Event 1: What's Next? Eco Materialism and Contemporary Art

“Is that all?” Linda Weintraub’s friend asked her, after she described the massive meadow, sprawling grass, and tantalizing streams of her house in upstate New York.

“Is that all?” He questioned her, and she conveyed the clouds that framed the valley, the standing trees that decorated the meadow, and the clear air that crisply addressed each person in the morning.

Is that all?

Weintraub's amphitheatre: https://weadartists.org

I was taken aback, and a little angry. How dare he, I thought. In was more of an insult to nature in my mind: that what was presented to him -- what was natural and good and pure -- was not good enough.

Linda Weintraub, although initially feeling the same, paused. What came was a much  different reaction.  

“What’s next?” She asked herself.

The answer: Eco Materialism.

Eco Materialism is employing the land for functional purposes, rather than the surface aesthetics. In Weintraub’s case, she capitalizes on the streams on her property to provide water, the maple trees to offer wood and syrup, the leafs to give smell, and the stone to offer support. Each day she participates in the act of foraging, pulling in pieces from the outdoors and integrating it into her home. She uses branches as fences, stones as seats of an amphitheatre, and seeds and berries as paint.

Weintraub's Woods

The lecture! (I am in the green jacket)

Linda Weintraub’s Eco Materialism emphasizes the connection of art and science that Professor Vesna introduces in the first week of class. While there may be two distinct entities in the world, and in this instance, nature and house necessities, they do not have to be partitioned from her each. Rather, they should be used to enhance each other’s capabilities. Weintraub continues to breakdown the boundaries between the outdoors and indoors by having twigs serve as railings in her house, and hosting fish to coexist indoors with her.

Initially, I had some hesitations to Weintraub’s way of life. I did not think she was cynical or old-fashioned, but I worried that employing nature was a bit idealized. Who is to say what is ours to take from nature, and who has the authority to determine if where beings of natural items should be, I thought. Was it fair to pull the branches from trees? Was it right to cast fish the role of her cohabitants?

Olana: https://parks.ny.gov

Linda Weintraub informed us that she follows a line of artists who also have more than a unique relationship with nature. For example, Frederic Church’s house, Olana, is more than just a place to reside -- it is an artistic display of the integration of nature and architecture. Everything the viewer sees while standing on his property is designed and constructed by him. He believed that nature was sloppy and messy, and thus worked to eliminate those aspects. He argued that it was the obligation of the artist to produce a harmonious scene.

While Weintraub’s beliefs do not align with Church’s, it is still interesting to see the difference in their approach. Ultimately, the each use nature to their desires, and wield their houses and actions around that.

If the opportunity arises, I would highly encourage to all students to visit her work - whether than be at an exhibit, online, or through books. It’s is a touching reminder of our obligation to be mindful of the heavy footprint we can all make and carry. I look forward to keeping up with her work, and seeing how she progresses.