ART AS UNMAKING

Notes on Robert Smithson's 1969 interview:

The notion that the object is a mental problem rather than a physical reality does not make much sense to me because it is a physical reality in our world because it was physically made. It could however be created from a concept of a mental problem though. He describes that product as a thought, which it is and can be compared to but that doesn't change that it did at one point physically exist. This could be related to the Descartes "dualism" thing where the thought is one entity and the physical act is another.

3-D objects in art have no frame-but the world can be its frame.

He breaks his materials down to its organic matter and that the components making it were natural, actual existence of things. His interest seems to lie in beginnings and ends of things and his power he has to control that. A "dematerialization in refined matter" or and interest in juxtaposition.

He claims "you can never escape your limits" but the idea is to "go outside the wall" or room that confines the work. When he displays his work or forms his work outside there seems to be no limit yet he describes the horizon as "diluting around him."

Smithson states,"anything that goes into a gallery is confined because of the room." I agree that once works that are put into a gallery it does confine the but the works are already finished or the gallery is included as part of the work just as his outside surroundings are a part of his. His works outside are their own gallery. To get the full affect of conceptual art it really needs to be displayed in parts, for example, just going to his non-sites or earth maps isn't going to clue you in as the photos would and making the trip. The photographs of these sites help reiterate what you need to be looking for.

He says everybody is convinced what reality is and bring their own concepts. I feel that maybe everyone does have their own reality in a way with maybe one shared version made by the standardized norms created. Reality to me is just perceptions and senses, and sometimes these can differ between people and the outcome is a different reality for them, an example is colorblind and crazy people have different realities because of differences in their perceptions and/or realities.

I love the concept of his non-existent sites from "earth maps" made of areas that are lost in time. I feel a good example of this is the Garden of Eden because there is a physical place where the Garden supposedly would be yet today that is not the name of that place, the Garden is gone.

His art is "disconnected parts of the earth" gathered together in arrangement to to make a whole object.

Smithson doesn't understand how some artists take beautiful materials and make them look ugly. I don't agree, I fell that "ugly" is yet another perception and differs also among people with based on social norms. "Ugly" is generalized and in "ugliness there is difference and interest in a way that is beautiful.

His term "de-differation" reminds me of when people play "7 degrees of separation," or something along the lines of tying everything together in ways that work but are not rational. The movie with Jim Carry and the number 13 is a good example of this where he broke everything in his life down to involving this number 13 because of a book about it.

Smithson believes that "if you name something, you destroy its reality." I believe that reality is a name itself, so you could say that reality is already destroyed itself based on his belief. He also speaks of artists being afraid of naming their work because it is then destroyed in reality. I have always felt that by naming something you are creating it or bringing something into existence-it was not known before-and now it is.