Being human is the state of being a person. The Wellcome Collection stated "being Human explores what it means to be human in the 21st century. It reflects our hopes and fears about new forms of medical knowledge, and our changing relationships with ourselves, each other and the world". We as humans are constantly developing, evolving, and creating. We have come so far in areas such as medicine, technology, etc. Although we have resolved major issues, we still have a lot to develop. I believe one of the most significant and revolutionary creations is medication and other health related treatments. This helped prolong and improve the lives of so many. This made me wonder why such an important creation that is proven to work/help is not accessible to everyone. I looked into the Universal healthcare system which made me even more curious.

WELLCOME MUSEUM: BEING HUMAN

This exhibition explored specific areas relating to human life. Genetics, Mind and body, Environmental breakdown, and Infections. This exhibition was different to others I have visited because it focused more on the context of the art. Its educates us on the what it is to be human and on certain scientific topics such as Genetics, which actually makes us human. The label in the exhibition states "This gallery explores how we think and feel about ourselves, our bodies and our relationship with the world around us. Our understanding of what it means to be human is being transformed: by new research, our own experiences and those of other people". 

Transparent Women (Anatomical Figure) Unknown Designer, 1980. There was a remote with buttons each one lights up a different organ. I found this interesting because although it says it's a women, it is generic. It represents a normal woman. Nothing individual or personal. It teaches us about our species. It is mundane, there is nothing that is new or out of the ordinary we are being exposed to. 

This is a still from T3511 by Heather Dewey-Hagborg, 2018. This film is about the relationship with a biohacker and their subject. I never expected this topic to be executed in this manner. I thought this was fascinating because the artist portrayed being human in a scientific manner by telling us information about genetics, and used human emotions and feelings in the character she played to make it relatable. She portrays emotions of love, sadness, hope, and vulnerability. Her character falling in love with the genetics of a donor she has never met or seen shows that our identity is not necessarily associated with our physical appearance. We can be exposed through our genetics and cells. The label describes genetics as "the blueprint of life. It provides instructions that shape every cell in the body." In order to be categorised as a 'human' we have to have the DNA, genetics etc, of this specific species. We are not the only species that can feel emotions so is the only thing making us human our genetics?

The works above relate to current issues around the world. Un Monde Sous Pression (The World Under Pressure) by Batoul S'Himi and Too by Adam Chodszko are about the effects of climate change on areas. Refugee Astronaut by Yinka Shonibare is about a refugee carrying its possessions and is aimed to make us curious as to why they had to leave and who they are. 

ARTISTS:

Un Monde Sous Pression (The World Under Pressure) by Batoul S'Himi stood out to me most because of its context. It talks about a current issue (climate change) which made me think about other issues happening around the world such as healthcare, war etc, which I can discuss in my work. I like how he used domestic objects. It makes the issue seem like real life because of how familiar these objects are. For this project we have to make a statement. Something to put in a time capsule to tell other species or generations in the future about what is happening in our time. I think discussing a current issue highlights what could and should be changed. And to also bring awareness to these issues.

Mappa by Alighieri Boetti (1971) is an embroidery of the world map. According to https://www.moma.org/collection/works/80620, this piece is meant to represent that "nothing is permanent on our earth". He used a map to show this because throughout the decades the map has changed as new countries had been discovered. "Certain countries do not appear on the map because they did not yet exist (Ukraine and Belarus, for example). Some nations, such as Israel, are not represented because the Taliban regime of Afghanistan did not then recognize their existence. Some countries that are represented, such as Zaire and the USSR, have since changed political identities and no longer exist." I think representing change through a map was appropriate for the idea of 'being human'. That is were we are. Representing that nothing there is permanent is also directed to us humans. We are not permanent. We are born, then we are gone. Using a map also highlights that we are all the same or we are all homo sapiens. This is because the map shows all the areas on earth which is all the areas where we exist. 

(Refugee Astronaut by Yinka Shonibare) After seeing this I wanted to research further about the context of this piece because I had a few questions. Does this represent a specific event? Why were they leaving? Who were they? 

The artists says it's a warning for what could happen if water levels continue to rise and the displacement of people. This is another piece aiming to spread awareness about current issues that could continue to worsen if we do not do something about it. This are issues that people are struggling with. This is another 'human' quality, selfishness. We are not as empathetic as we should be. We are careless about these issues. We do not think they are as serious as they actually are. One problem such as climate change can cause the next. Her next statement supports my point. “It’s not immediately graspable. That’s why things are very slow politically. People see they can still get their breakfast. It doesn’t feel urgent. Whereas if you’re in a war situation you can see your house being destroyed and that you have to respond very quickly.”

"Shonibare insists that the piece speaks to the present as well as the future, pointing out that the recent rise in asthma deaths has been linked to the air-pollution crisis." It is clear she is targeting environmental issues. This is a current issue. I aim to look into other current issues which are just as serious. 

https://wellcomecollection.org/articles/XYofFREAACQAp-Vl

PROJECT:

Is healthcare free everywhere? How many countries does the Universal Healthcare system actually cover? Should healthcare be free? Should medication be free? Is sufficient healthcare provided in countries that need it the most? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_universal_health_care

According to Wikipedia, Universal healthcare is described as "a healthcare system that provides health care and financial protection to all residents of a particular country or region." I want to emphasise 'particular' because the name is misleading. So this system does not actually cover all areas. 

As shown above, parts of Africa, North America, and Asia are provided with the least healthcare. Red indicates no free or universal healthcare. Africa is the poorest continent therefore they do not have the financial means to spend on healthcare. This made me think about if healthcare in areas that need it most should be free. It is definitely not this simple and I am looking into this topic quite philosophically, however because Africa is the poorest continent I am certain this is urgent. The Gates Foundation have listed concerns about each continent which they target and help to give us an idea of what they need. Africa and Asia have fatal diseases such as HIV, Polio, and Malaria. Due to the financial state of these developing countries, they cannot access sufficient healthcare. Poverty and health are intertwined. The majority of these countries are not educated on health and sanitation which leads to diseases as such. Healthcare will not only treat people but provide them with information about how to take care of themselves to avoid these diseases. Governments in these countries cannot afford universal healthcare therefore they rely on organisations such as NGOs, WHO, and other charities. I read a few arguments between people debating whether healthcare/medication should be free. On Quora, a user argued against free medication stating "Why stop at providing free medicine? Should food be free? Should clean water be free? Should clothing and shelter be free? Should unlimited education be free? Should your laptop and the electricity to power your laptop be free?" and linking it to "loss of economic growth and opportunity". Another user argued this point saying that "medication that a qualified doctor prescribes as necessary for maintaining or improving the health of someone, and that is approved and documented as effective, should be subsidized sufficiently that nobody has to go without for lack of financial muscle. This point takes into account valid points from the user before. I agree that economic growth is important because they make more money which they can invest back into the country and it is crucial for investors. However, what about low income countries with low economic growth? What about the large numbers of people even in wealthier countries who cannot afford? Should they be compromised for the sake of money? I do not have all the answers as this is an incredibly difficult and deep topic however there must be other ways that low income countries and people living in poverty can be treated. On https://www.debate.org/opinions/should-health-care-be-free, some argued 'right to like and right to health', 'Health care is mandatory!...Health care is something everybody needs. A price should not be put on someone's life'. There's a lot of back and forth in this topic as some will look at it more philosophically and others will be more concerned about the business side.   

The lecture gave me a few ideas of different ways to explore this topic of objects. I thought about a collection of found objects, inspired by Tom Friedman, the idea of giving an object value or taking it away, also consumer culture e.g Jeff Koons, Damien Hirst.  

Tom Friedman, Untitled 1995

Artnet states that he "explores the relationship between perception and logic. He uses vernacular materials including hair, plastic, Styrofoam, and paper to create unexpected objects". From this and most of his work, it is clear he focuses on the audience and how they interpret his work. He said in an interview (from art net) that art to him is  "a context to slow the viewer's experience from their everyday life in order to think about things they haven't thought about. Or to think in a new way,” which suggests that he aims for a specific reaction or perception from his audience. 

He cut up pencils in order to achieve this. This relates to the Collection project in part 1.  What I found most interesting is how he used one simple and basic object to make a complex figure. This makes the object appear more valuable, from an audience point of view. He added value by distorting the object and making it interesting which is different to Sylvia Fleury for example in her 'Prada Boots (2003)' because she enhances the value of these shoes using a metallic colour. Similarly to Jeff Koons who also using shiny colours to make his piece more appealing and attractive (Ballon Dogs). I want to use his technique of changing/distorting an object and repetition using found objects around my house. 

The Three Sisters by Peter Fischli & David Weiss 1985.

They attach objects together to create an unstable form for the camera. I do not like this piece as a whole but I think the way they connected the objects is interesting  because it fits perfectly and looks like the objects were made to fit into each other. I like how they did not have to distort the object to change its form.  

Tony Cragg, Stack, 1975. 

Cragg "randomly accumulated miscellaneous objects and materials" in the form of a cube. I like that the composition was random because the result is unexpected. Cragg doesn't attach the materials permanently, he recreates it every time the sculpture is exhibited in a different location. Therefore this sculpture is temporary. The performance is the act of recreating it and the outcome of the constantly changing composition. 

Styrofoam Cups, 2004-8, Tara Donovan.

What I found most interesting about Tara Donovan's work is her methodology. She has said that she approaches her work by understanding the objects she's working with in order to find out what she is able to do with them. "In a sense, I develop a dialogue with each material that dictates the forms that develop. With every new material comes a specific repetitive action that builds the work.” This is clear as she ends up creating such complex and abstract figures. This is something I want to incorporate into this project. Understanding the limits of a single object and how much I am able to do with it. 

I read a couple of pages from 'Sculpture's location in the midst of the real' by Maarten Doorman. I came across a sentence that describes what I am aiming to do with this project. "Making art from trivial objects created confusion about the different between art and non-art". An object with little value, often non-art objects, being given value through the way its displayed/presented to the viewer. This has qualities of consumer culture. Being fooled to spend large amounts of money on objects with little value because they are presented aesthetically. Therefore I can understand where this 'confusion' is from because the art is taken away when the aim is solely financial. This is evident with artists like Damien Hirst. 

The aim for this project is to create a formless object with no use, function, or anything recognisable. Georges Bataille describes formlessness as "formless is not only an adjective having a given meaning, but a term that serves to bring things down in the world, generally requiring that each thing have its form". What I am understanding from his text is that it is not only an adjective but it ha its own meaning. Also in order for something to become formless it must have an original form. Which is somewhat true because in order to create a formless object you must remove or distort a form. These certainly depend on the assumption that everything already has its won form. 

Lift, Richard Serra, 1967.

Serra wanted to experiment with non traditional materials such as rubber, which he used for this piece, and the process of using these materials. He made a list of verbs to mimic with the materials and chose 'to lift' for this piece. I found this method useful and I aim to use this strategy because he based the form on the limits of the material. The material has the control in this case and he created this according to what the material allows him to do. His outcome has no function or form, and this proves Georges Bataille's theory of something needs to have been a form before becoming formless. He has removed the function of what looks like a floor mat. It looks like it is rejecting any interaction with the viewer. There is no way we can turn this form into a tool.

Skulpturendition zu Cauldron, Tony Cragg, 2008. 

"his choice of material has determined the form"

Similarly to Serra, this formless sculpture is shaped by the properties of the material. What I like most about this piece is its solidity and harshness. Although its dynamism enhances these effects, I want to try to create a form that looks heavy or has weight and is complimented by harsh activity. 

Gnaw, Janine Antoni, 1992.

Antoni made one cube of chocolate and one cube out of lard. She bite pieces off both blocks until the cube shape was distorted. The texture stood out to me most because of the repetitive teeth marks. It appeals to our senses. I believe texture is important when aiming to create a certain emotion because the artist is physically marking how they want us to feel. Harsher/forceful textures are often reflections of the context and vice versa. 

Habitus by Ann Hamilton, 2016 (top) and Light and Space II by Robert Irwin, 2008 (bottom).

Habitus by Ann Hamilton is a large scale and offsite installation of curtain like cloth hanging from the ceiling. The fabric rotates and moves and the audience is free to move around and experience the effects of the installation. Videos show that there are ropes hanging down that the audience is free to pull down which make the fabric spin. She explains why she uses cloth saying that it is "our commonness... we wear it, we are surrounded by it" so seeing how she literally makes the audience surrounded by these large pieces of cloth is fascinating. In the video linked below the material is described as "Something cheap and resilient into something that looks like silk" suggesting that the way the cloth is displayed and flows makes it look more valuable. Light and Space II by Robert Irwin is an installation of fluorescent lights arranged in right angles, attached to the walls and corners of an interior. It emphasises the architecture of the room, making a plain white walled room more intriguing. What I find incommon between these two installations and what I find most interesting is the repetition. Repetition is an exciting device in art because it can create movement, rhythm, and balance. Something about an emphasis of the same object gives me a sense of stability. I want to utilize one material and create rhythm similar to both Irwin and Hamilton. 

For this project I was looking into themes of invisibility/camouflage. I came across Tania Bruguera and she talked about the "intangible and trying to push the limit of art into feeling more than seeing" (from linked video). I wanted explore the idea of making the invisibility of an object make us feel.

10,148,451 by Tania Bruguera (2018)

This is a commission for the Turbine Hall at the Tate. The ground is painted with heat sensitive paint so it leaves a print whenever its touched. It does however fade back to its original colour. The audience is welcome to walk and play on the ground. At initial glance, it does not look like anything as it is not far from the colour of the ground. The audience is needed to activate this piece. She suggests "things only change and happen in society when you intervene in them". What I like most about her work is her concept and how she explored the idea of invisibility. This work actually has a deeper meaning. When the floor is heated and walked one enough, a "large-scale image appears of a portrait of a young asylum seeker who arrived from Syria in 2011... we the people have the power, when we come together, to give those who don’t have a voice the visibility they need." This therefore relates to the invisibility of people and issues that need to be spoken about and given attention to. 

Refractions by Robert Morris (1960s)

Refractions is a series of works he makes that "conveys his unconventional handling of sculptural forms to create dynamic and sensory relationships between object, space, and viewer".  This piece I like specifically because of the illusion of extended and exaggerated space. The room looks larger and because it is based on reflection, us as the viewer play a role in this piece. I like how he creates subtle effects and uses space as the focal point. The sculpture supports the space, making it look larger therefore making the space look more attractive to viewers. I want to make something that supports/enhances the space around it instead of the other way around.

I was influenced by 'Cotton Candy Panopticon'(2017) by Tra Bouscaren to develop a digital edit I had made in part 1. He combines digital art and sculpture. I was drawn to specific areas of this room. Parts like the top left corner. I like the projections on random parts of architecture in the room. Areas we often would not look at first or give much attention too. It highlight the architecture and make us more aware of the space we are in. This makes sense as Bouscaren has said “I want viewers to reflect on their own role". If we are carefully observing the space we take into account our position in the space. Are we invasive? Is the space welcoming? etc. I was interested in this because of its isolation from everything else going on. Although it matches the theme of everything else, there is something separating it. 

Rebecca Birch explores ideas about subsurface geology in this piece called 'Lichen Hunting in the Lillomarka'(2019). She projects images of different surfaces of the earth on formless shapes. The shapes match the haptic sense of the images. I was fascinated by the harsh contrast she creates between the work and the space. I definitely want to experiment with contrasts. Although it is completely dark there is depth to it. I find it quite ambiguous because of its aura of the unknown. No movements or figures are visible in the background but there is a sense of liveliness. This piece is relevant to my interest in visibility/invisibility.