 |
| Artist: Diemut Strebe from the artists website - http://diemutstrebe.altervista.org |
From the museums website…
"The philosophical Theseus’ paradox forms the literary basis of the scientific approaches used in this art-project, that is the replacement of the genetic code at the molecular level, the cellular organization at the microscopic level and the composition of tissues and organs at the anatomic level. In the late 1st century Plutarch asked in The Life of Theseus whether a ship, which was restored by replacing all its parts, remained the same ship. In the course of time many variations of the principle have been described. One of these variations refers to the title of the project. The famous paradox is carried out with biological material making a particular form of human replication, from historical or synthesized material, a central focus of this project. The ear is one of a series of a limited edition, made of different scientific components referring in various way to the same principle of replacement."
According to the artists website, the ear can be spoken to through a microphone.
"The input sound is connected to a computer processor, using a software program to generate simulated nerve impulses from the sound signal in real time.
They mimic sounds recorded from an electrode inserted into the auditory nerve, when firing."
I find this to be an interesting piece of art. I like the idea of contemporary works that join art and science. It seems that today many people consider art and science to be far separated fields. As we all know this is not historically true. The piece is visually appealing. It plays on our shared pop culture references of living heads or brains of famous people in jars. Anything that makes me think of 1962's "The Brain That Wouldn't Die" is a positive thing in my view.
I like the artists description of the relationship of the piece to Theseus' paradox. If this is identical in shape to van Gogh's ear and is the same genetically (let's pretend it is anyway) then what makes this NOT van Gogh's ear?
I guess my only problem with the piece is that van Gogh's ear is such an art cliche. I guess this will make people more interested in this piece than they would be if it was Abe Lincoln's left foot pinkie toe. The iconic status of van Gogh (and his ear) is in one way, what makes the piece, but also makes it seem pandering.
It makes me think of an art museum gift shop. It helps pay the bills, but artists are reduced to caricatures. Vincent van Gogh - he's that ear guy. Dali - he's that funny mustache guy (and the melting clock guy.) Here is an umbrella with a print that looks like it has paint splattered on it. Oh look! It is being sold as a Pollock Parasol, how clever. Excuse me while I go vomit.
Everything has to be simplified and sold back to people as an easily understood package. How many people have posters of Marilyn Monroe that have never actually seen one of her films or T-shirts with Betty Boop that have never seen a Betty cartoon?
Now this same thing is happening with art and artists too. It seems that museums, rather than educate people about art, revel in this one-dimensional dumbing down of artists, art movements and art itself. It brings people to the gallery, they might argue. It makes them relate to the art. It gives people a familiar "jumping off"point, to learn about the art. Excuse me, while I swallow down this next mouthful of vomit.
For those of you that don't know, Vincent van Gogh committed suicide, shooting himself in the chest. According to his brother Theo, Vincent's last words were, "The sadness will last forever." Maybe he had a vision of "The Starry Night" on a $20 coffee mug.
For more info on the artist his website is http://diemutstrebe.altervista.org
and the galleries website is http://on1.zkm.de/zkm/stories/storyReader$8887
No comments:
Post a Comment