This morning’s Guardian hailed the fresh brilliance of the new Unilever Turbine Hall project at Tate Modern by Doris Salcedo.
It shows “a laudable unwillingness to compromise, wanting to make a work about absolute indifference, and to address desolation and destitution…Shibboleth begins with a hairline crack in the concrete floor by the entrance. As insignificant as a flaw in a teacup, as telling as the build-up scenes of a disaster movie, the crack soon widens and deepens, a jagged crevasse making its jagged way the length of the Turbine Hall, 167 metres away, jabbing a fork of lightning and deepening as it goes. You can never quite see the bottom of it.” The double page picture spread in this morning’s Guardian centrefold does give a good impression of just how massive this new work of art is, and how astonishing the feat of engineering.
But is Shibboleth really as er, groundbreaking as it appears?
I haven’t seen the “piece” or the “installation” or whatever it is called, but I have been to the De Young Museum in the Golden Gate park in San Francisco, where there is a very similar conceit by our own Andy Goldsworthy called Faultline, inspired by the unique character of California’s tectonic topography.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in