I noticed a book mistake on the syllabus. These are our three books:
Akins, F. & Check, E. (2016). Roads to Junction: Making art, teaching art. Dubuque, IA: KendallHunt.
Chapadjiev, S. (Ed.). (2008). Live through this: On creativity and self-destruction. New York, NY: Seven Stories Press.
Weintraub, L. (2012). To life! Eco art in pursuit of a sustainable planet. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Our last book is the Akins & Check book.
Just a reminder about posting--please remember to post a minimum of four posts per week. If you are absent and miss a week, I expect four posts from the previous week in the current week, along with a minimum of four posts for the current week as well.
Just a few notes form comments from last week. David and others posted about us being tenants of the land and not owners. Haha posted how "we don't own the land, the land owns us." David posted about the 1960s and "duck and cover" mentality about dealing with nuclear explosions and how the Middle Ages terrified him.And that is a reference to Europe. But also in the Middle/Dark Ages were nuns and convents and safer spaces, women making art (tho not getting much credit), and southern Spain where Jews, Muslims, and Catholics lived peaceably together, governed not by Christians. And then, I'm wondering what was happening in other parts of the world. I'm thinking about how I tell Visual Studies majors not to develop lessons that will create landfill--art that foes into the waste basket. That goes against learning the essentials of elements and principles I guess. But, I suspect different cultures have different names and processes for art and media--the Western Euro model feels inadequate to me. And a few posted about if the land or the earth writes us messages--and I think it does constantly.
We are in the beginning throws of the book. It gets much more interesting as we begin artists next week. And, keep in mind, these are her versions of histories. Be open to these stories.
Ecological Imperatives
ReplyDeleteIntroduction
Weintraub defines ecology and environmentalism. She notes how Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring launched an environmental movement. The beginning of Earth Day in 1970.
Eco Art Themes
Eco artists weigh breakthroughs and breakdowns; they see themes within spans of time. The question posed was: "What possibilities captivate my attention and inspires my creative?" I do know that there are some writings by teachers in RethinkingSchools.org, an urban journal, where students and teachers set out to investigate environmental issues within their schools. (You can google RethinkingSchools.org--a great resource.) I think you have to pay now. But parts may be free.
Weintraub lists foundational ecological concepts
Habitat
Range
Niche
Systems
Energy
Life/Death/Extinction
Sustainability
How has her explanation of foundational ecological concepts piqued your curiosity or imaginations? What is sticking in your mind? Resonating? What is troubling?
For example, some of the strategies mentioned under the heading Humans & Extinction/Biodiversity for overhunting, monocultures, paving, disrupting migration patterns, pesticides, and toxins are: green roofs/gardens, parks, conservation, wild areas--strategies that are occurring in urban areas--community gardens, shaded resting places, etc. She has given us a lot of terminology. I hope some of it is sticking with you. I took over six pages of notes--single-spaced. Living in Lubbock, Texas, I learned about xeriscaping years ago and dug up my lawn (I didn't really want to cut grass). When waiting for hot water to come out of my sinks, I capture cool water in watering can to water outside to not waste water. We will be in some drought condition soon again. Also, google place-based education. It's an interesting and exciting topic.
The concepts that resonated the strongest with me as well as what is the most troubling is the breakdown of "humans and cultural diversity". The strategies may as well be chants of the parties currently fighting to be the dominant voice of not only our country but now the world. The idea of Globalization is now calling for attention on the global scale. It would seem that many of these strategies once would easily produce art works anywhere from a microcosmic community focused work to a larger scale statement that attempts to break free from the bonds of site specific nature. I believe the microcosmic is now being choked out by global discourse and it is virtually impossible for the debate to not heavily influence the creators and/or the audience. I also wonder with the current political momentum of reduction of cultural diversity is our audience being reduced to those which we are politically aligned? The discussion of extinction and Weintraub's point towards a human presence that has virtually wiped out ecosystems and replaced them with farms makes me question the potential resulting statements of ecoart. Is ecoart becoming farfetched hypothetical dreams of what can be achieved and/or avoided if we stop dead in our tracks of current trends? Is ecoart becoming screams of inevitable failure to even protect what is left? At what point does ecoart cease to be due to artificial creation and farming wiping out ecosystems all together? The explanation of these foundational concepts leads me to believe that her point of view on human progression only permits ecoart to be defined in this current situation. To successfully achieve either political path would result in the foundational concepts no longer having relevance. Perhaps ecoart is a niche movement then in and of itself?
DeleteOne of the first things that caught my attention in this section was Weintraub's inclusion of examples wherein human activities accomplish certain goals but result in unintended consequences. Weintraub also points out that life - meaning reality/civilizations that are literally human-built - as we understand it today accounts for a mere fraction of Homo sapiens' existence on Earth, which is itself a tiny blip on the timescale of the universe(s). What seems important to me about beginning this section in this way is that it reminds the human reader that its relied upon habitat existed long before humankind's arrival, and will continue to do so long after its departure.
DeleteThinking this in this way makes the world seem less like a resource for human consumption and more like a vital component to human existence.
Weintraub also mentions the possibility of seeking out a new habitat one day when humans have exhausted their Earth home. This sentiment is often expressed in times when contemplating the weight of human effects on the environment gets too heavy. Although I don't think that Weintraub is acquiescing to this as a defensible solution, the fact that is a commonly held "escape plan" is disturbing, as it denotes an self-indulgent attitude towards matter and resources. Furthermore, "just going somewhere else" is a rather foolish form of escapism since it would most likely be much easier (from a practical standpoint) to remodel human actions and their effects on Earth than to find a suitable planet for the incredibly specific needs of the human species within the vastness of outer space.
Under the 'Habitat' Section, Weintraub writes, "Every form of life is married to a context." In addition to the basic environmental requirements for human life, millions of years of Earth's development have most certainly produced numerous other integrated structures that continued (long-term) survival would depend on. Perhaps it is the job of Eco art to reassert the vital complexity of our rare planet/circumstances. Perhaps Eco art can help forge or reestablish an emotional connection with Earth as home that is easily during times of abundance and non-imminent threats...?
DAVID:
DeleteThe first thing that hit me was the concept of immediate vs. eventual threats. Weintraub points out some obvious immediate threats to living organisms (though, oddly, what is bad for some is neutral or good for others). Except in the absence of awareness (knowledge), immediate threats are usually quite obvious. Heights can lead to falls, predators can take your life, the abject steers us away from that which is putrid, diseased, or deformed. Only with knowledge (cultural and scientific) would we know that daffodils are toxic if ingested, radium emits deadly alpha and beta radiation (http://www.messynessychic.com/2015/07/02/the-radium-girls-and-the-generation-that-brushed-its-teeth-with-radioactive-toothepaste/ ), and that an evenly dispersed cup of flour can make a room explode (think grain elevators).. Ecologists give us data and environmentalists sift through data to point out immediate and eventual threats.
Human short-sightedness makes eventual threats seem remote (never immediate). This brings to mind several ideas that I often consider: unforeseen consequences, planned obsolescence, and short-term planning. These 3 things, along with lack of knowledge, contribute to the eventual threats mentioned. The complexity of eco-systems can make eventual threats much harder to identify. The human propensity to not contemplate unforeseen consequences, along with short-term planning and planned obsolescence have given rise to many of the threats to our Earth-home. And the unwillingness of some to accept cause-and-effect factors in eventual threats sadly forces us to deal with them only when the threats become immediate. Hurricanes, floods, and extinctions of rare species make only minor impacts on human thinking, though they make major impacts on selected human and animal/plant populations. A rapid 35-foot rise in ocean levels, a 10-degree increase in average temperatures, massive crop failures, and plagues is a sad way to recognize eventual threats. This immediately points to divorcing context from living and inorganic systems.
Weintraub mentioned “humanity’s range is global” and the escalating human population and climate change will indicate the necessity to expand humanity’s range of occupation. The expanded range will be other places far from the earth. But if our range, the earth, in the future becomes a place which human can not live on any more and they could find a place out of the earth to live, who can afford to move to that place? If the earth gets over populated, how many of us can survive and travel to the new place? There are numerous reasons for earth pollution but the big factories and industries are the most polluting sources and they still continue their activities in the earth. They're not only exhausting resources but encouraging us everyday to consume their products. We are surrounded with their advertisements and our lives is full of their products. They have the markets all around the world and by consuming their products we make them rich and rich while their make the earth poor and polluted. Finally, when the earth changes to the place in which human can’t live they will change their range and we still have this previous range and we will die with it .Then they won’t say “The world is our home”in their advertisements, they will say the world is your home.
DeleteThe writer points that eco art themes are relevant to “political politics, manufacturing protocols, lifestyle patterns, ethical quandaries, and cultural expression.” I think this connection is, in fact, a critical point in thinking about environmental destructions. In other words, politic, and culture are playing a significant role in shaping the environmental issues. For example, production and consumption are major factors for the development of the economy. At the same time, they can be the causes of many environmental problems.
DeleteTherefore, I think, any given response to the problem is necessarily involved with politics and culture. Addressing the relation between politics and culture is an important theme for eco-artists.
Raha, I agree with your point. As I said, the environmental issues seem to me incredibly complex. The problem is involved with power structures, politics, economic systems, etc.
DeleteThe idea of justice is another important concept that needs to be considered while thinking about the issue.
These days over consumption is benefiting some people but is harming some other people on the earth. And many of the provided solutions are also beneficial only for people.
Yes. I am saying as a human I am personally responsible for the earth's health. We need to be aware how our lifestyle affects the environment and be careful how the crap we usually purchase when the commercials encourage us to buy destroy the environment.
DeleteThe advertise manipulate our choices and spending habits while the big victims of this consumption habits are the earth and ourselves.
I also agree. In our own ways we must take responsibility for ecological choices. My greatest frustration in Lubbock is the unwieldy way of recycling. In most cities of this size, curbside pickup is offered, and virtually for free. In Colorado, we'd pay 17 cents a month for twice-monthly co-mingled recycling being picked up. A frustratingly ignorant TTU grad, Chad Hasty, who hosts a local conservative talk show in the Lubbock area boasted that he "recycles everything, it all goes back in the ground where it came from." This is where activism, and legislation can make big inroads into a problem. And once this becomes the expectation for good citizenship and stewardship of the Earth, instituting ways to make doing the ecologically correct thing almost automatically, makes sense. But this doesn't go far enough. Corporations need to drastically reduce their carbon footprint and recycle their own worn-out products wherever possible. And redesign them to avoid waste and pollution.
DeletePost marker.
DeleteIt's true, the earth's responsibility is no one else's but our own, I don't understand as well how Lubbock isn't as green as most places that understand the concept of ecology. I recycle as well, and I have to drive about 6 to 8 miles to my drop off location from my house. In my neighborhood, there isn't a recycling center or drop off location anywhere near my location.
DeleteWeintraub brings up multiple topics that stick to my mind and resonate with me, except I have never really had the opportunity to set my thoughts out in writing. Taking a closer look the most troublesome ones are Humans and Energy, and Life/Death/Extinction. What comes to mind when I hear Humans and Energy is the Dakota Pipeline. Weintraub explains, "Establishing efficient, nonpolluting, reliable, inexpensive, renewable, and sustainable energy generation remains an unfilled goal." (Weintraub, pg. 27). So many conflicting reports on DAPL and it's coverage, saddens me to see such injustice leaving the fight in the judicial system.
DeleteNaturally I wonder if we as a humans will cease to exist, "According to fossil records, only two to four percent of the species that have existed on Earth exist today." (Weintraub, pg. 28). Not a day goes by that I don't think of disease, and how the medical industry here in the United States is more of a business in which not all people are medically treated the same as those who can afford healthcare coverage.
Eco Art Aesthetics
ReplyDeleteWhat happens when art or learning about art is more than learning about beauty? The early part of the 20th century expanded notions of what art might be.
Remember elements and principles of art? Weintraub defines and describes nature's design efficiencies:
Multiplicity
Lines
Outlines-Borders
Lines: Tubes
Spirals
Progressions
Complexity & Chaos
Fractals
Scale
Dynamism
Stability/Flexibility
Systems
It's as if she has given me a more dynamic way to integrate making art/living/and nature. Is anyone else excited about these ways of organizing learning and thinking?
Specifically, for me, I like how Weintraub describes the histories of words and ways of thinking--under shapes for example; how we live in a "box" world mentality. Or earlier under outlines and borders--how calendars and time are human constructs. The way night falls and seasons change are so much more interesting and complex. I was at a College of Education meeting where a professor talked about how "to kill two birds with one stone." I wanted to shout back--that's a power-over mentality. I would have rather offered, "to feed two birds with one seed." Your take on this section?
I found this section to be the most intriguing so far but not for the reasons i would have expected. I would argue that addressing this section as aesthetics is not entirely accurate. As you have asked about he excitement of ways in which to organize learning and thinking I couldn't agree more that it is exciting and very useful. The problem is that I believe it should be stated as a constructive aesthetic and not necessarily a perceived realization. My reasoning is that by the end of this particular essay any element of every work of art ever created could be given an ecologic aesthetic interpretation and be reduced to these simple limiting categories. On the contrary they are very useful in approaching how one might create art and instilling in students how their work may reflect nature. I believe she should stop there though; as she begins to incorporate technological systems and fluidity of a mass media social network of sharing and exchange I believe this is sort of deconstruction of the strengths of the categories. Constructs are a human derivative and all forms of communication and technology has been built upon systems of constructs. It is impossible to escape these constructs that she is embracing therefore all work is nothing but these categorical points of eco-aesthetics. If everything is nothing but ecological aesthetics than it becomes virtually as empathically meaningless as our core principles and elements of design already are. Do not get me wrong that I appreciate these categories but for these reasons i believe this is why she should have stopped with them being constructive aesthetics. This gives more meaning to how an artist decides to create a piece instead of post impositions made upon the works.
DeleteIt is interesting for me the way she defines the nature's design efficiencies especially lines and shapes. Regarding her description on spirals shapes of nature and cubic design that human has made, I found that the same thing exists in the world of the sound. Humans invented mechanical units that produce square waves and now we have it as musical sound, machines' sound and environmental sound includes noises. However, they are the combination of various sound waves such as sine, square, sawtooth and triangle waves. These invented sound waves are used for humans purpose like the signal sound we have in monitoring machines in medicine. But the results of inventing these sound waves are not always helpful; they polluted the sound environment. The point is the man-made shapes like boxes, square, have changed the unity of nature. While the sphere suggests infinity, the box limits us and gives us a framework which limits our being in different dimensions.
Delete
DeleteWhat is art? What is good art? I think answers to such questions are relative. Thus, art and its role in the society changes in different cultural or historical contexts. Clearly, in the contemporary art, beauty and goodness are not only formal beauty but are highly rely upon the conceptual dimensions of artworks.
Form and content are not completely disconnected. Thus, I found Weintraub's notion of eco art aesthetics very impressive. This was because she builds a dynamic between formal elements and the meaning they can create regarding environmental themes. She examines how formal elements like repetition, complexity, chaos, etc. can embody concepts and expressions related to humans' ecosystem and the environment. In particular, I enjoyed reading her exploration of "Complexity and Chaos." I have never thought of a chaotic situation as a necessary condition for our nature. Also, I have never defined chaos as a state of affairs that are not understandable by the human mind. The contrast she makes between the eco aesthetic artists and some artists like Cezanne was a very helpful comparison to comprehend how eco-artists are developing a new definition of aesthetics.
I would go even farther and say that form and content are necessarily connected, even in conceptual art. The section on the necessity of chaos in Nature was refreshing. It reminds me, again, that one of the functions of society (versus culture) is to "explain" the chaos of Nature and thus try to contain or control it. If our planet had never experienced chaos in Nature, we wouldn't be here. Because of chaos in nature, dinosaurs went extinct (except the feathered ones who evolved into birds). Actually, chaos is a human term that implies a randomness that cannot be intellectually explained, and Nature does not have intellect, though it has patterns unto itself that we project terms like "chaos" and "brutal" on. Nature doesn't care about us whatsoever. We should care about it, though, but not through giving it anthropomorphic qualities that it never possessed.
DeletePost marker.
DeleteIt was interesting to read how Weintraub uses shapes, spheres and boxes in connection with seeds, eggs and the womb. The sphere somehow in some ways connects us all, yet as Weintraub puts it we are in a box right down to the grave. I never noticed how we as humans use mailbox, x-box etc. my favorite spot in my house, actually my work area where I read and try to catch up on LATE homework is in the bay window a little nook that is half a sphere located in the front of the house. It's the most comforting in spot in the house and now I can see the reason and connection why that is so.
DeleteEco Art Materials
ReplyDeleteThinking in these ways can radically alter how we might think about learning in schools and assessments as well. Not to say how art making in schools could be impacted.
I once took a non-art major class to a local park where we could do one or more of three things: create a temporary piece of art using what was available in the park and take a digital image of it; sit and draw and watercolor something in the park, or create and document digitally a performance piece. I was trying to rethink materials and what is available and also utilize the park as a natural classroom. I encouraged students to bring a friend, food, a blanket--whatever it took to feel comfortable. Overall, it was interesting that some couldn't manage the freedom--they were being trained to operate within the confines of a building. One of my points was that outside the school walls counts equally.
use existing
use discarded
use living
The above feels poetic to me. What about an assessment for an art lesson like:
Did we recycle? Reuse?
Did we create or use renewable energy?
Were any of our wastes beneficial?
What was the impact on people and ecosystems?
That's revolutionary thinking. Any thoughts?
It is almost depressing that the students you would bring to the park we be lost outside the structure of a classroom. when I think I the history of painting i think about how until the past few hundred years you were expected to make your own pigments and a lot of it you would forage on your own. I think about the origins of pigment names and traditional binders and wood paneling or linens used and wonder what made that become so much less as part of the art than it used to be. The idea of creation of art is not to simply make an image or work that is art but the process as well. The children struggling outside of the confinements of the room seems to me the entirely opposite end of the spectrum of old. I wonder if it is our teaching methods that need stop trying to make the classroom so accommodating and start calling it out for being the stifling restriction it truly is. You spoke before about us all being authors and I wonder if there is something there that we can utilize to better help the kids. I we have our children explore the world they have around them everyday at home, to and from school, and anywhere else they may be we can have them write these things down and share them. The collective mind that we may all learn form each other is something I find so interesting in this day and age. Imagine if we all created our work from reused, recycled and re-purposed goods in a variety of ways but could share ideas through social media with ease. It seems to me that we may want to really reconsider the supplies from the get go. Would it be so radical to return to art being a process encompassing from the gathering of the supplies through creation? I wonder what things our children could learn then?
DeleteRegarding artistic mediums and materials, I think using recycled objects or existing materials is fascinating. This is because such materials automatically and naturally convey environmental concerns. A few years ago, I saw an installation made by plastic bags that an artist collected from the streets in Philadelphia. The installation was fantastic for different reasons. Using plastic bags as the material of creating the artwork was the vital aspect of the work for me. The artist was calling my attention to over consumption of plastics in the environment. He also transformed the function of plastic into the artistic material, which was a reference to the importance of recycling in our contemporary world.
DeleteAccordingly, I think artistic material plays a significant role in conveying a massage or expression to the audience in general and in the eco-art in particular.
"The idea of the creation of art is not to simply make an image or work that is art but the process as well." Marc, I think this is a wonderful sentence. Especially, for teachers.
DeleteEco- art can remind us, as art teachers, art is not only about creating beauty, but it should evoke change and transformation of ideas and culture in our society.
However, I think the idea of making and using materials in the past is remarkably different from how we perceived materials and medium these days. Materials after 20 century are not merely thought of means for creating an image, as old masters approached. Materials and mediums can carry conceptual and aesthetics values and experiences in nature. Thus, as teachers, it is necessary for us to engage students with the theoretical dimensions attached to the materials they use.
Mac Watson, You are right the creation of art is both making artwork and the process of creating. I think these days although children have bombarded with the bewildering variety of ideas, items, and experiences, they hesitate to practice something new, something that they themselves need to find it. Because they have learned to do things that everyday life recommends to them in various ways. They have found the process of making art differently like learning and making art in the classroom but providing a new idea with a new process is hard for them.
DeleteRaha I wonder if this is due to an overwhelming criticism of bias perspectives on how things should be done as opposed to the celebration of diversity. Culturally it seems the nation is fighting this war while other countries seem to lie on either end of this spectrum. Canada nationally upholds diversity and welcomes multi faceted approaches while we see a lot of Europe strongly holding onto to specific views from country to country. Some of them are starting to see the same debate because of it but I believe it is hard for strong willed bias natures to see the effect the politics are having on childhood development. I also wonder how much we can make a difference in undoing some of that damage in a years time. It is difficult to imagine a world in which we raise new artists to create what they are told and follow guidelines to obey as told. Is that even art anymore?
DeleteNillofar, while I agree that times are vastly different I do believe that the supplies we offer and examples can be a bit restrictive to have students believe that to create they must use store purchased supplies that reflect the classroom sets or other examples of how you may do it. I am simply stating that materials from around their environment of any kind can be seen as potential instead of the limitations. My fiance is looking at a potential job in Detroit and we were talking about the situations of schools up their and the economic divides. I am familiar with a lot of the street art in the region and am fascinated with how the environment becomes canvas, medium, and process. I have seen images done with used motor oil on concrete. So you are right that we must engage the ideas of why the use the materials they use and it would seem to me that takes more than reading a paragraph in a book in the confines of a classroom.
DeleteWhat I have observed in children is different than some of the other posts. Children, more and more, are directed to "the right answers" and their critical thinking skills have been stunted. Googling for solutions produces replicas, not new forms or concepts.
DeleteAs far as art material choices go, I agree that we have a legal duty to protect students from harmful art materials. But some of our safety protocols are out of whack. Safety is often invoked as an excuse to avoid challenging teachers, staff, and even students. Case in point: in the Annex Woodshed is a remarkable compound miter saw that is NEVER used for compound cuts. Why" "Safety" concerns. Baloney! It's that it takes more time to reset and recalibrate the saw after it is used. If students are taught how to do that, it is a very useful tool being used for what it was designed.
Post marker.
DeleteFootprints
ReplyDeleteEcological Materialism
Enchantment: one's nerves turned up and recharged.
Prudence: good judgment in practical matters.
Your thoughts on these two concepts: enchantment and prudence.
The observation of enchantment is a fine point however I feel the response to predictive creation as simply the solution of multi sensory perception seems to simply just add a layer to what is already there by making demanding interpretations be more sensationally complex. To me this is just a bandaid fix to the inherent problems and is not a solution by any means. This effort to extend life into the mundane is attempt that doesnt last long before being seen through. The prudent aspect of ecological materialism seems more of an actual reconsideration of what is presented. The idea of it being added criteria for assessment I feel seems to take a good idea of creative process and attempts to reduce it to a measurable device of sizeable merit. This in itself I believe is incredibly short sided. While the approach to art work can have dramatic effects to the meaning I feel there is an over analysis of the process to judge merit. Would we judge the work of an eco-artist differently if we knew they had McDonalds for lunch? Certainly we can build a case for sincerity in ecological positioning and the authentic expression of the artist but is that really anything in the work of art itself or are we getting way to carried away in the over analysis that we being way too critical with attempts to discredit or definitively endorse something?
DeleteComplexity may be required in certain creative endeavors, but the elegance of simple solutions is breath-taking. I see complexity for its own sake as a way to hide the fact that an elegant solution was not found.
DeletePost marker.
DeleteDAVID:
ReplyDeleteWeintraub enthralls me and confounds me. Going backwards through this week's reading, I can't help but cringe at some statements and celebrate others.
Cringes- 1) Boxes. Humans think they are so smart that they invented squares. Nature understands that squares are inherently unstable and virtually ignores them in its own designs, even in crystals. Triangles, spheres, spiraled, circles, are the norm. Add complexity and you have anti-boxes. As far as I can see, the advantage of boxes is that they stack nicely. The 19th-century elite traveler bought boxes with humped lids for steamer trunks, because you couldn't stack other boxes on them so they were taken off of ships and trains first.
2) Lines. Don't exist physically, just mathematically. Humans use them to define borders (property, and contour drawings. Neither exists in Nature. Never say "thinking outside the box." Say "What box?"
3) Things listed that reduce Cultural Diversity- pg.29- all are driven by profit economies.
4) Ecological Art Materialism- pg.45- the primary reason for art is to express the self? Maybe, but the driver with road rage is expressing themselves, and most Tweets (a travesty of late). There is more to art than this over-simplified idea, like accomplishment, epiphanies, service, sanity.
Celebrating: Biodiversity. The 1987 proposal by geographers Frank & Deborah Popper for a “Buffalo Commons” would return 139,000 sq. miles of American mid-western land into its pre-colonial condition. Great idea, but not for capitalism's short-term goals. Their proposal would return all non-urban lands in this area to Prarie grasslands. Dwindling communities move to places where they could thrive. Buffalo would become a source of protein through regulated culling of these herbivores living completely off of the natural land. Agribusinesses would retreat and quit growing subsidized genetically-modified plant material that can’t be sustained naturally. Other animals return to their ecological niches. (http://www.resilience.org/stories/2012-06-21/buffalo-commons-redefining-how-we-think-about-place-politics-and-policy/). Surprisingly, this unpopular proposal is gradually happening through Native American practices and economic forces.
2) Carrying Capacity. In the 1920's a Nobel Prize winning scientist calculated that the Earth's natural nitrogen-producing ecosystems, vital to growing food, would be outstripped by population growth by 1950. (read The Omnivore's Dilemma). We have exceeded this natural capacity. Since then, humans have been living on petroleum fertilizers which keeps nearly 1/4 of our species from starving.
3) Eco Art Materials. This is the first time I have read what artists learned the hard way; Reactive vs. Non-reactive materials. Can't mix pigments with all binders or they will harm you, change color, become unstable/useless.
4) Eco Art Materials, Cont’d: Never thought I’d be saying this, but image-makers who want to be really eco-responsible should maybe consider becoming tattoo artists! The pigments are principally minerals. Iron oxide (rust) for black, and other minerals for colors. Applied to our bodies, they return to the Earth when we die. Your body art will last your lifetime. If it’s great, it will reappear on another person. The “Iceman’s” 61 tattoos were applied around 3,250 BC, just 5,000 years after the earliest agriculture (which lead humans on an inevitable path towards impacting the environment). This may be my best rationale for tattoos since the movie “Memento.” And even though it would be really hard on me, having been trained by conceptual artists who had plans for their art to last from seconds to centuries, maybe the idea of art lasting longer than one’s lifetime is something we will need to embrace, especially in an age of digital communication.
Of course, we could use other eco art methods which we will surely study soon.
The idea of the lasting art and tattoos I find is a very beautifully faceted discussion. I myself half a number of tattoos and ironically i feel most of work will never last as long as the image that is on my flesh. While the digital age lets stuff float seemingly protected for and endless period I can also account for much of my work being lost to digital mishaps or format limitations. I did a lot of early animation back in the mid 90s on an IBM compatible. I had the files saved on a 3.5 inch floppy for years looking for ways to migrate them back to me, (mind you this was the era that the internet was still mainly text based and by no means was totally public yet). I moved forward and by the time it became easier to migrate files the degradation of magnetic imprint left the files corrupted. We still are limited today although it seems as long as we are backed up in several areas it is fine but lets be honest, all it would take is one piece of legislation to end cloud computing and an E.M.P. or just a bad hard drive failure day and it all could be lost. The difference i think here is how the hand becomes an important factor in the piece and the minerals of it all mean something beyond the image representation. I have a tattoo that the ink used for it is actually the ink I have used to create my first book. It was important to me that the ink be not off the shelf tattoo ink but that which came from my pen to create work. It became a collaborative piece with myself, the tattooist, and the ink we both use to create images that will express a piece of our soul. It has been a while since i thought about that so I am very glad you brought this up.
DeleteThe digital age is not about archiving. Far from it. It is inherently fragile. Books are better for keeping information around for long periods of time. I have a few books (I don't collect them) that are several hundred years old. Data on an ordinary CD is expected to last 7-8 years (so why did I give away my vinyl records?). I expect a catastrophic failure of the "Cloud" in my lifetime, with much more wisdom lost than the burning of the great library in Alexandria millennia ago had. And Silicon Valley executives are so well aware of the fragility of digital systems, that they are becoming the new survivalists: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/30/doomsday-prep-for-the-super-rich
DeleteI mention reactive and non-reactive materials, previously. Most students think that pigment colors come from organic sources, when the opposite is true. And blue is such a difficult pigment to obtain, that it typically takes a civilization 800 years to create blue paint. Only then does the word "blue" become a part of their language. For some time it was speculated that the ancient Greeks were all colorblind because the only colors mentioned in their texts were black, red, and white. But this turned out to be the case for all civilizations (it wasn't colorblindness). Black comes from carbon (burned bone, ivory, etc.), red and white come from clays. A very interesting phenomenon has to do with how language affects perception of color: https://vimeo.com/120808489
ReplyDeleteI thought I would share this video of recent scientific success stories that are largely cheers for the ecominded. Enjoy https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1558339554193856&id=206936646000827
ReplyDeletePost marker.
ReplyDeletePlease forgive my lack of perspective from a teaching standpoint, from a feminist/humanist perspective I can appreciate Weintraub's message to eco artists when she gives a laundry list of examples to support manufactured reformed materials. If we lack in the resources given to us through the use of recycled materials what example are we leaving for the next generation? Just some thoughts that were crossing my mind as I was looking over the material.
ReplyDelete