Another highlight of the Liverpool John Moores’ Teaching and Learning Conference 2015 was a session in the FabLab (right opposite the Catholic Cathedral). I have already written about the highlight of Professor Ronald Barnett’s keynote (see Student learning in a turbulent age).
Accredited by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, FabLab Liverpool is a physical space located in the School of Art and Design which provides access to the tools and knowledge to educate, innovate and invent using technology and digital fabrication to allow anyone to make almost anything. (Source of text – conference Abstract booklet)
In the session we were introduced to 3D printers, laser cutters and 3D scanners, all of which were new to me. We saw a key chain made in a laser cutter for Frances Bell and demonstrations of 3D scanning and 3D printing
The FabLab session was billed as ‘A place to play, to create, to learn’ and there was certainly a buzz in the room. The aim was ‘to demonstrate how a creative environment and access to innovative technologies can assist pedagogic development with transferable, creative skills’. It was a fun session.
Right at the end of the session, I had a brief discussion with one of the presenters about the applications of these technologies. We already know that 3D printing has been used successfully for facial reconstruction after severe injury such as in the case of a motor-bike accident. And there are clear applications of laser printing, 3D scanning and printing for many design projects. I did wonder though what the implications might be for the fine artist.
An article by Randy Rieland on the Smithsonian website reminds us that ‘technology has been providing artists with new ways to express themselves for a very long time’.
In contrast Iain McGilchrist warns us against art that is too abstract, cerebral and generalized. In his book The Master and his Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World, he writes (p.96)
‘… works of art – music, poems, paintings, great buildings – can be understood only if we appreciate that they are more like people than texts, concepts or things’.
For McGilchrist, art is more than the creation of ‘something’. He writes p.308 …
‘Art …in its nature constantly impels us to reach out and onward to something beyond itself and beyond ourselves.’
… which echoes Ron Barnett’s words when he suggested that we see learning as ‘becoming more than you are, becoming other than you were’.
I feel fortunate to have had the opportunity to see Liverpool John Moores’ FabLab in action, but on reflection I have wondered what the implications of these advancing technologies will be for art and artists. What will we lose and what will we gain in terms of the art that will be created in the future, our understanding and appreciation of it, and its place in our world?