A fleet of artists is reading and studying the same thinkers, the same Haraways’, Barad’s, Neimanis’ who all paint the same picture: Please, make up narratives which do not demand dualistic divisions between human and non-human experience, emphasize relations to the extent that possibilities to establish categories is hindered and build a body of work which supports and enables life (instead of representing facets of it). Please, don’t make works which dwell on an individual bodies relationship with the environment at the expense of the other.

Still it seems impossible to built critical mass which would have an impact through parlamentary vote and political organization, which is by definition a process of coming to terms with others (to support others who are not of your peer-group) is considered tacky. An endless stream of artworks which comment on global events is being authored by an endless pool of university trained minds. Thousands of minds are wasted (are made into pollution) in producing artefacts from climate change.

I should investigate what is the difference between hydrofeminism and communism or more clearly, what is blocking people from applying the body-of-water approaches which Neimanis advocates, to their political actions? Why do artists organize to produce artworks at great personal expense but avoid organizing politically (all the while calling for re-organization of power)? Is there an opening to develop hydrocommunism and what would it be like? A global effort to socialize all natural water resources?

I confessed to a friend that I joined SKP. They were surprised and stated that they believed I was “smarter then that”. I’m not sure if they were commenting my actions from a strategic stance or expressing their view on what the party is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.