< >
Flesh of a Dead Nature, 2022, P.M.S. FILOART
Flesh of a Dead Nature
The Flesh of a Dead Nature works employ the language of materiality and metaphor to deliver a radical critique of the meat industry. They operate at the intersection of installation art, object art, and surrealism, inviting reflection on consumption, ethics, and the treatment of natural resources.
Defamiliarization as an Artistic Strategy
The defamiliarization of everyday objects is a central strategy in art history, used by artists like Marcel Duchamp (readymades) and in the surrealistic objects of Salvador Dalí. Transforming fruits, vegetables, and household items into grotesque vessels for meat recalls this tradition but goes further: these works combine defamiliarization with a clear political message.
The minced meat in a banana peel or a slice of ham among green leaves disrupts habitual perception and creates a moment of disorientation. This visual disruption compels viewers to think about the meaning behind the objects—a hallmark of critical art.
Dead Nature
The title, Flesh of a Dead Nature, draws upon the artistic and philosophical concept of Natura Morta (still life), traditionally used to depict objects in a moment of stasis, often symbolizing mortality and the passage of time. In these works, the notion of “dead nature” is expanded and literalized: natural elements like fruits, vegetables, and plants are physically invaded by flesh, turning them into grotesque amalgamations.
This reinterpretation challenges the historical idealization of still life painting as a celebration of abundance or beauty. Instead, it reflects on the consequences of industrial exploitation, where nature is no longer alive or autonomous but subjected to the human-driven cycle of death and consumption. The title suggests a nature that has been metaphorically and literally killed, stripped of vitality, and repurposed into grotesque commodities.
Dead Flesh
The notion of dead flesh is intrinsic to the works, both as a physical material and as a metaphorical construct. Raw meat is not just a symbol of death but also of disconnection: it is flesh devoid of identity, stripped of the living being it once belonged to. By inserting this dead flesh into objects typically associated with life—like fruits, plants, or even an eggshell—the artworks heighten the tension between life and death, natural and unnatural.
This juxtaposition underscores the alienation inherent in industrial meat production, where living creatures are reduced to anonymous, packaged commodities. In this sense, the works challenge the viewer to confront the reality of what lies behind the sanitized images of meat in supermarkets and advertising.
Critique of Consumerism and Surrealism
The works employ surrealistic techniques by merging seemingly incompatible elements: fruit and meat, electricity and meat, plants and meat. These “uncanny” combinations evoke the surrealist assemblages of Meret Oppenheim or Max Ernst, which explored the subconscious and the absurdity of everyday life. In this context, surrealism is used as a tool to question industrial manipulation of nature and consumer goods.
The banana, zucchini, or pineapple—symbols of freshness, naturalness, and health—are “contaminated” by the presence of meat. They raise questions about the authenticity of our food: how much nature remains in a world dominated by meat production?
The Aesthetic of the Object
The use of minced meat and ham points to Julia Kristeva’s concept of the object. Meat, especially raw meat, possesses an uncanny aesthetic because it reminds us of death, decay, and destruction. By presenting meat in unusual contexts, these works heighten that sense of unease.
Visual arrangements—like an eggshell filled with minced meat or meat spilling out of an electrical outlet—create an atmosphere of absurdity and disgust. This emotional reaction is central, prompting viewers to reflect on their own relationship with meat.
Object Art and Critique of Consumer Culture
The works can be situated within the tradition of object art, as developed by artists like Claes Oldenburg and Joseph Beuys in the 1960s. This art form uses everyday objects to comment on societal issues. The meat-filled snow globe or the meat-filled teapot push the banality of consumerism to its absurd limits.
The minced meat in a pill blister pack or a champagne glass references the absurd overproduction and unreflective consumption of meat products. The message is clear: meat is treated as a commodity, with little regard for its origins or ethical implications.
Ethical and Ecological Dimensions
These works are not only visual provocations but also ethical statements. They criticize the normalization of meat consumption in a world grappling with ecological and moral crises. By combining plant-based symbols with meat, they highlight the absurdity of industrial agriculture and pose a pressing question: how far are we willing to manipulate nature to satisfy our consumption habits?
Social Context
These artworks emerge at a time when discussions about sustainability, environmental destruction, and animal rights are becoming increasingly urgent. They might also be interpreted as a parody of the meat industry and its often absurd attempts to justify unethical production practices.
The artworks in “Flesh of Dead Nature” are radical, visually striking commentaries on the meat industry and consumer culture. By integrating themes of dead nature and dead flesh, they challenge viewers to confront the ecological and moral consequences of their consumption habits. Using a surreal aesthetic and the materiality of meat, the works provoke emotional and intellectual responses. In their unapologetic directness, they fulfill the role of contemporary art: to encourage reflection, pose uncomfortable questions, and confront us with the consequences of our way of life.