Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper explores collaboration between artists and scientists through participant observation. Four artist/scientist pairs worked together to create ten-minute performances for a festival held in January, 2009 in Ithaca, New York. Each pair created their piece over the course of three two-hour meetings, the first of which employed a cultural probe to open a discourse between the artist and scientist and to facilitate collaboration. My role as a participant observer allowed me to closely observe collaborative processes in which pairs engaged in boundary work and made use of boundary objects. The boundary work helped the pairs establish authority and autonomy within their respective sub-fields, while at the same time provoking discussions that led to the creation of their projects. The pairs used three types of boundary objects: existing, created, and appropriated. These established a common language by which they could create and present their performances to an audience.

Keywords

art and science boundary objects boundary work collaboration science and performance

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Atkinson

Hammersley

(1994) Ethnography and participant observation. In: Denzin

Lincoln

(eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 248–261.

Becker

(2008) Art Worlds, 2nd edn. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (Original work published 1984.)

Boehner

Vertesi

Sengers

Dourish

(2007) How HCI interprets the probes. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. San Jose, CA: ACM, 1077–1086.

Burnett

(1999) A view from the bridge: The two cultures debate, its legacy, and the history of science. Dædalus 128(2): 193–218.

Callon

(1999) Actor-network theory: The market test. In: Law

Hassard

(eds) Actor Network Theory and After. Oxford: Blackwell, 181–195.

Cohen

(2001) Science and humanities: Across two cultures and into science studies. Endeavour 25(1): 8–12.

Daston

(2005) Fear & loathing of the imagination in science. Dædalus 134(4): 16–30.

Fujimura

(1992) Crafting science: Standardized packages, boundary objects, and “translation.” In: Pickering

(ed.) Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 168–211.

Gaver

Dunne

Pacenti

(1999) Design: Cultural probes. Interactions 6(1): 21–29.

10.

Gaver

Boucher

Pennington

Walker

(2004) Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. Interactions 11(5): 53–56.

11.

Gieryn

(1983) Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review 48(6): 781–795.

12.

Gulden

Baldwin

(2007) Wildflower shadow. Hand-painted genetically-engineered E. coli bacteria, in culture. URL: http://amychasegulden.blogspot.com/2007/07/ecoli-bacteria-wildflowers-in-process.html

13.

Hilgartner

(1990) The dominant view of popularization: Conceptual problems, political uses. Social Studies of Science 20(3): 519–539.

14.

Holton

(1978) The Scientific Imagination: Case Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

15.

Kovac

(2002) Two cultures revisited: New widening gaps. World Futures 58(1): 1–11.

16.

Latour

(1988) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

17.

Latour

Sheridan

Law

(1988) The Pasteurization of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

18.

Laudan

(1983) The demise of the demarcation problem. In: Grünbaum

Cohen

Laudan

(eds) Physics, Philosophy, and Psychoanalysis: Essays in Honor of Adolf Grünbaum, illustrated edn. Boston, MA: Springer, 111–127.

19.

Leavis

Yudkin

(1963) Two Cultures? The Significance of C. P. Snow. Being the Richmond Lecture, 1962. With a New Pref. for the American Reader. And an Essay on Sir Charles Snow’s Rede Lecture. New York: Pantheon Books.

20.

Ortolano

(2002) Two cultures, one university: The institutional origins of the “two cultures” controversy. Albion: A Quarterly Journal Concerned with British Studies 34(4): 606–624.

21.

Ortolano

(2009) The Two Cultures Controversy: Science, Literature and Cultural Politics in Postwar Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

22.

Popper

(1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books.

23.

Ruse

(1990) Making use of creationism: A case-study for the philosophy of science classroom. Studies in Philosophy and Education 10(1): 81–92.

24.

Ruse

([1988] 1996) But is it Science? The Philosophical Question in the Creation. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

25.

Snow

(1963) The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

26.

Star

Griesemer

(1989) Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science 19(3): 387–420.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.09 MB