Enobling Problems
12.00 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE The positive outcomes that emerge from artistic failures is the focus of the essay in TO LIFE! exploring the work of two esteemed eco artists, Helen and Newton Harrison. The ‘failed’ works under consideration were all created in the 1970s. These renowned artists have continued to produce failed projects ever since. In a recent interview in Leaf Litter, an on-line newsletter published by Biohabitats,, they discuss the paradoxical relationship between artistic success and failure.
Newton states unequivocally, “I’m going to take issue with the whole idea of measuring success. I think it’s stupid.”
He and Helen explain that their relationship with ‘success’ is unconventional because it is unrelated to personal recognition or fame, “The work “works” when the community with whom we’re working understands the work and takes it up…It becomes the work of the community….When the community takes up the work, and the work is big enough, then our name is lost.”
Helen and Newton Harrison - Sava River
Another reason for ‘failure is that the Harrisons define their projects as ‘‘ennobling problems,’ not solutions. Since the 1970s they have been addressing extremely complex issues that require broad sets of skills and enormous compilations of knowledge. “An ennobling problem is one of such dimension that any work you do on it that helps on any measure ennobles two things: the environment and you.”
Newton provides a compelling example when he refers to The Center for the Study of the Force Majeure, “Green roofs, and all the green stuff we’re doing is insufficient for what’s coming down. We need to adjust at the trillion dollar scale.” So we plan at that level…..
Often, these problems are not even identified until the artists begin to probe. One example is dates back to 1989 when the Harrisons were invited to help establish a nature reserve on the Sava River in the former Yugoslavia. This nature reserve was the last floodplain ecosystem in that part of Europe, and it included lots of endangered species. Newton comments, “We went there, and it didn’t seem endangered at all. It was beautiful. However, it was surrounded by irrigated farming, and that was endangering it, although nobody saw that.” Thus, instead of establishing the reserve, the artists analyzed the Sava River, which revealed the impending problem – runoff from surrounding farms. Their artwork revealed the urgent need to purify the river in order to protect the nature reserve.
Even when their works are associated with ecological definitions of successful outcomes, they don’t take credit for them. Newton states, “We design for salutary, unintended consequences. We don’t keep control of everything.”
The artists continually explore new geographic and intellectual territories, another invitation to ‘failure’. “When you work in new territory, you are making prototypes. Your success is going to be limited, but you are going to be coming up with new and original information.”
In sum, the artists explain, “We set our own agenda to take on these advanced problems, and we fail all the time. But we fail usefully. This is such a different position than most scientists take. Our desire is, generally, to influence policy.”
From this perspective, they identify Peninsula Europe as their most successful work. “We tried to see if one could see the whole peninsula in dissipative structure. In my opinion, the failure was a worthy failure. We learned a lot.”