Turning Science into Art: Conrad Shawcross | Brilliant Ideas Ep. 20

From elaborate machines that do not seem like artworks at first sight, to geometric structures, the works of Conrad Shawcross are ways of the artist studying philosophy and science. To the extent that he picks his high school math teacher and a friend of his who is a computer engineer as the mentors of his life, he shows enormous passion for science studies.Saying that he is attracted to scientific theories that had failed logically or methodologically, Shawcross reinterprets such theories in his own ways to create ambitious and structural sculptures.
Bloomberg and Hyundai Motor presents the 20th Brilliant Ideas Episode featuring Shawcross, who combines new emerging technologies and natural forces to inspire paradox and wonder in his works, ceaselessly endeavoring at the borders among science, philosophy, and art.

[@davidedwards7746]

I am astonished to read the negative comments. I'm not that into art but, as a math/science teacher, this spoke to me. He seems like a great guy and his work is fascinating.

[@rr7firefly]

I appreciate that Shawcross is working outside the narrative window, on a more conceptual level. I believe this is a plus in an art world too often obsessed with socio-political themes and human stories. The mechanical language is a wonderful way to communicate certain ideas. Still, when comparing his work to the elaborate contraptions by Jean Tingueley, these new works are far less poetic and they are often locked within the expression of a single repetitive module or detailed connection. The connected tetrahedrons, for example that extend in geometrical lines into space.

[@luizantoniodesousa1916]

Fantástico !!!

[@btamuli1]

Brilliant

[@analoguejerry9066]

This is not art. This is art design.

[@taylorj6177]

wtf

[@fournierveronique6466]

he is simply extremely clever; intelligent

[@knsummers]

don't get too wet

[@nikanfarsadi9974]

And boring! He thinks he is tatlin!

[@GaySingleMulatto]

He's eliciting from me impure thoughts...

[@RyanPaulMcCarthy]

can we rename this "simple ideas" please, and thanks.

[@knsummers]

Turning basic l mechanical ideas into art is the new thing. Just like Oliffar Elliason's "Green Light - a artistic workshop" is simply aestheticized putting models together.

[@RyanPaulMcCarthy]

Sorry, There's nothing new about mechanized art in the way he's adapted it to his sculptural practice. Other than similar geometric forms, There is no tangible relationship to Elliason. Green Light which as participatory art goes is pretty thin is what I'd imagine if IKEA made 'Art'.

[@yokyu2lea]

@@RyanPaulMcCarthy There is nothing new in almost anything in life. But he does make those colossal forms and objects with mechanic elements and materials usually used only in the industry, never exhibited in the way art objects were created, that means not crafted, visible in a very artsy way. Who do you know that have used these materials and emphasized the mechanics like this? I am curious.

[@knsummers]

It's nice work but too many adjectives here like "epic" and "ambitious" that seem a bit exaggerated. Ratcheting bolts and checking welds become "epic" eventhough working class folks do that everyday. Talk about a gilded frame. I would suggest words more like interesting, cool, large, mechanical, etc. The sound and the fury .... I am clearly also jealous and resentful. If you like his "Dappled Light" I suggest walking under an old rail bridge.

[@Nexus2Eden]

I think that is the point of his work, the commonality of human experience. Whether it is in a museum or on the street, we all succumb to the same awe in reality.

[@stretch1807]

yes, it's amazing how money it takes to imitate the real world

[@DAYBROK3]

Omg someone took a public sculpture for scrap?? They could have got more for it as art. How sad for us that there are people who have no idea of what art is, what it's for, and so uncaring to do such a barbaric act.

[@xwarx1000]

crap ought to be scrapped.....big egoistic bullist is going on in the name of art. Bored prople. Here I am not talking about guys like Anthony Howe to me he really fits into a category art marriage with science.

[@eg-g]

It's all about the ego, ridiculous.

[@fournierveronique6466]

don't criticize what you don't understand!

[@eg-g]

There is nothing to understand, it is just another "artist" pretending to do something important when in fact it is junk that never had any function or practical purpose, so it is even less than junk to me.

[@sportingrange1280]

Going to give you a thumbs up because you said "to me". Respect!

[@knsummers]

As a former third grade science teacher he is basically doing what kids do as they discover and explore science, music and mechanical engineering. Sure, there is a nice reductive quality in it. And it does take effort to do that. There are a lot of projects out now that look like his play structure, from Carol Bove to Bruce Beasley. I like them all but ok already. Challenge me.

[@vinayseth1114]

+knsummers Interesting perspective. What do you think of Anish Kapoor's works?

[@latetodagame1892]

I don't think film does any justice to the work.

[@hoomalumalu]

this guy isn't even close to the Korean guy

[@vinayseth1114]

What Korean guy?

[@taylorj6177]

wht lol. This dude is way better. That guy was annoying.

[@keithkhan174]

Viewing a washing machine washing clothes is not art...these pieces are devoid of ideas, there is no point to them, no statement beyond "I'm using science to construct objects that say nothing about anything"