THE ELEGIAC TRADITION AT THE END OF THE CENTURY: Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed and Sol LeWitt’s Black Form as contemporary memorials. Elena V. Fadeeva Word count: 4260
Two months after marching through Boston, half the regiment was dead; at the dedication, William James could almost hear the bronze Negroes breathe. Their monument sticks like a fishbone in the city’s throat.
For the Union Dead Robert Lowell, 1917 - 1977
Introduction:
1 Alois Riegl “The modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin” [translated by Kurt W. Forster and Diane Ghirardo] in Alois Riegl: art history and theory (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1993), 621
A monument in its oldest and most original sense is a human creation, erected for the specific purpose of keeping single human deeds or events (or a combination thereof) alive in the minds of future generations. [1]
The medium of sculpture has always been tied very closely with a commemorative function. Rosalind Krauss describes this relationship in her essay Sculpture in the Expanded Field, where she emphasises that the logic of sculpture is inseparable from the logic of the monument.[2] According to the author, sculpture is a commemorative representation as it represents the special site
2 Rosalind Krauss, “Sculpture in the Expanded Field” [1978] in Modern Sculpture Reader ed. by Jon Wood, David Hulks and Alex Potts (Leeds: Henry Moore Institute, 2007), 335
and the events which occurred on this site.
This argument can be deemed relevant to one that Henri Lefebvre makes four years earlier in his essay La Production de l’Espace [The Production of Space] where he introduces monuments and buildings as “the representations of the relations of production which subsume power relations”.[3] Every
3 Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space [1974], translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), 33
4 Lefebvre, The Production of Space [1974], 37
event that “happened at a particular spot or place and thereby changed it – all of this becomes inscribed in space”[4] or in other worlds materialises in the form of physical objects.
Sometimes it happens intentionally. Artists and sculptors create objects that are supposed to commemorate something from the beginning. But it also happens that the work of art achieves its commemorative value later, gradually becoming a symbol of events that happened in a particular place, which it was physically (or virtually*) connected with. It opens a very deep and interesting discourse about the works of art as both intentional and unintentional monuments that stay relevant nowadays but roots to the texts of art theorists from the beginning of the twentieth century, such as Alois Riegl’s essay The modern
3
Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin written in 1929. In this essay he stresses that:
5 Riegl “The modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin”, 623
6 Riegl “The modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin”, 622
Both intentional and unintentional monuments are characterised by commemorative value, and in both instances we are interested in their original, uncorrupted appearance as they emerged from the hands of their maker and to which we seek by whatever means to restore them. [5]
The author mentions that every historical monument is also an art monument [6] and this statement makes us think about the role, which art compo-
7 Marianne Doezema, “The Public Monument in tradition and Transition”, in The Public Monument and Its Audience (Cleveland: Cleveland Museum of Art, 1977), 9
nent plays in the creation of the memory. Some thinkers, such as Marianne Doezema, believe that “the public monument has a responsibility apart from its qualities as a work of art” [7] and that not only it should express the artist’s individuality, but also be considered as the object generating public reaction. Others, such as Rosalind Krauss, find that sometimes monuments are “unable
8 Rosalind Krauss, The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths (Cambridge, Mass.; London: Yale University Press, 1988), 90-91
to refer anything beyond themselves”. [8]
9 James E. Young, The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, (New Haven, CT; London: Yale University Press, 1993), xi
desire to destruct them. But as James E. Young emphasises in his book The
10 Young, The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, xii
Objects, created by sculptors and artists can draw attention to the focal points in our history and as a result they create very controversial feelings. Ones can be loved and respected; others can entail public rejection and the
Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning it would not be right to suggest that the society ‘represses’ some memories because they are not interesting to remember, or because they are shameful – in this case there is a danger of not considering many other forces that convey the formation of national memory. [9]
In this essay I would like to adopt the approach that James E. Young used in his book. To examine two different artworks, which became, one with, and an-
4
other without sculptor’s intention, memorial objects; their “dialogical quality”[10] and the way they interacted with the surroundings and the general public. I would like to consider the works chronologically, starting with the late 1960-s works of Robert Smithson – Partially Buried Woodshed in Ohio and then focusing on the Black Form created by Sol LeWitt in Münster seventeen years later.
Such juxtaposition imposes series of questions about the nature of sculp11 Jonathan Jones, “Too many memories?”, The Guardian, Friday 26 January 2007, available online http://www. theguardian.com/ artanddesign/2007/ jan/26/architecture accessed 03.12.2014
ture in the contemporary society and public’s reaction to it. Jonathan Jones in his article for The Guardian questions the suitability of the contemporary minimalist sculpture for commemoration purposes, and its ability to change our perception to the history through the art medium.[11] In this work I would like to address the similar issue and try to answer the questions about the factors which the negative reception of the objects chosen for this essay were connected with? I would then like to try to define the reasons, which caused such a reaction: was it typical for the time-period they were created or was
12 Young, The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, 13
it possibly connected to the artistic message they were conveying? In James Young’s words: “to suggest that we cannot separate the monument from its public life, that the social function of such art is it aesthetic performance.” [12]
5
Robert Smithson Partially Buried Woodshed. 1970 Kent University, Kent, Ohio January 1970 One woodshed and twenty truckloads of earth 18’6” x 10’2” x 45’
6
13 Glidzen, Alex, “Partially Buried Woodshed: A Robert Smithson Log,” Arts Magazine, Special Issue: Robert Smithson (May 1978), 120
14 Suzaan Boettger, Earthworks: Art and the Landscape in the Sixties, (Berkley: University of California Press, 2002), 200
15 Dorothy Shinn, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed, (Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984), 3
Unintended memorial: Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed, 1970, Kent, Ohio
In the lonely cold of the end of the century’s severest winter, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed remains a haunting and controversial work visited mostly by vandals and dogs, and poets. [13]
In January 1970 Robert Smithson was invited to come to the Kent University School of Art for a week as a visiting tutor. He came with the intention of giving lectures and studio critiques and by the end of the week, create a sculptural object together with the students.[14] The initial idea of the artist was to continue his series of experiments with pouring liquid substances which he started with Asphalt Rundown 1969 near Rome, Italy. As the extension of these activities, Robert Smithson planned to pour liquid mud to create another gravity forced object but this time in Ohio. But the weather conditions in winter were
16 Brinsley Tyrell, Interview on March 22, 1984 as quoted in Dorothy Shinn, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed, (Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984)
17 Boettger, Earthworks: Art and the Landscape in the Sixties, 200
18 Richard Martin, “Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed”, Arts 59, no.1 (September, 1984), 104
pretty extreme and the mud definitely would not pour. Brinsley Tyrrell, the professor of sculpture revealed in his interview that the artist had the flu[15] and was planning to return to New York, but Tyrell said that the students would not let him do that without an object:
They came out to the house and sat about on the living room floor and talked about what else they could do. Well, said Smithson, he had always liked the idea if burying the building. [16]
After walking on the University campus Robert Smithson found a small abandoned woodshed on the edge of campus territory, which was part of a farm complex, existing in this place before and then acquired by the University. [17]
He decided to dump twenty truckloads of dirt on the right-hand side of the
building, partially covering it [18] until the central beam cracked and the whole
7
19 Alex Gildzen, “Partially Buried Woodshed: A Robert Smithson Log”, Arts Magazine Special Issue: Robert Smithson, May 1978, 118 20 Lawrence Alloway, “Robert Smithson’s Development,” Artforum (November 1972), 53-61 21 Jennifer Padgett, “Robert Smithson” in Notations: Contemporary drawing as Idea and Process, available online http://notations. aboutdrawing. org/category/jennifer-padgett/ accessed 03.12.2014 22 Robert Smithson, “Untitled, 1971,” in The Writings of Robert Smithson, ed. Nancy Holt (New York: New York University Press, 1979), 220 23 Alexander Alberro, Conceptual Art and the Politics of Publicity (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2003), 127 24 Robert Morris, “Keynote Address”, in Earhworks: Land Reclamation as Sculpture: a Project of the King County Arts Comission (Seattle: Seattle Art Museum, 1979) 14-15 25 Tom Holert “Land
structure started collapsing. Alex Gildzen, who was a professor of library administration at the University, remembers that day in his article Partially Buried Woodshed: A Robert Smithson Log:
For Smithson cracking of the beam was crucial to the concept of the piece, for it symbolized the beginning of the process of entropy., which he compared to Humpty Dumpty: “A closed system which eventually deteriorates and starts to break apart and there is no way that you can really piece it back together again. [19]
The concept of entropy [20] , which the artist touched in Asphalt Rundown, was central to this work. [21] The artist believed that the processes which happened with the object after it was created and the processes of destruction and decay in the physical reality could be the focal point of the artwork.
These concepts can be understood more deeply in the context of the conceptual art of the 1960’s period. One of its unofficial mottos was the utilisation of the devastated landscapes, re-cycling land and water in terms of ‘earth art’.[22] The woodshed on the territory of Kent University was not an industrial object, but the heritage of the rural past, abandoned and declining. The process of entropy and of the immanence in the art object can be also considered in terms of the main tendency of the institutional critique
[23]
questioning the preciousness of art, its commodifica-
tion [24]: “characteristic tension (or dialectic) of work and exhibition, monument and document, primary and secondary information, site and nonsite.” [25]
Partially Buried Woodshed was never intended to be a temporary object, Robert Smithson donated it to the University with the appraisal to allow it to decompose in a natural way. [26] And it would probably happen, if six months later during the antiwar protests, the National Guard would not shoot four
8
Robert Smithson Partially Buried Woodshed. 1970 Kent University, Kent, Ohio As seen in 1982 One woodshed and twenty truckloads of earth 18’6” x 10’2” x 45’
9
Art’s Multiple Sites” in Ends of the Earth: Land Art to 1974 (Los Angeles, California: Museum of Contemporary art, Los Angeles; Munich: Haus der Kunst; New York: distributed by Prestel, 2012), 116 26 Shinn, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed, 2 27 Allen J. Matusow, Nixon’s Economy: Booms, Busts, Dollars and Votes (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1998), 69, quoting Newsweek, 18 May 1970 28 Katherine Kerrigan, “An Unintended monument: The Afterlife of Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed”, Montague 05, 2011, p.38 29 Alex Gildzen, Interview on 17 April, 1984 quoted in Dorothy Shinn, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed, (Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984), 5 30 Jennifer Mundy, “Lost Art: Robert Smithson” in The Gallery of Lost Art, 1 October 2012, available online http:// www.tate.org.uk/ context-comment/ articles/gallerylost-art-robertsmithson accessed 03.12.2014
unarmed students in the Kent State University. The tragedy, which happened on May 4th, was a very influential and significant event in the life of the whole society. John Lindsay, who was the New York Mayor at that time, said that the country at the moment was on the edge of a spiritual and a physical breakdown. [27] During the period when the University was closed somebody painted on the Woodshed MAY 4 KENT 70 with white paint. After that the object became irrevocably linked with this tragedy and became an unofficial [28] and unintended monument.
Alex Gildzen in his interview from 1984 said that: “Had it not been for these few strokes of white paint, one wonders if the Woodshed might not have been left to rot in relative quiet”. [29] But due to all these events the further destiny of the artwork caused a lot of controversy. The object became an unofficial point of pilgrimage of the students and the visitors, its declining form and cracked central beam became a metaphor of the break in the society[30] and in the political system [31]:
Obviously, the students, or whoever did the graffiti – it’s an example of graffiti
that enhances – the students obviously recognized the parallel. Piling the earth until the central beam cracked as though the whole government, the whole country were cracking. Really, we had a revolution then it was the end of one society and the beginning of the next. [32]
Robert Smithson tragically died in 1973 and two years after someone set the Partially Buried Woodshed on fire, which eventually destroyed the left half of the object. Before that, the University administration was uncertain about the object’s destiny, as some of the officials proposed to create a memorial site with a proper public access, whereas others wanted to preserve the work untouched. [33] After the fire, the general mood changed and the artwork was
10
31 Ann Reynolds, Robert Smithson: Learning from New Jersey and Elsewhere (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2003), 205 32 Nancy Holt, Interview on April 23, 1984 quoted in Dorothy Shinn, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed, (Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984), 5 33 Boettger, Earthworks: Art and the Landscape in the Sixties, 200 34 William Bierman, “Burn the Woodshed! Spare the Woodshed!” Beacon Magazine, Akron Beacon Journal, July 7. 1975, p 6 35 Alex Gildzen, Interview on 17 April, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed 36 Bierman, “Burn the Woodshed! Spare the Woodshed!”, p6 37 Alex Gildzen, Interview on 17 April, 1984 quoted in Dorothy Shinn, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed, (Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984) 38 Robert Smithson, “The Artist and Pol-
considered to be an eyesore which also embodied challenging and embarrassing memories. [34] The artist’s wife, Nancy Holt, visited the site after the fire and made several suggestions on how to reinforce the Woodshed in order to preserve the object. But this advice was not taken into consideration properly, probably because of the fact that Alex Gildzen mentioned in his interview: “[there were] certain University administrators who were to stand against the piece’s preservation.” [35]
As William Bierman points out in his essay, Burn the Woodshed! Spare the Woodshed!, the exact date of the object’s final destruction is not known. The main wooden structure kept cracking, the beams fell on the ground and were cleaned during the routine maintenance works on the campus territory. The fact of its complete disappearance (only the foundation and part of the wall left) was not noticed until February 1984. [36]
The object created by an artist has become deeply symbolical due to the events which happened in physical and historical proximity to it. The artist’s wife, Nancy Holt, mentioned in her letter to Alex Gildzen that she believed the Woodshed was “intrinsically political” and that the artist himself considered his work as “prophetic”.[37] At the same time, the questionnaire published in the September 1970 issue of Artforum is the evidence of the artist’s indifference regarding any political implications of his work: “The artist does not have to will a response to the deepening political crisis in America. Sooner or later the artist is implicated and/or devoured by politics without even trying....” [38]
Partially Buried Woodshed became an iconic work and an unofficial object of pilgrimage. Brinsley Tyrrell said in his interview on March 22, 1984: “It picked up a pretty good history. While it stood, anyone who knew anything about art wanted to see it.” [39] The University rejected [40] all other projects on the memo-
11
itics: A Symposium”, Artforum 9 (September 1970), 35
rials of the tragic events of May 4, 1970, such as George Segal’s project of the
39 Brinsley Tyrell, Interview on March 22, 1984 as quoted in Dorothy Shinn, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed, (Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984)
shed was the only object commemorating the tragedy, although this function
bronze sculpture depicting Abraham sacrificing Isaac; therefore the Wood-
was not authorised by an artist himself. [41] As Suzaan Boettger described it in her book: “Artistically, it [was] a public monument to disorder, perhaps better stated as a monument to a public disorder.” [42]
40 Kent State University Libraries special collections website quotes George Segal explaining that: “There is a strong connection in my mind between the image of Abraham and Isaac and the killings at Kent State” Segal explains. “It’s an attempt to introduce difficult moral and ethical questions as to how older people should behave toward their children.” See http://www.library. kent.edu/abrahamand-isaac accessed 05.12.2014 41 Kerrigan, “An Unintended monument: The Afterlife of Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed” 42 Boettger, Earthworks: Art and the Landscape in the Sixties, 2
12
Robert Smithson Partially Buried Woodshed. 1970 Kent University, Kent, Ohio Remains of the object
13
Missing memorial to missing people: Sol LeWitt’s Black Form, 1987, Münster, Germany
43 Sol LeWitt, “Paragraphs on Conceptual Art”, Artforum (Summer 1967), p. 80
The ideas need no to be complex. Most ideas that are successful are ludicrously simple. Successful ideas generally have the appearance of simplicity because they seem inevitable. [43]
Seventeen years later than the Partially Buried Woodshed was created and just three years after it completely disappeared, the American geometric minimalist Sol LeWitt created a memorial in Münster as a part of Germany’s “Skulptur Projekte 87”. The object consisted of a large cube of black stones in the middle of the baroque square in front of the Münster palace. James E.
44 Young, The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, 9
45 Young, The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, 17
46 Sol LeWitt, Critical Texts, (Rome: Lubri de AEIUO: Incontri Internazionali d’Arte, 1994) [Reprinted form Art in America, New York, Summer 1966], 72
47 Kate M. Sellers, “Foreword” in Sol LeWitt: Incomplete open Cubes ed. by Nicholas Baume (Hartford, Conn.: Wadsworth Atheneum Museum of Art; Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2001), 7
Young, in his book The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, compares it to an abandoned coffin left in the middle of the “sunny and graceful University square”. [44]
The monument was entitled Black Form dedicated to the “missing Jews of Münster.” [45] The cube consisted of small units referring to the earlier works of the artist. Sol LeWitt mentioned his preference to this geometric form in one of his Critical texts:
The most interesting characteristic of the cube is that it is relatively uninteresting. Compared to any other three-dimensional form, the cube lacks any aggressive force, implies no motion, and is least emotive. [46]
According to the artist, this geometric form was a basic grammar unit and was universally understood, self-sufficient and immediately recognized. Sol LeWitt, who was considered as a pioneer of minimal and conceptual art in the 1960’s-1970’s [47] , did not chose such a shape for his commemorative sculpture
14
randomly. It was an attempt to create the memorial which would reveal the challenging events of the past on a very abstract level, in other words to create 48 Young, The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, 18
49 LeWitt, Critical Texts, 88
a Holocaust memorial which would not violate the public space.[48] The conceptual artists made an attempt to turn away from the representativeness in their works. As Sol LeWitt defined it in his Sentences of Conceptual Art: “Conceptual artists are mystics rather than rationalists. They leap to conclusions that logic cannot reach.” [49]
The contrast between the external asceticism of the sculpture and the flamboyant environment that surrounded it developed with the time. The Black Form was eventually covered with graffiti. The local population was very unhappy with the structure installed by the artist because it spoiled the integrity of the square, was a barrier for the traffic and the chauffeurs from the 50 Young, The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, 17
university administration were complaining that it was creating difficulties for them to park and turn their cars. [50]
Due to this reaction, one year later the sculpture was demolished by the jackhammer crew of the University. James E. Young described it in his book 51 Young, The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, 18
concluding that “absent people [were] commemorated by an absent monument”. [51] Compared to the previous case with the Partially Buried Woodshed this monument was created intentionally, but it also received an unpredictable and uncontrolled reaction from the local community and was actively disliked by the local authorities in the end.
It was not Sol LeWitt’s only experience with the creation of the memorials. Seventeen years later, in 2005 he created an object for a Synagogue Stommeln in Pulheim. It was a sound space-installation titled Lost Voices, consisting of a high wall extending through a sacred space in the synagogue. It blocked two-thirds of this space and was described as on object that created an expe-
15
52 Sol LeWitt, Lost Voices, 29 May 2005, in Synagogue Stommeln archive available online http://www.synagoge-stommeln.de/ indexph
rience of enclosure, of being locked in or locked out. [52]
53 See Andre’s note in Carl Andre Stommeln Synagogue, exhib. cat. (Koln: Walther, 1997) quoted in Alistair Rider, Carl Andre: Things in their Elements, (London; New York: Phaidon Press, 2011), 224
people through the metaphor of absence: “<…> The void at the centre stood
54 Young, The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning, 18
Remarkably, another famous minimalist sculptor, Carl Andre, also created an object for this synagogue in 1997 – The Void Enclosed by the Squares of Three, Four and Five which similarly to the Black Form commemorated missing
for the palpable physical absence of the Jewish People who once worshipped here.” [53]
Unlike in the Partially Buried Woodshed, the local authorities changed their mind regarding the Black Form, as eight months later the local council asked the artist to recreate his piece, known as ‘wall-work’ [54] , in a new place which the sculptor agreed to do. Black Form created by Sol LeWitt represented “the paradoxical experi-
55 Nicholas Baume, “The Music of Forgetting”, in Sol LeWitt: Incomplete open Cubes ed. by Nicholas Baume (Hartford, Conn.: Wadsworth Atheneum Museum of Art; Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2001), 20
ence of an aesthetic affirmation generated through negation”[55] as Nicholas Baume described it in his essay The Music of Forgetting. But at the same time its abstract form referenced the artist’s own geometrical language, in the same way as Partially Buried Woodshed referenced the ideas of land art.
Black Form as well as Partially Buried Shed could be considered as architectural objects and landscape forms at the same time. This multi-polarity, described by Rosalind Krauss in her essay Sculpture in the Expanded field, was probably one of the factors creating this disturbing effect on the general public: “They were part of a universe or cultural space in which sculpture was simply another part – no somehow, as our historicist minds would have it, the
56 Krauss, “Sculpture in the Expanded Field”, 339
same. Their purpose and pleasure is exactly that they [were] opposite and different.” [56]
16
Sol LeWitt Black Form Dedicated to the Missing Jews. 1987 Munster, Germany Reinstalled in Hemburg, Germany in 1989
17
Conclusion: Even in Arcadia there is death - even in death there is Arcadia Here, then we have the occupant of the tomb substituted for the tomb itself, and the whole phrase projected into the past: what had been a menace has become a remembrance. [57] 57 Erwin Panofsky, ’Et in Arcadia Ego’: Poussin and the Elegiac Tradition [1936] Meaning in the visual arts, (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1970), 260
In terms of the analysis conveyed, it might be helpful to turn to James E. Young’s book again to bring the clarity in the terminological issue. The author makes a distinction between the terms ‘monument’ and ‘memorial’, concluding that although the meaning of both terms is blurred nowadays and they are often used as synonyms, there is a common idea that ‘monuments’ are created as celebratory markers of triumph and victories and these ‘memorials’ are used to commemorate or glorify the dead.
Both of the sculptural objects described in this essay are closely intertwined with the idea of commemorating the death. Not a glorious death on a battlefield but a tragic assassination of unarmed people in an unimaginable, 58 Jonathan Jones, “Too many memories?”, The Guardian, Friday 26 January 2007, available online http://www. theguardian.com/ artanddesign/2007/ jan/26/architecture accessed 03.12.2014”
incongruous and violent event. The abstractedness of the both pieces turns out by creating a deeply dramatic effect [58] like the phenomena described by Jonathan Jones in his article Too many memories? Both Black Form and Partially buried Woodshed are under the sign of Thanatos: hidden gravestones in the lively places. Probably the vanitas character of these memorials was the main reason for explaining negative public reaction to them. They had the same elegiac quality, which was underlined by Erwin Panofsky in his analysis of Poussin’s Et in Arcadia Ego and the work of art that brought such controversial
59 Panofsky, Meaning in the visual arts, 261
feelings “depressing and melancholy on one hand, comforting and assuaging on the other”. [59]
Being intrinsically abstract, both of these works were a permanent subconscious reminder of the proximity of death and injustice, memento mori, expressed in a language of the late twentieth century.
18
Nicholas Poussin Et in Arcadia Ego (Les Bergers dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Arcadie). 1639 Paris, France Musee du Louvre
19
Bibliography:
Alberro, Alexander. Conceptual Art and the Politics of Publicity. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2003 Alloway, Lawrence. “Robert Smithson’s Development,” Artforum. November 1972 Andre, Carl. Carl Andre: Stommeln Synagogue, exhib. cat. Koln: Walther, 1997 Baume, Nicholas. “The Music of Forgetting”, in Sol LeWitt: Incomplete open Cubes ed. by Nicholas Baume. Hartford, Conn.: Wadsworth Atheneum Museum of Art; Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2001 Bierman, William. “Burn the Woodshed! Spare the Woodshed!” Beacon Magazine, July 7, 1975 Boettger, Suzaan. Earthworks: Art and the Landscape in the Sixties. Berkley: University of California Press, 2002 Doezema, Marianne. “The Public Monument in tradition and Transition”, in The Public Monument and Its Audience. Cleveland: Cleveland Museum of Art, 1977 Gildzen, Alex. Interview on 17 April, 1984 quoted in Dorothy Shinn, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed. Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984 Glidzen, Alex. “Partially Buried Woodshed: A Robert Smithson Log,” Arts Magazine, Special Issue: Robert Smithson. May 1978 Holert, Tom. “Land Art’s Multiple Sites” in Ends of the Earth: Land Art to 1974. Los An geles, California: Museum of Contemporary art, Los Angeles; Munich: Haus der Kunst; New York: distributed by Prestel, 2012 Holt, Nancy. Interview on April 23, 1984 quoted in Dorothy Shinn, Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed. Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984 Jones, Jonathan. “Too many memories?”, The Guardian. Friday 26 January 2007. Available online http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2007/jan/26/archi
20
tecture accessed 03.12.2014
Kerrigan, Katherine. “An Unintended monument: The Afterlife of Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed”, Montague 05, 2011 Krauss, Rosalind. The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths. Cambridge, Mass.; London: Yale University Press, 1988 Krauss, Rosalind. “Sculpture in the Expanded Field” [1978] in Modern Sculpture Reader ed. by Jon Wood, David Hulks and Alex Potts. Leeds: Henry Moore Institute, 2007 Lefebvre, Henri. The Production of Space [1974], translated by Donald Nichol son-Smith. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991 LeWitt, Sol. “Paragraphs on Conceptual Art”, Artforum. Summer 1967 LeWitt, Sol. Critical Texts. Rome: Lubri de AEIUO: Incontri Internazionali d’Arte, 1994 Magazine. July 7, 1975 Martin, Richard. “Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed”, Arts 59, no.1. Septem ber, 1984 Matusow, Allen. J. Nixon’s Economy: Booms, Busts, Dollars and Votes. Lawrence: Uni versity Press of Kansas, 1998 Morris, Robert. “Keynote Address”, in Earhworks: Land Reclamation as Sculpture: a Project of the King County Arts Comission. Seattle: Seattle Art Museum, 1979 Mundy, Jennifer. “Lost Art: Robert Smithson” in The Gallery of Lost Art, 1 October 2012. Available online http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/articles/gallery-lost- art-robert-smithson accessed 03.12.2014 Padgett, Jennifer. “Robert Smithson” in Notations: Contemporary drawing as Idea and Process. Available online http://notations.aboutdrawing.org/category/jenni fer-padgett/ accessed 03.12.2014 Panofsky, Erwin. “’Et in Arcadia Ego’: Poussin and the Elegiac Tradition” [1936] Meaning
21
in the visual arts. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1970
Reynolds, Ann. Robert Smithson: Learning from New Jersey and Elsewhere. Cam bridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2003 Rider, Alistair. Carl Andre: Things in their Elements. London; New York: Phaidon Press, 2011 Riegl, Alois. “The modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin” in Alois Riegl: art history and theory. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1993 Sellers, Kate M. “Foreword” in Sol LeWitt: Incomplete open Cubes ed. by Nicholas Baume. Hartford, Conn.: Wadsworth Atheneum Museum of Art; Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2001 Shinn, Dorothy. Robert Smithson’s Partially Buried Woodshed. Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984 Smithson, Robert. “The Artist and Politics: A Symposium”, Artforum 9. September 1970 Smithson, Robert. “Untitled, 1971,” in The Writings of Robert Smithson, ed. Nancy Holt. New York: New York University Press, 1979 Tyrell, Brinsley. Interview on March 22, 1984 as quoted in Dorothy Shinn, Robert Smith son’s Partially Buried Woodshed. Kent, OH: School of Art Galleries, 1984 Young, James E. The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning. New Haven, CT; London: Yale University Press, 1993
22