Explore the truth behind the statement ‘Transdisciplinarity leads to originality’.
I will be discussing the opinion that transdisciplinarity can lead to the growth of originality within society. In this discussion I will be looking at two art works, one by Gunther Von Hagens and another by Jonathan Harris. I will analyse both artists and their work to further my investigation. Originality can be defined as ‘The ability to think independently and creatively.’ (http://oxforddictionaries.com), one may find that in a world that has been producing art for centuries it could be difficult for current artists to create anything truly original anymore. However one may find that cross-disciplinary relationships could further the possibilities of artistic subjects by allowing for a broader definition to the word ‘art’. Although a neologism transdisciplinarity can be defined as the crossing of the lines that classify one discipline from another. For example, the work of Gunther Von Hagens crosses the lines of science and biology and ventures into the artistic field by presenting corpses as sculptures.
Professor Gunther Von Hagens was the producer behind the controversial collection of plastinated human corpses titled ‘Body worlds’. Fig 1. Shows one of many scenarios in which Von Hagens has positioned the plastinated bodies into a seemingly normal activity or event like playing football, dancing or as with Fig 1. playing poker. In reference to the manner in which these bodies become plastinated statues, the tissue is impregnated with plastics and silicone rubber to become a permanent solid form. In Von Hagens’ words, the he wanted the exhibition ‘“to convey awareness for health and a better understanding of bodily functions by offering visible entertainment anatomy instead of school anatomy.”’ (G. Von Hagens. Anatomy Art: Fascination beneath the surface.). From this one may survey that von Hagens main goal was the education of others regarding personal health and awareness. Von Hagens explained his work as being ‘edutainment’ in the hopes that this new presentation of the body would encourage people to look at the human form with interest rather than fear, disgust or generally negative feelings.
It has been mentioned in the past the idea that these works may not belong in the field of art, but more likely a museum exhibition or educational services:
‘In large part, Body Worlds expresses a “museum ethos” oriented to public education.1 Its didactic aim is to communicate the importance of preserving one’s health and the complexity of the human body. However, Body Worlds is also an art show… Other bodies are transformed into surreal body-sculptures, for example, a man holding his own skin or a body opened up like a chest of drawers.” (The American Journal of Bioethics P.12)
This work is highly original in that although human anatomy has been the subject of many artists work, Body Worlds definitely the most known case of plastination. Moreover, one may find Body Worlds to be a step up from the historical works of biological illustrators such as Da Vinci, taking the estimated and undefined to the factual and completely defined. The work produced by von Hagens allows for people to come up close and personal with human anatomy and to have the opportunity to look at the subject in scale and proportion which before was barely a possibility. Another artist I believe to be of extreme relevance to this exploration is Damien Hirst, it could be mentioned that Hirst’s Thermaldahide encased animals are only a small step behind von Hagens’ Body Worlds work. Although a highly controversial collection of artwork, Hirst’s animals may seem tame when people are confronted with von Hagens’ human cadaver sculptures
I have found that Professor Gunther von Hagens’ work is a clear cross over between science and art in that his work was created for educational purposes, but it possesses features such as a stylised signature and the obvious appearance of each body scenario being human sculptures. I believe this work to be a perfect objectification of how transdisciplinarity leads to originality as this is something that would never have been classified as art before the boundaries of fields became less defined.
Next I will discuss the ways in which Internet artist and Computer Scientist Jonathan Harris has been able to create art through the production of software. Jonathan Harris’ work is a mix between art and social sciences such as phycology and sociology. In a Ted Talks Lecture, Harris explains that since a young age he has been interested in the collection of stories; his own and those from the people around him. In the project titled ‘Today’ Harris photographs one thing every single day as a way of expressing his need to preserve memories and to not forget even the smallest of his stories.
Whilst studying Computer science at Princeton University he discovered that through the internet, he could access ‘“personal artefacts”’ (J. Harris, 2005, the web as art) from all over the world via blogs posts where people shared their thoughts, feeling, opinions and even photographs with the rest of the internet. Harris found this to be an ideal method of collecting a large quantity of small scale personal stories. This method allowed Harris to gather a massively diverse collection of personal experiences. As seen in Fig 2. Harris has created an interface from this opportunity, collecting blog posts that feature the phrases ‘I feel’ or ‘I am feeling’ that are then categorised depending on the emotion each post represents. ‘We feel fine’ allows users to browse through these posts, giving them the option to filter the results using preferences like specific emotions, gender, age, the location the posts where made, what the weather was like when the people posted and the date of when they were posted. When speaking about ‘We feel fine’ Jonathan Harris explains that the main goal is “to show off a world that resonated with shared emotions, concerns, problems, triumphs and troubles.” (J. Harris, 2005, the web as art). One may find this to be a way of bringing the internet community together by linking emotions from blog posts to the author of each, especially in the case of posting about negative emotions.
Society has been the focus of a great deal of art for hundreds of years, especially in times of social duress like during war or revolution. Many artists have tried to cross the boundaries between sociology or psychology and art in previous years, for example, performance artist Marina Abramovic conducted a social experiment meant to test people’s mentality when provided with permission to do what they will to another person. In what Abramovic titled Rhythm 0, 76 objects were placed before a gallery audience, with the artists blessing that they could use any items on that table on her, in any way they pleased. Some of the objects included were a rose, a feather, grapes, honey, a whip, a scalpel, a gun and a bullet. (M. Abramovic, 1972). When speaking of her performance Abramovic explained how the audience reacted:
In the beginning the public was really very much playing with me, later on became more and more aggressive, it was six hours of real horror. They would cut my clothes; they would cut me with the knife across my neck, drink my blood and then put a plaster over the wound. (M. Abramovic, 1972)
In reference to sociology as the main discipline that Harris covers, the creation of We feel fine could be viewed as a socioeconomic exploration of society, by categorising factors like age, gender and location, Harris is able to gather a large quantity of practical and representative personal accounts. Another major advantage is the frequency of the data income, although posts may be sporadic, they are extremely frequent for most bloggers.
Through the crossing of discipline boundaries the introduction of ‘internet art’ technology has become a new and developing form of art. Moreover the people who are creating these artworks are people who would probably never have associated themselves with art before this new art form. This allows more people to be able to access art, critic and author of ‘Internet Art’ Rachel Green explores the possibilities that net art will bring forward; “Unlike the work of traditional artists, net art is almost always public and so it will be cherished by people who relate to art without having to own it.” (R. Greene, 2004). This helps to support the argument that transdisciplinarity leads to originality because, as with all technology, the development will allow for new forms of creation.
To sum up the points covered, the definitions of certain disciplines are becoming obscured and the disciplines are becoming much harder to denote than they have previously been. In addition, people may not find it necessary to define their discipline or practice anymore as they are not as important as the actual creations made by the practitioner. In relation to originality, I believe that the progression of obscured definitions are helping to broaden the boundaries of what is regarded as art, and this in turn is helping to create more original pieces of work.
