January 6, 2012

Infinite Balance: Nature and Human Nature

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

It's not true that aesthetics must be be compromised for meaning. I visited the excellent Infinite Balance: Artists and the Environment show at San Diego's Museum of Photographic Arts earlier this week, which features the shortlist for the Prix Pictet contest, the world’s top (and only? I ask myself) prize for photography and sustainability. The show features work mostly from photographers born in the 50s and 60s, like Edward Burtynsky (of Manufactured Landscapes), Susan Derges, Naoya Hatakeyama, and Chris Jordan (of TED fame). Even the artist statements had meaning. Naturally, that material was always depressing, at times beautiful, and also a tad reassuring because the photographer's minds and eyes were dedicated to the problem, at least for while. My favorite photographs were Nadav Kander's of the Yangtze River (he was the 2009 Prix Pictet winner). Here are a couple.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American