Air pollution is a significant issue we face in the modern world, especially those who live in large cities. Two factors further compound these dangers. The first is the visibility of the pollution as the human eye cannot see most pollutants. It leaves people unaware of any possible threat, for example, it is estimated that the average Londoner loses over “16 months of their life at the city’s current pollution levels” (Somerset House, 2018). The second factor is the body’s ability to adjust to the levels of pollution. As the longer people live in these cities, the less they notice odors and substances linked to pollution. However, this does not mean that it does not affect them, the UN estimates that “7 million people die prematurely because of poor air quality”. Furthermore, air pollution has more significant consequences on the environment, as dust particles carried by the wind over long distances can compromise water supplies and increase desertification, drought, and soil salinity. This essay will discuss and analyze the work of 3 contemporary practitioners as they respond to the issue of air pollution. First will be Michael Pinsky’s ‘Pollution Pods’, Banksy’s mural ‘Season’s Greetings’, and finally the performance artist Nut Brother’s ‘Project Dust’. This essay will compare and contrast their aims, methods, and public reception of their work to see how effective they were in achieving their goal and raising awareness of the issue, supporting these assessments with the theoretical analysis.
‘Pollution Pods’ by Michael Pinsky
Commissioned in 2018 by the Norwegian University for Science and Technology, Michael Pinsky’s installation called ‘Pollution Pods’ is comprised of five domes that recreate the atmospheric conditions of five major cities around the world, starting with the cleanest Tautra Norway, containing an air purifier, then London, New Delhi, Beijing and finally Sao Paulo.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
The pods aimed to encourage mindfulness around the topic of air pollution and to consider the impact of consumerism on densely populated cities. In this way, it can be said that the pods were effective. The nature of the installation actively invites the audience to engage with it. It makes the experience more personal, and installation becomes about the relationship between the individual and the environment that surrounds them.
Furthermore, the impact of the installation is heightened by its structure. Pinsky isolated each dome so it would have a very strong, visceral impact on you, which was effective, the New York Times, because people could be seen scrunching their faces and covering their noses as they moved from the Sao Paulo pod to the Tautra pod. The ‘visceral’ shock to the body as the air breathed in becomes polluted with chemicals making it harder to breathe is something that will be remembered for longer than something that is merely observed. The pods seemed to have been effective in achieving Pinsky’s aims, as they attracted much positive attention from both the public and the press with articles praising it for ‘shedding light’ on the varying levels of pollution around the world. One visitor stated: “It’s nasty, you don’t notice it much out there, but if it’s really that bad it’s dangerous, and we should be worried” (Yeginsu, 2018).
The installation was initially exhibited in Somerset House, the area is known historically as one of the most polluted areas in London. The pods have also been exhibited in various locations around, from Portland, and Melbourne to Manchester. This is effective as it allows people to not only judge the quality of air in the separate pods but also compare the air quality in their local area with those of the pods. As one visitor stated, “London and Florida have very different air quality. I can’t here. I tried...and I almost died of coughing” (Yeginsu, 2018).
Banksy’s Mural ‘Season’s Greetings’
After a message from a Port Talbot resident, complaining about the dust created by the local steelworks, the double-sided mural was found on the walls of a garage. On one side, it depicts a child playing joyfully in the some with their young stuck out tasting the snow, however, when the other side is examined, the context is expanded, and the snow is revealed to be the ash and particulate matter from a burning bin. The mural is a commentary on the industrial history of the town.
While the mural did not receive much attention initially, when it was revealed to be a Banksy piece, it gained a lot of media attention, which highlights a key strength and weakness. While the name of banks brought much attention to the town and helped to spotlight the issue, the spectacle of a new Banksy piece seems to have eclipsed the message of the piece. For example, the owner of the garage said: “I didn’t think much of it at the time, I knew a little about Banksy, but I never thought it would be him” (Marchese, 2018). Furthermore, another resident said: “There were people coming here all night. I am very pleased, I think it’s a smashing bit of artwork” (Marchese, 2018). From this, it seems that while a lot of people are interested in the piece, they are not taking away the message of the piece. They are there to marvel at the work of a world-famous artist, meaning much of this attention will inevitably fade away after the subsequent Banksy piece. In addition to this, the piece was later sold to gallery owner and Banksy’s aficionado Ian Lewis, who would display it in the town center and then move it to a gallery. The move to the town center would significantly increase the number of people who would be able to see it. However, placing it in a gallery would remove context from the mural, it merely becomes another work of art to be marveled at for a few minutes before the viewer would move on to the next piece.
Compared to the previous piece, this piece is also impersonal there, it tries to engage the audience in thought by first showing positive imagery and then revealing a darker scene. However, it does not require the audience to be much more than spectators, which will not leave as much of an impact on them as being able to experience this pollution firsthand.
‘Project Dust’ by Nut Brother
In 2016, over 100 days, the performance artist Wang Renzheng, known as Brother Nut, traveled the streets of China with an industrial vacuum, collecting smog and dust from the air. Upon completion, he took what he had collected and mixed it with clay, he then had it baked into a brick, which would be used in a building. This was done to raise awareness of the ongoing air pollution problem facing many of China’s cities said to be responsible for over “4000 deaths a year” (Phillips, 2015).
Each day he would ask a stranger to take a picture of himself and post this on social media Weibo along with the date, weather, and time. In an era when so many and so frequently use social media, this is an effective way of getting people to pay attention and follow along to find out the next location.
Also, by making the smog into a brick, it creates a tangible element to the pollution that people are breathing, showing them physically just how much smog and dust they’d breathe over 100 days, it is unsettling and shocking. In addition to this, the act of walking around a city with an industrial vacuum is likely to make people think about the air around them. However, this method has its limitations, because while the outlandish nature of the performance piece, draws a lot of attention to it, it may put people who aren’t already concerned off, dismissing it as another crazy artist doing something strange for attention.
Summary
In conclusion, after examining these three works they all seem to have their strengths and their weaknesses, though Pinskys left the most. Pinsky’s installation took a very direct approach to the issue of air pollution, bringing the pollution directly to the audience and allowing them to feel the effects for themselves. Though this can be said in some way about 'Project Dust' by providing a physical form for the pollution, however, unlike Pinsky's 'Pollution Pods', there is little interaction with the audience, similar to 'Season’s Greetings', which is one of the key differences between the three. Pinsky's pods are an experience and so the parts of said experience, e.g., the smells, the feeling of the smoke entering the lungs, the coughing, and the difficulty breathing, remain with you. The second key difference would be its focus on the issue, for example, whilst the pollution in Port Talbot was discussed in many media stories, they seemed to focus much of their attention on Banksy himself. This is not to say that the others are not effective at spreading awareness, as they all gained mass media attention.
Stuck on your essay?
