Search

This paper is an invitation and a map. It is also an exhibition, and it is a provocation. The reader is directly addressed and invited to be implicated in a "we" that is repeatedly mentioned throughout the essay. In doing so, we might imagine study as something that moves us, transports us, and finds us thinking alongside one another, above, or under some place we may never have thought we would end up. Many things are left unfigured. It was never the author's intent to figure them out, but instead, here, we might try something different, something out of grasp. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Academic Library & Information Science is the property of Anhui University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Art is a powerful tool for conveying scientific discovery. Despite the perceived gap between art and science, as highlighted by CP Snow and others, examples of art communicating science can be found in the ancient world, the Renaissance and contemporary data visualization, demonstrating an enduring and historic connection. However, much of science relies on visual elements, excluding those with blindness, low vision and diverse needs, resulting in their low representation in STEM discourse. This paper introduces a novel science and art collaboration in the form of an exhibition program exploring the concepts of Immunology and Biomedicine to blind and vision‐impaired audiences, capitalizing on the lived experience of a legally blind artist. Employing multisensory design, art and co‐creation methodologies, it transcends traditional vision‐based science communication, showcasing the potential for multisensory art to bridge the gap at the intersection of science and inclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the foundational principles of modern medical ethics is the maintenance of anonymity in the case of researching human material and in disseminating that research. This principle safeguards the privacy of living human subjects, and minimizes the prejudicial effect that personal knowledge might have on the researcher. Does this principle transfer to human material in museum contexts, especially when human remains are on public display? Many of the human remains displayed in museum or other institutional settings are necessarily anonymous. However, some institutions display the remains of historically identified individuals, often famous (royalty, senior clerics, saints, and celebrities) or infamous people (criminals). What are the ethical implications of exhibiting the remains of known individuals? This paper argues that human remains are situated on a continuum between person and thing. Anonymity is one of the strategies used to move the remains further towards the universal body as an object of enquiry (thing) and away from a biographied and personalized self (person). By decentring the post-colonial context in which much of the debate about the archaeological and museological treatment of human remains has taken place, I hope to tease apart some of the broader ethical issues around the power relations between the living and the dead. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Library & Information Science Research is the property of Library Association of the Republic of China and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The international mega exhibition Istanbul Biennial, which was first held in 1987, presents an unconventional exhibition model which has been structured with a choreography dominated by the curator's discourse. Within the framework of different concepts and themes determined by the selected curators, various venues specially determined by the curators were used in each exhibition to clearly reveal and characterize the artists' attitudes towards the subject. In this paper, the concepts and titles of the Istanbul Biennial held between 1987-2019 were scrutinized and the themes put forward by the curators for the exhibition were discussed in a certain categorization. This categorization is discussed under the three main headings: 'Global metropolis', 'political and cultural issues and borders', and 'ecology and human activities' and the exhibitions were discussed under these headings. Based on the analysis of these topics a question occurred: "Did the curators try to manipulate the concepts of the themes?" In addition, it has been discussed how much the Biennial titles and topics contribute to the idea of being a part of the global mainstream, which points to the initial founding goals of the Biennial.