You are speaking of complementary opposites that, when they work together toward a unified purpose, magic happens, so to speak. But when they stay separate, they wreak havoc much like a free radical. It's all physics. It's also a favorite thinking pastime of mine, so it's a joy to see others making the connection. Thank you. Been wanting to thank you for some time - I enjoy your entries more than most.
Thank you for sharing the work of Iris van Herpen. I had never seen it before. I showed it to my 13 year old who is interested in making both sculpture and costumes and she loved it. Fascinating!
You should check out the glass flowers exhibit at the Harvard Natural History Museum! It’s so awesome, a collection of replicas of flowers all made of glass!
I love this! I was a social-science major (history) but yeah, the classes I took in music and composition are the ones I really remember, and I kinda wish I had taken some visual-arts classes. Or science classes for that matter — the only "science" class I remember taking in college was ... get this ... a class on "artificial intelligence" in the early 90s at STEM-deficient Sarah Lawrence.
That's hilarious. Do you even remember at all what the class was about?? Until recently, I still had a lot of my college and grad school text books. Actually, we still have some of the books we read for music (still good!), but I finally got rid of the more technical text books for multi track recording, etc. I also had some older late 90s era books on HCI and interaction design. I kind of had a good laugh before putting them out soon the street. Someone took them, like they always do.
It was actually pretty good stuff — more philosophical and speculative than anything (we read John Searle, for example). So we got into questions about whether mechanical intelligence is even possible absent biological drive, complexity theory, what "intelligence" even *is*, the difference between thinking and algorithms, etc. It's stuck with me as a healthy intellectual skepticism about today's "AI."
And yeah, I still have a heavy copy of _The Harmonic Dimension_ sitting on a bookshelf, in case I ever need to revisit how to do four-part voice leading...
Philosophical and theoretical is kinda what it only could be back then, yes? Those questions stick, and these are the classes we need more of. Much to my younger kid's annoyance, I keep reminding her of that. I went to grad school from 1998-2000 and while some of the classes were built on theory around tech as a foundation, other classes were getting increasingly technical and vocational because of the interests of the students at the time since this was the height of the dot com era. The chair of the department didn't like where it was headed and pulled the direction towards more art and experimentation. And thank god. All of the languages we programmed in are obsolete, but the theoretical discussions is what remains. We're still grappling with some of the same questions years later.
Exactly. Like we talked about whether intelligence could potentially emerge from really huge computer networks, but, um, I was still typing out my papers for that class on a typewriter, so those networks were pretty theoretical. And that sounds like a fascinating grad school experience (and yeah, good thing the chair pulled the direction that way). Reminds me of the summer my friend at MIT got me a job working at the same tech company he was working at by having me learn the hot new UX language Tcl — the very existence of which there has left barely a trace on the internet now, as near as I can tell.
It was a great program! Founded by a visionary woman in 1979 as part of the Tisch School of Arts at NYU, so well before similar programs that exist now. Lots of interesting conversations around AI, tech, and jobs right now on our alumni email list serve. Also very curious to see how colleges will be dealing with the changes to tech in their curriculum. So much discourse around CS as a major now, and even some of the liberal arts colleges have gotten STEM-y, including swarthmore where my youngest is at.
It’s uncanny how you touch on every topic front of mind or close to heart—and this one is both! So thoughtful and elegant as always. I’m marking to read again!!
This summer, I discovered The Enchanter: Nabokov and Happiness by Lila Azam Zanganeh at a used bookstore. I'm also remembering Anne Fadiman's essay about butterflies and Nabokov in her collection At Large and at Small.
I love this post. My oldest, a middle schooler, has always been both artistic and science-minded, and she blends the two as she creates and investigates and learns. I heartily agree with you: art and science are entirely compatible.
Well this was wonderful and inspiring, especially as a Nabokov fan who is prepping for another semester of teaching creative writing at a regional campus in the bashed state of Indiana.
As someone that grew up loving art but was also into the sciences, this post resonated deeply with me. Honestly, I think I studied architecture in college because it felt like an amazing mix of art, history, culture, society, but also pure physics and geometry.
I went to an art school here in NY that had the architecture school on the 3rd floor and that was my favorite floor to visit! I always have that itch, like, maybe I should have studied architecture!
You are speaking of complementary opposites that, when they work together toward a unified purpose, magic happens, so to speak. But when they stay separate, they wreak havoc much like a free radical. It's all physics. It's also a favorite thinking pastime of mine, so it's a joy to see others making the connection. Thank you. Been wanting to thank you for some time - I enjoy your entries more than most.
Paula, I loved the way you framed it here. Thank you - and it's very nice to hear from you.
Thank you for sharing the work of Iris van Herpen. I had never seen it before. I showed it to my 13 year old who is interested in making both sculpture and costumes and she loved it. Fascinating!
Oh, I'm so glad! Her work is absolutely breathtaking!
Thank you for walking with me this morning- what a gift to spend time with you!
❤️ So nice to see you!
Insightful 🙌 we talk of the same stuff so you are recommended to any one who subscribes to me!!!!👌let’s spread the word of the good
🫶 Thank you, Paolo!
You should check out the glass flowers exhibit at the Harvard Natural History Museum! It’s so awesome, a collection of replicas of flowers all made of glass!
Oooh, thanks for the tip!
I love this! I was a social-science major (history) but yeah, the classes I took in music and composition are the ones I really remember, and I kinda wish I had taken some visual-arts classes. Or science classes for that matter — the only "science" class I remember taking in college was ... get this ... a class on "artificial intelligence" in the early 90s at STEM-deficient Sarah Lawrence.
That's hilarious. Do you even remember at all what the class was about?? Until recently, I still had a lot of my college and grad school text books. Actually, we still have some of the books we read for music (still good!), but I finally got rid of the more technical text books for multi track recording, etc. I also had some older late 90s era books on HCI and interaction design. I kind of had a good laugh before putting them out soon the street. Someone took them, like they always do.
It was actually pretty good stuff — more philosophical and speculative than anything (we read John Searle, for example). So we got into questions about whether mechanical intelligence is even possible absent biological drive, complexity theory, what "intelligence" even *is*, the difference between thinking and algorithms, etc. It's stuck with me as a healthy intellectual skepticism about today's "AI."
And yeah, I still have a heavy copy of _The Harmonic Dimension_ sitting on a bookshelf, in case I ever need to revisit how to do four-part voice leading...
Philosophical and theoretical is kinda what it only could be back then, yes? Those questions stick, and these are the classes we need more of. Much to my younger kid's annoyance, I keep reminding her of that. I went to grad school from 1998-2000 and while some of the classes were built on theory around tech as a foundation, other classes were getting increasingly technical and vocational because of the interests of the students at the time since this was the height of the dot com era. The chair of the department didn't like where it was headed and pulled the direction towards more art and experimentation. And thank god. All of the languages we programmed in are obsolete, but the theoretical discussions is what remains. We're still grappling with some of the same questions years later.
Exactly. Like we talked about whether intelligence could potentially emerge from really huge computer networks, but, um, I was still typing out my papers for that class on a typewriter, so those networks were pretty theoretical. And that sounds like a fascinating grad school experience (and yeah, good thing the chair pulled the direction that way). Reminds me of the summer my friend at MIT got me a job working at the same tech company he was working at by having me learn the hot new UX language Tcl — the very existence of which there has left barely a trace on the internet now, as near as I can tell.
It was a great program! Founded by a visionary woman in 1979 as part of the Tisch School of Arts at NYU, so well before similar programs that exist now. Lots of interesting conversations around AI, tech, and jobs right now on our alumni email list serve. Also very curious to see how colleges will be dealing with the changes to tech in their curriculum. So much discourse around CS as a major now, and even some of the liberal arts colleges have gotten STEM-y, including swarthmore where my youngest is at.
It’s uncanny how you touch on every topic front of mind or close to heart—and this one is both! So thoughtful and elegant as always. I’m marking to read again!!
🥰
This summer, I discovered The Enchanter: Nabokov and Happiness by Lila Azam Zanganeh at a used bookstore. I'm also remembering Anne Fadiman's essay about butterflies and Nabokov in her collection At Large and at Small.
I love this post. My oldest, a middle schooler, has always been both artistic and science-minded, and she blends the two as she creates and investigates and learns. I heartily agree with you: art and science are entirely compatible.
I'll have to check out the essay. And wonderful about your child. We should encourage both sides of learning and exploring!
Well this was wonderful and inspiring, especially as a Nabokov fan who is prepping for another semester of teaching creative writing at a regional campus in the bashed state of Indiana.
Have a wonderful new school year, Kelcey!
As someone that grew up loving art but was also into the sciences, this post resonated deeply with me. Honestly, I think I studied architecture in college because it felt like an amazing mix of art, history, culture, society, but also pure physics and geometry.
I went to an art school here in NY that had the architecture school on the 3rd floor and that was my favorite floor to visit! I always have that itch, like, maybe I should have studied architecture!
Ugh you should write about it! I'd be super interested in your perspective