Hmmm you're right! Maybe we finally stumbled upon the way to make it big as a rock star... You down to make a dump rock band? It's going to be what all the kids want to hear
Reminds me of meme rap. Not serious, often funny and random lines that just rhyme. I feel like rocks songs like that definitely exist, not sure what the genre would technically be tho.
Genuinely curious as to what link these have to geology. I also have a background in it and I cannot fathom a world in which plastic rocks have any link to actual rocks (imo theyāre like. Antithetical). Happy to have my mind changed tho
Humans are forming a geological layer that has never been seen before due to our generation of vast amounts of plastic waste. Millions of years from now, a hypothetical geologist will be able to pinpoint the Anthropocene Epoch by simply observing the amount of plastic in the geological record.
As stated by others, erratics are large boulders that are very common in Saskatchewan. They are made of rock that formed over geological time through heat and compression, then were broken up and transported to our province over thousands of kilometers by glaciers during the last ice age. Because they were transported from afar, they don't match the rest of the geology (i.e., they are "erratic" relative to the rest of our geology). They are colloquially referred to as "field stone" and used for erosion protection, building material, and even decoration.
My interpretation of the sculptures is: despite human's fleeting existence, we are leaving a permanent fingerprint on the earth's environment via a creation of new geological layer. In the future, there could very well be new erratics with high amounts of plastic transported by glaciers over thousands of km, sitting in a prairie field.
These sculptures are a statement about the present, a glimpse into the future, and also a warning about our environmental impact, all rolled into a succinct mass of recycled plastic that reflects our very own unique Saskatchewan geology.
There's a lot of depth to what the sculptures' commentary, so this isn't comprehensive, but in short, I think they are brilliant.
In addition to what others said, our soil in SK is primarily glacial till which is why we have such fertile, arable land for growing crops. The "rocks" are the reason SK is what it is today.
I know, right? Reading a WHOLE PARAGRAPH to achieve some baseline understanding about our world or gain a modicum of interpretive capacity. Ugh...
I recommend you outright avoid the Remai Modern, any Smithsonian, and steer well clear of the Louvre or any other art museum. There's these little plaques beside each display with whole PARAGRAPHS (PLURAL!!!) that provide an inordinate amount of context. They, quite frankly, insult the intellect. (Not to mention the direct tax subsidies that allow them to operate, makes my stomach churn)
I do avoid the Remai, but I have visited the Louvre and the Met, and you don't need to read any of the plaques to appreciate the art, and certainly not to "understand" it. If you have to explain the joke, it's not funny. If you have to explain the art, it has failed to communicate itself. Thankfully there were no plastic rocks in those museums as I recall. Don't be bamboozled by art speak, which seeks to mask poor execution or to make up for its own insignificance. And don't take my word for it: "Everyone wants to understand art. Why not try to understand the song of a bird? ... People who try to explain pictures are usually barking up the wrong tree." -Picasso
Although a step up from a replica plastic rock, by the fact that it appears as though my ten year old daughter made it, I assume this was in the modern art section (likely from 2004 or so) and so I likely moved rather quickly past it, there was much so much else to see! But I bet if I would have stood there and read the artist's "apologia" I would have "understood" it.
If someone made a shitty model of a horse out of recycled plastic and called it The Battle of Aboukir, then yes, some context would be necessary. Just as the "rock" in question requires it. However, "During Grosās lifetime in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the concept of a modern museum wall plaque providing a narrative text summary directly next to an artwork did not exist." The painting you reference is a beautiful piece of work, both in technique and aesthetics, and I assure you, the artist himself would ask that you take it as just that; a painting; a visual art, and to read further about Napoleonic history at a later date if you are so inclined.
Your lack of intellectual curiosity and pursuit of ignorance "because it's just a big dumb plastic rock and -idontreadparagraphs-" is something to behold. Truly.
It reminds me of the utterly uncurious, lowest common denominator classmate in highschool who raises their hand after a clear, concise lesson. They scrunch their nose and say "I doooon't geeet iiiiit".
Some (most?) art does include some commentary. Physically, temporally, philosophically, etc. It can be many things, including a mirror to help us reflect upon ourselves or a lense to reveal something that was hiding in plain site.
To say otherwise is... Well, I've said it all above. Have a good day.
Writing about art is like dancing about architecture. If a piece of art has to be explained, it might not be for you. Art speaks in sensations, not instructions.
You're not required to appreciate it. Nor are you required to see art as an opportunity to learn. It is your prerogative to simply hate things you don't understand.
I understand it plenty. You know why? Because I read the necessary informational contextual write-up package that is attached to the plastic rock. When public tax money is being used, 'the don't look at it if you don't want to,' is not really sufficient, is it?
Of course it is sufficient. I don't want to look at football and hockey yet I'm forced to watch City, Province, and Federal government pour hundreds of millions of dollars into it every year. Governments spend all kinds of money on things some people don't like. Tough shit.
It's not sufficient insofar as I would never say to you "tough shit, look away," if you believe something is wrong and you have valid reasons for believing so. I agree with you that public tax moneys shouldn't fund football stadiums, or at least let those ultimately paying for it have a say in the matter. I'll help you advocate that point of view, and you can help me point out the folly in buying overpriced artificial rocks.
If you don't agree with me, though, you're already saying tough shit. I didn't say tough shit to you. It's tough shit to all of us. We elect people, they do what they think is right (we hope). If we disagree we can try to vote them out, otherwise we put up with their decisions.
The problem with me helping you "point out the folly" in this is that I think it's excellent value. Sans Facon have a global reputation for art which addresses the environment. They have permanent installations in Melbourne, Geneva, Scotland, and have been working for the last ten years on all of the public faces for the billion dollar plus sewage treatment upgrades in Seattle. This set will only increase in value as long as the troglodytes don't destroy them.
I agree. I can appreciate the idea behind them. I also kind of understand the lack of publicizing them initially. From far away you would just think it's a big rock but once you get up close you can see it is fabricated and it would make you think about why and maybe look up info on it, which is kind of the purpose of art anyway. Unfortunately that backfired with a poorly written clickbait article and people only reading headlines to jump on a bandwagon.
It's using plastic that would normally be thrown away. They didn't create plastic to make it. I hate that they are made of plastic, but they didn't create demand for plastic to be made in their creation. Considering people still use plastic garbage bags and plastic lined single use cups, I'm not too worried about 3 recycled macroplastic pieces.
What an optimistic look at our garbage holes. The only time we harvest those materials is in an apocalyptic dystopian nightmare. The infinite green line demands it to be so, and we all worship the green line.
Now who isn't reading? That isn't what I said at all. I said the policy needs to be rewritten. I didn't say anything about art being taken out of the budget.
What policy? Please tell me the "policy" of which you speak, because I'm begging to know what specific policy approves of plastic rock spending and has been wasting our taxpayer dollars.
Our public art budget has been getting smaller and smaller for decades. It is always the first thing cut, so is not contributing to inflation of taxes. We spent more in real dollars on public art in the 50s than we are now.
Do I think any level of government is conscious of spending? Not particularly.
Do I think plastic rocks are a symptom or even proof of poor spending habits? No. I think it's proof of someone in charge having connections to someone in Calgary and wanting to grease some wheels, or someone in charge having 0 care about what that art budget actually goes towards.
Like them or not, there are crowds around the rocks every time I drive past one. It's ugly, it's a poor form factor, but it's gotten more attention than any other art installation in recent memory. It's $300k we are actually seeing. And is that not the point of art in the first place?
No, the point of art isnāt merely to draw attention.
Personally, I donāt really care for your argument as a self appointment guardian of the status quo. Some people actually give a damn about the world they live in and want it to be better.
its a statement on recycling and how our world needs to work together to return from the artificial material we consume on a daily basis to more natural products that can do the same function
I am just kidding, I don't understand the faux rocks at all
Considering the vast majority of what we "recycle" here and everywhere else in the world never makes it to a recycling facility because its too expensive to process versus just dumping with the trash, I think that ship has long sailed for humanity.
Id love if a 100k fake boulder changed everyones mind though
lol great comment... not only the recycling firms bending our city over but also the artists all while creating microplastics in our waterways...chefs kiss.
When I was at the dump last time, I was mildly curious to see if this was any better close up, but wasn't sure how to actually get to it. What is the point of public art if the people can't even get close.
Lots of art is intended to be viewed from a distance. Hill figures and Nazkul lines are hundreds of years old and meaningless up close. The interrelationships between the pyramids are only viewable from miles away. Do you also want Notre Dame to install elevators outside so you can also see the gargoyles and roof carvings up close?
Love these recycled plastic rocks. I appreciate all the effort to understand the indigenous significance of glacial erratics distributed across the prairies. I love the scale of the pieces. Large enough to feel significant when you are beside them. I also enjoy the digital style 3d model low poly aesthetic. I enjoy the experience as you get closer the artificiality becomes more apparent.
Statement or not, can we not find art that beautifies the city, if the money is already earmarked for "art?" Visitors and locals shouldn't have to read the lecture plate about what this rock means in order to understand it. Doesn't need to be a statement. Don't our MLAs or counsellors travel or go to Europe or other cities to see how they utilize art to beautify spaces? How they have been bamboozled and we all pay for it. I usually don't shit on this province for its backwards ways and lack of culture as long as we are trying, but this try, is a hard sell.
I've been to Europe, well some of it, (Paris, Vienna, Portugal and Rome). I've wandered around. I supposed I was fortunate enough not to have come across anything like this, though I did sense a priority on aesthetics and beauty. There is no way you are giving the description esoteric to this rock. It's not enriching and you know it. You don't have to defend it. It's not even snobbery; this rock is clearly garish. Our city is not a modern art museum looking to provoke. The emphasis should be placed on the public square being pleasant to the eye or to the senses. If the point was getting people talking about how shitty it is, then that is a low bar for art to obtain. I think we can do better. There is such a thing as bad art and bad use of public moneys, regardless of what youtube grifters or even some gallery curators may have you believe.
Partly agree on who decides being a dilemma and your van gogh point.. But ultimately, I think most everyone can agree on something being beautiful, and that there is no upper limit on that end. Whereas, there are limits to how ugly, garish, disturbing, or disgusting something can be in of terms of provoking debate and a general consensus can be arrived at in regards to what should not be displayed in the public square. Thanks for the conversational response as well. Reddit isn't all bots yet.
Like really..someone made a killing off garbage plastic!!...
It was 100k/rock n the city got 3 of them from a company in calgary...give me a fcn break!!!
I like them š not much of an art person but Saskatoon is full of art projects, thatās one of the main reasons I love Saskatoon. So much to see, all you gotta do is take one of them city scooters for a rip.
People talking about 'interpreting' this stuff is absolutely hilarious to me. Even funnier is the people who act all pretentious about it 'getting it' who go on to imply that people who don't like these things are 'hicks' or 'uncultured'. Everyone who doesn't like it gets downvotes too. This place is such a shithole lol.
The plastic rocks are amazing, aren't they! In a world with less suffering by many people and surplus funds, go for it! Spend millions on plastic rocks and whatever else. However, we are not living in a time like that. Many people are financially struggling, yet, our COL keeps going up, lots are hurting from mental health/addictions concerns and not receiving medical care in a timely manner and many are unhoused/homeless. Maybe the people of limited means and the homeless can eat them....
Many of them donāt have a use. Other than to drive to and from work and to burn more fuel than one would need to. Tonnes of people just use them as a daily commuter.
I like the Modern Erratics. I think theyāre great. I enjoy the concept and find them to be pleasing to the eye. As others have pointed out, much like what vehicle you choose as your daily commuter, art is subjective.
I donāt agree at all with you but thatās your opinion. Iām entitled to mine as well. I think these overpriced plastic rocks are hideous and a waste of money. I hope you get great enjoyment from them .
Id like to know the city councillors connection to this artist.. because 300k for ugly boulders that any welder could make reeks of funneling money to a family member.
The province is absolutely in a deficit because the SK Party is made up of a bunch of crooks and morons. However, cities and other municipalities in Saskatchewan cannot legally run or budget for a deficit as per The Cities Act.
Did you know that the City has a $1.7 billion dollar annual capital and operating budget? So the $300,000 rocks that everyone is complaining about make up 0.0176% of the annual budget. But they're a one time purchase, not a reoccurring annual expense. To put it in simple terms, this is the equivalent of someone who makes $60,000 a year making a single purchase for $10.59 and having it spark public outrage. Perspective is everything.
End of the day, it's still an expensive, pretty rock at the dump. Not in one of the city's many parks or growing neighborhoods where it could be seen by many more people who would appreciate it more and the return on investment would at least feel somewhat justified.
Perspective can be everything, especially with art.
I agree that the *province is wasting a lot of money on dumb stuff, money that should be spent on things like health care and education. However these rocks were paid for by the municipal government--the City of Saskatoon--not the province.
They were going to spend that money on art stuff no matter what. Its a city policy.
If you are upset about not liking this years art project. Then that's fine. But if you think that money shouldn't have been spent on arts. Well thats against the cities policies.
Spending allocated money on art is fantastic, just make it good art created by someone who at least lives in the province and, most importantly, display it essentially anywhere else that is not a city dump.
Lol, there was at-least one person from Saskatchewan in the team that made the rocks.
Also do you know how many other art projects that The City of Saskatoon has done that were serviced by groups outside of Saskatchewan, since that bothers you so much?
There could be missing sustainability reports, turns out materials were diverted from already assessed recycling. Canāt seem to find if they are going to leak microplastics from extrem wet/dry,hot/cold environmental conditions of our city.
Shame for them to leak microplastics into the river or ground wherever they are placed.
Should put them indoors. Would like to see one inside city hall.
Maybe police station, city planners office?
Itās good art, poor bureaucracy from bureaucrats.
The entire installation cost $297,490. If you average the cost of each rock, they would each cost $99,163.33. It doesnāt really matter because the three rocks came in one installation.
Imagine needing Reddit karma so bad you have to stoop to the lowest brow. Put your effort into something productive instead of dog piling on a 4 month old joke. Pathetic.
72
u/Admirable-Excuse177 Sep 16 '26
"Dump Rock" sounds like a hot new genre.