[Anna Dumitriu first artist-in-residence at the Institute of Epigenetics and Stem Cells (IES) at Helmholtz Munich is documented in the eBook, edited by Claudia Schnugg, The Mutability of Memories and Fates, Ravenna, Noema Media, 2026 (ISBN: 979-12-985585-4-0). It can be downloaded here for free]
This residency demonstrates that art that is produced within a scientific context can do much more than invite audiences to think about science or communicate science, but a partner capable of generating questions, opening conceptual space, and producing forms of inquiry, discourse, and connections unavailable to science alone.
What distinguishes art from other interdisciplinary partners is not simply the addition of another expertise, but the particular combination of artistic research, aesthetic practice, and cultural embeddedness. Artistic practice often operates synthetically rather than analytically, connecting diverse forms of knowledge and pursuing questions before outcomes are known (Root-Bernstein et al., 2017). Moreover, artistic media can support to create boundary objects that address the senses (Star, 2010) which connects the artistic practice with elements of aesthetics. Through aesthetics, artists work with sensory experience, embodiment, and affect, creating forms of understanding that exceed rational explanation alone (Kant, 1790; Baumgarten, 1750). At the same time, art’s embeddedness in culture allows it to connect scientific developments with broader social concerns, ethical questions, and collective imaginaries (Belfiore & Bennett, 2006). Together, these characteristics position art as a unique collaborator in scientific environments (see for detailed discussion Schnugg, 2022, and forthcoming).
At the beginning of 2020, Anna Dumitriu was invited to become the first artist-in-residence at the Institute of Epigenetics and Stem Cells (IES) at Helmholtz Munich. As an internationally renowned bioartist with extensive experience working directly in biological laboratories, the residency offered a unique opportunity to engage deeply with a new scientific field: the study of epigenetics, stem cells, and cellular identity. Her proposal, The Mutability of Memories and Fates, was selected because it resonated strongly with the institute’s scientific mission while proposing an artistic inquiry into some of its central concepts, including cell fate, cellular memory, identity, and transformation.
The residency emerged at a moment of global disruption. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, what had originally been conceived as an intensive programme of laboratory visits evolved into one of the institute’s first long-term hybrid collaborations. Through monthly meetings, online laboratory discussions, one-to-one conversations with scientists, and later extended periods of on-site laboratory work, Dumitriu became embedded within all four research groups of the institute. Over time, the residency developed into an unusually sustained dialogue between artistic and scientific modes of inquiry.
From the outset, the intention was not simply to produce artworks inspired by science. Rather, the residency was conceived as a shared process in which scientists would encounter artistic research methods while the artist would engage directly with scientific practice. Dumitriu was introduced to laboratory techniques, experimental procedures, and the conceptual frameworks guiding stem cell research. At the same time, she brought questions, speculative thinking, and alternative forms of knowledge production into the laboratory environment. Through conversations, thought experiments, workshops, and collaborative investigations, artistic and scientific perspectives became intertwined.
This process-oriented approach proved particularly fruitful because many of the concepts explored by the institute already carry philosophical implications. Scientific terms such as “cell fate,” “cell memory,” “reprogramming,” “totipotency,” and “identity” operate simultaneously as technical descriptions and as metaphors that invite broader reflection on individuality, inheritance, change, and possibility. Dumitriu’s practice engages precisely within this space where scientific knowledge and philosophical inquiry overlap. Rather than translating scientific discoveries into visual form, she investigates how scientific concepts reshape our understanding of what it means to remember, to become, and to change.
Several artworks included in this body of work emerged directly from encounters with specific scientific questions and laboratory practices. Works such as Identity in Flux, Mother and Father, Cell Division, and Performance of Care grew out of hands-on experiences within the laboratory environment. Others, including Totipotence and Dr. Clara’s Jumping Genes, originated in extended conversations about foundational scientific concepts and their wider implications. The Cellular Reprogramming Necklace exemplifies the collaborative nature of the residency: inspired by scientists’ descriptions of the Oct4 gene and realized through a collective workshop involving researchers, the work transformed a scientific explanation into a sculptural form that simultaneously reflected and challenged scientific representations.
Yet the most significant outcome of the residency was the work that ultimately gave the project its title: The Mutability of Memories and Fates. Consisting of a video installation, a framed work, and a vial containing cells from a dedicated laboratory experiment, the trilogy embodies the residency’s most ambitious form of collaboration. What distinguishes this work is that it originated not from an existing scientific experiment but from a question posed by the artist herself. In simple terms, Dumitriu asked: how many times can a cell be reprogrammed, and what traces of its previous states might remain? The question emerged from artistic reflection on the concepts of memory and identity, yet it resonated strongly with ongoing scientific investigations into cellular plasticity.
Over the course of nearly eighteen months, artists and scientists worked together to design and realize an experiment capable of exploring this question. The resulting process generated not only material for the artwork but also observations and ideas that stimulated further scientific interest. Art became a means of generating new questions, opening conceptual space, and creating conditions for scientific curiosity to develop in unexpected directions. The works presented in this body of work therefore represent not only the outcomes of a residency but also traces of a multi-year process of shared inquiry. Together they explore one of the central questions that connects art and stem cell science alike: to what extent are memory, identity, and fate fixed, and to what extent might they remain mutable?
The artworks originated from an artistic question and exploration into science. The artist asked whether repeated cellular reprogramming might leave traces of previous states and memories. The resulting experiment occupied a space between scientific curiosity and philosophical speculation, demonstrating how artistic inquiry can act as a catalyst for scientific investigation.
For the development of “The Cellular Reprogramming Necklace”, Dumitriu worked with several scientists, puzzling together the knowledge of the Oct-4 gene how it was represented through each scientist’s lens, while opening questions about details of its physical representation that either pointed to white spots in research or neglected information as only parts were relevant for the scientists who entered the conversation. The artist then set out to realize the artistic sculpture representing the details of the Oct-4 gene together with the scientists, also in a team workshop setting. This physical experience of reproducing in a tangible scale the gene that’s so familiar to the scientists in its visual representation in textbook, presented the scientists with a spatial understanding of the scientific matter in question that they did not engage with before.
Moreover, Dumitriu also draws from historical research and cultural representations that allow a broad audience to connect to the work. For example, the “Cellular Reprogramming Necklace” takes this shape of something a broad audience can relate to, but also by picking up on a sentence the scientists repeatedly mentioned when they described the shape, “imagine it like beads on a chain”. Other aspects she is drawing from in this body of work is the value of stem cells as something incredibly precious, thus she uses gold and a richly decorated flask to preserve and present them. A second layer in the use of gold is the cultural dimension of the role of gold for alchemy, the precious philosophers’ stone. Using elements like this and including historical and cultural references makes Dumitriu’s work approachable different audience groups but also reaches out to other disciplines from the humanities and sciences.
Looking back, the residency produced far more than a series of artworks. It initiated new collaborations, generated educational activities, inspired follow-up projects, contributed to scientific discussions, and provided opportunities for reflection on scientific assumptions, representations, and practices. At the same time, it allowed the artist to develop a substantial new body of work grounded in direct engagement with a rapidly evolving scientific field. Where these outcomes are located and how they can be distinguished is also something that can be discussed on several levels, as research into work processes and organizations that include art has demonstrated before (Berthoin Antal, 2009). For art and science collaborations, this can be understood as the individual level (such as the artist, or the scientist), the group and organizational level (such as the laboratory team, the hosting university, or the art-science team), the discipline (both artistic and scientific), and the societal level (engage people from different backgrounds, broad audience, defined audiences) (Schnugg 2022, and forthcoming). The outcomes of the residency can be understood across four interconnected levels of impact.
Individual
• scientists learned artistic methods
• artist learned new scientific practices
Group / Organization
• shared language
• new formats of collaboration
• artist-in-residence became institutional model
Discipline
• scientific questions emerged
• artworks entered international exhibitions
• follow-up projects developed
Society
• exhibitions
• public dialogue
• communication and reflection on biotechnology
The significance of The Mutability of Memories and Fates therefore lies not only in the artworks themselves. The project demonstrates how artscience collaboration can function as a space in which scientific knowledge, artistic imagination, and cultural reflection intersect. In this intersection, new questions emerge—questions that neither art nor science might have produced independently. For example, Anna Dumitriu followed up on a project on epigenetics with historians to develop her project “Manna”, and research interest has been triggered to follow up on open questions the work on “The Mutability in Memories and Fates” has brought up at Helmholtz Munich. The positive experience with this first artist in residence at Helmholtz Munich and the opportunities that come with it also supported the development of a follow-up artist-in-residence program integrated into the international doctoral network “RepliFate”.
[Anna Dumitriu first artist-in-residence at the Institute of Epigenetics and Stem Cells (IES) at Helmholtz Munich is documented in the eBook, edited by Claudia Schnugg, The Mutability of Memories and Fates, Ravenna, Noema Media, 2026 (ISBN: 979-12-985585-4-0). It can be downloaded here for free]
Workshop impression to produce the “Cellular Reprogramming Necklace” by Anna Dumitriu at the Institute of Epigenetics and Stem Cells of Helmholtz Munich, photo credit: Anna Dumitriu
References
Baumgarten, A.G., Ästhetik (1750), 58, reissued at Hamburg: Meiner Verlag, 2007.
Belfiore, E. and Bennett, O. (2007), ‘Determinants of Impact: Towards a Better Understanding of Encounters with the Arts’, Cultural Trends 16(3): 225-275.
Berthoin Antal, A. (2009), ‘Transforming Organisatiuons with the Arts’, Research Report. TILLT Europe Project Report.
Kant, I. (1790/1913), Kritik der Urteilskraft. 4. Auflage nach 1790, ed. Karl Vorländer, Leipzig: Felix Meiner Verlag.
Root-Bernstein R., Pathak A., Root-Bernstein M, (2017), ‘Review of Studies Demonstrating the Effectiveness of Integrating Arts, Music, Performing, Crafts and Design into Science, Technology,
Engineering, Mathematics and Medical Education’, White Paper.
Schnugg, C. (2022), ‘Serendipity and beyond Innovation’ in Joke Brouwer, Arie Altena & Boris Debackere (eds), Art + Water, Rotterdam, NL: V2 Publishing.
Schnugg, C. (forthcoming), ‘Art as a Collaborative Partner in Science: Exploring the Potential of ArtScience Practices’, in Isabel Fletcher, Bianca Vienni-Baptista, María Goñi Mazzitelli, Ulrike Kuchner (eds.), Spanning Boundaries: Intersections between science and technology studies and scholarship on interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research, Glos, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Star, S.L. (2010), ‘This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept’, Science, Technology & Human Values 35(5):601-617.
Comments are closed