The Bizarreness as it goes down.
In lieu of this article and this article about the literal miracles of modern medicine and technology, today I am simply going to post a poignant illustration of the point from explodingdog.
I’m very certain that this recent press release from The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champange has something to do with my new favorite TV show Fringe. I mean, there’s no doubt that the science in Fringe is ridiciulous bordering on the impossible, but then again, that’s sort of the point. Today, there was also a medical announcement that the first transplant was completed of an organ grown from the patient’s own stem cells—her entire windpipe was re-grown and replacement. With that sort of science being in the news, the kind of science fiction that a writer wants to tackle becomes (A) seemingly crazy and (B) the research becomes hard to access (due to the impenetrability of a lot of scientific literature). So, qouth the press release:
“…the newly formed Science & Entertainment Exchange will connect those in the entertainment industry to “some of the nation’s leading scientists, engineers and health professionals. The Exchange will facilitate a dialogue and foster deeper connectivity between science and entertainment.”
This is a good thing, to be sure. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve balked at the premise of film because of some ridiculous misconception about science.1 But the great thing about Fringe is that often (not always) you’re left feeling that, “well… that’s a far-fetched idea, but maybe…” And lots of other good science fiction movies started out with equally implausible premises (dino DNA from mosquitos in amber, anyone?). That makes all the difference really. There’s the impossible, the implausible and the just-plain-wrong. It is important for the scientific community to keep writers away from the just-plain-wrong types of premises if only because it can spread disinformation about science. But we have to keep the implausible and even the impossible alive to really challenge our imaginations (and the imaginations of scientists in turn).
Although it’s more engineering than science, the computer virus that defeats the aliens in “Independence Day” still ranks as my favorite “Huh!?” moments in a sci-fi movement. Hmmm, I smell a top-ten list in the making. ↩
What’s the problem with that!? Well, for anyone out there just no dipping their feet into the warm waters of advanced video watching technology, here’s a hint: don’t pronounce all the acronyms. You will drive your otherwise friendly sales help to madness.
First of all, free free to answer the question for yourself. It’s not what I would consider the most scientific study, but que sera sera. I draw a distinction between graphic design and art based on what is being communicated and what is the intent of the communication. Art attempts to communicate emotion, it evokes feeling. Graphic design has to communicate information—and I emphasize has to. If an artifact of the visual medium does not communicate information (or data, to be technical about it) then it is not graphic design. When information is communicated it can sometimes be done with excellence, and graphic designers want to call that art (because it is their art, as in trade) but other folks will still call it technical or design or advertising. But when the emotional content outweighs the communication of the information, as in, drowns it out, then I think graphic design can attain “artness.” And mind you, I am not saying the reverse of this: that art has nothing to say. On the contrary, art can say nothing at all or nothing specific. In my mind, a great deal of the cleaving of the two forms comes down to Andy Warhol’s “Soup Can” and an actual advertisement for the same soup. One form is trying to get you to think about your world, what it looks like and how it feels. The other form is trying to get you to think about soup. [Thanks to Kitblog for today's inspiration!]
The Obama transition team launched this new web site, Change.gov in order to keep the public informed on the transition team’s decisions and news. They are also soliciting information from the public—so go tell them what you think! I, for one, think that this web site, among other statements that President-elect Obama has made about making government transparent is a fantastic sign of things to come.1 Take a look at the current White House web site and try to imagine what it’s going to look in the next year—a new generation is what. Given the large amount of importance that online efforts played in the President-elect’s campaign, I think we can expect it to play a large role in his administration.
Not to mention his significant support for the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act that would actually create a searchable database of Federal spending open to the public. Talk about accountability! ↩
