Emergent Knowledge in the Third Space of Art-Science (original) (raw)

The notion of a third culture bridging science and the humanities has long been discussed [1-4]. We argue that the "third culture" of art-science, a heterogeneous field of collaborative scientific and aesthetic investigations [5-8], is distinguished by its intersection with the public and its capacity to connect audiences and stakeholders to researchers in ways that are mutually enhancing. Art-science takes the form of a "public experiment" [9] or "living laboratory" [10]. This paper discusses how a new method-the visual matrix-enables examination of the transdisciplinary "third space" that arises through interaction between art, science and the public (see Fig. 1). This third space is psychological, social and physical, requiring unique forms of research and support. The topic is important for 21st-century cultural organizations that support and present art-science. While civic spaces of informal learning and cross-cultural encounter are often theorized as "third places" [11], we extend this notion of "thirdness" to encompass the epistemic role of third spaces as public sites of transdisciplinary knowledge production [12,13], requiring new research methods that capture emergent knowledge [14]. Increasingly, cultural organizations seek to establish themselves as "epistemic organizations" for the production and representation of knowledge [15]. However, they struggle with public presentation of interdisciplinarity [16-18]; contextualization of transdisciplinary research [19,20]; and experimentation within new spheres of operation, formats of exhibition and models of engagement. To innovate, cultural organizations need to understand artscience research and its multiple points of engagement with community or interest groups. Collaborators in art-science programs report that the value of such programs is significant [21], without being able to fully account for their impact. An ethnographic study of U.K. Arts and Science Research Fellowships reveals familiar narratives and conventional, oppositional distinctions between art and science in describing their integration [22]. We argue that since art-science arises in the interaction between