Come on Big Business, He's Just an Amateur!

The case on the Critical Art Ensemble is an interesting one to me. I always had my own personal thoughts on the pharmaceutical and food administrative industries, and this case further feeds my interest. It began when I was a little girl. My mother was always very critical of the foods we ate and the use of plastic. She always commented about the chemicals in things and how they would affect us in the future. When I was younger, I thought all the stuff she said was nonsense and that she was just being paranoid. However, as I have gotten older and have learned things for myself, I understand that there is a great deal of truth in what she was saying. Beyond what my mother taught, I took Topics in Nutrition, a class offered here at Marist and my teacher was a very purist/organic type. I appreciated her methods because she explained the different toxins in foods that our bodies do not positively react to. She also shared with us how food was not as pure as it should be because the industry is only interested in profiting at the expense of the people. She also mentioned how cures and remedies were not pursued because it would collapse the pharmaceutical industry, who want to keep us hooked on over-the-counter drugs that only temporarily relieve our ailments.

Now that I've given a little background on my views about food, pharmaceuticals, food processing, and chemicals, understand that I was not surprised by this case. Sadly, an act that was put in place for the benefit of people and American Society to enhance our public safety has been misused and abused. It is not fair that little guys are attacked when they challenge a large industry or corporation. When this happens, we loose sight of the things our country was built on. Things like freedom of speech, public opinions, and privacy. It was unfair for Steve Kurtz and CAE to be trialed on account of sharing research and bio-organisms. In this country, we are encouraged to be thinkers, be critical, and be creative. The government attempted to stifle his efforts on creativity, criticism, and expression, and I'm glad they failed. Additionally, Kurtz was not even an official "accredited" and professional scientist. All of the things he did were basic and done in the eye of the public.

By Kurtz being an amateur scientist, he felt that he was able to be under the radar. Because he was an amateur, it would more difficult for him to be corrupted by big industry because his career did not depend on it. The author of this article questions why artist are needed to be scientist in order to get public attention about the food we eat. She states that (Pentecost, 3):
"[I]t is precisely because of our status as non-scientist, as non-experts, not invested in careers in the field, it's because of our status as amateurs, that artists are able to render important issues to a public through the public space accorded to art in our culture. This is because of what is happening in the sciences, an intense case of transformation of knowledge for the public good, into knowledge privatized and applied to profit for a few."
CAE and Kurtz worked to expose the happenings of big industry. I take this subject to heart because we are the food we eat, and it is important to know what we are putting in our bodies. I was shocked when I read that there are really no studies on genetically engineered food, and the study that did happen was shut down after having found some damaging information.

When comparing this case and the discussion of The Cult of the Amateur, I feel that this is a valid point against Keens case. Keen argues that the amateur is taking over the industries and is making it hard for big businesses that have been around for a while to be profitable. What I brought up earlier in the class and what I bring up now is what if those big businesses need to be destroyed? What if the system does need to be revamped and revised? In the case of the pharmaceutical industry and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, I believe that is the case.

Disguising the invasion of ones house and property with the PATRIOT act is a low blow. I feel that this act was genuinely put in place to further protect American people. However, I feel that the government is abusing and misusing this tool to survey people without them knowing and using the information for their own personal interest. This is unacceptable. Privacy is one of the freedoms we have been granted as Americans, and through the PATRIOT act, we continue to loose it on tiny step at a time. The government seems to use fear to insist the use and the need for the PATRIOT act. It should be used to help protect our country, not to blind us by hiding valid truths.

In closing, the amateur has shoved industry in the shoulder. The amateur has proven to do what what the professional cannot and will not do. This is sad because we assume that doctors and scientist have the best interest of the people in mind, but many times, they are only after money and profit.