i watched his dvd in art class last year. this kid in my class tried to challenge him by saying it wasn't real art. my teacher destroyed him.

and what is real art actually..?

exactly

anyways.. i appreciate goldsworthy as one of the biggest artists. his work is kinda zen, isn't it? :)

I don't like individual Goldsworthy pieces as much as i do overall environments that feature his stuff as part of the landscape. Same with Richard Serra.

Andy Goldsworthy reminds me of Nils-Udo. A Bavarian artist with similar work.

http://greenmuseum.org/content/artis...ist_id-36.html

its a different piece, but yeh.

okay vettriano's work is completely stunning. and is definately not just for people who just want prints on their walls. There is a massive difference between a close up leaf you can buy at ikea and the complete and utter resplendance shown in some of vettriano's work.

and imho they (goldsworthy and vettriano) are nothing alike.

I dont like the use of human forms... The thing(well one of) that appeals to me about goldsworthy's work is that it is completely and utterly timeless. It might have been created by someone or something, or it could have just occured. It is that untouched and pure, mathematical the way nature exists yet somehow almost unbelieveable in its beauty, that it could not be accidental.

a lot of this work seems far more 'cut in' to nature. where as to me, goldsworthy seems to work with the flow, and his works are never permanent. There is something not quite right about a red human form sitting amoungst the green. Or a square cut away from a trees roots. The images seem painful.

lols/.

I thought you might like him too!

I'm not to keen with Nils-Udo's use of human forms in his work. It makes the viewer focus on the figure and forget the surroundings. You could say that Goldsworthy's work is sort of timeless in it's simplicity and pureness, but I don't think it presents itself as something that just occured. There's always a reminder of human intervention. Also, some of his work is definitely permanent. If left untouched, those stone walls and oval shapes can last for ages.

fucking cool.
the jack vettriano comparison is just unfair. he is an untalented asshole.

ages /= permanent

who handles light in a way many painters can not.

I actually like Nils-Udo even if he is using human forms.

Do you mean / as "doesn't equal"?
If so, it's permanent in the sense that it doesn't disappear after the first 500 rainfalls.

not equal to. yes I do. I searched through my character map and couldnt find the real one. I guessed you'd understand.

it isnt cared for though. Once he creates, he leaves it there.. to be destroyed or exist or whatever shall happen. That is what I mean. Many artists don't do that. That to me therefore is impermanent.

Fair enough.
I'm outta here. Got loads of work to do before I leave the office at five. Bye.