andy goldsworthy

though they come at it from different directions i see him sharing a lot with serra.

I don't think they have much in common - Serra's work is experiential in nature whereas Goldsworthy's is sculptural and photographic. There's a sense of modification of space and an ability to inhabit Serra's pieces that's present in very few of Goldsworthy's works, even the single largest sculptural piece of his I've seen in person doesn't really leave the viewer a good way to experience it.

There is an "oh that's neat!" aspect to his work and I appreciate that he works with many different materials, but ultimately his work is about showcasing man's dominion over nature rather than nature itself like in James Turrell or Walter De Maria's work.

this thread is v informative! thx dudes

I DIED, i agree (obv!) that their praxis is very different. almost neatly opposed if you want it to be. but the ethos is the same - to find or produce a crack (in the earth, the sky, the horizon) through which can be perceived another world behind the one you knew.

i disagree with the reading that goldsworthy's work "is about" "showcasing man's dominion over nature." If anything, nearly the opposite. his work thrusts into relief, and grapples with, the between the "nature" we perceive, mediated by sense and sensibility, and the unknowable absolute that exists outside of perception, exists without you.

(side note that i was definitely thinking of serra in re the anecdote of the jar. also that i am 80% serious that goldsworthy is descended from the little folk known to live under the hills in that part of the world iirc)

("the same" is probably too strong - more like different trees with a shared root system)

man, ILX makin' me think today ps i am vv hung over

many threads i start go nowhere, but this one is going somewhere. or went somewhere.

Any recommendations on Goldsworthy books?

(Also, do carry on the conversation about whether he is any good or not).

when i was younger a lot of my friends were into goldsworthy and i was snobbish about it, accused him of gilding the lily etc. now i have lightened up and can enjoy stuff that's "just pretty".

i can't recommend a goldsworthy book but i recently picked phaidon's "themes and movements" set for a song, and when i cracked open the "land and environmental art" survey (edited by jeffrey kastner) i was surprised that the first thing i saw was goldsworthy. perhaps it's telling though that there's no real discussion of his work, just a few pictures and a brief note that his work draws attention to the beauty and ephemerality of nature. i guess that's the worst you can say about him, that there's not really that much to say about him. which jed noted in fewer words upthread. btw though this "land and environmental art" book is just great.

ultimately his work is about showcasing man's dominion over nature rather than nature itself

― I DIED, Saturday, January 9, 2010 8:02 PM (6 years ago

this is the essence of my gilding the lily complaint

i also think his works are, to some extent, a documentation of an exercise of patience and dexterity that's well out of my range as a human, so it's somewhat impressive on that level, as a feat of human athleticism to be admired. i think there should be space in "the art world" for that sort of thing.

wtf ILE this guys been around for a looooooong time. love him

― larry craig memorial gloryhole (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, January 9, 2010 12:48 AM (6 years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yea totally, he is an amazing artist

ultimately his work is about showcasing man's dominion over nature rather than nature itself

― I DIED, Saturday, January 9, 2010 8:02 PM (6 years ago

eh i don;t think thats really true

so many of his works achieve just a brief transitory glimpse of control over nature (captured in a photograph, sure) which is then quickly lost and that is part of the point

btw "andy goldsworthy: a collaboration with nature" is the book i have and it is spectacular

and yea i do think "collaboration with nature" is way more accurate than "control (or dominion) over nature"

parts of that book describe some failed attempts and are very interesting

some of his standing works invite interaction with the audience, or at least facilitate it
http://dsmpublicartfoundation.org/public-artwork/three-cairns/

not the best examples but a random sampling here in #2
http://www.desmoinesartcenter.org/blog/general/top-10-instagram-2015

I just recently watched the second Goldsworthy documentary film, Leaning Into the Wind, made in 2018 by Thomas Riedelsheimer, who also directed Rivers and Tides in 2001.
When I saw the latter more than a decade ago, part of its appeal was how he had managed to make a living and a life in the larger world out of what was portrayed as a very personal mode of relating and working with nature. In the more recent film, he's 17 years older, and while he still seems physically and artistically vital, his practise seems to be more of a way of life, almost private in its significance. I know he's a successful professional artist with commissions and works around the world, but what comes across is his relation with the natural world through his body and everyday actions.
The message of Leaning Into the Wind for me was a reminder that we don't need to be creating art in any institutionally recognized way to derive creative pleasure of "art" from the world around us.