Where is ‘utopia’ now : an exploration of contemporary Dutch utopian thought and art

The term ‘utopia’ originated in 1516, when Thomas More christened his imaginary perfect society ‘Utopia’. The name combines the Greek terms eutopia (‘good place’) and outopia (‘perfect place’ or ’no place’). In this article, this binary aspect of utopian thought (of transcendent utopias versus utopias achievable here and now) is utilised in an analysis of three waves of utopian thought and art, focusing on the most recent. These waves correspond to the post-World War I and post-World War II eras respectively, and to current (early twenty-first century) thought. The term ‘utopia’, as used here, refers to an attempt to create an alternative social system in order to abrogate social tension. Current preoccupations with ‘utopia’ can be interpreted as a focus on inclusivity, diversity and multiculturalism in an attempt to counter parochialism and othering. In this paper it is argued that the ideal of ‘unity-in-diversity’ re-occurs in Dutch utopian art from the early as well as mid-twentieth century and again at present. Furthermore, the discourse of contemporary art movements is contextualised in terms of current utopian thought, in order to answer the question: Where is utopia now?Waar is ‘utopia’ nou: ’n ondersoek na kontemporêre Nederlandse utopiese denke en kuns. Die term ‘utopia’ het sy ontstaan in 1516, met die benaming van Thomas More se denkbeeldige, perfekte samelewing. Die naam kombineer die Griekse terme eutopia (‘goeie plek’), en outopia (‘perfekte plek’ of ‘geen plek’). Hierdie tweeledige aspek van utopiese denke (van ’n bo-aardse utopie teenoor ’n utopie haalbaar in die hede) word hier aangewend in die ontleding van drie golwe van utopiese denke en kuns, met die fokus op die mees onlangse golf. Hierdie golwe stem ooreen met die tydperke na die Eerste- en Tweede Wêreld oorloë, en met hedendaagse (vroeg een-en-twintigste-eeuse) denke. Die term ‘utopia’, soos hier aangewend, verwys na ’n poging om ’n alternatiewe sosiale sisteem te skep met die doel om sosiale spanning te bowe te kom. Hedendaagse utopiese denke kan geïnterpreteer word in terme van ’n fokus op insluiting, diversiteit en multikulturalisme, met die doel om uit te styg bo nougesette denke en ‘anders-makery’. Met hierdie ondersoek word daar gepoog om aan te toon hoe die ideaal ‘eenheid-in-veelheid’ herverskyn in Nederlandse utopiese kuns in die vroeë-en middel twintigste eeu, en weer tans. Verder word die diskoers van kontemporêre kunsbewegings kontekstualiseer in terme van huidige utopiese denke, om sodoende die vraag te beantwoord: Waar is utopia nou

The (extra)ordinary (con)texts of beauty and be-ing

This article aims to interrogate Japanese theorist Sōetsu Yanagi’s philosophical writings on Zen Buddhism and Zen aesthetics (as expounded in his essays published in The unknown craftsman: a Japanese insight into beauty), as well as the being-historical writing of Martin Heidegger as encountered in his publication Mindfulness, in order to point out the similarities in thought expressed in these two publications with regard to the way in which the ordinary affords access to the extraordinary. In this way Heidegger’s terms ‘be-ing’ and ‘being’ are related to Yanagi’s framework of the relationship between ‘wabi’ and ‘shibui’. In the process Heidegger’s thought is hermeneutically interpreted in terms of Yanagi’s explication of the Zen notion of non-dualist beauty.Hierdie artikel poog om die Japanese teoretikus Sōetsu Yanagi se beskrywing van Zen Boedisme en Zen aestetika (soos gevind in sy teks The unknown craftsman: a Japanese insight into beauty), sowel [as] Martin Heidegger se syn-historiese skrywe Mindfulness, te ondersoek om sodoende ooreenkomste in hul denke oor die wyse waarop die buitengewone in die gewone aangetref kan word, uit te wys. So-doende word Heidegger se terme ‘be-ing’ en ‘being’ vergelyk met Yanagi se beskrywing van ‘wabi’ en ‘shibui’. Verder word Heidegger se denke hermeneuties geinterpreteer in terme van die Zen benadering tot nie-dualistiese skoonheid soos deur Yanagi beskryf

The (extra)ordinary (con)texts of beauty and be-ing

This article aims to interrogate Japanese theorist Sōetsu Yanagi’s philosophical writings on Zen Buddhism and Zen aesthetics (as expounded in his essays published in The unknown craftsman: a Japanese insight into beauty), as well as the being-historical writing of Martin Heidegger as encountered in his publication Mindfulness, in order to point out the similarities in thought expressed in these two publications with regard to the way in which the ordinary affords access to the extraordinary. In this way Heidegger’s terms ‘be-ing’ and ‘being’ are related to Yanagi’s framework of the relationship between ‘wabi’ and ‘shibui’. In the process Heidegger’s thought is hermeneutically interpreted in terms of Yanagi’s explication of the Zen notion of non-dualist beauty.Hierdie artikel poog om die Japanese teoretikus Sōetsu Yanagi se beskrywing van Zen Boedisme en Zen aestetika (soos gevind in sy teks The unknown craftsman: a Japanese insight into beauty), sowel [as] Martin Heidegger se syn-historiese skrywe Mindfulness, te ondersoek om sodoende ooreenkomste in hul denke oor die wyse waarop die buitengewone in die gewone aangetref kan word, uit te wys. So-doende word Heidegger se terme ‘be-ing’ en ‘being’ vergelyk met Yanagi se beskrywing van ‘wabi’ en ‘shibui’. Verder word Heidegger se denke hermeneuties geinterpreteer in terme van die Zen benadering tot nie-dualistiese skoonheid soos deur Yanagi beskryf

Design and empathy

The relationship between design and empathy is not unproblematic. Consideration of this relationship brings several questions to mind, including whether it is possible for design to be practiced in a predominantly empathetic way to begin with. An attempt is made to interrogate what might be understood by the term empathy, as well as its place in western culture, and, lastly, the potential role of empathy in design practice.]AFRIKAANS: Die verhouding tussen ontwerp en empatie is nie onproblematies nie. Nadenke oor hierdie verhouding bring verskeie vrae na vore, byvoorbeeld of dit enigsins moontlik is om ontwerp te produseer met ‘n oorwegend empatiese inslag. ‘n Kritiese bevraging na wat bedoel word met die term empatie, en die rol van empatie in westerse kultuur, en laastens, die moontlikke rol van empatie in die ontwerp praktyk, word hier gepoog

Mondrian se abstraksie: kokon of kolonie? ’n Psigoanalitiese en feministiese interpretasie.

This essay attempts to interrogate the notion of the female as ‘other’ in the abstract compositions of early twentieth century Dutch painter Piet Mondrian, notions also addressed in his writings. The existing (Freudian and post-Freudian) psychoanalytical reading of Mondrian’s abstract compositions by critic Donald Kuspit, interprets Mondrian’s work as sublimation, relating to the id, ego and super-ego aspects of the artist’s psyche. Kuspit’s reading of Mondrian’s abstract compositions as a form of sublimation, posits the art work as heroic personal and social redemption. In response to such a reading, feminist critique (specifically feminist theorist Luce Irigaray’s third wave feminist discourse around the notion of the ‘female as other’) is used to dismantle Kuspit’s model, and to read Mondrian’s abstract works as well as his writings from an alternative (feminist) perspective.Hierdie skryfstuk behels ’n poging om ‘n beskouing wat beskryf kan word as die ‘vroulike as die ander’ te ondersoek soos wat dit aangetref word in vroëe twintigste eeuse Nederlandse skilder Piet Mondrian se abstrakte komposisies, sowel as in sy skrywe. Bestaande Freudiaanse en post-Freudiaanse psigoanalitiese interpretasies van Mondrian se abstrakte komposisies, soos aangetref in die analise van kuns kritikus Donald Kuspit, word ondesoek. Kuspit interpreteer Mondrian se komposisies as ’n vorm van sublimasie soos wat dit herlei na die id, ego en super-ego aspekte van die kunstenaar se psige. In terme van Kuspit se interpretasie kan Mondrian se pogings as heldadige persoonlikke en sosiale oorwinning beskou word. In reaksie op laasgenoemde interpretasie, word feministiese konsepte (spesifiek soos wat aangetref kan word in die sogenaamde ‘derde golf’ feminisme van Luce Irigaray) ingespan om Kuspit se model te ontleed en ’n alternatiewe (feministiese) interpretasie van Mondrian se kuns en idees te bereik

Distopia : the utopia of dissidence and cultural pluralism in three generations of Dutch artists

This study develops a utopia, named distopia, positioned as a utopia of dissidence and cultural pluralism, also described as difference. The term distopia is a neologism formulated to invoke productive elements of utopia (such as a vision for an improved sociocultural sphere), with aspects of dystopia (namely, scepticism regarding the prevalent), whilst evading the potential naiveté of utopia as well as the hopeless resignation that dystopia can encourage. The term also denotes the political expedience of dissent. Utopia is analysed in terms of its form, content, or function, and according to its underlying sociocultural dynamic, which is, in turn, determined by intersecting permutations of space and time. This study furthermore categorises utopias as either representative of the same (that is, of the institutional, political, discursive, ideological and sociocultural status quo), or of the other. The other is defined here as an agent marginalised along the vectors of race, class, gender, and sexuality. Distopia is, accordingly, a dissenting utopia of the other, formulated to address, in particular, sociocultural exclusion and human rights violations linked to the parallel projects of neocolonial exploitation and of destabilising globalisation practices driven by neoliberal ideology. The utopias of three Dutch visual artists, namely Piet Mondrian (1872-1944), Constant Nieuwenhuys (1920-2005), and Jonas Staal (b. 1981) in collaboration with Moussa Ag Assarid (b. c.1975), are critiqued through the lens of distopia. This is done in order to assess the status of productive difference and engagement with the other in their respective utopias, created over the course of a century.Thesis (PhD)--University of Pretoria, 2017.Visual ArtsPhDUnrestricte

Stadsmure na stedelike strate : utopias van verset

Lewis Mumford makes the case that the first (western) utopia was a City, and that the first (western) City was a utopia, and David Harvey similarly iterates that “[t]he figures of ‘the city’ and of ‘Utopia’ have long been intertwined”. The fates of these two constructs are thus seemingly indissolubly linked. Regrettably, this initial construct, the City as utopia / utopia as the City, very shortly mutated into the originary dystopia, inaugurating the conception of the City as a place of suffering and social ills. This inherent dystopian aspect of the early City can be traced to the impulse to control and exclude, a phenomenon not limited to the Cities and utopias of antiquity, but concretely constitutive of the spatial and social geographies of a critical mass of contemporary global cities. This article interprets the works of street artists Banksy, Mustafa Hulusi, Invader and Ben Wilson as exemplary of the production of an alternative utopia which seeks to undermine the dystopian elements of the City. Their work is based on criticality and dissent generated in the city street. This reading is done from a Marxist perspective, based largely on the writings of David Harvey, and interprets the praxis of the artists discussed as the visual embodiment of the explicit or implicit critique of the contemporary deep structure of the dystopian City.Lewis Mumford redeneer dat die Stad die eerste (westerse) utopia was en dat die eerste (westerse) Stad ’n utopia was. David Harvey beaam Mumford se stelling, en bevestig die vroeë ineenstrengeling van utopia en die Stad. Die Stad en utopia deel dus skynbaar ’n onlosmaaklike geskiedenis. Ongelukkig het hierdie vroeë konstruk, naamlik die Stad as utopia / utopia as die Stad, spoedig ontaard in die oorspronklike distopia, en sodoende aanleiding gegee tot die wyd aanvaarde idee van die Stad as ‘n plek waar menslike lyding en sosiale ongewensdhede hooggety vier. Die wortel van hierdie inherente distopiese aspek van die vroeë Stad kan herlei word na die menslike impuls om te beheer en uit te sluit, en spreek dus nie slegs tot Stede en utopias uit die antieke era nie, maar verwesenlik die konkrete ruimtelike en sosiale geografie van die meerderheid van hedendaagse wereldstede. Hierdie artikel interpreteer die werke van straatkunstenaars Banksy, Mustafa Hulusi, Invader en Ben Wilson as verteenwoordigend van die skepping van ’n alternatiewe utopia wat die distopiese elemente van die Stad ondermyn, en wat gebaseer is op ‘n kritiese verset wat voortspruit uit die alledaagse kultuur van die stedelike straat. Die werke word bespreek vanuit ‘n Marxistiese perspektief soos gebaseer op die werk van David Harvey. Verder word die praktyk van die gekose kunstenaars geïnterpreteer as die visuele konkretisering van implisiete sowel as eksplisiete verset teen die huidige diep struktuur van die distopiese Stad.http://www.journals.co.za/ej/ejour_sajah.htm