17. Latour B., Woolgar S. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton, Princeton University Press Publ., 1979, 294 p.

18. Kabirova A. Film-Research. Project “One Artsapiens ID”, YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwM6jS8MlxQ (accessed 17.07.2023) (in Russ.).

19. Losev A.F. Istoriya antichnoi ehstetiki. Rannyaya klassika [History of the Antique Aesthetics. Early Classics]. Moscow, AST Publ., 2000, 846 p.

20. Smirnov N. Art as Alchemy or the Practice of Unity, Khudozhestvennyi zhurnal [Moscow Art Magazine], 2022, no. 120. Available at: https://moscowartmagazine.com/issue/108/article/2378 (accessed 11.07.2023) (in Russ.).

21. Eliade M. Aziatskaya alkhimiya: sbornik ehsse [Alchimia Asiatica: collected essays]. Moscow, Yanus-K Publ., 1998, 604 p.

22. Kant I. The Critique of Judgment. Moscow, Iskusstvo Publ., 1994, 367 p. (in Russ.).

23. Hegel G.V.F. Lektsii po ehstetike. V 4 t. T. 1 [Lectures on Aesthetics. In 4 volumes. Vol. 1]. St. Petersburg, Nauka Publ., 2001, 330 p.

24. Kuhn T.S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Moscow, AST Publ., 2009, 317 p. (in Russ.).

25. Latour B. Give Me a Laboratory and I Will Turn the World, Logos, 2002, no. 5—6 (35), pp. 211—242 (in Russ.).

26. Lubar K. Color Intervals: Applying Concepts of Musical Consonance and Dissonance to Color, Leonardo, 2004, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 127—132. DOI: 10.1162/0024094041139283.

27. Blinov N.N. Glaz i izobrazhenie [Eye and Image]. Moscow, Meditsina Publ., 2004, 320 p.

28. Kövecses Z. Extended Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press Publ., 2020, 206 p.

29. Komleva E.A. Science Art as Science and Innovation Communication to the Society, Kommunikologiya [Communicology], 2019, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 169—181. DOI: 10.21453/2311-3065-2019-7-4-169-181 (in Russ.).

30. Bogoslovskaya I.V. Nauchno-populyarnyi tekst: slozhnost’ ponimaniya [Scientific-Popular Text: The Complexity of Understanding], Cand. phil. sci. diss. Moscow, 2001, 192 p.

31. Bykova K.S. Linguo-Cognitive Mechanisms for the Formation of a Scientific Myth in Popular Science Discourse: To the Statement of the Problem, Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin], 2022, no. 4 (222), pp. 96—106. DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2022-4-96-106 (in Russ.).

32. Vakhshtain V.S. Popularization of Science: from Enlightenment to Obscurantism, YouTube: FutureBiotech. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hMmPZT7Rws (accessed 11.07.2023) (in Russ.).

33. Sontag S. Against Interpretation and Other Essays. Moscow, Ad Marginem Press Publ., 2014, 351 p. (in Russ.).

34. Thacker E. In the Dust of This Planet: Horror of Philosophy: Vol. 1. Moscow, Medlennye Knigi Publ., 2018, 177 p. (in Russ.).

35. Groys B. Pod podozreniem [Under Suspicion]. Moscow, Khudozhestvennyi Zhurnal Publ., 2006, 197 p.