WHY I AM USING TERM BIOART AGAIN
Firstly I was inspired by the bioart and that was main reason of my declaration as bio artist when i was describing projects like HERMAN. Then I started to think about the artworks based mainly on affective interaction and this term was for me something not suitable any more. By the last years I was using it just as most relevent keword for my art with the feeling that this is something what do not describes of the meritum. And in the last days I had dicovered the field of biosemiotics and biocentrism that are much better describing the field of my vision of bioart. Affective neuroscience was focused on the electric activity of brain and nervous system. However this kind research have strong impact on nowadays art this is for me the simplification of embodied communication and reduction of multichannel reference of impulses into the single channel. Affective interaction explores mainly the field of the mammals subjectivity, but can not to touch for the identity and consciousness of plants, or fungi. Biosemiotic is dealing with all of the communication channels and my art is declared as much more related to biosemiotics than affective interaction even if for now because of my tools I can use more related methodes to all of this affective communication art. This is the reason of my evolution from bio artist via affective interaction artist into the bioart again but with the additional background less related to Eduardo Kac definition of bioart (art of new transgenic designed lifeforms) as and more related to biosemiotic background. This evolution in terms is not related to evolution of my interests because if you will read my latest texts about transspecies communication you will find there strong appointment about the necessity of more complex research not based only on EEG or GSR (galvanic skin reaction). I was conscious that we need to expand field of interest in communication processes in the living organism. Now I had found biosemiotic research as much more related to my art theory than affective neuroscience. However affective neuroscience can be taken as part of the biosemiotic research.