The VIEW
27:05:09-09:26:13
<p><p>RTE's The VIEW featured Infectious last night, which you can view here: <a href="http://www.rte.ie/tv/theview/" target="_blank"><a href="http://www.rte.ie/tv/">http://www.rte.ie/tv/</a><wbr></wbr>theview/</a> in Real Player oron the RTE Player at <a href="http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1048742">http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1048742</a>.</p><p>Some of their points made sense to me, but I was a little surprised by their overall assessment. I'm wondering if anybody else saw it and agrees/ disagrees.</p></p>
27:05:09-09:35:49
#1
Offline
Re: The VIEW
<p><p>What struck me was when they said "maybe as an art programme we shouldn't get it" or something to that effect. So it got me thinking about the art science balance - shouldn't an "art audience" get Infectious? I'm most certainly not a scientist and I like the approach of mixing art and science - it makes science a bit less scary for me anyway... Or is there too much science? Is the science look and feel too real? I don't know but I thought it was an interesting point.</p><p> </p></p>
27:05:09-10:07:30
#2
Re: The VIEW
Sorry-- First link there got borked by the autolink. Here it is again: http://www.rte.ie/tv/theview/
Hopefully it works this time-- second link seems fine (and doesn't use Real Player)!
27:05:09-11:09:43
#3
Re: The VIEW
<p>My Favourite quote was "It was the kind of thing I liked when I was 18" so we hit the target 15-25 year olds. Also alluding that we set up the whole swine fl thing as marketing for the show - genius!</p>
27:05:09-15:49:34
#4
Re: The VIEW
<p>I think the most interesting thing this threw up for me was the question of the supposed "chasm" between art and science. Science Gallery is all about bringing these worlds into conversation but the View panellists last night seemed resolute on marking out the dividing line. Why? It's <a href="http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/are_we_beyond_the_two_cultures/">exactly 50 years</a> since CP Snow lamented the division between the "two cultures" of art and science, but it seems that the two cultures divide is alive and well in the minds of last night's commentators in Donnybrook. The world has moved on guys, it's boring to keep having the old art-science debate --Â from Paris to Beijing new centres are emerging to explore and experiment with the "third culture", as <a href="http://www.edge.org/">edge.org</a> puts it. Watching the discussion I felt like I was travelling back in time to 1959, to a highbrow notion of art that is as at least as dated as a notion of science as something extraneous to human culture. </p>
30:06:09-23:41:54
#5
Re: The VIEW
<p>Very well said, I'd have to agree with you.</p>
<p>I thought it was funny that the female panelist, Jesse, I believe her name is. Made a somewhat anti-intellectual comment by likening the exhibition to "doing homework" which I suppose she obviously didn't do much of. How typical to dismiss something that could fulfill the niche of a "new concept" to ones mind. Isn't that something art and science have in common? Trying to illustrate new concepts?</p>
<p>I don't think her characterisation of the mediator's behaviour was accurate... perhaps they explained things to her as to a child because she needed it.</p>
<p></p>
