Spontaneous mutations occur in all living organisms. They appear without human intervention, as another manifestation of how unpredictable nature can be. Rose breeders call such specimens “sports”. They differ from the original variety in color, growth pattern or flower form. Nadia Markiewicz came across this phenomenon while looking for an analogy between her own disabled body and anomalies occurring in nature. In both humans and roses, mutations may appear randomly, affecting the appearance of bodies or bushes. Gardening enthusiasts admire sports, making them almost celebrities in the world of botany. They breed them, hoping that a specific change will also appear in the “offspring” of the mutant.
During trips to botanical gardens, the artist began to photograph these unique specimens of roses, which became the main motif of the Mutants project. Markiewicz places oversized photos of mutant roses in the gallery space, filling the space of a Gothic, desacralized church. The site-specific installation resembles a monstrous garden overgrown with flower specimens admired for their uniqueness. Decorated with point bulbs, they emanate their own light, which emphasizes their peculiarity and value (including the economic one). Even though they do not resemble weeds or self-seeders, their presence in the brick space signals a disturbance of order, a takeover by unpredictable forces of nature. The background of the Gothic space, with its load of meaning, refers to considerations directed towards the human. Otherness and anomalies regarding the body have not been celebrated in the same way as in the world of plants.
From the very beginning, the Gothic was associated with otherness. Its name comes from the Germanic tribes, which were perceived by the Romans and Greeks as the personification of the figure of the “other”, carrying the threat of the “stranger”. Later it returned as a metaphor for an untamed, chaotic style that contradicted the classical rules of proportion. This resulted in its association with distortion, darkness and finally deformation. With the historical return of the Gothic, society once again came face to face with otherness – whether in the 19th century Gothic novel, 20th century horror cinema, or the alternative scene of the 1980s and 1990s, Gothic antagonists always represented otherness. Jack Halberstam, in his essay Skin Shows: Gothic Horror and the Technology of Monsters, points out that this queerness was often manifested through corporeality in its non-normative dimension. It was the body, deformed as in Frankenstein’s or unnaturally pale and soulless as in Dracula’s, that was an element of building horror. His otherness has always been constructed against the default white, male, heterosexual and able-bodied normativity. Everything that went beyond the default bodily, gender and cultural norms appeared as a terrifying monstrosity. Markiewicz deliberately uses non-human bodies, changing the rhetoric of fear, disgust and compassion into a narrative of affirmation of biodiversity and uniqueness.
The “sports” photographed by the artist also appear on the gallery walls. They were exposed in negatoscopes used in medicine to view X-ray images. The method of presentation refers to the medicalization to which the unique features of human bodies are subjected, but due to the nature of the entire exhibition, they can be seen as an analogy to movie posters depicting screen stars. The goal is not to detect anomalies, but rather to celebrate and advertise the distinctiveness of specimens, treated not only as curiosities, but also as potential progenitors of new species.
The artist plays with visual clichés, balancing between pop, medical and gothic iconosphere, celebrating difference according to her own rules. There are no stereotypical depictions of organisms with disabilities, but there is glitz, monumentality and even controlled grotesque. Otherness is affirmed, not only bodily, but also understood as any departure from culturally determined norms. In Markiewicz’s work, queerness is not synonymous with error or distortion. Rather, it is an incentive to consider what and why we consider normal or normative.
Text by Gabi Skrzypczak