Myopia Among the Ranks
While contemporary art is being invigorated and reinvented by throngs of eco artists worldwide, distinguished art professionals like the chief curator at the Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston remain oblivious of their contributions. Helen Molesworth revealed her myopic assessment of contemporary art in an analysis of this year’s Whitney Biennial that appears in the current issue of ARTFORUM. She wrote “…in today’s hypermediated art scene, no one actually expects to be bowled over by anything “new.” This makes a kind of sour sense, since the new as a value was pretty thoroughly debunked in the twentieth century and, well, here we are in the twenty-first.”
It is only fair to note that Molesworth has earned her esteem within contemporary art circles by looking backward to the 1960s and the 1980s, not forward. She is acclaimed for curating "Dance/Draw," which traced the origins of today's performance art in the intersection between dancing and drawing since the '60s, and "This Will Have Been: Art, Love & Politics in the 1980s." Molesworth confirmed her historic orientation in a talk at the ICA where she announced, "I'm not known in the field for being the discoverer of new talent."
Nonetheless, Molesworth is misrepresenting and belittling contemporary art accomplishments. Because her opinions are supported by impeccable credentials, they carry the weight of authority. Readers are likely to agree with her assessment of contemporary art as a paltry version of reruns, and not challenge her blatant disregard for the bold explorations of contemporary eco artists that are authentically ‘new’.
While contemporary art is being invigorated and reinvented by throngs of eco artists worldwide, distinguished art professionals like the chief curator at the Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston remain oblivious of their contributions. Helen Molesworth revealed her myopic assessment of contemporary art in an analysis of this year’s Whitney Biennial that appears in the current issue of ARTFORUM. She wrote “…in today’s hypermediated art scene, no one actually expects to be bowled over by anything “new.” This makes a kind of sour sense, since the new as a value was pretty thoroughly debunked in the twentieth century and, well, here we are in the twenty-first.”
It is only fair to note that Molesworth has earned her esteem within contemporary art circles by looking backward to the 1960s and the 1980s, not forward.
She even admitted, when speaking at the ICA, "I'm not known in the field for being the discoverer of new talent."
Nonetheless, Molesworth is misrepresenting and belittling contemporary art accomplishments. Because her opinions are supported by impeccable credentials, they carry the weight of authority. Readers are likely to agree with her assessment of contemporary art as a paltry version of reruns, and not challenge her blatant disregard for the bold explorations of contemporary eco artists that are authentically ‘new’.
By spearheading efforts to facilitate beneficial environmental outcomes, many eco artists are activating two former disqualifiers of fine art – ‘functionality’ and ‘didacticism’. While eco-art remains associated with artistic ingenuity, its creators are redirecting their ingenuity toward strategic designs and tactical interventions. Functional art conducts a utilitarian purpose. Didactic art is designed to instruct. Both necessitate strategic innovations that append the conventional repertoires of art-making. For example, the intended recipients of eco artworks include diverse populations of insects, plants, animals, bacteria, fungi, and amphibians, not just humans. As such, eco art demands that art viewers relinquish the significance of personal taste and elevate the importance of trans-personal art criteria.
Eco artists, through a multitude of mediums, processes, and approaches, are precisely tuned to current environmental concerns. Their work affirms that humanity is a major determinant of the planet’s ability to sustain diverse forms of life. Contemporary art historians and curators who ignore their contributions are consigning art to the periphery of historic importance; diminishing the role of art as a catalyst for cultural change; and demeaning art’s visionary, instructive, ethical, and pragmatic significance.