28' Diameter 

Editor: Here we have Andy Goldsworthy's "28' Diameter", a conceptual drawing using pencil. The circles and rectangular border feel very calculated, almost like a technical diagram. What do you make of this piece? Curator: Immediately, I think about Goldsworthy’s relationship with the landscape. It seems this piece explores how we quantify nature, trying to fit it into ordered structures. Consider the title itself – a precise measurement – juxtaposed with the potentially organic shapes he would work with outdoors. Editor: That makes sense. So, it's almost a commentary on how we attempt to control nature? Curator: Precisely! Think about how land is divided, mapped, and ultimately, exploited. The drawing style too suggests the hand of the artist mapping, sectioning, arranging; however slightly irregular it may be. Is it control if Goldsworthy can’t even fit the circles exactly within the box he’s created? Editor: I see what you mean! It's a bit… forced. Like he’s pushing natural forms into an unnatural framework. Is the very act of sketching itself a form of this control? Curator: A worthwhile observation! Museums historically played a role in classifying and displaying artifacts, creating narratives and power dynamics surrounding knowledge. Could this drawing, with its clear delineations and central 'dots', reference those curatorial structures and imposed classifications of nature? Editor: It's fascinating to consider those social elements in such an outwardly simple drawing. I’ll never look at a landscape the same way again! Curator: I find myself wondering, too, how Goldsworthy’s temporary land art factors in. Is this preliminary diagram the *real* art, or is it the natural work outside? Food for thought!