It is with great pleasure that I bring to your attention the call for nominations for the

FRANK J. MALINA ASTRONAUTICS MEDAL – 2017 CALL FOR NOMINATIONS- Deadline for nominations Feb 17, 2017

The first award was to Sharon Krista McAuliffe (First Teacher in Space, posthumously, USA). The purpose of this medal reinforces Frank Malina’s deep commitment to the peaceful uses of outer space. As you can read in the paper abstract at the end of this blog post by historian Fraser MacDonald, Frank Malina left the rocketry business as pioneer  whose team launched the first human made object into space, largely because he refused to work on  putting atom bombs on rockets. Fraser Macdonald in the abstract below says:

he developed :what we might call a kind of ‘leftist Olympianism’. ….. I show how Malina wanted to transcend, as he saw it, the ‘contradictions’ of political geography to offer a programme for ‘one world’ government. This programme was to be thrashed out, under his direction, by a committee comprised of: an economist or economic geographer, a construction engineer, a psychoanalyst, a philosopher and a politician.  In articulating this vision, he saw himself as ‘developing a new awareness… able to withdraw from … happenings of the moment … perched above the Earth as an observer of the whole’. ” ( I cant but help editorialise on how this vision might help us given the strange political turns under way in USA and Western Europe which turn their back the work of  international collaboration that is a legacy of WWI survivors)

Please nominate candidates for the Frank Malina Astronautics Medal and share this announcement to your friends and colleagues. The deadline  for nominations is Feb 17, 2017



The International Astronautical Federation (IAF) is pleased to announce its 2017 Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal that recognises outstanding contributions to space education by an educator who promotes the study of astronautics and space science.

The call for nominations for the Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal is addressed to IAF member organisations in good standing. Only one application per organisation will be accepted per year.

The most important criterion for this award is that an educator “has taken the fullest advantage of the resources available to him/her to promote the study of astronautics and related space sciences”.

If you have a nominee, please submit the following information:

  • 1 nomination letter;
  • The candidate’s credentials, including educational background, work history, awards and honours, and published works;
  • At least 3 letters of recommendation, two professional and one personal; letters from students are encouraged;
  • The nomination package should be forwarded under cover of a letter from an IAF member organisation, signed by the responsible official of that organisation, and listing the point of contact for any questions.

The entire application should not exceed 15 pages.

The Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal recipient will be selected by the Malina Medal Subcommittee who will review the nominations and make a recommendation to the IAF Honours and Awards Committee who will, in turn, make a recommendation for the recipient to the IAF Bureau during the IAF Spring Meetings in March 2017. The final decision rests with the IAF Bureau.

The Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal comprises an engraved commemorative medal and a certificate of citation. The medal will be awarded to the recipient during the International Astronautical Congress (IAC) Closing Ceremony and the recipient will be invited to participate in the Gala Dinner of the IAC as a special guest of the IAF President. In addition, the recipient will deliver the Keynote Address in the E1 Space Education and Outreach Symposium taking place during International Astronautical Congress.

Nomination documents must be received by IAF Secretariat by the 13 February 2017 15:00 CET (Paris time), preferably by email at (Subject line: NOMINEE’S LAST NAME Nominee’s First Name-2017 Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal).

If email is not available, the reference can be sent by postal mail to:

IAF Secretariat

Attention: 2017 Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal

3 rue Marco Nikis

75015 Paris


Frank J. Malina Astronautics Medal recipients include:

  • 2015 Boris Pschenichner (Russia)

  • 2014 Bryan Debates (USA)

  • 2013 John M. Logsdon (USA)

  • 2012 Amelia Ercoli-Finzi (Italy)

  • 2011 Yves Gourinat (France)

  • 2010 Jean-Marie Wersinger (USA)

  • 2009 Barbara Morgan (USA)

  • 2008 Anne Brumfitt (Australia)

  • 2007 Peter M. Bainum (USA)

  • 2006 Tetsuo Yasaka (Japan)

  • 2005 G.P. “Bud” Peterson (USA)

  • 2004 Eugene Dzhur (Ukraine)

  • 2003 William A. Hiscock (USA)

  • 2002 Sir Martin Sweeting (UK)

  • 2001 Carlo Buongiorno (Italy)

  • 2000 Roland Doré (Canada)

  • 1999 John L. Junkins (Texas A&M University, USA)

  • 1998 Kiran Karnik (ISRO, India)

  • 1997 Vladimir V. Prisniakov and Skip Fletcher (Ukraine/Texas A&M University, USA)

  • 1996 Julius E. Dash and Prof. Motocki Hinada (Oregon State University, USA/Institute of Space & Astro Science, Japan)

  • 1995 John L. Whitesides (The George Washington University, USA)

  • 1994 Richard A. Seebass (University of Colorado, USA)

  • 1993 Hans H. Von Muldau (PFIAT, Germany)

  • 1992 Oleg M. Alifanov and Dr. Willy Sadeh (Moscow Aviation Institute, Russia/Colorado State University, USA)

  • 1991 Gerald M. Gregoreck (USA)

  • 1990 no recipient

  • 1989 no recipient

  • 1988 André Lebeau (Météo France, France)

  • 1987 Luigi G. Napolitano (University of Naples, Italy)

  • 1986 Sharon Krista McAuliffe (First Teacher in Space, posthumously, USA)


Here is Fraser Macdonald;s talk abtract he will present in January

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, January 2017

‘Perched above the Earth as an observer of the whole’: the satellite
politics of Frank J. Malina

Fraser MacDonald


This paper is about the co-constitution of scientific and political authority in the life and work of rocket engineer Frank J. Malina. As a starting point, I take inspiration from the scholarship of the late Denis Cosgrove who considered the historical geography of Earth imagery, from Humboldt’s Cosmos to the modernist global visions of
Apollo photographs, 22727 and Earthrise. Unlike Cosgrove, the paper examines a purely abstract political image: one in which early technologies of space exploration foster an imaginative apprehension of ‘one world’ politics in the post-war period.

Frank J. Malina (1912-1981) is among the least recognized and yet most important figures in twentieth century American science. His propulsion research at Caltech in the late 1930s, supervised by the Hungarian aerodynamicist Theodor von Karman, led to the first successful US rocket program and to their jointly founding the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, today celebrated as a NASA facility for
autonomous interplanetary exploration. Today, Malina is not well known, despite his singular contribution as the architect of the first object to reach into extra-terrestrial space: the WAC Corporal rocket. Two factors partially explain Malina’s relative obscurity: an FBI
campaign gripped by concerns about his Communist Party membership; and his abandonment of practical rocketry, in protest against its weaponisation, to work initially at UNESCO, and, later, as a pioneer of kinetic art.

This paper considers a specific moment in the biography of Malina – the summer of 1946 – to open up wider questions about relationship between science and politics at the cusp of orbital access. Shortly before he left both the United States and his position as Director of JPL, Malina signed a contract with the Navy Bureau of Astronautics to
investigate the viability of a satellite launch vehicle. His idea was fatefully dropped on cost grounds: no state wanted a satellite in the late 1940s. Malina’s WAC Corporal however remained an unqualified success, soaring to altitudes of 235,000ft in 1945 and 1946. I demonstrate how this achievement also informs a development in Malina’s political thinking, moving from a strict adherence to the
CPUSA line to what we might call a kind of ‘leftist Olympianism’. Using a previously unseen cache of letters between Frank and his wife Liljan, then in the midst of separation and divorce, I show how Malina wanted to transcend, as he saw it, the ‘contradictions’ of political
geography to offer a programme for ‘one world’ government. This programme was to be thrashed out, under his direction, by a committee comprised of: an economist or economic geographer, a construction
engineer, a psychoanalyst, a philosopher and a politician.  In articulating this vision, he saw himself as ‘developing a new awareness… able to withdraw from … happenings of the moment … perched above the Earth as an observer of the whole’. Like his satellite vehicle, this proposal didn’t get off the ground but it provides a fascinating glimpse into the folding of midcentury science and politics.  The failure of Malina’s satellite idea inspires him to an act of imaginative transcendence – the embodiment of Donna Haraway’s
famous ‘God trick’ – where he could look down on ‘the best possible division of the world’s resources’. This vision is, I will argue, only made possible by the particular conjunction of political and scientific authority.



As you know there is an international discussion on “stem to steam” concepts and approaches for new art/sci/tech teaching and research methods.  There is much debate and discussion on whether the ideas behind STEM to STEAM are new in anyway, or whether the phrase is a repacking of current work in a way to attract new funding ( for an understanding the social and cultural processes at work in ‘selling’ programs like stem to steam – on  a larger scale- see for instance Patrick McCray’s detailed book called The Visioneers: How a Group of Elite Scientists Pursued Space Colonies, Nanotechnologies, and a Limitless Future   )

The US National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine are currently conducting a two year study to address  the higher education part of the question:

Integrating Higher Education in the
Arts, Humanities, Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

The European Union has initiated the STARTS (science technology and the arts ) funding program:

which seeks to address the innovation argument:

STARTS encourages synergies between the Arts and innovation for technology and society by promoting the inclusion of artists in Horizon 2020 projects.An increasing number of high-tech companies assert that scientific and technological skills alone are not sufficient anymore. In this context, the Arts are gaining prominence as catalysts for an efficient conversion of science and technology knowledge into novel products, services, and processes.

At the more local level our own School of Art, Technology and Emerging Communication has announced 7 funded PhD fellowships in a number of areas under the stem to steam concepts:

Looking for amazing new art-sci-tech PhD students

Fashioning Circuits Lab* Future Immersive Virtual Environments (FIVE) Lab* Institute for Research in Anticipatory Systems (ANTE)* Narrative Systems Research Lab* Public Interactives Research Lab (PIRL)* Social Practice and Community Engagement Media (SP+CE) Lab* 3-D Modeling Studio

These research labs are looking for PhD students to be funded by the fellowships:

Current research labs looking for PhD students include:

Current labs, studios, and research areas include:

* ArtSciLab

* Cultural Science Lab

* Creative Automata Lab

* Fashioning Circuits Lab

* Future Immersive Virtual Environments (FIVE) Lab

* Institute for Research in Anticipatory Systems (ANTE)

* Narrative Systems Research Lab

* Public Interactives Research Lab (PIRL)

* Social Practice and Community Engagement Media (SP+CE) Lab

* 3-D Modeling Studio

If there is interest we will  propose a discussion on the YASMIN discussion list on this topic. For your interest I append the agenda for a meeting we are having here in dallas Dec 2 ( you are invited) where we will  be debating these questions:

Roger Malina

ATEC Watering Hole

Friday Dec. 2nd 2 – 4pm

ATC 3.209


Dean Anne Balsamo has initiated a number of discussions on what STEM
to STEAM means for ATEC

We are will be holding a number of watering holes over the coming year
to provide a place to discuss what STEM to STEAM means for us.

This time:

Roger Malina

The National Academies study on Integrating Higher Education in the
Arts, Humanities, Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

Karen Doore:
Curriculum Re-Design: Computer Science for ATEC Students
Karen Doore will present an overview of curriculum for CS
programming-sequence courses for ATEC and will include student
projects showcasing top student works. There are significant
challenges and difficulties in attempting to teach complex technical
material to a diverse student groups, particularly when many students
question the premise that these CS courses provide value for the
effort that is required to learn the course content. There are
current efforts to re-design curriculum for these courses. She is
looking for feedback and suggestions that can further guide the
curriculum re-design efforts.

About Karen Doore

Karen Doore is a Senior Lecturer and PhD Candidate in the Computer
Science Department at UT Dallas. Her research focus is Computer
Science Education, with an emphasis on curriculum design for
Non-Majors. She earned her BS in Material Science and Engineering from
the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN and an MS in Computer
Science with a focus on Intelligent Systems from UT Dallas. She
currently teaches required CS programming-sequence courses for ATEC
students, and has been working for several years as part of the
re-design effort for the curriculum of these courses. Her new
curriculum has an enhanced focus on computational modeling, so that,
in addition to learning fundamental programming concepts, students
learn how to model dynamic, interactive systems. One goal of this
modeling focus is to provide students with skills to design,
communicate about, and implement dynamic interactive programs, such as
games, animations, and design tools.

Kathryn Evans:

UTD A and H Music Faculty
Robert Root-Bernstein’s proposed bridging concepts between
science/engineering/medicine and art/design humanities (accepted for
publication in Leonardo Journal)

Alex Topete
ATEC MA student
Finding Evidence that STEAM is a good idea: the ArtSciLab Examplars project


For non UTD people who need a parking permit contact

Looking for amazing new art-sci-tech PhD students


We are looking for a few new amazing PhD students in Art/Technology/Emerging Media and Communication at the University of Texas at Dallas. A number of 4 year PhD funded positions are availabe ( two years of a fellowship, two years of a TA ship)..deadline January 15 2017.

PhD applicants who are interested in the research areas of my ArtSciLab ( )  which includes areas in art-science creative work and scientific research, stem to steam and experimental publishing, should enquire directly to me at

Roger Malina

The School of Arts, Technology, and Emerging Communication

At The University of Texas at Dallas

The School of Arts, Technology and Emerging Communication (ATEC) at the University of Texas at Dallas invites applications for its graduate programs beginning in Fall 2017.  We seek students who appreciate the opportunities of cross-disciplinary education, who aspire to be visionary scholars, researchers, teachers and artists.

ATEC was founded in 2004 as a joint program between the School of Arts and Humanities and the Jonsson School of Engineering and Computer Science.  In 2015, ATEC became the newest school at UT Dallas with a mission to develop transdisciplinary academic programs that span the fields of art, science, design, humanities, and social sciences.

ATEC currently offers three graduate programs:  The Masters of Arts (MA), the Masters of Fine Arts (MFA), and the Ph.D.  Research areas for all graduate students include culture and technology studies, game studies, game development, computer animation, communication studies, critical media studies, media psychology, interaction design, and creative practice.

Current labs, studios, and research areas include:

* ArtSciLab

* Cultural Science Lab

* Creative Automata Lab

* Fashioning Circuits Lab

* Future Immersive Virtual Environments (FIVE) Lab

* Institute for Research in Anticipatory Systems (ANTE)

* Narrative Systems Research Lab

* Public Interactives Research Lab (PIRL)

* Social Practice and Community Engagement Media (SP+CE) Lab

* 3-D Modeling Studio

Join the ATEC Adventure!

Collaboration is the foundation of every program.  Students collaborate with faculty, with each other, and with colleagues from other schools, institutions, museums, and galleries.

Faculty have training and expertise in multiple disciplines:  digital humanities, critical race studies, cultural studies, game studies, game design, animation, virtual reality, narrative theory, art & science, computer science, interaction design, visual arts, 3-D arts.  They are leaders in developing new hybrid research projects and experimental creative practices.

ATEC is housed in the newly constructed Edith O’Donnell Arts and Technology Building.  Opened in 2014, the 155,000 sq. ft. facility includes computer labs, fabrication and maker spaces, faculty research labs, motion capture labs, usability lab, sound design recording spaces, game and media library, and a 3D art studio.

ATEC faculty are dedicated teachers who embrace project-based learning, collaborative creative practice, and critical analysis and social science research methods.  Students are encouraged to join lab-based projects, collaborate on experimental art and media productions, and engage in critical and social scientific research.

Funding is available for outstanding doctoral students for 4 years of study.  Funding support includes two years of fellowship (year 1 and year 4) and two years of teaching assistantships (year 2 and year 3).  Tuition is covered by the School.  Students in the MA and MFA programs may also be funded through research assistantships and teaching assistantships.

Requirements for application to the MA or MFA programs, students must have earned an undergraduate degree from an accredited school in a relevant field, and submit a portfolio with a written essay of interest, and examples of creative and/or critical work.

Applicants for the Ph. D program must have earned a master’s level degree in a relevant field, and submit a portfolio that includes a written essay of interest, an example of academic writing, and evidence of creative practice or research experience.

For details about ATEC graduate programs, visit


For further information about the doctoral program, please contact Ph.D. adviser Christine Messick

For information about the MA and MFA programs, please contact graduate adviser Ellen Curtis

General inquiries can be sent to Dr. Monica Evans, Associate Dean for Graduate Programs in ATEC

Graduate admission application deadline for consideration of funding and financial aid:  January 15, 2017.  Application details are available here.


Listen to the late Pauline Oliveros and other art/sci/tech pioneers on Creative Disturbance


Per my previous post re the passing of pioneer Pauline Oliveros,

I thought I would bring this to your attention:

Listen to the late Pauline Oliveros and host Scot Gresham-Lancaster, who had collaborated on many projects over the years and in this  2015 podcast they talk over some of that work with a focus on the pieces at the Art/Science boundary. The Deep Listening Art/Science Conference comes up as well as the interesting “moon bounce” pieces, “Echoes from the Moon”


We have been broadcasting a number of podcasts with pioneers, eg

Dan Sandin:

Helen Harrison:

Frieder Nake: 

Jacques Mandelbrot: 

Judy Malloy:

Sandy Stone:
Reg Gadney: 


You can find out more about the Leonardo Pioneers and Pathbreakers projects at:

If you are a pioneer ( you know who you are) and would like to publish a podcast, contact me.

Roger Malina








Pauline Oliveros passes a way– time for deep listening


I have just learned that colleague Pauline Oliveros just passed away

Pauline Oliveros, an accomplished composer, accordionist, and experimental music pioneer, has died, according to Red Bull Music Academy and FACT. She was 84.”


“Born in 1932, Oliveros was a multi-instrumentalist who later became a composer and performer. She was also a noted author and philosopher. In the early ‘60s, Oliveros was an integral member of the San Francisco Tape Music Center. In the late ‘80s, she coined the term “Deep Listening,” and later went on to found the Deep Listening Institute (now the Center For Deep Listening).   “

For more about her amazing work see:

“Pauline Oliveros describes Deep Listening as a way of listening in every possible way to everything possible to hear no matter what you are doing.  Such intense listening includes the sounds of daily life, of nature, of one’s own thoughts as well as musical sounds. Deep Listening is my life practice,” she explains, simply.  Oliveros is founder of Deep Listening Institute, formerly Pauline Oliveros Foundation, now the Center For Deep Listening at Rensselaer.”

Where to begin .. with the passing a few days ago of Jean Claude Risset.. we are feeling the passing of generations that created the culture the art science technology community of today inherits, a culture that is seeking new ways of re inventing ourselves for a saner world—

Pauline curated a CD for Nic Collins, editor in chief of Leonardo Music Journal

here is her curators statement:

Listening for Music through Community

Since 1988, a community has grown around Deep Listening. The practice was established with the recording of the same name released by New Albion in 1989. In the liner notes to Deep Listening, I described for the first time how Stuart Dempster, Panaiotis and I were listening to ourselves, one another and the marvelous space that we were experiencing and recording. The reverberation time was 45 seconds and clear as a bell. This challenged us to listen as never before. The Deep Listening Band was spawned out of this experience. The Deep Listening Retreats began in 1991. Musicians, artists, writers and others attracted to the concept have attended the retreats every summer for 19 years. Hundreds of Deep Listening workshops and classes have been given in many parts of the world. The Deep Listening Band is now in its 20th year and currently features David Gamper, Stuart Dempster and me. For the music and sound profession, Deep Listening is a matter of perceiving and making sound interactively, in a way that expands beyond the music to include the environment. Rapport with the space of sounding and with the audience deepens the musical experience for all. A profound experience can be shared and its influence can be spread. All 15 composers represented on the LMJ19 CD have had some relationship to the Deep Listening practice: Some are certificate holders; some have attended workshops and classes. The pieces on the disc reflect the practice in a wide variety of ways. The Nameless Sound Youth Ensemble fearlessly enters improvisation through their listening facilitated by David Dove. Theirs is a music of no hesitation—silences are honored and perceived just the same as sounds. Many in the ensemble began their improvisation with little or no musical training. Norman Lowrey has created his music through his making of masks that sound. He sounds his masks in a music of ceremony. He invites others to share in the sounding ceremony, which includes audio tracks of past performances. Sema by Sarah Weaver was developed during a Deep Listening retreat in Cork, Ireland (2008), in collaboration with other retreat members. Sema was performed at the Quiet Music Festival immediately after the retreat. The Cornelius Cardew Choir (Berkeley, CA), formed and directed by Thomas Bickley, hosts all levels of singers and performs pieces with and without notation. Bickley encourages members of the choir to make pieces to perform as well. Angelorum was first performed in 1997. If, Bwana (Al Margolis) makes backup tracks with a sampler. He often samples improvising musicians on the fly to build the tracks during the performance. Catarina de Re drew inspiration from the Troy, NY, community and a unique building to inform her opera The Gasholder Stupa. De Re’s operatic voice explores the huge round brick space of the Gasholder building as improvising musicians move through different cultural expressions. DLCGO employs a process of the individual creation of electroacoustic sound files that are uploaded to a server, rated by the makers and mutated a number of times to create material for improvisation, guided by Doug Van Nort’s score. Rocks as instruments in a beautiful outdoor environment bring people together for Seth Cluett’s fleeting and massive. This is a people-oriented piece that invites participation from any who are interested. Gathering information about daily rhythm cycles of many individuals produces the material

LEONARDO MUSIC JOURNAL, Vol. 19, pp. 100–101, 2009 ©2009 ISAST for Patterns of Living and Sounding by Marc Jensen. The collection of the material through a diary and the process of selection gives the musician a rich relationship to their daily lives that he uses for sounding. Kathy Kennedy’s extensive experience with radio transmitters, voice culture and large groups inform her HMMM. Anyone can hum. Her invitation to participation in a public space encourages strangers to make music together casually. Participant comments are a great part of this excerpt. Paula Matthusen cleans ears with her electroacoustic music. Her use of resonating materials and clear sounds penetrates the space in a variety of patterns. In The Listening Garden, colorful whirligigs await the wind and then turn to inform the musicians when to play and with what characteristics according to Shannon Morrow’s instructional score. Out of doors in a public park, people who likely would not attend a concert are attracted to the music through the unusual score. Mouth Piece, an improvisation guided by trombonist Monique Buzzarté with two singers, takes us into the acoustic space of the theater at Time & Space Limited in Hudson, NY. Their interactions develop purely through their listening to each other. In Skolelyder (ja, ja, hey), children improvise according to instructions by Kristin Norderval. There is a wonderful sense of children’s play with sound. Elainie Lillios goes deeply into electronics in Listening Beyond to express her relationship with listening. She takes us with her on a lovely journey, carried by her beautiful electroacoustic sounds and her voiced invitation to follow. Pauline Oliveros LMJ19 CD Curator E-mail: <> Pauline Oliveros (1932) is a composer, performer, author and philosopher. She pioneered Deep Listening, an aesthetic based upon principles of improvisation, electronic music, ritual, teaching and meditation designed to inspire both trained and untrained performers to practice the art of listening and responding to environmental conditions in solo and ensemble situations. During the mid-1960s she served as the first director of the Tape Music Center at Mills College, a.k.a. the Center for Contemporary Music, then as Professor of Music, and later as Director of the Center for Music Experiment, at the University of California at San Diego. Since 2001 she has served as Distinguished Research Professor of Music in the Arts department at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI), engaged in research on a National Science Foundation CreativeIT project. She also serves as Darius Milhaud Composer in Residence at Mills College doing telepresence teaching and is president of Deep Listening Institute, Ltd. She received the 2009–2010 William Schuman Award from Columbia University. ;

Roger Malina


dont miss eduardo kac space poetry on international space station !!!!


don’t miss eduardo kac material space poetry on international space station !!!!

It is a delight seeing friend and colleague Eduardo Kac perform a space poem through the intermediation of french astronaut Thomas Pesquet:

On the occasion of the next mission Proxima of ESA aboard the ISS, the french astronaut Thomas Pesquet come true Inner telescope, a poetic work imagined by the artist Eduardo Kac, with the support of the Observatory of the space of CNES.

I once wrote that space exploration would fail without the creation of a space culture- here we go

after Arthur Woods, Frank Pietronigro, Kitsou Dubois, Ansumas Biswas…..Eduardo Kac

see the Leonardo/OLATS space arts working group;

and the space arts data base ( if you are a space artist interesting in being in the database, contact me:
hear eduardo kac talk 26 nov in paris

Hear Kac talk about this space art project

Space Poetrymeeting with Eduardo Kac at the bookstore Michèle Ignazi, Saturday, Paris
26 November at 7 pm.

> November 17, Thomas Pesquet went for six months aboard the International Space Station. During his stay, the french astronaut will conduct inner Telescope, an artistic performance imagined by the artist Eduardo Kac.

Eduardo Kac has chosen to leave a trace of this adventure, which is “one small step for man and perhaps a big step for art” according to Thomas Pesquet, through a graphic novel, signed and numbered a hundred copies only. This artist’s book will be unveiled at the meeting held at the Michele Ignazi bookstore and will result in a reading of the eponymous manifesto performed.

>> Information:
Michèle Ignazi Bookstore
Saturday, November 26 at 7 pm
17 street of Jouy, 75004 Paris
Subway: Saint Paul
Tel: 01 42 71 17 00


Jean-Claude Risset passes away- stem to steam an inheritor of his ideas, inventions and music


With sadness we learn of Jean Claude Risset’s passing way on Nov 21 in Marseille.

For a good summary of his career ( in french with links to texts): 

or in english:

When I arrived in France to the CNRS and Aix-Marseille University in 1995, Risset was just a kilometer away in the Laboratoire de Mechanique et Accoustique ( LMA) and his laboratoire d’informatique et d’acoustique musicale. For me he is an examplar of the “new leonardos” today whose work straddles the sciences and the arts , in his case accoustics , digital tools and contemporary music, and of course music that could not have been made in any other age. But he also navigated the rapidly changing technology landscape, leading directions that now see so natural…from musical synthesis to digital remix.  His knowledge of psychoacoustics led him to explore sonic illusions such as the  Glissando Shepard-Risset effect which sounds if the sound descends for ever ( ).

During his later years he dedicated his work to composing so we look forward to a fascinating legacy= the last time I met him was when we were setting up the IMERA art-science residency program (ASIL) . He had many ideas and suggestions. We had of course read his art-science report for the french government ( ). Resulting from  chairing  a committee on art/science/technology he made specific recommendations to the french government, few of which unfortunately were implemented. The report was a pre cursor to Bill Mitchell’s “Beyond Productivity” ( ) and subsequent reports in europe the usa and elsewhere that first promoted the cultural industries,  our own SEAD report (   Steps to an Ecology of Networked Knowledge and Innovation: Enabling New Forms of Collaboration among Sciences, Engineering, Arts, and Design ) in 2015. The international discussion is now thickening into the STEM TO STEAM movement including new funding programs such as STARTS ( )

. Summary of the  Risset report:

‘The field of the arts is important for itself, but also in relation to the efflorescence of the digital. The arts feed cultural industries to a huge potential market. The progress of science and technology provides the art of new tools, new materials and new methods. Art can also be engine of scientific and technological innovation. The possibilities of the computer and multimedia make possible new heuristic approaches, for which the artistic research can be articulated with basic research.Therefore, that an organized search snaps into place on a subject that involves a chain of different actors: researchers, designers, educators, publishers, manufacturers, economists… It is particularly important that artistic concerns could penetrate to the heart of research. However, by tradition, the arts do not have in France the place they deserve in the University and research communities. This report deepens those expected and examines ways of enhancing the art-science-technology synergy. The first volume, synthesis and body of proposals, refers to a second volume of more full-text analysis and documentation. The report is articulated following five axes: the identification of resources; remarks on computer networks; the study of scientific strategies; directions of research; economic issues. “

He received the gold medal of the CNRS and the Legion of Honor.

He leaves a legacy internationally but also in Marseille with his exemplar laying the institutional rationales that legitimises the creation of a number of art science technology labs in France ( eg ASTRAM in Marseille :  led by Jacques Sapiega ). Music was one of the first arts that rapidly adopted and then transformed digital media in the 60s, and France among the first initiators of new computer music institutions such as IRCAM. For an excellent speech of his summarising his own career , vision, mentors and ideas see

Roger Malina

Jean-Claude Risset, who reimagined digital synthesis, has died

” French electronic visionary Jean-Claude Risset has sadly died. According to French media reports, Risset passed away on Monday (November 21) in Marseille. He was 78.

Alongside the likes of Pierre Henry, Pierre Schaeffer and Pierre Boulez, Risset brought early electronic music into new, unexplored territories. With a training in physics, piano and composition, he is often seen as the first French musician to ever use computers for composition and music production.

Born in 1938, Risset began his music career in his early 20s when he studied composition under the guidance of André Jolivet, before joining fellow electronic music pioneer Max Matthews in 1964 at Bell Labs in New Jersey. Together, Risset and Matthews help create the MUSIC IV software to digitally recreate the sounds of brass instruments.”

See also: )

Roger Malina

Roger Malina’s Critical Annotated Bibliography of Art-Science


I am pleased to present the critical annotated bibliography of art-science I published in the Fall 2016 isssue of Art Journal: 

Solicited by Michael Corris, Art Journal has been publishing a number of interesting critical bibliographies.

Roger F. Malina

Annotated Art-Science Bibliography

We are witnessing a resurgence of creative and scholarly work that seeks to bridge science and engineering with the arts, design, and the humanities. These practices connect both the arts and sciences, hence the term art-science, and the arts and the engineering sciences and technology, hence the term “art and technology.” Ever since we have divided knowledge into ways of knowing, with disciplinary approaches that focus on specific fields, there has been a need to link the fields and methodologies periodically. The branches of the tree of knowledge, however, inevitably grow apart. Today we are realizing that the dynamic network of knowledge, or a field of fields, provides a more fluid metaphor; unfortunately, our organizations are still mostly organized in tree structures. Consequently, the art-science literature necessarily addresses both creative and scholarly work, and their methodologies, as well as social and institutional issues that enable or block such work.

In the early nineteenth century, Alexander von Humboldt, one of the founders of modern observational science, insisted on a productive fusion of the sciences, arts, and humanities in his vision of the “Kosmos” (see Andrea Wulf, The Invention of Nature: Alexander von Humboldt’s New World, Knopf, 2015). In the late nineteenth century, T. H. Huxley argued for the introduction of science as a required subject in the United Kingdom at a time when education was steeped in the classics, with little science. Surprisingly, he tied ability in scientific research to competency in arts and crafts (see T. H. Huxley on Education: A Selection from His Writings, ed. Cyril Bibby, Cambridge Texts and Studies in the History of Education, Cambridge University Press, 2010). In these periods, the arts, humanities, and classics were dominant educational tropes, whereas of course today, in our techno-scientific society, the balance is reversed.

As long time executive editor of Leonardo Publications (MIT Press), I have witnessed during the past ten years a sociological expansion of art-science-technology work. In particular the emergence of numerous programs in higher education that reflect, and drive interest within, government and industry is surprising, with an emergent cohort of young professionals under the age of thirty-five. A thriving ecology of maker, hacker and coworking spaces embeds such work in local and community settings that bring to the fore a diversity of methods and scholarship.

I sometimes caricature this growth by intoning the mantra, “art, science, technology, creativity, innovation, entrepreneurs, employment,” as questions of the humanities, well-being, ethics, and value systems often remain inconspicuous. The current surge in interest, sometimes called “STEM to STEAM” in the United States, is driven largely by three simple side effects of digital culture. (STEM = Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics; STEAM = Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics. See The phrase STEM to STEAM emerged during workshops organized by the US National Science Foundation, National Endowment of the Arts, and National Endowment for the Humanities. It was articulated in particular by John Maeda and his colleagues at the Rhode Island School of Design, and the Rhode Island Congressional delegation. The discussion lead to the formation of the STEAM Caucus in the US Congress.

 First, shared technologies entrain shared epistemologies and ontologies, reminding us of the arguments of both actor-network theory in the social sciences and embodied cognition. Second, digital tools and networks enable new forms and modes of collaboration. Finally, the development of significant employment in what used to be called the “creative” industries—more generally the new industries emerging from digital culture—has attracted the attention of policymakers.

Staying abreast of interdisciplinary developments is always challenging. Terminologies are unstable, as for example with the evolution of terms such as kinetic art, experimental film, video art, electronic art, digital art, computer art, interactive art, new media art, and so on. (The Electronic Literature Organization has developed taxonomy and terminology projects tied to the semantic web; The loci of creative work and scholarship are similarly unstable, with no standard model or curriculum comparable to what has developed in better-defined disciplinary fields. Institutional innovation and evolution, however, have been rapid: key institutions, such as György Kepes’s Center for Advanced Visual Studies at MIT, the research facilities at Bell Labs, and Xerox PARC have come and gone. New institutions have been springing up, from ArtsCatalyst in London and the Science Gallery in Dublin to the PSL SACRe program in Paris dedicated to research and pedagogy in the field (see,, and New professional organizations are also emerging, such as the Alliance for the Arts in Research Universities ( A growing literature that studies these groups has emerged over the last fifty years (see, for instance, Craig Harris, Art and Innovation: The Xerox PARC Artist-in-Residence Program, MIT Press, 1999), while a number of historians—among them Linda Henderson, Oliver Grau, Patrick McCray, Erkki Huhtamo, and Edward Shanken—are developing a new literature.

In this annotated bibliography, I provide a snapshot of resources that are useful starting points. I apologize for the selective nature of this compilation and openly declare my conflict of interest for pointing to several projects in which I have been involved through the Leonardo Publications program. A second bias is that I myself was originally trained in the physical sciences, hence many of these references are from scientists advocating art-science work; there are many asymmetries in the field of fields and, perhaps surprisingly, art-and-design-led art-science programs are more developed in general that those in science-led institutions. (An important development in the past few years, under the leadership of the US National Academy of Sciences and its cultural director J. D. Talasek, has been the Academy’s monthly art-science discussion series DASER; see


Steve Wilson, Information Arts: Intersections of Art, Science, and Technology (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2015)

I have chosen to start with the work of the late Steve Wilson, an artist who successfully synthesizes the rapidly expanding landscape. He captures the transition in the late 1990s, when artists began investing their energies in fields of science beyond digital technologies. As Wilson points out, one of the surprising areas that rapidly saw art-science work was the intersection of art and biology. The pioneering work of artists such as Joe Davis, Eduardo Kac, George Gessert, and Natalie Jeremijenko has expanded with the labs of Symbiotica ( and Suzanne Anker, as well as the practice of Ellen Levy and the Trust Me I’m an Artist consortium in Europe ( (See also Meta Life, compiled by Yvan Tina, a companion site to a Leonardo anthology on the topic: Wilson details how artists, often using digital arts as a lingua franca, are now working in astronomy and space exploration, ecology, physics, and almost all areas of science. His book was an early advocate of research practice in art and the practice-based (or research-led) PhD in art and design (see


Jill Scott, ed., Artists-in-Labs: Processes of Inquiry (Vienna: Springer, 2006)

Numerous books document specific art-science initiatives, for instance the movement to host artists in research laboratories. Scott’s anthology documents the work of artists in research labs in Switzerland. Part of the Planetary Collegium program established by Roy Ascott, a pioneer in telematic art (, This volume is characteristic of books that document both the process of art-science collaboration and the production of work to be exhibited or performed. Anthropologists such as James Leach have investigated the terrain, and the artists-in-labs field has expanded recently with large institutions such as CERN imitating such residencies ( and Other examples are the Djerassi Foundation art-science residencies ( and the European Southern Observatory initiative, described below.


Roger F. Malina, Carol Strohecker, and Carol LaFayette, eds., Steps to an Ecology of Networked Knowledge and Innovation: Enabling New Forms of Collaboration among Sciences, Engineering, Arts, and Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2012; for a free PDF, see

A recent report of relevance, the result of a project I chaired— I need to declare again my conflict of interest—develops in depth the ongoing transdisciplinary trends. The report identifies thirteen processes the contributors view as enabling the conditions for interesting art-science or art-technology work. These include “embedding”—the need for public engagement and negotiation to break out of the hermetic world within which science and engineering are discussed in order to connect with the larger context of the digital, open science, and citizen science movements. A second is “translating”—or problem-driven connections among academic, commercial, and civil societies—which highlights the deep differences in methodology among the academic disciplines, when work is translated to commercial or public spaces. The report carried out limited demographic analysis, pointing to an emerging, growing group of “hybrid” individuals who have higher-education training and a career in the arts, design, or humanities and a second professional training and a career in a field of science or engineering. The spread of art-science projects and programs is international, with initiatives in South Africa, Latin America, Asia, and Eastern Europe. The Ars Electronica European Digital Arts and Sciences Network has recently been launched, including collaboration with the European Southern Observatory in Chile ( The European Union Science Technology and the Arts (STARTS) initiative has emerged recently as a sponsor of such work ( More theoretically, the “interdisciplinary turn” has itself been under intense study in the area of Translation Studies (as in the work of Doris Bachmann-Medick,

There is a growing literature, and some stabilization of the terminology, on interdisciplinarity, multidisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity (as in the work of Allen F. Repko, Lapointe coined the term “paradisciplinarity” for the work of hybrid individuals like himself; he holds PhDs in molecular biology and in dance ( These discussions focus on the need to establish collaboration methodologies and training, but also to draw on design thinking approaches, which avoid disciplinary framing in favor of problem- or inquiry-driven strategies. One example is a new book by the computer scientist Ben Shneiderman.

Ben Shneiderman, The New ABCS of Research: Achieving Breakthrough Collaborations (Oxford, UK, and New York: Oxford University Press, 2016)

Shneiderman has a long history of innovation, particularly in areas of human-computer interaction. His particular angle in this book is the articulation of two core principles, ABC and SED. The Applied and Basic Combined (ABC) principle argues that projects that pursue both basic and applied goals at the same time have a higher chance of producing advances in both areas. The Science Engineering and Design (SED) principle argues that blending the methods of science, engineering, and design produces work of greater impact. , the integration of art and design practices, consolidates a forty-year evolution during which researchers and corporations came to understand the weakness embedded in corporate human–computer interface thinking and methodologies. Shneiderman notes that a number of art and design schools have become prominent training grounds for technology professionals, including the Ontario College of Art and Design, the Royal College of Art, Goldsmiths College at the University of London, the Rhode Island School of Art and Design—birthplace of the STEM to STEAM argument—and the Savannah College of Art and Design. John Maeda of RISD has recently pointed out that design companies are now acquisition targets of Silicon Valley companies. The book includes useful case studies and exemplars that are helpful to understand the practical ways through which theoretical ideas are translated to practice.


Committee on the Science of Team Science; Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences; Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; and National Research Council, Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science, ed. Nancy J. Cooke and Margaret L. Hilton (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2015; for a free PDF, see

This US National Academies of Science report from the Science of Team Science movement is a particularly useful summary of the state of the art for collaboration methodologies. Although focused on the medical sciences, many of the techniques and methods are applicable to collaborations that bridge the arts and sciences. The report documents the dramatic growth of teamwork and team size in the sciences and engineering, and also recently in the social sciences. Useful documentation of social science studies demonstrates that heterogeneous teams (with respect to gender, age, discipline, and ethnicity) are more likely to show unusual productivity than those that are homogeneous. Separate chapters address techniques and methods for online and for or non-colocated collaborations (for practical training and best-practice manuals, see The work of artists coupled to science and engineering also shows the growth and development of collaborative practices. The literature is full of appeals to the terminology, often attributed to the design company IDEO, that identifies “T-shaped” and “Pi-shaped” individuals, with deep disciplinary knowledge in one or two disciplines, as well as broader expertise that facilitates and enables deep collaboration.


Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research (Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2005; for a free PDF, see

This report originated within the science and engineering community, where the same issue of how to enable appropriate transdisciplinary work has long been debated. It and others have led to significant investment by the Keck Foundation in the Futures Initiatives, which recently included the arts and design in its remit (

The focus on the need for public engagement is the result of an evolution from an emphasis on education to informal education, from outreach to public engagement. These issues are developed in depth by social scientists such as Helga Nowotny, a former president of the European Research Council, who advocates the development of “socially robust” knowledge (

Helga Nowotny, The Cunning of Uncertainty (Cambridge, UK, and Malden, MA: Polity, 2015)

Nowotny’s recent book continues the line of argument about changes needed in the social embedding and risk-averse culture of much of science and engineering today. The coupling to the arts and humanities is part of a creativity and innovation rationale.

The observation on the growing number of “hybrid” individuals is situated within the larger field of creativity and innovation studies. One example is the work of Robert Root Bernstein, whose series of longitudinal studies of successful scientists and engineers has fed into these debates (

Robert Root-Bernstein, “Arts Foster Scientific Success: Avocations of Nobel, National Academy, Royal Society and Sigma XI Members,” Journal of Psychology of Science and Technology 1, no. 2 (2008): 51–63, and at

This study examines all Nobel laureates between 1901 and 2005, and members of the National Academy of Science, the Royal Society, and Sigma XI. It argues for a correlation between success as a scientist and evidence of a simultaneous art or craft avocation. Additionally, a large number of artists and musicians show an avocation for science. This finding has important policy implications in light of the marginalization of arts in most curricula and connects to the thinking of von Humboldt and Huxley in the nineteenth century. The challenge is articulating the causation pathways rather than the existence of correlations. Root-Bernstein has recently concluded a massive review of all the existing studies demonstrating the effectiveness of integrating arts, music, performing, crafts, and design into science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical education. The US National Academies of science, engineering, and medicine have launched a two-year study seeking to review the current activity and the evidence of the benefits, and to make policy recommendations.

thread of the discourse is the revival of the two cultures debate reinitiated by C. P. Snow in 1959 (with which I am generally unsympathetic), in particular the promotion of a “third culture” concept exemplified by the recent work of John Brockman and Ryszard W. Kluszczyński, These approaches bring in cultural and media studies to understand the current developments, and the literature is rich with a mixture of the work of scholars and practitioners themselves. See for example Ryszard W. Kluszczyński, ed., Towards the Third Culture: The Co-Existence of Art, Science and Technology (Gdansk: Center for Contemporary Art, 2011; a free bilingual Polish-English PDF is available after registration atński).

The particularities of art-science practice today include the intentional mixing of conceptual and research work, the creation of original artwork, and innovation in disseminating the results. These mixed practices, with multimodal goals, were largely developed in England during the , in programs at the Royal College of Art, Goldsmiths, and other art and design schools in Europe. An example of this approach to which I was recently introduced is the work of PhD student Emile de Visscher, a well-explicated mix of theoretical and conceptual work; it ranges from prototyping concepts in works which can be viewed both as art installations and technological prototypes, to experimental publication of results by a community of practice. In this case de Visscher’s work is deeply embedded in local social issues, seeking to develop alternative ideas on the creation of industries that are part of the “slow innovation” approach (


Christa Sommerer and Laurent Mignonneau, eds., Art @ Science (Vienna and New York: Springer, 1998)

Within the art-science creative community we see exemplars such as Sommerer and her husband, Mignonneau, at the University of Art and Design in Vienna ( I note in passing the number of prominent married couples involved, such as Woody and Steina Vasulka, and Helen and Newton Harrison, but also numerous small and large teams. Some artists whose work requires technological innovation have oscillated between academia, industrial settings, and private practice, with the development of artworks that often require technological innovation. The “third culture” is then a praxis that involves a change of context and a fluidity between differing objectives in the projects, rather than a theoretical construct as exemplified by the writings of, say, the biologist E. O. Wilson.

Edward O. Wilson, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (New York: Knopf, dist. Random House, 1998)

Wilson’s synthetic approach appropriates the term “consilience” from William Whewell’s two-volume Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences (1847), where it has the sense of the fusion of two or more lines of induction drawn from different sets of phenomena. Wilson lays out an agenda for a grand unification of different strands of knowledge, to bridge the arts and sciences and begin to erase the false boundary separating the social from the natural sciences. One has the sense that, for him, approaches to verifiable knowledge will be scientific; the debate is deeply engaged and can be acrimonious with the emergence of digital humanities and now, “cultural science.” Champions of portions of Wilson’s agenda include the art historian Maximilian Schich, who charts cultural history and evolution using data science techniques; he has recently published a YouTube video that has now had a million views (“Charting Culture” at For Wilson, the evocation of the meaning and quality of life and experience will continue to be the province of the arts, their appreciation enhanced by an informed criticism newly aware of their cultural, cognitive science, and genetic bases. In this concept of consilience, the divides between the transcendental and qualitative, the empirical, and a quantitative basis for ethics will vanish. Arguing against this grand holistic vision are not only artists and scholars in the humanities, but also scientists who are wary of “grand unification” theories.


Edward Slingerland and Mark Collard, eds., Creating Consilience: Integrating the Sciences and the Humanities (Oxford, UK, and New York: Oxford University Press, 2012)

This multiauthor volume rethinks the consilience issue, arguing rather for integrative common grounds (such as integrating over time scales of study, or physical scales). The editors advocate a “second wave consilience that aims to move beyond eliminative reductionism to respect emergent levels of truth” (24–28), “move beyond the nature-nurture debate to recognize the importance of gene-culture co-evolution” (28–30), and “move beyond disciplinary chauvinism to recognize that consilience is a two-way street” (30–34). They foreground the fact that underlying assumptions, such as mind-body dualism, must inevitably be examined.

Jean-Marc Lévy-Leblond, La Science n’est pas l’art : Brèves rencontres (Paris: Hermann, 2010)

One articulate proponent of the “separate but equal” view of art and science is the physicist Jean-Marc Levy-Leblond, editor of the French interdisciplinary journal Alliage ( In this book—not yet available in English translation—he vigorously defends the epistemic boundaries between the arts and sciences, advocating rather the mechanism of “creative friction” between artists and scientists in, to use his term, “brèves rencontres.”


A growing literature documents the key postwar initiatives such as the exhibition Cybernetic Serendipity (organized by Jasia Reichardt, Institute of Contemporary Arts, London, 1968), the Experiments in Art and Technology movement, and the Center for Advanced Visual Studies that became the Art, Culture, and Technology program at MIT. In addition, a growing number of historians are analyzing and contextualizing the various developments. One historically significant report is the Los Angeles County Museum of Art’s 1971 Report on the Art and Technology Program of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1967–1971, 1971 ( A key art historian in the field is Linda Henderson, whose seminal monograph of 1983 has recently been updated:

Linda Henderson, The Fourth Dimension and Non-Euclidean Geometry in Modern Art, rev. ed. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013)

Henderson traces the history of interaction between artists, scientists, and engineers from the nineteenth century to the present. A key period is the beginning of the twentieth century, when artists such as Pablo Picasso, Georges Braque, Marcel Duchamp, Salvador Dalí, László Moholy-Nagy, and Kazimir Malevich were familiar with contemporary work in physics and mathematics on higher dimensionality and relativity theory. Interest by artists in the spatial fourth dimension experienced a resurgence during the later 1950s and 1960s, and the growing impact of this new conception of space figures in the writings and work of Irene Rice-Pereira, Buckminster Fuller, Robert Smithson, and the Park Place Gallery group of the 1960s. Later, with the development in the 1980s of both string theory in physics (with its ten- or eleven-dimensional universes) and computer graphics, artists were able to appropriate both the concepts and the formalisms, as seen in work by Tony Robbin and the digital architect Marcos Novak. More recently, the string theorist Lisa Randall has collaborated with the composer Hèctor Parra to produce the new-media opera, Hypermusic Prologue: A Projective Opera in Seven Planes (for a review, seeèctor-parra-hypermusic-prologue-mw0001975010). One driver of these new forms of art-science practice is the convening of art and science communities: although they are often sequestered in their own disciplinary practices, the thresholds for collaboration have been lowered due to internet connectivity. The crucial nature of the convening was emphasized in the report described above, “Steps to an Ecology of Networked Knowledge and Innovation.” The mechanism for such convening is often socially centered, as was the case at the turn of the nineteenth century. In his book Art and Physics: Parallel Visions in Space, Time, and Light (New York: Morrow, 1993), Leonard Shlain demonstrates how changes in music and literature synchronized with those occurring in art and physics through the interaction of social circles.

Eric R. Kandel, The Age of Insight: The Quest to Understand the Unconscious in Art, Mind, and Brain, from Vienna 1900 to the Present (New York: Random House, 2012)

In addition to the rapid development of collaborations between artists and biological scientists, one finds the interaction of the arts with the neurosciences and cognitive sciences. Drawing on contemporary neurobiology, initial explorations by, for instance, Semir Zeki and Jean Pierre Changeux resulted in the area now called neuroaesthetics. In Age of Insight, the medical science Nobel laureate and neuropsychiatrist Kandel retraces the interactions of art and science in Vienna of the turn of the last century, where artists and scientists from Sigmund Freud to Oskar Kokoshka argued that “only by going below surface appearances can we find reality” (16). He contends that this period is a good exemplar for what is possible today, as at that time “leading artists and philosophers were also influenced by this research, thanks to the intellectual melting-pot provided by the university, coffee-houses, and private salons in fin-de-siècle Vienna, and found their way into the ‘private theater of another’s mind.’” [ROGER—couldn’t find page number for this quote via Google Books. Can you provide it, please?] The book is a refreshing historical contextualization of current art-science developments and in particular argues for avoiding a narrowing to “art in service of science” or the reverse.

In closing let me point to some resources to which I have contributed and that may be of interest.

Leonardo LABS Abstracts: The Leonardo Abstracts Service project created and run by the artist Sheila Pinkel is a database of titles and abstracts of PhD, MA, and MFA theses in the art-science-technology field. The database is collaboratively filtered through an annual call for authors to deposit their thesis abstracts, and a peer review committee that reads and ranks them (

Other Bibliographies: Over the years Leonardo has solicited and published annotated bibliographies on topics such as developments in the Soviet Union, synesthesia, and space and the arts, all under the rubric of Leonardo Art, Science and Technology Bibliographies. The latest is by Richard Wirth on ProSocial Gaming. There is an open call for bibliographies ( Another relevant annotated bibliography is Kathryn Evans’s Curriculum Development in the Arts, Sciences, and Humanities” (CDASH, at Finally, I note a useful academic networking group, the Leonardo Education and Art Forum (LEAF), which is an affiliate member project of the College Art Association and is currently chaired by J. D. Talasek, of the US National Academy of Science (

It is appropriate to mention here the growing art-science “field of fields,” in particular, to note the place in the intellectual landscape of “grey literature.” Reviewing citations in books and journals, one observes an increase in references to material that is self-published by members of the creative community, the organizations, and networks in forms that do not go through traditional publishing or review processes. This growing professional literature, termed “gray literature,” is ephemeral, perhaps, yet highly influential; in addition, several efforts are under way to aggregate the more influential material with some form of selectivity, such as the ARTECA aggregator (



I would like to acknowledge the rewarding collaborations with the SEAD working group: Carol Lafayette, Carol Strohecker, and Robert Thill, and with my colleagues at Leonardo/OLATS Annick Bureaud and Yvan Tina.


Roger Malina is an astrophysicist, editor, and art-science researcher based in the School of Arts, Technology, and Emerging Communication at the University of Texas at Dallas. He has served for thirty-five years as executive editor of Leonardo Publications at MIT Press.


Note there seem to be some glitches in this version of the manuscript. For the published version see

Marcel Cage and John Duchamp perform REUNION at Nine Evenings 2 in Seattle tonight !!


Tonight October 28 2016 we will be performing our “Data Stethoscope” brain connectome data in Seattle- hope you can attend !! tonight at 7pm at the King Street Station, 3rd floor, Seattle. This in celebration of the 50th anniversary of Nine Evenings held in new york by EAT and Bell labs in 1966:

The performing team includes artist/musicians Scot Gresham Lancaster, Tim Perkis, neuroscientist Gagan Wig and yours truly astrophysicist Roger Malina. The project includes also neuroscientists Micaela Chan and Neil Savalia, Art and Technology PhD student Veena Somareddy and the Make or Break gaming company, with Mike Leach and Robert Nally. A truly transdisciplinary, intergenerational, intercultural  team !!!

We will be performing the fMRI brain connectome data sets for cohorts of 20, 40, 60, 80 year olds that Gagan’s team is developing to understand the way brain interconnections evolve with age and experience for healthy adults. The hope is of indentifying precursor anomalies that may lead to cognitive problems. The software has been developed with the use of data sonification to augment the data visualisation of the networks hence the title ‘data stethoscope”.

Scot Gresham Lancaster, Tim Perkis and Andrew Blanton will be performing three solos, with differing aesthetic approaches to the visualisation and sound. At the conclusion of the performance, Scot has designed a chess board interface in homage to John Cage and Marcel Duchamp, who in 1968 performed a celebrated game of chess that triggered sound and music that they titled Reunion


Scot has invited Gagan and I to be the chess performers for this chess performance of the brain connectome data in homage to John Cage and Marcel Duchamp, hence the meme John Duchamp and Marcel Cage !!. Just to underline the appropriateness of this device, I can’t but mention that the University of Texas at Dallas, , repeatedly wins national and international chess tournaments ( Special thanks go out to James Stalling of the UTD chess program). And  international master, and ATEC student  Zurabi Javakhadze, from Georgia is a member of our ArtSciLab and is currently launching a podcast channel on chess and technology on Creative Disturbance. I cant help but also mention that my father scientist-artist Frank Malina was an avid chess player and I grew up in a home where chess playing was often the social platform for art science technology discussions !

Scot Gresham Lancaster provides this personal recollection:

” Earlier in my career I had the opportunity to work closely with composer/performers John Cage and David Tudor. It was John Cage that connected me with Lowell Cross who designed the photoelectric enabled chess board that was an important part of the “Reunion” electro-acoustically enhanced chess match between Cage and Marcel Duchamp. I received the circuit for this chess board from Mr. Cross and built a working version of the board for a reenactment of the piece for a celebration of Cage’s work at a memorial concert at Mills College in Oakland,CA in 1998. This cemented my interest in using chess play as a source of indeterminacy as a  Post-Cage style musical performance organizing principle.

Fast forward some years later and we are working with the Art/Science lab and the Center for Vital Longevity at UTD and discover that the university has a world class chess program with full scholarships and several World Grand Masters. That program also has a new generation of digital chess boards that can be used to digitally communicate the moves of a chess game in real time. The opportunity arose to use the Art part of our Art/Science collaboration presented itself with an invitation for us to participate in the 50th Anniversary of the historic Engineering Art and Technology (EAT) 9 evenings performance. This time in Seattle and entitled 9E2. This is a wonderful opportunity for us to show our work and dedication to  really fully playing at the Art/Science boundary.

The Artists on the team are seasoned performers with decades of experience but the thought occurred to us that we could integrate the symbolic representation of brain activity, the chess game, as a way to get the scientists on the project directly involved in the performance itself. So while we are using a good part of the evening to directly create music using the tools we have been developing to research by visualizing and sonifying fMRI and EEG data in many different ways. Some of these techniques proved useful for the scientists, but all were created with an idea that they would be part of a human experience and therefore be crafted to bear some artistic interest. By the end of the evening the scientists themselves are driving the form of the visual and sonic interactions directly from the chess moves they are making. The symbolic meeting of the minds driving the multi sensory experience the audience is witnessing.

Special thanks go out to James Stalling of the UTD chess program, of course, the director of the two labs collaborating on this complex and fascinating project, Drs. Roger Malina and Gagan Wig and finally my artistic collaborators Andrew Blanton and Tim Perkis.”

Scot Gresham Lancaster

We are unbearable excited as we countdown for tonight’s performance ! and I must admit this art science collaboration is one of the most interesting and difficult projects I have been involved in – more difficult than most of the research projects in astrophysics that I have been involved in, for NASA or the European and French Space Agencis !! The goal of having an art-science collaboration develop both research software that will help Gagan’s team make scientific discoveries and also the artists perform compelling art is a sweet spot of art-science practice – we look forward to reactions !!


more details on Nine Evenings 2 below – we in particular thank John Boylan, Janeil Engelstadt, Sarah Kavage and Oliver Little for their inviting us to perform in the 9E2 they have produced:


 9e2 is an art exhibition and performance series commemorating “9 Evenings: Theatre & Engineering,” an iconic exhibition 50 years ago in New York that sparked a new era of collaboration between artists, scientists, and engineers.
The original 9 Evenings was organized in 1966 by Robert Rauschenberg and Billy Klüver, and featured artists creating performances in collaboration with engineers from Bell Labs. Fifty years later, 9e2 embraces that same spirit of experimentation and collaboration with a new series of projects. Installations, nightly performances, and other events will explore the intersection of art, science, and technology. 

Roger Malina

9e2 HOME

creative disturbance in turkey ? troll wars ….?


a new podcast from Turkey on the Key Words Creative Disturbance channel

Turkey’s new media sphere is a zone for troll wars for a long time. Efe Kerem Sözeri, as a freelance writer, is working on mapping troll wars and disinformation networks in Turkey’s political new media sphere and in this episode, we talked with him about his methods and findings.

Roger Malina