 |
| Akseli Gallen-Kallela, 1899 |
“A human
being is a part of the whole called by us universe, a part limited in time and
space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feeling as something separated
from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion
is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to
affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves
from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living
creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.”
- Albert
Einstein
“The earth
has music for those who listen.”
- William
Shakespeare
"Nature is a
haunted house--but Art--is a house that tries to be haunted.”
- Emily
Dickinson
“I think
having land and not ruining it is the most beautiful art that anybody could
ever want.”
- Andy Warhol
“The tree
which moves some to tears of joy is in the eyes of others only a green thing
that stands in the way. Some see nature all ridicule and deformity... and some scarce
see nature at all. But to the eyes of the man of imagination, nature is
imagination itself.”
- William
Blake
 |
| Ivan Bilibin, 1902 |
In the
showcase section of Spectrum 18 there are more than 500 images. Vast
majority of them (more than 85%) are showing no trace of nature, not a single
blade of grass. The situation is not much different in the previous few issues
of the Spectrum book. And because the Spectrum annual is a book that gives us
still the best impression of what is going on in this field (in all its facets)
at the present moment, I can’t do anything else but to conclude that we have
almost entirely banished Nature from Fantastic Art.
It appears
as if the contemporary artist, working in the field of the fantastic, is not
very much inspired, or compelled, to depict nature in his art. And when a piece
of nature finally has to be shown, it is often depicted as a piece of prop on
the theatre stage, technically and routinely done, but without much love,
understanding or dedication. Why is that? Why, when most of us love to be in
the nature (I am quite sure about this) we still don’t find enough reason to
show this fascination in our art. At the same time it seems like we almost
obsessively and abundantly are depicting desolate places, decay, destruction
and the lack of optimism in our art.
Why? Is it
some kind of fear? Is it frustration? Or just ignorance, reluctance or
opportunism? Or maybe following the current trends and hypes is the reason? In
other words – our unscrupulous professionalism? Or should we take in
consideration the fact that the majority of population (certainly in the West)
live their lives in big cities and urban areas, where the only piece of nature
they see and have contact with on a regular basis are more or less neatly arranged
city parks (again in other words - out of sight, out of mind)!?
Or do we
quite naturally and automatically just react to the outside world in a way that
reflects the given extern circumstances. Something like a mirror that reflects
the surrounding world without any kind of analysis or judgment. A few decades
ago, our professor of History of Art taught us that good art has to reflect the
spirit of its time. This does not mean that an artist has to be a mere wall
which bounces off the information that comes towards him. On the contrary. She
meant that the artist has to absorb the outside information and let it go
through his inner prism, and then consciously / intuitively and creatively
“digest” that information and sends it back into the world.
Not only our
fantasy worlds have less need for nature, it also appears that these worlds,
ideas and energies, that are populating our canvases, or computer screens, are
showing more and more the omnipresence of violence, destruction, deviance,
weirdness and ugliness.
I know that
we artists need to make living and that the market, that big, self-centered,
profit-orientated beast, commends it. If we indeed reflect the present state of
mind of the modern world, and its current aspirations, one is compelled to
conclude that “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark!”(Hamlet)
Again, we
might say, one has to make living, so it’s still better to make art that shows
(promotes) destruction, violent behavior and dehumanization, than to sell
weapons. Or is it, really?
Let me make
myself clear. I am aware of the fact that, after all, Life is full of
suffering. Some even claim that “Life is suffering”. I am also conscious of the
fact that we live in a world of dualism. Or in more popular terms, I know about
the “dark side” of Life, and its relation to the “white (good) side”. Likewise
I realize that Art is a subjective phenomenon, but at the same time it has the
power to reveal the universal. It is a perfect ground for expressing all kinds
of truths and phenomena, regardless whether they are considered beautiful or
ugly.
However, I
am also aware of something that is called decadence,
which in most simple terms implies a situation wherein the means to a goal
become the goal itself. At the same time I know about the inborn characteristic
of the human behavior to follow the majority, or to be a part of a group. We
are social animals, after all. But I also believe (fortunately I am not alone
is this belief) that a true artist should strive to be the group’s scout, so to
speak, instead of just following the group.
Everything we do contributes to the world of the
future. Today we create tomorrow. Did you ever stopped for a moment and
reflected on how your art, things you show and promote through it, will
influence that future. Which energies, which archetypal symbols, which aspects
of the consciousness (and subconsciousness) of the World will be stimulated by
your creations. Which kind of signals do you send into the world and the
universe?
 |
| John Bauer, 1913 |
“For most of history, man has had to fight nature to survive; in this
century he is beginning to realize that, in order to survive, he must protect
it.”
- Jacques-Yves Cousteau
If you are
from the US, go to the National Aquarium in Baltimore (MD). Look for a big
screen that shows the future of the forests on our Planet, in case we keep on
exploiting them as we did until now. You will be shocked!
Think about
it when you start a new painting and see for yourself how important is nature
in your life and in your art. If you find out that you, in fact, are very much
connected to nature, cherish this feeling and do something about it. Do not
help an infertile and desolate world to come into being in the minds of people,
for what is in the mind, will express itself in reality. Be conscious about it,
about yourself and your place in the world, be aware of your unique way of
experiencing and reflecting Life. Be true to yourself and your art will reflect
it. Naturally, as your self-awareness as an artist grows, so will your principles
become stronger. That might produce some problems when, for instance, a client
asks you to paint something which is against your principles, or far from your
preferences. It is up to you how to handle that situation. Making living as an
artist is not easy, nor is Life a rose garden.
 |
| Alan Lee, 1982 |
“I like it when a flower or a little tuft of grass grows through a crack in
the concrete. It's so fuckin' heroic.”
- George Carlin
Some of you
might hate me for saying these words, or feel the need to ridicule this point
of view, but I don’t care. I don’t care as long as some of you think about it,
even if it’s for a moment, for that moment might contain a magic trigger.
I presume
that it is not necessary to say that including nature in your art would not
make your art better. Subject matter does not define the quality of an art
piece, but the approach and the way that a particular subject matter is
perceived, understood and presented. So, the point of this article is not to
promote socially, morally or environmentally engaged art (nor am I somebody who
supports the L’art pour l’art ( art
for art’s sake) notion without reservations), but to raise the awareness.
I am not a Greenpeace
fantasist (although I financially support them), or a member of an obscure
group or sect that preaches childish or nonsensical things. I love trees but I
am not a tree hugger. I try to use my brains and common sense and to love and
protect things my very survival depend on. And I am not a naïve person. I know
that Nature is indifferent towards us people, and any other spices on this
planet. And I realize that nature (Life) has to devour itself continuously
(including us, as its part) in order to exist. I also know that when I walk
through a delightful meadow, or a forest , on the each square centimeter
something is fighting for survival.
But
still…it’s home, it’s beautiful, and I love it.
Nature is
our mother, our past, present and hopefully our future. And if Art is not an
appropriate podium for showing its beautiful face, together with all its
mysterious contradictions, and celebrate it, what else is?
 |
| Golden Apple-tree and the Nine Peahens, 2012 |
“I do not understand exactly what you mean by fear," said Tarzan.
"Like lions, fear is a different thing in different men, but to me the only
pleasure in the hunt is the knowledge that the hunted thing has power to harm
me as much as I have to harm him. If I went out with a couple of rifles and a
gun bearer, and twenty or thirty beaters, to hunt a lion, I should not feel
that the lion had much chance, and so the pleasure of the hunt would be
lessened in proportion to the increased safety which I felt."
"Then I am to take it that Monsieur Tarzan would prefer to go naked into
the jungle, armed only with a jackknife, to kill the king of beasts,"
laughed the other good naturedly, but with the merest touch of sarcasm in his
tone.
"And a piece of rope," added Tarzan.”
- Edgar Rice Burroughs, Tarzan of the Apes
