Culture of Congestion  

Latest Posts  |  Archive  | 

Olafur Eliasson's Water Falls Short

by Sandy Ikeda
Fri, 27 Jun 2008 at 11:45 AM

Print

Send

RSS

Share:

Olafur Eliasson's "waterfalls" public-art project opened yesterday. After weeks of anticipation we were eager to see this thing running, and proud that the artist saw fit to place half of it in our now-trendy borough of Brooklyn.

(Francis Morrone of the Sun writes about it here. His article also includes some photos.)

As we approached the waterfall on the edge of Brooklyn Heights and glimpsed the metal scaffolding through the entrance to the Promenade, we felt a surge of disappointment, because it looked like it hadn't been turned on, contrary to all the newspaper and TV reports. Turns out it was indeed on, but because the air was heavy and hazy, the falling water blended perfectly with the backdrop of wide sky. So when we saw the thin plume swooping off to the side of the structure we realized that the reports had in fact been right.

Weather aside, "our" falls were disappointingly thin and unimpressive. The water didn't come cascading down in torrents, as it appears to do in the artist's rendering, but to rain down vaporously. Perhaps with a higher volume of water, it would look less like a shopping mall display and more like, well, a waterfall.

This may be unfair as the entire project is probably best viewed from a distance. From the Promenade, for instance, we could see the second of the four installations on Governor's Island, about a mile away. Those falls looked satisfyingly dense and more distinct than the one a couple of hundred feet away from us. Later, I'll try to see what the other two look like (under the Brooklyn anchorage of the Brooklyn Bridge facing Manhattan, and on Pier 35 on the Manhattan side of the East River), especially at night, when the falls are supposed to be illuminated.

I suppose the main source of my disappointment is the artist's Manhattan-centrism. These falls are obviously meant to be seen from the other side of the river, so what we saw is basically "backstage" to the main event. As a Brooklynite I feel slighted by this. And it also puts into question Mr. Eliasson's creds as a cutting-edge artist (with a show currently at MoMA). I mean, doesn't he know that Brooklyn is the new Manhattan?

Culture of Congestion Homepage