RE: Figurative Painting - Anthropocene Artifacts: Human Relation with Nature
Wow. Thank you for the extensive response. This is rare on this platform. You make some salient points, especially in regards to art in relation to my application of these pieces. However, this is somewhat of a strawman since the focus is on the Anthropocene and not artistic interpretation or critique or even historical significance. I appreciate your enthusiasm but that seriously detracts from the principle message of this post which is awareness of the growing significance of the Anthropocene as a NEW epoch DIRECTLY related to human action. After all, arguments aside, there would not BE any discussion of aesthetics or art..etc if the human species continues along this destructive path. No humans left to paint , sketch, draw, sculpt or compose songs, write memoirs, sonnets or even dance in unison. Thanks for commenting.
Hi there! I see what you mean. I would say though that for me it isn't a straw man as you used Art as your means of evidence / argumentation. Wouldn't more specific environmental studies or reports be more suitable, or visual content of deforestation, the amount of green house gas the meat industry emits, or some other specific bit of information be more prescient? Using some else's life's work as evidence for something they didn't expressly have in mind, no matter the discipline or environmental problem you are talking about is troubling. If you're going to instrumentalist something, I think knowing the discourse behind it is necessary. Also, having a "larger idea" or "more urgent idea or issue" in mind doesn't invalidate critique. I want to build a 100 story building isn't more important than the steel you source to support it, right? If A then B doesn't allow for A not being A. Thanks for the response, I'm an arts professional so it is important to me how art is used, talked about, written about, shown, seen. Looking forward to more!