The rising tide of art and ecology

Artist Bram Arnold writes for newstatesman.com on the growing links between art and ecology

Something has been stirring in the wilderness for some time now, lurking on the peripheries of our collective vision. It has been growing and evolving in strength and form. Occasionally it leaps to the fore; Simon Starling wins the Turner Prize or a wooden elephant strolls through the streets of London. And these apparently disparate events can be drawn together under the banner of Arts and Ecology.

The scientific revolution was a great pinnacle of man’s achievements but its ultimate outcome is, for society, the segregation of thought and feeling. A schism between scientific rigour and artistic tenderness. There is now a growing concern in certain artistic circles to reconnect, to heal the divide that separates science from philosophy and art, and - through diverse media - to reinterpret our existence on this planet and invigorate it once more.

In this time of critical and irreversible change science seems to be inclining its head welcomingly towards the arts, if with a slightly bemused look on its face. In the wake of the year that finally put climate change on everyone’s lips, seems pertinent to throw Art & Ecology together in the mainstream.

The RSA recently held a conference on Arts & Ecology entitled ‘No way back’ and similarly themed conferences have cropped up in Canada, China and Dartington in Devon where the annual Desire Lines symposium is in its second year.

The roots of the Art & Ecology concept can be traced to a couple of art movements from the 60’s and 70’s - Conceptual Art and Land Art, along with a nod and a wink to the Fluxus and Situationist International groups.

The ‘Ecology’ spoken of is an extension of its conventional definition to deal with the various human dilemmas facing modern civilisation. From the actions of multinational corporations to the decline of traditional practices and from global warming to inter-cultural relations, these situations have changed the nature of the artist’s role, from the lone ranger of old, busying himself in a disused warehouse studio, to an interactive media savvy collaborative figure who roams between situations and organisations facilitating occurrences that would otherwise never have been considered as possible.

This presents society with the ready made weapon of ‘that’s not art’, the process of art’s evolution having sped up along with the rest of society we have very rapidly leapt from pictures on walls to prize winning artists who very rarely produce anything that could be called an object let alone an art work in the Constable, Turner, Holbein sense of the word. The artist has instead become the facilitator of projects. Gone are the days of presenting the world with future or past utopias, today it models, in real time, ways of being in the present world.

The artist is becoming an important figure for his ability to perceive paths where before there were only the segregating walls of a society bogged down by its own specialisms. Such perception is an important skill for the conditions in which we now live where collaborative interdisciplinary work may well hold answers unattainable to segregated disciplines.

One of the artists to speak at the ‘No way back’ conference in London was Brazilian born artist Maria Thereza Alves who is currently based in Germany.

At present she is working on a project called ‘Wake’, a project that began in Germany and is spreading now throughout Britain but one that has links to the majority of the globe and more than a fair chunk of human history.

In collaboration with German botanists Alves extracted all the seeds from a square metre of soil in the grounds of a plot in central Berlin that was currently being redeveloped. The seeds were then exposed to the necessary conditions for germination to take place and the results led to the exploration of the various histories of the location, its cultures and place in society.

Seeds have the capacity to lay dormant for hundreds of years and plants native to places as disparate as Argentina and China sprang up out of this ground below central Berlin. The continuation of this project in Britain takes the form of an exploration of old ballast dumping sites around the ports of the UK. Trade ships transporting goods would collect ballast from their destinations abroad only to dump it in Britain for it to be used in land reclamation, bringing with it all manner of plants that have lain dormant for hundreds of years. This simple gesture leads to an opening up of forgotten histories and a very different approach to the idea of native ecologies, as well as requiring the advice and assistance of various branches of society thereby encapsulating one of the many approaches within arts and ecology.

Simon Starling was a little known artist in this country before winning the 2005 Turner Prize and has a different approach. Throughout his work he has been interested in looking again at hither-too unconnected objects and the possibilities that conjoining these may bring.

Combining a bicycle and a chainsaw in 2003’s ‘Carbon’ created a moped. When parked you can remove its engine – the chainsaw – to cut timber. Then, strapped to the moped, the wood can be can be taken home to be used as fuel. It’s an example of how Starling looks at the multiple possibilities of individual objects.

Finding a disused shed on the banks of the Rhine he reassembled it into a boat and used the boat to float him and the rest of the shed down river to a gallery in Basle, Switzerland where the shed was reassembled in the gallery.

Both of these artists can be linked by a fascination with the reinterpretation of place and situation utilising perspectives that are not viewed through the eyes of conventional society.

So what of the wooden elephant that walked around London last May?

A performance by French street-theatre company Royal de Luxe, it brought a feeling of community and sense of wonder.

The performance broke down the barriers inherent in the ecology of communities like nothing else could, one did not require a ticket, an invitation, or a wealth of ‘high art’ understanding. One simply had to be there.

Art & Ecology is currently still a mystery wrapped in an enigma, requiring as it does the reconstruction of many of society’s current conventions, but the subject can only flourish from here. The litany of artists with an interest in science and scientists with an interest in arts is growing exponentially and this is reflected in the number of courses cropping up across the UK from Carlisle to Dartington and Manchester, and across the world. With its roots firmly embedded in long accepted artistic movements and its branches reaching out to many of societies’ common problems, at both a macro and micro level, it can but only become an important pedestal. Whether we all sit on it one day is up to us.

Ralph Steadman for the New Statesman.
Show Hide image

Tim Farron: Theresa May is "the prisoner of the Ukip wing of her party"

The Liberal Democrat leader on his faith, Blairism and his plan to replace Labour as the opposition. 

This is Tim Farron’s seventh general election. His first was in 1992, when his Tory opponent was a 36-year-old called Ther­esa May. He was just 21 and they were both unsuccessful candidates in the Labour fortress of North-West Durham. He recalls talking “to a bunch of ex-miners who weren’t best pleased to see either of us, some kid Liberal and some Tory”. Now he sees his former and current opponent as “the prisoner of the Ukip wing of her party . . . I think it has rendered Ukip almost pointless – she is Ukip now.”

May was elected to parliament in 1997, but it took Farron until 2005 to join her. She leads the dominant Conservatives while he heads a party of only nine Liberal Democrat MPs. Still, their reversal of fortunes gives him hope. “After the 1992 election, every­one said there’s no way for a non-Tory government, and it turned out there was. So let’s not assume it’s a given there’s a Tory government [for ever].”

In April, I accompanied Farron to Manchester Gorton, in the lead-up to a by-election that was cancelled by May’s decision to call a snap election on 8 June. Still, the 46-year-old’s party has been in campaign mode for months; Lib Dems spoke of using last December’s Richmond Park by-election to test their messaging. It clearly had an effect: the incumbent Conservative, Zac Goldsmith, lost to their candidate, Sarah Olney.

Brexit, to which the Liberal Democrats are vehemently opposed, will be a dominant theme of the election. Their party membership has just exceeded 100,000, close to an all-time high, and they have enjoyed much success in council by-elections, with more to come in the local elections of 4 May.

However, any feel-good factor swiftly evaporated when Farron appeared on Channel 4 News on 18 April. He was asked by the co-presenter Cathy Newman whether or not he believes that homosexuality is a sin, a question that he answered obliquely in 2015 by saying that Christianity started with acknowledging that “we’re all sinners”.

This time, he told Newman, he was “not in the position to make theological announcements over the next six weeks . . . as a Liberal, I’m passionate about equality”.

The Channel 4 interview divided opinion. One Liberal politician told me that Farron’s stance was “completely intolerable”. Stephen Pollard, the influential editor of the Jewish Chronicle, described it as
“a very liberal position: he holds certain personal views but does not wish to legislate around them”. Jennie Rigg, the acting chair of LGBT+ Liberal Democrats, said it was “as plain as the nose on my face that Tim Farron is no homophobe”.

Farron declined the chance to clarify his views with us in a follow-up phone call, but told the BBC on 25 April: “I don’t believe that gay sex is a sin,” adding, “On reflection, it makes sense to actually answer this direct question since it’s become an issue.”

For his critics, Farron’s faith and politics are intertwined. He sees it differently, as he told Christian Today in 2015: “. . . the danger is sometimes that as a Christian in politics you think your job is to impose your morality on other people. It absolutely isn’t.”

Tim Farron joined the then Liberal Party at the age of 16 but didn’t become a Christian until he was 18. Between completing his A-levels in Lancashire and going to Newcastle University to read politics, he read the apologetics, a body of Christian writing that provides reasoned arguments for the gospel story. “I came to the conclusion that it was true,” he told me. “It wasn’t just a feel-good story.”

In speeches, Farron now takes on the mannerisms of a preacher, but he had a largely non-religious upbringing in Preston, Lancashire. “I don’t think I’d been to church once other than Christmas or the odd wedding,” he says. “I went once with my dad when I was 11, for all the good that did me.”

When we meet, it is Theresa May’s religion that is in the spotlight. She has condemned the National Trust for scrubbing the word “Easter” from its Easter egg hunt, a row it later emerged had been largely invented by the right-wing press in response to a press release from a religious-themed chocolate company.

“It’s worth observing there’s no mention of chocolate or bunny rabbits in the Bible,” Farron reminds me. “When people get cross about, in inverted commas, ‘us losing our Christian heritage’ they mean things which are safe and comfortable and nostalgic.” He pauses. “But the Christian message at Easter is shocking, actually, and very radical.”

British politics is tolerant of atheists (such as Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg) alongside those who, like David Cameron, are culturally Christian but whose faith is “a bit like the reception for Magic FM in the Chilterns: it sort of comes and goes”. But the reaction to Farron’s equivocation on homosexuality prompted many to wonder if a politician who talks openly about his faith is now seen as alarming. Nebulous wishes of peace and love at Christmas, yes; sincere discussions of the literal truth of the Resurrection? Hmm.

Tim Farron’s beliefs matter because he has a mission: to replace not only Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the opposition but Theresa May in Downing Street. Over lassis at the MyLahore curry house in Manchester, he tells me that Britain is facing two calamities. “One is Brexit, indeed hard Brexit . . . and the other is a Tory government for 25 years. We have to present a genuine, progressive alternative that can not only replace Labour as an opposition, it can replace the Tories as a government.” This is ambitious talk for a party with nine MPs. “I understand the ridicule that will be thrown at me for saying those things: but if you don’t want to run the country, why are you in politics?” He pauses. “That’s a question I would ask most people leading the Labour Party at present.”

What does he think of May, his one-time opponent in North-West Durham? “She strikes me as being very professional, very straightforward, somebody who is very conservative in every sense of the word, in her thought processes, her politics, in her style.” He recalls her 2002 conference speech in which she warned Tory activists: “Our base is too narrow and so, occasionally, are our sympathies. You know what some people call us: the nasty party.”

“In many ways, she was the trailblazer for Cameron in being a softer-focused Tory,” he says. “It now looks like she’s been trapped by the very people she was berating as the nasty party all those years ago. I like to think that isn’t really her. But that means she isn’t really in control of the Conservative Party.”

Voters, however, seem to disagree. In recent polls, support for the Conservatives has hovered between 40 and 50 per cent. Isn’t a progressive alliance the only way to stop her: Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the Greens, the SNP and Plaid Cymru all working together to beat the Tories?

“Let’s be really blunt,” he says. “Had Jeremy Corbyn stood down for us in Richmond Park [where Labour stood Christian Wolmar], we would not have won. I could have written Zac Goldsmith’s leaflets for you: Corbyn-backed Liberal Democrats.

“I’m a pluralist,” he adds. “But any progressive alliance has got to be at least equal to the sum of its parts. At the moment, it would be less than the sum of its parts. The only way the Tories are losing their majority is us gaining seats in Hazel Grove –” he ticks them off with his fingers, “– in Cheadle, in the West Country and west London. There’s no chance of us gaining those seats if we have a kind of arrangement with the current Labour Party in its current form.”

What about the SNP? “Most sensible people would look at that SNP manifesto and agree with 99 per cent of it,” Farron says. “But it’s that one thing: they want to wreck the country! How can you do a deal with people who want to wreck the country?”

There’s no other alternative, he says. Someone needs to step up and offer “something that can appeal to progressive younger voters, pro-Europeans and, you know, moderate-thinking Middle England”. He wants to champion a market economy, strong public services, action on climate change, internationalism and free trade.

That sounds like Blairism. “I’m a liberal, and I don’t think Blair was a liberal,” he replies. “But I admire Blair because he was somebody who was able to win elections . . . Iraq aside, my criticisms of Blair are what he didn’t do, rather than what he did do.”

Turning around the Tory tide – let alone with just nine MPs, and from third place – is one hell of a job. But Farron takes heart from the Liberal Party in Canada, where Justin Trudeau did just that. “I’m not Trudeau,” he concedes, “He was better-looking, and his dad was prime minister.”

There is a reason for his optimism. “I use the analogy of being in a maze,” he says, “You can’t see a way out of it, for a progressive party to form a majority against the Tories. But in every maze, there is a way out. We just haven’t found it yet.” 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to British politics.

This article first appeared in the 27 April 2017 issue of the New Statesman, Cool Britannia 20 Years On

0800 7318496