Time, Space and Body

7/31/2019 Time, Space and Body

1/14

Time,spaceandbodySculpturevs.amorphedsitestudies

DavidLeal

Context3

UnitLeader:Dr.AtsuhideIto

BA(Hons)FineArtLevel2SouthamptonSolentUniversity

December2011


2/14

SouthamptonSolentUniversity

DavidLeal

FineArt2/Period1/VIA203

1


3/14


DavidLeal


2

Contents

Introductionp.3

I-Artofplacep.4

IIBody,objectandspaceasonep.5

III-Experienceandrelationofobjectandspacep.6

IVImpactonurbanspacesp.7

Conclusionp.8

Illustrationsp.9

Bibliographyp.12


4/14


DavidLeal


3

Introduction

Within this essay we find the integral comparison and highlights on

commongroundaswellasthemaincontrasts,between two sculptures,SpiralJetty(fig.1)andSequence(fig.2)fromRobertSmithson(1938-1973)andRichard

Serra (1939),respectively.Before introducingthe sculptures a few notionson

theoriginofthiskindofartanditsunderstandingareexplained.Iputeffortinmakingtherelationofthesenewworks,clear,bringinguptheearlychangesin

sculptures history, when the site-specific appeared and brought along the

disappearanceofthepedestalaswelltheiconographicalrepresentation.

Moreover it is discussed how two distinct works share the same purpose ofexistence and how they interact and change, not only the space but also the

viewersperception.


5/14


DavidLeal


4

I-Artofplace

By1930sartistsstartedtothinkdifferentlyanddevelopedanewformof

art,theartofplace,insteadoftheartoftime.Practicewasnolongerdefinedinrelation to a givenmedium sculpture but rather in relation to the logical

operationsonasetofculturalterms(Krauss1986).Arelationformedbetween

the newmedium that now couldbeanything and the surrounding, whichsomehowexpandedit.Thisexpandedfieldwasoriginatedbyproblematizinga

setofoppositions.Throughthereductionofthesculpturalmediumintosimpler

volumetricstructures,theyreachedaneutertermofthenot-landscapeplusthe

not-architecture. Obviously there was no reason not to imagine the exactoppositebothlandscapeandarchitecturetowhatRosalindE.Krauss(1941)refers as the complex in her structural graphic (fig.3). Structures such as

labyrinthsormazesandJapanesegardensarebothlandscapeandarchitecture.

()Theyarepartofauniverseorculturalspaceinwhichsculpturewas

simplyanotherpart-notsomehow,thesame.Theirpurposeandpleasure

isexactlythattheyareoppositeanddifferent.(Krauss1979:30-44)

With the Partially Buried Woodshed (fig.4) at Kent State, Ohio, by RobertSmithson, the complex axis began to be occupied,which can be called as site

construction.Thecombinationoflandscapeandnot-landscaperesultinonwhatsomecallmarkedsites that couldnot onlybeactual physicalmanipulationsofsiteslikeSmithson'sSpiralJetty,butotherformsofmarkingaswell.

Meanwhile Serra was one of the first artists to explore the possibilities ofarchitectureplusnot-architecture. In every case of theseaxiomaticstructures,

thereissomekindofinterventionintothespace,whichconsistonaprocessofmappingtheaxiomaticfeaturesofthearchitecturalinfluencesontoaparticular

given space. Thismethod results in the reflecting the condition of the logical

spaceasexperience.


6/14


DavidLeal


5

IIBody,objectandspaceasone

I find intriguinghow twodifferentworks, in formand inprocess,even

thoughbeing site-specific,can sharea purpose.Theybothtransform the space

where theyre inserted. Spiral Jetty seems to me, a literal approach siteconstructiontothistransformationreferredabove,inwhichSmithsondecides

tophysicallymodifytheactualspace/siteitselfinordertoachievethischange.

The sculpture was builtwith natural elements, such asmud, precipitated saltcrystalsandrocksandconsistsonalandspiralinvadingtheseashoreatGreat

SaltLake(Utah).

Theuniquespiralisandshouldbeperceivedastwo,sinceithastwoways,

intoandouterthecenter.In1970Serrahimselfhelpedhisclosefriend,RobertSmithsonto'layout'SpiralJetty.Notonlydoesithaveaphysicalimpactinthe

surrounding space but on the spectators perspective and perception aswell,

eitherbywalkingthroughandallowinghimselftogetinvolvedwiththespiralwhileapprehending the surroundingspacefrom the spiralscenter,or justby

apprehendingitfromdistance.Ibelievebycrossingit,backandforth,anotionoflimitiscreatedwhilewalkingalongthepathtowardsthecenter,whichisvery

muchrelatedtoSerrasSequence.Bothworksrevealapathspeciallycreated,in

whichthespectatorisallowedtowalk,reinforcingsubconsciouslytheirnotion

oflimitation.

InSequence,wefindthesameconceptasthe Jetty, butwithadifferentmethod.Serrassculptureconsistsonitsverticalcurvedmetalwallsinsteadof

havingauniquespiral,wefindtwotorquedellipsesconnectedbyanS,andtheSisthepassagethatreversesitselfrightinthecenterofthepiece.Itisalsoasite-

specificworksinceitisoneofthethreepiecesparticularlymadeforthesecond

flooroftheNewYorkMuseumofModernArt(MoMA)anditalsorequiresforthespectatortoinvolvehimselfwiththematter,verymuchsimilarto SpiralJettys

needandeffect:

Walking into and through around and becoming the subjectmatter ofyourown experiences iswhat thisworkhas tooffer.(RichardSerra2007)

According toBrancusi (1876-1957), even inspatial art, spaceand timecannot be separated one from another in purpose of analysis: All bodies,

however, exist not only in space, but also in time. In Passages in Modern

Sculpture, Rosalind Krauss (author) states that one of the striking aspects ofmodernsculptureishowitmanifestssomewherebetweenstillnessandmotion,

therefore,empoweringthesculpturesexpression,whichconsistsonthetensioncreated.


7/14


DavidLeal


6

III-Experienceandrelationofobjectandspace

Sequencerequestsaconfinementofspaceandanevidentdefinitionofthe

architecturalstructuresaround,otherwise,pieceswiththatscaleandbeingsite-

specific would get lost on the open space, according to Serra. Smithsonbelieved as well it was better to disclose reality of confinement rather than

freedom.Serrassculpturemayevenconfusetheviewerinmakinghimbelieve

thatheslostandwalkingthesamepathasbefore,whichisverymuchsimilartothesymptomssomemightfeelwhileexperiencingSpiralJetty.Healsobelieves

the experience derived from his work is new, and each person perceives it

differently,sinceithasnorepresentationalthemenorsubjectmatter,aswellasno iconographical figuration.Moreover thispiececan changewhatpeople see

and think, beingmerely basedonself-experience.The samecan beapplied toSmithsonswork.BothSequenceandSpiralJettyhaveafunction,withoutbeing

functionally useful, not needing for the observer tounderstand the history ofsculpture, which is to awaken an unknown personal experience within the

subject. Nevertheless, they demand an intense concentration and time of the

viewer.

OneofSequencesmagnificentconsequencesiswhilewalkingalongitis

affectsthesenseofgravityoftheparticularsubject,shiftinganddistortingit,due

toitscurvedandinclinedverticaltallmetalplates.Thescaleoftheseplatesandtheir organic form somehow absolve all the involving architecture andsurroundingspacesothatthesculptureitselfbecomesthesiteandmakingthe

spectatorignoreorannihilatewhatsurroundsit,thereforechangingit.Inspite

ofnotbeingaliteralmodificationtothesitelike SpiralJetty,SequenceachievesandsharesthesamepurposeofexistenceasSmithsonswork,onlybyinterfering

with its magnitude, always depending on the surrounding architecture/site.

ProofofthatareothertwoprojectsbySmithsonandSerra,the SpiralHill(fig.5)andSpinOut(fig.6).Forexample,inSmithsonsHillwhathappensisthatafter

timeandthelandsnaturalgrowth,theworkseemstobepartofthesite,almostcamouflagingitself,inadditiontheworkchangesalongwiththeweatherseasons

as we can see on SpiralHills different stages (fig.7).The samehappenswith

SerrasSpinOut1,onlywithalittletwist.Thediscrepancybetweenbothworks,likeinthemaincomparisonofthisdocumentbetween SpiralJettyandSequence,

isthatinSpinOuttheresanobjectinterferingwiththesite,ratherthanhaving

naturalelementsalone,buteventhough,similartowhathappensinSpiralHill,aftersometime,naturetakesitsplaceandnotonlydoesitchangethethreeplain

metalplatesmateriallyturning themfromabright/shinynew texture intoagreen/brown rusty texture but also casting shadows of the surrounding

elements,suchastreebranchesandleaves,allowingthepiecetoblendintothe

spaceasifboth,spaceandobject,wereone(fig.8).

1BuiltinmemoryofRobertSmithson.


8/14


DavidLeal


7

Thesenaturalcausesareessentialtobothartists,especiallytoSmithson,who defended that the returning of his works to an undifferentiated matter

represented the inescapable process of decay, which meant the defeat oftechnology.Despiteapprovingsomelimitedmeasurestomaintainandpreserve

hisworks,whichIperceiveasanattempttoslowdowntime,hedidntwantthe

deterioration to be entirely arrested, due to hes interest in natures longprocessoftakingcontrol.Contrarily,SerratakesadvantagewithwhatSmithson

somehow despises, the technology breakthrough. With the help from the

materials characteristics and the way the sculpture is built, Serramanages tosuggesttension.Howbothpiecesaremadeisanotherimportantaspect.Without

theevidenceoftheprocesstheywouldbecomesculpturallyweaker,inmypointofview.InSerrascase,thesteeliswhatshapestheplace.Ifwehadthesame

object built invariousmaterials such asplastic,wood oreven glass, itwouldtransmitadifferentexperienceastheoneweget.Theimportanceofthepieceisnotonlyonthecreatedobject,butonhowitwillshapethespaceinwhichitis

insertedaswell.But how did Serrasworks invade the urbanpublic space? Ifsomeone refused to experience the sculpture there would be no purpose, it

wouldbenull.

IV-Impactonurbanspaces

InSerrascase,atfirst,theimpactontheconventionalsocietywasntvery

good;onthecontrary,itgeneratedalotofcontroversy,eventhoughhebelieved

therewasnoneedforpastknowledgeaboutart,likeexplainedbefore.Herelieson people and their personal experiences although he doesnt consider arts

functiontobepleasing;Artisnotdemocratic.Itisnotforthepeople-hesaid.Obviously something had to be done and the sculptor decided to seduce the

audiencewithsomethingnew.Aftertenyears,Serraappliedcurvestohisworks,

instead of the angles and straight lines which made peoples opinion andreactiondrasticallychangetoageneralacceptance,leadingtheartisttowhereit

standstoday.


9/14


DavidLeal


8

Conclusion

Inmypointofviewthereisaclearandstrongconnectionbetweentime,

spaceandbody,being thebodyinbothcasestheexperiencegeneratedbytheobjects;Movement through and around the works iswhat connects all these

elements,whichishowthebodyknowsandregistersthespace.Thekeythought,

is that the human perception and the human experience are embodied alongwiththeradicaltransformationofthecontextinwhichtheyareplaced.

Art allows us to grow as individuals, by activating and awakening our

most personal and deep experiences. If not for the object nor the subjectsapprehension, there would be no outcome whatsoever, very much like thequestion:Ifatreefallsintheforestandnooneisaroundtohearit,doesitmake

asound?Theanswerisno,becausesoundis"somethingthatyouhear"andsince

noone is theretohear it, thereisnosound. This thought can beappliedandadaptedtoeitherSpiralJettyorSequence.Ifnooneisaround,doesitoriginate

experience?Theanswerremainsthesame,no.Sowecanconcludetheobjectand

subject activate each other and the experience is real, only when a dialoguebetweenhimanditsenvironmentisinitiated.Thisphenomenologicalaspectis

whatmanifestsinsidetheconsciencebasedonperception,inordertoconceivethat same experience. Those are the fundamental concepts of the sculptural

spaceandtheirconformingbases.

Lastly I find that themain beauty about this particular type of works

resides on taking a closer look to the relation between object and viewer,consideringthatthesculpturesarealive.Whiletheseworksarenew,acertain

tensionisgeneratedbetweennatureandmankind,whichreflectsintoaninside

conflictwithintheobserver,thekey-elementlikewhenSpiralHillwasrecent(fig.9). In time that tension becomes loose and all characteristics turn into

something else. They become old, like we (humans) do. This long morphing

process of ageing decay is as if the sculptures their selves were alive, and

therefore, likeall living beings,eventually theydie.The compulsive urgeforaconnectionbetweenthespectatorandthepieceisastruggleforsurvival.Theirlifeisinstableduetotheconstantchangesofexistence.Ononehand,whenalone

theyaredead,whileontheother,whenprovidingexperienceandconnectedto

theviewertheyareonceagainreborn.


10/14


DavidLeal


9

Illustrations

Fig.1SpiralJetty(1970).

Fig.2Sequence(2007).


11/14


DavidLeal


10

Fig.3DiagramexplainingtheExpandedField.

Fig.4-PartiallyBuriedWoodshed(1970).

Fig.5SpiralHill(1971).


12/14


DavidLeal


11

Fig.6SpinOut(1973).

Fig.7SpiralHillsdifferentstatesduringtheweatherseasons.

Fig.8SpinOutblendedinspace.


13/14


DavidLeal


12

Bibliography

Books:

Enrich Martin, Rosa Mara. 1995. Conceptos Fundamentales del EspacioEscultrico.PublicacionesUniversidadDelPasVasco.

Hopkins,David.2000.AfterModernArt1945-2000.OxfordPaperbacks.

Krauss,RosalindE.1981.PassagesinModernSculpture.London:TheMITPress.

Krauss, RosalindE.1979.TheOriginality ofAvant-Garde andOtherModernists

Myths.London:TheMITPress.

Roberts,John.1990.PostmodernismPoliticsandArt.ManchesterUniversityPress.

Films:

BBCOpenUniversityProductionCentre,ModernArt:PracticesAndDebates,

SmithsonAndSerra:BeyondModernism?(1994).

Rose, Charlie, A conversation with artist Richard Serra (June 2007),

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/8534

MoMA Exhibitions, Richard Serra Sculpture: Forty Years (September, 2007),

http://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2007/serra/flash.html


14/14


DavidLeal


13

Documents

Time, Space and Body