Marv Recinto, writing for Art Review (2023), argues that artists and art institutions “seem content to merely ‘address’, ‘engage with’ or ‘respond to’ the climate crisis”, putting out exhibitions that promise to raise awareness. One example is a past exhibition at the Hayward gallery in London titled Dear Earth: Art and Hope in a Time of Crisis which showcased the work of artists such as Andrea Bowers who is an artist as well as climate activist.[1] Recinto, although aware of Bower’s activism, argues the artwork does not fulfil the show catalogue’s claim that art plays a role in the climate crisis. The problem it seems, is that shows of this type, often call viewers to address the climate crisis, yet the works themselves merely call for action, and not evidence action in their production or concept. Furthermore, Recinto suggests that the institutions themselves could demonstrate actions they are taking.
This article resonated with my concerns and challenges when implementing within Fine Art pedagogy, UALs new Social Purpose Plan (UAL, 2023) and Climate Action Plan (UAL, 2021). As courses at Camberwell College get revalidated, the directive to implement these plans have trickled down and made their way into the new course handbooks, currently in progress and commencing in 2025/26. I have no objection to Fine Art addressing the climate emergency and actioning UAL’s overall strategy. My concern, however, is how these issues and declarations of intent become performative. Take for example this passage for a newly revalidated unit:
“you will be introduced to the idea that all art is ecological because it has the capacity to transform us and our relationship to the world. All art is ecological because it includes its environment in its form.”
It is clear that the Social Purpose Plan has influenced authors to attempt to address issues head on by stipulating that all art implicitly enacts climate justice goals. To me, this is the sort of institutional practice that Recinto is critiquing; art colleges uncritically promising an ‘addressing’ and ‘engaging with’ the climate crisis through its student’s work. Furthermore, I find this passage in the handbook problematic as it reduces complex planetary issues into a trivial matter of how to consider how artworks interact with the immediate space around it, clearly to reassure students that a learning outcome regarding climate justice can be met even by not addressing it explicitly.
I believe there are pedagogical ideas worth exploring further regarding the climate crisis. As a BA course, the onus could potentially be shared by actively engaging with groups that do promising work to drawn down carbon, build resilience, support biodiversity and so on. An example of this in practice is how we worked with Wolves Lanes Centre to introduce students to emerging ecological practices such as the growing of edible cacti. The students in return ran an event and shared their creative responses with the local community.
Next steps in applying the learning:
- revise the language used in the handbook, with consideration as to how it would affect pedagogy on the course.
- Identify areas that we as a course team can do to demonstrate our own commitments and action regarding the climate emergency.
- identify opportunities for students to collaborate with external organisations.
- find artistic references that go beyond ‘raising awareness’.
References
Recinto, Mark. 2023. Eco exhibitions won’t save us (no date). https://artreview.com/ecocritical-art-hayward-dear-earth-climate-crisis-exhibition/.
UAL (2021). Climate Action Plan. [online] UAL. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/climate-action-plan.
UAL (2023). Social Purpose. [online] UAL. Available at: https://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/social-purpose.
[1] http://www.andrewkreps.com/artists/andrea-bowers