This week, the material I found most interesting in respect to Nanotech was the Nanomeme Syndrome reading.
Unlike the other interactions of science and art we've studied this quarter, nanotechnology is in its infancy. Technology has only very recently been able to observe material on the scale of the nanometer, and going beyond these minuscule limits grows nigh-impossible when we consider the Raleigh limit (vision-based microscopes failing when their scale grows smaller than the length of light waves).
This creates an interesting implication: in some ways, nanotech-focused art forges ahead of its scientific counterpart. Of course, there are other areas of scifi that predict or assume scientific advancements, like space operas or dystopic technological overlords, but the reality of those works is limited by scale. Space infrastructure like dyson spheres or outer world colonies requires natural resources and decades of travel. Nanotech is not limited in the same way, as the problem lies in the opposite direction of magnitude.
That is one of the main discussions of the Nanomeme reading: how human imagination dictates (and distorts) the public comprehension of nanotechnology. This is prevalent especially in entertainment media: see Iron Man in the latest Avengers movies, the antagonists of Cixin Liu's Three Body Problem trilogy, or even old episodes of The Magic School Bus. Nanotechnology has become the opposite of a technological boogeyman. Instead, the general public might conceive of it as a futuristic one-size-fits-all solution.
Another interesting aspect of nanotech in regards to art is the failure of human vision. We cannot see (or even conceive of) the scale on which atoms operate, whereas we've probably all seen a telescope picture of an entire galaxy before. Where the universe dwarfs us, we dwarf nanotech, and that brings a new dimension to the art we create of it. Tactile forms of investigation are the norm when it comes to nanotech research, because of the aforementioned Raleigh limit, but not everyone can visit an in-person tactile installation. Even sizing up nano-scale art results in a loss of incomprehensibility, which I believe is a necessary component to art regarding this scale.
References
Cixin Liu. Author. (2021, April 14). https://cixinliu.com/.
Gimzewski , J., & Vesna, V. (n.d.). The Nanomeme Syndrome: Blurring of fact & fiction in the construction of a new science. http://vv.arts.ucla.edu/publications/publications/02-03/JV_nano/JV_nano_artF5VG.htm.
John Curtin Gallery. Art.Base. (n.d.). https://art.base.co/event/2104-art-in-the-age-of-nanotechnology.
Nanotechnology in the media. Nanowerk. (2013, January 21). https://www.nanowerk.com/spotlight/spotid=28564.php.
What Is Nanotechnology? National Nanotechnology Initiative. (n.d.). https://www.nano.gov/nanotech-101/what/definition.
It is interesting to note the difficulties of understanding things on the nanoscale. Human beings are very visual creatures and the lack of ability to see things on the nanoscale has resulted us to largely rely on our imagination for better or for worse. Using just imagination with no scientific understanding can present a false perception of nanotechnology, but it can bring new insights on how the technology can be improved and applied.
ReplyDeleteHi Michelle! You bring up a really interesting point in regards to the challenges of creating art focused on nanoscience when we cannot even see nanotechnology with our naked eye. Even though there are methods in which we can try to represent nanotechnology through tactile art or sizing up the art, it looses the originality and part of its meaning. Your blog was really interesting, thanks for sharing!
ReplyDeleteThe scale and world that nanotechnology operates in can be difficult to understand. After all, humans can't see what's occurring on a nanoscale. Even though we have methods in which we can represent the microscopic level at a scale we can see, some of its unique qualities are lost in the process.
ReplyDelete