Response toe "Sculpture in the Expanded Field"

Sculpture in the Expanded Field

Rosalind Krauss’s article really made me re-think how I perceive sculpture, landscape, and architecture. She first addresses that sculpture in the past was linked to a monument which connected it to the place and place. Sculpture had a purpose, a meaning, and was often vertical that was placed on a pedestal that connected it to its site. It is stated that over time this understand of sculpture changed, but in my mind figurative sculpture is simply one type of sculpture. Figurative sculpture may not be made as often as they use to be, but our understanding of that type of sculpture has not changed.

More modern sculpture is said to be separate from its site, no site, and may have no function. This is what we see more often today. It is with modern sculpture where the line between sculpture, landscape, and architecture becomes unclear. In other cultures landscape, sculpture, and architecture are intertwined, but in our culture it is harder to grasp the concept of the expanded field where one is not separate from one another. I believe our American culture has a hard time grasping this concept because we were taught to believe that there is only one. Students are in an architecture program, landscape program, or art program. Generally speaking most programs are separate from another. What isn’t talked about in this article is weather exploring or understanding the extended field actually helps create better designs. Is Richard Sierra’s work more outstanding because it does all three? I would also state that even if a design incorporates landscape, architecture, and sculpture, one is still more significant than other. Rosalind gives the example of the Japanese gardens; I would still argue that the main focus is the landscape. The architecture and the sculpture support and strengthen the landscape. Although there are many pieces that link landscape, architecture, and sculpture I would still argue depending on what its purpose is would force it to fit into one of those categories. I feel that for a designed piece to be all three would require a great understanding of each subject, which is difficult. Most designers are a master of one.

This reading really triggered my educational memories. I tried to think of the times where I was instructed to incorporate art and landscape into architecture. Landscape was always an afterthought. I just wonder if landscape and art were part of my education would I be a better architect in the future.

Daisy's Sites

This one isn't one of my sites, but two weeks ago when I was exploring California my boyfriend and I happen to run into one of Richard Serra's works. I immediately said "stop the car" and we went to explore this piece of "sculpture" or should I say "architecture." It is an amazing piece. You can occupy the sculpture and create noise or "music" in the structure. I just thought about if I had to design something and had to place it next to Richard Serra's work what would I come up with?

Site #1: Can't a bus stop be more interesting?

Site #2: Can this path have more?

Site #3: Those boxes looks like it's asking for some design

Site #4: What goes into a historic landmark area?

Reading Response for “Sculpture in the Expanded Field” by Rosalind Krauss

In this article, Krauss summarized the development of the American sculpture in 60s and 70s as two major trends: one trend is between architecture and not-architecture; the other one is between landscape and not-landscape. The former refers to the blending of sculpture and architecture, which ultimately leads to the development of the installation. The latter embraces a broader nature - humanity space.

The traditional sculpture has been lost between not-architecture and not-landscape. Krauss divided this development into three stages. Firstly, the representative works, such as Rodin's Gates of Hell and the statue of Balzac, broke the practice of traditional monument sculpture, which released the traditional sculpture from the function of architecture, religion, ethics, and literature and obtained the independence of the sculpture itself. Sculpture turned into the form of personal expression by artists themselves.

In the second stage is the modernist period and sculpture entered the space of sitelessness or homelessness. The base became a part of the sculpture. The pedestal is designed as an abstract form and integrated with the sculpture work. For example, in the work of Brancusi's Beginning of the World, the base tended toward radical abstractness which testifies to a loss of site.

In the third stage, sculpture turned into the form between architecture and landscape, which means that sculpture can't live without the environment and the background. Works of both Mary Miss and Robert Morris embodied the importance of the unity of the work and the environment. The form of the work depended on the form of the background. The intention of the work was not to express the form of the work but the environment. Only when the environment was fully expressed, then one can understand the form of the work.

My Sites

La Jolla Shores

Ocean Beach Dog Beach

My Apartment Complex

Reading Response for “Sculpture in the Expanded Field” by Rosalind Krauss

This article discusses the modern history of sculpture and its historical background. It presupposes that sculpture has been rationalized using historical precedents. Modern and Postmodern sculpture have continually derived more abstract and old historical references. This use of historical reference, as well as scientific methodologies like the Klein group to justify the sculpture of the last century and categorize it based on not-landscape and not-architecture principles is, to me, besides the point. Art is a reflection of cultural ideas using a given medium and the specific perception of the artist. Logical operations do not necessarily have a play in the artwork. To summarize the entire field of sculpture into historical and logical categories negates the feelings, mood, ideas, and randomness of the art form. Art isn’t always logical. I’d argue that the art of the current era is highly illogical and does not reflect historical ideals.

The author’s labeling of postmodern art as an opposition of architecture and landscape seems an apt description. No longer is sculpture the mastering of a specific medium, it is a test of ideas represented in whatever form the artist deems necessary. When did the bad representation of an unusual idea surpass the mastering and skill of classical art? How did art and sculpture become a scientific endeavor? It is interesting to me the need to analyze a piece of art in terms of its historical significance, scientific references, and cultural heritage rather than an object of beauty to enjoy simply for the sake of enjoyment.

My Sites

Balboa Park:

Cabrillo Memorial:

Ocean Beach Jetty:

-Rachel Dentel

On her article "Sculpture in the Expanded Field", Rosalind Krauss discusses how in the fifties, sculpture was referred to as something limited: it was to exist only in the space between “not-landscape” and “not-architecture.” This negative idea was conceived by taking only the image of sculpture as a single item and not as part of a conjunction to the environment in which it exists.

As a response to this closed minded idea, Rosalind explains her new structure for thinking and talking about sculpture, where actions exists in between the notions of landscape, architecture, non-landscape and non- architecture, creating new categories.

In today's world, we can find all kinds of functional objects, buildings and landscapes that have been molded into art pieces, that look like sculptures. In actuality art’s boundaries, in its relation with other concepts, is almost non-existent.

We can create new ways of expressing sculpture, where art is always present. We could position sculpture as a result of mixing architecture, landscape and objects. Whether we design buildings that are sculpted into the landscape, design objects to work in conjunction with the landscape or create inhabitable objects, in all of these cases, we are creating types of sculpture.

-Nadia Nunez

David's Sites

These are some sites that I thought would work well for some type of sculptural intervention. Yours can be smaller, larger etc.