Why do we think of bio-art as a type of art? Why classify it based on its content since we don’t think of Monet’s paintings of a cathedral as “cathedral art”?

Bio-art has changed greatly in the past ten years. We are viewing life more as software/code than as hardware.

Bio-art is increasinly re-materializing itself — less on code and more on a “phenomenological confrontration with wetwork.” It is increasinly interested with transformation processes. Body art is increasing. And it’s getting harder to define…hybrid media definition.

He defines a non-genetic, wetwork project he commissioned: culturing edible, shaped thingies out of frog tissue. It’s called “Disembodied Cuisine.”

(He mentions that this may make it harder for companies to patent culturing cruelty-free meat, but I don’t believe that will stop them; they’ll patent the techniques.)

Bio-art, he says, has become an art of transformation of living materials [Technorati tags: ArsElectronica2005]

Categories: Uncategorized dw