Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net  

Go Back  Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net > Community Announcements > Sculpture News and Events
User Name
Password
Home Sculpture Community Photo Gallery ISC Sculpture.org Register FAQ Members List Search New posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-21-2012, 03:38 PM
cheesepaws's Avatar
cheesepaws cheesepaws is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,137
Now you see it.....

I'm thinking about making a whole body of invisible monumentally scaled sculptures. Anyone else intrigued?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/a...sible-art.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-21-2012, 08:03 PM
Mack Mack is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: VA
Posts: 604
Re: Now you see it.....

Funny how things work out...I've had this piece in my studio for two years...
It's not as large as I think it could be, but you be the judge:

Thanks and I appreciate any comments, especially the negative ones. Thanks for saying what you feel because even if I disregard it as being inane or just plain ignorant, I would give my life to protect your right to say it!
Here's anothjer angle:

Sorry about the background...my stupid dog.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-22-2012, 04:40 PM
jOe~'s Avatar
jOe~ jOe~ is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spokane, Wa
Posts: 3,190
Re: Now you see it.....

From what I can see there's nothing new here. Been done before.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-22-2012, 05:35 PM
Mack Mack is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: VA
Posts: 604
Re: Now you see it.....

I appreciate your frankness (joeness?)...I think it's actually quite original. Perhaps you'd be good enough to show an example of what you are implying I might have borrowed my idea for this piece from...
This is a photo taken before all the feathers were added and the hot urine bath:
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-23-2012, 11:58 AM
fused fused is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 801
Re: Now you still don't see it.....

Can anyone actually "push the boundaries of visual art" with concepts that remain invisible and only engage the mind?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-23-2012, 04:03 PM
cheesepaws's Avatar
cheesepaws cheesepaws is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,137
Re: Now you still don't see it.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by fused View Post
Can anyone actually "push the boundaries of visual art" with concepts that remain invisible and only engage the mind?
You mean...like one's imagination?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-23-2012, 09:27 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Now you see it.....

If you are pushing boundries with concepts of the mind, one wonders what those boundries were doing there in the first place.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-24-2012, 03:02 PM
cheesepaws's Avatar
cheesepaws cheesepaws is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,137
Re: Now you see it.....

I've been seriously thinking about how many sculptures I've done that might count as "invisible." Here is one that might work - a self-portrait from 2008 (painted steel).



Anybody else got one?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-25-2012, 06:15 AM
chris 71's Avatar
chris 71 chris 71 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: ont canada
Posts: 1,054
Re: Now you see it.....

you should cover up that column cheese its stealing the show
maybe that door knob too lol
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-25-2012, 08:58 AM
Duck Duck is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 384
Re: Now you see it.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesepaws View Post
I've been seriously thinking about how many sculptures I've done that might count as "invisible." Here is one that might work - a self-portrait from 2008 (painted steel).



Anybody else got one?
Works for me cheeze

.....people, you know a sprue is usually used up for regrind...right
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-29-2012, 04:04 PM
Kilkenny's Avatar
Kilkenny Kilkenny is offline
Level 6 user
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Devon, United Kingdom
Posts: 110
Re: Now you see it.....

I'm curious about the exhibition's stated criteria - to 'show that art is not about viewing objects'. Is this a major issue in contemporary art? And is there a concern out there among artists that people have been mistaking the object for the art?
__________________
From the carver actually known as Sam Bell
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-29-2012, 04:41 PM
cheesepaws's Avatar
cheesepaws cheesepaws is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,137
Re: Now you see it.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilkenny View Post
I'm curious about the exhibition's stated criteria - to 'show that art is not about viewing objects'. Is this a major issue in contemporary art? And is there a concern out there among artists that people have been mistaking the object for the art?
Contemporary art is increasingly experiential - not just privileging the visual.

The "object" is no more the art - or less - than the act of making. Art has always been a synthesis of action and artifact.

Last edited by cheesepaws : 05-29-2012 at 05:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-30-2012, 02:34 AM
Kilkenny's Avatar
Kilkenny Kilkenny is offline
Level 6 user
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Devon, United Kingdom
Posts: 110
Re: Now you see it.....

Art has always been experiential, but that's like anything else (walking, for instance!). If you forget about the experience you'll miss the point. And taking in the natural world on those walks can result in anything from a David Hockney to a Graham Sutherland (quite different experiences). But the experience is still imbedded in the object, just as it is in the walk. As for not privileging the visual - we are talking about the visual arts here, aren't we?

I did like a piece (forget the name of the artist) that won the Turner prize a few years back - the main item was a gallery room in the Tate, in which the lights went on and off at spaced intervals. This was an interesting piece, for me, as the work itself had an ambivalent existence - it stopped existing as soon as the lights were set back to normal! And the experience in the room was dramatically foregrounded by the viewer actually being inside the work, so to speak. Of course, this is where the words 'work' and 'piece' become metaphor, as with 'object'.
__________________
From the carver actually known as Sam Bell

Last edited by Kilkenny : 05-30-2012 at 02:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-30-2012, 08:04 AM
rika rika is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,451
Re: Now you see it.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilkenny View Post
Of course, this is where the words 'work' and 'piece' become metaphor, as with 'object'.
Indeed, and I cannot consider "art" neither one (the one described in the original article or your example). It's the spark, the idea, the philosophy leading up to creating, not creation itself. It seems to me that there is a competition, a horse race out there in the so-called art world about who can come up with the most shocking idea. Nothing new there but it seems to me is less playful, less effortless as we seem to run out of safe taboos. The art world today is reduced to safe blasphemy. Tired and boring, recycled originality. That's my very subjective opinion on the subject at the moment.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-30-2012, 05:31 PM
Kilkenny's Avatar
Kilkenny Kilkenny is offline
Level 6 user
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Devon, United Kingdom
Posts: 110
Re: Now you see it.....

I know how you feel. But the thing about the Turner Prize piece (by Martin Creed) is that it has all the constituents of a work of art, it just doesn't exist like one and our relationship to it is such that the viewer cannot relate to it like an object, sitting there in the gallery.

I know what you mean about the striving for originality these days, but this piece has a history - it's a piece that reminds me, for instance, of the minimalism of Donald Judd and it maybe works through some of judd's interests.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	_1701400_room.jpg
Views:	139
Size:	13.3 KB
ID:	13582  
__________________
From the carver actually known as Sam Bell
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-30-2012, 07:55 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Now you see it.....

Eventually the conceptual/mental shennanigans will get tedious even to those invested in it. Hopefully they will find that actual growth comes from creating art instead of pretending to find the new "new".

But when?...some fads have more staying power than others.

I also don't buy into the art is not the object thesis. The object is what communicates the art to the viewer. The object is what the artist has created out of his or her relationship to time and space, and is infused with all of the focus of their artistic energies at that moment of time. Why would you want to cheapen the value of the object by shunning it as something that is not art?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-31-2012, 03:45 PM
Kilkenny's Avatar
Kilkenny Kilkenny is offline
Level 6 user
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Devon, United Kingdom
Posts: 110
Re: Now you see it.....

Perhaps an education that stresses appreciation of art would be a more practical way of encouraging viewers to see beyond the sheer presence of the object. I'm not sure that an exhibition of invisible art will really achieve its aims here. Also: didn't John Cage do this in musically way back in the 50s? And there's bound to be a book somewhere with no words (perhaps in a box, loose-leaved, so that you can start anywhere you like.....).
__________________
From the carver actually known as Sam Bell

Last edited by Kilkenny : 06-01-2012 at 02:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-07-2012, 10:00 AM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Now you see it.....

K is right, considering art (viewing it, hearing it, etc) has always been experiential and NOT palpable. It is no more "for" communicating than it is for eating or throwing at your enemies. I do not have a problem at all with an incident of encouraged experience (art show?) that addresses how one THINKS about aesthetica by offering up a philosophical thesis that has us "filling in the blanks" of the usual art encounter. And of course, the artifact, the things SEEN could never measure up to the experience that brought it into being. Unless it is an imposter, diluted amongst two or more consciousnesses. Then we are talking about another thing entirely...spectacle perhaps. And spectacles, burdened by their desperate want to "communicate", absolutely depend upon being "spectated". A spectacle has it backwards - with the object informing the process, rather than the more challenging manner whereby the process, the act, leaves some settled dust (significance) on the extrusion...some quite MAGIC dust perhaps, for the imagination of a viewer.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-08-2012, 10:24 AM
jim collins jim collins is offline
ISC Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Posts: 93
Space -space relationship or Invisible Sculpture

SPACE - SPACE RELATIONSHIP or invisible sculpture

Even thought he did not designate it, Claes Oldenburg did a mass-mass relationship sculpture in New York's Central Park in the mid-1960's. Oldenburg had workmen dig a 6-foot by 6-foot cube out of the earth and then had it filled back immediately with the same dirt that had been removed. Disturbed earth within undisturbed earth.

At the time this activity was called an "Art Happening" Actually what took place was the first documented mass-mass relationship sculpture. Disturbed earth within a well-defined 6 foot cube --- one cannot see it (invisible) but it is there to this very day.

Now where do we go from here? How about the other end of this spectrum, a space-space relationship, also a sculpture that could not be seen but only perceived by feeling (invisible). Several years ago I constructed two main devices that blew air into forms that could be felt, not seen. One could feel the form and the defining edges of disturbed and sometimes heated air blown into a still atmosphere.

What the hell was that about? People only saw the machines and never really got the idea of a space-space relationship. We are so visual!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-08-2012, 10:34 AM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Now you see it.....

If you think about the reason the monolith has always been such a potent in regards to allocating significance to a proximity, site, place, idea, notion; you will evnetually realize that it was not the size/weight of the thing, the rock etc, that was effective it was the resounding, emanating, radiating, vibrating, loaded, barely-harnessed, about-to-burst, aggravated stasis...all these things are NOT the result of optical perception. They are purely cognitive, and cognition is not attached to a sense-organ (no, not even the bulbous brain). So where are the sensors? Are they meaty? or are they leaping legs of magneti, or are they anti-material tentacles? Back to the ol' substance and void conundrum.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-08-2012, 11:23 AM
jim collins jim collins is offline
ISC Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Posts: 93
Re: Now you see it.....

I can see it. a monolith is a monolith (visual).
A conundrum is a conundrum (invisible).
The problem here is invisible - not fraying,
white hot wings of steel on a vertical monolith.

I*N*V*I*S*I*B*L*E
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-08-2012, 11:37 AM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Now you see it.....

Again, the object is of secondary importance. The "content" of a work of art arrives invisibly. You can stare at the damned "subject" all day, and not get any content. We are talking about leaps made by the viewer. The "filling-in" of blanks that are put to the sensory test (by the artist). Such is NOT art when it takes the form of a joke, game, a riddle or a puzzle executed by an obvious clown or charlatan.

The philosophers (eggheads) will place aesthetics as a mere branch of philosophy. But philosophy is actually a mere branch of aesthetics; as the entire uniqueness of a human consciousness is caused by a creative implulse. Homo-aestheticus (not homo-erectus) must first leap away from humanity to manage greater sensations. Sensations
not detectible by bloated blobs of tissue and blood.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-08-2012, 12:12 PM
jim collins jim collins is offline
ISC Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Posts: 93
Re: Now you see it.....

What Bloviation.
Using your very own thesis--even fools can make sculpture if it has "content"
Without content, it ain't art. On that I agree.
The viewer is not important to invisible sculpture.
But, the content is. It is still art when one simply becomes
aware of the content.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-08-2012, 12:40 PM
jim collins jim collins is offline
ISC Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Posts: 93
Re: Now you see it.....

OK. Let us get beyond the "see stuff and not seeing stuff". The sculpture, in whatever form, is the relic, record, or journal of the artist process. In its final form it becomes a "statement".
If no one ever sees or hears about or acknowledges it in anyway. It is still an art statement by the person that conceptualized it. As to evaluation. Not my problem at this juncture.

Art takes place in the mind of the artist. The art object is a record of that process. The communication, may or may not, take place in the mind of the viewer.

If the viewer becomes enthralled in the grain of a large carved piece of wood and does not credit or notice the form of the carving. The viewer has missed the art entirely. If the viewer is mystified by the hard work that went into a sculpture and skill of the sculptor. The viewer has missed the art entirely. If the viewer has to see the art work before they can judge the content. They too, may have missed the art entirely.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-08-2012, 12:48 PM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Now you see it.....

The content that is put-into an artifact by its creator may be very different from the content that is taken-away by a viewer (if such and exchange even occurs. Because we all know that not everything is art to everyone...even if it is art to someone else).

My favorite thing about bloviation is that there are many currents running through the same verbosities; many opportunities and secret messages to get wrung out. Those who are perturbed by it are mere clarity grubbers; as-the-crow-flies types of thinkers who'd rather not go the extra mile or mangle a sentence to reveal, by a belaboring, its invisible content. Ideas are not spreadsheets.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Sculpture Community, Sculpture.net
International Sculpture Center, Sculpture.org
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Russ RuBert