COMMON sense tells us that the contents of an artist鈥檚 studio should be easy to distinguish from those of an illicit bioweapons lab. Federal agents working for the US Joint Terrorism Task Force might disagree. They have spent the past few weeks investigating a radical artist called Steven Kurtz who uses DNA and bacteria to create works meant to spark debate about the safety and morality of genetic research. And their inquiries have taken an ominous turn: as 快猫短视频 went to press, colleagues of the artist were about to give evidence in a hearing prompted by the FBI to determine whether Kurtz should face charges under the US Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989.
The bizarre ordeal began when Kurtz, who teaches at the University at Buffalo in New York state, woke up last month to find his wife had stopped breathing. The paramedic who came to his house saw the petri dishes and lab equipment Kurtz uses for his artwork, and within hours federal agents were on the scene. Kurtz was whisked off for questioning while his home was cordoned off and searched by teams wearing full biohazard suits.
Whatever the outcome of this week鈥檚 grand jury hearing, the mere fact that it is happening shows that federal prosecutors believe Kurtz has a case to answer. Much less clear is what the offence is supposed to be.
Advertisement
Kurtz is a member of Critical Art Ensemble, an experimental group that seeks to demystify genetically modified foods and challenge their commercialisation through art and satire. You might question the coherence of some of the group鈥檚 ambitions, one of which is a proposal to release mutant flies into restaurants. But daffiness and a distrust of corporate bioscience are not chargeable offences. And at a time when better known artists are creating works out of dead animals, elephant dung and frozen human blood, it would perhaps be more surprising if artists like Kurtz were not building installations from GM plants or bacteria growing in petri dishes.
So, is it possible that Kurtz intended to cook up something harmful? It appears that his wife died of heart failure rather than anything connected with his work. Kurtz鈥檚 fellow artists insist that the FBI would only have found harmless strains of bacteria, along with chemicals and equipment found even in some high school labs. Unless the FBI produces evidence to challenge that view 鈥� which is possible 鈥� it seems that Kurtz is under suspicion not because he sought to create dangerous biological agents, but because he sought to handle any biological material.
The underlying message seems to be that tools and reagents of everyday bioscience are intrinsically threatening as terror agents and that science is simply too dangerous to be turned into art. Whether you think the FBI is being vigilant or paranoid, all scientists ought to be deeply worried about the 鈥渟cience is scary鈥� signals the case is giving out.