Spiral Jetty to Disappear Without Intervention. What Exactly is the Problem?
The history of the great earthwork's creation, submergence, re-emergence and possible re-submergence is all here. I'm curious as to whether creator/artist Robert Smithson is watching from some post-mortal dimension and what his thoughts on this would be. According to the story, the spiral will soon recede back into the Great Salt Lake if more rocks are not added to the work. The question is whether such an act would be in accordance with what the artist wanted/intended for the the work. One could make the argument that adding more rocks to the spiral is akin to the restoration of a painting or sculpture, that is, attempting to restore the work to its initial, natural form. However, as the artist is deceased, we do not know for certain whether Smithson would have wanted the work to remain constantly visible or simply endure the ordinary events of nature. This is probably what the Dia Art Foundation is contemplating, however a spokesperson provided the following:
"Bob spoke a few times about adding some more rocks, making this a possibility in the future. He wanted the work to be strong enough and visible enough to go through many natural changes."
I would say that the Dia could fairly easily justify adding rocks in order to simply provide stability to the work and maintain its integrity, however, if by the comment above they are suggesting that Smithson wanted the work to be continually visible and in order to achieve such an end more rocks should be added, I think they're mistaken. "Strong enough and visible enough to go through many natural changes" sounds an awful lot like withstanding submergence and re-emergence. This is supported by Smithson's delight when during the first year of the work's existence it disappeared briefly and resurfaced encrusted in salt.
I don't know for sure what Smithson's real intentions were when he created Spiral Jetty, although I would imagine that the logic was not all that dissimilar from that normally applied when designing and constructing most other earthworks. Typically there is an understanding that the work is as permanent as the earth itself on or from which the work was created and one assumes that the work will either withstand or succumb to evoluationary and natural changes that might occur in its environment. This runs rather incongruently with the the typical failure of humans to accept and appreciate change, loss, or other transformations of things they presuppose are static and permanent, which is why some people may make an effort to maintain the spiral's visibility. However, just as with any ephemeral work of art, we capture it in photographs and, once we have lost the original work forever, they serve as a reminder of what the work looked like and elicit the memory of what it was to experience it. (One could argue that the photographs themselves are art, however that is for another discussion). Unless it is explicitly stated, I believe that adding rocks to make the work visible despite rising water levels would alter the work's true nature and original purpose, effectually undermining the essense of the work itself. Fortunately, the Dia has no immediate plans for maintenance or alteration of the work, however if the waters continue to rise the issue will become all the more pressing so expect this story to resurface (pun intended, sorry).
"Bob spoke a few times about adding some more rocks, making this a possibility in the future. He wanted the work to be strong enough and visible enough to go through many natural changes."
I would say that the Dia could fairly easily justify adding rocks in order to simply provide stability to the work and maintain its integrity, however, if by the comment above they are suggesting that Smithson wanted the work to be continually visible and in order to achieve such an end more rocks should be added, I think they're mistaken. "Strong enough and visible enough to go through many natural changes" sounds an awful lot like withstanding submergence and re-emergence. This is supported by Smithson's delight when during the first year of the work's existence it disappeared briefly and resurfaced encrusted in salt.
I don't know for sure what Smithson's real intentions were when he created Spiral Jetty, although I would imagine that the logic was not all that dissimilar from that normally applied when designing and constructing most other earthworks. Typically there is an understanding that the work is as permanent as the earth itself on or from which the work was created and one assumes that the work will either withstand or succumb to evoluationary and natural changes that might occur in its environment. This runs rather incongruently with the the typical failure of humans to accept and appreciate change, loss, or other transformations of things they presuppose are static and permanent, which is why some people may make an effort to maintain the spiral's visibility. However, just as with any ephemeral work of art, we capture it in photographs and, once we have lost the original work forever, they serve as a reminder of what the work looked like and elicit the memory of what it was to experience it. (One could argue that the photographs themselves are art, however that is for another discussion). Unless it is explicitly stated, I believe that adding rocks to make the work visible despite rising water levels would alter the work's true nature and original purpose, effectually undermining the essense of the work itself. Fortunately, the Dia has no immediate plans for maintenance or alteration of the work, however if the waters continue to rise the issue will become all the more pressing so expect this story to resurface (pun intended, sorry).
posted by Corey Wyckoff at 4:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home