May 17, 2006 at 1:36 AM · Filed under Uncategorized
David Galenson is an Economics Professsor at the University of Chicago. He studies how and when artists have made important contributions to the field in their careers. Conceptual artists produce innovation early in their careers because they have not yet been constrained by conventional thought or practice. Experimental artists continuously revise their process without specific goals in mind, according to Galenson. Innovation comes later in the experimental artists’ careers.
If artists are animals (they are), how do these findings point to different strategies for reproduction, biologically and in terms of making artwork? What are the benefits and disadvantages? Which is more stable?
David Galenson
May 14, 2006 at 10:43 PM · Filed under Uncategorized
The Exquisite Corpse
For the Endless Forms: Engaging Evolution show, Andrew Yang sent in a piece made from the combined efforts of his Evolution & Biodiversity class at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago. Andy teaches in the Liberal Arts curriculum, and part of his focus is teaching evolutionary biology using art as a creative vehicle for exploring the subject.
{photo by andy yang}
The piece explores the use of the exquisite corpse in long term evolutionary changes in morphological features. What struk me about the piece was its use of the exquisite corpse (pioneered by the surrealists as a parlor game) to illustrate change. Using this creative device to expain to students how modification by descent takes place is an excellent combination of art practice and evolution concept.
1. Have students work in groups of three and start with a blank sheet of paper folded into thirds.
2. Each student represents a single generation and the environment that each “new organism” (drawing) will develop in.
3. For the sake of the exercise one student starts the lineage with a drawing, making sure to not draw more than 1 mm past the fold. It’s important to communicate that in the world, organisms don’t just appear ou of nowhere, but themselves come from long lineages. You could have the group discuss where the idea for the first drawing came from- if anywhere.
4. The next person starts the second drawing using the preexisting lines at the fold. These existing “suggestions” are the only information that gets passed from generation to generation much like genetic material constrains the next generation’s developmental scheme.
5. Finally the third person draws to complete the image.
Typically this technique has been used to create images of “hybrid” organisms. This approach extends the process to a multigenerational timeframe. Can the exquisite corpse be used to investigate developmental constrains at different life history stages (infant, adolescent, adult, etc)?
One significnt caveat keeps this from being a perfect example. How do we show that there are more “things” being produced than can “survive” in the next generation?
Natural selection requires that there are more individuals present than can contribute to the next generation. Perhaps the students draw in many more lines as part of their image and the next student “selects” at the fold of the page- carrying out their role of “the environment.”
Any other suggestions?
