Brandon Ballangee’s exhibition Collapse reviewd in PNAS*

by

* PNAS is The Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences
image

Brandon Ballangee’s work is at once good art and good science. This review draws out both the credibility and context of the work as science as well as the works’ existence as art. It also highlights some of the anxieties for artists if their work is understood as just “science communication”. This anxiety is most notable when the artist is brought in and handed ‘finished’ science with which to work (obviously this doesnt apply when you are both scientist and artist).
The curious legacy of CP Snow is that artists and scientists appear to be in opposition when both are in fact seeking to understand the world, albeit through different means and with different values. If there is a common opposition it might be more rightly understood to be with those who seek to obscure the truth. Not all scientists or artists’ work is involved in contentious areas like pollution (and many artists are providing a feel good escape from the everyday) but the artists we value the most are involved in truth just as the scientists are.
Given that Ballangee isn’t the only artist working with science and scientists it would be good to see more reviews of this sort.

One Response to “Brandon Ballangee’s exhibition Collapse reviewd in PNAS*”

  1. Brandon Ballangee’s exhibition Collapse reviewd in PNAS* | The CSPA Says:

    […] This post comes to you from EcoArtScotland […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: