Sights of Desire; Sites of Demise the Environment in the Works of Edward Burtynsky and Olafur Eliasson

Sights of Desire; Sites of Demise The Environment in the Works of Edward Burtynsky and Olafur Eliasson By Elysia H. French A thesis submitted to the Department of Art In conformity with the requirements for The degree of Master of Arts Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada (November, 2011) Copyright ©Elysia H. French, 2011 Abstract This thesis argues that the environmental undertones of artists Edward Burtynsky’s and Olafur Eliasson’s work have clearly aligned them; however, the focus of my study is not an evaluation of the artists’ abilities to express environmental concerns, but rather an exploration of the effects of their representations on our understanding of the surrounding environment, and of the artists’ contributions toward a definition of Nature that now includes its own demise as a site of aesthetic pleasure. This study focuses on Olafur Eliasson’s New York City Waterfalls and on Edward Burtynsky’s Nickel Tailings photographs. Burtynsky’s Nickel Tailings photographs, among them in particular, his well known Nickel Tailings No. 34, depict a barren grey and black landscape centered primarily around an intensely coloured red and orange river of molten metal. Eliasson’s recent New York City Waterfalls consists of four artist-constructed waterfalls, ranging from 90 to 120 feet tall, located within the waters of Lower Manhattan, Governs Island, and beneath the Brooklyn Bridge. In his monumental New York City Waterfalls, Eliasson has made an intervention into the landscape that effectively works to contaminate the established aesthetic upon which it is based. In his monumental photographs, in contrast, Burtynsky does the opposite; he aestheticizes the contaminated. Here I would add that both artists have carefully called upon the elemental in order to reference the idea of wilderness or a “pure” form of Nature. Reference to the elemental in Nature—to air, water, and fire— has allowed these artists to challenge ii the viewer’s perception and experience of the nonhuman world. These manufactured landscapes are undeniably owned by humanity, yet is this the type of landscape we are comfortable to claim as our own? iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Lynda Jessup for her encouragement, extensive knowledge and patient guidance, which has helped to guide me through this project. This thesis would not have been possible without Dr. Lynda Jessup’s continuous enthusiasm, honesty and thoughtful opinions. I would like the thank Dr. Keri Cronin for introducing me to, and sparking my interest in, environmentalism and art history during my undergraduate degree. I would also like to thank my thesis committee Dr. Janice Helland, Dr. Clive Robertson, and Dr. Allison Goebel for all of their thoughtful questions, comments and constructive suggestions for future research. My colleagues and professors at Queen’s University have provided me with endless support and encouragement. I would like to thank Alex, Michelle, Meg, Brennan and Jeff (among others) for their friendship and advice, and for the many necessary coffee breaks. I would also like to thank Samantha, Kallie, Carolyn, Leanne, and Beth for their encouragement from afar. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I would like to thank my family for their unconditional love and support. In particular, my parents for their reassurance, advice and patience. Meaghan, Josh and Graham for their enthusiasm, persistence, endless distractions, humour and understanding. iv Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………...………………….....ii-iii Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………...iv Table of Contents……………………………………………………..………………………………v List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………........………vi Chapter 1 Introduction and Literature Review………………………………………………...1 Chapter 2 The Environment in the Works of Edward Burtynsky…………….............17 Chapter 3 The Environment in the Works of Olafur Eliasson…………………………..38 Chapter 4 Conclusions: A Look at Olafur Eliasson’s Green River and Edward Burtynsky’s Oil Spills……………………………………………………….…………....60 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………….....76 v List of Figures Figure 1:Edward Burtynsky, Ferrous Bushling No.17…………………………………….…....20 Figure 2: Jackson Pollock, One, Number 31……….......……………………………………..…….....20 Figure 3: Edward Burtynsky, Dryland Farming #21……….……………………………...........23 Figure 4: Jean Dubuffet, Typewriter III…………………….………...………………………………..24 Figure 5: Edward Burtynsky, Nickel Tailings #30…………………..……………………...........26 Figure 6: Charles Comfort, The Romance of Nickel………..……………………………………..28 Figure 7: Edward Burtynsky, Nickel Tailings #31…………………...…………………………...31 Figure 8: Edward Burtynsky, Nickel Tailings #34………………………………………...……...34 Figure 9: W.H. Bartlett, View Below Table Rock……………………………..……...……………..41 Figure 10: Olafur Eliasson, Reversed Waterfall………..…………………………………………..43 Figure 11: Olafur Eliasson, Detail of Reversed Waterfall…………………………...………….45 Figure 12: Olafur Eliasson, Reversed Waterfall………………………..…………………………..47 Figure 13: Olafur Eliasson, New York City Waterfalls: Brooklyn Bridge……..…………..48 Figure 14: Olafur Eliasson, New York City Waterfalls: Brooklyn Bridge………..………..51 Figure 15: Olafur Eliasson, New York City Waterfalls: night view......................................55 Figure 16: Michelle V. Agins, Trees at the River Café in Brooklyn.….....……..…………….56 Figure 17: Olafur Eliasson, The Weather Project……………………………….....……………...58 Figure 18: Olafur Eliasson, Green River…………………………..………………………………..…63 Figure 19: Olafur Eliasson, Green River…………………………………………………..…………..66 Figure 20: Edward Burtynsky, Oil Spill #9…………………………………………………..……...67 Figure 21: Edward Burtynsky, Oil Spill #10……………………………..………………………….70 vi Chapter 1 Introduction and Literature Review Landscape is a complex and ambiguous term. A landscape is what viewers perceive, select, mediate, and modify to fit their particular needs and desires. It is a cultural construct that has enabled us to form emotional attachments to the earth, while maintaining a sense of control over the perceived wild. Malcolm Andrews argues that landscape “is mediated land, land that has been aesthetically processed.”1 But, if that is the case, then how can we distinguish landscape from the land and from Nature? I would like to argue that the time has come to redefine Nature, and to rethink its role in the creation of landscape. W.J.T. Mitchell comments that landscape is a verb. He urges his reader to “think of landscape, not as an object to be seen or a text to be read, but as a process by which social and subjective identities are formed.”2 This is important to note because scholarship now widely accepts the idea that the visual representation of a landscape is never neutral. In terms of landscape art, representation is now understood as a re-presentation of a particular environment. Marylin J. McKay explains that the “hyphenated spelling underscores the fact that any representation is both subsequent to an original and mediated through the particular circumstances of maker and viewer, such as ethnicity, gender, nationality, and social class.”3 This means that the land being portrayed is not only a version of an existing site in the nonhuman world but also a presentation of the site 1 Malcolm Andrews, Landscape and Western Art (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999) 7. 2 W.J.T. Mitchell, Landscape and Power (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994) 1. 3 Marylin J. McKay, Picturing the Land: Narrating Territories in Canadian Landscape Art, 1500-1950 (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 2011) 3. 1 encoded with the artist’s intentions and the viewer’s experiences. The actual environment depicted provides the basis for the image, which is the product of the artist’s negotiation of the land. This thesis examines the intersection of landscape, art, and environmentalism. It explores the environmental undertones of artists Edward Burtynsky’s and Olafur Eliasson’s work, which has clearly aligned them; however, the focus of this study is not an evaluation of the artists’ abilities to express environmental concerns, but rather of the effects of their representations on our understanding of the surrounding environment, and of the artists’ contribution to a definition of Nature that includes its own demise as a site of aesthetic pleasure. This study is interested in how an environmental language can be used to re-present Nature and landscape; again the hyphenated spelling here refers to the fact that representation is always mediated by particular circumstances. The relationship between artistic investment in landscape and environmental issues is not necessarily a new topic; however, the heavy emphasis on environmental issues in the present-day public forum has transformed the scholarly discourse surrounding the depiction of the land we inhabit. Many scholars have written about the interconnectedness of landscape, Nature, environmentalism and art. For the purposes of this thesis I have assembled a core group of texts that have been formative in the development of my understanding of that larger body of scholarship. To maintain a structured discussion, I have grouped the texts under the following themes: The Advancement of Environmentalism, Nature and Landscape Theory, Human Intervention into the 2 Land and, lastly, Landscape, the Environment and Art. All of the studies that I include are related to one another and can also be read in terms of each theme. It is important to note as well that this is not a comprehensive examination of the scholarship

Load more