Minimalist sculpture : the consequences of artifice

This study, "Minimalist Sculpture: The Consequences of Artifice", was \ninitially prompted by the wish to examine the case for a materialist approach \nto modern sculpture. Such an inquiry needed to address not only the \nsubstantiality of material and its process, but also the formative role of \nideology on those choices of governing materials and procedures. \nThe crux of this study began as, and remains, an inquiry into physical \npresence, and, by extension, the idea that Minimalist sculpture somehow \nreturns the viewer to the viewer. At the core of any materialist position is the \ncertainty that experience contains an element of passivity. If nothing exists \nbut matter and its movements and modifications, then consciousness and \nvolition depend entirely on material agency. The hierarchy of such a scheme \nunderpins the socio-economic and cultural level with that of the biological, \nand, in turn, the biological with the physical. However, perception is not a \nmatter of automatically recording external stimuli, but requires active \nelaboration. A hermeneutic process, therefore, is not one of unbridled pure \nthought; rather, it requires the recognition of an external and constant \nmeasure that gives form to thought. Recourse to the 'given' fact of an \nexternal reference, therefore, depends upon a relationship between \nmateriality and signification-the resultant heuristic method of perceptual \nhypothesis that is established remains perpetually open to questioning. C.S. \nPeirce is invaluable to this study in providing a theoretical framework for these \nconsiderations. \nThe manner in which modern sculpture was realized experienced a \ndecisive change with the emergence of Minimalism. The dominant aesthetic \nof Vitalism was brought into question as never before by the materialist \nprogramme set in motion by Minimalism. The key issue of adherence to a \nVitalist or Minimalist aesthetic is invaluable when clarifying the position of \nartists such as Tony Smith and Robert Smithson. \nEarlier sculptural forms generated by Constructivism utilized aspects of \nindustrial mimesis but did not engage with sheer physicality to the extent that \nMinimalism did. One reason for this major difference was the consideration \naccorded to scale rather than size by the Minimalists. Such a consideration of \nscale and the experience of spatio-temporality, understood as inextricably part \nof the sculptural situation, gave rise to site-specificity and its ramifications as \nMinimalist concerns. \nApproximately the first third of this study examines Vitalism as the \ndominant and enduring theme and background for modern sculpture. Vitalism \nformed an inherited intellectual situation that was directly challenged by the \nmaterialism of the Minimalists. \nIn the second part of the study, Barnett Newman and Constantin \nBrancusi provide the two central historical precedents for the re-introduction of \nthe precinctual into contemporary sculpture. Newman's interest in place as a \nspatio-temporal experience, and his extension of the artwork to include the \ninterstice between the viewer and the artwork was an extremely important \nstep for Minimalism. Brancusi is of interest mainly for his addressing of \ntemporality as a sculptural concern, and the relationship of material to place. \n11 \nHis early use of assemblage, as a method of drawing with materials in space, \nfacilitated not only the Minimalists but also modern sculpture at large. \nA section of the study is devoted to the sculpture of Richard Serra and \nthe idea of critical distance, something that he shares with Newman. This \nintellectual attitude aids Serra in his declaration of the space of sculpture as \nparallel to, and critical of, its context. The work of Robert Smithson is \nexamined in the light of site-specificity and ubiety, and, in particular, his use of \nsymbols as structural prompts. Smithson's dystopian Futurism is examined \nas a significant way of helping to draw the distinction between his intellectual \nposition and that of a Vitalist. \nThe study concludes with a consideration of contextualization in general, \nand of Maya Lin's site-specific memorial to the causalities of the Vietnam War. \nWhat has emerged from this study is that precinctual space was firmly \nre-established in contemporary sculptural practice by the Minimalist sculptors. \nI have used the term ubiety to describe the re-emphasis, and re-emergent \nawareness, of place as an interstitial space that was associated with the \nMinimalists. Ubiety is understood to be the condition of being in a particular \nplace, and comes from the Latin 'where'. In contrast, ubiquity is the condition \nof being everywhere. In the light of ubiety, sculpture, particularly site-specific \nsculpture, is discussed and understood as a spatio-temporal event.