This week's lecture really taught me how biotechnology can not only be used for stem cells in medicine, but also a form of human expression. While the lecture really allowed me to explore something I had never thought of before, I also felt quite uncomfortable and disturbed at some of the images of bioart. This included Stelarc's Third Ear, which consisted of a full sized human ear inserted in his left arm as an implant. 

Stelarc, a legendary Australian performance artist, used a skin expander to create excess skin on his left forearm. His Arm in Ear Project began in 2006, and since then, he is still perfecting the shape using stem cells and surgery to make the ear more prominent. 

 Pictures from the procedure can be seen above. Seeing Stelarc's arm really grossed me out, and left me wondering what was the motivation behind this artistic expression. Upon learning that his motivation was to suggest an improved human being, I really started to question whether or not this type of artistic expression was even justified.

However, other examples such as the Revival Field really sparked my interest in this field.

The Revival Field began as a conceptual artwork with the intent to sculpt a site's ecology, in order to promote greater social awareness and responsibility. Mel Chin's work led him to collaborate with scientists and government agencies in order to create natural work that transcends traditional sculpture. I feel like this project really materialized science, technology, and art, while not adhering to the traditional object of making art.

In summary, I believe that most of my disturbance at this week's lecture came from its motivation. I believe that life itself is a valid expressive medium, but at the same time, we have to balance ethical standards and practices with scientific and artistic values. If the art's motivation is to purely invoke thought and wonder, like the Third Ear, I feel like the art is unjustified. On the other hand, if the artwork is motivated by empathy and a greater sense of common good, the art is definitely more justifiable. I also believe that there should be limits to human creativity. Although people have their own rights to decide what to do with their bodies, seeing a human ear in one's arm does not sound like art to me.

Citations:

"Regulating Biotechnology: At the Interface between Science And Ethics." Ethics Technology and Society. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. <http://ethicstechnologyandsociety.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/regulating-biotechnology-at-the-interface-between-science-and-ethics/>.

"Stelarc’s Third Ear." Street Anatomy. N.p., 4 Nov. 2007. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. <http://streetanatomy.com/2012/06/27/stelarcs-third-ear/>.

Sellers, Nina. Stelarc's Third Ear. 226. Museum of Natural Art, Australia. Street Anatomy. Web. 8 Nov. 2013.

Stelarc. "Stelarc // Ear on Arm." Stelarc.org. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.

Summers. http://blogs.walkerart.org/visualarts/files/2008/03/revival-field-1991-943.jpg. 2008. Walker Art Center, Minnesota. Walker Art Center. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.

Vesna, Victoria. "5 Bioart Pt1." YouTube. YouTube, 18 Sept. 2013. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaThVnA1kyg>.