Unit 1: Two Cultures

The idea of art and science as “two cultures,” two disparate worlds, is neither new nor uncommon. As described by C.P. Snow, the two, exemplified by literary intellectuals at one end and scientists at the other, are separated by a “gulf of incomprehension” (Snow 4). The failure of both intellectual spheres to recognize and understand each other hampers the progress of knowledge and society as a whole.

Aerial view of UCLA campus
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/file?fid=52e76fe8f6091d782f0008cd

I too have unconsciously adopted this view of art and science as distinct entities. Despite being surrounded by elements of both, I have always viewed them as separate, never making the deliberate effort to connect and integrate the two. This perspective has been ingrained in me through our society’s culture and media, and is also evident at UCLA. As a science major, I rarely step foot in the northern half of campus, often seeing the need to do so as an anomaly and chore. The very terms “North Campus” and “South Campus” demonstrate the divide we still perceive – and create – between these two cultures. However, these two campuses are still unified as one UCLA campus – it’s exciting that both the arts and the sciences thrive in one concentrated location, and that we, as students, have the opportunity to explore and blend both worlds.

An artistic representation of genetic engineering
https://fineartamerica.com/featured/genetic-engineering-leon-zernitsky.html?product=art-print

This is where the idea of “the third culture” arises. I agree with Kevin Kelly’s view that “computers had a lot to do with it” (Kelly 992). The rise of technology advanced not only the boundaries of art and science themselves, but also their abilities to connect to each other. As John Brockman describes, this third culture involves communication between scientists and the general public (Graham-Rowe). This crosstalk is made possible by the prevalence and universality of technology, which also paves the way for interactions beyond this two-way exchange, allowing for a “triangular bridge” between art, science, and technology (Vesna 121). I identify particularly with Stephen Wilson’s analysis of genetic engineering as an example of a future area for this third culture to bridge (Wilson 3). As a researcher in genetic engineering myself, I appreciate how closely art, science, and technology interplay with each other, through construct design, biological models, and data analysis, to name just a few examples. As I continue in my career as a scientist, I hope to carry this newfound perspective with me, bringing together these two cultures to build the new bridge forward.

Bridging art and science: wonder
https://www.on24.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/art-science-1.png

References

Kelly, Kevin. “The Third Culture.” Science, vol. 279, no. 5353, 13 Feb. 1998, pp. 992-993.

Graham-Rowe, Duncan. “John Brockman: Matchmaking with science and art.” Wired, 3 Feb. 2011.

Snow, C.P. The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. New York, Cambridge University Press, 1961.

Vesna, Victoria. “Toward a Third Culture: Being in between.” Leonardo, vol. 34, no. 2, 2001, pp. 121-125.

Wilson, Stephen. “Myths and Confusions in Thinking about Art/Science/Technology.” College Art Association Meetings, 2000.