Yvette Watt writes on The Artist as Activist

The role of the artist in society is complex and multifaceted, but there is a basic expectation that the work of contemporary artists will in some way respond to and/or reflect the time in which it was made. While this can mean nothing more at times than a certain stylistic or aesthetic approach consistent with the time the work was made, at the other end of the spectrum it can involve artists tackling current socio-political issues through their work. Second Sight (2008) However, despite issues-based art being relatively common, it is rarer to find those artists who are prepared to actually take a stance in the work – to make work that addresses his or her own views. The reasons for artists’ reluctance to make their socio-political views clear in their work include a concern that such work may be seen as too closed, too direct or too didactic, and a persistent attitude amongst artists, curators and critics that art and socio-political issues don’t mix, or at least rarely mix well. Making issues based work can also compromise the commercial viability of an artist’s work. Additionally, there is the problem for the artist as activist regarding how to make work that engages with broad audience without resorting to populist cliché.

These are all matters I have had to negotiate over the last few years since I began to directly address within my artwork the issues associated with my long-term role as an animal rights activist. The challenge, as I see it, is to produce artworks that encourage the viewer to consider the issues associated with the animal rights ideology I subscribe to without resorting to an overtly heavy-handed polemic. The approach I take is to focus on the very personal nature of my interest in animal-human relationships and my consequent identification with non-human animals, which is expressed through the core role of the self within the works. There is an expectation that, just as I attempt to identify with the non-human animals that are my subject matter – to try and imagine the animals’ point of view - the viewer will likewise consider my point of view, and hence also that of the animals for whom I act as an advocate. While the method of production of the work varies from painting through to digital prints, imbedded in the mode of production or formal construction of the images is a conscious intention that work should accepted as valid by a contemporary art audience as well as be able to engage with the more general viewer.

Offering #3 Sally (2007)

The intention is to produce works that are discomforting and at times confrontational, but which are not shocking, with the desired result being a process by which the viewer is invited to question the position they personally hold in regard to human-animal relationships. This is achieved in part by the use of humour within many of the artworks as well as by the deliberate but judicious engagement of anthropomorphism or, more aptly, ‘egomorphism’ in the depiction of the animals, which I contend allows for an empathetic association between the viewer and the depicted animal/s. The term ‘egomorphism’, which was coined by social anthropologist Kay Milton as an alternative term for a common but inappropriate use of the word anthropomorphism, encapsulates the importance of the inclusion of myself in the artworks. Milton argues that anthropomorphism can be misleading as it suggests that humanness is the departure point for any understanding of non-human animals, whereas ‘egomorphism’ place the self, or ego as the primary point of reference. She also argues that anthropomorphism implies the attribution of human characteristics to other animals whereas as egormorphism allows for the perceiving of similar characteristics in animals. (1)

In his essay Animal Death in Contemporary Art, Steve Baker poses a question that is highly pertinent to my recent work, when he asks “Can contemporary art productively address the killing of animals?” (2) I would argue for the affirmative. I would go so far as to suggest that because the nature of art practice is more diverse now then it has ever been, contemporary art can address the killing of animals more effectively than art from previous eras. In addressing the killing of animals, I have chosen at this stage not to use images of their deaths. My rationale is to make artwork that causes the viewer to consider the issues through having to imagine the lives and deaths of these animals. This allows for more complex readings of the images.

Domestic Animals - Culinary Tips (2007)Implicit within Baker’s question is another: Can contemporary art enact social change? While I would not suggest that contemporary art can cause change by itself, I do believe that art can be a powerful instrument in the tool kit of social change. Like the multilayered and targeted strategies of advertising - and animal rights campaigns - the production of artwork that directly addresses socio-political issues is one part of a much bigger and more complex picture. Contemporary artists have a reputation for being progressive rather than conservative in their attitudes, and thus more likely to question than blindly accept the views held by that society. While this questioning drives the work of artists who engage with socio-political issues it is only when the artist is prepared to make their personal position clear that the roles of artist and activist are collapsed into one. This merging of art and activism can provide for a productive forum for debate and discussion of the issues addressed by the artwork, both on an individual level between artist/artwork and gallery audience and in art journals and the general media. For someone such as myself who is both artist and activist, I am pleased to say that while I have encountered certain challenges, the combining of these two roles has proved to be effective as a campaign tool and beneficial to my art practice.

Notes

1. Milton outlines this argument in her essay ‘Anthropomorphism or Egomorphism?: The Perception of non-human Persons by Human Ones’, in Animals in Person: cultural perspectives on animal-human intimacy, edited by John Knight Berg, Oxford & New York, 2005, pp255-271..
2. Baker, Steve, ‘Animal Death in Contemporary Art’, in Killing Animals, University of Illinois, Urbana and Chicago, 2006, p70.

Yvette Watt is a Hobart based artist whose practice spans more than 20 years. She has held numerous solo exhibitions over this period and has been the recipient of a number of grants, awards and residencies. Her work is held in many public and private collections including Parliament House, Canberra; Artbank; Art Gallery of WA and the Kerry Stokes Collection.