SciArt Magazine - All Issues | Page 11

at the time—perhaps the first instance in which an animal was made out to be an artistic installation. “It is a new era, and we need a new kind of art,’’ said Kac told the Boston Globe at the time. “It makes no sense to paint as we painted in the caves.” But many questioned what Kac was actually trying to do. At the time, it seemed that his only goal in creating Alba was to basically get a glow-in-the-dark bunny. Kac would later pen an essay after Alba was born, explaining his artistic vision behind the , saying he wanted to comment on the way humans are taming wild animals into domestication and using selective breeding to change them in ways that better conform to our “created realities.” It reads as disingenuous, in my opinion, and Kac comes across as being more interested in spectacle than art. Moreover, it should be noted that Kac—who did not actually create Alba himself, but simply contracted a French lab to genetically engineer the bunny—hasn’t got a real grasp of the science behind this . GFP works in any animal that has no hair, under special light conditions. The animal does not simply glow at all times, or even in the dark—a special light needs to be pointed at it to cause the protein in the body to fluoresce. “On the one hand, the green bunny is an icon of current scientific practice, like GloFish,” says Anker. “But on the other hand, it’s also an icon of fraud, so to speak. And it does raise the issue of fraud, which has been problem in art since art began.” More audacious, however, could be the current work by experimental Canadian poet Christian Bok. His Xenotext has a very ambitious goal: the creation of a living poem. Bok’s aim was to create an organism whose genetic information, when translated, contained the first stanza of a poem. That same genetic information would encode for a protein that, when translated, would be the following stanza. ing how to modify the organism in a way that will cause it to successfully produce the desired protein. The enciphered gene reads “any style of life/ is prim”, and the resulting protein translates to “the faery is rosy/ of glow…” The kicker is that the protein results in a red fluorescence, giving the bacterium a ‘rosy’ red glow. Like Alba, the Xenotext results in an organism that more or less stands as an actual artistic installation. But what Bok has done is something even more grand in its scope: he has created an organism that perpetuates the art indefinitely and stores it for what may be many more years, when considering time outside of human history. “We know of no other means of storing information that can endure for such long periods of time,” says Bok. “We may consider using genomes as a means of preserving information that doesn’t relate to survival of the species.” Of course, there’s no escaping the fact that this field of art raises a ton of ethical issues. Any endeavor involving the use of animals always brings about loud voices from both sides. “If bio art gains more respect and has more of an institutional backing—and if artists behave themselves, which could be a problem in the lab since artists notoriously break rules—there’s a bright future,” says Anker. But as is the case with other fields of work that rely heavily on genetic engineering of organisms, there is still a huge concern among the public that others are going too far. Although scientists are required to follow a heavy set of protocols when conducting research involving live animals, many institutions exist outside of tightly regulated organization (such as schools), and many artists work independently. They are largely free to act as they choose. At the SVA’s “Naturally Hypernatural” conference, questions from the audience on the first day directly brought up the issue of whether this was sound work. Anker and her colleagues seemed quick to dismiss those notions. This might have been out of a re