4 replies to this topic

[Philip]

I am writing a short dissertation for school on Minimalist art.
Minimalism is a rather elastic description for a NY art movement from the 1960s. Groups of artists tried to make (mainly) sculpture that possessed ‘minimal art content’.
Minimalists wanted austerity and employed the productive capacity of postwar manufacturing industries. Readymades (bricks timber) were ideal, items with no history, no individuality, no emotional content, just ‘things’. They took them and stacked them in such a way as to disguise the presence of the hand of the artist. They wanted the piece they had made to be seen for what it actually was.

The movement did not last long and was highly controversial (just go to the Tate Modern and read the blurbs). Even the major players realised that it was impossible to totally isolate a work from having some sort of relationship to its surroundings, and changing aspects as the viewer walked around (or even on) it.

Apologies for the long preamble. I will get to the point.
I have been exploring the possibility that the impulses that drove the NY minimalists, and what they did, has a long history.

This leads me to megaliths: Putting aside the symbolic, religious, astronomical aspects of stone circles and dolmens, can anyone tell me if any of these originate from materials actualy found on site, ie: dug up and stood up.
I note that the Avebury circle is composed of local, quarried, undressed stones. This would certainly make them 'readymades' or found objects. Until they were collected and erected, they had no (known) history, no individuality, no emotional content. They were just 'things'.
But, just by moving them, they became something remarkable.
I also read that Stonehenge stones were transported from Wales and shaped. But my interests, if anyone can tell me, are other sites like Avebury, in which the stones were retrieved 'on site' and raised without further intervention, dressing, treatment, carving etc.
I would appreciate facts or literature on this specific issue.
Regards and 1000 thanks in advance
Philip

[shiny]

Philip........................How do...................The sarsens used to build Stonehenge and Avebury stone circles, are thought to have been gathered from a spot on the Marlborough downs, just by an ancient path called "The Ridgeway".

Apparently there are still many stones strewn about the area. Maybe this is the source you're looking for.

The "Bluestones" erected at Stonehenge are the stones thought to have been dragged from West Wales.But these could have been dumped in the area by a retreating glacier. Nobody knows for sure.

Good luck with your project..........

Shiny.

[FourWinds]

Philip, on 6 September 2007, 7:57, said:

I am writing a short dissertation for school on Minimalist art.
Minimalism is a rather elastic description for a NY art movement from the 1960s. Groups of artists tried to make (mainly) sculpture that possessed ‘minimal art content’.
Minimalists wanted austerity and employed the productive capacity of postwar manufacturing industries. Readymades (bricks timber) were ideal, items with no history, no individuality, no emotional content, just ‘things’. They took them and stacked them in such a way as to disguise the presence of the hand of the artist. They wanted the piece they had made to be seen for what it actually was.

The movement did not last long and was highly controversial (just go to the Tate Modern and read the blurbs). Even the major players realised that it was impossible to totally isolate a work from having some sort of relationship to its surroundings, and changing aspects as the viewer walked around (or even on) it.

Apologies for the long preamble. I will get to the point.
I have been exploring the possibility that the impulses that drove the NY minimalists, and what they did, has a long history.

This leads me to megaliths: Putting aside the symbolic, religious, astronomical aspects of stone circles and dolmens, can anyone tell me if any of these originate from materials actualy found on site, ie: dug up and stood up.
I note that the Avebury circle is composed of local, quarried, undressed stones. This would certainly make them 'readymades' or found objects. Until they were collected and erected, they had no (known) history, no individuality, no emotional content. They were just 'things'.
But, just by moving them, they became something remarkable.
I also read that Stonehenge stones were transported from Wales and shaped. But my interests, if anyone can tell me, are other sites like Avebury, in which the stones were retrieved 'on site' and raised without further intervention, dressing, treatment, carving etc.
I would appreciate facts or literature on this specific issue.
Regards and 1000 thanks in advance
Philip

Well, you can't get much more minimalist than a standing stone. Many are local stones, but some can be of 'foreign' stone. The latter could have either been transported to a location or they may have been glacial eratics dropped where they were later erected.

[Pete G]

Hi,
Several of the Avebury stones have polishing marks on them indicating they were special in some way before being incorporated into the complex. Same at West Kennet long barrow.
Near Durrington walls henge the bulford stone, which was excavated 2 years ago, was a stone that was erected very close to where it was originaly laying.
This year we are excavating the Cuckoo stone near Woodhenge. So far we have uncovered its socket hole but not the original ground hole so this could have been bought from further afield.
Pete
Stonehenge Dig diary 2007

[BuckyE]

Stones were cup marked (Balnuran of Clava). Stones were chosen for their shapes (Avenue at Avebury) and possibly colors (East Aquorthies, Scotland). It would be difficult to attribute any particular motive to all the builders of so many monuments in so many places over such a long stretch of time..