Science

A topic or idea falls most always in more than one category. Art and science have always been mixed together. Materials for art production are often man made (synthetic paints and clay are mixed chemicals). Leonardo da Vinci sketched from muscles, dissected bodies and took an interest in the human form to created more accurate work. Renaissance painters used linear perspective to give the illusion of three dimensions- that is a mathematical (or scientific) concept (McDaniel). In my opinion, the reason why art and science mesh so well is that there is room for exploration in both. They evolve with every generation and every new technology. The ideas of art and science flow back and forth and can go in almost any direction.
After reading the text, I found the work of Patricia Piccini to be very interesting. She not only makes up a creature based on multiple other creatures, she give it a "human" look. The works she created in her We Are Family series depicts a new creature, but evokes a certain emotion from the viewer. The Young Family showing a mother creature with her three babies may evoke sympathy- the "disturbingly self-conscience" mother may be relateable. She is vulnerable and on display. If the viewer could, for a moment think that this creature is "real," what rights does it have? The question has come up in the text of what human rights would a hybrid creature have if there were to be a hybrid creature created (McDaniel). Could art like this be considered activist art if in fact on day there are human hybrids?

McDaniel, Craig and Jean Robertson. Themes of Contemporary Art: Visual Art after 1980. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc., 2010. 233-271.