In the beginning of the 20th century, faith in progress and scientific discovery had primary influence on both artists and scientists. As a result of this belief, a conviction that a scientific spirit forms part of a new artistic synthesis emerged raising expectations for a fundamental shift to gradually demolish the separation between the arts and the sciences by providing a new platform for interaction and dissemination. This position was in accordance with modernist theories including experimentation of the early twentieth century, by seeking innovative directions to chart a new, contemporary landscape in art, science and emerging technologies. Today, when the boundaries between specialties of knowledge become increasingly blurred, an investigation of some aspects of this theme is especially timely particularly as the dissemination of the results of these collaborations has the potential to create new knowledge, new ideas and processes beneficial to both fields. Despite these obvious benefits, exhibitions of the art and science projects –as outlined in the followings – remain frequently difficult.

Over the last century some of the earlier expectations concerning interdisciplinary efforts became a reality; today we witness far more cross-disciplinary collaborations than a couple decades ago. This is perhaps best exemplified by BioArt, which in part is facilitated by the spectacular advances of medicine and biotechnology. BioArt is an art practice in which the medium is living matter and the works of art are produced mostly in medical laboratories and/or artists’ studios. Bio-artists use materials that blur the traditional distinctions between science and art (BioArt). Notwithstanding the visible progress in developing cross-disciplinary projects – presentation opportunities (especially museum or art festival presentations) continue to be dismal. The reluctance to show such intricate projects in a traditional institute might be due to the complexity of technical requirements, as indeed several of these projects require high technology, oftentimes unavailable in art institutions. Sustainability of the art works as well as rapid technical obsolescence are other institutional deterrents The lack of enthusiasm by these venues however extends to low-tech, analog art & science works as well. To illustrate these points I would like to present examples from my own art & science and technology practice, especially a case study concerning an analog anatomical art project.

The background: Digital imaging technologies in medicine were implemented in the 1970′s, but until recently in human history, the body was solely viewed through the naked eye or (since the 17th century) via elementary mechanical magnification. Both of these sources of visualization traditionally carried limited possibilities for reproduction and, moreover, manipulation (Czegledy&Czegledy2000). While the currently available sophisticated technologies offer an entirely novel visual access to the human body, the time honored dialogue between analog representation of the body and medical imagery should not be forgotten. Anatomical visualization, dating back hundreds of years, flourished since the eighteenth century contributing to the growing prestige of medical education. It is obvious that the interior of the human body is difficult to visualize – in fact we have only an imperfect knowledge of the inner world of our own body – thus it remains mysterious and amazing. Yet the artistic value of anatomical artwork has been traditionally under valued. The failure of appreciation continues to this day.

Nearly ten years ago, during my curatorial work while researching historical materials for the Digital Bodies, Virtual Spectacles international touring project (Digital Bodies), I have discovered at the University of Toronto an amazing collection of anatomical art dating back to the last century. Before proceeding with the story of this discovery, a few words should be told about Digital Bodies, Virtual Spectacles. The project focused on the changing perceptions of the human body examining the relationship between art and biotechnology exploring the shifting notions surrounding body perceptions, material realities, and current forms of visualization. The project utilized low technology and involved the active participation of medical scientists. The novelty of this art & science & technology project in the late nineties (including easy audience access to the on site and on line events) secured invitations from international museum venues on its tour.

A selection of the anatomical artworks from the University of Toronto collection were included in the Digital Bodies, Virtual Spectacles project. The origin of this collection is closely linked to the history of Canadian medical illustration dating back to 1941 when Dr. J.C.B. Grant (1886-1973) from the University of Toronto, approached the Philadelphia publisher Williams and Wilkins to initiate an indigenously produced unique anatomical atlas. Grant took with him to the publisher drawings by his team of highly skilled medical artists working in the Art as Applied to Medicine program at the University of Toronto. The anatomist succeeded with his publishing proposal, and Grant’s Atlas of Anatomy, first published in 1943, has had a worldwide impact remaining in print to this day (Agur). Almost all of the illustrators of the original 6 editions who contributed to the atlas were female. The two main illustrators, Dorothy Chubb and Nancy Joy were both incredibly adept artists who were able to use a wide variety of techniques. The pen and ink drawings, the carbon dust works used by these artists are exquisite, scientifically accurate and of astounding craftsmanship. It is important to note that due to new technical tools this is a practically lost art form. The brilliant drawings -on the threshold of art and medicine- confirmed that the anatomical artist, in addition to his/her scientific knowledge, the mastery of the body as a functional system and an expert eye is also required to decide on the most appropriate interpretation.

On the discovery of the remarkable anatomical art collection, I began negotiations with Prof. Nick Woolridge himself an illustrator and currently director of the Division of Biomedical Communications, University of Toronto for a loan to exhibit, for the first time ever, a selection of these medical artworks. The selection was shown publicly in 1999, within the framework of the Intimate Perceptions exhibition, forming part of the Digital Bodies project at the InterAccess Electronic Media Art Center in Toronto. This introductory historical material demonstrated my curatorial conviction: to provide a historical context as a crucial benchmark for contemporary art. The original scientific representations from the last century, elegantly complimented the contemporary reflections on the human body as revealed in the exhibited artworks and all of the online and onsite events of the project.

The key initiative prompting the Digital Bodies, Virtual Spectacles project was indebted to the magnitude of major advances in biomedicine and biomedical visualization causing a significant change in the common perception of the human body. From prehistoric representations to contemporary art the nude human body has an eloquent place in art history and has been celebrated throughout the ages by magnificent examples crowding museum displays, books, films and lately the Internet. The consideration of genuine anatomical representation however is another matter. While based on factual scientific information, anatomical visualization is rather personal, often beautiful yet sometimes frightful or grotesque. It is frequently termed “bizarre” and presentations of these works are often slated into controversial quasi-scientific exhibitions. Of course there have been some outstanding exceptions such as the Spectacular Bodies: The Art and Science of the Human Body from Leonardo to Now show at the Hayward Gallery in 2001 and others (Spectacular Bodies). Ars Medica: Medical Illustration through the Ages, another example of excellent anatomical print reproductions was shown at the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library University of Toronto in 2006 (Ars Medica).

Recently within the framework of a collaborative research grant aimed at the systematic organization, archiving, development of preservation strategies, digitization and indexing the art works, I had an opportunity to re-examine this remarkable collection. It became evident that while Grant’s Atlas remains of great scholarly value, there is simply no comparison between the elegant, intricate style of the originals and the printed reproductions. The drawings are simply magnificent and prompted me to return to my original curatorial goal to exhibit a comprehensive selection of these works.

This quest is also prompted by a current trend to examine issues of visual memory and the relationship between memory and the archiving of written and visual scientific material. Another tendency to be examined is concerned with social reflections, conveying political and societal criticism through the combination of artistic and scientific processes. Lately a critical discourse including these new forms of artistic expressions emerged, generated by artists working through scientific concepts. As a consequence a re-examination and re-evaluation of archival art material – partly due to digitization- is now in process. Yet, despite this process and the praise heaped on exhibition proposals including the historical, medical and aesthetic significance of the artworks in the University of Toronto collection, – it seems to be difficult to find committed venues. Why? Partly because – apart from spectacular, extravagant projects such as Body Worlds – moderate analog works based on science seem to be rarely exhibited in sizeable contemporary venues. This difficulty raises a few questions. The original art works date back about fifty years. Is this material then historical, but not sufficiently historical? Is it obligatory to situate it within a complex socially reflective structure? Is it necessary to include a comparative contemporary perspective?

The exhibition project is still in progress. While the exhibition material on the intersection of art and medicine is exquisite and scientifically accurate, there are no clear-cut answers yet for the questions listed above. In conclusion it seems that improved communication and a broader endorsement of traditional and contemporary art and science projects by exhibition venues, including museums remains a crucial issue.

Back to EAMHMS list of absracts

Reference:
Pasko, Jessica M. Bio-artists bridge gap between arts, sciences 2007: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17387568/

Czegledy N, Czegledy Andre P. Digitized bodies, virtual spectacles 2000 Futures Vol.32, issue 2, pp 103-120

Digital Bodies Virtual Spectacles Project: http://www.digibodies.org/

Agur, Anne M. R. and Arthur F. Dalley. 2009. Grant’s Atlas of Anatomy, Twelfth Edition Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Intimate Perceptions exhibition: http://www.digibodies.org/intimate.html

Kemp, Martin, Wallace, Marina 2001 Spectacular Bodies The Art and Science of the Human Body from

Leonardo to Now. Hayward Gallery, University of California Press, London.

Oldfield, Phillip, Landon Richard 2006 Ars Medica: Medical Illustration through the Ages, University of Toronto Press