Akbari (Expo E-42c/W Unit 4) 1
Krista Campbell
Expo E-42c/W
Unit 4
Tom Akbari
18 December 2014
Art + Science = Art2
Abstract
Throughout Units 1 and 2 of Tom Akbari’s Expo E-42c/W course, I strategically utilized broad
visual concepts to relay complex ideas. This tactic met with success until Unit 3, when I
encountered a dilemma: my research started naturally flowing in the direction of pharmaceutical
development. Inner artist and inner beginner scientist clashed in a struggle between thoughts of
career suicide and imposter syndrome. Reaching an impasse, I all but lost my drive. I started to
encroach upon the use of a humorous angle to get through the project, repelled as I was to
engage with the science of pharmaceutical. However, the date of oral presentations approached, I
found myself holding back, refraining from letting loose to the point of a successfully humorous
execution.
Introduction
I am a woman of extremes. The rough drafts I have composed throughout the course of Expo E42c/W, although sprinkled with nuggets of conceptual gold, are tragically telling of such poles.
The rough draft of my Unit 2 Literature Review provides an exemplary model of my tendency to
overwrite, laying upon on the page my tangled mess of fact and creative inspiration (1).
Conversely, my rough draft for the Unit 3 project appeared short, sweet and well ordered, but
vague, revealing an inspired concept that lacked a firm foundation of factual evidence to carry it
Akbari (Expo E-42c/W Unit 4) 2
through to something closer to scientific completion (3). I feel a twinge of remorse for the
confusion my revision club partners endured over my rough drafts throughout the course. But
only a twinge, because an artist has got do what an artist has got do.
Methods: Audience
The purpose of writing in the field of immunology is to inform the readership of current science
and offer directions of knowledgeable hypothesis for scientific advancement. My Unit 2
Literature Review does this quite satisfactorily, although the intended audience is a bit vague. If I
consider myself—a curious, artistic student seeking to break into the field—as the primary
audience, then pinpointing the systems approach to immunology as I did in my Unit 2 paper was
absolutely essential. Defining the concept of a “two-pronged approach” of data and hypothesis
involved in the systems approach to immunology (4) helps to equip readers (and myself) with the
necessary big-picture tools to understand precisely how to approach the concept of immune
research. Breaking the science down into basic components in such a way puts readers’ minds at
ease, offering them a lifeboat in the otherwise disorienting waters of an in-depth scientific
discipline. From there, as the reader and scientist alike now stand more squarely on the same
page of general understanding, I offered an informed, novel way in which to push the science
forward. I pressed that scientists view the “effect of microgravity on the immune system as an
hypothetical ‘disease state’” (4); in doing so, I suggest that a shift in perception is needed to
impact future research. With such a shift, approaches to immunology may be wholly
transformed. We artists are ever playing with the pliable medium of perception, a medium
belonging to the audience; for without the audience’s perception, there is no art.
Methods: Visuals
Akbari (Expo E-42c/W Unit 4) 3
My strategy to seek out a visual concept by which to explain the complexities of science worked
well for my Unit 1 paper: it proved a helpful tool in assessing and analyzing the scientific
discourse of immune function in space. I observed a “weaving” phenomenon of both imagery
and quantitative science in the scientific paper of study, which aiding in the paper’s successful
transmission of knowledge (2), much like the use of the “two-pronged approach” in Unit 2 (4).
Clearly, I should have employed such a technique in my Unit 3 Reference Document; weaving
more quantitative science throughout the visual-heavy Unit 3 would have granted the concept as
a whole more potency and scientific grounding, perhaps also making it more accessible for an
audience, as noted by a fellow student who was unsure “whether there are specific relations or
interactions between design elements or if they exist purely as graphic elements” (5). Despite my
well-noted observation of a keen use of impactful and easily digestible graphic representations of
quantitative scientific data in the Unit 1 analysis (2), the concept was thoroughly discarded in
Unit 3, and thus the transmission of any quantitative science was obviously lost. I primarily
focused on rendering conceptual icons, representations of the steps involved in my flow chart. A
rather pseudo-scientific image was born of the attempt, something storybook-ish and wild,
projecting an almost oxymoronic “creative laziness” correlated to a wanton disregard for rules—
the lifeblood of any artist.
Challenges
The negotiation of art and science has proven a challenging exchange indeed. Advancing
science in the area of pharmaceutical development was far from my intended direction when I
initially dove into the project, and my immediate disinterest in it certainly tainted the Unit 3
outcome. If artists have one strong, unified message to convey, it is a resounding “fuck you” to
any idea, notion, or construct in place which they do not whole-heartedly support or agree with.
Akbari (Expo E-42c/W Unit 4) 4
And the ultimate danger of artistic license lies in its granted liberty to do exactly that: to express
an intrinsic, subversive need to buck the system. So while the art-heavy Unit 3 project may be
lacking in disciplined scientific integration, its true discipline is not made immediately evident:
the suppression of the artist’s cutting sarcasm, and the urge to turn the Unit 3 project into a
satirical representation of biotech and pharmaceuticals. I could have chosen a different area of
study to delve into for the final research project to avoid such conflict, yes—but I wished to stick
with and fully explore immunology, to understand fully what it has to offer.
For Unit 3 especially, it would have been wise of me to convene more frequently with revision
club partners so as to better my chances of covering obvious holes in my document’s logic. As
made evident by my oral presentation, leaving out the important science of how precisely one
extracts a proposed “map” from genomic data (4) left me unable to answer the question of my
peer audience member with any sense of confidence or expertise. Yet I carried the concept
forward regardless—exemplifying the very definition of baloney.
Synthesis
From perhaps a more constructive standpoint, my Unit 3 project’s strictly conceptual focus not
only misses the mark in teaching anyone a damn thing of value, but it also heads in the direction
of reinventing the wheel, essentially verging on explaining nanotech in a very simplified, visual
way. I question not only whether I should have allowed the sarcasm flood forth with full force,
but whether such an image should in fact be geared toward teens, or rather more fittingly toward
professionals in the field who may find some humor or cleverness in the representation. The fact
remains: without science to back up the concepts therein, there remains a strictly entertainment
quality to the document. Having chosen the field of immunology for the focus of my study
Akbari (Expo E-42c/W Unit 4) 5
throughout this class, it should have been obvious that pharmaceuticals would be a possible end
point, but somehow I did not necessarily wish see that, or to be directly involved in it. More
interested am I in piecing together the complex puzzle that is the human immune response in
space, and finding a creative ways to navigate that complexity, as I did in the Unit 2 Literature
Review. I am an idea gal—my revision of John-Bryan’s Unit 3 project shows that I am inspired
most by concepts and ideas I find mentally stimulating—whether they be novel, revolutionary, or
groundbreaking (6). But without a solid base of knowledge, I must admit that most ideas are
groundless.
Conclusion
Writing in my chosen discipline of immunology has been an act of discovery, and has brought
myself as an artist closer to it and it closer to me. A largely unknown area of study for me to
begin with, despite my current job at a biotech laboratory, I now find it accessible. My once
burning questions now have a basic foundation upon which I am able to ask more informed and
strategic questions of my coworkers. I cannot yet call them colleagues, as there remains much
distance between their expertise and my humble, liberal exploration of interests.
Acknowledgement
I would like to sincerely thank my revision club partners for the help they have offered
throughout the course. I thank Donyell Floyd and John Rebello for their gentle support during
our exploratory Unit 1 assignment; I thank Elif Vahapoglu and Azita Ghodssi for their
courageous attempts to pick through the mess of my Unit 2 paper and offer insight; and I thank
John-Bryan for leading us with inspired enthusiasm into the Unit 3 assignment. I thank Tom
Akbari most of all, not only for his guidance, but for this well-structured class which has granted
Akbari (Expo E-42c/W Unit 4) 6
us students a working knowledge of a scientific field of interest. Walking away with a strategic
method of understanding is an invaluable gift I will take with me in my future explorations
within the sciences.
References
1. Elif’s Revision of Krista Unit 2 Rough Draft. Approaches Immunology: Spaceflight
Application.
2. Krista Unit 1 Final Draft. Woven Comprehension of Body Weightless
3. Krista Rough Draft Unit 3
4. Krista Unit 2 Final Draft. Approaches Immunology: Spaceflight Application
5. Oral Presentations Assessment for Krista
6. Krista’s Revision of John-Bryan’s Unit 3 Rough Draft
Akbari (Expo E-42c/W Unit 4) 7
Excellent
X
x
Understands and participate in scientific discourse
X
Understands the importance of audience and context
Low
Understands writing in different scientific genres
Failed
Good
At standard
Assessment Sheet
Unit 4: Reflective Essay and Portfolio
X
Writes with appropriate style and arrange scientific documents in
strategic ways
X
X
Orders knowledge effectively
x
X
Conducts effective research in the scientific literature
x
x
Follows appropriate grammar, spelling, syntactical, and citation
conventions
X
Displays confidence and facility with the processes of revision
x
X
Offers written reflection on her or his writing and critical reasoning
x
x
Offers specific and constructive evaluation to fellow students in
Revision Club
X
Portfolio Grade: B
x