The gargantuan granite rock described in my previous article as destined to become "Levitated Mass" -- an earthwork art exhibit by Michael Heizer -- may serve a dual purpose.
Whether or not this boulder ultimately is accepted as art by everyone, the mere fact of its being displayed in a levitated manner may arouse interest in the levitation concept as a viable architectural safety feature for homes subject to earthquakes.
Regarding the boulder as art, comments on my previous post were less than sanguine that this gigantic stone should be considered such, and from one reader, other than "just a rock." This was also another instance warranting a comment suggesting what constitutes art lies in the eye of the beholder.
Perhaps this boulder exhibit's value may also, or instead, lie in stimulating interest in the levitation concept.
The levitation idea has led me to explore related information with potential significance for earthquake resistant housing. The Japanese are building housing using a levitating system intended to protect homes from earthquakes as described in this Inhabitat link.
Note the Los Angeles County Museum of Art expects to unveil "Levitated Mass" later this year.
Consider this report from KPCC Public Radio:
"The estimated cost for the project is 10 million dollars. The boulder itself was sold to LACMA for around $70,000 and it [crept] through Southern California at night on a football field-sized transport valued around 5 million dollars."
Private funds and no taxpayer dollars are reported to have been expended on this project. Future generations perspective may best assess how worthwhile this endeavor has been.
I love the rock but question the wisdom of spending tax payer dollars on it. I know the arts need public funding to survive, but children need hot lunches and the fire department needs hoses. We can argue until we are blue in the face. The rock will lift the spirits of children. On and on it goes. Dianne
ReplyDeleteI think you're overlooking the fact that the money isn't eaten by the rock. It goes somewhere. It goes to the construction workers, the engineers, the transporters etc. Even if it were public tax dollars, it would have been spent on job creation regardless.
DeleteIt comes down to priorities. I am a huge supporter of the arts but when people can't afford their basic needs and infrastructure is crumbling, I question the expense and wisdom of such funding.
ReplyDeleteSchmidley and Kay: You both must have misunderstood what I wrote: "...NO TAXPAYER DOLLARS are reported to have been expended on this project..." so there's no argument about unjust public fund expenditures. Whether or not the private investors should have used their own money for this project is another matter.
ReplyDeleteI'm simply suggesting the levitated mass may have possible significant value in focusing attention on, and contributing to knowledge about levitation for application to architectural safety against earthquakes.
The Japanese earthquake frequency, including the major one that was followed by last year's catastrophic tsunami, motivate them to research ways to insure building safety. Californians definitely, but other states too (including Virginia and Ohio) could benefit from such knowledge as I recall the unsettling East Coast tremors in recent years -- think D.C., the seat of our government, and the huge populace of New York City.
Yes, you are correct. I did miss the part about 'no tax payer dollars.'
DeleteWonderful. Yes, we've had a tremor or two. Private funds now used to repair the National Cathedral, but Washington Monument repair will come from dollars in the Park Service budget (along with repair of damage from OWS in Layfayette Park).
And yeah, I saw that it isn't costing me a cent and it promptly took a walk from my brain. That said, I say "Go for it!!"
ReplyDeleteThanks for calling me on this.
It is hard to assess this at this point, BUT, Me Thinks it is an awful lot of money for this Boulder---raised privately or not....!
ReplyDeleteThink of the numbers of people who could be fed and clothed and housed with this money.....I know "ART" is important, truly I do. But I need some more evidence about this Boulder before I am willing to say it is worth the 10 Million it is costing whomever.
Kay: Just wanted to make sure you knew public funds were not used on the rock project. As for the private funds spent in light of human needs -- 10 million dollars could do a lot.
ReplyDeleteOldOldLady: Me Thinks there might not be a definitive answer, just questions -- what's "art"? -- is any art worth 10 million dollars -- what criteria should private individuals/groups consider when donating funds? -- are there any redeeming features to this project?
History has shown us some ideas appear to be wasted mistakes and remain so. Other ideas appear to not be worthwhile, but later prove to be of value and, sometimes, even more so than ever thought.
That's a lot of money; but I'm glad to see it isn't being asked to come out of the taxpayer's pocket. I guess my criteria for a project like this would be as you say....is it worthwhile and valuable?
ReplyDeleteDid you see Avatar?
ReplyDeleteHattie: No, I did not see Avatar. Guess it was spectacular, so may see it eventually. Think it might be most enjoyable viewed on a large screen.
DeleteI confess to the snide remark about the boulder just being a rock. I saw a rock standing on edge in the Japanese area in L. A. years ago and I had the same feeling. I guess I like my nature art where is originated. Sorry I don't appreciate the artistic value. It goes with my pragmatic nature I think.
ReplyDeleteI do see the value in levitation as related to earth quakes. My daughter once worked in a bank in Pasadena that had been built to withstand earthquakes. She said it was a weird feeling to be in the upper story and feel the floor move beneath her. It frightened her at first until they explained the reason for the movement.
Appreciated your comment as I was curious about how everyone might react to the whole idea of this rock exhibit as art, especially considering the monies dedicated to the creation. I tried to present the issues in a manner non-prejudicial to any point of view, as I often do with topics I introduce here. Also, I wanted to avoid influencing responses by adamantly stating my own opinion. My intent always is that everyone would feel free to civilly speak their mind knowing I won't be offended, as I wasn't with your or any one else's comment.
ReplyDeletePrimarily, I have curiosity about this LACMA exhibit, as I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the whole concept of earthwork art. I most appreciate nature's naturally created earthwork, like the Grand Canyon, a special favorite of mine on many levels. Interestingly, an acquaintance who finally visited the Canyon for the first time a few years ago had quite a different reaction. She returned to announce: "I don't know what the big deal is -- it's just a hole in the ground."
What I can't visualize is a "football field sized transport" moving through Los Angeles! ????
ReplyDeleteI don't wonder about whether this levitating rock will qualify as art once it's completed in place--I couldn't imagine Christo and Jeanne-Claude's Central Park Gates project, either. It sounded like something totally dumb and posturing--but when I saw it, it blew my mind (heh). I have half a dozen photos of the Gates on my dining room wall, and they never fail to move or inspire me. Also, I adore LACMA. Anything they want to do is fine with me. So it cost a bucket of $$--way cheaper, probably, than just one of those drones we fling around at defenseless people.
P.S. I'm with Darlene in that I'm not sure I'd walk under it! :)
ReplyDeleteExtreme English: Yeah, that transport system pictured in the video is partially what brought so many people out to see the megalith's journey.
ReplyDeleteI've seen other earthworks only on video screens, but can imagine they would be visually overwhelming in person. Christo's Gates "blew your mind (heh)" (I wondered what happened.....) The follow-up "arrival" post next, will include a video giving an overall look at that transport.