Environmental ART V CARBON FOOTPRINTS Online Art Gallery
Calling for artists to Express their thoughts in their work on the environment
art and climate change
I recently wrote an article about Climate Change. that was published in AN magazine.
Following this I was asked to write an article for Welsh Art Now.
both articles are included below. ( in their original form).
Climate change
The media is awash with commentary about ‘climate change’, a serious issue that of course affects every one of us. Some have been expressing these environmental concerns for many years but it is only now that these ideas are being taken seriously. But how is the art world dealing with these issues?
I recently responded to several exhibition opportunities that displayed a concern for climate change, not because my work deals directly with it in a narrative sort of way, but because the methods through which I make work have a relevance to these issues. Much of my work uses the detritus from consumer society, thus through recycling comment is made.
One call came from a gallery in the USA, for an exhibition titled ‘Sublime Climate’. I made contact with the gallery and simply sent a link to my website, the gallery responded with an invite to participate. Even just travelling to the gallery and working onsite would result in a trail of carbon footprints across the Atlantic – something approaching 100 tons of Carbon dioxide are produced by each transatlantic flight. Could I justify this within the terms of an exhibition about climate change? When compared with the recent world conference in Bali which saw world leaders and other luminaries – many of whom arrived by private jet – gathering to discuss the need to reduce the causes of climate change I would be treading lightly, ultimately I considered even my slight imprint too much.
The upshot is that I will be web-streaming images of an installation in The Gallery, New College, Nottingham, to be projected into the gallery in USA. The development of the installation will be conducted with students from Nottingham, shadowed by students in Massachusetts. The materials used will be redundant technology machines, these having a commonality on both sides of the Atlantic. The students will swap instructions as they solve the many problems encountered in reducing a computer or other new technology machine down to its constituent components. At the end there will be a competitive element as each place strives to recycle the most stuff – in a previous exhibition in Canada 95% by weight of 100-plus dismantled machines was recycled.
This entire project has used the minimum of materials; no letters have exchanged hands, no images have been sent on disposable CD and no materials will have moved further than a couple of miles. The equipment will be sourced from within the respective institutions and thus the only shift of material will be when it is recycled after the exhibition.
This is in stark contrast to another climate change exhibition here in Britain. I received the info online (so far so good), wrote the proposal and submitted it online with a link to my website, only to be asked to submit hardcopy. I refused and pointed out that this would result in approximately ten printed pages and a CD, plus envelope, and that even if only fifty artists made similar applications this would result in a whole ream of paper and a full fifty-pack of plastic CDs, used once and chucked away. I was not successful on this occasion, whether this was due to my ‘attitude’ or because there was a more suitable proposal I will never know.
For a project relating to rising sea levels (a public artwork situated on new flood defence walls). I offered a temporary interactive community-based project but I was informed that they thought that the work was “too political” and could mislead people into thinking that these flood defence walls were “climate change proof”. The latter was a good point but “too political”? I am not sure if the destruction of our planet through the avarice of consumer society is something that can be differentiated as mere “politics”.
How many ‘climate change exhibitions’, or ‘recycled material exhibitions’ are mere lip-service to these issues – galleries jumping onto a bandwagon without making any attempt to change their methods of assessment? Perhaps this is indicative of the current attitude: ”environmentalism is something that others do”. A denial of responsibility a refusal to acknowledge personal contributions to the problem?
It is routine practice to send non returnable applications often with a CD material that is either filed but most often thrown away. Apply this to the hundreds of calls for submissions as seen in the pages of a-n Magazine and we suddenly realise that something needs to change.
I have not survey of attitudes towards climate change within the microcosm that is the art world. However I do know that many artists already work within a materially minimal manner, often through necessity rather than for ideological reasons: The use of the found object, appropiation etc. What I am seeing is an increasing number of artist-run organisations limit their submission procedure to online materials thus doing away with huge amounts of materials and cutting down on administration time and expenses. Hopefully galleries and other arts organisations will follow this lead and thus reduce the amount of paper and other stuff that passes through their hands.
Welsh Art Now.
Climate change
The media is awash with commentary about ‘climate change’, a serious issue that of course affects every one of us. Some have been expressing these environmental concerns for many years but it is only now that these ideas are being taken seriously. But how is the art world dealing with these issues?
I recently responded to several exhibition opportunities that displayed a concern for climate change, not because my work deals directly with it in a narrative sort of way, but because the methods through which I make work have a relevance to these issues. Much of my work uses the detritus from consumer society, thus through recycling comment is made.
One call came from a gallery in the USA, for an exhibition titled ‘Sublime Climate’. I made contact with the gallery and simply sent a link to my website, the gallery responded with an invite to participate. Even just travelling to the gallery and working onsite would result in a trail of carbon footprints across the Atlantic – something approaching 100 tons of Carbon dioxide are produced by each transatlantic flight. Could I justify this within the terms of an exhibition about climate change? When compared with the recent world conference in Bali which saw world leaders and other luminaries – many of whom arrived by private jet – gathering to discuss the need to reduce the causes of climate change I would be treading lightly, ultimately I considered even my slight imprint too much.
The upshot is that I will be web-streaming images of an installation in The Gallery, New College, Nottingham, to be projected into the gallery in USA. The development of the installation will be conducted with students from Nottingham, shadowed by students in Massachusetts. The materials used will be redundant technology machines, these having a commonality on both sides of the Atlantic. The students will swap instructions as they solve the many problems encountered in reducing a computer or other new technology machine down to its constituent components. At the end there will be a competitive element as each place strives to recycle the most stuff – in a previous exhibition in Canada 95% by weight of 100-plus dismantled machines was recycled.
This entire project has used the minimum of materials; no letters have exchanged hands, no images have been sent on disposable CD and no materials will have moved further than a couple of miles. The equipment will be sourced from within the respective institutions and thus the only shift of material will be when it is recycled after the exhibition.
This is in stark contrast to another climate change exhibition here in Britain. I received the info online (so far so good), wrote the proposal and submitted it online with a link to my website, only to be asked to submit hardcopy. I refused and pointed out that this would result in approximately ten printed pages and a CD, plus envelope, and that even if only fifty artists made similar applications this would result in a whole ream of paper and a full fifty-pack of plastic CDs, used once and chucked away. I was not successful on this occasion, whether this was due to my ‘attitude’ or because there was a more suitable proposal I will never know.
For a project relating to rising sea levels (a public artwork situated on new flood defence walls). I offered a temporary interactive community-based project but I was informed that they thought that the work was “too political” and could mislead people into thinking that these flood defence walls were “climate change proof”. The latter was a good point but “too political”? I am not sure if the destruction of our planet through the avarice of consumer society is something that can be differentiated as mere “politics”.
How many ‘climate change exhibitions’, or ‘recycled material exhibitions’ are mere lip-service to these issues – galleries jumping onto a bandwagon without making any attempt to change their methods of assessment? Perhaps this is indicative of the current attitude: ”environmentalism is something that others do”. A denial of responsibility a refusal to acknowledge personal contributions to the problem?
It is routine practice to send non returnable applications often with a CD material that is either filed but most often thrown away. Apply this to the hundreds of calls for submissions as seen in the pages of a-n Magazine and we suddenly realise that something needs to change.
I have not survey of attitudes towards climate change within the microcosm that is the art world. However I do know that many artists already work within a materially minimal manner, often through necessity rather than for ideological reasons: The use of the found object, appropiation etc. What I am seeing is an increasing number of artist-run organisations limit their submission procedure to online materials thus doing away with huge amounts of materials and cutting down on administration time and expenses. Hopefully galleries and other arts organisations will follow this lead and thus reduce the amount of paper and other stuff that passes through their hands.
Following this I was asked to write an article for Welsh Art Now.
both articles are included below. ( in their original form).
Climate change
The media is awash with commentary about ‘climate change’, a serious issue that of course affects every one of us. Some have been expressing these environmental concerns for many years but it is only now that these ideas are being taken seriously. But how is the art world dealing with these issues?
I recently responded to several exhibition opportunities that displayed a concern for climate change, not because my work deals directly with it in a narrative sort of way, but because the methods through which I make work have a relevance to these issues. Much of my work uses the detritus from consumer society, thus through recycling comment is made.
One call came from a gallery in the USA, for an exhibition titled ‘Sublime Climate’. I made contact with the gallery and simply sent a link to my website, the gallery responded with an invite to participate. Even just travelling to the gallery and working onsite would result in a trail of carbon footprints across the Atlantic – something approaching 100 tons of Carbon dioxide are produced by each transatlantic flight. Could I justify this within the terms of an exhibition about climate change? When compared with the recent world conference in Bali which saw world leaders and other luminaries – many of whom arrived by private jet – gathering to discuss the need to reduce the causes of climate change I would be treading lightly, ultimately I considered even my slight imprint too much.
The upshot is that I will be web-streaming images of an installation in The Gallery, New College, Nottingham, to be projected into the gallery in USA. The development of the installation will be conducted with students from Nottingham, shadowed by students in Massachusetts. The materials used will be redundant technology machines, these having a commonality on both sides of the Atlantic. The students will swap instructions as they solve the many problems encountered in reducing a computer or other new technology machine down to its constituent components. At the end there will be a competitive element as each place strives to recycle the most stuff – in a previous exhibition in Canada 95% by weight of 100-plus dismantled machines was recycled.
This entire project has used the minimum of materials; no letters have exchanged hands, no images have been sent on disposable CD and no materials will have moved further than a couple of miles. The equipment will be sourced from within the respective institutions and thus the only shift of material will be when it is recycled after the exhibition.
This is in stark contrast to another climate change exhibition here in Britain. I received the info online (so far so good), wrote the proposal and submitted it online with a link to my website, only to be asked to submit hardcopy. I refused and pointed out that this would result in approximately ten printed pages and a CD, plus envelope, and that even if only fifty artists made similar applications this would result in a whole ream of paper and a full fifty-pack of plastic CDs, used once and chucked away. I was not successful on this occasion, whether this was due to my ‘attitude’ or because there was a more suitable proposal I will never know.
For a project relating to rising sea levels (a public artwork situated on new flood defence walls). I offered a temporary interactive community-based project but I was informed that they thought that the work was “too political” and could mislead people into thinking that these flood defence walls were “climate change proof”. The latter was a good point but “too political”? I am not sure if the destruction of our planet through the avarice of consumer society is something that can be differentiated as mere “politics”.
How many ‘climate change exhibitions’, or ‘recycled material exhibitions’ are mere lip-service to these issues – galleries jumping onto a bandwagon without making any attempt to change their methods of assessment? Perhaps this is indicative of the current attitude: ”environmentalism is something that others do”. A denial of responsibility a refusal to acknowledge personal contributions to the problem?
It is routine practice to send non returnable applications often with a CD material that is either filed but most often thrown away. Apply this to the hundreds of calls for submissions as seen in the pages of a-n Magazine and we suddenly realise that something needs to change.
I have not survey of attitudes towards climate change within the microcosm that is the art world. However I do know that many artists already work within a materially minimal manner, often through necessity rather than for ideological reasons: The use of the found object, appropiation etc. What I am seeing is an increasing number of artist-run organisations limit their submission procedure to online materials thus doing away with huge amounts of materials and cutting down on administration time and expenses. Hopefully galleries and other arts organisations will follow this lead and thus reduce the amount of paper and other stuff that passes through their hands.
Welsh Art Now.
Climate change
The media is awash with commentary about ‘climate change’, a serious issue that of course affects every one of us. Some have been expressing these environmental concerns for many years but it is only now that these ideas are being taken seriously. But how is the art world dealing with these issues?
I recently responded to several exhibition opportunities that displayed a concern for climate change, not because my work deals directly with it in a narrative sort of way, but because the methods through which I make work have a relevance to these issues. Much of my work uses the detritus from consumer society, thus through recycling comment is made.
One call came from a gallery in the USA, for an exhibition titled ‘Sublime Climate’. I made contact with the gallery and simply sent a link to my website, the gallery responded with an invite to participate. Even just travelling to the gallery and working onsite would result in a trail of carbon footprints across the Atlantic – something approaching 100 tons of Carbon dioxide are produced by each transatlantic flight. Could I justify this within the terms of an exhibition about climate change? When compared with the recent world conference in Bali which saw world leaders and other luminaries – many of whom arrived by private jet – gathering to discuss the need to reduce the causes of climate change I would be treading lightly, ultimately I considered even my slight imprint too much.
The upshot is that I will be web-streaming images of an installation in The Gallery, New College, Nottingham, to be projected into the gallery in USA. The development of the installation will be conducted with students from Nottingham, shadowed by students in Massachusetts. The materials used will be redundant technology machines, these having a commonality on both sides of the Atlantic. The students will swap instructions as they solve the many problems encountered in reducing a computer or other new technology machine down to its constituent components. At the end there will be a competitive element as each place strives to recycle the most stuff – in a previous exhibition in Canada 95% by weight of 100-plus dismantled machines was recycled.
This entire project has used the minimum of materials; no letters have exchanged hands, no images have been sent on disposable CD and no materials will have moved further than a couple of miles. The equipment will be sourced from within the respective institutions and thus the only shift of material will be when it is recycled after the exhibition.
This is in stark contrast to another climate change exhibition here in Britain. I received the info online (so far so good), wrote the proposal and submitted it online with a link to my website, only to be asked to submit hardcopy. I refused and pointed out that this would result in approximately ten printed pages and a CD, plus envelope, and that even if only fifty artists made similar applications this would result in a whole ream of paper and a full fifty-pack of plastic CDs, used once and chucked away. I was not successful on this occasion, whether this was due to my ‘attitude’ or because there was a more suitable proposal I will never know.
For a project relating to rising sea levels (a public artwork situated on new flood defence walls). I offered a temporary interactive community-based project but I was informed that they thought that the work was “too political” and could mislead people into thinking that these flood defence walls were “climate change proof”. The latter was a good point but “too political”? I am not sure if the destruction of our planet through the avarice of consumer society is something that can be differentiated as mere “politics”.
How many ‘climate change exhibitions’, or ‘recycled material exhibitions’ are mere lip-service to these issues – galleries jumping onto a bandwagon without making any attempt to change their methods of assessment? Perhaps this is indicative of the current attitude: ”environmentalism is something that others do”. A denial of responsibility a refusal to acknowledge personal contributions to the problem?
It is routine practice to send non returnable applications often with a CD material that is either filed but most often thrown away. Apply this to the hundreds of calls for submissions as seen in the pages of a-n Magazine and we suddenly realise that something needs to change.
I have not survey of attitudes towards climate change within the microcosm that is the art world. However I do know that many artists already work within a materially minimal manner, often through necessity rather than for ideological reasons: The use of the found object, appropiation etc. What I am seeing is an increasing number of artist-run organisations limit their submission procedure to online materials thus doing away with huge amounts of materials and cutting down on administration time and expenses. Hopefully galleries and other arts organisations will follow this lead and thus reduce the amount of paper and other stuff that passes through their hands.
Comment
About
Badge
Latest Activity
For friends of Pieronymus Art Network. Pieronymus Art Network is a social network for artists, and for people who like art. We have groups in English, in German and in Hungarian.
RSS
Loading feed
© 2009 Created by dawn hilton on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
You need to be a member of Environmental ART V CARBON FOOTPRINTS Online Art Gallery to add comments!
Join this Ning Network