Author: Enchanted_Viper

Environmental humanities is an interdisciplinary field that employs distinct humanistic studies about natural world and the role of humans living in it with a view to looking at ranges that are far beyond literary studies. As per Qatar, there are numerous public arts installed that can potentially be linked to environmental humanities, such as Force of Nature, On their Way, Falcon, Gates to the Sea and many more, because the study of these public art installations indeed allows us to recognize the interdisciplinary nature of the message that they are trying to convey. This course indeed inspired me to analyze the relationship between the human and nonhuman world through a comparative environmental study of public art installations in Qatar; and also led me to a question “Though these sculptures might meticulously showcase the relationship between the human and nonhuman world, to what extent are they considering their own interests/benefits or how far it is more of an anthropocentrism rather than an even balance of both human and nonhuman world?”

The significance of modern and contemporary public art installations in Qatar lies in internalizing an ecological responsibility through the power of art, but at the same time bringing out the depiction of the national representation. As for the public art installations, most of them were created by foreign artists, where the sculptures intently showcase the relationship between the natural world and human world, but the overarching theme of anthropocentrism is still vividly conspicuous. Therefore, in my final brief, I will explore the potential grounds and motivation of these foreign artists establishing their artwork in Qatar with ecological consciousness, while at the same time depicting the national representation or identity, which definitely counterbalances the anthropocentrism over biocentrism.

For instance, in the case of “Falcon”, it is known to be one of the renowned public art installations in Qatar that was created by a Dutch sculptor, Tom Claassen. He made this sculpture with a view to portraying the significance of nature and wildlife by an abstract representation of Qatar’s national bird. This immediately brings forth the book “How Forests Think” by Eduardo Kohn, where he explicitly enforces the readers to step out of an anthropocentric perspective, re-think and re-evaluate humans’ actions. It is because the scholarship of this book indeed responds to the sculpture “Falcon”, as it shows the falcon merely as a human activity and ‘almost’ camouflages the true identity of the bird and its intrinsic value in nature. As an illustration, the falcon is covered in a fabric of Qatar’s traditional attire and the lines/curves on its feathers are found in the Arabic calligraphy; which definitely serves the purpose of representing the national identity of Qatar but again does it really depict the wildlife in its natural habitat?

Building up the argument, there is another secondary source “What is Posthumanism” by Cary Wolfe, who also supports the claim that the topic of anthropocentrism is a problematic position. And as the title of this book already suggests, Wolfe is also seeking to find an answer for ‘posthumanism’; but most importantly can this new kind of philosophical perspective respond to both the technological and environmental continuum in the long run?

Furthermore, with respect to the artworks made by Sue Coe that essentially include animal rights commentary and are portrayed powerfully in showing the scenes of animal suffering, there are some critiques made about her artwork. For instance, Cary Wolfe openly extended his response to Sue Coe’s artwork, explicitly stating that her artwork’s representational choices should be far more significant than the impact it has on the audience. And this entails the fact that Wolfe is more interested in physical representation of the artwork rather than the contextual representation, because Wolfe sees Sue Coe’s artwork not only anthropocentric but also “committed to this posthumanist question in a humanist way”. Now, linking it back to the sculpture “Falcon”, I can still criticize it the same way Wolfe did to Coe’s artwork. As a matter of fact, the falcon acts as a metaphor representing the national identity of Qatar as well as ‘allegedly’ depicting the wildlife. However, I as an audience along with Wolfe, we do not look for ‘metaphor’ or the hidden message behind the sculpture, but rather the representational choices and the artistic intentions of the artwork. Seeing that Tom Claassen aimed to create this sculpture with an intention of representing the natural wildlife, he should have let the falcon exhibits its authenticity in its true natural habitat, in order to give importance to its intrinsic value. But unfortunately, from the audience’s perspective, the first thing we see is the golden coverage that immediately evokes the atmosphere of royalty, rather than nature or environment. And second, the facial expression of the falcon is not visible at all – stressing on the fact that the falcon as a bird is barely significant. Thus, this conspicuously shows that the sculpture “Falcon” is subtly regarded as a human activity that attracts the audience as an object or a simple sculpture, instead of actually ‘showing’ the true colors of the falcon.

Nonetheless, in order to strengthen my argument, this final brief will look into another public art installation in Qatar that can contribute to the claim from a different angle. “On their Way” is another sculpture that was made by a French artist Roch Vandromme, which vividly mirrors the enriching culture of Qatar comprising the figure of four camels that represent the continuation of the dynamic relationship between humans and camels. In this case, Vandromme dedicated his work for the camels in their natural habitat, and the sculpture as a whole is indeed an embodiment of portraying Qatar’s long history of nomadic lifestyle and the human-camel progressive relationship over the course of time. Thus, we can see that there is an even balance of depicting the national representation/identity as well as providing equal acknowledgement for the natural world. It is because this can be deduced from the absence of humans that infers the rejection of ‘human exceptionalism’ – also highlighting the fact the sculpture is not anthropocentric at all.

As mentioned earlier, Vandromme depicts the camels in their natural habitat – and this is vivid from the fact that there are two calves and two mature camels standing very ‘naturally’, but most importantly their facial expressions are very clearly shown. This again actively demonstrates that the representational choices of Roch Vandromme were very deliberate and, henceforth this counterclaims the argument “we cannot see as much as we think we can” made by Cary Wolfe. The sculpture indeed responds to this statement by Wolfe, because as an audience we can clearly see the facial expressions, body language and the significance of the camels immediately, rather than attempting to seek the hidden message or the metaphor behind it. That is why, this sculpture by Roch Vandromme, a foreign artist, certainly proved to depicting the national representation/identity as well as gave equal importance to both human activity (the sculpture itself) and the natural world (the camels in their natural habitat).

All in all, through the analysis of these public art installations in Qatar and linking them with secondary sources from distinct fields of study indeed gave me an exposure of exploring environmental humanities overall. And I believe that Qatar intentionally gave the opportunity to foreign artists, in order to invest in Qatar’s arts in general, with a view to holistically represent Qatar’s identity as well add their ‘own’ contribution and motivation, whether it is environment-related or history-related. However, as I was closely arguing that the grounds and motivation of foreign artists is not only creating their work for national representation, but with a strong ecological consciousness, where the concept of anthropocentrism is very limited. As seen from the sculptures discussed above, some of them are merely serving the purpose of ‘being a metaphor’ for some hidden meaning and very less thought is provided on the artwork itself. While others are very deliberate with the minute details of the artwork and the audience is undoubtedly convinced with the representational choices of the work made by the artist.

“I want my monumental works to have even more of an effect on the public. The moment the sculpture enters the common space, it is no longer mine. My ownership ceases and it becomes the people’s.”

– Lorenzo Quinn

“Falcon” is one of the renowned public arts outside the departures hall of Hamad International Airport that was created by a Dutch sculptor Tom Claassen and was installed in Qatar in July 2021. This sculpture was made with a view to portraying the significance of nature and wildlife by an abstract representation of Qatar’s national bird.

Looking closely at the details of how this sculpture was created, it seems that even though the artist’s intention was to depict and appreciate the wildlife, there is still found vivid details about the sculptor that ‘almost’ camouflages the true identity of the bird. As an illustration, the falcon is covered in a fabric of Qatar’s traditional attire and the lines/curves on its feathers are found in the Arabic calligraphy; which definitely serves the purpose of representing the national identity of Qatar but does it really depict the wildlife in its natural habitat?

Moreover, the main objective of installing this sculpture in the airport is because the falcon acts as a clear parallel with the aviation routes from Qatar to the rest of the world. Thus, this reminds me of the reference of Greg Garrard’s reading Ecocriticism, where he explores the representation between the human and nonhuman, as it is shown in what he refers to it as “large scale metaphors”. As per the sculpture, the falcon is the metaphor representing the national identity of Qatar as well as ‘allegedly’ depicting the wildlife. However, I strongly argue that if Tom Claassen aimed to create this sculpture with an intention of representing the natural wildlife, he should have let the falcon exhibit its authenticity in its true natural habitat. But unfortunately, from the audience’s perspective, the first thing we see is the golden coverage that immediately evokes the atmosphere of royalty, rather than nature or environment. Second, the facial expression of the falcon is not visible at all – stressing on the fact that the falcon as a bird is barely significant. Thus, I agree with Garrard’s Ecocriticism because he is explicitly implying that the major task for ecocriticism is the ‘reconsideration of the idea of ‘the humans’’, since at the end of the day ‘the humans’ always strive to achieve what is best for them.

Furthermore, referring back to “Positions” a chapter from Garrard’s Ecocriticism, it seems that the critiques of deep ecology still see human activity as “unnatural”, in the sense of completely separating it from nature. And Garrard connotes that humans hold this position deceitfully, because they keep repeating what they are doing, as it allows them to be benefited from what they are doing. And comparing this thought with the sculpture created by Tom Claassen, we see that the activity of creating the sculpture is more or less “unnatural” and most probably, there will be more public art installations that entail the ‘notion of depicting and appreciating the nature and wildlife’, but in fact pursuing the projects that is for the most part advantageous for their personal interest.

Bibliography:

1. Fabrique. “Falcon by Tom Claassen.” Qatar Museums. Accessed October 28, 2022. https://qm.org.qa/en/visit/public-art/tom-claassen-falcon/.
2. “Ecocriticism (2012) – Nature in Children’s Literature and Culture.” Accessed October 28, 2022. https://blogg.hvl.no/nachilit/2017/05/29/greg-garrard-2012-ecocriticism-new-york-routledge/.
3. Google Docs. “Garrard_positions.Pdf.” Accessed October 28, 2022. https://drive.google.com/file/u/1/d/1sNz2Tz0PoajurxfNs-8gfdW9egvK3Y4M/view?usp=drive_web&usp=embed_facebook.

The public installation “On their Way” was created by a French artist, Roch Vandromme, and was installed in Qatar (National Museum) in early 2009. The sculpture vividly mirrors the enriching culture of Qatar, which comprises the figure of four camels that represent the continuation of the dynamic relationship between humans and camels. Roch Vandromme usually dedicates his works for animals in their natural habitat and surrounding; and his artistic intentions behind “On their Way” is a superb embodiment of portraying Qatar’s long history of nomadic lifestyle and the human-camel progressive relationship over time.

Looking closely at the camels, Vandromme has given them life in bronze sculptures, and his purpose behind the absence of humans in this sculpture is very deliberate. In fact, it is the absence of humans that infers the rejection of ‘human exceptionalism’ as rightly suggested in the article, “Interspecies Diplomacy in Anthropocenic Waters” by Una Chaudhuri. The very first phrase of her article, “Yes, animal, what a word!” is more or less equivalent with Vandromme’s artistic intentions behind this sculpture while acknowledging the significance of camels in Qatar’s history and culture. And perhaps, in this context from Vandromme’s perspective, it would be “Yes, camel, what a word!” – implying to the fact that camels are indeed extraordinary animals; and humans especially the people of Qatar must acknowledge and appreciate the dynamic relationship between themselves and the camels. Thus, this blog will explore both the advantages and disadvantages of establishing the interspecies diplomacy with a view to the sculpture “On Their Way” and the article “Interspecies Diplomacy in Anthropocenic Waters”.

Una Chaudhuri explicitly argues in her article that even though our anthropocentrism is obstructing us from building that interspecies relation, our “deep-rooted” and “nature-affirming” outlook must enforce us to connect with the “earthly realities”. This argument may be supported by Roch Vandromme in making the sculpture, since he also intends to depict the close relationship between humans and camels, while creating these majestic camels essence. And moreover, Vandromme found the ‘connection to the earthly realities’ exceptionally significant, because this French artist visited Qatar, explored its enriched heritage, and discovered the strong bond of humans-camels; and thereby, this sculpture is till to date holds a very vital connotation that involves both the preservation of Qatar’s heritage as well as the exhibition of interspecies diplomacy.

Nonetheless, it is important to consider the consequences of the interspecies diplomacy that can harm both the humans and nonhumans species, such as the outbreak of zoonosis from animals to humans, or even the transmission of pathogens from humans to animals. That is why, there is really no any correct or true conventional way of establishing the relationship of human-nonhuman worlds. It is because even though different species rely on each other’s diplomacy, most of the times it is important that our respective natural habitats and ecosystems are valued and not disturbed. However, linking it back with the Vandromme’s work, it seems that his sculpture is in fact representing the camels in their truest natural state, the presence of two generations of camels portraying the continuation of the close relationship between humans and nonhumans, but most importantly, the title of this sculpture “On Their Way” vividly implies to how camels were indispensable to Qatar’s culture and they were indeed ‘on their way’ making people’s lives easier by providing all the necessities.

Bibliography:

1. “Ocean-Oriented Ontologies: Performing Interspecies Diplomacy in Anthropocenic Waters.”  I Routledge Companion to the Environmental Humanities, edited by Ursula Heise. 2017.
2. “Roch Vandromme » On Their Way (2013).” Accessed October 16, 2022. https://roch-vandromme.com/musee-national-du-qatar/?lang=en.

“I want my monumental works to have even more of an effect on the public. The moment the sculpture enters the common space, it is no longer mine. My ownership ceases and it becomes the people’s.”

– Lorenzo Quinn

The installation of “The Force of Nature II” is a series of phenomenal sculptures by Lorenzo Quinn, but the one in Qatar was installed in October 2011. This installation is crafted from bronze and aluminum, depicting Mother Nature holding on to our world as well as beautifully illustrating the balance between the Earth and its navigator. As per the artistic intentions, Lorenzo Quinn has deliberately created this sculpture as a dedication to Mother Nature, but most importantly it serves as a reminder of nature’s power and humanity’s responsibility to Earth.

This sculpture is a wonderful personification of what an Indian historian, Ramachandra Guha, who presented a critique on wilderness in his essay “Radical American Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation”. It is because Guha strongly claims that the emphasis on wilderness is more or less dangerous especially in the Third World, as all these conservation projects of the ‘elites’ or even other international organizations tend to harm or at least threaten the lives of the people as well as pose collateral damage to other species. Thus, this clearly shows that even though we are trying our best to preserve the wilderness or at least to maintain a balance between the Earth and its navigator, there are still those who are interested more in “enjoying the material benefits of an expanding economy and the aesthetic benefits of unspoilt nature” (p.79).

Delving deeper into the analysis of this figurative sculpture, it indeed reflects the main point of deep ecology – transitioning from anthropocentrism to biocentrism, where nature has an intrinsic value independently of the interests of human individuals. As per the sculpture, it brings out the sense of twirling motion without the slightest bit of physical movement. All the minute details in this sculpture are created so deliberately that it “has even more of an effect on the public”. As per the installation in Qatar, the woman, representing Mother Nature, is being blinded/covered by her attire, but she is still managing to keep a firm grip on holding the Earth. However, as an audience not seeing her facial expression, it leaves us with various interpretations of the artistic intentions. For instance, whether she is very calm, holding on to the Earth with ease and letting us know that Mother Nature is so powerful as if ‘everything is in her hand’. Or it could be, she is completely helpless, as if she was swept by the gust of wind and barely holding on to the Earth.

Referring back to Guha’s essay, “Radical American Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation”, he also attempts to argue that the Western emphasis particularly on wilderness nonchalantly ignores the social realities of the developing countries, and on top of that treating the whole concept of wilderness as a one size fits all approach. Therefore, it brings us back to our sculpture, “The Force of Nature II”, where the Mother Nature is blinded by her attire – meaning that she cannot see who is the dominant one or who is trying to take advantage of ‘pretending to preserve wilderness’; and since ‘everything is in her hands’, she is capable of doing anything.

Looking back at the sculpture and considering Ramachandra Guha’s critical viewpoints, there are few questions that were raised:

• To what extent is it fair for deep ecologists to claim that the ‘positive programs’ will bring positive changes for EVERYONE equally?
• When we refer to anthropocentrism, do we actually mean all the human beings from different race, class, or backgrounds are the central entity in the universe?
• How likely is it to get Mother Nature no longer keeping a firm grip on holding the Earth?

Bibliography:

1. Guha, Ramachandra. “‘Radical American Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation: A Third World Critique’ (1997).” The Future of Nature. Yale University Press, 2013. 409–426. Print.
2. Hypocrite Reader. “Wilderness and ‘A Third –World Critique’ in the Era of Climate Change | Ethan Linck | The Hypocrite Reader.” Accesses October 10, 2022. http://hypocritereader.com/69/title.
3. Noorata, Pinar. “Gravity-Defying Sculpture of Mother Nature Rotating Earth.” My Modern Met, April 16, 2013. https://mymodernmet.com/lorenzo-quinn-the-force-of-nature/.