I just visited the Setouchi Triennial that takes place on a group of Islands in the south/east of Japan. In a gallery on Naoshima I fell upon the installation “bystander” by Mari Katayama made specifically for the triennial.
In a series of photographic self-portraits, Katayama arranges herself, with stuffed, toy-like mannequin-like prosthetic legs and arms, in a way where it becomes difficult to figure out which is her limbs and which are dummies. It takes time and effort to see that she has a deformed hand and both her legs are amputated mid-leg. To a backdrop of the sea, she mimics the figure of the mermaid or the siren, which made me think of Giorgio Agamben’s The Open in which he tells the story of how scientists have always struggled to point out exactly what it is that separates human from ape, animal or even mythical figure. The Danish anatomist Caspar Bartholin categorized the siren as “Homo Marinus” next to man (homo sapien) and orangutang (homo sylvestris). Agamben goes on to argue:
“[Homo-sapiens] is an optical machine constructed of a series of mirrors in which man, looking at himself, sees his own image always already deformed in the features of an ape… Whoever refuses to recognize himself in the ape, becomes one.”
In this manner Katayama, points to the deformity at the heart of what it is to be human.
Litterature:
Agamben, Giorgio (2004) The Open, Man and Animal, Stanford University Press
Setouchi Triennale 2016 Official Guidebook (2016) Gendaikikakushitsu
image source: http://benesse-artsite.jp/en/art/miyanoura-gallery6.html
Leave a Reply
5 Comments on "Mari Katayama’s self portraits and Giorgio Agamben’s The Open"
thanks so much for this- amazing photo! just a little thought because i have been thinking about deformity of the human body recently too. it has struck me that we tend to figure deformity in terms of disability and limitation where as much of the powerful affects of the deformed body have a lot to do with the possibilities that the altered body offers/leaves open. we are forced to imagine a human beyond the usual range and that can be both threatening and exciting. seems to me that this art makes imaginative use of that open possibility for reimagening/offer alternatives.
Dear Angela. Great you bring up Cary Wolfe. I am not sure I understand Agamben fully myself. I believe there is a reference to queer theory and psychoanalysis thrown in there that points to a social construction in the definitions of the human. But I also have a feeling that there is an implicit argument, when he points to scientists’ failed attempts to define human from animal, that it is impossible to make such a distinction. But maybe I am wrong.
Dear Eva. I think you are right. deformity might not be the right word in a justified analysis of this work. I am not sure it is to break away from a focus on the human either, but rather a re-negotiation of the definition and boundaries of the human. As far as I understand Agamben, and I might be wrong, it is impossible to separate the human from the animal, and this I think can be seen in Katayama’s work.