Subject: categories: Re: Demystifying the categorial approach

From: John Stell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 16:49:08 +0100 (BST)

When Venet's commutative diagrams as art appeared in the AMS Notices
(vol 49 no6 2002, pp663-668) this was mystification of the
categorical approach by the artist. Good art but nothing to do with
mathematics. Since many attempts to demystify mathematics have a visual
aspect, the role of art here is interesting, as well as how artists see
this kind of activity.

One aspect of the continuing discussion seems to concern disciplinary
boundaries -- complaints that some computer scientists, physicists,
philosophers etc 'misuse' category theory or deride it. It's interesting
that efforts to explain mathematics to the general public can fall
foul of exactly similar complaints from an opposite quarter.
Often public participation projects involve art in some way and
these are indeed often funded under 'art-science' programmes.
Most such projects are valuable for engaging the
public and succeed in getting people interested, however the art is
usually of no interest to artists concerned with current issues in
contemporary art. This is not to say they are poor projects, but labelling
them as "art-science" creates the false impression there is an engagement
with art in a meaningful way.

On the other hand there is art which references mathematics, but which
has absolutely no mathematical content. For example Venet's work
and others who lift elaborate equations to great visual effect.
Yet other work (e.g. Conrad Shawcross)
involves references to physics in a quite different, but still
non-expository, way.

It seems to be an open question how art might be used to promote or
facilitate a genuine understanding of mathematics (which must
involve the reasoning processes and apreciation of abstract structure).
Perhaps Sol LeWitt (despite his writings and some critics (e.g. Rosalind
Krauss)) indicates a possible way forward. Some of his work (just like
Venet's) has nothing to do with mathematics despite the superficial
apperance; other parts are worth thinking about.

John Stell