Rivers and Tides
I was very pleased to be able to watch Rivers and Tides (even though no matter what I did the movie continually skipped) as this was not my first time experiencing this movie. I think that Goldsworthy is absolutely fascinating as a person and as an artist as well. The way he handles the landscape around him is incredible. It seems that he really treats it as a part of his own self and sense of being with every meticulous placement of nature. I feel he is very persistent too because not only does he spend an almost endless amount of time and effort into his pieces but the problems that he encounters with time and nature are almost self inflicted. Yet he always manages (or at least I think) to figure out a way through the obstacle and create a piece of art through nature that will not last. It is this specific aspect to Goldsworthy’s pieces that I find the most fascinating. For lack of better words he puts his blood, sweat, and tears into molding the earth’s surface and bountiful resources into something that lasts only a short while until mother nature takes it away and smoothes it back into the surrounding landscapes.
During the film Goldsworthy makes a comment about an obsession with forms that are repeated throughout sites yet when he travels he feels “uprooted” and becomes a stranger. Although this seems somewhat like an oxymoron it makes perfect sense because although these “obsessive forms” are constantly repeated throughout nature Goldsworthy himself becomes a stranger due to the change in time and location. This new time and place is unfamiliar to him and he must reacquaint himself with these forms within nature that he knows so well. He also talks about how he shakes hands with the place as to get to know it all over again due to this sense of unfamiliarity he encounters. I would compare this idea to that of déjà vu in a way because it is evident that something is very familiar yet there is an amount of uncertainty and newness to it. Therefore these forms and tides of the new site are triggering that familiarity within Goldsworthy’s mind and being yet he must pay particular attention to this new space as to not miss anything.
When Goldsworthy was building his ice sculpture along the stream he mentioned that he had a discovery during his work with something occurring that he had not originally planned when he began this project. He further discussed the potential that this little discovery, or accident if I may, was unveiled. I could completely sense this discovery of his because it was at that exact moment that I found myself expelling a small ‘gasp’ in awe of the beauty of the light hitting and shining through his ice sculpture. I believe that this is one of the many goals of art to make the viewer experience these little moments of awe and wonder. It is these moments that inspire people and truly unleash the potential of expression through art. I also believe that you can not force these moments but they must just naturally occur during the process of a piece as it did for Goldsworthy. Usually these moments of potential happen purely by accident or through a mistake made by the artist but as you can see by the example in the film some mistakes are good mistakes. They make you think in a way you had not thought of before.
Goldsworthy comments on the fact that many times that the thing used to create the piece is what ultimately ends it—or as he put it “the very thing that brings it to life causes its death.” I think that this concept is almost surreal and touches on thoughts of equal existence between life and death. Although I’m not sure they really can be experienced at the same time they can be experienced by the same factor, which is kind of depressing yet beautiful if you think about it. It is a way of living life that comes full circle and as corny as it made sound it is indeed the ‘circle of life.’ On one hand this idea of giving life and causing death by one solitary thing expresses and expands the idea of potential and yet at the same time it squashes it. I believe it is all a matter of how we as humans explore this idea in order to show its true potential in art and life.
Overall I would say the term “destruction” is a negative one and is associated with less than desirable objects or people. I definitely would not consider what happens to Goldsworthy’s pieces as destruction by any means but rather a form of recycling. In my eyes this “coming apart” of his pieces is simply a part of the art process. It demonstrates the different stages of his creations as it is melted away back into its environment. In reference to one of the pieces within the movie, the wooden cave by the salmon pit, I would classify destruction of that piece as putting explosives in the hole and blowing it to smithereens. However what Goldsworthy did was much more quiet and peaceful and was the exact opposite of destruction. The process of the piece was only continued as it floated down the stream slowly coming apart piece by piece and stage by stage of its life. I would definitely say that human life can be related to this idea. For starters we can really only live one day at a time, no matter how hard any overachiever/workaholic can try. One single twenty four hour period is a stage in our lives and our lives are obviously made up of several days one after the other revealing each stage of our being little by little. Granted there are those who manage to cause their own self-destruction but as far as destruction versus mutation go in life, well that’s just the individual’s own desires and choices.
Goldsworthy mentions that his failures teach him. I think that this makes perfect sense. There are so many different sayings about this exact idea about learning from your mistakes—or even those of others around you. Although failure is not exactly uplifting I believe it has the most impact on who a person is and how they work. Without mistakes no one in the world would ever learn because nothing would ever be considered “wrong” or not effective. Thus, the world would be a stale and boring place to live—I know I would not want to be a part of it because growth is achieved through experience, change, and most importantly, mistakes.
As far as Goldsworthy’s comment about how his projects are “markers” of his journey, I think that without the backdrops of nature in which they reside, the pieces would mean next to nothing. If I saw one of his pieces in a museum I probably would have no interest in it because there is no story to it, and without a story there is no meaning. In a museum, one of these pieces would be just an object rather than art, at least for me. This is because the core of Goldsworthy pieces is about the atmosphere in which they are created and the process it took to create them. Additionally, the importance resides within the cycle of its birth and death rather than just the object itself.
During the film Goldsworthy touches on the ideas of stereotypes and preconceived notions we have about things before we actually take the time to get to know whatever the thing may be. He specifically talks about the sheep in the area and how important they are to the landscape. He mentions that the reason there aren’t any trees is because of the sheep—though I wish he would have gone into much greater detail about that. Personally I feel that stereotypes hold the human race back as far as human potential goes—it holds us back from the truth. I find this ironic in a way because it seems as if most human beings strive for truth whether it is within themselves or through other people. So, the idea of stereotypes and misjudging a person, place or thing is painfully sad for me. Therefore, it was pleasing for me to watch Goldsworthy create this piece about this topic using a jagged rock wall lined with wool from the sheep. This unexpected juxtaposition seemed to say to me “take a closer look” before you judge what is going on. Watching this portion gave me the desire to make art about the flaws within stereotyping and forcing viewers to take a closer look—maybe if more work like this existed it would help alleviate all of the pain in the world caused by stereotyping.
The idea of recording the “absence” of what once existed in a location is very intriguing for me. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to find a very good source of information of Joe Sternfeld or many examples of his work but what little I did manage to find was fascinating. I’ve never really thought about recording or documenting the past of something in that manner. I have personally used my own past experiences to create art yet it was still about the here and now as well as how I feel now about this past experience. I’m not really sure how one would go about recording what once was within a landscape other than a few obvious things such as the path that is carved out by water (the Grand Canyon is a huge example of that) or maybe even places that have drastically changed due to something that happened in the area. I think it would be very interesting to record the past or even the void of something. For me it is a very thought provoking idea and makes me wonder about documenting things that are indeed there but are not visible to the human eye.
There are so many more ideas from the film that I could continue to discuss but I think that the most important thing is the experiences I gain from this film every time I watch it. I seem to notice something different each and every time I watch it, whether it be how Goldsworthy approaches something or something he says. He always manages to make me think—sometimes without even talking.
