In this lecture we looked at several artists who create art using the Earth. Whether large or small pieces of work, they all include either man made objects or man's opinions of nature. Would it be considered art without this, and should thoughts/ideas be considered part of nature? These artists include Robert Smithson, James Turrell, Walter de Maria and Nancy Holt etc. They have all dealt with different aspects of nature and land. Out of all of these artists I must say that James Turrell has caught my attention. After all what is visual reality other than our own perspectives? Turrell has the ability to visually create space and change where it is not physically existing. I find his work rather hypnotic and enchanting, with a futuristic twist. I have read that James Turrell is a Quaker, so the manipulation of light and space is much more than just a fascination of logical being. It has a deep spiritual meaning applied to it. Living with Quakers for nearly a year, I learned how important 'light' is when exploring oneself. It is a type of meditation. Although all Quakers interpretation of their religion seems to differ, light represents the soul to me. So when I think of Turrell's work, it's about the seemingly impossible evolution and adaptation of the mind and soul in the world around us. It's about what's real and what's not. It's about breaking and pushing the boundaries of the existence of the soul and conscience, and understanding their relationship with reality in a visual 3D way. Turrell's work is overlapping the interest and unresolve of reality I have and hope to express with artwork. I just haven't found as clear a route as this is to explain myself with yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment