The project "Maelström" is hard to be categorized as it leaves the usual formats or combines them in an unusual way. It attempts a synthesis of cinema and sculpture and is based on generative, material processes.

Maelström is an autonomous mirror of reality, in which perception and dream, the visible and invisible, the imaginary and the material will come together to form a whole.

Documentation coming soon!

"Maelström" - THE BOOK

Planned for September 2009

Nano reflections

some thoughts on Hank van den Belts text "Playing God in Frankenstein's Footsteps. Synthetic Biology and the Meaning of Life":

Synthetic biology facilitates the design, construction and change of biological systems by synthesizing DNA and inserting it into host cells whose genomes have been removed. It is an engineerial discipline that requires the extensive use of information technology. In fact some approaches within synthetic biology make it possible that the material world can be manipulated as if it were information.

Drew Endy, a researcher at Stanford, together with institutes at MIT and Harvard is developping a system of building blocks, "BioBricks", pieces of DNA, that can be used like Lego. He is not only following an open-source path, he also uses the language of a software designer to describe the procedure: the combination of laptop and raw chemicals (information and material) makes it possible to "compile" genetical material. So easy. The only difficult thing in the process seems to be that you have to mailorder the BioBricks as they are stored in a freezer at MIT.

Craig Venter, researcher and entrepreneur, uses a similar language. But he brings in venture capital for his project and thus operates in a less open way. His goals are clearly economical. In his TED talk in 2008 he even goes so far as claiming to wipe out the petrochemical industry with his microbes that shall produce fuel out of CO2 in a large scale. New variations and recombinations of genes can be designed in his software that is not so different from a 3D-program. All that needs to be done after the synthetization is to "boot up" the cell to see if it is runnable. After the same talk he manages to get out of every critical question with a joke. The answer, that he is not playing, to the question if he is playing god was just one of them. Another one referred to the more critical european position when it comes to genetically modified food: Europeans are soon going to be afraid that their food might contain DNA.

Does the lightness of a software designer's mind influence the attitude of synthetic biologists - a mind that can always use the undo button? Even if Frankenstein went to far in using his mastery on creating a human being and entrepreneurs like Venter stay within the limits of microbial life, which impact will the possible large size of such enterprise have (e.g. on non-synthesized organisms and on complex ecosystems)? Will we use it as an easy solution to complex problems that will bring quick results (so important in democracies) and create even larger problems in a long term. Which new accidents come together with this new technology that can help mass-produce experimental GMOs?
How can the effects of GMOs in highly diverse environments ever be traced back? How can persons or corporations ever be held liable for possible genetic damages or for unbalancing ecosystems caused by proliferations of their organisms although they can profite from the negative rights of their patents beforehand?
Might this be the cause why atheist accuse biologist of playing god? Not because they see the threat to a deified nature but because they lack an easy expression to explain how incomprehensible natural processes are in their multirelational complexity for simple human beings. Espacially for those who still think of mainly maximizing profit.