Nicolas Nova recently dropped a nugget on what he calls Art + Science in Collaboratory.
Last week, there was a very pertinent article in the NYT: Researchers Look to Create a Synthesis of Art and Science for the 21st Century by John Malkoff. The articleâ€™s take is the fact that artists will be central to the future of computing technology. It exemplifies this thesis through different examples liek Calit2 or MIT.
Why do I blog this? The topic is one near and dear to my own research interests, both in terms of how transdisciplinary collaboration might work to spur innovation in the practices I enjoy (technology mediated social formations, mobile and pervasive design, etc., etc.). I’m also engaged in trying to figure out how to create a collaboratory. Sigh. It’s hard!
It’s an ongoing topic out in the world. Douglas Rushkoff’s new book Get Back in the Box : Innovation from the Inside Out (December 2005, Amazon tells me) is on-point. I was lucky enough to read it before December â€” heartily recommended! Rushkoff is blogging sneak-peeks, as we speak.
One approach to addressing these topics is a research proposal I submitted to the US [w:NSF] Science & Society directorate titled A Study Of Inter- and Transdisciplinary Collaborations Amongst Scientists, Engineers and Artists. My proposal took the conservative approach of studying a specific collaboration practice â€” Bell Labs scientist Billy Kluver’s Experiments in Art and Technology group in the 1960s. If given the opportunity to conduct this research, I would use it as a wedge into the larger topics of how collaboration can become productive, and to figuring out the business case for such an innovation framework.