Author: Kotryna Zukauskaite
Degree: MA Arts and Cultural Enterprise
University: Central Saint Martins, University of the Arts London
First published as Assessment Evidence for Unit 3 (unredacted): 2017
Toxic Art by John Sabraw
The
purpose of this report is to analyze John
Sabraw's project Toxic
Art
as an example of a successful
attempt to engage with the global environmental challenge of
industrial water pollution on a local scale through artistic
practice, interdisciplinary research, and entrepreneurial strategy.
Therefore, the
paper investigates the initiative in a context of sustainable
development as environmentalism and “its interconnection to the
social and economic dimensions” (Anheier
and Isar, 2010, p.206). Moreover, as Toxic
Art
falls
within the category of
a self-sustaining cycle that recycles something dangerous (toxic
sludge) into something useful (artist's paints) to create something
meaningful (art), this report argues its success as an Ecovention—“an
artist-initiated project that employs an inventive strategy to
physically transform a local ecology” (Spaid, 2012, p.1). To do so,
the paper outlines the initiative, explores its success as a
self-sustaining business model, explores the interdisciplinary
collaboration between art and science, and, in this context,
discusses the shifting position of the eco-conscious artist who
oversteps the traditional boundaries of the art world. This analysis
is important because it demonstrates how an inter-disciplinary
approach can empower the cultural sector in its engagement with a
global issue on a local
scale.
Toxic
Art
is an Ecovention
initiated by John Sabraw, environmentalist and Professor of Art at
Ohio University, alongside Guy Riefle, Associate Professor of Civil
Engineering. The initiative focuses on cleaning and reviving
biologically dead rivers
in the State of Ohio that have been polluted by abandoned coal mines:
“operators of the mines simply picked up and left, since, prior to
the act1,
they had no legal obligation to restore the land to its previous
condition” (Gambino, 2013, n.p.). After the mines' closing, a
network of underground passages had been flooded, and as oxygen in
the water reacted with minerals in the rock, picking up high iron and
aluminum levels, the water's pH decreased and, when streamed to the
local watershed, extinguished all aquatic life in the area (2013).
The team of artists and scientists developed a method of extracting
iron oxidants from the river and recycling them into rich pigments
(fig.1), perfect for producing acrylic or oil-based paint (Sabraw,
n.d.). Beyond the highly publicized Toxic
Art
exhibition2
of Sabraw's abstract art made with this paint (fig.2,3,4), the
pigment production process showed some potential for commercial
development3,
which hinted at a possible source of income to keep the environmental
effort going. To summarize, the project focuses on a defined area and
aims to recycle pollutants into a commercially valuable product, and,
in this way, to fund the environmental cause and create art in the
process.
Approaching
sustainability objectives from an entrepreneurial angle enabled the
project to develop a financial strategy to effect lasting change.
There are three streams of funding planned for the effort. The first
is commercial profit from a collaboration with Gamblin
Artists Colors, who are in the process of producing the first batch
of pollutant-based paints and putting them on the market in 20184,
according to Sabraw (2017). The second flow of income comes from
sustainable art sales: “some of the paint would be given at no cost
to artists who are creating sustainable artwork, and profits from the
portion that's sold
will go towards the cleanup” (Sabraw in Alaimo, 2017). The third is
government funding: “we have just received funding for two years to
build and operate a scaled pilot [water treatment]
plant
in Corning, Ohio. This will be the culmination of all our efforts. We
will be able to prove the efficacy of our process
on site <...> Once we have proved this - we can lobby
government entities to build a full-scale plant and clean up these
toxic seeps” (Sabraw, 2017).
However, the team is being very realistic about their profit goals:
“even if we just break even, that would be a success, because we
would be cleaning up a devastated stream for free and creating a few
local jobs” (Sabraw in Gambino, 2013). In summary,
the entrepreneurial logic and financial planning behind the activism
aim to see the reclamation pay for itself and fund the team's
long-term commitment to sustainable production patterns5.
Moreover,
the project is defined and enriched by interdisciplinary
collaboration between art and science. First of all, integrating
different competencies to achieve a common goal is critically
important because, as formulated by Gablik, “Western culture has
been pervasively shaped by this assumption of separateness as the
absolute foundation on which we live our lives. Today with the future
of the planet in doubt <...> we need integral awareness in
every field” (1992, p.50). Secondly, scientific research provides
technological tools and techniques that artists wouldn't be able to
access otherwise (e.g. laboratory equipment, methodologies of
monitoring the process and its results). Thirdly, art provides a
social perspective on scientific research by communicating a complex
technological concept on a human level, attracts media attention, and
engages a broader audience: “when it comes to art, sponsors don't
weigh practical priorities or expect to make a profit, the way
funders of scientific research do. Art is viewed as a positive
contribution that makes a long-term restoration project immediately
attractive to a wider audience” (Spaid, 2012, p.1). By and large,
an interdisciplinary approach to environmental art extends its scope,
provides tools for measuring results, and raises public
awareness of a complex scientific issue.
In
conclusion, the success of Toxic
Art
as a self-funded cycle of sustainable production is based on a
consolidation of artistic, scientific, and entrepreneurial approaches
to environmentalism. The case study is defined by an eco-conscious
artist overstepping traditional boundaries of the art world to become
a part of something bigger than his self-expression. As Gablik (1992,
p.49) describes, “the word ecological
has replaced the word metaphysical,
as the need for restoring awareness of our symbiotic relationship
with nature becomes the most pressing spiritual and political need of
our time.” Moreover, the project's interdisciplinary spirit
directly proves H.S.Becker's classic notion, that “art worlds do
not have boundaries around them so that we can say that these people
belong to a particular art world while those people do not” (1984,
p.35). This open attitude toward change also shifts the position of
the artist in and beyond the art world, and opens new paths for
further action: “I've gotten a tremendous response to my work from
around the world <...> What is my responsibility now? How can I
have a greater impact?” (Sabraw in Alaimo, 2017). Arguably, this
global response to a local achievement is both evidence of success
and a burden of responsibility to spread the local model on a global
scale.
1Refers
to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977.
2As
opposed to the nature of most Ecoventions
that end as public
works (e.g. sewage and waste-water treatment plants), contributing
to their invisibility (Spaid 2012), the Toxic
Art
project was highly publicized by mainstream media (e.g. The
Washington Post,
BBC, Huffington
Post)
and more specialized publications (e.g. Smithsonian,
New Scientist, Scientific American).
3“To
make paints of these colors, international companies basically mimic
this reaction, adding chemicals to water tanks containing scrap
metals” (Gambino 2013)
4It
is important to note that, by becoming an enterprise, the group of
activists accepted their responsibilities by “being mindful to
create something that is economically viable and that meets industry
standards” (Gambino, 2013).
-->
5Which
also fits a definition of one of the Sustainable Development Goals
outlined by United Nations as, “to ensure sustainable consumption
and production patterns” (United Nations, 2017).
REFERENCE
LIST:
Anheier,
H. and Isar, Y. (2010). Cultures and Globalization: Cultural
Expression, Creativity and Innovation. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Alaimo,
C. (2017). Gallery: Pretty poison. [online]
ideas.ted.com. Available at:
http://ideas.ted.com/gallery-pretty-poison/ [Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Becker,
H.S. (1984). Art worlds. Reprint 2008. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Gablik,
S., 1992. The ecological imperative. Art Journal, 51(2),
pp.49-51.
Gambino,
M. (2013). Toxic Runoff Yellow and Other Paint Colors Sourced
From Polluted Streams. [online] Smithsonian. Available at:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/toxic-runoff-yellow-and-other-paint-colors-sourced-from-polluted-streams-17561886/
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Sabraw,
J. (2017). A question from MA student, CSM (UAL).
Interviewed by Kotryna Zukauskaite. [e-mail]. 11 July, 2017.
Sabraw,
J. (n.d.). John
Sabraw.
[online] John Sabraw. Available at: http://www.johnsabraw.com/
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Spaid,
S. (2002). Ecovention: Current art to transform ecologies .
Cincinnati: Contemporary Arts Center. Available at:
/www.Greenmuseum.org. [Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
ADDITIONALLY
REFERRED IN FOOTNOTES:
United
Nations Sustainable Development. (n.d.). Sustainable
development goals - United Nations. [online] Available at:
http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
[Accessed 23 Jul. 2017].
ILLUSTRATIONS:
Figure
1: TED
(2017). Creating
pigment from pollution.
[image] Available at:
https://tedideas.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/web_ready_toasted-line-of-test-tubes-2-1.jpg?w=2000&h=806
[Accessed 24 Jul. 2017].
Figure
2: Sabraw, J. (n.d.). Toxic
Art.
[image] Available at:
https://tedideas.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/we_ready_chroma-s1-17-36x36-inches-1.jpg?w=2000&h=2004
[Accessed 24 Jul. 2017].
Figure
3: Sabraw, J. (n.d.). Toxic
Art.
[image] Available at:
https://tedideas.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/web_readyebb132134.jpg?w=1800&h=1797
[Accessed 24 Jul. 2017].
Figure
4: Pond, L. (2009). John
Sabraw: “Toxic” Artist.
[image] Available at:
http://www.northwestern.edu/magazine/summer2014/images/large-images/CU_%20John%20Sabrawr1_L.jpg
[Accessed 24 Jul. 2017].
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Art
the Science Blog. (2016). CREATORS
– John Sabraw.
[online] Available at:
https://artthescience.com/blog/2016/07/04/creators-john-sabraw/
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Brooks,
K. (2013). Artist Paints With Toxic Sludge In An Effort To
Raise Awareness Of Coal Mining Pollution. [online] HuffPost.
Available at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/28/john-sabrow_n_3824917.html
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Dauray,
M. (n.d.). John Sabraw: Eco-Conscious Artist and Alchemist.
[online] Healing-power-of-art.org. Available at:
https://www.healing-power-of-art.org/john-sabraw-eco-conscious-artist-and-alchemist/
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Dean,
D. (2013). Artist John Sabraw. [online] Serial Optimist.
Available at:
http://www.serialoptimist.com/interviews/artist-john-sabraw-13791.html
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Fazeli
Fard, M. (2013). Pollution transformed from health concern to
art piece. [online] Washington Post. Available at:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/pollution-transformed-from-health-concern-to-art-piece/2013/09/09/c9cbd55c-10c5-11e3-bdf6-e4fc677d94a1_story.html?utm_term=.dd7520ff5910
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Gamblin
Artists Colors. (n.d.). Gamblin Artists Colors. [online]
Available at: https://www.gamblincolors.com/ [Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Gibson,
A. (2012). OHIO: Research |Earth Works: Artist John Sabraw
makes a case for sustainable art in a new series of paintings that
celebrate the natural world. [online] Ohio.edu. Available at:
https://www.ohio.edu/research/communications/earthworks.cfm [Accessed
18 Jul. 2017].
Kagan,
S. (2011). Art and Sustainability: Connecting Patterns for a Culture
of Complexity, Transcript Verlag, Bielefeld. Available from: ProQuest
Ebook Central. [18 July 2017].
Minerals.ohiodnr.gov.
(n.d.). AML
Reclamation Programs.
[online] Available at:
http://minerals.ohiodnr.gov/abandoned-mine-land-reclamation/aml-reclamation-programs
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Pope,
L. (2013). Toxic sludge from polluted rivers turned into art.
[online] New Scientist. Available at:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21929300-100-toxic-sludge-from-polluted-rivers-turned-into-art/
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Suplinskas,
G., 2016. Realizing Urban Water Pollution Impact In Melbourne,
Australia Through Painting.
Ohio.edu.
(n.d.). John Sabraw. [online] Available at:
https://www.ohio.edu/finearts/art/faculty-staff/profiles.cfm?profile=AD8190E9-5056-A800-488512189491E533
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
Ohio.edu.
(n.d.). R. Guy Riefler. [online] Available at:
https://www.ohio.edu/engineering/about/profiles.cfm?profile=61584988-5056-A800-48E43A5B68E10135
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
What
is Acid Mine Drainage. (n.d.). [pdf] U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). Available at:
http://www.sosbluewaters.org/epa-what-is-acid-mine-drainage%5B1%5D.pdf
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].
MULTIMEDIA:
Koestler,
J. (2017). Toxic Art. [video] Available at:
http://www.johnsabraw.com/video/ [Accessed 13 Jul. 2017].
-->
Toxic
art | John Sabraw | TEDxWarwick. (2017). [video] Available at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Qz1HVcRu7g [Accessed 18 Jul. 2017].