Well I minimized that question to concentrate on how humanity can create highly expressive, yet sustainable modern art. To begin with, can sustainable art piece be a predominantly permanent item?Here are some photos that would suggest a yes to that answer:
Mayan Temple
Chinese Hill converted into a Mausoleum
Serpent Mound in Adena, Ohio
Wood henge did not last as long
I assure that no plastics were used in the construction
It was a good try at least
Made from rubber bands and recycled aluminum cans
Gravity's only a "theory" anyway...
It was a good try at least
Made from rubber bands and recycled aluminum cans
Gravity's only a "theory" anyway...Analysis:
Technically both answers are correct. The only difference with the yes and no answers is that it would take an awfully long time for the component materials of the more predominantly permanent architecture (...which is an art form for those none the wiser) to be separate d from each other or reduced to different physical states. Whereas the jenga tower is highly susceptible to falling, the "green" car to rusting/composting, and the chair is to rusting. Some of the most permanent structures and pieces of art on the planet were created many thousands of years ago and are less susceptible to environmental change because they coincide with the area around them as more natural landmarks than modern skyscrapers.
The Eiffel Tower, a comparably modern design, along with Salvidor Dali's The Persistence of Memory, were only created in a way that would give them an effective lifespan of a few centuries before they needed restoration efforts by humans. But great sustainable architectural achievements like the Mayan Temple of the Sun and Stonehenge have lasted and will last many more centuries than their designed use.
*Note: The Pyramid complex at Giza, Egypt was not included in the predominantly permanent art section because of the traditionally hot and dry climate the buildings reside. This will cause them, if man no longer exists or makes any preservation efforts, to be engulfed completely in neighboring sand dunes within the next full rotation of the Earth's axis (26,000 years). The Mayan Temples will still remain by then, covered by foliage they may be, but the overall structure would still give its effect.
Technically both answers are correct. The only difference with the yes and no answers is that it would take an awfully long time for the component materials of the more predominantly permanent architecture (...which is an art form for those none the wiser) to be separate d from each other or reduced to different physical states. Whereas the jenga tower is highly susceptible to falling, the "green" car to rusting/composting, and the chair is to rusting. Some of the most permanent structures and pieces of art on the planet were created many thousands of years ago and are less susceptible to environmental change because they coincide with the area around them as more natural landmarks than modern skyscrapers.
The Eiffel Tower, a comparably modern design, along with Salvidor Dali's The Persistence of Memory, were only created in a way that would give them an effective lifespan of a few centuries before they needed restoration efforts by humans. But great sustainable architectural achievements like the Mayan Temple of the Sun and Stonehenge have lasted and will last many more centuries than their designed use.
*Note: The Pyramid complex at Giza, Egypt was not included in the predominantly permanent art section because of the traditionally hot and dry climate the buildings reside. This will cause them, if man no longer exists or makes any preservation efforts, to be engulfed completely in neighboring sand dunes within the next full rotation of the Earth's axis (26,000 years). The Mayan Temples will still remain by then, covered by foliage they may be, but the overall structure would still give its effect.
No comments:
Post a Comment