University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

From land art to social practice: environmental art projects by Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Bonnie Ora Sherk, Mel Chin, Fritz Haeg, and Fallen Fruit

(USC Thesis Other)

From land art to social practice: environmental art projects by Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Bonnie Ora Sherk, Mel Chin, Fritz Haeg, and Fallen Fruit

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

FROM LAND ART TO SOCIAL PRACTICE:
Environmental Art Projects by Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Bonnie Ora Sherk,
Mel Chin, Fritz Haeg, and Fallen Fruit

By

Karen L. Hinchcliffe

A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSKI SCHOOL OF ART AND DESIGN
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF ART AND CURATORIAL PRACTICES AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE

May 12, 2017

2
Table of Contents

List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. 3
Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 8
Chapter 1: Early Environmental Artists of the 1970s to 1980s.................................................... 14
Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison
Making Earth (1970) ............................................................................................ 16
Portable Orchard: Survival Piece #5 (1972-73) .................................................... 17
Bonnie Ora Sherk
Portable Parks I-III (1970) .................................................................................... 19
Crossroads Community (The Farm) (1974-80) ..................................................... 20
Chapter 2: New Genre and Research-based Public Art from the 1990s to the 2000s ................ 22
Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison
California Wash (1996) ........................................................................................ 24
Mel Chin
Revival Field (1991-ongoing) ................................................................................ 26
Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project (2006-ongoing) ........................... 29
Chapter 3: Transition to Social Practice in the 2000s .................................................................. 31
Mel Chin
The TIE that BINDS: MIRROR of the FUTURE (2016-ongoing) ............................. 32
Fritz Haeg
Edible Estates (2005-ongoing) ............................................................................. 35
Fallen Fruit
Fruit Tree Adoptions (2007-ongoing) ................................................................... 38
Public Fruit Maps (2004-ongoing) ........................................................................ 38
Public Fruit Jams (2006-ongoing) ......................................................................... 38
The Endless Orchard (2006-ongoing) ................................................................... 39
Del Aire Fruit Park (2012) ..................................................................................... 39
Chapter 4: Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 41
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................. 48
Figures .......................................................................................................................................... 54

3
List of Figures

Figure 1. Michael Heizer, Double Negative, 1969-70, photograph of two trenches measuring
1500 x 50 x 30 feet, Mormon Mesa.
http://doublenegative.tarasen.net/double-negative/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 2. Robert Smithson, Spiral Jetty, 1970, photograph of mud, precipitated salt crystals,
rocks, water coil, 1500 x 15 feet, Rozel Point.
https://www.robertsmithson.com/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 3. Walter de Maria, The Lightning Field, 1977, photograph of four hundred polished
20’7.5” steel poles, New Mexico.
http://diaart.org/collection/collection/de-maria-walter-the-lightning-field-1977-
1977-003-1-400 [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 4. Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Making Earth (Gathering Earth and
Watering), 1970, photograph of live performance using sand, clay, sewage sludge,
leaf material, and chicken, cow, and horse manure, La Jolla.
http://theharrisonstudio.net/making-earth-1970 [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 5. Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Making Earth (Breaking and Mixing
Earth), 1970, photograph of live performance using sand, clay, sewage sludge, leaf
material, and chicken, cow, and horse manure, La Jolla.
http://theharrisonstudio.net/making-earth-1970 [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 6. Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Making Earth (Tasting and Smelling
Earth), 1970, photograph of live performance using sand, clay, sewage sludge, leaf
material, and chicken, cow, and horse manure, La Jolla.
http://theharrisonstudio.net/making-earth-1970 [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 7. Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Portable Orchard: Survival Piece #5,
1972-73, photograph of installation with hexagonal redwood boxes, assorted semi-
dwarf citrus trees, and hexagonal light boxes, California State University, Fullerton.
https://www.pinterest.com/verawestergaard/artists-helen-and-newton-harrison/
[accessed March 4, 2017].

Figure 8. Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park I, 1970, photograph of site-specific performance
installation of small, portable parks with plant and animal species in urban dead
areas, James Lick Freeway, San Francisco. http://www.alivinglibrary.org/blog/art-
landscape-architecture-systemic-design/early-art-bonnie-ora-sherk-featured-
sfmoma-show [accessed March 3, 2017].

4
Figure 9. Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park I, 1970, photograph of site-specific performance
installation of small, portable parks with plant and animal species in urban dead
areas, James Lick Freeway, San Francisco. http://www.alivinglibrary.org/blog/art-
landscape-architecture-systemic-design/early-art-bonnie-ora-sherk-featured-
sfmoma-show [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 10. Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park II, 1970, photograph of site-specific performance
installation of small, portable parks with plant and animal species in urban dead
areas, Mission/Van Ness freeway offramp, San Francisco.
http://www.alivinglibrary.org/blog/art-landscape-architecture-systemic-
design/early-art-bonnie-ora-sherk-featured-sfmoma-show [accessed March 3,
2017].

Figure 11. Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park III, 1970, photograph of site-specific performance
installation of small, portable parks with plant and animal species in urban dead
areas, Between Stockton Street and Grant Street, San Francisco.
http://www.alivinglibrary.org/blog/art-landscape-architecture-systemic-
design/early-art-bonnie-ora-sherk-featured-sfmoma-show [accessed March 3,
2017].

Figure 12. Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park III, 1970, photograph of site-specific performance
installation of small, portable parks with plant and animal species in urban dead
areas, Between Stockton Street and Grant Street, San Francisco.
http://www.alivinglibrary.org/blog/art-landscape-architecture-systemic-
design/early-art-bonnie-ora-sherk-featured-sfmoma-show [accessed March 3,
2017].

Figure 13. Bonnie Ora Sherk, Crossroads Community (The Farm), 1974-1980. Photograph of
environmental art installation with domestic animals, vegetable and flower gardens,
and The Raw Egg Animal Theater, San Francisco.
http://www.foundsf.org/index.php?title=The_Farm_by_the_Freeway [accessed
March 3, 2017]

Figure 14. Suzanne Lacy, The Oakland Projects, 1991-2001, photograph of series of
installations, performances, and political activism with youths, Oakland.
http://www.suzannelacy.com/the-oakland-projects/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 15. Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, California Wash, 1989-1996,
photograph of installation with landscape sculpture, garden, pathway, mural,
sculptural forms, Santa Monica. http://theharrisonstudio.net/california-wash
[accessed March 3, 2017].

5
Figure 16. Mel Chin, Revival Field, 1991-ongoing, photograph of land art project with hyper-
accumulator plants within industrial fencing on a hazardous waste landfill, Pig’s Eye
Landfill, St. Paul. http://melchin.org/oeuvre/revival-field [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 17. Mel Chin, Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project, 2006-ongoing, photograph
of Fundreds-hand drawn interpretations of $100 bills, New Orleans.
http://melchin.org/oeuvre/operation-paydirtfundred-dollar-bill-project [accessed
March 3, 2017].

Figure 18. Mel Chin, Safehouse (exterior), 2008-2010, photograph of existing house, stainless
steel, steel, wood, plywood, Gatorboard, lead-encapsulation paint, automotive body
and pain finishes, 12000 brass thumbtacks, 6000 unique hand-drawn Fundred Dollar
Bills, 10’x10’ bank vault door with rotary combination lock, New Orleans.
http://melchin.org/oeuvre/render [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 19. Mel Chin, Safehouse (interior), 2008-2010, photograph of existing house, stainless
steel, steel, wood, plywood, Gatorboard, lead-encapsulation paint, automotive body
and pain finishes, 12000 brass thumbtacks, 6000 unique hand-drawn Fundred Dollar
Bills, 10’x10’ bank vault door with rotary combination lock, New Orleans.
http://melchin.org/oeuvre/render [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 20. Edgar Arceneaux, The CENTER of the EARTH, 2016, photograph of two fountains,
cast in metal, chrome plated in rose gold, Cheviot Hills Recreation Center, Los
Angeles. https://artandcakela.com/2016/08/05/currentla-water-public-art-biennial-
2016/the-center-of-the-earth-edgar-arceneaux-2016/ [accessed March 26, 2017].

Figure 21. Rirkrit Tiravanija, Untitled 2016 (LA Water, Water Pavilion), 2016, photograph of
open timber-frame structure, Sepulveda Basin, Los Angeles.
http://forecastpublicart.org/public-art-review/2017/02/going-with-the-flow/
[accessed March 26, 2017].

Figure 22. Lucky Dragons, The Spreading Ground, 2016, photograph of immersive
environments and experiences with sound, music, movement, choreography, and
objects, Hansen Dam, Los Angeles. http://forecastpublicart.org/public-art-
review/2017/02/going-with-the-flow/ [accessed March 26, 2017].

Figure 23. Mel Chin, The TIE that BINDS: Mirror of the Future (15-O), 2016, photograph of
California native drought-tolerant gardens, digital prints of garden blueprints, The
Bowtie Parcel, Los Angeles. http://the-tie-that-binds.org/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 24. Mel Chin, The TIE that BINDS: Mirror of the Future (15-O), 2016, photograph of
California native drought-tolerant gardens, digital prints of garden blueprints, Los
Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles. http://the-tie-that-binds.org/ [accessed
March 3, 2017
6
Figure 25. Fritz Haeg, Edible Estates, 2006, photograph of various vegetable and fruit plants
and trees, Lakewood.
http://www.fritzhaeg.com/garden/initiatives/edibleestates/losangeles.html
[accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 26. Fritz Haeg, Edible Estates, 2006, photograph of various vegetable and fruit plants
and trees, Lakewood.
http://www.fritzhaeg.com/garden/initiatives/edibleestates/losangeles.html
[accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 27. Fritz Haeg, Edible Estates, 2007, photograph of various vegetable and fruit plants
and trees, London.
http://www.fritzhaeg.com/garden/initiatives/edibleestates/london.html [accessed
March 26, 2017].

Figure 28. Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Tree Adoptions, 2007-ongoing, photograph of fruit trees
planted in communal urban spaces, Los Angeles. http://fallenfruit.org/fruit-tree-
adoptions/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 29. Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Maps, 2004-ongoing, photograph of hand-drawn maps of
fruit trees planted in communal urban spaces, Silver Lake, Los Angeles.
http://fallenfruit.org/media/maps-2/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 30. Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Jam, 2006-ongoing, photograph of jam made of fruit from
fruit trees planted in communal urban spaces, Los Angeles.
http://fallenfruit.org/projects/public-fruit-jam/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 31. Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Jam, 2006-ongoing, photograph of jam made of fruit from
fruit trees planted in communal urban spaces, Los Angeles.
http://fallenfruit.org/projects/public-fruit-jam/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 32. Fallen Fruit, The Endless Orchard, 2006-ongoing, photograph of fruit trees planted in
communal urban spaces, Los Angeles. http://fallenfruit.org/the-endless-orchard-
planting-day/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 33. Fallen Fruit, Del Aire Fruit Park, 2012, photograph of civic art commission of park
including orchard with 27 fruit trees, 8 native grapevines, and edible herbs, Del Aire,
Los Angeles. http://eco-publicart.org/fruitpark/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 34. Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Map (Del Aire), 2012, photograph of hand-drawn map of
fruit trees planted in communal urban spaces, Del Aire, Los Angeles.
http://mviegener.com/portfolio/del-aire-public-fruit-park/ [accessed March 3,
2017].

7
Figure 35. Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Portable Orchard: Survival Piece #5,
2016, photograph of installation with hexagonal redwood boxes, assorted semi-
dwarf citrus trees, and hexagonal light boxes, Walker Art Center, Minneapolis.
http://www.walkerart.org/image/helen-mayer-harrison-and-newton-harrisons-por
[accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 36. Bonnie Ora Sherk, A Living Library, 1981-ongoing, photograph of eco-art native
landscapes with native and fruit trees, vegetable and flower gardens, rainwater
harvesting cisterns, native creeks, integrated artworks, San Francisco.
http://www.alivinglibrary.org/blog/branches/omiexcelsior [accessed March 3,
2017].

Figure 37. Mel Chin, The Fundred Reserve (exterior), photograph of installation of 453168
Fundreds, Fundred Presentation Pallet, Safehouse Door, Cochran Museum,
Washington, D.C. http://fundred.org/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

Figure 38. Mel Chin. 2017. The Fundred Reserve (interior), photograph of installation of 453168
Fundreds, Fundred Presentation Pallet, Safehouse Door, Cochran Museum,
Washington, D.C. http://fundred.org/ [accessed March 3, 2017].

8
Introduction

The United States in the 1950s was an era of mass over-indulgence; a byproduct of
experiencing exponential economic growth after recovering from The Great Depression prior to
World War II. Americans invested in many household conveniences that were once unobtainable,
such as televisions, refrigerators, vacuum cleaners, and family automobiles. As historian Elaine
Tyler May suggests, “The federal government and the American people saw the new
consumerism as a way to deemphasize class…With the things that defined ‘the good life’ within
economic reach, working-class people could achieve the upward mobility they craved.”
1
Another
way suburban Americans displayed their wealth and success was through the installation and
maintenance of super green lawns, which called for the use of toxic chemicals and pesticides that
ran into water systems alongside increases in gas-use and carbon-dioxide emissions from lawn
mowers. The expectation and pressure to ‘keep up with the Joneses’ infiltrated every aspect of
life and left little room or concern for the negative environmental impacts this consumption
caused.
Unlike the seemingly sanitary utopia that was 1950s America, the 1960s decade was
marked by unrest and government critique regarding war, civil rights, and environmental
disasters. Eventually, the government responded by enacting some environmental protection,
such as the National Wilderness Preservation System in 1964 that initially secured the
preservation of over nine million acres of American wild lands
2
and the National Environmental

1
Elaine Tyler May quoted in “The Rise of American Consumerism,” PBS,
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/tupperware-
consumer/.
2
“20
th
Century: Sixties 1960-69,” Environmental History Timeline, web, accessed January 29,
2017, http://66.147.244.135/~enviror4/20th-century/sixties-1960-1969/.
9
Policy Act in 1969 to ensure positive environmental conditions for Americans and their future
children.
3

This new interest in the environment in the 1960s coincided with new, more conceptual
forms of art emerging. During the 1960s and 1970s some artists began rejecting the traditional
ideas of art forms through various types of performances, happenings, and Conceptual practices,
in which the value was not in the object itself, but in the idea behind the work. No longer purely
“art for art’s sake” or for visual consumption and pleasure, the purpose of these radical, idea-
based works was to make a statement and send messages about specific issues, including the
environment. As Jeffrey Kastner remarks in Land and Environmental Art:
Among the most complex and fascinating of these artistic responses to the earth are the
works that have come to be called Land Art. What began in the mid 1960s with a small
number of committed conceptualists – disenchanted with the modernist endgame and
animated by a desire to measure the power of the artwork isolated from the
cosmopolitan modifications of the white cube – has grown over the last thirty years to
include a widely diverging collection of forms, approaches and theoretical positions.
4

Although earthworks and land art can be traced back to ancient times in various parts of
the world, it was not until the 1960s and 1970s that they began appearing in the United States.
One of the main features of this land art was site-specificity—locations chosen for specific
reasons; through earth art, the artist makes a comment about particular issues or events related
to their chosen site. Many of these works also comment on man’s mark on or power over the
land but sometimes actually harmed the environment.

3
NEPA Declaration of National Environmental Policy 101(a) quoted in “20
th
Century: Sixties
1960-69,” Environmental History Timeline, web, accessed January 29, 2017,
http://66.147.244.135/~enviror4/20th-century/sixties-1960-1969/.
4
Jeffrey Kastner, “Preface,” Land and Environmental Art, Ed. Jeffrey Kastner, London: Phaidon
Press Limited, 1998, 11.
10
One of the earliest and best known works of American Land art is Michael Heizer’s Double
Negative (1969-70) (Figure 1). Located in Mormon Mesa, just northwest of Overton, Nevada,
Heizer cut two trenches into the land, facing each other, that measured four hundred seven
meters long, over fifteen meters deep, and over nine meters wide. These trenches displaced two-
hundred-forty-thousand tons of rock from their original location. Robert Smithson’s Spiral Jetty
(1970) (Figure 2) is another very important early land work. Measuring one thousand five
hundred feet long and fifteen feet wide, a path of rocks, mud and salt crystals spirals into the
Great Salt Lake near Utah’s Rozel Point. Although Smithson chose sites that are known to be
particularly damaged, Spiral Jetty displaced natural land and water and altered the original
landscape. Walter de Maria’s The Lighting Field (1977) (Figure 3) is an installation of four-hundred
steel posts in a one-mile grid in western New Mexico. The steel posts are meant to attract
lightning during a storm where it travels from one steel post to another, illuminating the entire
field, thus sending large quantities of electrical charges into the earth.
One of the features of land art is that it exists outside of the gallery and museum setting
and outside of the traditional art market. Because Land Art is site-specific, these works are
located all over the world, and they cannot be moved, therefore, they are not easily accessible
and are not usually bought, sold, or shown in galleries or museums, unless it is through
photographic documentation. While this suggests that the artwork exists solely outside of the art
market, these examples are exceptions because The Lightning Field was commissioned and is
maintained by Dia Art Foundation and Double Negative, which can be viewed by anyone willing
11
to journey to the desolate site, is technically owned by the Museum of Contemporary Art, Los
Angeles.
5

American Earth works and Land art also responded to the negative side effects of
urbanization, growing populations, and industrialization. As Brian Wallis claims in Land and
Environmental Art, “Like many political currents of the 1960s, the ecology movement was a
millennialist reaction to both the successes and failures of Modernism. It was not simply a moral
campaign against the corporate depredation of the environment, but also an anxious response
to the globalization of electronic and cultural technologies.”
6
With the environment showing an
urgent need of intervention, artists started using different methods and techniques to convey
their ideas.
Concurrent to Environmental and Land Art was the development of public art, often in
urban environments. Departing from more traditional forms of memorials and murals, this new
public art took many forms, including site-specific sculptures, installations, and earthworks. At
this time, the government recognized the varying degrees of value that could be found in art in
public spaces. As Barbara Hoffman supports in Art and the Public Sphere:
In the 1960s, federal, state, and municipal governments began to explore new ways to
support art in public places for purely aesthetic reasons. They sought to install artwork
that would both enhance public places and expand public awareness of contemporary
artists. The bronze or stone commemorative work gave way to large scale abstract
sculpture and earthworks. The victory of abstraction meant that what was selected as
public art was for the most part not public in the sense of shared aesthetic vocabulary,
symbolism, or worldview between artists and their audiences.
7

5
Michael Heizer’s Double Negative was given to the Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles
by Virginia Dwan.
6
Brian Wallis, “Survey,” Land and Environmental Art, Ed. Jeffrey Kastner, London: Phaidon Press
Limited, 1998, 24.
7
Barbara Hoffman, “Law for Art’s Sake in the Public Realm,” Art and the Public Sphere, Ed. W. J.
T. Mitchell, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1992, 114.
12

By beautifying public spaces with public works of art for all to enjoy, cities were able to refresh
areas that were rundown and neglected. Introducing new and one-of-a-kind works of art in these
previously worn spaces encourages and inspires reclamation of the space by its community and
encourages a shared responsibility to care for and maintain that space. Despite these community-
focused public art projects’ intent to encourage participation, they did little to actually involve
the community’s opinions on what to install or, more importantly, allowing them to participate
in the installation. Without a physical connection to the project and in turn, to the environment,
many public works lose their purpose to the community.
The environmental artists working with the land that will be discussed in this thesis were
able to not only reclaim the site in which the public art was located, but they also had the power
to reclaim the environment itself. They focus their practices on emphasizing the importance of
the preservation of nature and the environment in works that span from the early 1970s to the
2000s. The first section discusses the early environmental art projects: Helen Mayer Harrison and
Newton Harrison’s Making Earth (1970) and Portable Orchard: Survival Piece #5 (1972-73) and
Bonnie Ora Sherk’s Portable Parks I-III (1970) and Crossroads Community (The Farm) (1974-80).
Grounded in conceptual art and performance, these projects provide an art historical context for
ideas related to earthworks and participatory public art that raises awareness about degradation
of the land as they attempt to reclaim or green the urban environment.
13
The next section discusses how the Harrisons and Mel Chin would turn towards what
Suzanne Lacy has called “new genre public art.”
8
Moving beyond personal physical interaction
with the earth, the Harrisons’ California Wash (1996) and Chin’s Revival Field (1991-ongoing) and
Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project (2006-ongoing) all involved extensive research and
interdisciplinary collaboration to make public works to address specific ecological issues—
specifically ocean pollution and lead toxicity in the soil—that continue today.
By the 2000s, there has been a shift towards more collaborative, community-based
environmental art projects and can be considered as forms of social practice.
9
In this section I will
be analyzing Mel Chin’s The TIE that BINDS: MIRROR of the FUTURE (2016-ongoing), Fritz Haeg’s
Edible Estates (2005-ongoing), and the collective Fallen Fruit’s projects Fruit Tree Adoptions
(2007-ongoing), Public Fruit Maps (2004-ongoing), Public Fruit Jams (2006-ongoing), The Endless
Orchard (2006-ongoing), and Del Aire Public Fruit Park (2012). These more recent projects are
dependent on public engagement as the artists use pedagogical strategies to inspire action in
specific communities or contexts.
My initial research for this thesis started with my research on historical examples of
California artists included in my MA practicum exhibition, Dirty Talk: Art / Environment / Action.
Subsequently I decided to explore a few specific recent case studies of Los Angeles artists to
analyze environmental art projects spanning from the 1970s to today. Ultimately, I aim to
determine the distinctions between the artists’ strategies and methodologies used in the

8
New genre public art is an artistic genre that utilizes the consultation, and often collaboration,
of experts in fields other than art, for the purpose of making research-based work that
addresses issues specific to a particular community.
9
Social practice is an artistic genre that utilizes social engagement and collaboration to create
participatory artwork with and for a given community.
14
historical environmental land and earth works versus the contemporary social practice
environmental art projects, as well as how this specific group of artists attempted to impact
society through the emphasis on participation and education, and why the need for such
environmental interventions is more urgent than ever.

Chapter 1: Early Environmental Artists of the 1970s to 1980s
The 1970s era was marked by the establishment of various progressive environmental
policies including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Environmental Protection Agency,
the Clean Air Act, and the Soil and Water Conservation Act, to name a few. Additionally, the very
first Earth Day
10
celebrated in April of 1970, ignited the Environmental Movement in the United
States.
11
The San Francisco Bay oil spill in 1971 also contributed to increasing environmental
activism in California. However, the Oil Embargo in 1973
12
and subsequent recession and
inflation, focused attention on the world-wide energy crisis and economic issues rather than
activism. In response, to regain the focus of environmental issues, many artists at this time were
making work to address a variety of the pressing ecological issues.

10
Earth Day, April 22, is a day dedicated to the acknowledgement and support of
environmental protective acts.
11
The Environmental Movement began in the 1960s and 1970s and was a time in which actions
and policies were made to focus on the protection and preservation of various environmental
issues in America.
12
The Oil Embargo of 1973-74 was enacted against the United States by Arab members of the
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), severely reducing American access to oil
and in turn inflating the cost of what little resources were available.
15
While some early earth and land artists made work that relied on visual aesthetics that
did more to harm nature than good, in contrast there were a handful that focused on the
restoration of nature. As Amanda Boetzkes mentions in The Ethics of Earth Art:
Over the course of the seventies, [these] artists were concerned not merely with the
aesthetic revitalization of space but also with ecological resuscitation. To this end, they
joined forces with scientists, landscape planners, engineers, environmental specialists,
activists, and local communities to create art projects that would overhaul degraded sites
and quite literally bring them back to life.
13

Among the artists concerned with the reclamation and rejuvenation of the land in the 1970s were
Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison and Bonnie Ora Sherk, who will be discussed in the
first chapter of this thesis.

Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Making Earth (1970) and Portable Orchard:
Survival Piece #5 (1972-73)
The Harrisons’ artistic practices came from the 1960s and 1970s Conceptualism
movement, but they are also considered to be pioneers in the Eco-Art movement.
14
Using
methods such as photography, installation and performance throughout the years, they have
collaborated with many professionals from various disciplines to make work that addresses
numerous ecological issues, such as remediation strategies, inner city habitats, community

13
Amanda Boetzkes, “Contemporary Art and the Nature of Site,” The Ethics of Earth Art,
Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 2010, 31.
14
“Eco-art,” short for Ecological art, is an artistic genre that revolves around the preservation
and rejuvenation of ecosystems. The term is often used interchangeably with Environmental
art, however, Environmental art can include work that addresses both ecological and socio-
political issues relating to ecology and the environment. While many present the Harrisons as
“Eco-art pioneers,” their work addresses ecology and various social and political issues affecting
it, aligning themselves more with Environmental art.
16
empowerment, government responsibility, and different resources like soil, to name a few. The
couple’s art projects focus largely on environmental and ecological issues, but they are influenced
by their personal backgrounds; Helen has a background in teaching, philosophy, and studied
English literature, while Newton not only studied sculpture but also math and science, which
greatly impacted their collaborative work. Although most of their projects culminate in a physical
object or installation, it is the concept behind the object or installation that is the real work of
art.
While living and teaching in San Diego, California, the Harrisons created a process-
oriented, performative project known as Making Earth (1970) (Figures 4, 5, and 6). For this work
they combined sand, clay, sewage sludge, leaf material, and several types of manure, then
watered and mixed it for a period of four months until the soil was rich and could be tasted.
Making Earth was created as a response to the discovery of the endangered state of topsoil
throughout the world.
15
This project attempted to replenish the land that had seen years of
neglect and abuse. Several renditions of Making Earth were performed, from small-scale Revered
Earth to a large-scale project for ArtPark in New York.
Like other environmental artworks created by artists influenced by Conceptualism,
Making Earth was not a static object that existed in a traditional art space marketed for profit.
Boetzkes adds, “More than simply replacing the art object, however, the use of the body as an
artistic medium cultivated a heightened physical engagement with the earth.”
16
Like other artists

15
According to the World Wildlife Fund, half of the planet’s topsoil has eroded in the last one
hundred fifty years, https://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/soil-erosion-and-degradation.
16
Amanda Boetzkes, “Contemporary Art and the Nature of Site,” The Ethics of Earth Art,
Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 2010, 48.
17
at this time addressing the environment, the Harrisons incorporated their bodies into their
project, allowing them to physically connect with, interact with, and alter the pre-existing land in
order to produce additional viable earth suitable for sustaining vegetation. Growing urban
development has distanced humans from nature and the earth weakening their relationship to
the element from which all life originates. Making Earth exposes man’s role in the destruction of
the land and shows man’s ability to make amends by restoring it, while reestablishing the hands-
on and intimate relationship humans once had with the earth.
Just a couple of years after Making Earth the Harrisons began their Survival Series, which
focused on other environmental and ecological issues. Portable Orchard: Survival Piece #5 (1972-
73) (Figure 7), one of their Survival pieces, featured an orchard of semi-dwarf citrus and avocado
trees assembled inside of the art gallery at California State University, Fullerton. This piece was
conceived with the acceleration of urban and suburban development in mind, and with the
resulting reduction of land and increased smog production threatening the viability of sustainable
agriculture systems throughout Southern California. By creating an indoor environment safe from
the harsh elements of urbanization, the Harrisons nurtured what was predicted to be the very
last orange orchard in Orange County. Throughout the duration of this exhibition the condition
and vitality of the trees were monitored and noted. The orchard was accompanied by a feast in
which participants could enjoy meals made from the fruit that was grown in the gallery. Members
of the community could literally enjoy the fruits of the Harrisons’ labor.
As Linda Weintraub, author of To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of a Sustainable Planet, notes
about Portable Orchard:
Some trees thrived, but the meaning of the work was most effectively conveyed by the
trees that withered. They confronted museumgoers with evidence that, unlike
18
engineered manufacturing, engineered farming does not guarantee predicted outcomes.
Futhermore, viewers were led to ask why such a drastic measure as growing fruit indoors
was undertaken. The practice signaled two environmental problems that are endemic to
contemporary lifestyles—trees may be brought indoors because croplands are being
usurped by suburban and industrial development, or they might be relocated to escape
the smog, acid rain, and polluted soils outdoors.
17

While Portable Orchard made an impact in communicating the seriousness of the pollution and
lack of land caused by urban and suburban development, it could not offer a viable solution for
these agricultural issues as a whole. Weintraub also points out some criticisms of the project
saying that:
The Harrisons were concerned that Portable Orchard gave the mistaken impression that
a simple strategy could solve a compound environmental problem. In actuality, rectifying
these problems involves science, politics, sociology, architecture, city planning, ecology,
and more. As a result, the artists sought a way to use the full expressive potential of their
profession to invent the radical schemes that might be needed to address such pragmatic
issues. ‘The signals became clear. We decided to choose a direction other than simple
sculptural installations with farming systems. We began improvising ways to present
whole systems by adding text, photographic and drawn or painted images and narrative
to the work in a new format.’
18

Although installing an orchard in an art gallery to monitor its viability and to protect it
from external harsh elements does not solve the problem of air pollution and the reduction of
healthy agricultural land, it did present the severity of the Southern Californian environmental
state and by using supplemental charts and graphs, Portable Orchard foreshadows and sends a
warning of how barren our future land will be if further protective measures are not taken.

17
Linda Weintraub, “Twentieth-Century Eco Art Pioneers,” To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of a
Sustainable Planet, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2012, 77.
18
Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, “From Here to There,” published by Helen
Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, 2001 quoted in Linda Weintraub, “Twentieth-Century
Eco Art Pioneers,” To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of a Sustainable Planet, Berkeley and Los Angeles:
University of California Press, 2012, 77.
19
Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Parks I-III (1970) and Crossroads Community (The Farm) (1974-80)
Bonnie Ora Sherk, like Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, began with
Conceptualism but moved into video, performance, and installation art. She later worked as an
educator and landscape architect. And like the Harrisons, Sherk has collaborated with others to
create art works and projects that address issues such as food production, inner city habitats,
agricultural reform, education, and community empowerment, to name a few.
Beginning in 1970, in collaboration with Howard Levine, Sherk created Portable Parks I-III
(1970), a series of three temporary, site-specific performance installations at under-utilized
urban spaces in San Francisco. Portable Park I (Figure 8) involved planting palm trees on an
overpass located on the former James Lick Freeway that crossed over Market Street. For Portable
Park II (Figures 9 and 10) they installed turf, picnic tables and benches, and brought live animals
onto two concrete islands adjacent to the Mission/Van Ness off ramp. Similarly, Portable Park III
(Figures 11 and 12) included turf and sitting areas, and brought both domestic and zoo animals
to Maiden Lane between Stockton and Grant streets near Union Square. The positive reception
of the Portable Parks series helped frame Sherk’s artistic practice, and she has continued to
develop projects that intervene in urban spaces to create inhabitable areas where people can
enjoy and learn about natural elements usually inaccessible in city centers.
Portable Parks addressed the ever-growing issue of under-utilized public spaces, and
attempts to turn empty communal spaces into parks where the community can congregate and
interact. By transforming these spaces into parks, Sherk created a welcoming environment to
encourage engagement and a sense of community and ownership. When people feel that they
20
are connected to or belong to a particular site, they feel a shared sense of responsibility for
maintaining and protecting it.
After Portable Parks I-III, Sherk was the founder and director of the site-specific project
Crossroads Community (The Farm) (1974-80) (Figure 13), a seven-acre farm and community art
space built on an abandoned lot underneath a San Francisco freeway. The space featured gardens
and live animals, provided educational programming for children, internships, and performance-
art events. With a mission to raise awareness of environmental and urban issues, it has been
credited as one of the very first alternative, artist-run spaces in California. The Farm was later
turned into a public park. Again, with The Farm, Sherk brings attention to under-utilized urban
spaces. Here, she transforms a large abandoned lot in the middle of San Francisco, where space
is hard to come by, into a complete functioning farm. Once again, she turns an otherwise barren
and unwelcoming plot of land into a thriving and inviting space for the community to gather and
engage.
In addition to the performance art events at The Farm, Sherk’s site-specific project was
seen as a performance in itself. In an interview with Weintraub, Sherk reveals that, “‘I thought of
it as a performance piece; I was creating the performance of being.’ She goes on to explain, ‘The
ultimate performance is being a total human being….Within this performance I performed
multiple roles. I was the administrator, politician, strategist, teacher, cook, designer, gardener,
etc. In a sense, everyone who participated was also a performer.’”
19
Sherk utilized performance
to lead by example and educate visitors; by participating in the performances, visitors learned by

19
Bonnie Sherk Interview with Linda Weintraub on March 12, 2010 quoted in Linda Weintraub,
“Twentieth-Century Eco Art Pioneers,” To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of a Sustainable Planet,
Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2012, 106.
21
taking action and contributed to the life of the project. Without participation The Farm would
likely die. In a highly dense urban city such as San Francisco, the opportunity to spend time at
and contribute to a farm with live animals and crops was unusual. Since The Farm was such an
innovative project, offering an experience far beyond that of attending an art gallery presenting
static objects, it was considered to be one of the first alternative art spaces.
20
As Weintraub adds:
The Farm established an autonomous zone of action that far exceeded the alternative art
spaces that were being established at the time. Attending to the problems of the urban
environment as an art practice was one noteworthy innovation. Another was including
nonhumans within its definition of a city community. In this manner its site-specific
features model an ecologically based society in which biological and cultural systems are
fully integrated. Sherk identifies the ultimate significance of these accomplishments by
saying that The Farm ‘had to do with the theory and practice of art as a tool for cultural
transformation and human survival.’
21

The Farm taught the community that art has endless possibilities and can be used to benefit a
diverse audience and the environment in an unlikely urban setting.
These environmental art projects by the Harrisons and Sherk departed from the early
examples of Earth and Land art in various ways. Although they were site-specific, the locations of
these projects by the Harrisons and Sherk were more accessible to public audiences and were
often created for the purpose of public viewing and participation. Unlike early earthworks that
lacked the presence of the artist’s body and focused on the influence man had over nature, the
Harrisons’ and Sherk’s work revolved around the artist’s direct, physical relationship to and effect
on nature. Also, even though the projects were temporary, rather than contributing to the
demise of these specific spaces, the Harrisons and Sherk created projects that offered potential

20
Steven A. Nash and Bill Berkson, Facing Eden: 100 Years of Landscape Art in the Bay Area,
University of California Press, 1995, 122.
21
Linda Weintraub, “Twentieth-Century Eco Art Pioneers,” To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of a
Sustainable Planet, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2012, 110.
22
solutions to the environmental issues their work addressed. The Harrisons incorporated
interdisciplinary collaboration with professionals in other fields, performance, and installation to
bring awareness to and warn about urgent ecological issues, while Sherk incorporated
interdisciplinary collaboration, performance, installation to educate, encourage the
reconceptualization of barren urban sites, and to create inviting urban oases where the
community could gather and engage. Although some of these projects are no longer on physical
display or installed somewhere, they continue to exist and educate through photographic and
written documentation, like many earthworks, Land art, and eco-artworks.

Chapter 2: New Genre and Research-based Public Art from the 1990s to the 2000s
While the innovative and ground-breaking art projects of the 1970s sparked hope that
similar actions taken would make positive environmental change, the United States as a whole
was not as concerned with the protection of nature as it once was. Although the term global
warming came to be well known within the science and political realms,
22
with Ronald Regan
elected as President in 1980 the country’s attention was directed towards the prevention of
Communist nuclear proliferation and the arms race, the War on Drugs, and “trickle-down”
economics.
23
Measures were taken to remove the solar panels previously installed on the White

22
Global warming, a term coined in 1896 by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius, suggests that
due to increased emissions of carbon dioxide, mostly by human activities, into the Earth’s
atmosphere, over time the temperature of the planet would gradually rise. Based on carbon
dioxide levels increasing exponentially by the 1980s, global warming became a topic of
discussion and concern for many.
23
Trickle-down economics was an economic policy proposed by President Ronald Reagan, also
nicknamed “Reaganomics,” which supported tax cuts for the wealthy and upper class with the
idea that their excess earnings would encourage spending that would go back into the economy
23
House roof by President Jimmy Carter, and Regan reversed tax credits given for solar water
heaters, wind energy and similar renewable energy initiatives. These actions suggest that by
eliminating positive reinforcements to those who make “greener” choices that these initiatives
are not valuable and the country is not concerned with the state of the environment. Others,
however, might look at this situation and respond by continuing to raise awareness about
environmental issues in their own way.
With the new technological advancements of the 1990s, artists began utilizing alternative
forms of media and resources to make a greater impact on larger audiences. A number of artists
focused on using research and science to develop their public projects. Suzanne Lacy, one artist
who helped define new genre public art, identifies it as, “[…] Visual art that used both traditional
and nontraditional media to communicate and interact with a broad and diversified audience
about issues directly relevant to their lives […].”
24
And as Malcolm Miles adds:
The value of new genre public art is, then, in its ability to initiate a continuing process of
social criticism, and to engage defined publics on issues….whilst its purpose is not to fill
museums….but to resist the structures of power and money which have caused abjection,
and in so doing create imaginative spaces in which to construct, or enable others to
construct, diverse possible futures. New genre public art is process-based, frequently
ephemeral, often related to local rather than global narratives, and politicized. It
represents the most articulate form of a wider disenchantment with the art world
conventions still embodied by most public art during the 1980s.
25

New genre public art largely focuses on research, activism, relationships, and engaging with
audiences. For example, Suzanne Lacy’s The Oakland Projects (1991-2001) (Figure 14) was a

and gradually “trickle down” to the working class and enhance their income and economy as a
result. While this plan seemed practical in theory, it did not play out this way.
24
Suzanne Lacy, “Introduction,” Mapping the Terrain: New Genre Public Art, Ed. By Suzanne
Lacy, Seattle, Washington: Bay Press, 1995, 19.
25
Malcolm Miles, “Art as a Social Process,” Art Space and the City: Public Art and Urban Futures,
London and New York: Routledge, 1997, 164.
24
decade-long project consisting of installations, performances, workshops, and activism in
Oakland, California.
26
For this series, Lacy facilitated a dialogue between local teenagers and
other members of the community, including law enforcement officers, to address various
personal, social, economic, and political issues and concerns.
The following research-based works were not always interactive, but they did focus on
issues particularly pertinent to viewers. Artists such as the Harrisons and Chin who pioneered
environmental art in the 1970s and 1980s, used new genre public art methodologies, specifically
research and engaged social relationships in their work of the 1990s to 2000s. Much like early
Land art and earthworks, new genre public art existed outside of the gallery and museum and as
a result, outside of the art market. By creating dialogues with and bringing awareness to the
community, their purpose was to educate and start conversations rather than incurring profit.

The Harrisons, California Wash (1996)
In 1989, the concept and building of the Harrisons’ California Wash (1996) (Figure 15)
located on Pico Boulevard in Santa Monica began. Overseeing the project’s construction were
designers and project managers Gabriel Harrison and Vera Westergaard, along with several
landscape architects, Spurlock/Porier, Leslie Ryan, and Robert Perry. The Cultural Affairs Division
of the City of Santa Monica commissioned the Harrisons for this transformative community
project.

26
Suzanne Lacy, “Early Works: The Oakland Projects (1991-2001),” accessed March 17, 2017,
http://www.suzannelacy.com/early-works/#/the-oakland-projects/.
25
Opening in 1996, California Wash, through the efforts of the Harrisons and their helpers,
transformed an eighteen-thousand square foot portion of Pico Boulevard into a visually-
stimulating pathway highlighting various elements along the way. It is considered to be a work
of landscape sculpture, accompanied by a garden, sculptures, and mural, that tells the story of
the ecology of the original wash and how it has since been changed over the years due to Los
Angeles’ ever-expanding urbanization. Also included is a plaque and images of the native plants
that once thrived there. The Wash serves as a memorial to the fallen nature and wildlife that
previously dominated this coastal climate. It is also designed to take the form of the path in which
the water from topographical washes flowed from the Arroyo
27
to meet the ocean before the
city built the current storm drains. The almost-lyrical path incorporates an undulating ramp
intersected by a series of staircases allowing access to people of all physical capacities to immerse
themselves within the experiential passage, which concludes at the Wave Fence overlooking the
water run-off.
California Wash surprisingly received criticism for beautifying or romanticizing the
deterioration of the Santa Monica landscape. However, what the Harrisons had really done was
to draw the attention of the public to the very source of the problem, the water drain. Before
there was a path leading directly towards the drain, enhancing its presence, visitors were not as
aware of the foul smell coming from the waste run-off. California Wash made this unpleasant
condition known, which after spiking public complaints, a purification system was installed by the
city to reduce the smell. In one installation, the Harrisons paid homage to the rich nature and

27
Tongva Park in Santa Monica is based on the same flow of water from the Arroyo into the
ocean near Pico Blvd. http://www.fieldoperations.net/project-details/project/tongva-
park.html.
26
wildlife that once roamed the Santa Monica coastline while at the same time pointing out issues
being caused by these recent urban interventions.

Mel Chin, Revival Field (1991-ongoing) and Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project (2006-
ongoing)
Mel Chin, much like the Harrisons and Bonnie Ora Sherk, made his start in Conceptualism.
Utilizing a number of methods, one example would be installation, and collaborating with multi-
disciplinary professionals, Chin creates thought-provoking work to address such issues as the
effects of environmental illness, remediation strategies, inner city habitats, community
empowerment, and government responsibility, to name a few.
Revival Field (1991-ongoing) (Figure 16) is an ongoing work created in conjunction with
Dr. Rufus Chaney, senior research agronomist at the United States Department of Agriculture.
Located at Pig’s Eye Landfill in St. Paul, Minnesota, Revival Field served as a field test in which
hyper-accumulator plants were used to extract heavy metals from soil at the site with the goal
to find a low-tech method of “green remediation” as an alternative to expensive soil remediation
techniques. The results proved that although the conditions were unfavorable, one variety of
Thlaspi—a plant commonly known as pennycress—possessed a significant capacity to absorb the
hazardous element cadmium, which when exposed to plants can affect metabolic processes such
as photosynthesis and transpiration. As Weintraub claims, “Revival Field (1991) is acknowledged
as a landmark bio-remediation artwork because it used plants to withdraw heavy metals from
27
contaminated soil instead of relying on front-end loaders, fossil fuels, and high-tech fixes.”
28
The
very nature of this project, however, led many to hesitate considering it art since this project was
so heavily rooted in science, departing from traditional artistic practices. The intersectionality of
science and art in Revival Field posed questions from both perspectives; as Weintraub pointed
out, scientists had to ask, ‘Is art science?’ and artists had to ask, ‘Is science art?’
29

Because of this, Chin had a series of issues acquiring funding for Revival Field from the
National Endowment of the Arts. As Miles supports, “Chin describes the work as a sculpture
involving the reduction process. Unlike conventional sculpture, here the material is not seen and
the process is biochemistry and agriculture, the invisible aesthetic being measured in terms of
soil regeneration.”
30
The test site itself exists as a sculpture, but Chin brought this site-specific
experiment to larger audiences by displaying various items in museums. He created detailed
prints of the different types of hyper-accumulator plants used, as well as blueprints,
photographs, three-dimensional models, and videos.
31
The concept of Revival Field seemed to
appeal to a number of individuals. When Chin’s proposal for NEA funding was denied, private
benefactors offered to fund the project themselves; however, Chin said, “No, it’s a public
problem, and it should be [supported by] public funds. We should show that arts can be
important for public service. I don’t want private funding. An idea like Revival Field is for the

28
Linda Weintraub, “Twenty-First-Century Eco Art Explorers,” To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of a
Sustainable Planet, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2012, 136.
29
Linda Weintraub with Skip Schuckmann, EnvironMentalities Twenty-two Approaches to Eco-
Art, Rhinebeck, NY: Artnow Publications, 2007, 104.
30
Malcolm Miles, Art Space and the City: Public Art and Urban Futures, London and New York:
Routledge, 1997, 185.
31
Linda Weintraub with Skip Schuckmann, EnvironMentalities Twenty-two Approaches to Eco-
Art, Rhinebeck, NY: Artnow Publications, 2007, 104.
28
public domain.”
32
While Revival Field is not what one might expect when thinking about public
art, and although it does not incorporate community participation or interaction, Chin continues
to work towards finding a solution to contaminated soil with Revival Field and additional projects,
which is a problem that has the ability to affect generations to come.
After previously exploring green remediation methods to extract heavy metals from soil
in Revival Field, Chin continues to make work that addresses heavy metal contamination and the
affects it can have on a community. In the 1990s, scientific studies were conducted to determine
the effects of lead poisoning on human behavior. Dr. Herbert Needleman at the University of
Pittsburgh Medical Center published his study in the 1996 Journal of the American Medical
Association and commented that, “I’m not saying that lead exposure is the cause of delinquency.
It is a cause and one with the biggest handle to prevention.” He explained: “Lead is a brain poison
that interferes with the ability to restrain impulses. It’s a life experience which gets into biology
and increases a child’s risk for doing bad things.”
33
When Chin visited New Orleans after
Hurricane Katrina in 2006, he discovered that their soil reflected four times the amount of lead
that the Environmental Protection Agency considered safe, that the soil had this amount of
contamination before the hurricane, and that New Orleans did not have an active plan to resolve
it, which affected more than thirty percent of the city’s children.
34

32
Tom Finkelpearl,“Interview: Mel Chin on Revival Field,” Dialogues in Public Art, Cambridge,
Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2000, 395.
33
Dr. Herbert Needleman quoted in Jane Brody, “Aggressiveness and Delinquency in Boys is
Linked to Lead in Bones,” New York Times, February 7, 1996, web, accessed January 29, 2017,
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/02/07/us/aggressiveness-and-delinquency-in-boys-is-linked-to-
lead-in-bones.html.
34
Nato Thompson, Living as Form: Socially Engaged Art from 1991-2011, Cambridge, MA: The
MIT Press, 2012, 127.
29
To address awareness of the relationship between lead-poisoning and resulting
behavioral problems, Chin created Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project. Operation
Paydirt (2006-ongoing) was another ongoing initiative that underscored the effects of lead-
poisoning on children in New Orleans, and attempted to raise funds for a solution. One aspect of
Operation Paydirt is the Fundred Dollar Bill Project (Figure 17), an interactive program in which
children and members of the community design personalized versions of the United States one-
hundred-dollar-bill. This acted as a community-based project that educated locals on the dangers
they were exposed to, and incorporated and relied on the collaboration of community members
to contribute personalized Fundreds. Once decorated, the Fundreds are collected and displayed.
To ensure the safety and protection of the Fundreds, for a duration of time they were stored in
Safehouse (2008-2010) (Figures 18 and 19). Safehouse was comprised of an existing house,
stainless steel, wood, plywood, Gatorboard, lead-encapsulation paint, automotive body and
paint finishes, 12,000 brass thumbtacks, 6,000 unique hand-drawn Fundred Dollar Bills, overall
size is 18’x 22’x 40’ with interior walls 10.5’ tall and sealed with a large bank vault door. This space
was also a place for the community to gather, converse, and spend quality time decorating
Fundreds together. As Chin explains, “Fundreds represent the tangible voices of millions speaking
to those with the power to end this national problem. The goal is to exchange the value of
informed public voice into real resources to leverage 100% prevention.”
35
In a performative
gesture, Chin’s goal is to collect Fundreds that add up to the equivalent total of United States

35
Mel Chin, Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project,
http://melchin.org/oeuvre/operation-paydirtfundred-dollar-bill-project.
30
dollars it would cost to completely remediate the city’s soil and deliver them by armored truck
to Congress. As Weintraub reinforces:
Operation Paydirt (2006-ongoing) is a $300 million art project that depends upon the
participation of three million artists and will, according to artist Mel Chin’s plans, occupy
350 square miles…However, the profit margins he seeks are not calculated in terms of
personal profit or fame; they are measured according to the benefits to the health and
well-being of impoverished children, a goal he plans to achieve by detoxifying the soils in
their neighborhoods.
36

Like other projects designed by Chin, Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project is dependent
upon the participation of the surrounding community, but the purpose is solely to benefit said
community and create a brighter, healthier, and safer future for generations to come. Weintraub
adds that, “Gathering children’s art may challenge some people’s definition of a professional art
practice, but it confirms Chin’s faith in ‘the participatory power of art as a driving force for public
awareness, dialogue, and action.’”
37
Although Chin’s work is unconventional, having convinced
others that his projects qualify as art, Operation Paydirt is educational, socially-engaging, and
seeks to enrich the lives of others, even aligning itself with the field of social work. Chin’s Fundred
goal has not yet been reached, but he continues to work towards ending lead-poisoning in New
Orleans with the help of the community.
The Harrisons use scientific research and collaboration to address site-specific
environmental problems that affect the individuals who inhabit said locations, with their project
California Wash, by bringing public awareness to local issues by looking back into their project
site’s past. In contrast, through Revival Field and Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project,

36
Linda Weintraub, “Twenty-First-Century Eco Art Explorers,” To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of a
Sustainable Planet, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2012, 135.
37
Ibid, 138.
31
Chin uses scientific research to bring public awareness to environmental issues by looking
towards solutions that will benefit humanity in the future. Unlike California Wash and Revival
Field, Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project functioned as a participatory collaboration
between Chin and members of the New Orleans community. In order to survive and achieve the
intended outcome, in this case raising sufficient awareness and in turn funds to relieve the soil
of lead contamination, Chin is solely reliant on volunteers and community participation. Because
Operation Paydirt is supported by the efforts of the many collaborators, meeting their Fundred
goal took more time than expected.
While it was previously unconventional for artists to use science and research as the
foundation of their artistic practice, through these projects, the Harrisons and Chin demonstrate
how the fields of art and science can intersect and make a profound impact on the way in which
we look at both art and the environment. Although their areas of focus differed, both the
Harrisons and Chin utilized scientific research in creative ways to bring public awareness to local
environmental issues. The Harrisons’ California Wash is a finished installation that remains in
Santa Monica, but Chin’s Revival Field and Operation Paydirt will continue to evolve over time
until he can put his green remediation techniques to action in places in need of soil regeneration
and amelioration.

Chapter 3: Transition to Social Practice in the 2000s
At the turn of the century, the rise of the internet allowed quick and easy access to
information, news, cultures, etc. from all over the world without ever leaving our homes. The
same time technology and the world’s access to information and people are evolving, art
32
continues to take alternative forms, including activism. People and how they participate or
engage with the art becomes an integral and vital factor of this new genre public art/social
practice; they, themselves, become part of the piece. As Pablo Helguera emphasizes, “While
there is no complete agreement as to what constitutes a meaningful interaction or social
engagement, what characterizes socially engaged art is its dependence on social intercourse as
a factor of its existence.”
38
This socially-engaged artistic approach is used to expose and comment
on an extremely wide range of social issues to incite activism and social change. More and more
artists are using this form of engagement and public collaboration to address ecological issues.
The artists discussed in this chapter, Mel Chin, Fritz Haeg, and Fallen Fruit, each use live
plants in their respective forms—drought-resistant gardens, delawned front yards replaced with
edible landscapes, and publicly-sited fruit trees—to inspire environmental activism in urban
contexts. The following collaborative, community-based and community-building projects take a
Do-It-Yourself approach to share knowledge with the public to encourage dialogue and to re-
establish shared responsibility and accountability for the wellbeing of the area’s inhabitants.

Mel Chin, The TIE that BINDS: MIRROR of the FUTURE (2016-ongoing)
Chin started his most recent project, The TIE that BINDS: Mirror of the Future (2016-
ongoing), for CURRENT: LA Public Art Biennial, the first public art biennial in Los Angeles (July 16-
August 14, 2016). Focused on the pressing issues of water and water conservation in L.A., the
Department of Cultural Affairs, with major support from the Bloomberg Philanthropies and local

38
Pablo Helguera, Education for Socially Engaged Art: A Materials and Techniques Handbook,
New York: Jorge Pinto Books, 2011, 2.
33
organizations, hosted a biennial with art installations at sixteen locations throughout Los Angeles.
Among the long list of works included were Edgar Arceneaux’s The CENTER of the EARTH (2016)
(Figure 20) at Cheviot Hills Recreation Center, which “[drew] parallels between the use of altars
and water in religious and everyday contexts,”
39
Rirkrit Tiravanija’s Untitled 2016 (LA water,
water pavilion) (2016) (Figure 21) at Sepulveda Basin, which “employ[ed] architecture to create
a juncture between people and place, creating situations that bring us closer to the river,”
40
and
Lucky Dragons’ The Spreading Ground (2016) (Figure 22) at Hansen Dam, in which “interested
participants [were] invited to work with the artists through a process of open rehearsals that
culminate[d] in a dramatic procession and public performance along the top of Hansen Dam.”
41

While many of the artists worked directly with water, Chin addressed the local water issues
through the use of drought-resistant, water-saving gardens.
Chin’s The TIE that BINDS (Figures 23 and 24) began by cultivating eight temporary
gardens of California-native, drought-tolerant plants at the Bowtie parcel near the L.A. River.
These gardens were coupled with eight, identical permanent gardens—referred to as “mirror
gardens”—planted in public and private spaces throughout the city. During the biennial, Chin set
up a field office where visitors could participate in tours of the plant installations at the Bowtie,
acquire information about the gardens, engage in dialogue, and obtain one of five-hundred-
twelve individual artist-designed blueprints to implement a water-saving garden at their own

39
CURRENT: LA WATER, Edgar Arceneaux “The CENTER of the EARTH,” accessed March 17,
2017, http://www.currentla.org/artists/edgar-arceneaux/.
40
CURRENT: LA WATER, Rirkrit Tiravanija “Untitled 2016 (LA water, water pavilion),” accessed
March 17, 2017, http://www.currentla.org/artists/rirkrit-tiravanija/.
41
CURRENT: LA WATER, Lucky Dragons “The Spreading Ground,” accessed March 17, 2017,
http://www.currentla.org/artists/lucky-dragons/.
34
home. Although the garden blueprints are individually designed, Chin permits blueprint holders
to personalize and adjust their gardens to meet their own needs and the climate at their homes,
allowing participants to “do-it-themselves.” He has expressed that it is more important for
blueprint holders to implement the gardens than to follow the landscape design precisely. His
main rule, however, is that all of the plants used must be California-native and drought-tolerant
species. The “TIE” binding participants is their shared ownership of the gardens at this project’s
site, their shared concern for their city’s limited and valuable resources, and their shared
responsibility for maintaining their own mirror gardens to benefit their city as a whole.
Without the participation and collaboration of L.A. residents, this project could not exist.
Even though the biennial has ended, The TIE that BINDS continues with a “Follow Through Crew”
that is cultivating relationships between places, people, and plants in the greater Los Angeles
area with the goal to plant the five-hundred-twelve gardens that cumulatively save up to three-
and-one-half-million gallons of water annually. The Bowtie parcel is now owned by California
State Parks and has plans to transform the site into a state park in the near future. Chin considers
this project to be a living earth art installation. Ironically, Chin was the only participant in the
biennial to propose a transition from these temporary installations into a continual city-wide and
community-based initiative that could be owned by the public. Even when the Mirror Gardens at
the Bowtie parcel are removed to transform the plot into a park, The TIE that BINDS will live on
in the yards of Los Angeles residents, schools, and museums, continuing to spread Chin’s
message. Chin, however, is not the only artist planting gardens to make Los Angeles a more
sustainable place.

35
Fritz Haeg, Edible Estates (2005-ongoing)
Fritz Haeg is an architect, artist and educator who uses various methods, including
performance, dance, and installation, to address numerous issues such as sustainability and
ecology. Like all of the artists discussed thus far, he often collaborates with others to bring site-
specific projects to life, and much of his work is commissioned. He created a program known as
Gardenlab (2000) in which he designed and installed community gardens at the Art Center
College of Design and California Institute of the Arts (CalArts). He has since been involved in many
other projects, but continues to use plants and gardens as his artistic medium.
Edible Estates (2005-ongoing) is a delawning initiative started by Haeg to encourage
property owners to replace their lawns, or “pre-edible landscapes,” with fruit and vegetable
gardens. Maintaining grass lawns produce large amounts of waste and pollution. Historically, in
Los Angeles specifically, lawns have been utilized as symbols of wealth and status in American
society that fueled the “super green lawn look” in 1950s suburbia. The efforts needed to maintain
such a green lawn include toxic chemicals and pesticides that run into the water system and the
use of gas and production of carbon-dioxide emissions from the use of lawn mowers. By
eliminating lawns in front yards in favor of fruit and vegetable gardens, the additional toxic waste
and pollution lawn maintenance produces is also eliminated.
Edible Estates have been installed throughout American cities. The second prototype
garden (Figures 25 and 26) took place at the Foti family home in Lakewood, California, who
volunteered for this project in early 2006 through the website treehugger.com. It took fifteen
helpers and three days to transform the Foti front yard. Based on the Southern California climate,
there are squash, cornstalks, eggplants, watermelons, pomelos, oranges, mandarins, and other
36
citrus fruit planted in the Foti yard. In her article, “Redefining American Beauty, by the Yard,”
Patricia Leigh Brown discusses how many of the Foti’s neighbors were concerned that the Edible
Estate would potentially decrease property values and attract unwanted attention from
questionable characters, such as thieves, as well as vermin.
42
In the article, Michael Foti also
alludes to the fact that having an Edible Estate demands attention and care that a lawn might
not, and after he gets home from a long day at work he must then go to work tending to his
garden.
While Edible Estates have not yet been adopted by the masses, more and more
homeowners are now growing edible yards. Not only does this provide healthy new food sources,
but these yards also provide a way to significantly reduce the pollution emitted into the
environment by eliminating the need for fuel-powered lawn mowers and toxic pesticides. It is a
viable solution to the smog and air pollution issue especially in Los Angeles, but also far beyond.
Without property owners offering up their front yards, Edible Estates could not exist.
In addition to the location in Lakewood, California, and the other locations throughout
the United States, Haeg established Edible Estates in roughly six other countries. One of Haeg’s
Edible Estates is located in London, England (Figure 27). Commissioned by the Tate Modern, this
garden was established in 2007 in the Southwark neighborhood.
43
Unlike the Foti Edible Estate,
the London Edible Estate belonged to an entire housing complex. This strategically-placed garden
allows for maximum visibility from multiple housing complexes, making mass-viewing possible

42
Patricia Leigh Brown, “Redefining American Beauty, by the Yard,” New York Times, July 13,
2006, Web, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/13/garden/13lawn.html?fta=y&_r=0.
43
Fritz Haeg, Edible Estates, accessed March 17, 2017,
http://www.fritzhaeg.com/garden/initiatives/edibleestates/london.html.
37
and sparking the interest of many. So, unlike the Foti Edible Estate, this Edible Estate functions
more as a community garden than a personal garden in a private yard, but without individually
assigned plots, meaning that the people who get their hands dirty and care for the garden are
permitted to enjoy the fruits and vegetables grown from it. This garden also functions as a
communal gathering place for the residents to come together and socialize. Similar Edible Estates
can also be found in Rome, Istanbul, Budapest, Tel Aviv, and Aarhus.
Although Edible Estates are predominately grown on private residential property they are
visible to the public passing by. Among a sea of grass front yards these few gardens stand out
and present an opportunity to facilitate conversation between neighbors and to inspire others to
replace their lawns with a healthier and more sustainable alternative, which could have a positive
impact on not only themselves, but the entire community. While Haeg’s use of gardens is
innovative and revolutionary, he is just one artist using edible species as an artistic medium.

Fallen Fruit, Fruit Tree Adoptions (2007-ongoing), Public Fruit Maps (2004-ongoing), Public Fruit
Jams (2006-ongoing), The Endless Orchard (2006-ongoing), and Del Aire Fruit Park (2012)
Fallen Fruit is a Los Angeles-based artist collective initially founded in 2004 by David
Burns, Austin Young, and Matias Viegener, but continues today as a collaboration between David
Burns and Austin Young. The duo develops various community-focused participatory projects
using their preferred medium, fruit trees. Through their various projects they educate and aid
the public in locating the endless edible resources available to them and help them reestablish
their relationship with nature. All of Fallen Fruit’s projects are directed toward the benefit of the
38
community, but, like Chin and Haeg, they are completely dependent upon the community’s
involvement and participation.
Fallen Fruit has created numerous projects revolving around fruit trees, such as Fruit Tree
Adoptions (2007-ongoing) (Figure 28) where the collective provides fruit-bearing trees in various
urban locations to encourage the community to plant them in public spaces or places where they
can extend over into public spaces to continue the network of shared resources. Everyone who
adopts a tree is asked to sign an agreement ensuring that they will care for and maintain the tree
they planted, giving them a major role in the creation of this shared network. Public Fruit Maps
(2004-ongoing) (Figure 29) is a mapping initiative Fallen Fruit started to show the fruit trees
growing in or over public spaces in various communities. These maps are hand-drawn and
available as jpegs and pdfs for free. They have been featured in various publications and
exhibitions where Fallen Fruit’s work has been mentioned or shown. This ongoing project
depicting Fallen Fruit’s network of resources includes cities from all over America as well as other
countries.
An outgrowth of the Fruit Maps is another interactive project that Fallen Fruit refers to as
Public Fruit Jams (2006-ongoing) (Figures 30 and 31). These Fruit Jam events are an opportunity
for members from various communities to come together to create delicious preserves using
fruit from their local fruit trees. To concoct tasty combinations, participants share and trade their
fruit with people from other communities to take advantage of access to fruits that possibly do
not grow in their immediate neighborhoods. This activity requires participants to engage in
discussion and work together in order to cook up something delicious that everyone can enjoy.
39
Fallen Fruit’s planting initiative The Endless Orchard (2006-ongoing) (Figure 32) is a living
artwork that is planted by the public for the public’s enjoyment. It is intended to inspire the
community to transform their neighborhoods into spaces that provide edible and nutritional
resources. As Fallen Fruit would say, it takes a community to grow an Endless Orchard. They
believe that everyone should have access to fresh fruit that is grown in public places with the
agreement that the community continues to maintain and care for the fruit trees. The Endless
Orchard is always expanding and is connected through a network in which each tree is identified
through signs and mapped on the Endless Orchard mobile application. Fruit trees in public spaces
and in private spaces that extend over into public spaces are identified through this network as
available resources to anyone who stumbles upon them.
Del Aire Fruit Park (2012) (Figures 33 and 34), planted in 2012, is located in Hawthorne,
California. It was commissioned by the city as an inventive civic art piece. Del Aire Fruit Park
contains an orchard of twenty-seven fruit trees, eight native grapevines, and other edible plant
species. The Fruit Park is maintained by the immediate community. The Los Angeles County
Department of Cultural Affairs understood the immense positive impact of Fallen Fruit and their
mission and commissioned them to contribute to the Del Aire neighborhood in Hawthorne,
California by planting a public fruit tree park. In addition to the public fruit tree park, almost fifty
trees were adopted and planted on the edges of private and public properties by the community
residents.
In order to thrive and exist, the community must remain dedicated to the welfare of the
Fruit Park. Everyone is welcome to the resources it provides, such as beauty, shade, additional
fresh oxygen, and fresh fruit, with the stipulation that they share the responsibility in caring for
40
it. Due to the size of Fruit Park, it really does take the entire community’s efforts to maintain the
trees and other edible plants, encouraging them to work together towards a collective goal.
In addition to residential neighborhoods and public parks, Fallen Fruit’s work has even
been featured in art institutions. In 2010, Fallen Fruit curated EATLACMA, a three-part exhibition
at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art focusing “on the interaction of food, art and the public
with a variety of performances, installations, and participatory events.”
44
Along with Fallen Fruit’s
own work, they organized various types of work, such as paintings, photographs, sculptures, and
videos, from LACMA’s collection to feature art that displayed fruit. Bringing their work to LACMA,
Fallen Fruit was able to reach a larger audience and educate the public about their work and how
the audience, themselves, can become more involved in the rejuvenation of their own
neighborhoods.
Through planting, Chin, Haeg, and Fallen Fruit rely on the collaboration and participation
of local communities to educate the public, create conversation, and provide potential solutions
for site-specific environmental issues. Since the livelihood of their projects are so dependent
upon the involvement of others, all of these projects are still in progress and occurring. The TIE
that BINDS remains an ongoing project until all of the blueprints are dispersed and implemented
into water-saving gardens. One factor potentially preventing the completion of Chin’s initiative
is the limitation on the location of blueprint holders; since The TIE that BINDS was commissioned
for the LA Public Art Biennial, in order to specifically improve the water use in Los Angeles, they
have currently restricted the blueprint distribution to Los Angeles residents only. Edible Estates
and the projects created by Fallen Fruit remain active not because they have not met a certain

44
Fallen Fruit, EATLACMA, accessed March 17, 2017, http://fallenfruit.org/projects/eatlacma/.
41
goal, but because their projects are meant to continue expanding and contributing to the welfare
of the communities and environments all over the world.

Chapter 4: Conclusion

While every artist discussed uses unique methods to create innovative projects, there are
similarities between projects from different eras. For instance, Sherk’s Crossroads Community
(The Farm), Fallen Fruit’s The Endless Orchard and Del Aire Fruit Park, and Chin’s Operation
Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project and The TIE that BINDS are all collaborative, dialogical,
pedagogical, were created for the benefit of the local community, and are also dependent upon
the participation of said community. Sherk’s Portable Parks I-III, the Harrisons’ Making Earth,
Portable Orchard: Survival Piece #5, and California Wash, and Chin’s Revival Field bring public
awareness to local issues, are educational and informative, but are not necessarily participatory
or dependent upon community participation. Finally, Chin’s The TIE that BINDS, Haeg’s Edible
Estates, and Fallen Fruit’s The Endless Orchard offer solutions and ways individuals can easily
incorporate these sustainable initiatives into their daily lives to support the wellbeing of their
local community. While many of these projects display similarities, they were unique to the time
and environmental issues occurring during their production.
Although the Harrisons’ work has been around for quite some time, their projects are
regaining momentum and recognition in the media and art world with its relevance to the current
pressing environmental state. Last year, Portable Orchard: Survival Piece #5 was re-created and
installed at Walker Art Center in an exhibition called Hippie Modernism: The Struggle for Utopia,
an Examination of the Radical Art, Architecture, and Design of 1960s & 1970s Counterculture
42
(Figure 35).
45
Even though this work was made forty-five years ago, the issues the Harrisons
brought attention to in 1972 are still very much problems today. Urban and suburban
development have continued to grow exponentially without any inclination of it slowing down.
To shed light on this, Portable Orchard has had a second life giving the work the opportunity to
reach new generations today. Santa Monica’s California Wash is still intact and serves as a
reminder of what the region’s nature was before the constant threat of urban development and
expansion. The Harrisons are now based in Santa Cruz, California, where they have created The
Center for the Study of the Force Majeure at University of California, Santa Cruz, to “bring
together artists and scientists to design ecosystem-adaptation projects in critical regions around
the world to respond to climate change.”
46
And as Arlene Raven would say, “Despite the
impressive range of their conceptualizations, the artists describe themselves modestly: ‘We’re
just two people putting one foot in front of the other, asking for reasonably ethical behavior
[…].’”
47
While the Harrisons have dedicated a lifetime toward environmental awareness and
preservation, there was a time when they were just starting to embark on this journey; and
anyone with the same interests can take a step towards making a difference by starting off with
something small, even if that is just making a mound of rich earth.

45
This exhibition traveled to the Cranbrook Art Museum, June 19–October 9, 2016 and is
currently on view at the The UC Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive, February 8 –
Mary 21, 2017.
46
Center for the Study of the Force Majeure, Accessed 28 February 2017, Web,
http://www.centerforforcemajeure.org/.
47
Helen Mayer and Newton Harrison quoted in Arlene Raven, Two Lines of Sight and an
Unexpected Connection: The Art of Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, 2002,
http://www.communityarts.net/readingroom/archivefiles/2002/09/two_lines_of_si.php
quoted in Weintraub, “Twentieth-Century Eco Art Pioneers,” To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of a
Sustainable Planet, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2012, 80.
43
Bonnie Ora Sherk’s Portable Parks I-III and Crossroads Community (The Farm) began
nearly fifty years ago, but she remains an environmental artist and activist in San Francisco and
New York focusing on integrating gardening and sustainability into the public school curricula
through her project, A Living Library (1981-ongoing) (Figure 36). A collaborative initiative
consisting of architects, landscape architects, and city planners, Sherk describes it as “an
indoor/outdoor culture-ecology” Think Park
TM
and “lifelong learning magnet that brings the local
culture and ecology of a place to life, unifying disparate sectors of the community.”
48
Sherk still
organizes various types of participatory events and programs to stress the importance of the
connections between nature, culture, and technology with the community and its actions.
Since Edible Estates, Fritz Haeg purchased Salmon Creek Farm in November 2014, a
formerly well-known commune that was established in 1971 near Albion, California, where
residents were completely self-sufficient. Haeg maintains Salmon Creek Farm as a long-term art
project which he describes as “a sort of commune-farm-homestead-sanctuary-school hybrid”
where “an extended community of regularly returning comrades contribute to its revival,
propose projects, host gatherings, lead workshops, and shape its future.”
49
Although there has
been no mention of the current status of the Edible Estates series or new projects, Haeg is living
the sustainable lifestyle that he has encouraged others to do. While the majority of us cannot
afford to leave our current professions or families to go live and work on a fully-sustainable
commune, Haeg’s projects, namely Edible Estates, offer a realistic beginning point to begin living
more sustainable lives starting at our homes.

48
Mapping the Terrain: New Genre Public Art, Edited by Suzanne Lacy, Seattle, Washington: Bay
Press, 1995, 275.
49
Salmon Creek Farm, Accessed 28 February, Web, http://salmoncreekfarm.org/.
44
The collective Fallen Fruit might not have been around as long as some of these other
artists, but they continue to make it their mission to beautify urban and suburban areas and
provide edible resources to those in need. The duo has been very busy in recent years, working
hard to expand The Endless Orchard and put the ever-growing number of resources on their
Public Fruit Maps. They have also planted additional Fruit Parks in various cities throughout the
United States.
Mel Chin continues to expand upon his many ongoing projects. Many of his current
projects are aimed towards alleviating environmental issues specific to their location. He also
continues to incorporate participation and interaction in his work. Operation Paydirt/Fundred
Dollar Bill Project remains alive and well. Just this year Chin has opened a Fundred Reserve at
Corcoran in Washington, D.C. (Figures 37 and 38) to display the existing 453,168 Fundred Dollar
Bills and to provide a space for visitors to help reach the Fundred goal by creating more Fundreds.
The TIE that BINDS is also alive and well and currently in the implementation stage. Los Angeles
residents, as well as schools and museums, who received one of Chin’s drought-tolerant
blueprints this past summer are in the process of planting their gardens. Although there are some
remaining undistributed blueprints, this project will continue until every last blueprint becomes
a thriving garden. Every single garden planted is one step closer to water conservation and a
more sustainable Los Angeles.
These environmentally-focused, socially-engaged public projects do have an impact on
the community and should continue to be commissioned and available to all, but this can only
happen if public funding for such projects remains available. One of the hardest aspects of
activism and environmental participation in general is the growing divide in public opinions of
45
the value of the environment. As our technology increases, so too does our waste, and for those
who do not see or experience full circle the harmful effects, the environment holds little
immediate value.
One positive aspect and glimmer of hope though is that the same technological advances
that originally turned the environment into a dump site, have now given those inspired by these
works the ability to reach millions on a global scale. Technology has played a huge role in the
public’s participation and activism but the art has stayed true to its roots focusing on the
materials and mediums. Recognizing the importance of educating future generations, even
colleges for the first time in history are offering degrees in environmental sciences with an
emphasis on the reintroduction of waste as tools and structures to be reused and almost always
in an artistic and creative way. There are entire cities being developed with the intent of using
recycled plastics and materials in a way that displays the beauty of recreation. More importantly
though, just as the artists in this thesis have done, initiatives must be executed on the smaller
scales and engage local communities.
The current President of the United States, extremely conservative, Republican Donald
Trump, makes his indifference for environmental preservation known by undoing protective
initiatives passed by former, Democratic, presidents. By attempting to dismantle environmental
protection enacted by former leaders of this country, and by presenting these harmful acts of
violence against nature, Trump has made the desire for environmental preservation a strictly
Democratic or liberal value. In reality, the desire and dedication to preserve the world we all live
in should be a universal value. It affects us all and should be our collective responsibility,
46
regardless of our political beliefs. In the recent words of Newton Harrison, “We have collectively
wrecked the place and we have some responsibility to collectively unwreck the place.”
50

As mentioned in the introduction, I selected the historical artists for this thesis when I co-
curated Dirty Talk: Art / Environment / Action (October 27-November 20, 2016) with my
colleagues, Rachel Keller and Carly Warhaft, at the Roski School of Art and Design gallery. Dirty
Talk incorporated documentation of historical environmental artists, like the Harrisons and
Sherk, with Los Angeles-based, environmental artists utilizing social practice, like Chin and Fallen
Fruit, to explore ways in which art stimulates public awareness of urgent ecological issues and
inspire activism through soil regeneration, re-conceptualizing land use, and activating under-
utilized green space. In addition to many of the works discussed in this thesis, we also included
younger, local artists who use social practice to inspire action, such as Jenny Kane, a recent
graduate from the Public Practice program at Otis College of Art and Design, who hosts a series
of educational workshops and immersive experiences in Joshua Tree that allow participants to
relate to and connect with the environment in creative ways, as well as the collective
Encyclopedia Inc., consisting of artists Googie Karrass, Nicholas Korody, and Carlye Packer, who
create radioactive, multidisciplinary, interactive installations revolving around the element
uranium. Integral to these young, environmental artists’ practices is dialogue and community
participation. Another crucial aspect these younger artists include in their work are various forms
of takeaways and easy guides on how to relate to your local environment at home. The
educational aspect of these works is so important now more than ever, given our planet’s, and

50
Newton Harrison, “Celebrating Helen and Newton Harrison: 45 Years of Ecological
Art,”(presentation, University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, March 9, 2017).
47
especially our country’s, urgent environmental state. Even though the thought of trying to solve
all of these ecological problems seems daunting and somewhat impossible, offering small-scale
solutions and takeaways in the gallery gave inspired visitors a starting point of action. That action
could lead to another action and possibly conversation with friends and family about how they
can live more eco-friendly lives. As the Harrisons advise, “[…] The most important thing is to begin
anywhere, and get cracking.”
51

51
Helen Mayer and Newton Harrison quoted in Arlene Raven, Two Lines of Sight and an
Unexpected Connection: The Art of Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, 2002,
http://www.communityarts.net/readingroom/archivefiles/2002/09/two_lines_of_si.php
quoted in Linda Weintraub, “Twentieth-Century Eco Art Pioneers,” To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of
a Sustainable Planet, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2012, 80.
48
Bibliography
Art and the Public Sphere. Edited by W. J. T. Mitchell. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago
Press, 1992.

Bauch, Nicholas and Emily Eliza Scott. “The Los Angeles Urban Rangers: Actualizing
Geographical Thought.” Cultural Geographies in Practice (2012), 19:3, 401-409.
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1027548554?pq-
origsite=summon&accountid=14749.

Baum, Kelly. Nobody’s Property: Art, Land, Space, 2000-2010. New Haven, Connecticut:
Princeton University Art Museum, distributed by Yale University Press, 2010.

Beardsley, John. Earthworks and Beyond.4
th
Ed. New York, New York: Abbeville Press
Publishers, 2006.

“Beyond Green: Toward a Sustainable Art.” Smart Museum of Art, University of Chicago, and
Independent Curators International, New York. Chicago: David and Alfred Smart
Museum of Art, University of Chicago, 2005.

Boetzkes, Amanda. The Ethics of Earth Art. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota
Press, 2010.

Bonnie Sherk. The Green Museum. http://greenmuseum.org/content/artist_index/artist_id-
85.html.

Brody, Jane. “Aggressiveness and Delinquency in Boys is Linked to Lead in Bones.” New York
Times, February 7, 1996. Accessed January 29, 2017.
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/02/07/us/aggressiveness-and-delinquency-in-boys-is-
linked-to-lead-in-bones.html.

Brown, Patricia Leigh. “Redefining American Beauty, by the Yard.” New York Times, July 13,
2006. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/13/garden/13lawn.html?fta=y&_r=0.

Brown, Patricia Leigh. “Tasty, and Subversive, Too.” New York Times, May 11, 2013.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/12/us/fruit-activists-take-urban-gardens-in-a-new-
direction.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.

Center for the Study of the Force Majeure. Accessed February 28, 2017.
http://www.centerforforcemajeure.org/.

Commonstudio. Accessed May 9, 2016. www.thecommonstudio.com.

49
Critical Issues in Public Art: Content, Context, and Controversy. Edited by Harriet F. Senie and
Sally Webster. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1998.

CURRENT: LA WATER – LA’s Public Art Biennial. Accessed March 17, 2017.
http://www.currentla.org/.

Environmental History Timeline. Accessed January 29, 2017.
http://www.environmentalhistory.org/.

The Everyday Practice of Public Art: Art, Space and Social Inclusion. Edited by Cameron Cartiere
and Martin Zebracki. New York, New York: Routledge, 2016.

Fallen Fruit. Accessed May 9, 2016. http://fallenfruit.org/.

Fallen Fruit. “EATLACMA.” Accessed March 17, 2017. http://fallenfruit.org/projects/eatlacma/.

Finkelpearl, Tom. Dialogues in Public Art. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2000.

Finley, Ron. “A Guerilla Gardener in South Central LA.” TEDTalks. 2013.
https://www.ted.com/talks/ron_finley_a_guerilla_gardener_in_south_central_la?langu
age=en.

Fritz Haeg. Accessed May 9, 2016. http://www.fritzhaeg.com/wikidiary/.

Fritz Haeg. “Edible Estates.” Accessed March 17, 2017.
http://www.fritzhaeg.com/garden/initiatives/edibleestates/main.html.

Gottlieb, Robert. “Nature in the City.” Reinventing Los Angeles. MIT Press, 2014.
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/uscisd/reader.action?docID=10194157&ppg=1.

Grand, John K. Art Nature Dialogues: Interviews with Environmental Artists. Albany, New York:
State University of New York Press, 2004.

Harrison, Newton. “Celebrating Helen and Newton Harrison: 45 Years of Ecological Art.”
Presentation. University of California, Santa Cruz. Santa Cruz, CA. March 9, 2017.

The Harrison Studio. Accessed May 9, 2016. http://theharrisonstudio.net/.

Helguera, Pablo. Education for Socially Engaged Art: A Materials and Techniques Handbook.
New York: Jorge Pinto Books, 2011.

Hoffman, Tricia R. and Nan Kathryn Fuchs, Ph.D. Save L.A.: An Environmental Resource
Directory. San Francisco: Chronical Books, 1990.

50
James Corner Field Operations. “Tongva Park.” Accessed March 17, 2017.
http://www.fieldoperations.net/project-details/project/tongva-park.html.

Joel Tauber. Accessed May 9, 2016. http://joeltauber.com/.

Jones, Diana Nelson. “Urban Gardening, For Real, with Ron Finley.” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette,
May 6, 2012. http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1520882491?pq-
origsite=summon&accountid=14749.

Johnstone, Mark. “Building Community.” Urban Surprises: A Guide to Public Art in Los Angeles.
Edited by Gloria Gerace. Monrovia, California: Navigator Press, 2002.

Kastner, Jeffrey and Brian Wallis. Land and Environmental Art. Edited by Jeffrey Kastner and
Brian Wallis. London: Phaidon Press Limited, 1998.

Kester, Grant H. Conversation Pieces: Community and Communication in Modern Art. University
of California Press, 2004.

Kester, Grant H. “Conversation Pieces: The Role of Dialogue in Socially-Engaged Art.” Theory in
Contemporary Art Since 1985. Edited by Zoya Kucor and Simon Leung. Blackwell
Publishing, 2005.

Kim, Chi-Young. “Mel Chin’s The TIE that BINDS: MIRROR of the FUTURE.” LACMA.
http://unframed.lacma.org/2016/08/04/mel-chin%E2%80%99s-tie-binds-mirror-future.

Korp, Maureen. Sacred Art of the Earth: Ancient and Contemporary Earthworks. New York, New
York: Continuum Publishing Company, 1997.

Knight, Cher Krause. Public Art: Theory, Practice and Populism. Malden, Massachusetts:
Blackwell Publishing, 2008.

Kwon, Miwon. One Place After Another: Site-Specific Art and Locational Identity. Cambridge,
MA: The MIT Press, 2004.

Lailach, Michael. Land Art. Edited by Uta Grosenick. Los Angeles: Taschen, 2007.

51
LaPoint, Scott. “Ecological Connectivity Research in Urban Areas.” Functional Ecology 29, no. 7
(7/2015): 868-878. http://zb5lh7ed7a.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-
2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-
8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journ
al&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ecological+connectivity+research+in+urban+areas&rft.jtit
le=Functional+Ecology&rft.au=LaPoint%2C+Scott&rft.au=Balkenhol%2C+Niko&rft.au=Ha
le%2C+James&rft.au=Sadler%2C+Jonathan&rft.date=2015-07-01&rft.issn=0269-
8463&rft.eissn=1365-
2435&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=868&rft.epage=878&rft_id=info:doi/10.111
1%2F1365-2435.12489&rft.externalDocID=FEC12489¶mdict=en-US.

Lauren Bon and the Metabolic Studio. Accessed May 9, 2016.
http://www.metabolicstudio.org/page/home-page.

“A Living Library = A.L.L.” A Living Library. http://www.alivinglibrary.org/.

Los Angeles Urban Rangers. Accessed May 9, 2016. http://laurbanrangers.org/site/.

Mapping the Terrain: New Genre Public Art. Edited by Suzanne Lacy. Seattle, Washington: Bay
Press, 1995.

Mel Chin. Accessed January 29, 2017. http://melchin.org/oeuvre/.

“Mel Chin: The TIE That BINDS: Mirror of the Future.” LACMA.
http://www.lacma.org/art/exhibition/mel-chin.

Miles, Malcolm. Art, Space and the City: Public Art and Urban Futures. New York, New York:
Routledge, 1997. Print.

Miranda, Carolina A. “Why Mel Chin is giving away the land art design of his subversively
charming Current: LA native garden.” Los Angeles Times, July 21, 2016.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/miranda/la-et-cam-current-la-mel-chin-
bowtie-parcel-20160720-snap-story.html.

Nash, Steven A. and Bill Berkson. Facing Eden: 100 Years of Landscape Art in the Bay Area.
University of California Press, 1995.

New Land Marks: Public Art, Community, and the Meaning of Place. Edited by Penny Balkin
Bach. Washington, D.C.: EDITIONS ARIEL, an imprint of Grayson Publishing, 2001.

Public Art: A World’s Eye View. Kanagawa, Japan: ICO Co. Ltd. Publishing House, 2007.

Public Art by the Book. Edited by Barbara Goldstein. Seattle, Washington: Americans for the
Arts in association with University of Washington Press, 2005.
52
Reed, Helen. “A Bad Education: Helen Reed interviews Pablo Helguera.” The Pedagogical
Impulse: Research-Creation and the Intersections Between Social Practice and Pedagogy.
Accessed March 17, 2017. http://thepedagogicalimpulse.com/a-bad-education-helen-
reed-interviews-pablo-helguera/.

“The Rise of American Consumerism.” PBS.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/tupperware-
consumer/.

Ron Finley. Accessed May 9, 2016. http://ronfinley.com/.

Salmon Creek Farm. Accessed February 28, 2017. http://salmoncreekfarm.org/.

Stephenson, Hannah. “Gardening Guerilla: Groups of Gardeners Who Plant Crops and Flowers
on Neglected Urban Spaces Without Permission Are Sparking Mixed Reactions from
Locals, says Hannah Stephenson.” Belfast Telegraph, January 3, 2015.
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1641585186/abstract/42D62DA
6E6F140C5PQ/1?accountid=14749.

Suzanne Lacy. Accessed March 17, 2017. http://www.suzannelacy.com/.

Theaster Gates. http://theastergates.com/home.html.

Thompson, Nato. Living as Form: Socially Engaged Art from 1991-2011. Cambridge, MA: The
MIT Press, 2012.

TreePeople. Accessed May 9, 2016. https://www.treepeople.org/.

Tufnell, Ben. Land Art. Millbank, London: Tate Publishing, 2006.

Urban Surprises: A Guide to Public Art in Los Angeles. Edited by Gloria Gerace. Monrovia,
California: Navigator Press, 2002.

Walker Art Center. “Press Releases, Hippie Modernism: The Struggle for Utopia.” Accessed
March 17, 2017. http://www.walkerart.org/press/browse/press-
releases/2015/opening-october-24-at-the-walker-art-center-h.

Wallis, Brian. “Survey.” Land and Environmental Art, Ed. Jeffrey Kastner and Brian Wallis,
London: Phaidon Press Limited, 1998.

Weintraub, Linda. To Life! Eco Art in Pursuit of a Sustainable Planet. Berkeley and Los Angeles,
CA: University of California Press. 2012.

53
Weintraub, Linda with Skip Schuckmann. EnvironMentalities: Twenty-Two Approaches to Eco-
Art. Rhinebeck, New York: Avant-Guardians Textlets on Art and Ecology, Artnow
Publications, 2007.

World Wildlife Fund. “Threats: Soil Erosion and Degradation.” Accessed March 17, 2017.
https://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/soil-erosion-and-degradation.

Xiaoguang, Li. “Deconstruction and Reconstruction: Contemporary Public Art Under the Vision
of Ecological Aesthetics.” Cross-Cultural Communication 10, no. 4 (2014): 63-68.
http://www.cscanada.net/index.php/ccc/article/view/4808.

Yes Naturally: How Art Saves the World. Niet Normaal Foundation. The Netherlands: nai0 l 0
publishers, 2013.

54
Figures

Fig. 1: Michael Heizer, Double Negative, 1969-70.

Fig. 2: Robert Smithson, Spiral Jetty, 1970.
55

Fig. 3: Walter de Maria, The Lightning Field, 1977.

Fig. 4: Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Making Earth (Gathering Earth and
Watering), 1970.

56

Fig. 5: Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Making Earth (Breaking and Mixing Earth),
1970.

Fig. 6: Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Making Earth (Tasting and Smelling
Earth), 1970.

57

Fig. 7: Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Portable Orchard: Survival Piece #5, 1972-73.

Fig. 8: Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park I, 1970.
58

Fig. 9: Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park II, 1970.

Fig. 10: Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park II, 1970.
59

Fig. 11: Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park III, 1970.

Fig. 12: Bonnie Ora Sherk, Portable Park III, 1970.
60

Fig. 13: Bonnie Ora Sherk, Crossroads Community (The Farm), 1974-1980.

Fig. 14: Suzanne Lacy, The Oakland Projects, 1991-2001.
61

Fig. 15: Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, California Wash, 1989-96.
62

Fig. 16: Mel Chin, Revival Field, 1991-ongoing.

Fig. 17: Mel Chin, Operation Paydirt/Fundred Dollar Bill Project, 2006-ongoing.
63

Fig. 18: Mel Chin, Safehouse (Exterior), 2008-10.

Fig. 19: Mel Chin, Safehouse (Interior), 2008-10.
64

Fig. 20: Edgar Arceneaux, The CENTER of the EARTH, 2016.

Fig. 21: Rirkrit Tiravanija, Untitled 2016 (LA Water, Water Pavilion), 2016.
65

Fig. 22: Lucky Dragons, The Spreading Ground, 2016.

Fig. 23: Mel Chin, The TIE that BINDS: the MIRROR of the FUTURE (15-O, Bowtie Parcel), 2016-
ongoing.
66

Fig. 24: Mel Chin, The TIE that BINDS: the MIRROR of the FUTURE (15-O, LACMA), 2016-ongoing.

Fig. 25: Fritz Haeg, Edible Estates (Lakewood, CA), 2006.
67

Fig. 26: Fritz Haeg, Edible Estates (Lakewood, CA), 2006.

Fig. 27: Fritz Haeg, Edible Estates (London, England), 2007.
68

Fig. 28: Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Tree Adoptions, 2007-ongoing.

Fig. 29: Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Maps (Silver Lake), 2004-ongoing.
69

Fig. 30: Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Jams, 2006-ongoing.

Fig. 31: Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Jams, 2006-ongoing.
70

Fig. 32: Fallen Fruit, The Endless Orchard, 2005–ongoing.

Fig. 33: Fallen Fruit, Del Aire Public Fruit Park, 2012.
71

Fig. 34: Fallen Fruit, Public Fruit Map (Del Aire), 2012.

Fig. 35: Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Portable Orchard: Survival Piece #5, 2016.
72

Fig. 36: Bonnie Ora Sherk, A Living Library, 1981-ongoing.

Fig. 37: Mel Chin, Fundred Reserve (Exterior), 2017.

73

Fig. 38: Mel Chin, Fundred Reserve (Interior), 2017.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Sustainability through participation: public art projects by Fritz Haeg, Futurefarmers, and Fallen Fruit

PDF

Explorer-at-large: artist-led inquiry and the rise of the museum as athenaeum

PDF

The art of staying: Theaster Gates and the Rebuild Foundation

PDF

Art as a political tool: the early feminist production of Mónica Mayer, 1976–1984

PDF

Public engagement and activating audiences in Los Angeles museums

PDF

Business casual: performing labor in the work of Harun Farocki, Pilvi Takala, and Melanie Gilligan

PDF

Light and space as experience: a study of the work of James Turrell, Olafur Eliasson, and perceptual phenomenology

PDF

Prospering in resistance: the performance art of Zhang Huan from the 1990s to 2000s

PDF

Mud kin: mapping adobe and land-based indigenous and Latinx projects form southern California to west Texas

PDF

Death from above: art contemplates drone warfare

PDF

Museum programming and the educational turn

PDF

Evaluating art for social change: the Anti-Eviction Mapping Project and the Los Angeles Poverty Department in relationship to Tania Bruguera’s concept of Arte Útil; Evaluating art for social cha...

PDF

Queer nightlife networks and the art of Rafa Esparza, Sebastian Hernandez, and Gabriela Ruiz

Asset Metadata

Creator Hinchcliffe, Karen L. (author)

Core Title From land art to social practice: environmental art projects by Helen Mayer Harrison and Newton Harrison, Bonnie Ora Sherk, Mel Chin, Fritz Haeg, and Fallen Fruit

School Roski School of Art and Design

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program Curatorial Practices and the Public Sphere

Publication Date 05/05/2017

Defense Date 05/05/2017

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Eco-Art,environmental art,land art,new genre public art,OAI-PMH Harvest,participation,public art,social practice

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Moss, Karen (committee chair), Arceneaux, Edgar (committee member), Tain, John (committee member)

Creator Email hinchcli@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-371304

Unique identifier UC11258039

Identifier etd-Hinchcliff-5317.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-371304 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Hinchcliff-5317.pdf

Dmrecord 371304

Document Type Thesis

Rights Hinchcliffe, Karen L.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA