On Sculpture and Architecture

Abstract

Traditionally, the central role of sculpture has involved placement on public sites, although during the 20th century the trend has been for sculptors to make works for display in a neutral gallery environment. Interest, however, has been growing to again place sculpture in urban areas not restricted to private use, such as thoroughfares, public buildings, parks and squares [1]. Sculpture can offset excessively impersonal modem architecture by adding a human sense of scale and points of emotional significance. Perhaps it is more certain that public sites need the sculptor rather than that he needs such sites. A sculptor who takes on such a commission is faced with problems that do not arise in gallery work. His sculpture as an aesthetic object must compete visually with utilitarian objects. He may have to contend with ideas proposed by a patron or by an architect. He must make decisions arising from a specific location regarding scale, materials, viewing space and placement [2, 3]. Two of the senior author's sculptures of the 1960's that are placed at public sites illustrate some of these considerations. 'Locking Piece' (1963/4), sited by the river Thames near the Tate Gallery in London, was a gift to the Nation. John Barton, of Farmer and Dark, Chartered Architects, after discussions with the senior author (hereinafter referred to by the personal pronoun) planned the environment of the sculpture and the firm designed both the garden surrounding the sculpture and the nearby Riverwalk House. In a letter to the junior author, Barton discussed the design of the freestanding cooling tower of Riverwalk House, which can be seen on the right in Fig. 1. Because of proximity and similarities