Speculating futures of existence where nature and human and technology of natural humans philosophically collide.

Envisioning a 4th dimension to the biological tree of life… 

• I’m interested in how the body and its extended structural covering may evolve in the future to be ‘toolified’ in new ways. Bacteria, carbon sequestion, autographic tools to identify ecological safety eg…

within this new version of synthetic/natural existence, Ginsburg creates speculative objects formed through synthetic bodily adaption… usually around ideas of the microbial and bacteria evolution with technological changes and CRISPA

Incorporates living cells into a modular jewellery design as a way to encapsulate an emotion of a moment in time through harnessing the unique BACTERIA.

Ie; a kiss or a whisper

• interesting idea in our ‘distanced’ world of global pandemic.. how to keep people near whilst keeping them far…
• how bacteria use of bacteria is harnessed whilst also being shunned in an ultra hygienic world..

Use of ornamentation / bodily architecture speculation practices to ponder the future of a techno-synthetic-organic experience of human existence.

EG – female reproductive organs being equivalent to a 3D printer.

she advocates absurdity when envisioning futures

“using stories and film making to communicate science (fictions..?), we can reach the fringes of culture and explore the emotional impact of technology how it may redesign our bodies.”

• A point I can’t help but mention is that McRea explicit speculates the ‘merging’ of body and nature
• This is interesting to me as it is ignorant of eco-philosophy proposed by Peter Frase in that he states the necessity to understand the non duality of ‘human nature’ – the non dichotomy, advocating a view of human AS nature.

Quotes:

CA: As a scientist, I’ve found working with artists like Lucy to be incredibly powerful for exposing different perspectives on the values and potential futures of science
and technology. Scientists are pressured to project certainty and closure in public, whereas artists create openness and space to question and explore. Art can have a vulnerability that science often can’t, coming with a willingness to take risks for the sake of curiosity without having an ultimate conclusion in mind. 

CA: Lucy’s work explores notions and stereotypes of feminine beauty and how they might intersect with technology, chal- lenging our expectations of what science fiction and what technology can do and what it can look and feel like. By incorpo- rating and reimagining concepts from the wellness and beauty industries, from the spa to perfume and beyond, Lucy’s work has challenged me to rethink some of these “frivolous” products associated with women in the context of technology. Are cosmetics a wearable technology? What about perfume? 

Zhihan Ying’s project Microbiome Jewelry incorporates living cells into a modular jewelry design as a way to encapsulate a memory of an emotion at a moment in time. She designed jewelry that incorporates agar petri dishes that can capture a kiss, a tear, or whis- pered story. When the microbes grow, they become living representations of a memory that can be carried as part of a necklace. 

^ SOSOSOSO ME!!!! bioplastics do this anyway. clothes/body art that grows as we do or the world does….

its autographical in its approach … process is the object. the narrative is the object. the object lives the evidence of both agency and autonomy 

Bacteria engineered as sensors or as therapeutics are being tested in mice and in early clinical trials. This kind of technol- ogy was prophesied by Daisy Ginsberg and James King in their design fiction E. chromi in 2009, imagining a probiotic drink featuring engineered E. coli that sense dis- turbances in the gut and produce an easily detected colored output. 

Biometric Mirror is an immersive installation that blends the act of casually glancing at one’s reflection with modern algorithmic perspectives on facial per- fection. Audiences enter a futuristic sci-fi beauty salon and let an AI scan their bio- metric data to reveal a mathematically per- fect version of their own face. But whose version of perfection is it really? Biometric Mirror embraces flaws in algorithms, either by using crowdsourced AI datasets (thus reflecting societal biases, as a critique of opaque AI today) and models of perfec- tion developed in Western countries (thus reflecting cultural biases, as a critique of the idealized Western individual beauty 

I had recently seen this meme about the uterus being an “onboard 3D printer.” I had a funny thought—is the uterus a wearable technology? I sent over another email saying to Lucy “What will the midwife clinic be like in 10,000 years?” 

^womb as wearable technology 

I like the way the converse with each and spit ball interesting brain farts.