Dan Harlow

The following text is from an official statement by the Chinese government dated May 20, 2006. The images are from zonaeuropa.com.

The Three Gorges Project, whose mammoth dam was completed on Saturday, May 20, 2006, will acquire the capability of combating a super big flood occurring once in 100 years as of this year and will start to take effect in flood control two years ahead of schedule.

In an interview with Xinhua on Saturday, Li Yong’an, general manager of China Yangtze River Three Gorges Project Development Corporation (CYRTGPDC), heralded Saturday’s completion of the gigantic dam to a landmark in the construction of the Three Gorges Project.

“Even if there is a major flood this summer, the Three Gorges Project is capable of regulating flooded waters in an effective way and preventing 15 million people on the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River and their property from damages,” said the general manager.

Built with 16.1 million cubic meters of concrete, the Three Gorges Dam is considered the largest reinforced concrete dam in the world. A minor cofferdam has been constructed to facilitate building of the mega dam on the southern bank of the Yangtze River. The mega dam will be put to holding water when the minor cofferdam is blast away on June 6.

In accordance with a flood control plan approved by the State Flood Control and Drought Relief Headquarters, the level of water stored in the Three Gorges Reservoir will be kept below 150 meters during the flood season in this summer.

However, if an emergency arises, the water level in the reservoir can be raised to control the water flow in the mainstream of the Yangtze and to alleviate the pressure on the middle and lower reaches of the mighty river, said Li.

As a key facility to hold back flooded water, the Three Gorges Reservoir is capable of holding 39.3 billion cu m of water, including a space of 22.15 billion cu m for extra flooded water when it attains a normal water level of 175 meters.

With a length of more than 6,300 km and a natural fall of 5,400 meters from the west to the east, the flood-prone Yangtze River is the largest of the kind in China and the third largest in the world.

Most of the flooded areas are located at the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze, which are economically developed regions where 15 million residents live and 1.5 million hectares of farmland exit. Four major floods occurred in the regions in the 20th century, with the most recent one occurring in 1998 killing 1,526 people.

Professor Wang Jun, a flood control specialist, said the Three Gorges Project, situated at the juncture of the upper reaches of the Yangtze and its middle reaches, could play an irreplaceable role in holding back an influx of water from areas within one million sq km along the upper reaches of the Yangtze.

Dr.Wang Wei, a specialist with the Headquarters for Yangtze River Flood Control, said in accordance with the water control plan for the Three Gorges Reservoir in this summer flood season, the Three Gorges Reservoir is capable of taking the initiative to store up flooded water by providing a space of containing 7.29 billion cu m of flooded water, or just one third of the Three Gorges Project’s total flood control capacity, when necessary.

An estimate given by the Yangtze River Water Resources Committee shows after the construction of the Three Gorges Project, an average of 23,000 hectare of farmland might be spared from inundation each year, and plus the reduced losses spared from inundation of urban residential quarters, the annual benefit could come to two billion yuan (247 million U.S. dollars) which will otherwise have been lost judging by the economic standard and constant prices of 1992, one year before the Three Gorges Project began building.

The fact that the Three Gorges Project begins to take effect in flood control does not necessarily mean no worries left in the flood control of the Yangtze River, and the main embankments built along both banks of the Yangtze are direct barriers that will help hold back the swollen waters in the Yangtze, said Li Yong’an, the CYRTGPDC general manager.

“China has been investing heavily in constructing a comprehensive flood control network on the Yangtze River, which has the Three Gorges Project as the backbone facility, supported by an upward of 30,000 km of embankments along the Yangtze and specially built zones for diversion and storage of 50 billion cubic meters of flooded waters,” said Li.

Launched in 1993, the Three Gorges Project, including the 2,309-meter-long, 185-meter-high dam with 26 power generators, is being built in three phases on the middle reaches of the Yangtze, China’s longest river.

In addition to flood control functions, the gigantic project is expected to generate 84.7 billion kwh of electricity annually when it is finally completed.

The entire project will be completed by 2008, a year ahead of schedule.

Popularity: 3% [?]

A couple of days before vandals punched a hole in one of Monet’s masterpieces in France, a group of neo-Nazis (unrelated) stormed into the Kulturen Gallery in Sweden armed with axes and crowbars and destroyed half of Andres Serrano’s exhibit “The History Of Sex”. The group shot the entire incident on a hand held camera and posted the video, accompanied with industrial music and a lettered commentary asking “This is art?” to YouTube and LiveLeak (English version and Swedish version). By the time the intruders were done, an estimated $200,000 damage had been done to the exhibit and leaflets reading “Against decadence and for a healthier culture” had been left behind.

Since the video shot by the Nazi thugs violates the terms of service for YouTube it was only a matter of time before it got taken down (again). The English version is still available on LiveLeak but it too will probably come down soon. I do feel however that it is important for people to see what happened so I utilized my “high tech” screen capture software (A-PS) to frame grab as much of the video as possible. I make this available not because I wish to publicize what these Nazi thugs did, but rather to talk about controversial art and peoples reaction to that art. I feel this is an important topic to discuss because freedom of expression is a right not everyone in the world enjoys these days. (The red blocks covering up all the “naughty bits” are part of the original video.)

No stranger to controversy, Andres Serrano’s work has drawn outrage from angry citizens and even governments before. In 1989 when his photography “Piss Christ” was exhibited, “detractors accused Serrano of blasphemy while others raised this as a major issue of artistic freedom. On the floor of the United States Senate, Senators Al D’Amato and Jesse Helms expressed outrage that the piece was supported by the National Endowment for the Arts, since it is a federal taxpayer-financed institution.” In 1997 a print of “Piss Christ” was destroyed while on display at the National Gallery of Art in Melbourne, Australia.

Gallery chief Anki Dahlén was quoted as saying “It is terribly sad that democracy can’t be upheld and people don’t have respect for other people’s work”.

I find it interesting that the above statement does not go both ways. As a good citizen and lover of art I should (and will) respect the vision and right of the artist to comment freely with their art. Yet at the same time why does the artist get to get away with controversy while everyone else must just “accept it”? Does not the artist also have to have respect for other people’s beliefs? Why is it acceptable for an artist to immerse a plastic crucifix into a jar of urine and photograph the result while it’s not acceptable for people to be outraged by such a statement? Who has more freedom, the artist or the viewer?

Though the exhibit which was destroyed was not quite as controversial as the artist’s previous efforts, it does expose the long standing elitism of the art world over regular society and common folk. Yes the Nazis who forced their way into the gallery and smashed up the place are criminals, but don’t they represent a segment of society which does not have a platform to express itself? As an artist Mr. Serrano is free to express whatever he pleases and can rock the boat at will, yet there are always two sides to the coin. While I don’t side with Nazi thugs, there are plenty of people who do not want to have to live in a world where long standing beliefs and values are freely challenged in public.

The notion of beliefs and values are really what is at the heart of the argument here. Everyday we see more and more violence and tension between the secular world and the religious. The religious supporters see a world which once gave them comfort and answers slipping away into a world of doubt and uncertainty. Though seen as old fashioned and outdated, religion does allow a person to live a structured life in accordance to rules and traditions which helps bring some sort of meaning and order to life. In the secular world rules and traditions are replaced with the freedoms of choice and each person is allowed to interpret and question the world as they wish.

To return to the question in my headline (sorry about burying the lead down here), is the vandalism also art? Does the reaction to art constitute and artistic expression all it’s own? Could it even be considered performance art? These questions are intriguing and also controversial. Most people agree that an artist is deliberate and has dedicated a considerable amount of time, energy and effort into creating a work of art whereas a vandal just comes along and smashes it up out of anger. Surly a violent emotional response to a photograph can’t be art? Can it?

In this case the vandals took the time to stake out the museum to determine which works were to be destroyed and which were to be left alone. They planned a time to strike (a half hour before closing) and they prepared themselves not only with a camera, but had access to video editing equipment to make a video of their actions. Is that not just as deliberate as creating art? In fact does the video they left behind deserve being called an art film? Since the vandals are not famous artists, perhaps this was the only way they could express their art - by violently destroying someone else’s expression. Then again, destroying someone else’s expression is typically considered oppression and I doubt the Nazi thugs have ever been oppressed - aside from maybe receiving the similar sort of teasing people get when they sport a mullet in public.

So who has more rights, the artist or the society? As an art lover and someone who enjoys a secular lifestyle I will always choose art over tradition yet I would be hypocritical to think that my way of looking at the world is the only valid point of view. Perhaps, in some odd way, the Nazi thugs who smashed up the gallery were also making an artistic statement as a sort of backlash against secular freedoms. Though what they did was criminal, perhaps they feel Mr. Serrano’s work is also criminal. Whose to judge?

I also want to point out that the New York Times originally ran this story stating that the music played in the video was a “strain of thundering death-metal music” while in fact the music is more industrial. I know this is a small point, but when a newspaper such as the NY Times claims to be a credible and reliable source of information it’s reporters should have an understanding of what they are reporting. Using blanket statements and pointed adjectives such as “thundering death-metal music” to describe the soundtrack to a neo-nazi video only seeks to hang an extra noose around the necks of the vandals. It reminds me when O.J. Simpson was in the news back in the 90’s and Time magazine photoshopped his mug shot to make him look “more guilty”. Why is this necessary to subtly pass judgment on the guilty? Is their crime not enough to prove their guilt without adding thin layers of misinformation on top of it? What did the reporter hope to gain? I’m sure it was not out of ignorance since this was a NY Times Arts reporter and surly Carol Vogel knows the difference between “Death Metal” and “Industrial”. Or does she not consider metal or industrial to be “art”?

Oh well, who are we to worry about what is and isn’t art?

Popularity: 9% [?]

Titled ‘Head On’, this instillation was created by the artist Cai Guo-Qiang after a visit to the Berlin Wall. Consisting “of a pack of 99 life-sized wolves barreling in a continuous stream towards—and into—a constructed glass wall”, the wolves were:

From Deutsche Guggenheim:

…produced in Quanzhou, China, from January to June of 2006. The commissioned local workshop in Cai’s hometown specializes in manufacturing remarkable, life-sized replicas of animals. First, small clay models were created as movement studies, out of which Cai subsequently developed Head On’s artist editions of cast resin wolves. However, the realistic and lifelike 99 wolves that grew out of these models and drawings possess no literal remnants of wolves: they are fabricated from painted sheepskins and stuffed with hay and metal wires, with plastic lending contour to their faces and marbles for eyes.

The artist created the exhibit “With few wolves scattered in the front gallery, all ninety-nine wolves run, gallop, and jump toward the far end of the exhibition hall, where a wall stands. The bravery of the wolves is met head on by the unyielding wall. As the leading wolves go down, many more follow with force and determination. As those in the front fall and pile up, those behind take up their positions.”

For me what I get out of this work is the relentless persistence of the predatory nature of governments and dictators (such as Burma or North Korea) that are now forced to explain their actions to a world that can clearly see the brutality of their terror. We live in such a transparent world which has a camera on every phone in every neighborhood in every city that reports of the cruelty of these terrorists can reach even the most remote audience. The trouble is that most of us just stand on the other side of the glass wall and only watch the wolves pile up while we remain safe at home.

It’s also interesting (maybe even funny) that the wolves are made out of sheepskin.

Popularity: 6% [?]

The British Library may have recently wrapped up it’s popular exhibit of medieval illuminated manuscripts but another medieval prayer book is in the news. Subject of the new book titled The Archimedes Codex by Reviel Netz and William Noel, the prayer book was written in the year 1300 by an unknown monk. Since parchment was in short supply those days (and expensive for a lowly monk) he “recycled” (technically known as creating a palimpsest) an animal-skin parchment which contained a copy of the original works of the master Greek mathematician Archimedes. By scraping off the original ink, cutting the parchment in half and rotating the whole thing 90 degrees, the monk then proceeded to write down his prayers.

400 years later the Danish philologist Johan Ludwig Heiberg discovered the prayer book at a library in Constantinople and after careful study with a microscope to see the faint Greek letters he made a transcription of the work but then put the book away where it was again lost for almost another 100. The book resurfaced again in 1998 after having been in the possession of a French family where the book had grown moldy and dusty in their closet. When they realized that the book might have some value they took it to the Christie’s Auction House of London where it was eventually auctioned for 2 million dollars to an anonymous buyer. The buyer then set about immediately to uncover the hidden text.

Discovering the text and drawings was no easy task as “researchers took digital pictures of it in different wavelengths of light, creating a multi-spectral image that could be manipulated to reveal the text by Archimedes. On four of the pages, forged paintings covered the entire text, so the researchers used x-ray fluorescence imaging to peek beneath the paintings and decipher the obscured text”.

The value of this prayer book is not just because it contains the works of Archimedes but that it contains “previously unknown texts by Archimedes”.

From Science News Online:

Two of the texts hiding in the prayer book have not appeared in any other copy of Archimedes’s work, so no one but Heiberg had studied them until now. One of them, titled The Method, has special historical significance. It could be considered the earliest known work on calculus.

Though modern calculus was not developed into its modern form until the 1700’s by Isaac Newton and Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz, the Archimedes text reveals just how advanced the ancient Greek master really was. Reviel Netz, one of the authors of The Archimedes Codex and a historian of mathematics at Stanford University says that the discovered work gives “a new twist on the entire trajectory of Western mathematics”.

Archimedes computed the area of the curved figure (left) by enclosing it in a bigger one with straight edges (right). He then examined random slices to compute the volume—using the concept of actual infinity.

Archimedes found a relationship between the full area of that slice, which was a section through the plane-sided volume, and the smaller area within it, which was a section through the curved shape. Then he argued that he could use that relationship to calculate the entire volume of the curved shape, because both the curved figure and the straight one contained the same number of slices. That number just happened to be infinity—actual infinity.

“The interesting breakthrough is that he is completely willing to operate with actual infinity,” Netz says, but he adds that “the argument is definitely not completely valid. He just had a strong intuition that it should work.” In this case, it did work, but it remained for Newton and Leibniz to figure out how to make the argument mathematically rigorous.

Now imagine what the world would be like if religion, especially Christianity had not flourished. Imagine if the work of Archimedes had continued not 1900 years later when Newton and Leibniz made the final breakthrough but 1000 years before Newton - even earlier. What kind of world would we be living in today? Had Christians not burnt the works of the Greek masters, had religion not kept the western world in fear after the fall of the Roman empire for 1500 years and had the crusades not murdered so many in Islam who themselves were generations ahead in science and art we may well be living in a world that is 500-1000 years more advanced than it is today.

In an earlier post of mine that talks about other medieval manuscripts which contain similar scientific works, I made a comment (now lost due to a Wordpress upgrade, grrr) that religion, especially Christianity has done more harm to the development of the modern world because of artistic abuses like erasing older manuscripts for prayers and such. My comment drew the ire of many but in reality we have to accept the fact that religion and religious people tend to dismiss works of knowledge, reason and science in favor of dogma. Though I’m sure the monk who wrote the prayer book meant no real offense, his ignorance was born out of the religious attitude that all things not “godly” are worthless and can be defaced or destroyed at will.

These attitudes persist even to this day which is why we see so much fake science being heralded as truth and forced on our kids in school and on the general public by our governments (America included). And while science can’t solve all of the ills of the world and guarantee a better, more ethical and plentiful tomorrow, it can improve the lives of millions and enlighten a world that was formerly dark.

Popularity: 11% [?]

When it comes to Monet, I’m of two minds. While I recognize his brilliance as a painter and appreciate the impressionist movement for what it is I also am sick of seeing his paintings everywhere. Hanging a Monet on the wall just seems to scream “I have no taste in art” or “I only like pretty things on the wall”. Just like a radio station that plays the same 10 songs everyday for years on end because the fans only like safe and regular music, Monet is sort of the Clear Channel of art right now - he’s everywhere. If you don’t believe me then the next time you walk into someone’s home that has a Monet print check to see if there is also an Ansel Adams photograph hanging up not to far away and an old French poster for wine somewhere in the kitchen.

Now even if you don’t agree with my assessment of Claude Monet and Ansel Adams, you have to admit that art can arouse strong feelings in people. Art appreciation, even among people who don’t know how to read a painting is a right we all have. Something I like may be something you absolutely hate and vice versa. Even if only 1 person in the entire world honestly finds something to be art then that outweighs the other 6 billion of us who loudly disagree in protest. Art is personal to each of us and what we choose to like and hang on our walls says volumes about us as individuals.

Art is so powerful, in fact, that governments, king, mobs and religions have burnt, stolen, defaced and destroyed tons of it over the centuries. Akhenaten defaced the likeness of Hatshepsut in her own temple, early Christians destroyed goodness knows how many invaluable works of art and writings from the Greeks and Romans and the Communists and the Taliban have a long history of destroying art. Typically this destruction of art seeks to serve the political purpose of control over people - if you don’t let people see dangerous ideas then they can be controlled easier by those in power.

Sometimes art is defaced by treasure hunters and bandits. Seeking only wealth from gold and jewels, famous temples, carvings and other works are destroyed to mine only the valuable materials they are made from. All over the middle east and Americas are examples of ancient civilizations and cities that have been so badly looted that gleaning any sort of useful history from these sites and extremely difficult. Who knows how much history has been lost to time for the sake of pure vanity?

Finally there is just plain and simple vandalism which is what happened at the Orsay Museum in France on this past Sunday. Apparantly breaking in through the a faulty back door, a group of drunk youths entered the museum and when the alarm finally sounded one of them punched a hole in the masterpiece “Le Pont d’Argenteuil” leaving a repairable 4 inch tear in the canvas. Ironically the break in and vandalism happened during an all night festival taking place out on the streets celebrating the arts with public concerts and exhibits.

So for whatever reason you don’t like a work of art, destroying it is just dumb and it speaks volumes about you as a person or group. You don’t have to like something to protect it and feel sad that it has been damaged or worse, you just have to be a human being to understand that art is important to all of us and deserves to be protected.

Popularity: 4% [?]

The world’s largest foreign exchange company Travelex believes it has the “solution” to interstellar commerce. Called the Quasi Universal Intergalactic Denomination (QUID, for short) these lozenge shaped denominations represent the future of what money could look like once spaceflight becomes commonplace for the regular citizen.

Manufactured from a space qualified polymer called PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene - basically Teflon), the QUIDs have been designed to withstand the rigors of spaceflight. Travelex wanted to create a currency that possessed no chemical risk to astronauts and space tourists while in biologically fragile environments such as space ships and space stations. The QUIDs also needed to be rounded and have no sharp edges which could pose a danger to electronics and pressurized space suits.

Each QUID “contains eight planets orbiting a sun, reflecting the position of the planets in Earth’s Solar System. In addition to the aesthetic appeal this will help if the QUID needs to be used on planets inhabited by other life forms. Each of the orbiting planets will carry a number, like the serial numbers on notes, giving the disc a unique code thus allowing currency to be tracked and helping to prevent counterfeits.”

So why not just use a credit card? Well anything that has a magnetic strip would be too badly damaged by solar radiation and since that data needs to be transmitted to a bank back on Earth, the distances would be so great that it would be impractical for the customer or vendor to wait for an approval or denial.

In the Travelex press release of the QUID a representative is quoted as saying “It’s only a matter of time before people will be walking up to our shops and asking for QUIDs for their two weeks in a space hotel. There will be a real need for this currency to be introduced to meet the needs of those intergalactic tourists. Wherever we go on holiday – whether its Spain or Saturn we’ll always want to take some cash. Apart from anything else, if you’d just had a fortnight in space you’d definitely want to buy a souvenir to bring back.”

One QUID currently costs just under $13.00 US at the current exchange rate and Travelex is hoping to begin selling them online, at currency shops in the UK and has even put in a request to become the first currency exchanger on the moon.

Now while all of this may seem like great news for the future of spaceflight there is one nagging little problem with the QUIDs. They are huge! Where is an astronaut or space tourist going to put all these buggers? Are we going to have to stuff our spacesuits to the point of looking like the Michelin man or will we carry around leather money pouches like in some fantasy role playing game?

While I appreciate the efforts of Travelex to pursue a standardized Terran currency, I’m pretty sure we can come up with something a little better than giant Teflon lozenges. We don’t want our first contact with an intelligent alien species to consist of asking them if they can make change for 20 QUID while at the toll booth on the intergalactic highway.

Popularity: 4% [?]

The 8th North American Wife Carrying Contest was held today at the Sunday River Ski Resort in Bethel, Maine.

From Sunday River:

The origin of the competition is based in Finnish history. A notorious 19th century character, Ronkainen the Robber, imposed strong physical standards on men he considered for his band. To qualify, the men had to complete a difficult course with a heavy sack on their backs. It was also not uncommon for men to steal women from neighboring villages. The concept is a little archaic - but the modernized wife carrying event is all in fun, and in reality, is a true test of physical strength and agility.

And how does one become a master in wife carrying? (from Sonkajärvi):

• Attitude
  The wife carrying is composed of humor and hard sport on a fifty-fifty basis. Everybody may choose what attitude to take towards the competition. The course is open for all to participate.
• Postures
  There are four customary styles to carry the wife: the traditional piggyback, the wife dangling upside down on the carrier’s back, thrown over on the shoulder and crosswise on the carrier’s shoulders. The style is free. You may also create a new personal style of your own.
• Outfit
  It is preferable to wear clothes which won’t be stripped off in full speed running and which are easy to hold on to. The carrier’s belt is the only equipment allowed to help in keeping one’s grasp. Some other tools known to be beneficial are a bunch of birch switches, swimming glasses and swimming slippers.
• Life
  The wife carrying is an attitude towards life. The wives and the wife carriers are not afraid of challenges or burdens. They push their way persistently forward, holding tightly, generally with a twinkle in the eyes.
• Eroticism
  You can sense the excitement in the air during the wife carrying competition. The core of the race is made of a woman, a man and their relationship. The wife carrying and eroticism have a lot in common. Intuitive understanding of the signals sent by the partner and becoming one with the partner are essential in both of them – sometimes also whipping.
• Wife
  According to the rules the minimum weight of the wife is 49 kilos. If it is less, the wife will be burdened with such a heavy rucksack that the total weight is 49 kilos. Generally the best wife is the wife of one’s own, all the more if she is harmonious, gentle and able to keep her balance while riding on the shoulders of her man.
• Track
  The traditional track for the wife carrying consists of sand, forested terrain, a water obstacle and two log hurdles. If your style is “the wife dangling upside down”, you have better to remember that in the water pool the wife’s head is likely to go under the water.
• Rhythm
  It is of great importance to find a mutual rhythm. I the wife on the man’s back is rocking out of time, the speed slows down. When the rhythm is good, the wife and the carrier become one accompanying the motions of each other. It is advisable to practice in order to find the mutual rhythm before the competition.
• Training
  It is possible to train for the wife carrying competition everywhere in the middle of the daily routines: in the bath, in the super market, in the playground or in the body building center. The wife carrying is good for your relationship.

The man who can carry his wife without dropping her along the 278 yard course the quickest will win his wife’s weight in beer.

I wonder how many men have won more than 120lbs of beer?

Popularity: 3% [?]

No, the Hubble Space Telescope has not been equipped with a Palantir but you could be excused for thinking NASA has been teaming up with WETA Digital for their latest find.

This image, taken by NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope, is the first visible-light image of a dust ring around the nearby, bright young star Fomalhaut (HD 216956). The image offers the strongest evidence yet that an unruly planet may be tugging on the dusty belt. The left part of the ring is outside the telescope’s view. The ring is tilted obliquely to our line of sight.

The center of the ring is about 1.4 billion miles (15 astronomical units) away from the star. The dot near the ring’s center marks the star’s location. Astronomers believe that an unseen, Neptune sized planet moving in an elliptical orbit is reshaping the ring.

Astronomers used the Advanced Camera for Surveys’ (ACS) coronagraph aboard Hubble to block out the light from the bright star so they could see the faint ring. Despite the coronagraph, some light from the star is still visible in this image, as can be seen in the wagon wheel-like spokes that form an inner ring around Fomalhaut.

The suspected planet may be orbiting far away from Fomalhaut, near the dust ring’s inner edge, between 4.7 billion and 6.5 billion miles (50 to 70 astronomical units) from the star. Only Hubble has the exquisite optical resolution to resolve that the ring’s inner edge is sharper than its outer edge, a telltale sign that an object is gravitationally sweeping out material like a plow clearing away snow.

The ring is in the Fomalhaut system’s frigid outer region, about 12 billion miles (133 astronomical units) from the star. This distance is much farther than the dwarf planet Pluto is from the Sun. The ring’s relatively narrow width, about 2.3 billion miles (25 astronomical units), indicates that an unseen planet is keeping the ring from spreading out.

Fomalhaut, a 200-million-year-old star, resides 25 light-years from the Sun in the constellation Piscis Austrinus (the Southern Fish).

The ring is tinted red for image analysis. The Hubble observations were taken over a five-month period in 2004: May 17, Aug. 2, and Oct. 27.

Popularity: 3% [?]

For years now, Spencer Tunick has been talking nice, average folks into taking off all of their clothes in public and letting him take pictures of them. At first quite a few people thought he was a kook or even a voyeuristic pornographer. What nobody knew back then, except Spencer most likely, was that the point of his art was not something sexual but rather a statement about the condition of the human being in the modern world. Though often his photographs have involved mass nudity in open urban areas such as parking garages and city streets, recently he placed his nudes on the foot of a melting glacier to expose the truth about global warming and how fragile we humans are in the face of mother nature.

Nudity has always been an interesting subject in art and its depictions have gone through a few transitions in it’s history. Some of the earliest art consists of fertility idols which often were exaggerated female forms. The image on the right is of the “Venus of Willendorf” and dates from roughly 30,000 - 25,000 bce. Carved from a pebble and once painted red ochre, it was carried around in the palm of the hand much like one would an amulet. Carvings such as these have been discovered all over Europe from France to Italy to the Danube basin “and even as far east as Asiatic Russia”. The exaggerated form including the swollen breasts, stomach and thighs most resemble a pregnant woman and may have been carried by a tribal priest or elder who was given offerings to pray for a couple who wanted a child. Important to keep in mind here is that though the image is not sexual in nature (desire), it does imply sexuality as far as the act of sex and fertility are concerned.

Though it would be unreasonable to assume that in pre-history people were not aroused by the nude form of either sex - after all a good looking person has a better chance to attract a mate and have children - it is unknown if the art and artifacts uncovered during this period in history could ever be considered pornographic or were ever used for self stimulation.

The Greeks were famous for their celebration of the human form. The early Olympics were a show of strength and skill and were played in the nude. Classic representations of the “perfect” human form are found in museums all over the world to this very day and by all accounts the Greek image of male perfection with it’s muscular, stoic self confidence has changed little, if at all, through all history. Even 1500 years after these sculptures Kouros (youth) were made and the pudgy female was considered the height of sexual beauty in art, the male was still portrayed as fit and trim - only the king was obese; his knights and princes were much leaner.

The Romans of course took things quite a bit further and openly celebrated the nude form and were not ashamed to carve phallic symbols in temples and even indulge (at least at the imperial level) sexual practices that have rarely been rivaled in scale or possibly even perversion.

Possibly due to the blatant and public sexuality of the Romans, the era of Christianity rejected not only the public displays but even the psychology of the human form. No longer was the body a temple to be worshiped because now one was to worship God and not the sinful lusting of the body. This rejection of the nude form had a profound impact on art and artists who were still eager to explore the themes of the body wanted to find a release that did not run the risk of angering the church.

The answer lay in the pages of the bible itself and especially in the first few chapters of the bible before Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Here was a chance for artists to explore the themes of beauty and sexuality without offending the delicate sensibilities of the church. And not only did the church approve of these works, but in fact they were encouraged by the very fact that they were allowed to be displayed publicly in all the churches. At the Sculpture of Autun by Gislebertus we are given what is considered to be the most sensuous nude in all of medieval art. Here Eve is shown nude, one her hands and knees, her breasts bared directly to the viewer and the fruit of temptation held lazily in her left hand. Imagine being alive when this was new and you lived in a repressive culture (especially sexually) where any impure thought meant hours and hours of prayer to forgive and then you walk into Autun Cathedral and see this Eve. I would bet good money that it helped fill the seats (especially with men) and I also guarantee the church knew it too.

Of course the images of a nude woman holding the fruits of temptation before a man did little regarding women rights and is an image that is still so powerful to this day that women are still in many cultures seen as tempestuous and evil and are forced to endure prejudice (and worse) in many cultures - especially religious.

The Catholic church had a powerful hold over all aspects of life through pretty much all of the western world and though the quality of art steadily improved, the subject matter rarely ventured into controversial waters. As with all periods in history though this slowly began to change. After the reformation the church was no longer the central influence on the public and private life of all citizens. For the first time pretty much ever people were beginning to be allowed to think for themselves. Technology such as the printing press and even public education was cheap and allowed the uneducated masses to gain access to knowledge previously forbidden to them. Though the governments at the time still wielded much power over the average citizen, rulers really only wanted peace and taxes and didn’t concern themselves with public morality nearly as much as the church had. In other words, the western world was becoming secular and the world of art and science exploded.

What is interesting about this period in history (up to and including today) is that unlike the Greeks and Romans and even medieval artists who freely depicted both the nude male and female, the new age of enlightenment seemed almost exclusively concerned with the nude female. Heroic warriors standing mightily with brazen nakedness were replaced with the sexuality of the woman and the soft lines of the nude female. To this day when one speaks of beauty even women will agree that the female form is the ultimate definition of beauty whereas the male form is considered rigid and even almost completely undressed in public while the man is typically more covered up.

One could argue that art as an oppressor of women is still a valid point and that artists objectify women by painting them nude but not the male. Certainly one can make a case that modern porn does little to empower women beyond being mere objects of sexual gratification. Yet there is a power in some of the art as well for women. Having been represented as sexual objects in art for so long, women pretty much now own sex and are the givers of and takers away of it for men. Whereas before the nude male was a symbol of ultimate power, the nude female is the new symbol of power because they have the ability to control fertility. In a sense all women have become the Venus of Willendorf that the male must pray to.

These themes of turning the female form from a purely sexual devise into something more realistic has been explored but has yet to become mainstream in any sense.

The four paintings I have included above I chose for a very specific reason to show a progression of artistic styles regarding the nude female. The first painting is by Titan and is titled The Venus Of Urbino. Art depicting the pagan gods was another favorite of artists during the years of the Catholic church but were mainly enjoyed by the wealthy and were not available for viewing by the general public. In other words, the rich were able to get away with more. Anyway, Titan’s nude from 1538 is far from erotic here but the subject is aware that she is beautiful. If anything the picture has a pleasant and kind intimacy to it and is not overtly sexual.

The second painting is by Goya titled Nude Maja from 1805 and was painted almost 300 years later. The pose is similar to Titan’s but the sexuality is much more overt. Not only is she the only figure in the painting, but she is obviously inviting the viewer to engage her sexually.

The third painting is by Manet and is titled Olympic and was painted only 60 years later than Goya’s in 1863. Here the girl is obviously a prostitute and though she is sexual there is a harshness to her, almost a professionalism to her nakedness. She is neither seductive or coy and her servant (possibly as stand in for the viewer) seems to have a look of shocked judgment on her face.

Finally the last painting is by Rouault from 1906 and is titled simply The Prostitute. There is hardly anything appealing here and is a grim assessment of the state of sexuality in the modern world. Here it is dirty and shameful - shameful in the Catholic sense and indeed is a full circle in sensibilities to that earlier time of universal church domination.

Of course all four paintings are dealing with sex in one way or another, a fact that is usually inescapable when painting or photographing a nude woman. Yet some artists have tried mightily to break this sexual tradition. A good example is the incredible lifelike polyvinal sculpture by De Andrea titled Seated Woman from 1978. The nude here is not sexual at all, she just is an average woman of modest income and build. She does not even care that she is naked; she does not tempt or really seem to care one way or the other about pretty much anything. She is just a seated nude woman and nothing more.

And how does all this relate to Spencer Tunic?

In a world that values sexual beauty as a marketing tool and form of false self esteem for both sexes, Spencer Tunick is interested in exposing the body for what it is - a device that is a master and slave by and of nature. He places his subjects in man-made settings (even the glacier is man-made because of how global warming has affected it) to show how fleshy and weak we are compared to what we have created but also how powerful we are too because these fleshy beings have created all that surrounds them. Tunick has incorporated and is aware of the entire artistic history of the nude form in his own work and as his projects grow larger and larger he pushes into new artistic territory that has never really been explored.

Spencer Tunick is quite possibly the most important artist alive today because his work challenges thousands of years of artistic expression and forces the viewer to rethink our own physicality and our relationship to nature and each other as human beings. His work is secular and religious and is inclusive not divisive which is something we as a species need allot more of these days. Perhaps he is even starting a much needed revolution.

Popularity: 7% [?]

Does the above image of a spinning dancer (found via and article in Perth Now) demonstrate which side of your brain is the more dominant? According to the article most people will see this dancer moving counter-clockwise because they apparently use more of the left side of their brain and tend to be more logical and practical. People who see the dancer moving clockwise (like me) are right brain dominant and tend to be more risk taking and imaginative. Can it be true?

From Viewzone:

Experiments show that most children rank highly creative (right brain) before entering school. Because our educational systems place a higher value on left brain skills such as mathematics, logic and language than it does on drawing or using our imagination, only ten percent of these same children will rank highly creative by age 7. By the time we are adults, high creativity remains in only 2 percent of the population.

Below is another interesting example of how the left and right brain works together and separately. The below images are made by taking each half of the face and pasting them together. All the portraits on the left are made by pasting a mirror image of the right side of the face to the normal right side of the face. The image in the middle is the normal portrait and the image on the right is the opposite reflection using just the left side of the face.

What’s really happening in the image of the dancer is really just a matter of your perceptual and cognitive flexibility. The image contains just 34 frames running in a constant loop but since the two-dimensional image does not contain enough three-dimensional information to tell the brain which way she is spinning, your brain fills the rest in, as brains are apt to do with optical illusions. In this case the brain can do it one of two ways but which side of your brain is more dominant does not really have a bearing on which way she spins. (credit and thanks to the New Scientist)

It is important to note that — while functions of the brain are indeed lateralized — these lateralizations are trends and do not apply to every person in every case. Short of having undergone a hemispherectomy (the removal of an entire cerebral hemisphere) there are no “left-brained only” or “right-brained only” people.

The BBC has some more interesting brain tests that you can take if you want to play around with these ideas more. Own a Nintendo DS? Then you can look forward to this new game. Finally, if you like 3D illusions give this article a try.

Getting back to the spinning dancer above; those of you who are still trying to determine if she is naked or not are probably thinking with your “other brain“.

UPDATE: I came across this video via Cognitive Daily on Science Blogs (real scientists, great bloggers) which explains what happens when the corpus callosum is cut in a human patient leaving the left and right brains no longer able to communicate through that pathway. Hopefully this will put an end to those who think this post is a hoax and is nothing but “phony science”.

Popularity: 100% [?]