The lamp is designed to resemble a flower, and with its bright yellow colour and round shape, it also resembles a little sun. In addition to being a design-object, it is therefor also a representation, an image of a flower, or a sun. It can be seen both as a reconstruction of nature and a representation of nature. The lamp functions as a little sun when the actual sun has set, it stores sunlight and recreates it, and can both be seen as a cultural and a natural object. It resists nature – in the durability of its materials (plastic), but it also resists the natural cycle of the sun rising and setting.
The project considers both sustainability in relation to production and usage, and also social sustainability. It aims to sustain both the natural and the cultural. Does this affect how we perceive it, as a cultural/natural object?
What is the possible ideological and ontological effects of this re-creation of nature?
My paper will suggest that the Little Sun project can be seen as a way of reconstructing a natural phenomena for cultural benefits, and will argue that the project can have implications for the traditional natural/cultural and representational/original - dichotomies. I will argue that on an ontological level it can contribute to weaken these dualisms. Many of Eliassons installations concern a reconstruction of natural phenomena, and I will argue that the design-object of Little Sun, also falls into this category.
Welcome to the blog for the course KUN4500. Here the students will make their blog entries and comment on current topics in art history. Spring 2016 are all about design in nature.
Log in to comment
Not UiO or Feide account?
Create a WebID account to comment