Sunday, April 09, 2006

Catalonian street art or art of street selling?

So, what about using nature (birds) to create a culture? Do they still belong to nature or they have been transformed into culture due to having been transformed into art? Have they ever been nature? I do not know if somebody wanted to sell the birds or if it was just expression of somebody's aesthetic views. But still, these birds are there.

Question: what statements about our attitudes can be done when the boundaries are unknown? Chewong, a small group of aboriginal people of the Malay tropical rainforest, do not differentiate between these two in a way we do. Their culture is built upon nature, as all are supposed to be, but they do not make distinction between these two dimensions. In a context of modern (or postmodern?) art we are like Chewong and others. But, there is culture that has imported what before had been reserved to the natural domain. And we do remain this classification despite proving all over again that "there are no boundaries any more!". The fact that they do not exist ANY MORE indicates something.

I think it is worth to research the art performances in a way they use both the natural symbols and objects. In this case, nature in the popular meaning has been reduced to an object. How we perceive performances as this one, depends on our perceptions of this object. Or in other words - if we perceive the birds as an object or as a manifestation of nature. And why do we still try to prove the holistic worldview which is actually against our "nature"?