Ugliest Temple Ever?

Postby MistressSybs » Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:56 pm

geekster wrote:Or maybe The Temple of Sarcasm which would be a zen garden with a big rock in the center surrounded by cans of spray paint where people could tag it up and then on Sunday night, a candle gets lit and we watch it burn and then the rock goes on eBay after to reimburse the borg for the grant.


hahahaha! I like it! ;-)
Opinions and Assholes, everybody's got one!

.:: starfuckers incorporated ::.
User avatar
MistressSybs
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 1:56 pm
Location: Texas

Postby Teo del Fuego » Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:04 pm

I loved this year's Temple and the fact that it didn't look like a man-made structure. I loved the little niches built into the walls and the sense of a space that was enclosed yet open at the same time. Hats off to the designer and the crew who brought it to life!
User avatar
Teo del Fuego
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 11:31 am
Location: Denver
Burning Since: 2005
Camp Name: Whiskey & Dust

What we did to it

Postby bradtem » Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:10 pm

I liked the temple, but I didn't like what we did to it. The temple is (for many years) intended as a place to put memorials, and it has always been moving to walk through them. But this time the temple got completely covered with them, somehow you could no longer see the temple and only the modifications.

And most (and worst) of all were the large coloured graffiti put up higher on the walls, by those who climbed them (the designers did not expect this, which is an error on their part.) "Be yourself!" Gee, that's profound.

I hope for temple designs where the memorials become an important part of the temple but the temple does not vanish underneath them. And large flat surfaces suitable for graffiti seem to attract dickheads, alas.

I agree that at night, it was better because the form of the temple took hold and the memorials were something you appreciated only by coming closer to them.
User avatar
bradtem
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 12:27 pm
Location: Silicon Valley
Burning Since: 1998

Postby gaminwench » Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:39 pm

My first reaction was "Doesn't look/feel like a temple", but the structure grew on me as the week passed, as it gained energy. Disliked the tagging, but that's a universal dislike of mine. Loved the burning, beautiful...

Since the 'need' for a spiritual repository grew spontaneously out of the community's response to a personal art piece (in '00), it represents burners' desire for one place to grieve/let go/reflect; as such, any designated structure can fulfill that need...

There are many smaller 'sacred spaces' built throughout the city, and some of the playa art feels incredibly 'sacred' (Aeolian PyroHarp comes to mind, beautiful for weddings)... but the power of one large 'sacred' space intended for the entire community brings unity and groundedness...
User avatar
gaminwench
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 11:57 am
Location: Shangri-la
Burning Since: 1999
Camp Name: DOTA, EoD, OBOP

Postby hollywallydoodle » Thu Sep 09, 2010 6:29 pm

junglesmacks wrote:All of my night pics are horrible and didn't come out.. :cry:


thank you! i pmed you a link to my set on flickr. i remembered my tripod this year :D
User avatar
hollywallydoodle
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 9:58 pm
Location: sf

Postby zcassidy » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:09 pm

I liked how non metropolis it was and to me it represented an organic space for reflection in the midst of a right angled universe. I was never shocked by its intricate detail but I enjoyed the flow of the wind and noise through its hollow spaces. It was simple and made me think of how before humanity created great religious marvels our most sacred sites were natural depressions and peaks made by the earth itself.
Be absurd with your goodness
User avatar
zcassidy
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:40 pm
Location: Santa Clarita, CA

Postby sdowney2002 » Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:16 pm

Geez, this conversation is making me exhausted. Why don't y'all just put up a poll instead and we can all vote on whether we liked this year's temple. Majority rules. If the "I didn't like the temple" faction wins then well make the artist go back to the playa and rebuild it till everyones satisfied.

Geez, it's just fuckin art, people. Get a life
User avatar
sdowney2002
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 1:44 am
Burning Since: 2010

Postby fbcota » Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:46 pm

Temple was rad in my opinion.

But there is little reason to name call because people disagree about it. Its rare that everyone love a piece of art, its even rarer when its a "spirtual" space that takes a drastic design departure.

There is no reason that everyone can't built their own temple. On the build crews for the last 2 years, we have thought of our projects as small temples. For 2008, it was a temple of birth and in 2009 it was a temple of support.

I do say rant and rave at the top of your lungs. But if you didn't like it, then please put up some art next year and prove your point. Or at least throw a comedic tantrum about it out on the playa.
User avatar
fbcota
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:30 pm
Location: Reno, and Tahoe, and Somewere else

Postby buckycat » Sun Sep 12, 2010 5:11 pm

I dug the Temple of Flux this year. The geometry and curves and color reminded me of the slickrock slot canyons I love on the CO plateau. I like that it was a change up from the past several year's approaches.

I still prefer the elegant David Best temples though. Which leads me to:

Many previous years' temples were made from largely salvaged/scrap wood. I have seen no indication that the Temple of Flux used recycled wood, so I am supposing it did not. Anyone who worked on Temple crew able to comment that?
buckycat
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 11:28 pm

Postby FireShaman » Sun Sep 12, 2010 5:53 pm

I loved it....
User avatar
FireShaman
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Denver, CO
Burning Since: 2008
Camp Name: Pillow Punch

Postby aspectacle » Sun Sep 12, 2010 7:09 pm

I really loved this year's Temple, especially once I realized the form it was alluding to: a cave. If the modern metropolis is the city built on metal beams and right angles, the original place where a community of humans formed was a cave, with some fire in it--this was the Temple of the place where we come from, at the outskirts of the city where we are.
aspectacle
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 7:22 pm

Postby theCryptofishist » Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:30 pm

aspectacle wrote:...the original place where a community of humans formed was a cave, with some fire in it...

Okay, we know that that's not really where it was. The image of "caveman" came from early discoveries and was probably slanted because the remains had a larger chance of survival in that sort of environment.
Simon's real sig line?

Embrace the Sock

Winners never quilt, quilters never win...
User avatar
theCryptofishist
 
Posts: 37437
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:28 am
Location: In Exile
Burning Since: 2017

Postby Box Burner » Sun Sep 12, 2010 10:44 pm

I liked it. It had a more primitive feel to it that, to me at least, is more appropriate to it's purpose.
Dance in the heart of chaos. . . . .

ὁ δὲ ἀνεξέταστος βίος οὐ βιωτὸς ἀνθρώπῳ
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- Σωκράτης

.
User avatar
Box Burner
 
Posts: 5761
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Kentucky

Postby kman » Mon Sep 13, 2010 2:49 pm

I got what they were doing, and appreciate it. I have no problem with it.

It didn't meet my expectations, based on the temples that came before it, and I didn't much care for the aesthetics, again, compared to the earlier incarnations. I didn't HATE it, but but I understand the "let-down" that some have expressed.

I LOVED the look at night, however, the burning embers seen from a distance. That rocked.

And the FEEL was there. It gave people the place that the prior temples provided, to use in similar ways, in spite of it's radically different appearance.

I like the Temple burn. I like burning the Man. The two events are radically different, and have different purposes, and each has a radically different feel. Burning the Man is a cathartic party and celebration of wanton destruction (and so much more). Burning the Temple is a more somber affair.

Someone in our camp remarked that the weekender clowns leave after the Man burns... while the truer burners stay and only leave after the temple burns. You see burners at their best when you attend the Temple burn. You see Frat Boys at their worst when you see the Man burn. (don't be stupid, obviously these are generalizations to make a point and not meant to completely pigeon-hole everyone into each category without exception)

So did I like this year's Temple? Overall, I'd agree with the detractors that my overall reaction was highly mixed, and that's unusual. I did, however, love it the same as I have loved it's predecessors.
User avatar
kman
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:27 pm
Location: Studio City, CA

Previous

Return to 2010 Art & Performance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests