Page 118 - Hrobat Virloget, Katja, et al., eds. (2015). Stone narratives: heritage, mobility, performance. University of Primorska Press, Koper.
P. 118
stone narratives
for a second) against the established art, rejecting commodification, and leaving the gal-
leries for the wide open spaces »out there«.
Whether presented as a »troika« (Crump, 2015) or as »high priests« (Dwan, 2012,
p. 93), Robert Smithson, Michael Heizer and Walter De Maria are the three artists cen-
trally positioned on any land art list of the period.
American land art, also referred to as earth art, or Earthworks (after the sci-fi book
Smithson was reading while looking for the site for his art project) emerged in the second
half of the 1960s as integral part of the social movements of the time, anti-war protest, nu-
clear tests, new technologies, landing on the moon with clear view of the Earth as pain-
ted, sculpted object. It was also a period of the revival of the 19th century American lan-
dscape painting (Menard, 2014).
At the time, a group of artists based in New York was searching for what they refer-
red to as »larger canvas« (Crump, 2015). Working out of tradition of minimalism and con-
ceptualism, they undertook monumental projects on land using earth as the main medium.
There appear to be three basic approaches to the history of 60s/70s land art, it is ei-
ther »quintessentially American art form« (Kastner, 2015, p. 12), and all the main Ame-
rican artists firmly subscribe to that view, it differs from the British land art »simply in
terms of the land available« (Hopkins, 2000, p. 176), or it is »an international phenome-
non« (Kaiser and Kwon, 2012, p. 19), a view put forward in the critical exhibition at The
Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles, entitled Ends of the Earth (which was Jean
Tinguely’s project in Nevada Desert). When invited to participate at the mentioned ex-
hibition, both Michael Heizer and Walter De Maria refused by stating that their work is
»out there« and needs to be experienced in situ, which implies a revered pilgrimage with
a 4W drive and a solid map. The persistent construction and reconstruction of American
desert as somewhat timeless wilderness is part of both American coded national identi-
ty and contemporary tourism imagery. Imagining the wilderness as »out there« is the
»product of culture’s craving and culture’s framing« (Schama, 1996, p. 7)
Land art has always depended heavily on photographic records of the work done in
»remote« areas, presented in galleries and museums but also on land art installations in-
tended to be presented in the galleries and in museums. Regardless of the romantic con-
viction that artists walked away from the galleries, the relationship between them and the
galleries has always been tangible, in funding, promoting and owning the art.
Several early earthworks that were not reclaimed by natural processes are considered
iconic, among them is Heizer’s Double Negative.
The importance of absence: a negative sculpture
There’s nothing there but it’s still a sculpture.
Michael Heizer
Heizer’s celebrated Double Negative precisely fits Edmund Burke’s definition of the Sublime as ‘an outrage on the imagination.’
Edward Lucie-Smith
Double negative owned by The Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles, was part of
the »solo exhibition« offered to Michael Heizer, sponsored by Virginia Dwan in 1969
and reworked in 1970. Heizer displaced 240,000 tonnes of earth and rock in the desert
near Overton, Nevada. He cut two opposing slots from the slopes and surface of the Mor-
116
for a second) against the established art, rejecting commodification, and leaving the gal-
leries for the wide open spaces »out there«.
Whether presented as a »troika« (Crump, 2015) or as »high priests« (Dwan, 2012,
p. 93), Robert Smithson, Michael Heizer and Walter De Maria are the three artists cen-
trally positioned on any land art list of the period.
American land art, also referred to as earth art, or Earthworks (after the sci-fi book
Smithson was reading while looking for the site for his art project) emerged in the second
half of the 1960s as integral part of the social movements of the time, anti-war protest, nu-
clear tests, new technologies, landing on the moon with clear view of the Earth as pain-
ted, sculpted object. It was also a period of the revival of the 19th century American lan-
dscape painting (Menard, 2014).
At the time, a group of artists based in New York was searching for what they refer-
red to as »larger canvas« (Crump, 2015). Working out of tradition of minimalism and con-
ceptualism, they undertook monumental projects on land using earth as the main medium.
There appear to be three basic approaches to the history of 60s/70s land art, it is ei-
ther »quintessentially American art form« (Kastner, 2015, p. 12), and all the main Ame-
rican artists firmly subscribe to that view, it differs from the British land art »simply in
terms of the land available« (Hopkins, 2000, p. 176), or it is »an international phenome-
non« (Kaiser and Kwon, 2012, p. 19), a view put forward in the critical exhibition at The
Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles, entitled Ends of the Earth (which was Jean
Tinguely’s project in Nevada Desert). When invited to participate at the mentioned ex-
hibition, both Michael Heizer and Walter De Maria refused by stating that their work is
»out there« and needs to be experienced in situ, which implies a revered pilgrimage with
a 4W drive and a solid map. The persistent construction and reconstruction of American
desert as somewhat timeless wilderness is part of both American coded national identi-
ty and contemporary tourism imagery. Imagining the wilderness as »out there« is the
»product of culture’s craving and culture’s framing« (Schama, 1996, p. 7)
Land art has always depended heavily on photographic records of the work done in
»remote« areas, presented in galleries and museums but also on land art installations in-
tended to be presented in the galleries and in museums. Regardless of the romantic con-
viction that artists walked away from the galleries, the relationship between them and the
galleries has always been tangible, in funding, promoting and owning the art.
Several early earthworks that were not reclaimed by natural processes are considered
iconic, among them is Heizer’s Double Negative.
The importance of absence: a negative sculpture
There’s nothing there but it’s still a sculpture.
Michael Heizer
Heizer’s celebrated Double Negative precisely fits Edmund Burke’s definition of the Sublime as ‘an outrage on the imagination.’
Edward Lucie-Smith
Double negative owned by The Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles, was part of
the »solo exhibition« offered to Michael Heizer, sponsored by Virginia Dwan in 1969
and reworked in 1970. Heizer displaced 240,000 tonnes of earth and rock in the desert
near Overton, Nevada. He cut two opposing slots from the slopes and surface of the Mor-
116
