Land Art

 

In the reading, “Between Landscape Architecture” Weilacher states a quote, “Sculptures are not placed in a landscape, rather the landscape is the very means of their creation.” I think this is a prime definition of Land Art. Many times, as designers we have design in mind that we want to fit into a particular site. In some cases, this could be a great idea but most of the time I see the existing landscape undergoing a significant change to make an idea work. The idea and conception of “Land Art” reminds me of “Vernacular Architecture.” Vernacular architecture focuses on the design and construction of buildings that are prominent to local traditions and materials in a particular region or environment. Although vernacular architecture is based on a built object or form, I think it’s important to bring the concept of Land Art into the built environment. With that being said, Land Art is an artistic expression that challenges traditional ideas of art and the relationship between humanity and the natural world.

            The natural world encompasses many materials that land artists are able to manipulate to create beautiful art forms. Weilacher states, “Land art…. Is to be understood as a protest against artificiality, plastic aesthetics, and ruthless commercialization of art.” Basically, land art serves as the frontliner in the protest of commercialization of art by ignoring conventional norms and ideals associated with modern- and present-day art in our society. It pushes back against the commercial art market's emphasis on financial gain, the superficiality of plastic aesthetics, and the disconnection from the natural world. Instead, land art reconnects with the environment by emphasizing the importance and authenticity of the natural material world and creates the importance that the experience that the work of art presents itself. With land art creating a protest within its concept, its main goal is to challenge what we think is normal or applicable to be valued as art. By doing so, land art challenges the status quo and calls for a reevaluation of the purpose and values of art in society, advocating for a deeper, more direct connection between art and nature.

        “The Greening of Art,” focuses the attention of land art in a different perspective. I thought it was interesting that the German artist Joseph Beuys took matters and concerns into his own hands by creating his iconic photographer named “Double Negative.” The author states, “Beuys was affirming a conception of nature as a living system of which we are part and which we modify, for better or for worse, with our actions.” I totally agree that we as humans are very much a part of the problem for this commercialized way of thinking about art in a landscape. I think our attitudes as designers to the natural world are to blame. We are so far detached from things that actually exist in the landscape and things that are made from materials in the landscape. In “Double Negative,” I almost see the photograph as humans should kind of hide their aura of ideas from the natural and just blend in with the natural elements with their art.

In conclusion both readings have an interesting perspective on what land art encompasses. However, the first reading to me ignores the bigger problem of humans actually being a part of the commercialized problem with today’s art forms. In the second reading the author states, “Nature is something apart from culture.” Land art should become something that is almost irrelevant to what we as designers and humans think is correct. Instead, it should be something that is strictly influenced by the natural world it is made from.