1884: The Solvay Process Company (later to become Allied-Signal Corp.) begins production of soda ash.
1918: The Solvay Process Company begins production of organic chemicals.
1940: Swimming is banned.
1946: Allied begins chlorine production and discharges mercury into the lake.
1960: Construction of the Onondaga County Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant (Metro) is completed. 1970: Fishing is banned. Due to the discovery of mercury in the lake's fishery, the US Attorney General sues Allied-Signal to stop mercury dumping. The amount of mercury discharged to the lake is calculated to be 22 lb/day.
1977: Allied closes chlorinated benzene plant and Willis Avenue chlor-alkali plant. 1979: Metro is upgraded to secondary and tertiary treatment. 1986: Allied closes soda ash manufacturing operations.
Calcium carbonate
Mercury
Clay
Silt
Phosphorus
Ammonia
Nitrite
Pathogenic bacteria and viruses
PCBs
chlorinated benzenes
chloride, sodium, and calcium (salts)
Phosphorus leads to algae growth which impacts the lake's water clarity and when the algae die, oxygen is consumed which leads to depletion of oxygen in the lake.
The Allied chlor-alkali facility discharged an estimated 165,000 pounds of mercury to Onondaga Lake from 1946 until 1970. Scientists estimate that 7 million cubic yards of the lake sediments remain contaminated.
Methyl mercury, formed in aquatic systems through the activity of certain bacteria, is among the most poisonous chemicals known. If all the mercury in the average fever thermometer were converted to methyl mercury, it would be enough to render more than 10,000 one pound largemouth bass unfit for human consumption.
The water in the oceans, which is about 3.5% salt by its weight, is extremely salty compared to fresh waters. For comparison, Otisco Lake, a lake also located in Onondaga County, has a salt content of about 0.03%, nearly 120 times lower than the ocean. Before the Solvay Process Company (later Allied-Signal) closed in 1986, the salt content of Onondaga Lake was unusually high, averaging 0.30%. This was 10-times greater than Otisco Lake.
The water in the oceans, which is about 3.5% salt by its weight, is extremely salty compared to fresh waters. For comparison, Otisco Lake, a lake also located in Onondaga County, has a salt content of about 0.03%, nearly 120 times lower than the ocean. Before the Solvay Process Company (later Allied-Signal) closed in 1986, the salt content of Onondaga Lake was unusually high, averaging 0.30%. This was 10-times greater than Otisco Lake.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
To do:
Sunday: Search for information for label - everyone
Make label - Blair
Monday: Buy water bottles and poster board - Blair
Buy water bottles - Pierson
Make water bottles - everyone
Wednesday: Bring camera: Blair, Pierson
Do project: everyone
Introduction: Alyssa
Before we talk about our project, I want to quickly go over some of the history of Onondaga Lake:... Now that we’re all on the same page, we’ll talk a little about our proposed project.
Project: Pierson
We don’t think enough has been done to clean up Onondaga Lake, so we are planning to perform, after class today, a piece of public art. We bought these bottles of water and changed the labels so that they say Onondaga Lake Water. Additionally, we created a Nutrition chart on the back listing some of the toxins in Onondaga Lake, which include:…
Outcome: Blair
As we pass these out, we plan to give the subjects some startling facts about the toxins in Onondaga Lake, like:… We plan to document their reactions. We’re not expecting a certain reaction, but instead we’re kind of carrying out an experiment to see what happens and how people react, kind oh like the Panhandling for Reparations or the Couple in the Cage. That’s about it, and you guys can stop on by if you want to check out what we’re doing. We’re going to be on the quad or in the general area.
Sunday: Search for information for label - everyone
Make label - Blair
Monday: Buy water bottles and poster board - Blair
Buy water bottles - Pierson
Make water bottles - everyone
Wednesday: Bring camera: Blair, Pierson
Do project: everyone
Introduction: Alyssa
Before we talk about our project, I want to quickly go over some of the history of Onondaga Lake:... Now that we’re all on the same page, we’ll talk a little about our proposed project.
Project: Pierson
We don’t think enough has been done to clean up Onondaga Lake, so we are planning to perform, after class today, a piece of public art. We bought these bottles of water and changed the labels so that they say Onondaga Lake Water. Additionally, we created a Nutrition chart on the back listing some of the toxins in Onondaga Lake, which include:…
Outcome: Blair
As we pass these out, we plan to give the subjects some startling facts about the toxins in Onondaga Lake, like:… We plan to document their reactions. We’re not expecting a certain reaction, but instead we’re kind of carrying out an experiment to see what happens and how people react, kind oh like the Panhandling for Reparations or the Couple in the Cage. That’s about it, and you guys can stop on by if you want to check out what we’re doing. We’re going to be on the quad or in the general area.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Superfund Restoration: Onondaga Lake
Onondaga Lake has been described as the most polluted lake in the country. With increasing industrialization, the past century has been deleterious to waterways near many production centers. Onondaga was hit harder because of the large amount of waste being dumped into it. AlliedSignal, a chemical company, pumped approximately 1.5 million tons of chemical waste per year into Onondaga Lake at its peak. The Metropolitan Syracuse Wastewater Treatment Plant (Metro) has also been dumping large amounts of effluent into the lake. It actually takes in a greater percentage of water as effluent than any other lake in the United States. During times when water from tributaries declines, the effluent being pumped from Metro can be the biggest contributor of water to the lake (Landers 64-69). These statistics are alarming and it is obvious and imperative that something needs to be done. A few organizations, especially Superfund, have taken the lead in remedying the lake, and in all there are eight subsites of the Onondaga Lake National Priorities List (NPL) site (Proposed Plan of Onondaga Lake Superfund Site).
Cleaning up a waterway, however, does not simply consist of filtering. Much has to be done to restore the body of water to the condition it was in before being contaminated. For example, Onondaga Lake started its renewal programs in the 1970s with the institution of the Clean Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Bans were placed on the production of harmful chemicals, a lawsuit was created against AlliedSignal, upgrades were made to Metro, and studies of pollution effects were undertaken. In the 1980s, the sewage treatment plant was again upgraded and several other industries that contributed to the damage were closed. This continued into the 1990s and today with many more legislative advancements and modifications (Addressing the Problem).
As a proposed solution for the cleanup of Onondaga Lake, a remedy “will involve dredging an estimated 2.7 million cubic yards of contaminated sediment and waste…” (Landers 66). This highly contaminated material will be treated and exposed on off-campus sites. Isolation caps will also be placed over the contaminated layers of sediment coating the floor of the lake. This method will help prevent the pollution from rising and further contaminating the water (Landers 67). Researchers hope that such a plan will be a success in decreasing mercury levels and overall improving the condition of Onondaga Lake.
Landers, Jay. New Life for Onondaga Lake. May 2006. 64-71,86. Civil Engineering—ASCE. 6 Oct. 2007. EBSCOhost: Business Source Elite.
Proposed Plan of Onondaga Lake Superfund Site. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 6 Oct. 2007.
Addressing the Problem. Onondaga Lake Partnership. 6 Oct. 2007.
Onondaga Lake has been described as the most polluted lake in the country. With increasing industrialization, the past century has been deleterious to waterways near many production centers. Onondaga was hit harder because of the large amount of waste being dumped into it. AlliedSignal, a chemical company, pumped approximately 1.5 million tons of chemical waste per year into Onondaga Lake at its peak. The Metropolitan Syracuse Wastewater Treatment Plant (Metro) has also been dumping large amounts of effluent into the lake. It actually takes in a greater percentage of water as effluent than any other lake in the United States. During times when water from tributaries declines, the effluent being pumped from Metro can be the biggest contributor of water to the lake (Landers 64-69). These statistics are alarming and it is obvious and imperative that something needs to be done. A few organizations, especially Superfund, have taken the lead in remedying the lake, and in all there are eight subsites of the Onondaga Lake National Priorities List (NPL) site (Proposed Plan of Onondaga Lake Superfund Site).
Cleaning up a waterway, however, does not simply consist of filtering. Much has to be done to restore the body of water to the condition it was in before being contaminated. For example, Onondaga Lake started its renewal programs in the 1970s with the institution of the Clean Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Bans were placed on the production of harmful chemicals, a lawsuit was created against AlliedSignal, upgrades were made to Metro, and studies of pollution effects were undertaken. In the 1980s, the sewage treatment plant was again upgraded and several other industries that contributed to the damage were closed. This continued into the 1990s and today with many more legislative advancements and modifications (Addressing the Problem).
As a proposed solution for the cleanup of Onondaga Lake, a remedy “will involve dredging an estimated 2.7 million cubic yards of contaminated sediment and waste…” (Landers 66). This highly contaminated material will be treated and exposed on off-campus sites. Isolation caps will also be placed over the contaminated layers of sediment coating the floor of the lake. This method will help prevent the pollution from rising and further contaminating the water (Landers 67). Researchers hope that such a plan will be a success in decreasing mercury levels and overall improving the condition of Onondaga Lake.
Landers, Jay. New Life for Onondaga Lake. May 2006. 64-71,86. Civil Engineering—ASCE. 6 Oct. 2007. EBSCOhost: Business Source Elite.
Proposed Plan of Onondaga Lake Superfund Site. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 6 Oct. 2007.
Addressing the Problem. Onondaga Lake Partnership. 6 Oct. 2007.
Monday, November 5, 2007
The Couple in the Cage: Dialogic Art at its Worst
By: Blair Dudik
Art is culture in that it functions as a medium of ideas and beliefs of a group of people. Chartres Cathedral and Venus of Willendorf depict the values and motivations of an ancient culture, and analyzing these can make it easier to understand the way of life of the individuals living during the era (Fiero 6,297). Art history is not necessarily a study of previous creations, but a study of why such works were created. There are many incentives, including religion, survival, commemoration, and beauty, however, the sophistication and drive for understanding that is prevalent today has greatly altered these traditional underlying inducements in a new form of art: dialogic art. Artists are no longer historians but philosophers as well. They attempt to understand the problems of society and solve them through public forms of artwork, which has completely altered the spectrum and purpose of art. In many cases, the audience actually participates in the formation of the art, becoming subjects instead of just viewers (Kwon 117). In this example, the author sets the stage so that people may learn and grow, while the audience does not analyze the author’s perceptions and portrayals, but instead analyzes themselves as a member of various societies and cultures. This evolved form of art acts as an instructor showing people their failings (as structured by the author) so that they may understand and hopefully correct them.
In Coco Fusco’s and Guillermo Gómez-Peña’s The Couple in the Cage, the group tried to bring awareness to the public through an obvious satire (Verhagen 22). They traveled to various museums in cities across the globe, including London, Sydney, New York, Madrid, and Buenos Aires pretending to be “Amerindians” from an undiscovered island (Taylor 163). In a description of their dress, Gómez-Peña expressed himself as an, “Aztec wrestler from Las Vegas,” and Fusco as a, “Taina straight out of Gilligan’s Island” (Kershaw 601). They made voodoo dolls, worked on a laptop, watched television, and, for a fee, danced to music and posed for pictures (Taylor 163).
This “art” was partly intended to be a response to the act of Christopher Columbus taking Native Americans back to Spain as caged animals (Taylor 161). As stated before, this project was supposed to be an obvious satire, and when the attendees took the display seriously, Fusco and her companion mocked them in their later writings, quotes, and film. “Consistently from city to city, more than half of our visitors believed our fiction and thought we were ‘real’” (Kershaw 602). Yet the only inclinations that the exhibit was a pretence were the clothes and activities. Even with these links to modern culture, the two “Amerindians” were presented as authentic (Kershaw 602). They were displayed at a museum, which, in itself, legitimizes the event (Verhagen 22). Fusco and Gómez-Peña pretended not to speak English, so “zoo guards” were present to fabricate information. Even a fake map from an Encyclopedia Britannica was displayed as further evidence (Taylor 163).
How can these people be criticized? Yes, they were fooled, but this is not something new. The television series Punked on MTV profits from fooling people. The exhibit was presented as legitimate, so why should people not believe it? I can not be sure what was actually said to the viewers about the modern clothes and activities, but from my research there was probably an excuse for those as well. One goes to a museum to be informed, not to be deceived, so those who saw the exhibit were already under the assumption that what they were seeing was something straight from National Geographic.
Another argument that could be made is that the people who actually participated in the “art” by posing with the “Amerindians” and feeding them bananas were naive. Much focus is placed on this, yet those who were outraged are ignored (Verhagen 22), and the fifty percent of attendees who did not accept the scenario are forgotten (Kershaw 602). Yet even those who participated have an excuse. The zoo guards fed Fusco and Gómez-Peña sandwiches and fruit (Taylor 163), so by Bandura’s social cognitive theory, onlookers thought it would be acceptable to feed the “Amerindians” as well (Heyes 504). The theory states that:
“to imitate, an observer must (1) attend to a model’s action, (2) store the information about the action in the form of some sort of ‘symbolic conception’ that can be used to generate and select behavioral variants, and (3) execute behavior derived from the symbolic conception when (4) motivated to do so”(Heyes 504).
In other words, seeing the exhibit attendants may have led some to believe that it would be acceptable to feed the “Native Americans,” especially if the attendants encouraged them to do so. The people did not know if it was or was not a hoax. The stipulations surrounding The Couple in the Cage made it appear legitimate, so the people cannot and should not be blamed.
Also, it is not fair to argue that because a few deceived people acted foolishly, “colonial unconscious…structures the Western psyche” (Kershaw 602). Now, once again, I cannot be sure whether the visitors were told that the couple came on their own will or not, but for the most part people are intelligent, compassionate, and would never condone slavery. Our sins from the past do not determine who we are, which is something that Fusco and Gómez-Peña do not seem to understand.
These artists may also be trying to communicate modernized views of third world civilizations, but if they are it seems a futile attempt. A good deal of money is already being given to Africa, research is being done to help cure diseases rapid in poorer countries, and much more is happening to help those less fortunate. Modernized countries, for the most part, are not colonizing and taking over land that belongs to native persons any more. It is true that many countries, especially the United States, have made huge mistakes in the past as far as usurping the rights of other human beings, but that does not mean that people today would do the same if they had the chance. Like Damali Ayo’s Panhandling for Reparations, Fusco and Gómez-Peña bring up non-issues for the sake of making a ruckus.
This project is actually less of an artwork and more of an experiment. However, the architects introduced variables that skewed the results. They have the mindset that if a tree falls in the woods, and a carpenter emerges from the woods, he is responsible for the fall of the tree. The subjects were placed under an extraneous situation unfit to test a hypothesis; it cannot be determined whether or not Western culture has an “appetite for such inhumane exoticism,” as Fusco and Gómez-Peña seem to think (Verhagen 22). As far as one of these new forms of art, it was pointless. It did not introduce social, economic, or political problems to an oblivious audience. The audience did function as subjects, though they operated more as white mice instead of co-creators of a piece of dialogic art. In order for the project to function properly, the subjects should have learned from their interactions. Not only did they gain no insight, but “the simple stratagem of refusing to signal clearly the ontological status of its codes, this spectacle risked reinforcing the very forces it aimed to subvert,” if there was even a defined issue in the first place (Kershaw 602). In many cases art cannot solve social issues, if there is even a problem to begin with (Kester 182).
The whole project would have been more effective if the artists in charge had not pretended the scenario was real, but instead clearly staged the event in commemoration of those who were denied rights as human beings. This would have made the viewers think about the abuses of power in the past, look for the same situation in the present, and possibly make them reconsider the glory of “our” culture versus “their[’s],” or whatever the creators were hoping to make people understand (Kershaw 602).
Works Cited
Fiero, Gloria. The Humanistic Tradition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006.
Heyes, Cecilia. Language, Brain, and Cognitive Development.Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2001.
Kershaw, Baz. “Curiosity or Contempt: On Spectacle, the Human, and Activism.” Theatre Journal 55.4 (December 2003): 591-611.
Kester, Grant. Conversation Pieces. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2004.
Kwon, Miwon. One Place After Another. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2002.
Taylor, Diana. “A Savage Performance: Guillermo Gómez-Peña and Coco Fusco's ‘Couple in the Cage.’” The Drama Review 42.2.158 (Summer 1998): 160-174.
Verhagen, Marcus. “Nothing If Not Satirical: The Nunnery London.” Art Monthly (March 2004): 21-22.
By: Blair Dudik
Art is culture in that it functions as a medium of ideas and beliefs of a group of people. Chartres Cathedral and Venus of Willendorf depict the values and motivations of an ancient culture, and analyzing these can make it easier to understand the way of life of the individuals living during the era (Fiero 6,297). Art history is not necessarily a study of previous creations, but a study of why such works were created. There are many incentives, including religion, survival, commemoration, and beauty, however, the sophistication and drive for understanding that is prevalent today has greatly altered these traditional underlying inducements in a new form of art: dialogic art. Artists are no longer historians but philosophers as well. They attempt to understand the problems of society and solve them through public forms of artwork, which has completely altered the spectrum and purpose of art. In many cases, the audience actually participates in the formation of the art, becoming subjects instead of just viewers (Kwon 117). In this example, the author sets the stage so that people may learn and grow, while the audience does not analyze the author’s perceptions and portrayals, but instead analyzes themselves as a member of various societies and cultures. This evolved form of art acts as an instructor showing people their failings (as structured by the author) so that they may understand and hopefully correct them.
In Coco Fusco’s and Guillermo Gómez-Peña’s The Couple in the Cage, the group tried to bring awareness to the public through an obvious satire (Verhagen 22). They traveled to various museums in cities across the globe, including London, Sydney, New York, Madrid, and Buenos Aires pretending to be “Amerindians” from an undiscovered island (Taylor 163). In a description of their dress, Gómez-Peña expressed himself as an, “Aztec wrestler from Las Vegas,” and Fusco as a, “Taina straight out of Gilligan’s Island” (Kershaw 601). They made voodoo dolls, worked on a laptop, watched television, and, for a fee, danced to music and posed for pictures (Taylor 163).
This “art” was partly intended to be a response to the act of Christopher Columbus taking Native Americans back to Spain as caged animals (Taylor 161). As stated before, this project was supposed to be an obvious satire, and when the attendees took the display seriously, Fusco and her companion mocked them in their later writings, quotes, and film. “Consistently from city to city, more than half of our visitors believed our fiction and thought we were ‘real’” (Kershaw 602). Yet the only inclinations that the exhibit was a pretence were the clothes and activities. Even with these links to modern culture, the two “Amerindians” were presented as authentic (Kershaw 602). They were displayed at a museum, which, in itself, legitimizes the event (Verhagen 22). Fusco and Gómez-Peña pretended not to speak English, so “zoo guards” were present to fabricate information. Even a fake map from an Encyclopedia Britannica was displayed as further evidence (Taylor 163).
How can these people be criticized? Yes, they were fooled, but this is not something new. The television series Punked on MTV profits from fooling people. The exhibit was presented as legitimate, so why should people not believe it? I can not be sure what was actually said to the viewers about the modern clothes and activities, but from my research there was probably an excuse for those as well. One goes to a museum to be informed, not to be deceived, so those who saw the exhibit were already under the assumption that what they were seeing was something straight from National Geographic.
Another argument that could be made is that the people who actually participated in the “art” by posing with the “Amerindians” and feeding them bananas were naive. Much focus is placed on this, yet those who were outraged are ignored (Verhagen 22), and the fifty percent of attendees who did not accept the scenario are forgotten (Kershaw 602). Yet even those who participated have an excuse. The zoo guards fed Fusco and Gómez-Peña sandwiches and fruit (Taylor 163), so by Bandura’s social cognitive theory, onlookers thought it would be acceptable to feed the “Amerindians” as well (Heyes 504). The theory states that:
“to imitate, an observer must (1) attend to a model’s action, (2) store the information about the action in the form of some sort of ‘symbolic conception’ that can be used to generate and select behavioral variants, and (3) execute behavior derived from the symbolic conception when (4) motivated to do so”(Heyes 504).
In other words, seeing the exhibit attendants may have led some to believe that it would be acceptable to feed the “Native Americans,” especially if the attendants encouraged them to do so. The people did not know if it was or was not a hoax. The stipulations surrounding The Couple in the Cage made it appear legitimate, so the people cannot and should not be blamed.
Also, it is not fair to argue that because a few deceived people acted foolishly, “colonial unconscious…structures the Western psyche” (Kershaw 602). Now, once again, I cannot be sure whether the visitors were told that the couple came on their own will or not, but for the most part people are intelligent, compassionate, and would never condone slavery. Our sins from the past do not determine who we are, which is something that Fusco and Gómez-Peña do not seem to understand.
These artists may also be trying to communicate modernized views of third world civilizations, but if they are it seems a futile attempt. A good deal of money is already being given to Africa, research is being done to help cure diseases rapid in poorer countries, and much more is happening to help those less fortunate. Modernized countries, for the most part, are not colonizing and taking over land that belongs to native persons any more. It is true that many countries, especially the United States, have made huge mistakes in the past as far as usurping the rights of other human beings, but that does not mean that people today would do the same if they had the chance. Like Damali Ayo’s Panhandling for Reparations, Fusco and Gómez-Peña bring up non-issues for the sake of making a ruckus.
This project is actually less of an artwork and more of an experiment. However, the architects introduced variables that skewed the results. They have the mindset that if a tree falls in the woods, and a carpenter emerges from the woods, he is responsible for the fall of the tree. The subjects were placed under an extraneous situation unfit to test a hypothesis; it cannot be determined whether or not Western culture has an “appetite for such inhumane exoticism,” as Fusco and Gómez-Peña seem to think (Verhagen 22). As far as one of these new forms of art, it was pointless. It did not introduce social, economic, or political problems to an oblivious audience. The audience did function as subjects, though they operated more as white mice instead of co-creators of a piece of dialogic art. In order for the project to function properly, the subjects should have learned from their interactions. Not only did they gain no insight, but “the simple stratagem of refusing to signal clearly the ontological status of its codes, this spectacle risked reinforcing the very forces it aimed to subvert,” if there was even a defined issue in the first place (Kershaw 602). In many cases art cannot solve social issues, if there is even a problem to begin with (Kester 182).
The whole project would have been more effective if the artists in charge had not pretended the scenario was real, but instead clearly staged the event in commemoration of those who were denied rights as human beings. This would have made the viewers think about the abuses of power in the past, look for the same situation in the present, and possibly make them reconsider the glory of “our” culture versus “their[’s],” or whatever the creators were hoping to make people understand (Kershaw 602).
Works Cited
Fiero, Gloria. The Humanistic Tradition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006.
Heyes, Cecilia. Language, Brain, and Cognitive Development.Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2001.
Kershaw, Baz. “Curiosity or Contempt: On Spectacle, the Human, and Activism.” Theatre Journal 55.4 (December 2003): 591-611.
Kester, Grant. Conversation Pieces. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2004.
Kwon, Miwon. One Place After Another. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2002.
Taylor, Diana. “A Savage Performance: Guillermo Gómez-Peña and Coco Fusco's ‘Couple in the Cage.’” The Drama Review 42.2.158 (Summer 1998): 160-174.
Verhagen, Marcus. “Nothing If Not Satirical: The Nunnery London.” Art Monthly (March 2004): 21-22.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Dialogic art has tremendously changed the subject of art from the author’s ideas and perceptions to those of the people’s.
“If new public art engages the audience as active participants in the production of an art work, which to a degree renders them subjects of the work, too, then who is the audience for this production?” Kwon
Original stipulations of art
How the subject of art has changed
How the audience of art has changed
What are the benefits of this “new age” art
The creation of dialogic art has effectively destroyed the audience of a work of art. Now people are subjects of the work of art, and instead of trying to understand the author’s objective, they analyze and criticize themselves.
“If new public art engages the audience as active participants in the production of an art work, which to a degree renders them subjects of the work, too, then who is the audience for this production?” Kwon
Original stipulations of art
How the subject of art has changed
How the audience of art has changed
What are the benefits of this “new age” art
The creation of dialogic art has effectively destroyed the audience of a work of art. Now people are subjects of the work of art, and instead of trying to understand the author’s objective, they analyze and criticize themselves.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Coco Fusco & Guillermo Gomez-Pena: The Couple in the Cage
Is this ethical?
Was the subject matter the viewers?
English is broken here : notes on cultural fusion in the Americas, Coco Fusco
Corpus delecti : performance art of the Americas, Coco Fusco
Only skin deep : changing visions of the American self, Coco Fusco
Beyond primitivism : indigenous religious traditions and modernity
Is this ethical?
Was the subject matter the viewers?
English is broken here : notes on cultural fusion in the Americas, Coco Fusco
Corpus delecti : performance art of the Americas, Coco Fusco
Only skin deep : changing visions of the American self, Coco Fusco
Beyond primitivism : indigenous religious traditions and modernity
Sunday, October 28, 2007
"Culture in Action took the entire city of Chiago as its stage and 'focused on the active partisipation of residents in diverse communities in the creation of the artworks.' " (Kwon) This is true in the case of Haha and the volunteer group Flood. They created a garden for those suffering from AIDS/HIV. This garden was planted with special plants that contain agents for preventing cancer, called a hydroponic garden. Once finished, the garden looked great and worked as a soothing atmosphere for both those who were effected and the common person. The garden changed function from "beauty to service and back again." It was seen as a public form of art that everyone could enjoy, but it also functioned as a remedy for those who suffer from HIV/AIDS.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)