JP: What is possible when we use speculative fiction to imagine alternative futures around climate change?
AC: I am drawn to how justice is integrated into the science fiction worldbuilding by authors of systemically minority backgrounds, such as Octavia E. Butler and Samuel R. Delany. Stories often advocate for racial, social and climate justice, as well as queer, trans and disability rights as a given criteria for a secure, safe and healthy future. So I feel it’s not only about the imagining of futures that’s significant, but also the understanding of how to bring historical facts and real experiences into shaping a more just future for all.
Paraphrasing a text I wrote for my exhibition Climate Knowledges, I like that we can explore alternative ways to think about the truths of the climate crisis through speculative storytelling, from ancient mythologies to futuristic science fiction. These can confront the colonial and patriarchal origins, and their exploitative processes, that produced the current climate crisis. Radical climate science fiction reconciles with the mistreatment of race, class, disability and gender politics in the mainstream climate debate, by reaching beyond and building fairer worlds.
JP: Why is it important to center anti-colonial climate narratives?
AC: The climate crisis has been unnaturally caused by the long violence of oppressive powers on peoples and their lands. For example, we can look to the colonisation and genocide of Indigenous peoples by European invaders to the Americas in the 1500s, which caused advanced agricultural lands to regrow, and shift the global CO2 levels. I think cultural narratives are really significant in telling truths that should inform public climate framings. Why does it take Western sciences to prove that Indigenous cultural and climate histories are truths? Analysing how power and knowledge is structured is interesting to me in thinking about how this moment of history will be documented for the next generations too. It’s about asking questions like: “What constitutes knowledge about climate change?”, “Who is in control of producing and sharing information?”, “How does this information benefit or compromise marginalised groups?
JP: When working within or adjacent to institutional settings, how do you identify and resist the widespread tendency towards greenwashing?
AC: It’s important to raise that I see many parallels between the mainstream arts and the global North’s climate movement. Both are inaccessible to certain demographics, restricting who gets to be involved and steer the actions. In their overlap, there is a business-as-usual sustainability approach in the arts. The green capitalism that has stemmed from colonial exploitations that continue today through frameworks like free market imperialism, curatorial programmes as extractive exercises, while major patrons are active in fossil fuels and arms industries.
As an independent practitioner, I have unfortunately witnessed countless individuals, small organisations and national institutions who not only co-opt the global climate struggles for their artistic careers or programmes, but also actively exclude the people who have long practiced intersectional approaches to the issues and are often speaking from lived experiences. There are many examples of how greenwashing can be avoided: redistributing resources to community organisers and practitioners who are actually fighting for climate justice, rather than to blockbuster artists who use extractive processes to create ‘climate art’; not speaking over or for marginalised people in tokenistic and silencing tactics; budgeting for greener, more accessible and ethical practices; financing longer term public engagements on anti-colonial climate issues, rather than treating it as a one-off, tick-boxed curatorial season.