Land art [...] is in large measure about the landscape itself—its scale, its vistas, its essentially horizontal character, its topography, and its human and natural history. It is frequently made from the materials at hand. It reveals the changing characteristics that a work assumes in different conditions: diurnal or nocturnal light, winter glare or summer haze, full sun or could shadow. While any outdoor work will change appearance under different conditions, sited sculptures are less exclusively about the landscape itself. They are also about mass, form, volume, surface: that is, some of the traditional concerns of sculpture. Alternatively, they are manifestations of the organization of space, both internal and external: that is architecture. They are still made with a great sensitivity to the surroundings—and often, this is the landscape—but have an internal coherence that land art does not. With sited sculptures, there is often an explicit boundary between the work and the environment. Rather than being forms that have emerged from the landscape, they often have the look of objects that have been set down within it (Beardsley 103-104).
When assessing Land art, there are many identifiable similarities and differences from Public art and Sculpture Gardens. I have found the following qualities helpful in determining what is Land art:
*Context/Site-Specificity
*Materials (organic vs. synthetic)
*Artist's intention/Viewer's perception
*Resistance to formal structures of art (i.e. Modernity and Post-Modern concepts)
I hope that by viewing this site people can begin to clarify their understanding of Land art and its unique way of conveying meaning through methods of creation and display.
No comments:
Post a Comment