Introduction While investigating various Biology Bachelor courses at universities I’ve stumbled upon an unusual artwork by Henry Horn, an Ecology professor at Princeton University. It intrigued me how he managed to bring the audience closer so such a seemingly unimportant and small animal. Like in the movie “The Butterfly Effect” small details become more important after further examination. In the following study I want to compare three artworks by three different artists, who have used diverse approaches to using butterflies in art.

By Ksenia Kurnosova

The Kingdom of the father, Damien Hirst, 2007, butterflies on glass Source: "Damien Hirst." The Kingdom of the Father -. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 May 2015.

The Orange and the black, Henry Horn, 2010, photograph manipulated on Photoshop Source: "Art of Science / 2010 Gallery / The Orange and the Black." Princeton University. Web. 22 May 2015.

Extract from book “Art forms in Nature”, Ernst Haeckel, 1899, lithograph Source: "Nature." Design Squish Blog: SPRING! N.p., n.d. Web. 22 May 2015.

Compared Artworks

Damien Hirst’s work is significant to the contemporary art movement of the 21st century, as he is the first artist to use carcasses in a way to represent their anatomy openly to the public. Publically displayed carcasses were taxidermized to look life like and to hide the feeling of death. Anatomical dissections have been displayed in the past, but only to medical students, professors etc.. Hirst takes this to the next level as he displays his art works in public galleries open for everyone to see. This brings a lot of controversy as children might get affected by such images. Hirst has gotten a lot of opposition especially from religious organizations which don’t support his moral values. His art piece “The Kingdom of the father” openly refers to the church as it is representing the Gothic stained windows of a medieval church, through the gothic arch shape of the three piece composition. The butterflies are chosen in bright, mainly primary with few secondary, colours to imitate the stained glass usually used during the 19th century. The blue is alluding to the cape which mother Mary is often portrait in, representing pureness and clarity. The yellow is representing the halo of the saints and angles and the gold and riches of the church.

Page from my sketchbook visualizing the formal

elements of Hirst’s artwork

The Kingdom of the father

By Damien Hirst

After years of research in various areas of biology new technology has allowed us to process new information and decipher neurological codes, people didn’t even know existed a 100 years ago. Henry Horn being a Ecologist and evolutionary biologist has researched the way vision develops in butterflies. While investigating the neurons in the butterfly’s brain through electrical currents Horn deduced an estimation of what a butterfly’s vision looks like. The name of the art work originates from the phenomenon that when the compound eye of the butterfly moves the butterfly sees partial flashes of just orange or just black. The largest image of the butterfly on the top right is the approximated picture a butterfly sees at only 18 centimeters' distance. This distance is the usual courtship distance for this species. This tells us a lot about the Great Spangled Fritillary butterfly as we see that with its vision though its compound eye it sees the pattern on the wings of its peers in perfectly round circles. This step taken by nature shows that the definition of beauty is superficial. As theoretically our eyes could be developed in a way that we see each other in a different way than we actually are. Maybe we have different coloured skin but our eye is just incapable of seeing it?

Page from my sketchbook visualizing the formal elements of Horn’s artwork

The Orange and the Black By Henry Horn

Haeckel was an influential evolutionary biologist of the 19th century. He set his goal on writing a book with the representations of the life forms found in nature. Over the course of years of research he collected samples and discovered new life forms all over the world. His work towards Darwinism were so extensive and significant that Darwin himself thanked him in a letter, telling him that he is not worried about further researchers after his death, as he knows that Haeckel is one of them. The title of the book holds Haeckels opinion on the plants and animals of the world. He changes the words “Life forms” to “Art forms” and hereby stating that for him life is art. In this sense he uses his scientific drawings to show the beauty of nature and the life in it. He depicts how the way cells divide into functional bodies with various characteristics which they have acquired through the course of evolution and which have allowed them to adapt, is an art form by itself. His plates showing the various life forms, from microscopically plankton to animals observable with the naked eye. Most of his lithographs are coloured to emphasize the magnificence of life and make biological processes like specification of the life form in the field easier. Due to his extensive research in the field of evolution, he was highly recognized by Charles Darwin himself. He complemented Haeckels delicacy in the work with small organisms and supported the evolutionary links Haeckel made between certain species.

Page from my sketchbook visualizing the formal elements of Haeckel’s work

Art Forms in Nature

By Ernst Haeckel

Context

Page from my sketchbook visualizing the contextual links between the three artists

Historical Context: The Church

Haeckel with a skeleton of a human ancestor, The New York Times, 1910

Similar to Darwin, Haeckel’s evolutionary views weren’t welcomed by the church. At one point in 1910, nine years before his death, Haeckel got accused by the church of faking his photographs and artworks for his Book “Art forms of nature”. The church didn’t want to believe or accept that those findings and scientific theories were true, as they opposed their religious belief. Haeckels states this accusation as one of the reasons for him leaving the church. Different to Haeckel, who tried to distance himself from

the church due to the many conflicts, Hirst is fascinated by the extensive imagery and symbolism found in churches. Using the religious symbolism Hirst produces many religion influenced artworks as seen in “The Kingdom of the father”.

Opposing to both Haeckel and Hirst, Horn isn’t in any way affected by the church. Not producing any controversial artworks but staying close to the beauty of nature in a non-interfering way, due to his ecological degree, Horn doesn’t draw the churches attention to himself.

The perception of the church changed over time: It is not the most important source of moral rules for the whole population, just for the followers of the religion. In the time of Haeckel the churches opinion was the public opinion, meaning that as Haeckel opposed the church, he wasn’t liked by the public. Hirst, living in the modern days, while opposing some moral issues with his formaldehyde tanks, is just labeled as controversial, but not hated by church or public.

In the modern days the church isn’t part of the government anymore, and therefore doesn’t check all art presented to the public. Most likely, as Horn’s work was only published for the University, the church hasn’t even heard about his work.

Technology In comparison the two scientists Haeckel and Horn have different approaches to their work. As Haeckel was researching 100 years earlier than Horn the technology that he had was far less developed that the nanotechnology Horn can use today. An example for that is the picture on the right showing an image taken with an electron microscope to examine the compound eye of the butterfly. Caused by the lack of technology and little previous discoveries Haeckel focused on the outer features of the butterflies. Using a light microscope for some of his examinations, I presume that the magnification glass shown on the right is the kind Haeckel used for his examination of the butterflies. He described the visual characteristics while Horn has taken his research to the next level and has looked into the inner characteristics of the butterfly. Through the use of dissections, electrical impulses and the examination of the way the compound eye is built under the electron microscope Horn was able to estimate the vision of the butterfly. Different to many of his other artworks Hirst doesn’t examine the anatomy of the butterfly. He breeds the needed colours for the composition and glosses them to preserve their colour and shape.

Magnification of a butterfly head using an electron microscope

Magnification glass from the 19th century

Breeding of butterflies in a terrarium

A link between the patterns of Horn’s and Hirst’s artwork can be found when looked at the techniques both artist used to create it. To produce his simulated image Horn has used the “stained glass tool” from the “artistic effects” section in Adobe Photoshop to manipulate the original photograph shown in the right bottom corner of his composition. Hirst has used butterflies to imitate the pattern of a stained glass window from a gothic catholic church. Contrasting to that is the lack of pattern in Haeckels work, but a high presence of negative space. This negative space places the main focus on the butterflies which are the investigated subjects. As Haeckel doesn’t want to show the habitat of the butterflies and wants to leave the printing at the simplest he doesn’t add a background. All three artworks share the principle of balance as each composition distributes its colours and forms evenly. Hirst’s looks the most balanced as it is symmetrical at a vertical axis through the tip of the middle window. The high number of butterflies doesn’t standout when the piece is looked at from a distance. Horn’s work is balanced due to a compromise of yellow and green and the arrangement of the panels divided by the white gutter. The repetition of the same butterfly adds to the sense of balance which leaves the question how Haeckel’s print is balanced as it seems to be the most chaotic from the three compared artworks. But as the butterfly is symmetric to itself Haeckel’s compositions still appears balanced to me as the overlapping butterfly wings seem to complete each other.

Visual aspects

Page from my sketchbook physically comparing the three artworks

Mood All three artworks share the tone of calmness as the butterflies are all motionless and are shown in a moment of stillness with no intention to fly away. But this tone of motionless and stillness triggers different moods of the audience in the different artworks.

While Hirst’s work is bright and colourful, I get a repressive feeling as this is the affect churches have on me. I can’t place it, but as an atheist churches have a very suffocating effect on me. This direct reference to a church stained glass gives me the feeling of being in one.

In comparison the other two images arouse a optimistic feeling. As the combination of the green and the yellow in Horn’s art piece seems positive and relaxing. The homologous pattern in both Hirst’s and Horn’s art work have a soothing effect as the audience doesn’t have to focus on any particular object. This can also remind the viewer of a kaleidoscope. Child memories like these evoke positive feelings in the audience.

Lastly Haeckel’s work seems to radiate a sensation of quietness and a tiny bit of tenseness. This is caused by the photo realistic style of image, as it seems like if I made a sound all those beautiful butterflies would be disturbed and would fly away. Its motionlessness and mystery of why so many butterflies crowd on one spot, lets the viewer forget that he is reading a biology book about the evolution of the species, but takes him away to the untouched nature which is so hard to find in the new century.

Intention Comparing the intentions the three artists have for their work, it gets apparent that all three strive towards different goals. As Horn and Haeckel try to achieve success in the scientific world, Hirst tries to impress in the art one. He intends to shock his audience and plant his artworks into their memories, so they can spread the word about them and in the modern world make them viral. This memorability doesn’t only give him fame and recognition but boosts his business and profit. In addition Hirst connects all his works through a certain sense of control and order. Similar to his previous works “Pharmacy” and “Abalone Acetone Powder” he also uses the controlled repetition of objects in his installation “Kingdom of the father”. The key in this simplicity lies behind the will to show the audience that the idea of an artwork counts not its complexity. Horn on the other hand doesn’t seek recognition but works towards his own personal research. His visualization of the way a butterfly is used as an illustration for his book “Social Butterflies: simple rules, complex behaviour, and population consequences.” and was only later entered into the 2011 “Art of Science Competition”, where it won an exhibition spot in the online gallery. By adding this image to his book Horn intends to gain the understanding of the reader of the processes in a butterfly. This understanding could also lead to empathy as the audience sympathizes with the in our eyes bad vision the butterflies have. With his art piece Haeckel intends to spread knowledge as he also, similar to Horn, is adding his artwork to his book. Different to Horn, Haeckel solely produces his prints for the sake of science, while Horn partially for the artistic side. Haeckel’s image of the butterflies gives a base to his scientific explanations and evokes compassion in the readers, as they realize the beauty of our fauna.

Damien Hirst, Pharmacy, 1992, installation using glass, packaging etc.

Damien Hirst, Abalone Acetone Powder, 1991, acrylic paint on canvas

Inspiration Inspired by the quiet and motionless tone of the three compared paintings I have included it in some of my work. The left picture showing my art work “Over coming boundaries” is in a way portraying the same motionless of the audience as Haeckel’s lithograph does, but through a different method. While the viewer is cautious to move while examining Haeckel’s artwork due to the lifelike butterflies, afraid to scare them away, the audience tries to be motionless around my sculpture in the fear that it might collapse.

The art piece on the right called “The beauty in sensitivity” is influenced by the grace of a butterfly and the small detailed beauty of nature which many people forget about. By adding this illusion I show how sensitive a human is and also how closely linked we are with the flora and fauna. Similar to the three artists I compared I want my audience to be more aware of their surroundings and appreciate them more.

“Overcoming boundaries”, acrylic paint on paper cups

“The beauty in sensitivity”, acrylic paint

on canvas

Inspiration Inspired by Henry Horn’s idea of showing the world through the eyes of a butterfly, I composed an artwork showing how different animals perceive an image of a lilac. The lilac was chosen, as in Russia, my home country, it represents the beginning of spring. Spring is the most colourful season to humans as they are happy about the first flowers at the end of winter. The reason for choosing a bird, was the expression “bird’s view”. Many people think that for birds only the angle changes but not the hue or saturation. On the other hand for fish, we just imagine blurry outlines and no colours. But actually the vision of the fish is simply distorted by the water, not the quality of the eyes. Lastly the dog was chosen, as it is important to know how the man’s best friend sees the world. Because how many dog owners know, that their dog doesn’t see any red or green?

Human Bird Dog Fish Original photograph of the lilac with the visions of the 3 different animals in addition to the humans. This row shows the way the human and animals see the surroundings.

The photograph in this row has been pixelated, so that the single shades of colour can be seen distinctively. This way the animals’ perception of the same natural colours can be understood.

This row is started with an abstract Photoshop painting of the lilac. The bright unnatural colours give the opportunity to show slightly different shades of the perceived colours. The background has been made grey and white to put the focus on the lilac. This idea was inspired by Haekels blank background in his prints.

The last row was photoshopped into a very unnatural and futuristic piece. The wide range of colours allows to demonstrate all wave lengths perceived by the animals.

Animal Lens, Photoshop, my own work

Inspiration Using the by all three artists utilized principle of design “Pattern” I have created a scientifically artistic piece which is displayed as a slide under a microscope. The installation portrays the message of viewing the world as a whole instead of focusing on the tiny details. Engaging the audience into the artwork helps to initiate their thinking process about the concept The link to biology is closely related to Horn’s and Haekel’s work as both are natural scientists . Biology being the field I want to further pursue in my career the piece involves scientifically correct cell organelles, which in a way helps the audience’s education. This information is hidden in the art similar to Horn’s work, however doesn’t hold as much knowledge as Haekel’s lipographs.

The colours are bright and saturated as this effect is often achieved when dyeing a microscopic sample to distinguish the different textures. This adds to the scientific value of the design and makes it more authentic, fitting Haekel’s scientific background. Overall the artwork is presented in an usual way which curationally links to Hirst’s exhibitions, who uses his artworks to set up an installation.

Inside Out, Batik on textile and projection

Inside Out, installation as visible at the exhibition

Inspiration Inspired by the symbolic design of the butterfly used by all three artists, I have developed a Photoshop collage using the same symbol. The butterfly represents rebirth and a new beginning. A shift from a by farmers feared caterpillar, to a commonly loved beauty of a pollinating butterfly. With nature and the protection of ecosystems as my theme , I have used rubbish as my parts of the mosaic. This is the opposite of the artwork “The kingdom of the father” by Damien Hirst, as he has used butterflies to construct his mosaic, while I have constructed a butterfly. The message behind the use of conventional rubbish pieces is the need for recycling and the benefit of it. Harmful objects which are regarded worthless ,can through recycling undergo a metamorphosis and become useful, beautiful new things.

Metamorphosis, Photoshop collage

Process 1 I have started with the bigger wings and started building up the layers

Process 2

Process 3 At this stage I had more than 100 layers which I organized using folders

Conclusion All three artists use ideas from a biological background to represent the beauty of nature in their work. Detailed lithographs by Haeckel for the representation of the anatomy, computer simulation by Horn for the illustration of a butterfly’s vision, so the audience identifies with it and the use of butterflies by Hirst for controversy and the audience’s empathy with the seemingly unimportant animal. All three men achieve a similar result: bringing the audience’s attention to the small details in nature, ones which still need to be explored, ones which need to be admired more. Inspired by such powerful work I want to contribute to the achievement of those messages.