By Lisa Katayama at 10:45 am Wed, Feb 17, 2010
Neil Dawson(via The Grip via NotCot)
it looks like litter from god.
yes, god’s litter.
and anything god litters is art.
I was lucky enough as student to have a tour of The Farm last year, this sculpture is as you see it here, it is on the crest of a hill… it is not 2D ( 2D is like a drawing on paper, this is a large built work.)… it is 3d and presents as even more 3D than it is. It also overlooks a massive Richard Serra work, and there is an amazing Andy Goldsworthy down on the shoreline. Sorry bornonbord but there is no comparison of this to the so called corrugated iron works littering New Zealand.
NZ has all sorts of random sculptures, most with currogated iron.
*Where* in New Zealand?
Here’s a wonderful site that happens to mention where.
Reminiscent of Claes Oldenburg’s work. It is too bad that the Neil Dawson link goes to a placeholder page (empty but logo).
An interesting link to the artist’s work is a project of his in Wellington, NZ
See Ferns http://www.ferns.co.nz/ interactive, 3D, needs Shockwave (and 32-bit mode in Safari)
It seems his website is an optical illusion too? Or does it just have no content whatsoever?
Yes, what gives? Instead of the simplicity and elegance of his own art–the website is a Dadaist pile-up.
I believe the sculpture is located on ‘The Farm’ – a large property owned by New Zealand businessman Alan Gibbs. The property is on the Kaipara Harbour – north west of Auckland.
…Haw! You know what this needs? A normal-scale pic-a-nioking family running for their lives to avoid the giant blanket that’s about to crush them!
This post should carry an “Irritating Web Site” alert.
A “sculpture” is usually meant to be seen from multiple angles. I get nothing sculptural, out of this single image. It could be a painting on a building side, who knows. Maybe some alternate views?
Given the only other two existing images of this piece that I can find on the web, visible here: http://thegrip.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/neil-dawsons-horizons, I’m skeptical that we’re not merely seeing a photocomposite concept of what it will or may look like in situ. In that series of three images, it’s painfully clear that the “sculpture” in image 2 has been flipped L to R vs. the “sculptures” in images 1 and 3.
You’re looking at a 2d sculpture. The illusion part is that it looks 3d. This is why it looks like it’s been flipped from the opposite side.
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Art and Design
Submit a tip
The rules you agree to by using this website.
Who will be eaten first?
Jason Weisberger, Publisher
Ken Snider, Sysadmin