What Can We Say About
“Math/Art”? By George Hart
Summary
In the article "What
Can We Say About 'Math/Art'?", George Hart, an applied mathematician and
sculptor, explores the maturing yet ill-defined field where mathematics and art
intersect. Hart argues that while a vibrant community exists, the discipline
lacks a coherent formal framework or even a rigorous definition. He suggests
that much of what is produced by this community may be better categorized as
craft, design, models, or visualization rather than traditional "fine
art," but he views this not as a deficit, but as a unique cultural
expression that shares the "mathematical landscapes" and joys of
discovery familiar to mathematicians. Ultimately, Hart encourages
mathematicians to engage in artistic creation as a rewarding form of
self-expression and a way to communicate the wonders of mathematics to a
broader audience.
Stop 1
Quote:
“From a human perspective, I find no contradiction, rather a great resonance,
in the blending of mathematics with fine art. It is a central part of my life.
Yet when attempting any rational introspection into the nature and power of
mathematical art, one is immediately stymied by the fact that the subject seems
ill-suited to our usual tools of formal analysis. One can’t even define “art”
in the rigorous way that elementary mathematical practice would require. And
even without a universal definition of “art,” if we agree that a particular
object is art, people may still disagree on whether it is also “mathematical art.”
Pg.521
Explanation:
The author talks about how closely connected mathematics and fine art really
are, even though most people think they are completely separate. Growing up in
Nigeria, I was taught to see math as a tool for science subjects like physics,
chemistry, and accounting. In contrast, students who weren’t good at math were
encouraged to focus on history, languages, or the arts. This made me think of
the two as completely different worlds.
Coming to UBC and
studying EDCP 552 has changed that. I now see mathematics as a way to
understand patterns, rules, and relationships that are also at the heart of
art, like sculpture, music, and design. The author, being both a mathematician
and a sculptor, shows that these worlds can overlap. Even if we recognize
something as art, people might still debate whether it is “mathematical art.”
The real barrier is not math or art itself, but the assumptions we carry about
them.
Stop 2
Quote:”
I trust that as society evolves, more and more people will be freed to create
art. And as a fundamental humanist expression, the scope of art needs to be
enriched by the viewpoint of mathematicians. Those who have journeyed through
mathematical lands have unique stories to tell of what they found and how they
now see the world.pg 525
Explanation:
I am excited to see mathematics moving beyond simple number manipulation to
meet the creative and expressive needs of the 21st century. I was particularly
inspired by the recorded Zoom meeting between Susan and Nick Sayers, where
everyday materials like bottles and sand were used to create patterns that not
only expressed ideas but also solved problems, such as the creation of dune
fractals to convey messages, much like expressive art would. This approach
reflects the ideas of ethnography, showing how mathematical patterns can
connect to human experience and culture. I also thought of a colleague who
creates tie-dye fabrics. While skilled, he produces relatively few designs
because he has not incorporated mathematics into his process. I can imagine how
much richer and more expansive his work could become if he embraced the beauty
and structure of mathematics. Hart’s article suggests precisely this: that
mathematical thinking, when applied creatively, can transform art and human
expression, revealing patterns and possibilities that traditional methods alone
might miss.
Question:
If Mathematics describes patterns in everything around us, then why do we often
strip it of creativity, movement, and culture when we teach it?
Hi Clementina,
ReplyDeleteYour reflection on George Hart’s article is such a thoughtful look at how we can bridge the gap between "logical" and "creative" identities. I really resonated with your personal story about growing up in Nigeria - it highlights a global issue where math is often cordoned off for "science students," while the arts are reserved for those who supposedly "can't do math."
Hart’s argument about the lack of a formal definition for "math/art" feels very true to my experience as a secondary teacher. We often get stuck in a "dualistic shutdown" because we don't have a rubric for beauty or self-expression in a geometry unit. Your first stop reminds me that the barrier isn't the difficulty of the subjects, but the rigid boxes we put them in. When you mentioned that studying at UBC changed your view of math as a way to understand patterns and relationships, it made me think about how much our students miss out on when we only teach them math as a tool for accounting or physics.
Hi Clementina, thank you for sharing your reflection and your experiences at UBC. I think your question is a layered and complex one. To begin answering it, we would likely need to look more deeply into the history of education, colonialism, and broader systems of oppression.
ReplyDeleteMathematics has long been institutionalized and celebrated within traditions dominated by white settler men, and formal education has often functioned as a gatekeeping mechanism—maintaining power and excluding those positioned as the “other.” When mathematics is defined narrowly through rigid, Eurocentric frameworks, those who do not conform to or have access to that definition can be constructed as less educated, less capable, and historically even less human.
Your question opens up an important conversation about who gets to define mathematics, whose knowledge counts, and how educational systems continue to shape belonging and exclusion.
I also wonder if we need to move beyond simply asking why we teach mathematics in certain ways, and instead begin asking how we can empower ourselves—and our students—to flourish through math and art. Rather than remaining in critique alone, perhaps the next step is imagining and enacting new possibilities. What would it look like to create spaces where multiple ways of knowing, creating, and expressing mathematics are genuinely valued? How might we design tangible learning experiences that invite curiosity, embodiment, and cultural connection, so that students see themselves not as outsiders to mathematics but as capable contributors to it?
I’m also thinking about our experiences at UBC—moments that felt expansive, interdisciplinary, and reflective. What might it mean to carry those paradigm-shifting experiences into our own classrooms? How can we translate that sense of openness, experimentation, and critical awareness into learning environments where students are invited not just to learn mathematics, but to reimagine it?