The Language
of Flowers
by Michael Taussig
The flowers in Echavarr ía's
photographs
have
stems made of curving ribs or of the decayed long bones of arms. The
petals are formed from what appear to be the human pelvis or spinal
vertebrae. In some photographs, small bones like teeth or chips of
bones lie to one side, thereby disturbing pretensions to symmetry or
completeness. A vertebra hangs delicately off a rib, five of which are
bunched together like plant stems emerging from a column of three
vertebrae glued together, not as in the human spine, but separated from
that, like a child's building blocks, then stuck front to back, one on
top of the other.
Lying on their bleached-out background, the
flowers
appear fragile, suspended in midair and ungrounded. They could be
flying. The law of gravity no longer holds. There is a sense of a world
on hold, a painful absence of sound. What we see is silence, the
silence of something gone awfully wrong with the human world such that
we are all, God included, holding our breath, which is probably what
happens when you fall a long, long way.
To add to their strangeness, each photograph
bears a
title like the Latin names used in the plant illustrations of the
famous botanical expedition to Colombia organized by the Spanish crown
and led by José Celestino Mutis at the end of the eighteenth
century. Echavarría is very conscious of this genealogy. In fact
he sees his flowers as its latest expression. The difference is that
Echavarría 's latinate names are hybrids suggesting the
grotesque, one pelvic bone flower being named Dracula Nosferatu,
while another flower made of a curved rib with a bunch of metacarpals
at one end, suggestive of petals, is called Dionaea Misera.
Although these names are in small, discreet letters, names are of
consuming importance to this work, beginning with the name of the
mutilation—The Flower Vase Cut. The name is crucial because on
viewing the mutilated body without the name, I doubt whether an
observer would get the point—as we say of a joke—without the name. All
the observer would see would be a bloody morass of hacked-off limbs and
a limbless trunk (figs. 1 – 2).
The mutilation would be incomplete, by which I
mean it
would lack the meaning that destroys meaning. I do not understand this.
Perhaps I am not meant to. But what I do know is that what mutilation
registers, what all mutilation registers, is this wave, this continuous
wavelike motion of auto-sacrifice of meaning heightened then dissipated
by the name in conjunction with the corpse as a work of art. I think it
goes like this: that in attaching a commonplace name to a transgressive
act the act is somehow completed, dignified with a meaning, we could
say, only to shatter that name and that meaning. Herr's story of the
necklace made of amputated ears in Vietnam comes to mind. Love beads
they were called.4
|