“Strange Weather” — an ongoing project with tentacles

Hi All,

I’ve been working on various projects about weather and climate change; there seem to be a number of sub-plots, sub-projects, off-shoots, tangents, etc. etc. First, there’s a weblog which I hope will eventually provide a useful research archive of relevant contemporary artists’ projects. The blog lives at http://StrangeWeather.info.

Another recent project (2006) took the form of a group exhibition and was fairly whimsical: out of the blue.

I’ve been interested in the conflicted relationship between art and the documentary. At times they seem to be pitted against each other…

Currently I am working on a series of paintings. In brief, I pull images — news documentation of climate events and disasters — and re-enact them as paintings.

Here’s an introduction to a subset of these that focus on post-Katrina New Orleans, by way of an announcement and a few links :

Washington, DC - “Strange Weather,” an exhibition of paintings by Joy Garnett depicting environmental and social catastrophes, will be on view by appointment from Jan. 15 through April 30 at the National Academies’ Keck Center, 500 Fifth St., N.W., Washington, D.C. It will then be placed on public view from May 5 through July 30 at the National Academy of Sciences’ headquarters, located at 2100 C St., N.W., Washington, D.C.

An artist’s multiple with essays by art critic Lucy Lippard and The New York Times science reporter Andrew Revkin, is available upon request.

Joy Garnett gathers photographs of man-made and natural disasters from the internet and renders the images as richly textured oil paintings. In the process, she locates tensions between the visceral power of paint and the fleeting nature of images in the mass media, addressing the evolving role of art in an information-saturated society.

Curated for the National Academy of Sciences, the exhibition focuses on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. In Strange Weather, Garnett takes widely distributed news images of a devastated New Orleans and recasts them as paintings in which geological, political, and sociological weather are inextricably intertwined.

Based in New York City, Joy Garnett studied painting at the École Nationale Supérieure des Beaux-Arts in Paris and received her MFA from the City College of New York. Her paintings were recently exhibited in “Image War,” organized by the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York City, and “Run for Your Lives!” at DiverseWorks, Houston. In 2004, she received a grant from the Anonymous Was a Woman Foundation. In 2000, she received a commission from the Wellcome Trust to participate along with her father, biochemist Merrill Garnett, in “N01se,” a multi-site exhibition about information and transformation at Kettle’s Yard, Cambridge, and the Wellcome Trust’s Two10 Gallery, London. The exhibition was organized by artist Adam Lowe and historian of science Simon Schaffer.

-- JoyGarnett

MattShanley Says:

Hi Joy, thanks for sharing your work with us. I’ve been following the Strange weather blog for awhile now - it always brings up so many wonderful works, like the recent one on At This Rate, by Giles Revell and Matt Wiley.

JaneMarsching Says:

Joy, it would be great to see more of your images of Katrina, and to find out more about the particular choices you make in your paintings. I like this idea of calling the paintings reenactments, instead of appropriations. It suggests nostalgia I think, which is a little odd, but also suggests an active performance, an engaged subjectivity, a cultural production of history, which when then applied to our daily media is quite thought provoking. Are images history immediately? And if so, how much do the histories linked to those images change over time, or how can they be changed?
Anyway, fascinating ideas, thanks.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

JoyGarnett Says:

Thanks Matt, Thanks Jane… after much poking around for better terms, I think “re-enact” is really the most accurate one — I’ve also tried out “re-interpret”, “re-cast”, etc. But Jane, you are right about the importance of emphasizing the performative element in the act of painting, in this case. (They are all painted in one go, my overarching rule, which I never break.) There are more images of Katrina paintings up on my flickr site for popular consumption:
www.flickr.com/photos/newsgrist/

best, til soon,
joy

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

JaneMarsching Says:

Joy, I’m reposting a comment from someone else on a recent post I wrote about science and art to get other responses. its one of the top questions i get asked about my work, and I’m not sure I have a great answer, or at least one that isn’t too complex… what do you think?

“The question for me is, does making art about climate change ever get beyond preaching to the choir? Is it possible that art can play a role in changing the minds of those who continue to reject the scientific evidence? How can art make a difference, where a photo of environmental devastation, can not?”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

JoyGarnett Says:

My short answer is: it’s the wrong question; there are no such equations, where A + B = Change.

Also: this is a false distinction between “art” and “photography”.

I don’t buy in to the notion that art is about that kind of persuasion — isn’t that propaganda? manipulating, forcing meaning on people, telling them what to think. I’m not sure if anything really functions efficiently or can be instrumental in that simplistic, immediate way. Can art make a difference? of course it does, absolutely, when you consider that the sum total of human behavior doesn’t just amount to being convinced of one thing or another, of buying one advert as opposed to another.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

JoyGarnett Says:

Funny, that previous comment of mine seems so strident and shrill now when I read it. (I was pre-caffeine when I responded!). A few hours later, when I arrived here at work and logged on, a somewhat related discussion was starting on another blog, about political art content; my comment there is a little more leavened:

edwardwinkleman.blogspot.com/2007/02/is-challenging-art-hot-or-ed-eats-bit.html

((joy said…

It depends what you mean by does it “work”. If you mean: does didactic art succeed in convincing people of x,y,z?, the answer is probably no. But I can’t think of anything less interesting or less useful than [mis]using art to try to convince people of something –that belongs to the realm of propaganda, agitprop and advertising (ie: our mainstream culture). If we were to agree with Jonathan Lethem’s assertion (I do) that part of what distinguishes art from, say, even extremely artful advertising, is that it essentially functions as a gift — which means you don’t require something in return, not even that the viewer swallow the content. My feeling is that if you want to take intelligent risks with content — not foolish ones — you consider how you can finesse/push it so that rather than force meaning upon people, you allow for many possible readings that might resonate in different ways with different folks — including those readings you didn’t intuit or don’t intend. That can be difficult, as that’s when you might have to let go of your intentions, and the intended meaning/context of the work. In other words: content can be buried, it can be open-ended; in the end, its reception may not be something you should want to control, entirely. Does that make any sense?))
2/05/2007 11:07:00 AM

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.