Bioart has become an increasingly popular form of expression, but also a more debated topic. Artists are taking advantage of life processes to produce art. The controversy between what is considered living versus being alive creates ethical issues. An exhibit at the Museum of Modern Art, Paola Antonelli uses mouse tissue as the centerpiece. The tissue is living, but when it got to the point where too much was growing, they had to cut off their nutrients and “kill” the exhibit(Miranda). Although the idea for such a medium is interesting, I do not believe it is ethically sound to create life in a laboratory to test it or kill it. However, this being said, there should be separate standards for creating or manipulating living organisms and semi-living organisms. Living subjects should never be manipulated in any way that may be harmful or without an unknown consequence. Tissue that is multiplying and being manipulated in a laboratory should be monitored and always kept in mind that the tissue is living, just as a plant is living.
Scientists are limited with what they can do when testing animals to avoid issues with “animal rights.” The restrictions should be the same with artists who experiment and create BioArt. The morality is the same whether the organism is being used by a scientific or for artistic purposes. Today, people have the ability to genetically modify plants and animals to achieve a desired trait. For example, GMOs in fruits and vegetables change the phenotype of the food. Organic foods are smaller, duller in color, and have imperfect shapes that may be unappealing to a consumer. Genetic modification allows for a larger, more colorful, and perfectly shaped fruit or vegetable that is aesthetically attractive. It is still unsure how these affect humans when eaten for a long period of time, causing controversy with GMO versus non-GMO products sold in grocery stores and restaurants. Although this may be limiting human creativity, ethical concerns should be a factor in creating art of any medium.
"Weird Science: Biotechnology as Art Form." ARTnews. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 May 2015. <http://www.artnews.com/2013/03/18/biotechnology-as-art-form/>.
"Seed Magazineabout." This Is Your Brain on Food § SEEDMAGAZINE.COM. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 May 2015. <http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/this_is_your_brain_on_food/>.
"Animal Testing - the Facts." Animal Testing - the Facts. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 May 2015. <http://www.planet-science.com/categories/over-11s/technology/2011/09/animal-testing---the-facts.aspx>
"Bio Art." Bio Art. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 May 2015. <http://bioart.sva.edu/>.
"Bio Arts and Bio Engineering - BioArts.com." BioArtscom. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 May 2015. <http://www.bioarts.com/>.
Hi Jake,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you completely that while Bioart is interesting, it should not come at the harm of living creatures. They should be held to the same restrictions and standards that scientists. A living creature's quality of life should not be diminished because of human creativity. I like the issue of GMOs that you brought up. It will be interesting to see if these genetically modified foods will be found to cause harm or not after extensive use.
-Marissa