MICROSTORY OF ART

MICROSTORY OF ART
ONLINE JOURNAL FOR ART, CONNOISSEURSHIP AND CULTURAL JOURNALISM

Dedicated to Sustainability and Carpe Diem, again

(Picture: DS; detail of a poster advertising a forum on climate justice in the city of Basel)

Sustainability and Carpe Diem (2)

(17.6.2023) Do proponents of sustainability admire the European Renaissance? Perhaps, but since the European Renaissance is very ambiguous, in that it also – not only, but also – heralds the Industrial Revolution, proponents of sustainability admire the Humanist who is questioning mining, but not the scholar who systematically wrote up everything about mining. Georgius Agricola, who was working briefly as a teacher of Latin when being 23 years old, can be seen as the quintessential Renaissance man who heralded the modern age (in all its ambiguity). Apparantly, Agricola was holding shares of a silver mine even himself. Paulus Niavis, on the other hand, questioned mining in a piece of Latin prose, due to its doing harm to mother nature; and with Paulus Niavis, the modern proponent of sustainability does apparently identify. To the effect of running into the danger of becoming ideological. Because Niavis, in truth, was also ambiguous as to mining. And the concept of sustainability, at least in the way it is understood today, does include also an economical dimension. And the question we are raising here is the question of how the modern teacher of Latin, if he or she is a proponent of sustainability, does deal with this ambiguity. Of the European Renaissance – heralding modern economy, and generally, our modern age.

1) The Teacher of Latin as an Activist

Let’s imagine the modern teacher of Latin as a proponent of sustainability, and even as an activist. The above picture (photograph taken by me) does show a detail of a poster, advertising a forum on climate justice in the city of Basel. And the slogan says: no more mining.

The modern proponent of sustainability, at least in the city of Basel, does know that it was in the city of Basel, where, in 1556, the opus magnum by Georgius Agricola, was published posthumously (the picture on the left is showing a later edition). In Latin, under the title of De re metallica. And this is no less as: the genealogy of modern mining, in all its (ambiguous) potential. And this story was about creating wealth, this story was about creating growth.

But the effects of mining, visible to another Renaissance man, namely the Humanist Paulus Niavis, got already questioned at the time of the Renaissance. And what Niavis did, in his Iudicium Iovis, was staging a discussion, a forum. And it was the Gods who held this forum, and it was Jupiter presiding that forum. Accused was mining. But also defended, And Jupiter, perhaps ambiguous, left the decision to Fortuna, the goddess of fortune. And Fortuna decided – this is what the modern proponent of sustainability tends to dislike – man to be not guilty. It was just that man (the miner) suffered (by mining and the risks of mining), but Fortuna (or the author, staging a judgment) did not dismiss mining per se. This piece of Latin literature was written roughly 40 years before Georgius Agricola did write his De re metallica. Which means that mining was already developing early, and it got questioned long before it got systematicized (by Agricola).

2) The Iconography of Carpe Diem (2)

Carpe diem, in the way I am understanding it here, does not mean to innocently catch the day, but: to seize the opportunity. The economic opportunity. And the question is to what degree this concept goes along with ›thinking with the eyes of tomorrow‹. This conflict is not only a theoretical one in affluent societies, but affluent societies perhaps do tend to think of themselves and of their own ecological conscience, and – sometimes – less of the necessity of creating growth in other regions of the world. So the iconography of sustainability, as well as the iconography of carpe diem is very ambiguous as well, and it depends where one does stand, what you will perceive as an iconography of sustainability, or of carpe diem. Sustainability, in the context of forestry in the 18th century, was about the economy, about economical sustainability. And the conflict that arose from that, we can also study by going back further in time and by studying the European Renaissance: even in the forum of the Gods, staged by an early proponent of sustainability, the goddess of fortune, acting as the arbitrary, decides that the miner, even if devastating the earth, is found to be not guilty. And this the proponent of sustainability, at least in the context of affluent societies of today, finds hard to digest.

3) To Read – But How to Read?

Which is not a bad thing per se. But more problematic is ideology, and more problematic is the discourse on sustainability, turning or having turned into an ideology of (ecology first). The United Nations defining sustainability suggest that harmony of ecology, economy, culture and society is the goal one has to work for, and that this harmony of possible. But this is to neglect the conflict of goals, and the conflict even being inherent to the basic concepts. If sustainability implies the return to a pre-modern, perhaps pre-mining economy, how popular would that concept suddenly be? If that would imply no raw materials to supply a modern smartphone?

But our imaginary modern teacher of Latin is not necessarily biased. The decision he or she has to make is the decision of how to read the Iudicium Iovis with his/her pupils, as well as the decision of how to read an ode by Horace that transmits the ›slogan‹ of carpe diem. There are probabaly teachers of Latin that have become ideological proponents of sustainability, in that the wish their pupils to rewrite the Iudicium Iovis, with man – or the miner – being found guilty. The question is, if the smartphone generations will find this to be very convincing. And perhaps this discussion will end with agreeing on smartphones with an eco label (which probably will not end the discussion on the ambiguity of modern economies).

But our modern teacher of Latin (with or without holding shares of a silver mine, and with or without propagating ›sustainable investment‹) might also read Georgius Agricola with his/her pupils. And also Agricola should be read critically. And as usual the academe is rather lethargic and disinterested in anything substantial, since the discussion on Agricola is generally affirmative and not very critical. Although there was once a humanist, Paulus Niavis, who at least, and forty years in advance, was ambiguous as to mining.

Selected Literature:
Paulus Niavis, Iudicium Iovis oder Das Gericht der Götter über den Bergbau. Ein literarisches Dokument aus der Frühzeit des deutschen Bergbaus, translated and edited by Paul Krenkel, Berlin 1953

The Art Museum of Sustainability


Monet on Sustainability

Velázquez on Sustainability

Van Gogh on Sustainability

Picasso and Sustainability

Hopper and Sustainability

Rubens on Sustainability

Caspar David Friedrich and Sustainability

Iconography of Sustainability


Iconography of Sustainability

Iconography of Sustainability 2

From Bruegel to Solarpunk (Iconography of Sustainability 3)

Sustainability and Carpe Diem 1

Concepts, Labels and Varia


Solarpunk

Renaturalization

Tipping Points

The Blue Hour in Ecotopia

Reforestation

Emergency Supply

Sustainability and Luxury

Eyes of Tomorrow

Bamboo

MICROSTORY OF ART
ONLINE JOURNAL FOR ART, CONNOISSEURSHIP AND CULTURAL JOURNALISM
HOME

Top of the page

Microstory of Art Main Index

Dietrich Seybold Homepage

© DS