Conceptual Art is like a disappointing Christmas present. As our parents told us, “It’s the thought that counts”. In conceptual art, the basic idea, or the ‘rules’ for generating an artwork appear to be more important than the physical realisation of it. When I reviewed the 2016 Tate exhibition for EYV, I preferred the exhibits that displayed a reasonable degree of craftsmanship – an opinion which I also hold in respect of the works I have read about while preparing this posting.
Earth Art and Land Art are both conceptual art practices, apparently with some distinctions but treated interchangeably by most commentators. The most impressive are those by Robert Smithson, which are large enough to be easily viewed on Google Earth, as seen in the screenshots below of ‘Spiral Jetty’ and ‘Broken Circle/Spiral Hill’ (all screenshots reproduced in accordance with Google’s fair use guidelines). Indeed, this is the organising basis of the Holt/Smithson Foundation website
In the UK, the best-known example is Charles Jencks’ ‘Northumberlandia, the Lady of the North’
However, I must question what makes these things ‘art’ when the objects below are not. All are man-made objects, of similar shapes, requiring large-scale earthmoving. In the case of Maiden Castle, the earthmoving was done by hand, not machinery. Is ‘art’ defined by a lack of utility or by the presence of a naked emperor in the reporting of it?
One of my favourite examples of accidental Land Art is the circular fields of the American mid-west, caused by the use of pivot-irrigation systems. I saw them from an aircraft window last year and found this group in Kansas on Google Earth.
My inner philistine comes to the fore when reviewing much of the other material presented in this section. I cannot, for instance take seriously the concept expressed by Hamish Fulton and Richard Long that the act of walking constitutes an art form in itself, even if it does involve trampling some grass and wild flowers and photographing the result. (Long s.d.)
Earth Art has also been taken into the gallery, but remains conceptual. Andy Goldsworthy’s ‘Jacks Fold’ (1996) starts with materials taken from a dry-stone wall in Cumbria, assembled as a dry-stone sheepfold in a gallery in St Albans, which was subsequently dismantled and reassembled in Cumbria (Andrews 1999, 218-220) Apparently, the stones retain some sort of cultural memory of their journey.
Richard Long brings the materials of the landscape into the gallery, literally. He seems to specialise in large-scale finger-painting using river mud, direct onto the gallery walls. A YouTube video (Jackson 2012) shows a River Avon Mud Circle under construction in Bristol in 2011. The differences between this and a nursery-school finger-painting are scale, lack of colour palette and the use of a rubber glove rather than the full tactile involvement of nursery-school child.
References
Andrews, M. (1999) Landscape and Western Art. Oxford University Press, New York.
Bedford, C. (2016) Conceptual Art at Tate Britain. At: https://chasbedfordocablog.wordpress.com/2016/06/29/conceptual-art-at-tate-britain/ (Accessed on 12 August 2020)
Holt/Smithson (2020) Holt•Smithson Foundation. At: https://holtsmithsonfoundation.org (Accessed on 12 August 2020)
Jackson, S. (2012) Richard Long @ M-Shed Bristol. April 2011. At: https://youtu.be/JD2Ai_BECbg (Accessed on 13 August 2020)
Long, R. (s.d.) A Line Made by Walking – England 1967. At: http://www.richardlong.org/Sculptures/2011sculptures/linewalking.html (Accessed on 13 August 2020)
Landscape Lines 
Leave a comment