I've reached a turning point in my creative practice and I'm confused about where to go next (you might want to read more about this over in a little hummingbird land). Reduce, reuse, recycle and educate is a mantra I've adopted in most areas of my life - transport, food consumption, communal living etc... Yet when it comes to art, I'm full of contradictions: I often use chemically-based paints on newly-acquired sweatshop-made canvasses; I'm creating material objects that people can add to their collection of consumerables
So what does it mean to make environmentallly sustainable creative work? Is it simply about the material we use? Or is it about artistic intention?
Jules, Rhi and I over the next few hours will chat online about our ideas on the function of art and their relation to environmental sustainability. Feel free join in with us!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
Hello!
Damnit, I just lost my last post so here’s a reconstruction:
Despite the fact that I think I suggested this topic a week ago I’m not sure exactly how to progress – so I’ll start by making a few very basic thoughts.
1. My ideal lifestyle is one in which I make art that is widely disseminated among others. Therefore, whilst I believe in maintaining an environmentally responsible lifestyle to me it is simply a means to an end, so I probably wouldn’t make art that is ‘about’ being sustainable. It’s just a byproduct of the bigger picture - having fun and making stuff.
2. I try to take a very broad view of the idea of ‘consuming’. We consume stuff every day – food, water, air, shelter, conversation, ideas. Exchanging things is a fundamental part of being human. So I have no problem with selling, buying, exchanging things.
3. I love the idea that humans can have a creative interaction with their environments, just as other animals do, so I am quite excited by the idea of ‘development’. I wonder where that leaves me in this discussion.
Over to you!
Julian
So do you think Dan's hypocritical if she uses stuff in her art that's damaging to the environment?
Not that I'm pointing a finger - I'm full of similar contradictions.
But all of us revere art above the everyday - as something that is not only fun, but something that is a crucial part of our humanity.
Does this make it okay to draw different boundarites around what we would and wouldn't do for art compared to our everyday lives?
Well, I believe that art should be a rule-free zone (as in 'set rules' that need abiding by everyone) so I would possibly do whatever was necessary in my art to get my point across. I would hesitate with illegal things because I'm a bit of a scaredy cat and relatively realist but I'd defnitely cross my own boundaries if it came to it.
We've been talking about making our song-cycle-thingie vegan, so translating actual meals that prisoners have ordered into vegan-friendly alternatives. I feel uncomfortable with that because it feels like we are compromising and making the work a bit weaker. Although at the same time I can see that it's making a strong personal stance.
I can also see that yes Dan is being hypocritical if she uses environmentally unfriendly products.
Rhi: I'm interested in what you say about 'revering art above the everyday'. Does creative work sit at a necessary distance from 'life' so that it can observe, comment and challenge. Art as the critic. Or can creative work integrate smoothly into society?
If, for example, I create a giant vegan meal for friends. Can I then turn around and call that art? Is there really any difference between this kind of creative pursuit and a painting I might create? Perhaps, for me, art is anything you want it to be. So I'm really interested in ways I can integrate art with the everyday. A good example of this is an artist you spoke at a workshop on 'art and activism' at the 'This is Not art' festival last year. She runs a knitting group for activists in NZ. Artists come together and talk about art and create woolly objects. She refers to this process as art...
Jules: I agree that 'consuming' generally takes on quite a broad meaning. But I believe we as a society need to be conscious of consuming in a way that is environmental sustainable. Even the way we consume water, air, shelter and conversations can be damaging. So I think it's really important to be finding new ways to adopt 'eco-logic' in the way we consume
I agree that I'm being hypocrtical as well! So I'm looking for ways to change this. eg. making my own canvasses from recycled material. using naturally produced paints.
In this instance, this is a case of ensuring the materials I use are environmentally friendly. I'm not making any comment about environmentally sustainability within the art work. But I am making a statement about environmentalism in my process. They are two different things...
Yeah - I'm not entirely sure where I stand on the vegan meal thing.
I would definitely hesitate to cook meat for others, but my first thought was that I wanted to make the most impact...
Part of it for me is about what you are hoping to achieve - the intention of the artwork.
What if, for instance, by using meat, or specially bought plastic bags, or brand label T-Shirts you might make people stop and think about sustainable eating, or waste and consumerism?
Jules: I also believe in art being a 'rule free' zone. And I would also try to do what ever I can to get my point across... but only to a point because of the lifestyle choices I've made. For example, I wouldn't ever kill a bunch of animals and exhibit them to make a point about veganism. it would go against my value system.
I think there are two different issues here. One is the intentions we try to communicate within the art work. And then there is the approaches to the art work. I really think that artists need to start thinking about they way that they approach their creative work, in the same way that I think that people need to start thinking (and acting!) about the way they approach food consumption. Both of these activities are damaging the earth and drawing heavily on its limited resources.
From this perspective it isn't about trying to overtly 'educate' people through your art, but it is about being more conscious of your personal impact.
I've always thought of art as a being pretty broad and flexible term, so yes I think art can be anything. In a way the word 'art' is sort of a verb, a way of seeing things. You can 'art' a meal by naming it as such.
I do like art where it matches perfectly with the artist's belief about life. I liked Andy Warhol for instance because there was very little division between himself and his art. I distrust artists who proclaim to be about one thing but their lifestyle is completely different. Perhaps this is why I am suspicious about Arthur Boyd - he was always painting the rugged Australian landscape but lived on the most genteel farm in NSW and chose to keep living in the UK for years on end. What were his actual values?
Then again I also like art that abides by its own principles and nothing else. I don't enjoy being naked in public, but if I thought of a piece that demanded nakedness then I'd feel a compulsion to have to respect that despite my personal feelings. Perhaps if you think the idea is strong enough then it comes to BE a personal value (eg I mustn't mind being naked if I quite like the artwork's idea).
So I'm a bit torn on the sustainability thing.
Rhi: your point about buying shopping bags or sweat shop shirts is an interesting one. But in such an instance, couldn't you just source second hand items? That way you are able to make your point about consumerism, waste etc. and in the process of making the artwork you aren't then contributing even more to the problem.
It comes back to your original quesiton. Am I (we, you, they) being contradictive if the artwork uses unsustainable products within the art work. I think it is.
So going back to our dinner party project, I wouldn't want to use any products that contribute to issues of waste and environmental damage. I wouldn't cook meat. It isn't about wanting to send out a message on veganism. It isn't about the artwork's intentions. It's about my approach to life. I don't cook meat in everyday life or buy new products, so why would I do that in the name of art? Especially if there are easy alternatives. I want consistency in my life.
Jules: so does that mean you aren't coming swimming with us this arvo?
So does this mean you've been conducting an artwork over the last week?
Your enjoyment was so realistic!
Hey Dan,
1. What if I cooked meat in the project? And the project isn't really about vegetarianism, or vegetarian prisoners - unless we change the topic, surely?
2. RE: sweat-shop canvases, it's quite easy to make your own canvases. I used to do it as a kid, you just need to buy wood and cotton and primer and glue. Far far cheaper and more versatile too. But I wonder if cotton is a pretty environmentally unfriendly material - it uses so much water to grow.
Jules: Yeah, that's exactly what I mean. Matching artwork with lifestyle . And I agree about the Arthur Boyd thing. I've found it quite odd being a part of an English country side for the last two weeks. It's a strange contradiction...
re: nakedness and fluidity of values. I agree that values are fluid concepts. But for me their are clear boundaries. I wouldn't create art that damages other being. Cooking meat, as far as I'm concerned, damages other beings. So I wouldn't incorporate this into an art work.
And what if we just cooked a little bit of meat? I reckon that if the world simply cut down on its meat consumption the environment would be so much healthier. Wouldn't that make a big difference?
Are we meant to be skinny dipping this arvo? I'm way too self-conscious of my body! I need a t-shirt and shorts at least.
You cooking? But I didn't think you did that sort of thing... ;-)
I still wouldn't feel comfortable putting my name to something that harmed animals during its making. So it makes no difference to me who does the actual cooking.
on making canvasses: yeah, cotton isn't so good. But there's bound to be places that I can find recycled material to use. And Rhi and I were looking at some paintings in the Boyd Collection the other and found some interesting ideas. One AIR had recycled ringbound folders to use as canvasses. There's lots of options. I often use bits of old wood as well...
but maybe you can show me how to build a canvass! That would be awesome...
Dan: But buying second hand things is kind of missing the point - yup this would be possible and applaudable - but what if the artwork required something that couldn't be sourced this way?
What if the crossing boundaries you wouldn't in life enabled you to make a more powerful comment?
I'm not sure whether making a comment on issues of sustainability is so important for Jules in his art, but it certainly seems to be for you...
A random example - juxtaposing dumpster food with identical items bought from Coles in Lane Cove (along with dockets and including a can of meat) with food from a supermarket in Airds?
Damn, all this talk about meat is making me hungry! I think I need to reconvene up at the house for a hearty slap-up lunch. Vego of course. Ladies??
are there other types of swimming besides skinny dipping?
Anyway, we aren't allowed to swim at Bundanon...so of course we'll only be conceptually swimming. Perhaps you won't feel so self conscious after all...
I just realised the last comment I wrote never got posted... dammit...
I'll try and rehash what I wrote in response to Rhi's last comment...
Basically, it comes down to weighing up the options. Making art occurs within my life, not outside of it. So I'm feeling the need to go through the same decision making process when I create something. So at each point along the way I stop and evaluate the options. So since we're using the example of meat: if I had to choose between making a piece of art that uses meat or not making the piece of art I'd choose not to make the piece of art. But if the point I wanted to make necessitated meat to be in the work of art then I'd look for other alternatives: road kill, dumpstered meat or perhaps there are other options again. A good example is the film 'a zed and two noughts' the director waited two years for a zebra to die naturally in a zoo so that he could then film it decaying....
so for me it is about constantly weighing up options at each point. it's too fluid a concept to be able to give a hard answer...
But I have a question back at you guys...
Thinking more along the lines of artistic intention: what do you want to achieve with your creative work? What, if any, messages are you trying to send to your audience?
For me, I want my life to inspire, challenge, motivate and empower those around me. So creative work is a really powerful tool in which to achieve that... (though it isn't the only reason I make art)
you?
Post a Comment