This was an essay for a class
Prompt: How are Art and Science similar?
Art and science are similar in that they are both fields of imagination. The so-called “boring” scientist dreams up an interesting explanation for a mystifying phenomenon. He then tests this theory multiple times in order to find the truth. While this may be fascinating to him and his colleagues, the public does not share the thrill they experience. The public gets lost in the complicated Latin labels and the seemingly enigmatic figures and tables. They see science as an isolated feel, only for “nerds.”
Moving on to art, the creative artist ponders over how to express his/her views on society and life among other things. They furiously create until they finish their work of art, which is then brought to a place where visitors may either glance upon it for no more than a second, or stare at for hours trying to find the true meaning behind it. How often people stare at it usually depends on how famous the artist is, and if the certain style he/she used is popular among sophisticated art fans The general public either sees art as a pleasant distraction from the troubles of our world, a tool for getting ideas out to other people, or a useless endeavor that should have no place in society. Those who believe the latter are fans of the practicality of the sciences.
The beliefs of the public are influenced by pop culture. Scientists in movies are more likely to be the assistant rather than the star. The scientist in the movie spouts scientific jargon that isn’t supposed to make sense to the viewing audience. The scientists are usually the nerds and are more likely to die in the movie than the adventurous explorer. The scientists in the movie invent splendid gadgets that catch our attention, yet we think of it as magic rather than a product of science. We also ,in our minds, give more credit to the jock using the gadgets. If we had taken the time to educate the public about science, these gadgets could have been reality in our lifetime
Art is also influenced by pop culture. The artist is always the quirky assistant who is funny, but basically useless. In this way, we discredit the arts and put more focus on adventure and thrill. We misrepresent the real heroes and instead praise the fictional ones (not to discredit Indiana Jones). Art is considered free, while science is considered constricted by rules and ethics. The opinions of the public could not be further from the truth.
Art and science are also similar in that they awe the public. While we may not give as much credit as we like to art or science, we are inspired by their accomplishments. The Moon Landing was a result of science, and kickstarted a new generation of aspiring astronauts. The age of animated movies inspired a new generation of animators, who are still artists in their own like. We never thought of these events as science and art, but rather as magic and wonder. This consideration may very well be a product of our deficient education system. Science and art inspire the public and shock them with new discoveries and projects. They capture the attention of the public with their accomplishments, but are forced to keep coming out with new and spectacular products to keep the said attention. Even with this pressure, they deliver and deserve credit.
Science and art are really not that different. The only difference is that one (usually (cough cough Climate Change deniers) ) uses practical methods with a generous amount of creativity, while the other uses purely creativity to achieve true beauty. We must understand that art and science are human endeavors, not gated fields of magic. If we do that we will, as a society, achieve enlightenment and prosperity.
Question: “If science and art are so similar, how come some people are good at science but terrible at art?”
The answer to this question depends on your idea of art. Art, itself, is not limited to drawing with a pencil. Art is the ability to imagine and create beautiful things with any materials, be they paints and pencils, or garbage and computer software. You do not need to be good at drawing in order to be an artist. If we use this definition of art, we see that anyone can be an artist should they try. I am one of those people, who can’t draw a straight line to save my life, but I can still be an artist in my own right. Using the proper tools, anyone can create something beautiful. I have a friend, who is a terrible painter, drawer, and sculptor (in his opinion and mine too). He used an online graphing calculator called Desmos, and created art. On Desmos, you can graph different lines with different colors and create funny drawings. If you go to their website and scroll down, you can see featured Desmos art. The answer to this question is that no one is truly terrible at art. There are those who think they are, but given the proper tools and the right motivation, they can create something amazing.