How Do People/ecological artists Respond to Urgency?
How Do People Respond to Urgency?
WEEK IN REVIEW April 23, 2006Meltdown: Yelling 'Fire' on a Hot Planet By ANDREW C. REVKIN: is global warming now a reality? What do scientists know for sure and when are they just guessing?
http://tinyurl.com/hq9l9
Revkin poses a very serious question in this article which was also addressed last year by the article, Is Environmentalism Dead? The latter posited that people go numb in response to fear as a strategy. But what if the fear is legitimate, timely, requires our responses, as, with global warming?
These questions relate to ecological art making because they inform the dramatic framing of work that is in a viewed by the public.
So, how can we have to find a way to help people get past the numbness of urgent calls for dramatic action and not let them avert themselves from truth. O but maybe that sounds too holy & self-righteous, doesn't it?Philosophically, I have always held the position that it is a good thing to be vulnerable, talk about fears and concerns and explore anxieties. In art we do this by getting someone in the face with ideas and experiences. This is an assertive pose. It is arguably also both a Feminist and psychologically based position.
But for many people, there is nothing scarier. Vulnerability, emotion, exposition of fear and anxiety can evokes feelings of helplessness, powerlessness, even deep memories from childhood in the listener. They just want the scary stuff to go away. Esp if it is in their face.
Feminism believed that people would respond with a sense of justice deferred to an exposition of issues. Many of us believed that if we spoke to issues of child care, for example, men would see how they were missing something by not participating more fully. Some did respond that way. Others had a fight or flight response. Many seem stuck there. The same dynamic is at play with global warming.
But fight or flight is not always possible or desirable even when we feel fear. When we avert our eyes from danger or pain it tends to get bigger. This is true on every level of life I have ever observed. It is certainly true of global warming. Arthur Miller, in the Crucible, wrote of that fear and ultimate capitulation to inevitability. In the original play, Marilyn Monroe dreams of the scary child-monster she tries to escape. When she finally turns and embraces it, she finds out it is herself.
We can address global warming. Yes the actions needed are dramatic. They can be broken down into manageable part. Ecological art can be part of that process. Thus we make our internal urgency match the external pressure. Science addresses the dynamics of dealing with complex problems differently than art.
Peter Taylor, Australian author of "Unruly Complexity" (Univ Chicago Press 2005) addresses the interface between internal and external dynamics as a scientific modeling problem. The publisher describes his book as " How does science deal with situations that lack definite boundaries, where what goes on "outside" continually restructures what is "inside," and where diverse processes come together to produce change?"
We have birthed global warming and we must turn and face this monster we have created. But how exactly do you convince people it is safe to do that? How to invert the relationship between internal fear and external aversion that can result in necessary change?
If there is part of me that is pollyanna, it is in foolishly thinking I can "help people see the light" of my point of view: If I give enuf important facts, clear reasoning, compassion for their worries, they will be willing to be open, vulnerable, trusting of life, new ideas. That is not always true. But I have seen people change opinions and positions about critical problems, with or without my help over time.
As an ecological artist my first task is to accept my own sense of informed urgency. And then express it.
In my installation for Exit Art, http://www.exitart.org/ I painted a large mural of how Arctic Melt will come down thru the waterways and the Atlantic and flood the building where The Drop show is being exhibited. In the center of the mural, I outlined what has to happen to make the building safe, extending out to the surrounding blocks. It included tearing up all the impervious traffic surfaces and replacing them with indigenous plants and sheathing the building with green. I don’t expect this to manifest imminently.
The biggest problem I see is that we don't have the luxury and kindness of time. So for the sake of my own sanity, I shall continue to do what I normally do. That is, trying to articulate the problems in my work and my thinking. I shall continue to find colleagues of like mind. I shall cast my personal fate to the winds of the universe and rejoice every time someone is willing to pay attention to these issues, as Revkin demands.
WEEK IN REVIEW April 23, 2006Meltdown: Yelling 'Fire' on a Hot Planet By ANDREW C. REVKIN: is global warming now a reality? What do scientists know for sure and when are they just guessing?
http://tinyurl.com/hq9l9
Revkin poses a very serious question in this article which was also addressed last year by the article, Is Environmentalism Dead? The latter posited that people go numb in response to fear as a strategy. But what if the fear is legitimate, timely, requires our responses, as, with global warming?
These questions relate to ecological art making because they inform the dramatic framing of work that is in a viewed by the public.
So, how can we have to find a way to help people get past the numbness of urgent calls for dramatic action and not let them avert themselves from truth. O but maybe that sounds too holy & self-righteous, doesn't it?Philosophically, I have always held the position that it is a good thing to be vulnerable, talk about fears and concerns and explore anxieties. In art we do this by getting someone in the face with ideas and experiences. This is an assertive pose. It is arguably also both a Feminist and psychologically based position.
But for many people, there is nothing scarier. Vulnerability, emotion, exposition of fear and anxiety can evokes feelings of helplessness, powerlessness, even deep memories from childhood in the listener. They just want the scary stuff to go away. Esp if it is in their face.
Feminism believed that people would respond with a sense of justice deferred to an exposition of issues. Many of us believed that if we spoke to issues of child care, for example, men would see how they were missing something by not participating more fully. Some did respond that way. Others had a fight or flight response. Many seem stuck there. The same dynamic is at play with global warming.
But fight or flight is not always possible or desirable even when we feel fear. When we avert our eyes from danger or pain it tends to get bigger. This is true on every level of life I have ever observed. It is certainly true of global warming. Arthur Miller, in the Crucible, wrote of that fear and ultimate capitulation to inevitability. In the original play, Marilyn Monroe dreams of the scary child-monster she tries to escape. When she finally turns and embraces it, she finds out it is herself.
We can address global warming. Yes the actions needed are dramatic. They can be broken down into manageable part. Ecological art can be part of that process. Thus we make our internal urgency match the external pressure. Science addresses the dynamics of dealing with complex problems differently than art.
Peter Taylor, Australian author of "Unruly Complexity" (Univ Chicago Press 2005) addresses the interface between internal and external dynamics as a scientific modeling problem. The publisher describes his book as " How does science deal with situations that lack definite boundaries, where what goes on "outside" continually restructures what is "inside," and where diverse processes come together to produce change?"
We have birthed global warming and we must turn and face this monster we have created. But how exactly do you convince people it is safe to do that? How to invert the relationship between internal fear and external aversion that can result in necessary change?
If there is part of me that is pollyanna, it is in foolishly thinking I can "help people see the light" of my point of view: If I give enuf important facts, clear reasoning, compassion for their worries, they will be willing to be open, vulnerable, trusting of life, new ideas. That is not always true. But I have seen people change opinions and positions about critical problems, with or without my help over time.
As an ecological artist my first task is to accept my own sense of informed urgency. And then express it.
In my installation for Exit Art, http://www.exitart.org/ I painted a large mural of how Arctic Melt will come down thru the waterways and the Atlantic and flood the building where The Drop show is being exhibited. In the center of the mural, I outlined what has to happen to make the building safe, extending out to the surrounding blocks. It included tearing up all the impervious traffic surfaces and replacing them with indigenous plants and sheathing the building with green. I don’t expect this to manifest imminently.
The biggest problem I see is that we don't have the luxury and kindness of time. So for the sake of my own sanity, I shall continue to do what I normally do. That is, trying to articulate the problems in my work and my thinking. I shall continue to find colleagues of like mind. I shall cast my personal fate to the winds of the universe and rejoice every time someone is willing to pay attention to these issues, as Revkin demands.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home