Zhao Rong: What are your take on the two sides’ diversified perspectives about science, technology and art? And how do you think the education field can build more effective understanding on this level?
Feng Feng: I think communication is very important. Although every person is like an isolated island, people have the desire to communicate with each other. The same applies to subjects. We may not have very deep understanding of another subject. But most importantly, I think it inspires the two sides’ imagination, which will unleash lots of power and uncertain energy in more subject communication.
Jo Wei: While ARS Electronica started in 1979, we probably did in the 1990s. What we are doing now, or will be doing soon in CAFA, is basically synchronous with ARS. But we need to strengthen our theoretical research. In terms of what we mentioned just now - science and technology, including exhibitions, research and education, ARS is developing at an even speed, and for us it will be an accelerated process, although we started relatively later.
Zhao Rong: On today’s global supply chain, while an idea may be born in Europe, the actual product can be produced in Shenzhen. So in terms of science and technology distribution, how does it affect your discussion that science and technology is a cultural product, or technology is an orientation that requires our thoughts on, and how to guide that orientation? Does it have any influence on you?
Martin Honzik: Technology is absolutely defining our behavior, culture and our cognition of our whole identity. Other than that, any culture, regardless of which background it comes from, defines technology itself. I think this is a very important point and a very interesting thought.
Lucas Evers：Lucas Evers: For example, gene editing is now a very controversial technology. We ask artists to interpret from moral and philosophical perspectives and then cooperate with scientists to create a scenario, allowing common citizens to see and touch those technologies, to truly understand them, and to discuss those questions with a fair, inclusive and open mind.
Ole Bouman: We must understand that there is a sense of urgency in promoting art and culture, which requires us to take the initiative to communicate and collaborate with others. We need to seek suitable methods. Whether it’s technological means or other means, we need to convert personal momentum into the momentum of the whole society. In the future, it should be both the elite and the whole society that are doing those things.
Tore Knudsen: In terms of common vision, I think technology, art and science can play very big roles. There can be many directions of development for our future. We need to create conditions and open our window to show everyone the possibilities of the future. Sometimes our work looks like something conceptual without any tangible object, but people will get more inspiration if they are allowed to see such designs.
Zhao Rong: I can see that as a real estate developer, when engaging in urban operations, you want to employ related science and technology in your own space to offer a new scenario and experience for the city. What’s your original intention of doing that? Is it effective to apply such practices in commercial scenarios?
Lv Hua: If we can implant our understanding of the world, the future, climate, environment and interpersonal relationship into urban space, it will affect the cognition and behavior of billions of people. When a person acquires a new inspiration in his office and consumption environments, in a city complex, it will be an addition to his value and experience. Such value and experience will drive him to carry out more activities in the space and that value will be converted into commercial and capital value, which will be injected into the building and the land that house the space.
Chrisl Baur: We have been looking for or imaging new ways in the past 10 years, trying to seek new life space, and how to own better life. Could you share with us the process of your practice? What are your discoveries in science, technology and art? What does it mean to you to humanize it?
Sebastian Neitsch: I think technology itself is already humanized. But as it develops towards increasing complexity, technology is gradually evolving into a closed circle that shuts out outsiders. I think it is getting increasingly important to break through this situation and open the circle up. We need to engage common people in creations, and allow non-professionals to become inventors once again. In my opinion, it is one of the major forces for our creations.
Mariano Sardón: Humans have created science and technology, while science and technology is generated from human activities and is a mirror of them. How we treat others and how others treat us - it is also a mirror. We may be affected by technology, so this relationship is likely to build an interconnected system between us and technology. As an artist, I’m not studying a particular science or technology, I’m looking for a question instead. I used to be a scientist. I think it is more important to raise than answer a question. I don’t think we will surely find a good technology or master a certain technology. Sometimes you need to connect with another person and find topics concerned by both of you, topics that connect you.
Kensho/AnotherFarm: We are thinking about how to humanize technology, and the term “humanize” itself is very complicated. So seeing this exhibition, I think to humanize means to draw science and technology closer to people. Now we have so many technologies and big data that are affecting us intangibly. So what does technology exactly mean to humans? If you see our works, listen to our speeches, and then feel that it is contentious, that is what we intend to express.