Bone carvings have been around for a very, very, very long time. They have historically been used as spiritual pendants and even “trial pieces” for metalworkers. Human bones have even been used to decorate catacombs in Italy and even whole churches in Prague. If I am familiar with these facts, why is it that I am completely fascinated with Charles LeDray’s workworkworkworkwork at the Whitney Museum?
One thing to consider about modernity is whether or not something has to be completely new and innovative, “never seen before”, to be considered modern. I would argue that when something familiar or more traditional is taken and either used in a different way or in within a different context, it can be equally considered modern.
LeDray has created small human bone sculptures that have a lot to say. There is a solar system model displayed that completely contrasts any spiritual history of the medium; he is making a statement of scientific modernity using our expectations of theology. We come from (outer space) science – a bold statement to make with an already unconventional material. Just when I thought I had him figured out, I couldn’t help but laugh at myself when I came across the sculpture of a human finger wearing a ring – the finger being carved out of ivory. He definitely made an ass out of me with that stunt.
The irony, ridicule and incredible use of the human body brings up many questions about where humanity has come from, where humanity is going and the limits our expectations put on us. It seems that to be modern today is to be flexible enough to at least consider your assumptions false, test the waters between theology and science and to realize that we are all just human…bones and all.
My favorite piece from that exhibition is "Cricket Cage" (2002; human bone, 3 3/8 x 3 3/8 x 1 7/16 inches [8.6 x 8.6 x 3.7 cm]). It seems to me to be an emblem of the ways in which human beings have domesticated nature, potentially leading to the demise of humanity itself.
ReplyDeleteYou can see an image of the piece here.
When you talk about being modern 'today' as being flexible,are you suggesting that modernity was not necessarily associated with broad and open minded thinking in the past? Or do you think being flexible and being able to challenge your own assumptions are just requirements of this age/time? Because may be, the need to "test the waters" between theology and science does not spring from the idea of modernity but rather from the intellectual age that humanity is in right now. So I am confused about the difference between the idea of modernism and the simple idea of being more intellectually advanced.
ReplyDeleteI didn't see particular sculpture - when I realized it was human bone I went into my "EEEEP - AVOIDAVOIDAVOID" setting. But theoretically, I see his point - I get a sense of limitation? Or maybe grounding - it's a literal human interpretation of the "world around us," loll.
ReplyDelete