In response to David Nashs’ “Wooden Boulder” sculpture, I wanted to experience a similar liberating freedom, of turning an object over to the random forces of nature.

The wooden Boulder started its journey in 1978, but it is now 2012. For my experiment I wanted to do something more “up to date”, something using modern technology.

Whilst researching the Wooden Boulder, and reading Nashs’ accounts of the journey it took and the experiences the object had; I found myself thinking “It’s a pity the boulder couldn’t record its own journey and experiences – tell its own tale.

It was while pondering this, that I had an idea, I way to record a journey through nature form an alternative perspective…

Description

Being a keen sailor, I had recently bought a waterproof to keep my iPhone dry whist out on the water (iDry). I had tested it in the kitchen sink, but wanted ta more thorough test.

I set out walking along a local stream; iPhone carefully packed in its new waterproof case – a long piece of string securely attached.

When I reached a small footbridge I set the phone video recording and started to lower the phone into the river.

As the phone hit the water, the speed of the flow took the iPhone and carried it off down stream; all the while I paid out the string, keeping tight hold. The phone alternated between bobbing on the surface and then being sucked under by the current – once going down a waterfall. When the phone had drifted 60 metres downstream, I started to reel it back in, watching the phone skim the surface like a fish trying to break to freedom from the fisherman.

Eventually I hauled the phone back onto the footbridge to see what I had captured.

How i felt

This was a spur of the moment experiment. I must admit I was very nervous about throwing my new and expensive iPhone 4s into a stream. Even though the marketing literature from the iDry waterproof case manufacturers guarantees no leeks up to a depth of five metres, I was pretty sure they hadn’t tested it in a stream.

I didn’t know whether the phone would be ruined, or even it would record a video. What if the string snapped and my phone went floating off down stream. All these thoughts raced through my head as it “splashed” into the stream and I pad the line out.

But once it was in the water, there was no point in worrying. I started to enjoy toying with the phone on the end of a line, reeling it in and then letting it go and get pulled under the surface and trying to hold it in the same place.

After a few minutes I started to reel the phone back in. As it got nearer the footbridge I was stood on, the anticipation grew – as did the dread. I hoisted the phone out o the stream and into the deck – the moment of truth.

I was relieved to see the phone still working, absolutely perfectly; but concerned because the video had stopped recording. I had a few moments of panic as I thought the experiment was in vain, relief replaced this feeling when I eventually found the “saved” recording. The phone must have hit a stone on the way downstream – right on the “stop” button. What are the chances o that?

I took the phone out of its protective case and played back the video. The emotions were many at this point. Elation, surprise, shock, confusion all mixed together. The video was very energetic – lots of fast moving bobbing and turning, but the best bit, a part I hadn’t even considered; the phone had also recorded the sound. I could hear each bubble and ripple, each rush of water and “clonk” at the phone made its way downstream – I couldn’t have been happier with the results of this experiment.

Evaluation, Analysis & Conclusion

What was good about the experience?

Well, the best thing was that it worked. Not only did my phone survive the experiment, but I recorded some interesting footage and sounds as well. The video allowed me to view nature form a new perspective – to glimpse the chaos and energy of nature.

What was bad about the experience?

Due to the poor quality of the water in the stream, much of the recording shows cloudy water, with occasional glimpses of recognisable shapes and textures. In some ways this was a disappointment, but on the other hand, it did add interest and anticipation while watching the video.

I was also disappointed that the recording stopped short after coming into contact with a rock. Although out of my control, I expected to have more footage. I tried to record for a second time, but the battery on the phone was running down, and due to the coldness of the stream, actually went flat in the middle of the second experiment.

What sense can I make of this experiment?

As an experiment to experience nature from another perspective, it was very successful, but as an experiment about “letting go” and relinquishing control, it didn’t really succeed. After all, I wasn’t prepared to let my phone drift off down the river without a safety line.

This experiment has confirmed to me that I enjoy being outdoors, interacting with nature, and that I am on the right track towards my final project.

What could I have done differently?

I would have liked to have had another camera recording what I was doing while conducting the experiment. I would have been interested to see my actions and reaction as the experiment played out.

I would have liked to use a cheaper, disposable camera, that I could have left to float down the stream, perhaps to get caught in a net placed a mile downstream

What would I do next time?

I will develop this idea further, using a cheaper camera that is able to record for longer periods and with more battery power. This would enable the camera to travel a greater distance. I would also choose a better location for the next experiment, somewhere with clearer water.

I will research new technologies that I could develop to enhance the work I have already done, to see if I can stream video from a devise floating down a river, or track its position via GPS.

In the summer of 1978, David Nash was cutting the first of a series of sculptures from large fallen Oak tree. The sculpture was a large ball, and being too big to easily move by hand, Nash decided to push it into the stream, to float down to a more accessible location.

Once Nash pushed the boulder into the stream, he decided to let nature to take its course. It did, but it took until 2003 before the boulder made its way down the estuary and out to sea, and has not been seen since.

Feelings

When reading about this piece, I seem to share many of the feelings Nash seems to have. I can empathise with the initial excitement of turning over a creation to the natural elements. Throwing caution to the wind and “letting go”

Perversely, the erratic “Wooden Boulder” has for many years been a constant in Nashs’ life. Although not knowing its exact position for months on end, he has searched for and found the sculpture, then charted its position for over 30 years.

Having formed such a strong bond with his creation, it must have ben a wrench when it finally disappeared. On this subject Nash [2001] writes, “The ‘goneness’ was palpable.”

I find Nashs’ us of the word “goneness” here is very telling. He could have used many other words to describe his feelings, but “gone” is a very final word. For Nash, it is as if he was dealing with some sort of trauma and loss.

Evaluation & Conclusion

I find this sculpture, and its subsequent journey, fascinating. It shown Nashs’ thought process and ability to adapt – I suppose his rashness. To spend days carving the ball in the first place and then tip it into the stream to transport it shows lateral thinking. But to then identify its potential, as a random piece of artwork with its own “life” is an inspired leap.

Nash never tried to recreate or reproduce this sculpture, as he has with many of his others. The Wooden Boulder was a one off “happy accident” that lasted for over 30 years.

I admire Nashs’ sense of adventure and abandon. I have always been very structured and constrained in my artwork – perhaps this is a condition of being a graphic designer?

In response to David Nash, and in particular “wooden Boulder”, I would like to introduce a little more creative freedom into my work, planning for my final project

References:

Nash, D. (2001). Forms into Time. Artmedia Press, London

However, the first was to be a giant Oak ball, three feet across and weighing about half a ton. Being difficult to remove from the hill, Nash decided to make good use of the nearby stream, by floating the boulder downstream, and collect it later.

But once released, Nash realized the potential of the ball. That he had merely released this natural object back to nature. From this point “Wooden Boulder” was born, with its own life, moving when it wanted. From this point, Nash was merely the guardian of this sculpture.

Deakin [2008] wrote, “Wooden Boulder is an equally radical work about letting go. It is adventurous in every sense, a great gesture of liberation in which Nash has surrendered his work to nature and the elements and set no limits”.

Since 1978, the boulder has slipped, rolled and sometimes forced by flood through the landscape, following the course of stream and river until it was last seen in the estuary of the river Dwyryd in 2003. It may have been washed out to sea or buried in sand in the estuary.

Nash [2001] writes, “I have followed its engagement with the weather, gravity and the seasons. It became a stepping-stone into the drama of physical geography.

Spheres imply movement and initially I helped it to move, but after a few years I observed it only intervening when absolutely necessary – when it became wedged under a bridge.”

During the first 24 years it moved down stream nine times remaining static for months and years. Sedentary and heavy it would sit bedded in stones animated by the varying water levels and the seasons. Beyond the bridge its position survived many storms, the force of the water spread over the shallow banks did not have the power to shift it. I did not expect it to move into the Dwyryd river in my lifetime.

Then in November 2002 it was gone. The ‘goneness’ was palpable. The storm propelled the boulder 5 kilometres, stopping on a sandbank in the Dwryd estuary. Now tidal, it became very mobile. The high tides around full moon and the new moon moved it every 12 hours to a new place, each placement unique to the consequence of the tide, wind, rain and depth of water.

In January 2003 it disappeared from the estuary but was found again in a marsh. An incoming tide had taken it up a creek, where it stayed for five weeks. The equinox tide of March 19 2003 was high enough to float it back to the estuary where it continued its movement back and forth 3 or 4 kilometres each move.

The wooden boulder was last seen in June 2003 on a sandbank near Ynys Giftan. All creeks and marshes have been searched so it can, only be assumed it has made its way to the sea. It is not lost. It is wherever it is.”

References:

Deakin, R. (2008). Wildwood, A Journey Through Trees. Penguin Books, London

Nash, D. (2001). Forms into Time. Artmedia Press, London

MANIPULATED LANDSCAPES – LETHA WILSON

November 10 2011

NOBUHIRO NAKANISHI

Read more at Design Milk: http://design-milk.com/nobuhiro-nakanishi/#ixzz1kKL8LKTR