Q1: In Smithson's article, "The Crystal Land", he begins making the crystallography relates to Judd's artpiece the "pink plexiglas box" and how you can see the wiring of the inside of this structure that basically holds it together. Because you can see the inside of this structure, it makes it seem as if the "works verge on the notion of dissapearance". Then basically the rest of the article is a description about a trip that he and Judd took to explore nature. He mentions once of the crystallizing structure resembling the landscape of highways and suburban homes, then the rest of the essay is about the rest of trip. I don't know if I missed the point of this article, but why did he go on to explain his trip in such detail and only noting certain information that seem to be unnecessary like the flipping of the newspaper in the car?
Q2: In Smithson's second article, "Entropy and the New Monuments", he talks about the new way artists are viewing art. He also mentions that problems lead to the "illusion of [a] purpose", which to lead to categories of opposites that cause reaction, action, and then inaction. What is the actual problem between artists and problems? Is it because problems fit people into square boxes that doesn't allow to go beyond the label for what they're standing for like the formalist against the content?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment