growing pains - thought colliderthoughtcollider.nl/.../uploads/2014/09/growing_pains.pdf ·...

GrowingPainsNurturing The Relationship Between Man & ObjectMike Thompson

Thesis Project 2nd Trimester 2009:

Growing Pains:

Nurturing The Relationship

Between Man & Object

Mike ThompsonIM Masters

Design Academy Eindhoven

In memory of Henry ‘Harry’ Thompson

Acknowledgments

Without the help of the following people, this thesis project would

not have been possible: Joost Grootens, Barbara Visser, Maarten

Baas, Dr Carlijn Bouten, Dr Gerrit Glas, Dr Roel Kuijer, Linda Kock,

Kees Berende, Adam Farlie and Koen Kleijn (thanks for the use of the

‘machete’). Special thanks must go to Dr Rene Van Donkelaar, his

advice on bone growth has been invaluable and Maartje Kunen and

Daniel Rossi in helping me visualise my ideas. And last and no means

least, Susana Camara Leret, and my parents for keeping me sane and

making sure this thesis project made some sense!!

Contents

1. InTRoDuCTIon 01

2. BoDy AS MATERIAL 05

3. ConSIDERATIonS 06

4. STEM CELL RESEARCh 08

5. STEM CELLS & DESIGn PoTEnTIAL 10

6. BuILDInG TISSuE: 12

EnGInEERInG TEChnIquES AnD PRoCESSES

7. quESTIonS 17

8. ASPECTS oF ThE RELATIonShIP 27

WITh ThE BoDy-oBJECT

9. ConCLuSIon 29

10. PRoPoSAL 30

LIsT of ILLusTraTIons 33

EndnoTEs 34

1. The body is a material we can sculpt

1. Introduction

Breakthroughs in biological science have redefined the capabilities of

the human body. As science extends the horizons of what we can do,

we confront complex questions about what we should do.

A new frontier has opened for design, allowing the utilisation of the

body’s material to cultivate products within the human body.

The boundaries of the body are changing. We think of the human body

as a material we can sculpt – we pierce it, adorn it with jewellery,

decorate it with tattoos, we cut and colour our hair. Then of course

there’s cosmetic surgery, with nearly 12 million operations performed

in 2007 in the uS alone.

We also consider our bodies as machines. In his 1747 book L’homme

Machine (The human Machine) Julien offray de La Mettrie refers to

the human body as “… a machine which winds its own springs.”1 In

science and education alike, body parts are described in functional

terms as if they are part of a machine: the body machine. We refer to

the heart as a pump and the brain as the most complex of computers.2

The body machine has its own natural chain of production. If you

break a leg new bone grows to repair the fracture. If you cut yourself

you bleed, beginning the healing process. And of course, reproduction

leads to the birth of more humans, body machines in their own right.

Some bodily products we discard. Excessive quantities of materials

such as body fat and body hair are considered undesirable, as are

others such as kidney stones, cysts, abscesses, pus, snot and tears.

Additionally our bodies contain vestiges, parts or organs that have

become functionless in the course of evolution. Examples include the

coccyx, 13th rib, cervical rib and body hair. Whilst they do us no harm,

neither do they serve any real purpose.

Similarly, human remains are kept as mementos, whether as a lock of

hair sealed inside a pendant or the creation of diamonds from carbon

extracted from ashes, creating a symbolic object from non functional

remains.

01

02

2. Bone graft held in place by steel rods

Some bodily products we harvest. Blood transfusions, kidney

transplants, skin and bone grafts, the use of blood and urine for health

tests, and umbilical cord blood and bone marrow in stem cell research

illustrate man’s thriftiness, whilst the black-market trade of kidneys

from Egypt3 or real hair extensions from India4 demonstrate the more

debatable use of human materials.

however, most controversial of all are discarded embryos from

unwanted pregnancies or left over from IVF treatment. This is where

the controversy surrounding stem cells begin.

03

3. Embryo in the lab

04

4. Lamallae in Compact Bone

2. Body As Material

It is in many ways logical to consider the human body as a material.

For the first million years of our existence, humans used five basic

materials for making tools and objects: wood, rock, horn, bone and

leather. Then, following the neolithic revolution, there was significant

enrichment: clay, wool, plant fibres and, in more recent times,

metals.5 The selective breeding of living organisms reshaped plants

and animals for both functional and aesthetical purposes.6 Is the

manipulation of human biology so vastly different? It makes perfect

sense to look towards nature for inspiration, and indeed as a tool.

“nature,” says Janine Benyus, “crafts materials of a complexity and

functionality that we can only envy.”7 “Bone, wood, tusks, heart muscle,

antlers, skin, blood vessels, tendons – they are a “bounty of resilience,”

says Benyus, “miracle materials all.”8 Previously, man would have

turned to nature for its source materials. Today we have the capability

to manufacture new ones. But nature has discovered a level of

efficiency that we can only dream of. As British engineer Julian Vincent

explains, “… after 3.8 billion years of evolution, nature has a pretty

good idea of what works, what is appropriate, and what lasts.”9 Indeed,

‘natural’ often refers to ideal material characteristics.10 nature has

become the yardstick by which we base all technological developments.

This makes sense as nature is extremely durable and efficient and, yet

nature has had millions of years of evolution in which to figure things

out. This is the big debate within tissue engineering.

05

3. Considerations

i: The relationship between man and body-object.

We might refer to the body as a factory, with its own natural chain of

production, capable of producing life.

It is often stated that our possessions are as much a part of us as our

own flesh and blood. If we were to grow objects within our bodies we

would nurture fresh relationships with objects and question our value

of things, establishing a new, codependent relationship between man

and object.

ii: If we can cultivate material inside the human body, thus

nurturing a relationship with an object, then this (biological)

process enters the field of design.

Throughout this thesis I will focus upon one particular technique:

Tissue Regeneration. Tissue regeneration itself is a vast field

encompassing many different disciplines such as engineering,

chemistry and biology. In order to understand the techniques and the

massive potential of tissue regeneration I have spoken with scientists

such as Dr. Carlijn Bouten and Dr Rene Van Donkelaar at the Technical

university Eindhoven, and Dr Roel Kuijer from the university of

Groningen. It is also important to consider the wider implications

of these technical advancements and I was lucky enough to have the

opportunity to talk with Gerrit Glas, a philosopher specialising in

medical ethics. As broad as the field itself is the literature on tissue

regeneration. Bearing this in mind I have directed my reading towards

understanding the science behind the technique, whilst considering

topics such as the relationship between man and technology, man and

object and the body as a means of production.

06

5. Stem Cell

07

4. Stem Cell Research

The buzz around stem cells comes from the ability to regenerate

one’s own body using one’s own cells. Thus it may be possible to cure

diseases such as Alzheimer’s by regenerating nerve cells in the brain

from a cheek cell, or to grow replacement body parts such as heart

valves or blood vessels. Such techniques already exist in the treatment

of joint damage, where cells can be taken from the damaged knee joint,

cultured in the laboratory and then reintroduced to the area where the

cells grow new cartilage.

This use of stem cells to culture tissues offers the possibility of not

only regeneration, but the capability to engineer the human body.

Such technology has ramifications for not only medicine, but design.

We have the opportunity to reconsider the human body as a material

and as a means of production. We can contemplate using the body to

cultivate ‘non-body’ objects. however, before we focus on the design

possibilities we must first understand stem cell technologies and

consider some rather complex issues.

08

6. Stem Cell Locations

1 Brain

2 Cornea

3 Retina

4 Dental Pulp

5 Spinal Cord

6 Peripheral Blood

7 Blood Vessels

8 Liver

9 Pancreas

10 Fat Cells

11 umbilical Cord

12 Bone Marrow

13 Skin Cells

14 Skeletal Muscles

To date, stem cells have been

found in the aforementioned

parts of the body, however,

there is reason to believe

that there are many more

yet to be discovered.

09

5. Stem Cells & Design Potential

“Grow, cells, grow,” Cedric’s dad whispers.11

Stem Cells are cells with the ability to divide and specialize. Their

job is to replace and replenish cells with more specialized functions,

such as muscle cell contraction or nerve cell signalling.12 They fall

into two categories: Embryonic Stem Cells (ES), which are stem

cells derived from the inner cell mass of an early stage embryo

known as a blastocyst, and are capable of creating every tissue in

the body (Totipotent); and Adult Stem cells (AS), which are already

specialized and can only create tissues specific to where they are from

(Multipotent), although research in the last 10 years shows that these

cells can be manipulated and reprogrammed to create other tissues.*

AS cells are found in human bone marrow, blood, both the cornea

and retina of the eye, the brain, skeletal muscle, and the pulp of our

teeth, among other locations. utilising stem cells it is possible to grow

materials such as bone and teeth, sharing properties similar to man-

made equivalents, thus offering new potential for design.

* on the 27th of February 2009, nature.com published the story that stem-cell

researchers at the Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute at Mount Sinai hospital

in Toronto, Canada, and the university of Edinburgh in the uK have managed to

transform specialized cells into an embryonic like state, thus rendering them

pluripotent (capable of generating all the body’s specialized cell types).

10

7. Bone Marrow Tissue

11

6. Building Tissue: Engineering Techniques and Processes

There is a subtle difference between tissue engineering, that is tissue

cells cultured in the lab before implantation, and tissue regeneration,

which refers to helping tissue to regenerate. The latter requires the

implantation of a scaffold material into the body with the body

carrying out the rest of the work. other terms for tissue regeneration

include regenerative medicine, in-vivo (inside the body) tissue

engineering, and functional tissue engineering. From here on in I will

focus on tissue regeneration.

Cultivating tissue requires three interrelated components: the cells

themselves; a scaffold (mould) to provide a structure for the cells

to grow into; and the correct environment for the desired cell type.

For each component there are many options available, each directly

impacting on each other and the resulting tissue.

Cell type, of course, is dependent on what you want to grow. Cells are

removed from the body by inserting a needle into the desired tissue

type. however, before being reintroduced into the body, the desired cell

type must be differentiated from the other cells, after all, a tissue is

a constitution of many tissues. once you have the population of cells

that you want, they can be seeded into a scaffold for moulding.

There are commonly two types of scaffold, each suited to specific cell

types and environments. Gels, such as Alginate, are mixed with cells,

and poured into a mould to solidify, creating a structure for the cells

to grow into. This is the technique commonly used in the lab for the

cultivation of cartilage.* The other, more publicised type of scaffold,

are mesh’s. By sculpting porous, mesh-like scaffolds into shapes

* In 2002 engineers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the

united States created a new technique for the repair of cartilage. This technique

involves growing cartilage cells within a peptide hydrogel scaffold outside

of the body, then delivering the cell-seeded gel into the damaged joint. The

new tissue grows and integrates with the normal cartilage surrounding it while

the gel slowly degrades, leaving behind functional tissue. The Peptide Scaffold

hydrogel is useful for a wide range of cell/tissue types for tissue regeneration

and has been used to support nerve cells and tissues including bone and liver.

12

13

8. Neural stem cells cultivated in the lab

in which cells can settle, cells will organize themselves into real

tissues as the scaffolds dissolve.*13 This was the technique used by Dr

Charles Vacanti to sculpt the ear on the mouse. A three-dimensional,

ear shaped scaffold, was created, seeded with cells, and implanted

under the skin. using biodegradable polymers, either naturally

derived from collagens, or synthetics such as polylactic acid, scaffolds

can be designed in CAD software and printed in three-dimensions.

Properties can be added to the polymers that directly influence the

final composition of tissue, for instance, you might want part of the

scaffold to remain, creating an inner structure or design feature. It is

also possible to combine the scaffold polymers with growth factors to

further enhance the properties of the material.

Growth factors stimulate cellular division, so by simply injecting

the drug, patients produce cells themselves.14 Bone morphogenetic

proteins, such as BMP2 and BMP8a, might be used independently or in

tandem with the introduction of stem cells, to stimulate the growth of

bone and cartilage. These growth factors can be added to the polymer

of the scaffold so that they are released as the scaffold degrades,

leading to all kinds of design possibilities. you might, for example, use

morphogenetic proteins to manipulate the speed of growth of certain

cell types, leading to differences in tissue thickness or hardness.

The third component, environment, is seen as key to the development

of tissues. Biology is efficient and cells learn from their environment.

For example, if you’re in hospital with a broken leg and you spend

a prolonged period laid in bed, you grow less bone. you can’t grow

strong bone in a place that isn’t loaded. The time taken to cultivate

tissue varies from cell type to cell type and is influenced by many

complex variables. If you break a bone for example, it could take you

6 weeks to 3 months for regeneration, however, the optimisation takes

years.† ultimately it depends on your aim. ‘how good is good enough’

* …and by providing the correct environment and nutrients…

† In 1998, the university of Texas health Science Center, San Antonio, studied the use

of ultrasound upon tibia fractures. Low-intensity, ultrasound pulses were administered

to patients continuously for 20 minutes every day until the fractures were judged

to have healed. Results showed the average time of healing was 122 days, 32 days faster

than without treatment. Similarly, electrical stimulation, that is, passing a 9 volt

current between two electrodes either side of the fracture, has been proven to be a

14

is a tough question. Material functionality is a different proposition

to a scientist than to a designer. If you understand the intricate

mechanisms that drive natural processes, you can contemplate the

creation of non-organic forms. Rene Van Donkelaar from the Technical

university Eindhoven explains:

“Wherever you put your cells, at that place they will make material…

You have cells of type one inside this tube, so then you can start

culturing it… But if you then put cells inside here as well, maybe cells

of type two, and they like each other, then you would get tissue one

here and tissue two there. You could have a mixture of cell types or

tissue types by separating them while you are seeding them.”15

In effect you could change material properties. you could have a

smoother surface on one side and a rougher one on the other. here

there is a play between the natural and the man-made. on one hand

man dictates the form of the object by injecting cells into the scaffold

whilst incorporating growth factors to stimulate the growth of specific

cell types, on the other, ‘natural’ forces such as body environment

and mechanical loading hugely influence the growth of material.

These complex variables have the potential to send cells into the

production of weak tissues, or indeed, the wrong type. If we can learn

to understand the intricate mechanisms that drive natural processes,

then we can utilise the efficiency of the body for the production of

more than just replacement body parts.

successful technique for patients who have bone healing problems, or fractures with poor

healing potential.

15

16

9. The mass production of human material poses many questions

7. Questions

Despite the obvious benefits and potential of tissue regeneration, there

are numerous, complex questions we must consider, ranging from the

ethical to the notion of the body as a material.

1 Economics of production

“…[We can create] standardised men and women in uniform

batches… ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical

machines… The principles of mass production at last applied to

biology.”

ALDouS huxLEy, BRAVE nEW WoRLD.16

It has been suggested that in the future, industrial opportunities

are going to stem more from the biological sciences than from

chemistry and physics.17 This very thought breeds the fear of the

mass production of the human body. Leon Kass, the chairman of

President Bush’s Council on Bioethics and staunch opponent to

tissue engineering, has written that we are heading towards the

commodification and consequent devaluation of human beings. he said

virtually the same thing about IVF treatment twenty-five years ago and

his dark vision of the future has still to come to fruition.18 As science

extends the horizons of what we can do, we increasingly confront

complex questions about what we should do.19 Central to Brave new

World is the mechanized reproduction of humans for the benefit of the

state. Similarly, there is fear from some doctors as to the pressures

of big business as Roel Kuijer from the university of Groningen

states: “The influence of industries is very large, and the influence of

industries to doctors. And this is economic driven. And economy here

is more important than health care. here’s an ethical issue as far as

I’m concerned.”20 yes, regenerative medicine has made human body

materials of commercial interest and raised questions concerning the

ownership of these biological materials, but just because we can mass

produce something doesn’t mean we should.21 We clearly disapprove of

the black-market trade of kidneys from Egypt or real hair extensions

from India, so is it likely that society would turn a blind eye to the

mass production of human parts and materials?

17

18

2 Life or Non-Life?

This is most evident when considering the use of human embryos.

Clearly, regular human embryos have the capability to become

fully grown human beings. The most common argument here is

that ‘scientists are playing God.’ other opponents prefer to use

Frankenstein as the paradigm– creating life, violating the natural

order, and unleashing forces beyond his or our control,”22 Do we

really have so much to fear? Can we really think of engineered tissues

as human? oron Catts and Ionat Zurr of The Tissue Culture and Art

Project explain:

“When cells and tissues are removed from the (context of the) host

body and kept alive, they are also being stripped of many other

aspects of what is perceived as a living individual… These cells and

tissues change morphologically, functionally, and in relations to space

/ time.”23

Just because it consists of human material, doesn’t make it human.

These cultivated objects will not bear the hallmarks of what is

perceived to be human. not all human tissue is human life. If we

consider human waste, as I mentioned earlier, it can be construed

as more than just excrement. Speaking about discarded embryos,

Philosopher Gerrit Glas explains, “they have become waste because we

treat them as waste.”24 he goes on, “It becomes waste in the context

of a laboratory… As far as we use it, it has a use and a meaning. As

far as we don’t use it it’s waste… It becomes a kind of technological

product.”25 Whether body materials can be deemed as waste, or

even human, has more to do with our purpose for them than the

terminology.

If you consider blood donation as an existing practice, you might say,

I donate blood every now and then so my body produces blood. I take

it away. I sell it, or I give it to other patients and my body makes new

blood for me.26 If we propose the body as factory scenario in exactly

the same way, so I use my cells, taken from and cultivated in my body

isn’t this the same? Ethically, where’s the problem? Catholic moral

theologian, Margaret Farley, whilst discussing the use embryos for

research, argued that … because it is a form of human life, it is due

19

10. Is it human?

20

some respect – for example, it should not be bought or sold.’’27 We have

already discussed whether or not we can think of embryos, cells or

tissues as being human, but her point about whether they should be

bought or sold is a valid one. Much the same as the trade of organs

and hair extensions, such actions question the morality and ownership

of such items. have I done anything illegal for instance?

here we should consider a contemporary example – the Body Worlds

exhibit. Professor Gunther Van hagens used his plastination technique

to create sculptures from the deceased which he used to create an

exhibition of the human anatomy. This led some to question whether

it is disrespectful to display bodies in this way, or if it is in fact a

celebration of life. however, some 17 million people have seen the

travelling exhibition worldwide with Van hagens claiming that some

30% of visitors are ready to donate their bodies to the Institute for

Plastination in heidelberg, Germany, which equates to some five

million people.28 If that’s true that’s a lot of people! Von hagens

believes he understands why:

“… plastination opens the hearts of the people to themselves. They

recognise themselves, get a new kind of body pride.””29

Maybe redefining the body as a material for sculpting is not so taboo

after all.

21

11. Professor Gunther Van Hagens Body Worlds exhibit

22

3 The Body & Technology, Man and Machine

It is often suggested that modern science and technology, are blurring

the space between man and machine. Modern prostheses rather than

replacing a missing or malfunctioning part of the body, are alternate

additions to the body’s form and functions.30 But is this not what we

did when we began crafting tools and objects to assist us?

our experiences of the world changed greatly when we used our

creativity to design and create these more primitive body extensions.

Australian performance artist Stelarc explains, “Technology has

always been coupled with the evolutionary development of the body.

Technology is what defines being human… it’s part of our human

nature…. technology is, and always has been, an appendage of the

body.31 French philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty suggests that

technologies become like body parts rather than the other way around.

A foot is not like a ski one can take off: rather, the ski becomes like a

foot, part of the skier’s way of experiencing and relating to the world.32

American philosopher Don Idhe explores Merleau-Ponty’s idea further.

Consider a woman putting on her glasses: her vision changes from

being vague to clear, the glasses become part of what she can do

(see) and the world gains in important detail. however, the manner in

which technology and the body change depends on to what extent a

technology becomes part of the body… If the woman’s glasses become

dirty she needs to clean them, in which case they are objects to her

rather than parts of her embodiment. If the object is transparent to

someone, he or she does not notice it and it is simply part of his or her

being-in-the-world.33 here, the transparency of the object is key to a

successful relationship. Some objects we use are considered integral

to the body such as a prosthetic leg, others partly, such as a pair of

reading glasses, and others temporarily, a pair of crutches for example.

But here we are talking about objects that assist the body due to its

physical inadequacies whether permanent or temporary. Everyday

tools and objects, rather, supplement the body, allowing us to hold a

volume of liquid or cut through material. The relationships we share

with these objects are somewhat different as we are not dependent on

them in the same manner, nor are they transparent enough to feel a

part of us. What determines the relationships we share with objects?

12. Modern prostheses blur the line between man and machine

23

13. The duality of life and death

24

25

4 Emotional: life and death (memory and immortality)

We might refer to the body as a factory, with its own natural chain of

production, capable of producing life.

however, one day it will cease production – we die. By facing the

dualities of life and death we are forced to confront the value of

things. During life we face various rights of passage marking a change

in social status, such as puberty, graduation and marriage, each

marked by its own rituals, memories and objects.

We are all familiar with the example of the family heirloom, passed

down from generation to generation – the table finely crafted by

grandfather, a beautiful locket containing a lock of hair. Such objects

come alive, breathing the stories of their past, totally irreplaceable

and invaluable.

upon death, objects take on extra reverence. For centuries the urn

has existed as an object for holding the ashes of human remains.

More contemporary solutions for the remains of the dead include:

the creation of diamonds from carbon extracted from the ashes,

yielding crystals suitable for pendants or rings; art work created by

sprinkling the ashes of the deceased over a painting; and plastination

– the process pioneered by Dr Gunther Von hagens where by the body

is injected with plastic thus preserving it for anything up to 4,000

years.”34

Could it be ‘life’ itself, or the feeling that the sentimental object is

‘alive’ that helps to create this bond? There’s nothing like the creation

of life to illustrate the generative capacity of the human body and yet

in contrast, death makes us aware of the value of things – facing our

own mortality makes us aware of the value of life.

Many people later on in their lives prepare for death, having a will

drawn up and making basic funeral arrangements. In this sense we

design our own death, orchestrating how we are remembered, fulfilling

our final wishes beyond our terminal breath. Tissue regeneration

allows the opportunity to create using our own body material, thus we

might cultivate an object that represents us beyond the grave. If we

26

were to grow an object within our bodies, not only would it live on as

a remnant of our being after death, but it might help us come to terms

with our own mortality during its growth. The relationship between

man and object is heightened.

14. Locket of hair

27

8. Aspects of the relationship with the body-object

Tobie Kerridge’s Bone Ring, grown from a loved ones own bone cells,

and Georg Tremmel and Shiho Fukuhara’s tree implanted with human

DnA, paint poetic pictures of the future for but somehow miss a

stroke. Might it be possible to nurture a relationship with an object if

we somehow cultivated it within our own bodies? Would we treat them

differently than objects bought on the high street?

Thanks to tissue engineering we can reassess the interaction between

man and object. Rene Van Donkelaar explains:

“If you make a load bearing material and you want it optimised, then

you also have to think about what kind of loading you want to apply.

If you just implant the scaffold, with the cells, under the skin then you

would have a skin you could hold, do some trick’s with, so you could

apply mechanical loading.”35

Rene suggests that by ‘holding’ or ‘doing tricks’ with the object under

the skin, a new, codependent relationship between man and object

emerges.

In order for man to cultivate an optimized material inside the

body, he must nurture a relationship with the object. By physically

interacting with the object under the skin we not only increase the

growth potential of the object but also come to terms with its value.

If man treats his cells right they will grow. In this process, the object

is personalised, carrying the indexical traces of its interactions and

experiences in its form.

28

15. A codependent relationship between man and object emerges

29

9. Conclusion

Traditionally the body is perceived as sacred, yet, using stem cell

technologies, it is possible to engineer the human body, giving us an

opportunity to revaluate the generative force of the human body, and

the body as a material.

of course, regenerative medicine will bring many benefits, such as

the regeneration of body tissues and organs, and the opportunity to

augment the human body, however, with such developments come the

opportunity to question: what should we grow?

As we have seen, such advances in technology are not without

opposition, however, we must not think of such materials as being

living, human entities, rather as cultivated materials. Do you still think

of your wooden table as being a living tree? Man has exploited nature

for millions of years, including the human body. The notion of the body

as material is nothing new, yet we should question why it is that we

prize certain materials over others? Why do we revere a lock of our

grandfather’s hair but not his teeth for example?

Earlier I discussed how the interaction between man and cells is

crucial to growing optimised tissue. on a similar level, Merleau-Ponty

and Idhe examined how technologies become transparent like body

parts. I suggest that objects become body parts, grown from human

tissues within our bodies, thus the bond between man and object is

nurtured within the body.

Implications

In ‘the body as factory’ scenario, new tools are needed to facilitate the

cultivation of objects within the human body. Tools that, in conjunction

with scaffolds or gels (or a combination of the two) inserted into the

body, allow us to enhance and influence the cultivation of the object

within. In this sense we create new relationships with the object

growing within us, interacting with it on a day-to-day basis. These

tools might optimise the growth of the object, or enhance it visually.

They may become ways to show off the growing object to the world, or

similarly, hide it away. Indeed, these tools should not only strengthen

the object but enhance our lives both physically and mentally.

30

10. Proposal

Growing Pains: Nurturing the relationship between man and

object

The bond a mother has with her child originates within the womb.

We can think of the ‘body as factory’ scenario as being similar to a

pregnancy, an entity developing within the body over a period of time.

In this sense we might nurture some sort of relationship between man

and object during ‘pregnancy.’

As we have seen, the outer body functionality of the object is directly

influenced by the interaction between man and object beneath the

skin. I suggest that this codependency should be exploited by design

as a means to strengthen the bond between man and the body, and man

and object.

I suggest that objects become body parts, grown from human tissues

within our bodies, thus the bond between man and object is nurtured

within the body.

If man were to grow an optimized material he must nurture a

relationship with the object, physically interacting with it under the

skin. Through this process, the object is personalised, carrying the

indexical traces of its interactions and experiences in its form. If man

treats his cells right they will grow.

Growing Pains

‘Growing Pains’ is a term referring to the pain symptoms commonly

felt by children during development. Metaphorically, it can also be

applied to the growth we experience throughout life both physically

and emotionally. utilising the potential of tissue engineering we

can cultivate objects within our bodies that not only represent, but

participate in our most profound life experiences.

Scenario: Death

If we were to cultivate an object that represents us beyond the grave

inside of our bodies, we would grow death inside of us, forcing us

to interact with it on a daily basis whilst nurturing new material

in preparation for our decay. In this instance, new tools are needed

31

to help us interact and nurture the object, tools that customize the

final form. These tools become part of our daily routine, enhancing

our lives whilst preparing us for death. In this growth process, by

physically interacting with the item under the skin, we not only shape

and increase its growth potential, but also come to terms with our

own mortality – you design your own death. upon death the object is

removed from the body, a representation of the self both physically

and symbolically.

List of Illustrations

1. SuRGERy (FLICKR)

2. BonE GRAFT (LuBKIn FunD) 02

3. EMBRyo (MIT PRESS) 03

4. LAMALLAE (SCIEnCE PhoTo LIBRARy) 04

5. STEM CELL (LEnnART nILSSon) 07

6. ILLuSTRATIon By MIKE ThoMPSon 09

7. BonE MARRoW TISSuE (SCIEnCE PhoTo LIBRARy) 11

8. nEuRAL STEM CELLS (FLICKR) 13

9. DoLL FACToRy (FLICKR) 16

10. BoRIS KARLoFF’S FRAnKEnSTEIn (FLICKR) 19

11. BoDyWoRLDS ExhIBIT (FLICKR) 21

12. oSCAR PISToRIuS (FLICKR) 23

13. LIFE & DEATh (FLICKR) 24

14. LoCKET oF hAIR (FLICKR) 26

15. PREGnAnT WoMAn (FLICKR) 28

33

Endnotes

1 L’homme Machine (The human Machine):

By Julien offray de La Mettrie,

Taken from www.britannica.com, 27th February 2009

2 p.12

Engineering Flesh:

Towards Professional Responsibility for ´Lived Bodies´ in

Tissue Engineering

By Mechteld-hanna Derksen

Publ. Mechteld-hanna Gertrud Derksen, 2008

3 Egypt pressured to end underground organ trade

By Jason Keyser

Publ. Associated Press, 17th March 2009

4 The real cost of posh locks

By Tamara Kaminsky

Publ. The Daily Mail, 31st July 2006

5 Smart Matters

By John Thackara

Posted on Doors of Perception, 12th February 2002

6 Artistic life forms that would never survive

Darwinian Evolution:

By Ionat Zurr & oron Catts

Publ. Art Association of Australia and new Zealand, 2003

7 p.187

In The Bubble: Designing In A Complex World

By John Thackara

Publ. The MIT Press, 2005

8 p.188


By John Thackara


34

9 p.196


By John Thackara


10 p.38

Engineering Flesh:

Towards Professional Responsibility for ‘Lived Bodies’ in

Tissue Engineering



11 The Stem Cell Divide

Written by Rick Weiss

Publ. national Geographic Magazine, July 2005

12 p.77

A Clone of your own?: The Science and Ethics of Cloning

By Arlene Judith Klotzko

Publ. oxford university Press, 2004

13 how to Build a Body Part

By Josh Fischman

Publ. Time Magazine, 1st March 1999

14 Drugs unlock the body’s own stem cell cabinet

By Andy Coghlan

Publ. new Scientist, 8th January 2009

15 Interview with Dr. Rene Van Donkelaar

Department of Biomedical Engineering

Technical university, Eindhoven

Wednesday 11th March 2009

16 p.1




35

17 George E. Brown, Jr.

Taken from http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/

georgeebr194456.html,

25th February 2009

18 p.122




19 p.11

The Stem Cell Controversy: Debating The Issues

Second Edition

Edited by Michael Ruse and Christopher A. Pynes

Publ. Prometheus Books, 2006

20 Interview with Dr. Roel Kuijer


Faculty of Medical Sciences

university of Groningen

Thursday 29th January 2009

21 p.17

Engineering Flesh:


Tissue Engineering



22 p.xvii




23 Towards a new Class of Being: The Extended Body

By oron Catts and Ionat Zurr

Publ. Intelligent Agent, June 2002

36

24 Interview with Prof. Dr. Gerrit Glas

Specialisation Coordinator

Master of Arts in Philosophy of Medical Science

Department of Philosophy

university of Leiden

Thursday 12th February 2009

25 Interview with Prof. Dr. Gerrit Glas

Specialisation Coordinator

Master of Arts in Philosophy of Medical Science

Department of Philosophy

university of Leiden

Thursday 12th February 2009

26 Interview with Dr. Carlijn Bouten



Friday 20th February 2009.

27 p.275

The Stem Cell Controversy: Debating The Issues

Second Edition

Edited by Michael Ruse and Christopher A. Pynes

Publ. Prometheus Books, 2006

28 Dr Death v’s Lord Life

By Gunther Von hagens & Robert Winston

Publ. The Times, June 4th 2005

29 The Plastination Professor

Posted on BBC news World Edition,

Wednesday 20th november, 2002

30 Stelarc Tissue Culture And Art:

Clemenger Contemporary Art Award

By Stelarc

Posted RMIT university, 2006

http://www.sial.rmit.edu.au/Projects/Stelarc_Tissue_Culture_

and_Art.php

37

31 Extended-Body: Interview with Stelarc

By Paolo Atzori and Kirk Woolford

Academy of Media Arts, Cologne, Germany

Posted www.stanford.edu, 6th September 1995

32 pp.165-169

The Phenomenology of Perception

By Maurice Merleau-Ponty

Publ. Routledge, 2002.

33 p.136

Engineering Flesh:


Tissue Engineering



34 50 ways to leave your body

By John naish

Publ. The Times, november 10th 2007

35 Interview with Dr. Rene Van Donkelaar



Wednesday 11th March 2009

38

growing pains - thought colliderthoughtcollider.nl/.../uploads/2014/09/growing_pains.pdf ·...

Documents