Dear Amanda and List,
Thanks for guesting on our list, and introducing the theme. Here in the UK, the art and science field seems to be at an 'interesting stage'. After several 'sciart' schemes such as the Wellcome Trust Sciart <http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/>, organisations seem to be reflecting on difficult questions such as 'is it art?' and 'does it reach a new audience?' Although these projects can be very interesting, they can be difficult to manage successfully, if mutual misunderstandings are not to occupy a lot of time.
Perhaps the process and the 'research' is ultimately more useful than the end product in these projects? Scientists may be more familiar with this approach than artists, who are often expected to 'produce a nice object' at the end of any residency.
Bronac Ferran of the Arts Council of England is currently developing the 'Play Garden' initiative which is looking at the question of audiences for art/science, which should be available as a web site in the next months.
At the Tate, Susan Collins is presenting the Tate in Space project <http://www.tate.org.uk/webart/>, and other recent interesting art/science collaborations include the Makrolab project <http://www.artscatalyst.org/htm/makrolab.htm > involving artists living and working in a mobile silver pod with satellite dishes.
Art Science projects often seem doomed to live in 'Turing-Land' rather than in the land of art museums - would List members agree with this?