Shawn Decker's "Prairie"

            Shawn Decker’s artwork—titled Prairie—is named so because the installation attempts to convey a field of grass filled with bugs, frogs, and other noisy animals. The project is constructed on two metallic grids anchored to the ground and consists of separate metal rods representing individual stalks of grass. Throughout the course of the piece, the individual stalks move and buzz according to an algorithm that is supposed to make it feel randomized and organic, much like being in a real prairie.

            Interestingly enough, the title implies a vast field in open air. However, this work of art is contained within a building (specifically the Chicago Cultural Center). Moreover, in nature we can walk through fields, but this exhibit requires the viewers to stay around the perimeter. To somewhat fix this, Decker deliberately made a “path” in between, allowing the viewers to walk between the two fields to create an illusion of being “in” the prairie. There were also seats at the side, but as there are no true restrictions, some others and I sat on the ground in the middle, which certainly yielded a unique and immersive experience.

            As much as the work tries to replicate a natural environment, nature is something that is considered organic and more randomized as everything in the world follows the “rules of nature” (or, as a Christian, I would say, the rules that God ordained so that the world could at least function, which may seem somewhat of a paradox). Yet, when we think of culture, we think of it as something that is created by humans – culture is art, so to say. These are things that are “manufactured” using human ideas and could be made out of materials found on the earth (things found in nature), and could very well be based on nature. In this case, the prairie (a natural phenomenon) is the subject of the artwork, but Decker conceived the concept of the work and constructed it using human means.

            This brings up the question: can art be natural? I think art could be seen as natural, but it depends on the context. For example, Christians believe that God created the earth and everything in it including the variety of colors (imagine flowers or birds and other animals) and sculpted landscapes (such as canyons and mountains) among other things, which all point to God’s splendor as a creator. Many may consider these natural phenomena as art, yet, from a more human/worldly standpoint, art is something created by people at a much smaller scale, and could include things such as sculptures, paintings, and music. There always seems to be some sort of deliberate organization and ordering of things as it involves human choice and decision-making.

            In regards to “decision-making,” the artist “composed” the path that the viewers can walk on and chose to place the work in the Chicago Cultural Center. Furthermore, he used all he could to try to replicate something natural by using things that are seen as unnatural/industrial (i.e. metal rods, electronics, etc.). In a strange way, the whole work seems to be some sort of fabrication of the natural, especially the randomly generated portion where, based on what’s happening to certain rods, other rods would move and make sounds in an algorithmically randomized way. The electronics still had to be programmed, and even though the randomization may make it seem more “natural,” the type and variation of “randomization” is decided on through human logic and choice. In fact, there was a natural ebb and flow in the course of the piece, and every once in a while, the piece would reset and start from a "beginning point;" if the piece was totally "random," then it would lose its effect, and it wouldn't feel like a prairie at all.

            In a way, this piece of art is like a landscape painting, which uses paints, textures, colors, and other means to convey a scene from nature. In this case Decker uses sounds, movement (through the rods and electronic motors) to replicate a prairie. It’s not the real deal, but it’s representative of the prairie (This could then be linked with McEvilley’s Content Carrier #1: Representation). Yet, because this is a more musical/acoustical work, the aspect of time allows for more real-time randomization to convey more of an organic feel.

            Overall, this was a very awesome work that certainly gets us wondering about constructed art, the natural world, the time aspect of acoustical art, and what it really means for something to be organic and natural.
          Below are some pictures of the exhibit, as I do believe a visual aid will somewhat help in conveying parts of the experience: