A (very) Brief History of Art/Science Collaboration

Written by: Dr. Mark Kasumovic

Climate change is one of the most pressing issues of our time, affecting ecosystems, economies, and communities worldwide. As researchers, scientists, artists and advocates, we have a unique opportunity to come together and make a significant impact. By engaging with our network and participating in climate research collaboration, you can contribute to innovative solutions and share valuable insights that can drive meaningful change. However, it can often be difficult to find truly interdisciplinary communities that are inspired by thinking through problems together. In this brief post, I explore some of the history of collaboration between artists and scientists, and explore why the two disciplines are more intertwined than most believe.

One of the first uses of photography was to catalogue flora, but photography continues to shape both the domains of art and science in many ways to this day.

Why Collaboration Matters

Any hesitancy around collaboration between scientists and artists may stem from the perception that art–science partnerships are a relatively recent phenomenon. From a British perspective, many such collaborations emerged in the 1990s, shaped by the ‘public understanding of science’ paradigm—the idea that art can help communicate scientific knowledge along with its social, cultural and ethical dimensions. This has included efforts to popularise science and convey its more visual aspects, often aiming to broaden public engagement with scientific ideas and principles. Yet, the entanglement of art and science reaches much further back. Early cave paintings, for example, reflect detailed empirical observations of animal behaviour, movement and anatomy. Philosophers like Plato and Pythagoras saw harmony across mathematics, music and art, rooted in proportions and geometric form. Renaissance figures like Leonardo da Vinci and Albrecht Dürer combined artistic skill with scientific investigation, while the Scientific Revolution relied increasingly on illustration as a method of inquiry. During the Enlightenment, artists worked alongside scientists to document botany, zoology and anatomy discoveries. In this light, art and science are not simply compatible but are historically and conceptually intertwined.

       However, these collaborations were gradually strained by the increasing specialisation of academic and industrial disciplines. The rise of scientific positivism during the Industrial Revolution further prioritised quantifiable knowledge, especially where it aligned with economic and technological advancement, reinforcing disciplinary divides throughout the 19th Century. Yet artistic movements such as Naturalism persisted in depicting reality through observation and method, sustaining the shared foundations, at least intellectually, that have long connected art and science: observation, experimentation, creativity, and representation.

        Nevertheless, today there is still a sharp divide between what we consider artistic and scientific knowledge. C.P. Snow’s (1959) influential Rede Lecture warned that the division between the sciences and the humanities posed a serious threat to the future of knowledge production and argued that the cultures of the arts and sciences had become mutually unintelligible, with little understanding or appreciation for one another’s methods, languages, or values. He believed this divide was holding back innovation, policy development, and the capacity to address global challenges like poverty, energy and education, especially in a time that required interdisciplinary solutions to increasingly multifaceted problems. The debate sparked decades of academic discussion about interdisciplinarity, the nature of knowledge, and the structure of education and research.

       Numerous developments since have helped re-establish the relevance of art–science collaborations. The rise of novel and hybrid technologies has also been pivotal. Utilising emerging technological tools (such as the computer) as artistic apparatus was directly influenced by György Kepes, who founded the Centre for Advanced Visual Studies (CAVS) at MIT in 1967. CAVS was influential in its mandate to absorb “new technology as an artistic medium” through encounters between scientists, artists, engineers and industry (MIT 2025). A new collaborative language emerged within new shared instruments of artists and scientists. The emergence of doctoral programmes within visual arts subject areas has also led to more cross-disciplinary opportunities among researchers. There has also been a vast increase in cross and inter-disciplinary funding opportunities that encourage collaboration and cross-disciplinary thinking, and a steadily growing desire to re-‘legitimise’ practice research amongst artists.

        Alongside these structural and technological developments, artists have increasingly assumed new cultural responsibilities, moving beyond the gallery to engage directly with public spaces, communities, and pressing social and environmental challenges. This shift has expanded the scope of artistic practice, aligning it more closely with questions of knowledge production, while also increasing interest in the impact of practice-based research. As Friedrich von Borries (2015) notes, an important shift began in the second half of the 20th century when artists started reflecting critically on the ‘scientification’ of the world—referring to the expanding influence of scientific rationality, metrics, and systems thinking across many domains of life. In response, many artists adopted scientific methods not only as creative tools but also as objects of inquiry and reflection. These developments saw artists moving beyond gallery conventions into ecological, public, and socially engaged projects, culminating in high-profile moments like Documenta 13 in 2012, which placed artistic research at the centre of an internationally significant exhibition. Such reflexive engagement has both complemented and interrogated scientific perspectives within Western knowledge systems, helping to lay the conceptual groundwork for contemporary art–science collaborations.                                          

References

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2025): History. Available from: https://act.mit.edu/about/history/ (Accessed 14.2.2025).

Snow, C. P. (1959). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.

von Borries, Friedrich (2015): Artistic Research—Why and Wherefore? Journal of Science Communication 14 (1): C06.