Plonczak, Irene, and Susan Goefz Zwirn. "Understanding the ART IN SCIENCE and the SCIENCE IN ART Through Crosscutting Concepts." Science Scope 38, no. 7 (2015): 57-63. Accessed November 2, 2020. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43691253.
Abstract:
Science and art are often seen as different disciplines and have been separated in school teaching. STEM has become a popular curriculum in schools and it emphasises science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Recently there has been a push to modify STEM into STEAM which includes art. Science needs aspects of art to be more successful and vice versa, “the scientist needs an artistically creative imagination.” This article outlines ways that schools have integrated arts and science to give students a better understanding of the natural world through analysis of form and function and applying scientific concepts to real world experiments.
Annotation:
This article is credible because it is co written by a science educator and an art educator and they are showing how beneficial it is to teach art with science and science with art. The intended audience for this article is other educators but also people interested in the intersection between art and science. This source relates to my inquiry because it gives examples of the many ways science can be combined with art, and why it is beneficial to artists to use scientific concepts in their art making. One example cited in the article is drawing microscopic images of cells. This experiment is based on the work of Ramon y Cajal who discovered the structures of neurons by observing them under a microscope and then drawing them. Many other scientists had studied neurons under a microscope but it wasn’t until Cajal drew them that he was able to understand their structure more clearly. The article describes a similar experiment done by science students. The students were encouraged to draw what they saw under the microscope in a single line drawing without lifting their pencil. This helped them to better understand what they were seeing under the microscope as well as create an interesting drawing.
Clark, T. J. "In Defense of Abstract Expressionism." October 69 (1994): 23-48. Accessed November 2, 2020. doi:10.2307/778988.
Abstract:
This article is titled, “In Defense of Abstract Expressionism.” It is describing why we should make more art in the abstract expressionism movement. Abstract expressionism is all about the form, color and line of the piece. It de-emphasizes cultural and social contexts. The article uses Jackson Pollock’s piece, Phosphorescence as an example. There is nothing representational about this piece, when viewing it you can only describe it in terms of what is actually on it, color, line, etc. Abstract expressionism is art for art’s sake it doesn’t have a message it just exists to comment on the form of itself.
Annotation:
This article was written by T.J. Clark, an art historian with a Ph.D. from the University of London. This article as a source is credible because the author has devoted his life to studying art history. In his piece, he is defending Abstract Expressionism and saying why it’s an important part of art history and an interesting way to make art. I can’t disagree with anything he says but it presents a different perspective because abstract expressionism is contradictory to science in art. Science in art relies on context and meaning and isn’t about the form of the piece but what it represents. Art that uses mathematical and scientific concepts, therefore can’t be classified as abstract expressionism pieces.