Development of sculpture forfunctionality: an exploration with terracotta in the landscape

Thesis Overview

<p> BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY<br>1.1 Introduction<br>Sculpture has a history of functionality as well as that of the politics of the<br>space it occupies or its environment; two options are clearly discernible: the<br>interior space and the exterior landscape. Within the interior, it may be enclosed in<br>the inside spaces of buildings, or in dingy rooms of an underground burial<br>chamber or better still, meant to be concealed in the body space of a carrier who<br>tucked it away under the dress. For the open-air landscape it may mean sculpture<br>of the open arena in the public spaces, site-specific locations, and contextual<br>spaces.<br>An initial reference to the function and functionality of the many ancient<br>flint stone implements of the pre-historic man puts the story of sculpture in the<br>right perspective. To tell the same story of contemporary sculptures in the open<br>landscape, one needs to mention the protracted romance between sculpture and<br>architecture since the period of the pre-historic cave dwellings. According to<br>Janson (1973), the first known pictures and sculptures were done on walls of caves<br>by people who lived in caves. The functions of such etched or engraved<br>sculptures, according to Gilbert and McCater (1988) were “to exert control over<br>the forces of nature”, the environment where the works were placed and the<br>restriction of such placement to the interior being in line with their condition of<br>living, availability of the material surface and function. Clottes (2002) agrees that<br>2<br>there were, probably, no better place than the walls of their shelters for such<br>renditions.<br>However, with time human activities became more complex, the tempo of<br>religious activities equally increased with the attending ritual practices and<br>sacrifices, hence the choice of sculpture’s location or environment in respect to its<br>functions and functionality depended more on a number of factors. For example, it<br>became apparent to embellish open spaces like tombs and temple- adjoining –<br>spaces with much larger colossal pieces that were seen as the dawn of open air<br>sculptures. Savage (1969) and Aldred (1980) agree on the sphinx at Giza built<br>around 2550 BC and the Japanese bronze Budha done around the first century<br>A.D. as examples respectively.<br>Answers to the question as to why sculpture has been so long entwined<br>with architecture may be found in sculpture’s close association with the fabric of<br>the built environment which has taken it with much difficulty to shake off that<br>deep rooted connection. Carless and Brewster (1959) report that sculpture and<br>architecture have always been allied. World Book Encyclopaedia (2002) opines<br>that “stone masons’ skills approached that of the sculptor” simply because similar<br>materials are used in both. Dmoschowski (1990), from an architect’s perspective,<br>sees sculpture and architecture as “closely knitted”. Coldstream (1991) writes that<br>the distinction between the two was always blurred because it is really difficult to<br>isolate the moment at which sculpture emerged as specialisation and that “the<br>profession of stone carvers was rooted in the quarry and the lodge”.<br>3<br>From the above perspective, the history of the incidence of space, location,<br>site or environment of sculpture has been largely due to an array of influences.<br>Fagg and Plass (1966) agree that form follows functions and that those functions<br>which may be diverse have largely been responsible for where a sculpture is<br>placed and the arena in which sculpture inhabits. For example, personal objects as<br>“Akuaba” of Ghana and “Ere Ibeji” of Yoruba carvings are often meant to be<br>tucked in dresses where the bodily arena becomes their environments. In the same<br>vein, other sculptures of paraphernalia status, according to Ravenhill (1992),<br>surround the immediate environment of the body as dictated by their functions.<br>Curtis (1999) asserts that “subjects for commemoration suggested not only the<br>appropriate form of their monuments but also the site”. He states further that<br>doctors were put outside their hospitals, academics in universities and statues of<br>men action were erected to face the hustle and bustle of the city square. In the<br>contemporary scene, public role functions that took sculpture to such exterior open<br>spaces, traditional burial sites and modern cemeteries is not unconnected with<br>grave stones of the tombs of kings, the notables and the wealthy.<br>The demand for leisure in the modern times made sculpture to be more<br>accepted in leafy glades, parks and gardens and the philosophy of modernism<br>allowed sculptors to seek for more freedom from the overbearing influence of<br>architects. The ensuing parting of ways brought the cherished freedom to work<br>more in the open landscape. The advent of scientific discoveries, modern<br>techniques and rapid pace of life in 19th century, according to Arnason (1981),<br>4<br>brought an accompanying guarantee for the dissemination of new ideas and<br>achievements.<br>Deepwell (1995) on his own highlights the growing discontent for sculpture<br>“enslaved” within the confines of architectural setting or four walls for museum<br>oriented audiences. While utilising the principles of industrial production sculptors<br>have tried to “liberate” sculpture from the shaky union between it and architecture.<br>Hammercher (1969) reports that Ducham Villion advocated for sculpture that live<br>in the open air day light as “something different from sculpture suitable for<br>architecture and architectural setting’’. For Wezzel Couzin, one of his sculptures<br>literally escapes from the wall assigned to it and shoots out: instead of a wall<br>statue, the work became a statue for the entire structure.<br>At the dawn of the 20th century, the issue of the environment or space of<br>sculpture especially in the open landscape became a contentious issue. Kastner and<br>Wallis (1998) state that sculptors began to question the notion of sculptural<br>verticality and started responding to the horizontality of the land. Noguchi (1987)<br>describes such move by Isamu Noguchi with his “Sculpture To Be Seen From<br>Mars”. Henry Moore in Read (1965) on the Time life Building Sculpture states<br>that: “because a work is placed in the terrace and stands freely from the building it<br>could be, therefore, more individualistic and complete in its own right”<br>In addition, Coe (1978) opines that Eldred Dale, an American artist,<br>believed in the enrichment of sculpture for the open landscape such that the<br>physical world, as a lab, becomes the open air studio, galleries and museums for<br>5<br>monumental works in places like city squares, schools, centre of traffic, vast arid<br>land and to punctuate jungles.<br>Whether aesthetically, physically or otherwise, all works of arts in the open<br>landscape perform a kind of function or the other. The likes of the environmental<br>sculpture that is the focus of this research are meant for public outdoor spaces and<br>to be large enough for the viewer to enter and move about. These are terracotta<br>pieces which are designed for display in the outdoor environment in such places as<br>street lobbies, pedestrian malls, and open fields either as pass-through, temporary<br>shelters for momentary stoppages by passers-by and even domestic animals.<br>1.2 Statement of the Problem<br>Amidst the wind of change as brought to the fore by sculptors in Europe<br>and America in line with philosophy of modernism, and with reference to the<br>perennial use of clay as a material by both Ceramists and Sculptors (Okpe, 2004),<br>this researcher is not aware of the same level of exploration with sculptures for the<br>landscape in the Nigerian scene hence most works have continued to be entwined<br>within arch spaces. Despite its inherent qualities, prolong history of use, its low<br>cost and commonality, terracotta sculptures continued to be made largely for the<br>interior spaces as this researcher is also not aware of its extensive use for such<br>functional sculpture meant for practical public embrace in the open landscape in<br>Nigeria. The problem of this research therefore is how can terracotta sculptures be<br>explored in the open landscape to such a level of functionality as for people to go<br>in, walk around and through.<br>6<br>1.3 Objectives of the Study<br>The main objective of this study is to explore the use of terracotta for<br>sculptures to be placed in the exterior public spaces while the other objective is to<br>create three dimensional terracotta sculptures for functionality as an ambience in<br>the public exterior spaces for practical utility.<br>1.4 Scope and Delimitation of the Study<br>This study is delimited in its scope to, primarily, the production of<br>sculptures for the open landscape using terracotta: the choice of the medium being<br>largely informed by its limited use for works meant for functionality as pass<br>through and temporary shelters outdoors.<br>1.5 Justification of the Study<br>The utter lack, absence or dearth of colossal or monumental terracotta<br>pieces for the public spaces in the open land space within Nigeria landscape forms<br>the basis of justification for this research. This is further strengthened by the fact<br>that the pieces are to be subjected to one form of public physical functionality or<br>the other.<br>1.6 Significance of the Study<br>Sculptures in open spaces in various media may have been done elsewhere<br>and especially in Nigeria. The bulk of the work of this research in an attempt to<br>stretch the context of the use of sculpture to such limit of functionality demanding<br>a public romance. This is in addition to bridging the yawning gap of such pieces in<br>a material like terracotta, an unusual phenomenon in the Nigerian landscape. <br></p>