http://www.tate.org.uk/magazine/issue2/boltanski.htm
Thursday 17 February 2011
Monday 7 February 2011
Herbert Dupret
Duprat traces his work with the caddis fly larvae back to pioneering nineteenth-century entomologists such as François-Jules Pictet and Jean-Henri Fabre, who both conducted experiments in which structure-building insects were given alternative, non-indigenous materials. Seen within the context of the artist's work—a practice that has often addressed aspects of mimesis in the realms of both nature and facture through his conceptual sculptural activities—the caddis fly larvae project is an example of Duprat's ongoing interest in productive collisions between organic forms and technologized materials. Yet the work also provokes broader philosophical questions regarding behavior and intent, one that was summarized particularly astutely by the critic and philosopher Christian Besson, in a conversation with the artist conducted in the late 1990s:
Kant's distinction between works of art and those of nature leaves us in a quandary. The production of the artifact within nature herself poses a problem—even more so when an aesthetic aspect is involved. Whether the insect is a craftsperson or whether, more generally, nature is a creator of forms, the consideration, within nature, of an aesthetic dimension is the stumbling block of science. ...
Your activity as an artist, upsetting the ordinary ethology of the insect, seems to me to be the same thing as introducing a noise, complicating its umwelt and producing a response. In your diversion of the caddis worm's behavior, in your artistic manipulation, the effect is twofold. From a biological viewpoint, a random event triggers self-organization. From a human viewpoint, the experimenter's intent produces this effect. ...
Is the caddis worm's precious case the work of the insect or the work of the artist? This is not the right question. The contradiction can be resolved by the differing viewpoints. According to the first view, the caddis worm owed nothing to the artist (who is simply the author of one noise among the thousands of other noises in its environment). According to the second view, the caddis worm is merely the executor of the artist's project. The artistic statement plays on the confusion of the two levels by overlaying the two perspectives. The aesthetic result (at once natural and artistic) turns the caddis worm's case—which is more than an assisted ready-made or a diversion—into a doubly exposed object...1
—Jeffrey Kastner
Christian Besson in conversation with Hubert Duprat, from “The Wonderful Caddis Worm: Sculptural Work in Collaboration with Trichoptera,” translated by Simon Pleasance, in Leonardo, vol. 31, no. 3, June–July 1998.
The Failure of Rationality in Swift
Man can never be purely rational because man is an animal. Is this the way man will end up should he attempt to become a purlely logical being, such as the Houyhnhnms This seems to be the point that Swift is trying to make. Although Gulliver so admires them, Swift does not mean us to take this admiration seriously. Once Gullivar leaves the island, he is disdainful towards the rest of his race who he sees as vulgar Yahoos. The fact that these creatures are horses, not humans, symbolizes how Swift believes that no humans can be so perfect. Their lack of strong feelings can be understood through their attitude to their offspring; "They have no fondness for their Colts or Foles, but the Care they take in educating them proceeds from the dictates of "Reason". Being face to face with man in his animal form (the Yahoos) further propels Gulliver into his futile effort to be completely reasonable and logical eventually leading to his insanity. Don Pedro treats Gulliver with nothing but kindness and affection, and yet Gulliver repays him with disgust. " This admiration grows and grows until he quickly comes to believe that these creatures are perfect in every way possible. His new attitude towards his fellow man is displayed in his treatment of Don Pedro. Mates are selected based on their coloring, and to produce offspring that will enhance the species as a whole. Indeed, Love plays no part in even the institution of matrimony. The extent to which Gulliver worships these creatures is further delineated by his self-loathing; "When I happened to behold my Reflection of my own form in a lake or a Fountain, I turned away my face in Horror and Detestation of myself. Gulliver can be looked upon as a human, trying (in an effort to escape his animal tendencies) to become supremely rational which is a futile effort.
Gulliver in Houyhnhnm Island
In 1719 Daniel Defoe's story Robinson Crusoe explored the possibility of a solitary utopia.
Seven years later the poet, clergyman and satirist Jonathan Swift (1667-1745) published Gulliver's Travels - a satire on the society of the day and a warning about human folly.
Gulliver's Travels comprises four books. In each Lemuel Gulliver embarks on a voyage and is cast upon a strange land.
In the first book he becomes the giant prisoner of the six inch high Lilliputians. In the second he arrives in Brobdingnag -a land of giants. Book three takes Gulliver to Laputa, a floating island whose inhabitants are so preoccupied with higher speculations that they are in constant danger of collision.
In book four, Gulliver travels to the utopian island of the Houyhnhnms; ran by grave and rational horses devoid of any passion, even sexual desire. The island is also inhabited by Yahoos - vicious and repulsive creatures used by the Houyhnhnms for menial work. Gulliver initially pretends not to recognize the Yahoos, but eventually admits that they are human beings.
Gulliver himself, and each of the populations encountered by him, can be identified with distinct aspects of contemporary society and human nature.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
