Leonardo: Smorgasbord, Collage or Synthesis?

Leonardo: Smorgasbord, Collage or Synthesis? Editorial One of Leonardo’s aims is to seek out and publish writings by artists who in some way integrate art, science and technology in their work. Articles in the Journal often use words such as synthesis, integration, interface, holistic, interdisciplinary. Does Leonardoachievethe verysynthesisthat it states as one of the goals of the artists it features? Leonardo da Vinci, after whom the’Journa1is named, is recognized as having had h grasp of contemporary knowledge,a grasp good enough to enable him to contribute to severalfieldsduringhis lifetime.Where are today’s geniusesof Leonardo’s stature? Geniusesthere are, but fragmentation and specialization of knowledge seem to conspire against any one individual contributing significantlyto more than one domain. Yet the need for a synthesisof the divergentbranches of human knowledgehas been emphasized in the Western world for at least the last 40years and is a recurrent theme inpopular philosophy. In contemporary science, there are many proponents of an interdisciplinary approach bridging traditional disciplines.The boundaries of research areas are constantly being redefined in the hope of spurring fruitful collaborations. Today cognitive science, for instance, brings together philosophers, psychologists, linguists, computer scientists,anthropologists and neurophysiologists; their goal-“to provide a cogent scientific account of how human beings achieve their most remarkable symbolic products: how we come to compose symphonies,writepoems, invent machines(includingcomputers), or construct theories (including cognitivescientificones)” [Howard Gardner, TheMindsNew Science: TheHistory ofrhe CognitiveRevolution (NewYolk: BasicBooks, 1985)l.Therisksarchigh in thesenew areas; the results may be few, the conclusions incorrect. The advantages of working within a wellestablished and defined discipline are that the applicability of theories is better understood, the problems better posed and the answers more recognizable than in the novel interdisciplinary fields. Verifying the validity of hypotheses in the less-charted territories can be time-consuming. Yet on the other hand the potential rewards are high; new insights,discoveriesand understandings canarisefrom stepping outside the established world view. One area of successful interdisciplinary research is contemporary astronomy, a science currently going through a renaissance and golden age. New instruments, the opening up of space-based astronomy, and planetary exploration all have generated a wealth of new data. This in turn has attracted researchers from other disciplines,bringing their owntools andformalisms. Theresultsarea tremendous cross-pollination of scientific disciplines and startling new conjectures and questions. Particle physicists studying the properties of matter on the smallest scales are collaborating with cosmologists studying the universe on the largest scales. In some cases, use of astronomical datahas proved to be the only way to verify hypotheses about the interactions of fundamental particles. Some collaborations find astronomers, paleontologists and evolutionary biologists discussing extinction theories. A current hypothesis holds that the extinction of the dinosaurs and other extinctions in the geologicrecord were triggered by the recurrent passageof a companion starof the sun named Nemesis. Other venues find astronomers and archaeologists studying prehistoric sites for evidence of astronomical record-keeping, or radio astronomers and geographers working together using v,ery long-baselineradio astronomy techniques to study the motion of the earth and measure the motion of plate tectonics. It is significantthat, in contemporary science,synthesisi srarelyachievedany longerby one individual but rather by teams of scientists. And what about crossdisciplinary art? Every issue of Leonardo includes articles by artists using ideas and techniques from contemporary science and technology. In this issue Bill Bell makes use of surprising properties of the human visual system to create artworks that are visible only when prompted by the saccadic motion of the eye; two psychologistsdiscussthe phenomenon. Also in this issue Mike Clark discusseshow illusion and delusion need to be understood andapplied indiscussions of science and art. Computers are used in the artwork of authors Imrich Bert6k, Edward Zajec, The0 Goldberg and Giinther Schrack. Andrew Stonyer and Roger Linford incorporate photoelectric cellsto control and activate their kinetic sculptures. Artists working with contemporary science and technology clearly are introducing new ideas and concepts into visualart. The successof this synthesismay be difficultto determine, but the hope isthat the work clearlyiscontemporary art, art thatcould not havebeen made in anypreviousera. Sometimes, however, the result differs little from work produced by traditional means; the computer may have been no more than a labor-savingdevice.In other casestheresults...