This is a review essay based primarily on the 2021 Routledge Handbook of Art, Science, and Technology Studies, edited by Hannah Star Rogers, Megan K. Halpern, Dehlia Hannah, and Kathryn de Ridder-Vignone. It focuses particularly on the use of art for public engagement with science and technology and it also draws upon the following books: Dialogues Between Artistic Research and Science and Technology Studies (2023), edited by Henk Borgdorff, Peter Peters, and Trevor Pinch, Making Art Work: How Cold War Engineers and Artists Forged a New Creative Culture (2020) by Patrick McCray, and Art, Science, and the Politics of Knowledge (2022), by Hannah Star Rogers.
BeckerH. S. (1982). Art worlds. University of California Press.
2.
BorgdorffH.PetersP.PinchT. (Eds.). (2023). Dialogues between artistic research and science and technology studies. Routledge.
3.
BornG.BarryA. (2010). ART-SCIENCE: From public understanding to public experiment. Journal of Cultural Economy, 3(1), 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530351003617610
4.
BourriaudN. (1998). Relational aesthetics. Les Presse Du Reel.
5.
BurriR. V. (2021). Doing research by means of art. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 183–197). Routledge.
6.
CalvertJ.SchyfterP. (2017). What can science and technology studies learn from art and design? Reflections on ‘Synthetic Aesthetics’. Social Studies of Science, 47(2), 195–215.
7.
CalvertJ.SchyfterP. (2021). What can science and technology studies learn from art and design? Reflections on ‘Synthetic Aesthetics’. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 63–80). Routledge.
DawsonE. (2014). “Not designed for us”: How science museums and science centers socially exclude low-income, minority ethnic groups. Science Education, 98(6), 981–1008. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21133
10.
DawsonE. (2018). Reimagining publics and (non) participation: Exploring exclusion from science communication through the experiences of low-income, minority ethnic groups. Public Understanding of Science, 27(7), 772–786. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517750072
11.
de Ridder-VignoneK. (2021). Art, artists, and the wrong kind of science education. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 295–318). Routledge.
12.
FeltU.BarbenD.IrwinA.JolyP. B.RipA.StirlingA.StöckelováT. (2013). Science in society: Caring for our futures in turbulent times. European Science Foundation, 50, 1–36.
13.
FitzgeraldD.LittlefieldM. M.KnudsenK. J.TonksJ.DietzM. J. (2014). Ambivalence, equivocation and the politics of experimental knowledge: A transdisciplinary neuroscience encounter. Social Studies of Science, 44(5), 701–721. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312714531473
14.
GierynT. F. (1999). Cultural boundaries of science—Credibility on the line. The University of Chicago Press.
15.
GluzmanY. (2021). Reflexivity practiced daily: Theatricality in the performative doing of STS. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 249–270). Routledge.
16.
HabermasJ. (1973). Erkenntnis und interesse. Suhrkamp Verlag.
17.
HabermasJ. (1987). The theory of communicative action volume 2—The critique of functionalist reason. Polity Press.
18.
HalpernM. K. (2021). Negotiations and love songs: Integration, fairness, and balance in an art–science collaboration. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 319–334). Routledge.
19.
HesslerS. (2021). Curating in-between systems politics, ecology, and art. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 542–548). Routledge.
HorstM. (2011). Taking our own medicine: On an experiment in science communication. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(4), 801–815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9306-y
22.
HorstM. (2013). Learning from discomfort: Science communication experiments between diffusion, dialogue and emergence. In PhillipsL.GunnarssonE.KristensenM.VehvilainenM. (Eds.), Knowledge and power in collaborative research: A reflexive approach (pp. 21–41). Taylor and Francis; Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203083673
23.
HorstM. (2021). Science communication as a boundary space: An interactive installation about the social responsibility of science. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 47(3), 459–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439211003662
24.
HorstM.DaviesS. R.IrwinA. (2017). Reframing science communication. In FeltU.FouchéR.MillerC. A.Smith-DoerrL. (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (4th ed., pp. 881–907). The MIT Press.
25.
HorstM.MichaelM. (2011). On the shoulders of idiots: Re-thinking science communication as ‘event’. Science as Culture, 20(3), 283–306.
26.
IrwinA.WynneB. (Eds.). (1996). Misunderstanding science?Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
27.
JordanS. B. (2021). Recipes for Technoutopia: On hospitality and infrastructure as experimental performance. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 239–248). Routledge.
28.
LatourB.WeibelP. (2005). Making things public—Atmospheres of democracy. The MIT Press.
29.
LiebermanJ. L. (2021). Discovering alternative technological futures through literature. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 214–227). Routledge.
30.
LuhmannN. (1995). Social systems. Stanford University Press.
31.
MaggicM. (2021). We’re all living in an Estroworld. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 542–548). Routledge.
32.
MarshallO. (2021). Infrastructural inversions in sound art and STS. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 411–414). Routledge.
33.
McCrayW. P. (2020). Making art work: How cold war engineers and artists forged a new creative culture. The MIT Press.
34.
NoldC.SobeckaK. (2021). Aesthetic strategies for engaging with environmental governance. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 91–101). Routledge.
35.
RogersH. S. (2021a). Art’s work in the age of biotechnology: How art can make arguments in science and technology studies. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 228–238). Routledge.
36.
RogersH. S. (2021b). Constructing borders and borders at the instersections of art and science. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 47–18). Routledge.
37.
RogersH. S. (2022). Art, science, and the politics of knowledge. The MIT Press.
38.
RogersH. S.HalpernM. K. (2021). Introduction: The past, present, and future of art, science, and technology studies. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 1). Routledge.
39.
SalterC. (2021). The art–science complex. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 1–46). Routledge.
40.
SammanN.CharrièreJ. (2021). As we used to float: Within Bikini Atoll. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 577–590). Routledge.
41.
SchickL. (2021). The power of generative critique in art–energy projects. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 469–487). Routledge.
42.
ShellH. R. (2021). The skin of a living thought: Art, science, and STS in practice. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 81–90). Routledge.
43.
TriscottN.SantomauroA. (2021). Transdisciplinary co-inquiry as curatorial methodology: From the Canadian Arctic to the Calder Valley, Yorkshire. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 335–254). Routledge.
44.
VaageN. S. (2021). Trading between science and art worlds: From biology laboratory to art exhibition. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 276–294). Routledge.
45.
WilletJ. (2021). Feasting the lab and other projects: Art and science that skirts the limits of institutional frameworks. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 396–406). Routledge.
46.
WitzkeA. S.FritschJ. (2021). Environ/mental ecologies in new media art. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 616–626). Routledge.
47.
WrayB. (2021). Emotion, affect and participation: Why science communication practitioners should embrace a feminist ethics of care in their work. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 130–140). Routledge.
48.
ZaretskyA. (2021). Human germline gene editing is bioart: An open letter to Lulu and Nana. In RogersH. S.HalpernM. K.HannahD.de Ridder-VignoneK. (Eds.), Routledge handbook of art, science, and technology studies (pp. 450–464). Routledge.
