Category Archives: Sculpture 2

Overall Evaluation

Learning Journey

I feel I have come a long way in my journey through this course. At the outset of the course I was enjoying producing sculptures but had not developed a style that was mine. I feel that I have now started to develop that style and have a much clearer view on the direction in which I am taking my work. I have more confidence with my main working materials of bronze and steel and have challenged myself to produce ambitious work.

I now have two main bodies of work that I am going to develop further, my map tiles and my pollen/microscopic sculptures.

Throughout level 1 I had completed the research elements of the course in a perfunctory way and it was a noticeable weakness in my results. In this course I have carried out research in more depth, have begun to enjoy it more, incorporate it into my work, and now appreciate the benefits of carrying this out well.

I still need to do more to address my other weakness which is in my drawings, moving on to study drawing 2 is therefore daunting, but hopefully will be beneficial to me.

Selected work

Part 1 – ‘Resurgence’ from my project work included. This piece has more presence and a stronger form than the other work, it also fits better with my other work in using rusted steel. Assignment 1 piece ‘Sanctuary’ included in supporting work.

Part 2 – No work from this stage is included in my selected work. The project work I completed for this section was not all successful, ‘Wing’ was too contrived, the bronze sphere in ‘Box’ worked well, but the sculpture as a whole was less successful, ‘Untitled’ (included in supporting work) worked the best and was a precursor to my Assignment 3 piece. My assignment piece ‘Target’ is the piece that worked best in this section, but as it doesn’t fit with my other work I have included it in my supporting work.

Part 3 – ‘Organic abstraction’ was chosen from my project work as a successful translation of my initial drawn idea and although different to my developing style, still similar in the use of steel and bronze (or plaster painted to look like bronze). ‘Organic carving’ is submitted as supporting work as it had a fairly successful outcome, but I didn’t feel that it contained any meaning for me. The assignment piece ‘Untitled’ had some issues in the design and construction of the piece, but the form and concept work well. This work led on to ‘Decaying pollen 2’ which was completed after the assignment and is now part of a body of work I am developing.

Part 4 – I produced a series of 8 sculptures for this stage so have just selected two of the original assignment pieces ‘Conistone Moor’ and ‘Howgills’. I have also included development work completed after the assignment was submitted in ‘Fractured Landscape’, the start of a new series I am developing.

Part 5 – I completed 4 sculptures for this section and have included all of these except ‘Animalcule 1’, which was not as successful as the other three due to the internal forms used.

All these works are being submitted digitally, with the exception of ‘Conistone Moor’ which I will post.

Posted in Assessment | Leave a comment

Work Submitted

Body of Work

01 Resurgence 03 Organic abstraction03 A3 Untitled 03 A3D Decaying pollen 2 04 A4 Conistone 04 A4 Howgills04 A4D Fractured landscape 05 A5 Captured Passion05 A5 Animalcule 205 A5 Animalcule 3

Supporting Work

01 Assignment 1 Sanctuary 02 Stage 2 Project Untitled 03 Assignment 2 Target 04 Stage 3 Project Organic Carving

Posted in Assessment | Leave a comment

Assignment 5 – Follow-up

Animalcule 3 was unfinished at the time of submitting my assignment, it had the steel and bronze is a raw state. This looked good for this sculpture, but wouldn’t stay in that state, the steel would rust (quickly if displayed outdoors) and the bronze would slowly colour over time.

I liked the colours in the raw state pieces, so I started out by painting the steel silver. I then made the mistake of patinating the bronzes mostly in a blue colour. Some of them went a bit brown in colour and these work better, but the blue ones don’t provide enough contrast between the two different colourings.

A3 revised 1A3 revised 2 A3 revised 3 A3 revised 4

I think I need to strip the bronzes back and re-patinate them a brown colour. I’ll not be able to do that until after assessment though, so I will submit my original unpainted/patinated pictures and video.

Posted in Assignment 5 | Leave a comment

Map Tile Follow-up Drawings

I developed some more ideas for map tiles, covering issues such as desertification, flooding, drought, etc.

MapTileDev1 MapTileDev2 MapTileDev3 MapTileDev4MapTileDev5 MapTileDev6 MapTileDev7 MapTileDev8MapTileDev9

Posted in Assignment 4, Assignment 6 | Leave a comment

Assignment 5 – Tutor Feedback

Looking at the work I had produced for this assignment, my tutor made the following comments:

Work well as a body of ambitious work. Have more of a sculptural sense about them that my previous map tile work.

‘Captured passion’ – whilst the grid is interesting and the patina works well, the pollen sphere is too placed and ‘pretty’.

‘Animalcule 1’ – the steel form has the form of a scientific vessel and this theme could be played on more? Of the 3 animalcule sculptures, this is the one which needs more work.

‘Animalcule 2’ – The canvas softens the steel and works well with it, but perhaps the wiring could be made more of (too delicate at the moment)? It is like a zeppelin and has the feel of wanting to travel.

‘Animalcule 3’ – This is very dynamic looking, with animation in the way the internal bronze elements travel around the steel structure. This has much more confidence in working with the materials and placement of the forms.

My research is OK as far as it goes, but it needs to be more fully integrated in my processes. I need to broaden my reflections and identify the areas I need to work on more. I also need to make notes on what I am reading, comment on the work and how it could be used. Need more clarity and more depth. I also need to broaden my reflections


My tutor suggested I research and comment on the following:

Isomorphology by Gemma Anderson

This is a fascinating little book by Gemma Anderson. She has obviously spent a lot of time drawing different specimens to come to the conclusion that forms can be compared based on their basic form.

The fact that animal, vegetable and mineral forms can be classified in a similar way is interesting, but the most interesting points for me are:

  1. Following a line of thought in great depth can lead to interesting results – I will take this forward with my pollen work, dedicate a sketchbook to this work and follow it in as many different ways as I can think of.

  2. Combining science and nature can work well – this may form the basis of my third stage project.

  3. Drawings can be very simple (her bold coloured outline drawings), or detailed (her etchings) and still work. I had this discussion with my tutor earlier in the course that the notes often push towards the free expressive marks, but that these don’t work for everyone – myself included.

Place by Tacita Dean and J Millar.

I will research this book in relation to the stage 6 essay

On Growth and Form by D’Arcy Thompson

Having only got through the introduction and first chapter of this book so far, I also looked at the Henry Moor Institute Essays on Sculpture 70, which is about the influence that this book has had on sculptors (Hammer et al., 2014).

Thompson’s principle theory was that the growth and form of living creatures could be explained using the laws of mathematics. His ideas were very controversial and none more than his ‘Theory of Transformations’ – the idea that physical forces could account for differences between different species. The diagrams he produced to show this were very convincing and influenced Henry Moore to produce his ‘Transformation Drawings’.

Naum Gabo believed in an alliance between science and art and was also heavily influenced by Thompson, particularly his work on shells.

Richard Hamilton was the sculptor whose work directly referenced Thompson’s book in his 1951 exhibition of the same name, which presented objects which translated Thompson’s diagrams into three dimensions and mixed sculptural items with scientific objects.

Other artists who were influenced include:

  • Herbert Read
  • Ben Nicholson
  • Barbara Hepworth
  • Jackson Pollock
  • Mark Bickers
  • Charlotte Sale

This shows what a huge impact his book had on artists and sculptors in particular because of his focus on shape and form. This influence is obviously still continuing in inspiring Gemma Anderson with her work. I shall keep reading and see where it takes me.

From the introduction to the 1961 abridged edition of ‘On Growth and Form’ I bought, this is attributed to the fact that ‘it is good literature as well as good science; it is a discourse on science as though it is a humanity’ (Thompson and Bonner, 1961, p.viii). This seems more common nowadays, so as more and more science is explained in this way, the link between science and nature will no doubt only strengthen.

Science is obviously influencing my own work and I am interested to take my pollen work forwards, looking at the effects of genetic modification of crops. I can’t find any images of GM pollen, so I could work on combining images of bacteria and pollen, then use some of the principles in this book to distort/modify these and develop the work in this way. This could be an interesting project to take forwards to level 3.


Hammer, M., Jarron, M., Kemp, M. and Le Feuvre, L. (2014). D’Arcy Thompson’s “On growth and form”. Leeds: Henry Moore Foundation.

Thompson, D. and Bonner, J. (1961). On growth and form. Abridged Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Posted in Assignment 5 | Leave a comment

Assignment 6 – Tutor Feedback

I had an encouraging tutorial for this assignment and seem to be heading in the right direction with my essay. I have many notes on how to tweak it, my main stumbling block is adding in my tutor’s suggestions whilst keeping it below the 2,000 word count. I only hope I have cropped out the right bits!

For my next level 2 course I need to deepen my research and its application to my work as I go through the course. I also need to ensure I have primary research as part of my next essay. It will be interesting to see what comments I get from assessment to add to my list of ways to improve.

I need to do some more drawings in relation to my map work for the assessment.


My tutor suggested I research and comment on the following:

Whistler’s “arrangement in White and Yellow” 1883 in relation to the movement towards displaying art in minimal spaces.

Whistler’s exhibition ‘Arrangement on White and Yellow’ was staged at a time when the usual method of displaying art works was the salon hang, with pictures crammed together, occupying the majority of the wall space, on bold painted walls and framed in large gilded frames. Whistler’s exhibition went completely against that principle, framing the works in thin white frames, spacing them out, painting the walls white to merge into the frames – an arrangement we would be very familiar with today. In addition to this, he turned the exhibition into a performance, affecting the quality of the light with yellow drapes, adorning guests with yellow satin and velvet butterflies and an attendant dressed in white and yellow to match the gallery theme. Such a significant change in display challenged the established way of displaying artwork, caused great publicity for his exhibition and led to the minimalistic gallery environments we now all expect.

Rosner, V. (2005). Modernism and the architecture of private life. New York: Columbia University Press.

The Fine Art Society. (2017). James McNeill Whistler. [online] Available at: [Accessed 11 Aug. 2017].

Olafur Eliasson in conversation with Tim Marlow

This is a fascinating talk that I think will take me some time to digest fully. Some interesting points I noted:

Regarding space in works – do they celebrate your movement through them, or try to alienate you for moving? – In Olafur’s case, definitely the former.

People come into galleries to take a closer look at the world. They heighten people’s senses.

In his works, he wants to encourage shared experiences that people see differently – he sees their disagreement as a positive thing, to be celebrated and embraced. Certainly when looking at ‘place’ as I am, no two people will experience or remember it in the same way.

He gives the responsibility of finishing his art works to the viewer. He trusts them and gives them the confidence to experience them fully and make the works their own.

Royal Academy of Arts (2016). Olafur Eliasson in Conversation with Tim Marlow. Available at: [Accessed 11 Aug. 2017].

Posted in Assignment 6 | Leave a comment

How do sculptors evoke a sense of place in a gallery environment?


Mapping is a theme that has been present in my work for many years. The idea of representing a landscape on a flat surface fascinates me, as does the history the features can reveal.

Conistone 2Howgills 3

Mark Butler, Conistone, 2016 and Howgills, 2016

Through working on a series of map based sculptures, the subject of place came to the fore. I produced sculptures that started out by depicting the topography accurately, before adding found objects or more abstract marks. They were successful, but they might benefit from concentrating on the emotional response the landscape evokes rather than any accuracy to the terrain/features being depicted. Researching this subject will help me to decide on the future direction of this body of work.

What does ‘evoke a sense of place’ mean when it comes to sculpture?

Evoke means the appearance of feelings about something, to ‘bring or recall (a feeling, memory, or image) to the conscious mind’ (Oxford Dictionaries | English, 2017).

Place has many meanings, but it does seem to imply a specific location. A sense of place is ‘hard to define with any satisfaction’ (Dean and Millar, 2005, p.17), but means a location which has a feeling of being special in some way, it is an emotional response.

So evoking a sense of place involves triggering an emotional response and will therefore be different for each individual. Tacita Dean says ‘the artist can evoke a place that will always only exist as a memory of another place in the mind of the viewer’ (Dean and Millar, 2005, pp.182 – 192). In sculpture this might take the form of a large scale installation which places the viewer in a new special place, possibly also evoking memories of similar locations from the viewer’s past, or smaller works to which the viewer would travel in their minds eye which might be more in the realms of the imagination.

Why do I want to examine work in a ‘gallery environment’?

White walled galleries are used to provide a blank canvas, a void like atmosphere in which no distractions are present (, 2017). Brian O’ Doherty (1999, p.15) describes the design purpose of the modern gallery spaces is that ‘The outside world must not come in’.

Bringing the outside into a space specifically designed to keep it out is an interesting and challenging idea.

On the other hand, an outside location already has its own sense of place, so using the vacuum of a gallery environment allows the viewer to focus purely on the sense of place the sculptor is trying to evoke.

I will examine two artists: one who uses installation to bring the outside environment into galleries and another who produces landscapes on a smaller scale.


A number of artists import natural materials into the gallery environment to blur the lines between outside and inside. An early example of this is Walter de Maria’s, ‘The New York Earth Room, 1977’ (Foundation, 2017) where Maria imported 197 cubic meters of earth and spread it evenly over the floor of a white walled gallery space.

More recently the work of Olafur Eliasson brings elements of the outside into the gallery environment and creates a sense of place within them. ‘The Weather Project, 2003’ consisted of a giant ‘sun’ made out of hundreds of mono-frequency lamps, a mirrored ceiling, and haze machines producing a fine mist atmosphere. Over ten years later, ‘Riverbed, 2014’ created a rock landscape and stream inside a gallery.


Olafur Eliasson, Riverbed, 2014 (changeorder, 2015)

Eliasson’s work considers what is ‘natural’ and how our experience of nature, natural phenomena and landscape is actually cultural. To engage viewers with this question, his installations are created in a way that enables people to see the construction techniques used. ‘The Weather Project’ allowed viewers to walk behind the ‘sun’ and see how it was made (Tate, 2003); ‘Riverbed’ was obviously a built landscape because of its setting in a gallery. He wants to make it clear how his installations are made so the viewer can question what they are experiencing (Collins, 2014).

Both pieces invite more interaction than purely observation, with the visitors having an impact on the work as they pass through it, or actively interacting with it. Many of the reviewers point towards the freedom in this work from the usual rules of engagement in a museum environment. The installation removes the ‘rules’ of a gallery experience and ‘there is no expected way to act within or experience the space, allowing for freedom of reflection, thought, sensory experience, and sense of self.’ (Quddus, 2014), others find ‘something disorienting about a piece that so openly invites intervention’ (Secher, 2014). These reviews were about ‘Riverbed’, but looking at the videos of ‘The Weather Project’, the same seems to be the case for this installation.

‘Riverbed’ can be seen as contemplative in a similar way to the layout of a Japanese garden, it is monochromatic and simplistic, with a peaceful stream flowing through it. Conversely it can also be viewed as sinister and destructive, the barren and lifeless landscape imposing itself on the gallery like a scene of devastation or ‘a post-apocalyptic environment’ (Coghlan, 2015). Eliasson is interested in how people can shift between the two perceptions dependent on their mood and the impact of the people around them (Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, 2014).

It is hard to know what my response to this work would be without being able to experience it, but I think I would find it oppressive. The sterile nature of the landscape in the equally sterile gallery environment would find me relieved to escape into the outside world. However I experienced it, both ways of viewing it detailed above are strong emotional responses, so would therefore evoke a strong sense of place. Interacting with and contemplating the meaning of the installation would create a strong memory and opinion of the work which would not be quickly forgotten.

The installations accentuate elements of the natural environment we might not pay attention to normally. Voon (2014) puts this down to ‘the role of the white cube in creating more alluring environments.’ These installations certainly couldn’t work in the same way anywhere else but in these gallery environments because their isolation from the real world is a necessary part of the work. Eliasson does not see the gallery environment as a vacuum as discussed in the introduction, rather he sees it as an environment that should amplify what we know about the world. Whether it succeeds depends whether there is trust – if visitors experience an exhibition where they are trusted, they then have trust in themselves to interact with the art (Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, 2014). From videos of viewers interacting with his installations, I would say that this trust has been achieved.

Smaller scale landscapes

In this section I will look at the work of Mariele Neudecker. The works she creates appear like fantasy landscapes, but they are actually based on romantic paintings where the artist (Friedrich) adapted the landscape to suit what he wanted to show. Neudecker recreates these landscapes and immerses them in tanks with dyes and salts which react over time to create different atmospheres, simulating the effects of fog or sunsets on the scenes. The highly detailed landscapes are crafted in great detail to give the illusion of reality, with the aim of being able to transport the viewer into the scene in their mind’s eye (Cumming, 2000).

Heaven the sky

Mariele Neudecker, Heaven, The Sky, 2008 (Jeffery, 2011)

‘Heaven the Sky, 2008’ consists of two large glass tanks housing cropped mountain ranges made from cast and painted fibreglass, filled with water and a chemical solution. This piece addresses a number of different issues:


The chemical reaction which takes place in the tanks results in a change in the environment, simulating snow forming on the mountain tops and fog around the base of them, similar changes to those which take place in our own environment.

The scenes are also animated by the viewer moving around them, through refraction from the water in the tanks, reflections off the glass walls and changing views as foreground becomes background and vice versa.


The scenes Neudecker depicts are based on romantic paintings and she is interested in how these paintings and any view of a landscape are always a crop of reality. This is depicted by cutting the sides of the mountains to leave flat planes where they meet the edge of the tank.


Containing the mountain ranges in tanks captures a piece of the outside for the viewer, bringing it to them. Placing them on plinths at or just above head height makes them still inaccessible though and distances the viewer from the landscape in the same way we view mountain ranges in reality.

The artist Friedrich, on whose work many of her tank pieces are based, ‘demonstrated a strong conviction as to the enduring identity of place’ (Dean and Millar, 2005, p.17) by using images of people in his landscape paintings. Neudecker has removed the people, but left evidence of man’s impact on the environment, be it a cairn, or a pathway, or a tower. This evidence of mankind’s impact will help viewers to project themselves into the landscape and bring about that sense of place. However, due to the bright lighting and reflection in the tanks, we are always reminded of the gallery space in which they are placed. The glass tank is used to remove the scene a step further, to displace it from the everyday world (Searle, 2000), the viewer is acutely aware that they are on the outside looking in.

Neudecker’s works are described as ‘captivating’, they have a ‘reverence and mystery’ (Jeffery, 2011) or a ‘religious majesty’ (, 2009). They certainly appear intriguing and provide a realistic (yet obviously cropped and contained) landscape in which to lose yourself in your mind’s eye. The cloud-forming chemicals add a sense of time passing as well as another layer of realism to feed the imagination. I imagine these evoke a strong sense of place, even if that place is definitely contained and outside of reality.


Evoking a sense of place in sculpture is possible in many different ways. The only requirement to be able to do this is for people to be able to be in a landscape, either physically or in their imagination.

Triggering the memory of a real place can be achieved through almost any means (even smell), but that memory is dependent on the viewer in question, whether they have visited that site and the experience they had of it when they were there.

It is much easier to create a new sense of place in a sculpture. Doing that through installation or in smaller works would seem to require a degree of realism, not necessarily relating to a real location, but in how they depict a chosen location. Placing yourself in a location would require a belief in that landscape. In developing my map tile work this is an important consideration to keep in mind as I move towards more abstract work – if the sense of landscape is lost by abstracting too far, then so is the sense of place.

The notion of time is also embedded within place (Dean and Millar, 2005). This can be depicted through movement in installation work, either within the landscape or the viewer’s movement through it. In smaller pieces this could be achieved through the viewer’s ability to move around a piece, or through evidence of occupation in a landscape, providing a ‘route’ for the eye to travel through the work.

Whilst a ‘sense of place’ can be hard to pin down, the key to its success in sculpture appears to be creating a believable landscape, introducing a sense of time, and producing an emotional response in the viewer.

Bibliography (2009). “Trying to Cope with Things That Aren’t Human (Part One)” – / critics’ picks. [online] Available at: [Accessed 19 Jul. 2017].

Blayney Brown, D., Daniel-McElroy, S. and Young, D. (2004). Mariele Neudecker: Over and Over, Again and Again. St Ives: Tate.

changeorder (2015). Riverbed by olafur eliasson at the Louisiana. [image] Available at: [Accessed 20 Jul. 2017].

Coghlan, N. (2015). Olafur Eliasson, Expanding Environments in Aesthetica Magazine. [online] Aesthetica. Available at: [Accessed 11 Jul. 2017].

Collins, J. (2014). Sculpture today. London: Phaidon.

Contemporary Art Forum, Kitchener + Area. (2009). CAFKA.09: Mariele Neudecker. [online] Available at: [Accessed 7 Jul. 2017].

Cooke, R. (2003). The Unilever Series: Olafur Eliasson, The Weather Project, Turbine Hall, Tate Modern. [online] the Guardian. Available at: [Accessed 12 Jul. 2017].

Cressey, D. (2013). Arts: Framing change. Nature, 497(7448), pp.187-187.

Cumming, L. (2000). Review: Mariele Neudecker. [online] the Guardian. Available at: [Accessed 12 Jul. 2017].

Dean, T. and Millar, J. (2005). Place. London: Thames & Hudson.

Eliasson, O. (2017). Riverbed • Exhibition • Studio Olafur Eliasson. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Jun. 2017]. (2009). Royal Academy of Arts. [online] Available at: [Accessed 7 Jul. 2017].

Foundation, D. (2017). Dia | Visit | Walter De Maria, The New York Earth Room. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Jun. 2017].

Jeffery, C. (2011). Preternatural. Ottawa, Canada: Punctum Books.

Louisiana Museum of Modern Art. (2014). Olafur Eliasson. [online] Available at: [Accessed 11 Jul. 2017].

Neudecker, M. (2017). Artist – Mariele Neudecker. [online] Available at: [Accessed 20 Jul. 2017].

O’Doherty, B. (1999). Inside the white cube. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Oxford Dictionaries | English. (2017). evoke – definition of evoke in English | Oxford Dictionaries. [online] Available at: [Accessed 9 Jul. 2017].

Quddus, S. (2014). Olafur Eliasson Creates an Indoor Riverbed at Danish Museum. [online] ArchDaily. Available at: [Accessed 11 Jul. 2017].

Searle, A. (2000). Arts: The magical landscapes of Mariele Neudecker. [online] the Guardian. Available at: [Accessed 12 Jul. 2017].

Secher, B. (2014). Riverbed by Olafur Eliasson, Louisiana Museum of Modern Art. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Jun. 2017].

Tate. (2003). The Unilever Series: Olafur Eliasson: The Weather Project. [online] Available at: [Accessed 12 Jul. 2017].

Voon, C. (2014). Olafur Eliasson Creates a Riverbed in a Museum. [online] Hyperallergic. Available at: [Accessed 12 Jul. 2017]. (2017). Zimmerman Art Gallery – Why do galleries have white walls?. [online] Available at: [Accessed 7 Jul. 2017].

Posted in Assignment 6 | Leave a comment

Part 6 – Charles Simonds Research

I was going to include Charles Simonds’s work in my essay, but decided to restrict it to just two different artists instead. The research work I did on his work is below.

Imagined landscapes

Charles Simonds started his career constructing buildings for imaginary ‘Little People’ on the streets of New York. These were temporary installations that would be destroyed by vehicles, people or the weather. He was interested in making them for their own sake and for the community he was working in, not for art collectors as work to sell.

Working on location in the poor areas of the city, his early sculptures had a strong sense of place, usually constructed in decaying abandoned buildings and echoing that in his constructions. They were also a comment on displaced people looking for a safe place to live (Coffey, 2015).

He initially resisted putting his work into the gallery environment, wanting his work to be discovered by chance on the streets (Weber, 2013). This changed as he received more invites to show in them and whilst he still works in this way on the streets of various cities, he does also create work for galleries.

Early on in his career he created his ‘Three Peoples’ – three different tribes of ‘Little People’. These people lived linearly, circularly and spirally and he described their way of living, their beliefs, history and their buildings in this way. He has built upon this foundation ever since. This way of working with imaginary occupants fits well with my ‘residency’ work.

‘Two Streams, 2011’ is a landscape and buildings for ‘Little People’ reminiscent of an Indiana Jones set, or the floating islands of Jorge Mayet (My Modern Met, 2017). Like all of his pieces, they have body references, the streams in the title appear like tongues projecting from this piece. The small ruined buildings are constructed in intricate detail, the landscape they sit in is portrayed in grey or red colours like rock and earth. It’s suspension from the wall makes it even more other-worldly, but is portrayed with great realism.

‘Ruined Blossoms, 2011’ is a landscape of grown walled flowers in various states of decay. The clay they stand on is dry and cracked, the lack of water perhaps the reason these blossoms are dying.

‘Grown Walls, 2011’ is a fantastically detailed piece, with a central flower turning into brick walls as it goes outwards. The close and uneven walls mimic the flower’s petals but tend to a more regular square shape, crumbling at the edges.

In moving from the street into the gallery, his gallery works do not try to address their setting, his later works take this further in their suspension from the wall or ceiling. Taking about ‘Mental Earth, 2002’ he says that ‘it’s not part of the space, it’s in the space’ (The Institute of Fine Arts, 2016).

In his conversation with Richard Shiff (The Institute of Fine Arts, 2016), we hear how his pieces were originally built on his body, he sees the body as the original house and all his landscapes have body references. From his 1984 exhibition catalogue (Simonds, 1984):

‘These works are wilted ruins, sprouting towers, body rock plant hills, stumps, smears, buds and floral sprays.

They are living places.’

Do these sculptures have a sense of place? With their myriad of ruined dwellings and realistic rock and earth surfaces, they certainly provide locations you can project yourself into, so I would say that they do.


Coffey, M. (2015). “I Build Ruins”: Charles Simonds and the Dwellings of his Little People – artcritical. [online] artcritical. Available at: [Accessed 12 Jul. 2017].

My Modern Met. (2017). Miniaturized Landscapes by Jorge Mayet Appear to Float in Mid-Air. [online] Available at: [Accessed 23 Jun. 2017].

Simonds, C. (1984). Charles Simonds: house plants and rocks. New York: Leo Castelli Gallery.

The Institute of Fine Arts (2016). Charles Simonds in conversation with Richard Shiff. Available at: [Accessed 14 Jul. 2017].

Weber, S. (2013). BOMB Magazine — Charles Simonds’s Absence by Stephanie Weber. [online] Available at: [Accessed 12 Jul. 2017].

Posted in Part 6 | Leave a comment

Stage 6 – Structure Notes

Frame title as a question then focus on answering it.

Structure around an introduction that outlines the question you’re asking and how you propose to answer it. Why this question + how going to answer it.

Then 2 or 3 chapters to break up the test into key areas + conclusion that summarises what you’ve deduced and your final thoughts.

Structure plan:

  • Title
    • How do sculptors evoke a sense of place in a gallery environment?
  • Introduction (200 words)
    • why this question? Relate to map tile work
    • why ‘place’?
    • why ‘gallery environment’? Vacuum / white cube
    • How going to answer the question?
  • Chapter 1 – 2 or 3
    • Two or three different artists + relate to own work
  • Chapter 3 or 4
    • Comparisons between them
  • Conclusion
    • summary of what deduced
    • final thoughts
  • Bibliography (assume this doesn’t count towards the word count? Not according to the course notes)
Posted in Part 6 | Leave a comment

Stage 6 – Notes

After an early draft of my essay, comments from my tutor were:

  • Re-read the unit notes from p60 to get more structure into the essay and a systematic way of working through the review

  • Keep academic tone and don’t fall back to learning log style

  • Look at fewer artists (2-3) in more depth. Unpick their work and underpin my arguments with research

  • Try to get primary research into the essay (this would have been nice to be able to do, but with the artists selected it was unfortunately not possible. I will have to ensure I manage to do this in my next stage 2 essay)

  • Stay focused on the question I am posing

  • Research ‘Place’ by Dean and Millar and consider how your reading of key sections here can help to bring a critical underpinning to the overall theme of the essay

Need to demonstrate my awareness and understanding of how my own and other sculptor’s work relates to the wider cultural picture – mention climate change / environmental destruction.

Demonstrate a critical and contextual understanding of how my work fits into a broader framework of practices and explore the ideas that underpin some of these.

Need evidence of ability to:

  • understand significant issues

  • use research skills competently

  • analyse source material, and

  • articulate your own ideas at an appropriate level

Posted in Part 6 | Leave a comment

Stage 6 – Research notes

There are too many artists in my initial research, I need to narrow this down to identify 2 or 3 sculptor’s working in this area who approach the subject of ‘place’ in different ways.

Look at their ideas, context. Look at my ideas and position. Look at the area of comparison between the two points of view.

Use research to support or refute an argument. Don’t repeat what has already been said, give own opinion and back it up with good references. Be critical.

Sculptor’s to research in more depth:

Mariele Neudecker – her work is the closest I have found to my map tile sculptures so needs to be included here

Oalfur Eliasson – his ‘Riverbed, 2014’ is the best example of making an environment in a gallery that I have come across so far

Charles Simonds – he works with imagined landscapes and his work relates well to my residency work

Posted in Part 6 | Leave a comment

Stage 6 – Initial Research

I initially though that answering this question would break down into two sections:

  • Making an environment
  • Representing an environment

Making an environment would cover bringing elements of the outside into a gallery to make a new environment, or creating imaginary landscapes. These would be less concerned with any accuracy towards an actual location and more about the experience.

Representing an environment would be more concerned with depicting specific real locations, not necessarily in accurate detail, but in their essence.

These two areas were then researched.



A number of artists import natural materials into the gallery environment to blur the lines between outside and inside.

An early example of this is Walter de Maria’s, ‘The New York Earth Room, 1977’ (Foundation, 2017). Here Maria imported 197 cubic meters of earth and spread it evenly over the floor of a white walled gallery space. Although using a natural material, it is kept free of vegetation so it is displayed as a barren landscape. Although hard to assess purely from a photograph, I imagine it has a sense of calm and scent of the outdoors.

Heather Ackroyd and Dan Harvey’s ‘Dilston Grove, 2003′(Ackroyd & Harvey, 2017) is another example. Here they covered the walls of an abandoned church with a clay/seed mix and grew grass on the walls to create an enveloping green space. This work is more concerned with the life of the grass and it’s contrast with the decaying space it occupies.

Finally, Olafur Eliasson’s ‘Riverbed, 2014’ (, 2017) is a very ambitious project to import a stream into a gallery environment. Again, this is a barren environment devoid of vegetation, but given life by the movement of water through the work. This piece invites more interaction that purely observation with the visitors having an impact on the work as they pass through it, or actively interact with it.

None of these works attempt to depict a real world environment, they focus more on the interaction between inside and outside and raising questions about man-made and natural environments.


Working on a smaller scale allows the depiction of real or imagined landscapes in a realistic or abstract way.

Jorge Mayet creates miniaturized landscapes (My Modern Met, 2017) which float in the air as if they have been ripped or blown off the surface. I like the playfulness evident in this work, although the realistic depiction of the landscapes would wear thin if I was making them all the time.

Mariele Neudecker’s ‘Stolen Sunsets, 1996’ (Collins, 2014) are landscapes created from resin and encased in glass tanks. These appear like fantasy landscapes, despite often being based on German Romantic paintings (and therefore presumably real locations, so a mix of making and representing).

Like me, Neudecker has an interest in mapping and combining art and science. The works she creates are based on romantic paintings where the artist (Friedrich) has adapted the landscape to suit what he wanted to show. She then recreates these landscapes in detailed 3D and immerses them in tanks with dyes and salts which react over time to create different atmospheres, simulating the effects of fog or sunsets on the scenes. Another example of science meets art which appeals to my background.

The work also references the history of her country and the evil of Nazism. This is sometimes referenced in the titles – ‘Stolen Sunsets’ references a remark by Hans-Jürgen Syperburg in a 1977 film – ‘Hitler stole our sunsets’ (Blayney Brown, Daniel-McElroy and Young, 2004) or by portraying eerie, decaying forest landscapes.

Neudecker also makes work referencing environmental issues such as ‘There is Always Something More Important (Iceberg), 2014’, a cross section of an iceberg which was made in a project looking at the effects of man on the environment (Cressey, 2013). The use of sculpture to reference these issues is a developmental idea I am playing with at the moment with my map tiles series, something which is close to my heart and I hope will offer many ideas for developing my work.

Fractured map tile 2

‘Fractured map tile, 2017’, Butler, Mark

Ben Young creates similar, but imaginary scenes (Cochrane, 2015), combining laminated layers of float glass to represent the sea, with concrete and small bronze elements. His landscapes do not appear to be of specific locations, but try to capture the essence of the ocean. I find his work interesting, but in many cases they appear (from a photograph at least) to be a bit sterile. I think this is possibly due to the use of clear glass?

In creating imaginary landscapes, I am very taken by the work of Charles Simonds (, 2017 & Collins, 2014). His detailed constructions of buildings for imaginary people look fascinating and fit neatly with my residency work, and pieces like ‘Ruined Blossoms, 2011’ also fit with the direction I am thinking of taking my map tiles.

Residency no9 Residency no10 Residency no11

‘Residency No.9, 2017’, ‘Residency No.10, 2017’, ‘Residency No.11, 2017’. Butler, Mark

Map tile with found items

Map tile development sketch

Some of Lee Bontecou’s sculptures (Salvo et al., 2008) create similar imaginary landscapes with buildings, in her case, ones that look more like alien worlds.

Looking at the work of these artists, I think the imaginary small-scale landscapes work the best for me. I think these do bring a sense of place into a gallery environment, although it is a place from the mind of the sculptors.


Richard Long makes land art and then brings it into the gallery through the medium of photography in recording his interventions, he also brings sticks, stones and mud into the gallery to duplicate his work both in the environment and in the gallery (Long, 2009). He is representing his intervention on a natural environment in a gallery environment, but it can hardly be said to evoke a sense of the place they were taken from.

David Smith’s ‘Hudson River Landscape, 1951’ is not based on a specific location, but a landscape seen from a train (Pachner and Smith, 2013). This piece is as close as sculpture gets to a drawing, as if a thick ink line has been picked up off a page and stood upright. With its abstract nature, it is evocative of the landscape he saw, but could be about any similar location.

Robert Smithson’s non-sites are an abstract representation of an actual site (Robert Smithson : The Collected Writings, 1996). Whilst they may represent an actual site, I doubt they evoke a sense of the place itself.

The work of Yutaka Sone is interesting. He uses aerial photographs of motorway junctions to create accurate models of them which he then has carved in marble. These pieces (apparently) reference the way we view the landscape in a car-centric world (Los Angeles: Yutaka Sone: MOCA at The Geffen Contemporary, 2004), but they don’t do that for me, they might as well be an engineer’s model of the road system. I think this is the trap I fell into when making my map tiles, of relying too much on accuracy (or as my tutor put it, the ‘baggage of ordnance survey’). As a detailed and accurate model, they show no imagination in their construction which, combined with the fact that the carving was shipped out to China and they are therefore not an expression of craftsmanship of the artist, add up to provide little of merit in my eyes.

The Boyle Family have a similar emphasis on accuracy and from comment in an exhibition review (Boyle Family – Delaye/Saltoun, 2008), it appears that these re-constructions have a love/hate relationship from viewers. Boyle said in 1966 ‘I have tried to cut out of my work, any hint of originality…’ (Whitfield, 2003) . Surely, originality is the cornerstone of art? In some of their other works, originality is in evidence (their assemblages for instance), but in their random earth series, the detailed replication of the surface of randomly selected sections of land, it is all about duplication and it can be said that originality is absent. Their aim is to capture reality and it would seem that these works succeed in this regard. As art works though, I am not sure of their merit. I am sure many of them are beautiful, because the surface of the earth is beautiful, however, I look for creativity in my art work. As well as replicate the surface of the land, they also record data about the sites – acting much more like scientists in this regard.

In some ways their work is similar to my map tiles when I produced some with close attention to accurate depiction of the landscapes.

Grimwith 3

Detail from ‘Grimwith, 2017’, Butler, Mark


Collins, J. (2014). Sculpture today. London: Phaidon.

My Modern Met. (2017). Miniaturized Landscapes by Jorge Mayet Appear to Float in Mid-Air. [online] Available at: [Accessed 23 Jun. 2017].

Foundation, D. (2017). Dia | Visit | Walter De Maria, The New York Earth Room. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Jun. 2017].

Ackroyd & Harvey. (2017). Dilston Grove. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Jun. 2017]. (2017). Riverbed • Exhibition • Studio Olafur Eliasson. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Jun. 2017].

Secher, B. (2017). Riverbed by Olafur Eliasson, Louisiana Museum of Modern Art. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Jun. 2017].

Blayney Brown, D., Daniel-McElroy, S. and Young, D. (2004). Mariele Neudecker: Over and Over, Again and Again. St Ives: Tate.

Cressey, D. (2013). Arts: Framing change. Nature, 497(7448), pp.187-187.

Cochrane, G. (2015). Ben Young: Floating. Craft Arts International, (95), pp.16-19. (2017). Charles Simonds. [online] Available at: [Accessed 28 Jun. 2017].

Salvo, D., Hadler, M., Judd, D., Smith, E. and Storr, R. (2008). Lee Bontecou: A Retrospective. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Long, R. (2009). Richard Long – Heaven and Earth. London: Tate Publishing.

Pachner, J. and Smith, D. (2013). David Smith. London: Phaidon.

Robert Smithson : The Collected Writings. (1996). University of California Press.

Los Angeles: Yutaka Sone: MOCA at The Geffen Contemporary. (2004). Sculpture, 23(1), pp.72-73.

Boyle Family – Delaye/Saltoun. (2008). Modern Painters, (September), p.115.

Boyle Family: Journey to the Surface of the Earth. (2004). Modern Painters, (December).

Whitfield, S. (2003). Boyle Family. Edinburgh. The Burlington Magazine, 145(1207), pp.736-738.

Posted in Part 6 | Leave a comment

Stage 6 – Choice of topic

The essay should explore the same research questions tackled through my sculpture work, but answer them in written work. My two topic choices based on the work I have been doing were therefore:

  • Landscape and place

  • Science and nature / microscopy

Both subjects were appealing, but I decided to focus on the former of these for this essay.

The landscape and place theme comes from my map tile work for stage 4 of this course. Whilst these sculptures are successful in some ways, they did get bogged down in depicting the topography in accurate detail and could have done with being more representational. Elements of them also resulted in a loss of translation of the message I was trying to get across in some instances. Researching this issue should help me to decide on the future direction of this body of work.

After much deliberation, I decided on the following for my essay question:

How do sculptors evoke a sense of place in a gallery environment?

Posted in Part 6 | Leave a comment

Assignment 5 – Development

It would be nice to do some sketches from microscope viewing of samples taken from the local area and basing a project on that. I could also tie that in with the landscape tile work I have been doing.

If did at a pond, could produce a cross section bronze with slices of glass for the pond water, containing discs of glass with drawings (print on glass) of microscopic slides. I keep having ideas of incorporating glass into my works – one day I’ll manage it!

Posted in Assignment 5 | Leave a comment

Assignment 5 – Reflection

The pollen grid work doesn’t fit with the other 3 sculptures as it is very different in form and style. The grid works well, however the pollen grain is a bit too sterile? I think the decaying pollen sculptures have shown me that I need to try to introduce more randomness into my work. Also on this piece, it was put together to hang from the wall like a picture on D rings and string. However, this tips the piece forwards which doesn’t work as well. It would be better having recessed fittings in the back board so it fits flush against the wall.

The ‘Animalcule’ series of sculptures worked quite well. Working with open steel forms allows me to work on a much bigger scale without the issues of weight in using metal.

‘Animacule 1’ would probably have worked better using my original idea of Egyptian paste for the centre pieces if this could be achieved. Cast glass would also be an interesting alternative. The paper forms are a bit too messy for my liking – too messy in being not very well manufactured that is, messy in an unpredictable cracking like that which would be on the Egyptian paste would be fine.

The use of fabric and eyelets in ‘Animacule 2’ works well, although the fabric could do with being thicker to allow the eyelets to grip better and have less risk of pulling out. I wonder whether the fabric could have been drawn on or whether that would distract from the form. The unfinished steel works well with the slightly fraying fabric. Longer term it might need some kind of finish to protect it.

Leaving ‘Animacule 3’ as unfinished steel and bronze seemed to work well, echoing the feel of the organisms when looked at under the microscope – like unfinished basic forms of life. Whether it works better like this or finished as originally intended remains to be seen.

The ideas used in the animalcule series could have been developed further, but weren’t due to my restricted timescale in getting through this course before the 2 year time limit runs out. Overall I think they have been successful though, with the open steel forms and the material wired onto it being ideas I may carry forwards with my work. I just have to work out how on earth I’m going to store works of this size now!

Posted in Assignment 5 | Leave a comment

Assignment 5 – Animalcule 3

Animalcule 3a Animalcule 3b Animalcule 3c Animalcule 3d

‘Animalcule 3’
Steel and bronze

Posted in Assignment 5 | Leave a comment

Assignment 5 – Animalcule 2

Animalcule 2a Animalcule 2c Animalcule 2d Animalcule 2e Animalcule 2f

‘Animalcule 2’
Steel, fabric and wire

Posted in Assignment 5 | Leave a comment

Assignment 5 – Animalcule 1

Animalcule 1a Animalcule 1b Animalcule 1c Animalcule 1d Animalcule 1f

‘Animalcule 1’
Steel, paper and paint

Posted in Assignment 5 | Leave a comment

Assignment 5 – Captured Passion

Pollen grid 1Pollen grid 2 Pollen grid 3 Pollen grid 4 Pollen grid 5

‘Captured Passion’
Bronze on a wooden back board

Posted in Assignment 5 | 1 Comment

Part 5 – Accompanying work

I also contemplated what accompanying work could be produced with these sculptures. An exhibition of purely sculpture might leave a lot of wall space uncovered and many artists mix sculpture with 2D work. Some of this accompanying work may not be relevant for this course, but looking forwards to my next one (Mixed Media or Drawing), it becomes more relevant to think about this.


Shelves of vessels for storing water samples (tea-cups, glasses, white delft porcelain vessel, blue tub, stoppered glass bottle, glass phial, wine glass – all mentioned in his studies of water (Dobell and Leeuwenhoek, 1960)) – label with contents and number of days exposed to air

Note books of observations

Illustrator drawings


Microscope slide disks cut in lino and stuck in the centre of rectangle bases. Make lino-cuts based on the images seen. Series of prints (one colour with coloured tissue behind elements – Chine Collé), then mould and cast the lino plate and use the bronze discs in a sculpture or archway.

Dobell, C. and Leeuwenhoek, A. (1960). Anthony van Leeuwenhoek and his “little animals”. 1st ed. New York: Dover.

Posted in Part 5 | Leave a comment