Secret Installation Disguised as Art?

Why would an artist do art and make it so nobody was allowed to see it?
What would be the point?

Originally posted by borrowedname
Why would an artist do art and make it so nobody was allowed to see it?
What would be the point?

For the third time in this thread:

www.marin.cc.ca.us...

So is their a conspiracy of landscape artists?

reply to post by borrowedname

It's not completed, the best reason not to show it.

Originally posted by zorgon
Or someone with WAY to much money and time on their hands?

This one is in my backyard (Well a few hours away)

Location 44 miles from Rachael Nevada...

This is in the middle of Nowhere yet near the infamous Area 51.

It is Land Art, or so we are told

Here are some points...

1) Its HUGE
2) It is almost inaccessible
3) It cannot be seen from any highway
4) Its near Racheal, Nevada mecca of UFO buffs
5) NO ONE is allowed to visit it

It is called "Michael Heizer's City"

All this for a sculpture? A lifetime to complete perhaps...

There is NO QUESTION that this is man made, but is it merely Art? or is this something more...

At the moment it can only be viewed from above... but it is certainly a very interesting undertaking...

Somewhere in the Nevada Desert
+38° 1' 48.00", -115° 26' 10.00"

"As long as you're going to make a sculpture, why not make one that competes with a 747, or the Empire State Building, or the Golden Gate Bridge." - Michael Heizer

I'm building this work for later. I'm interested in making a work of art that will represent all the civilization to this point." - Michael Heizer

Map...

So what's the verdict?

1) Eccentric Art
2) Secret Base
3) Message to Aliens

Michael Heizer's City



[edit on 30-8-2009 by zorgon]

Almost all of those pics looked photohopped but thats just my opinion.

I'm going to say its a Underground Secret Base that actually looks like art.

reply to post by ArMaP


So why the hell would he be showing pictures of it. Anyone I know that does art doesn't want to show it half done, including pictures of it.

Why would he release pictures if he doesn't want anyone to see it before it's completed. To the point where he will shoot or have arrested anyone that looks.?

reply to post by McGinty


That doesn't really prove anything. That proves that this type of art exists. Do you know how many artists, green peace, or movie industry people have been recruited by the CIA or other government factions for the sole purpose of espionage, dis-info, spying, etc. Mata Hari was a spy, you are gonna put it past this guy when (essentially) a prostitute can do it.

If they wanted a cover story, they wouldn't take an unknown and have him start making land art. They would make an offer to someone already established.

I'm not saying this adds validity to the claim of it being an alterior motive operation but it is a realistic assumption of the possibility.

You cannot really prove/disprove this without sneaking into the site and snooping around.

Originally posted by zorgon
So what's the verdict?

1) Eccentric Art
2) Secret Base
3) Message to Aliens

I don't see why it can't be all three.

1) Yes, it's obviously artwork, and obviously artistic in nature. It's also quite eccentric, though sometimes it seems each sculptor tries hard to be the "most" eccentric, so that's not unusual at all.

2) Yes, it's a secret base. Look at it. Way out in the desert, can only be seen from above, and it looks just like a city, which is why it's called that. I think it's just like those bases they cover with camo tarps and pretend it's not there. It's there. If that isn't a military base, I'd be shocked and awed.

3) Of course it's a message to aliens. Look! We're smart! We exist! The same was the Pyramids of Giza or the lines of Nazca are messages to aliens, simply the message that Humans are #1! Woo!

Originally posted by indy0725
...Almost all of those pics looked photohopped but thats just my opinion...

Well, they are real.

This is a relatively famous piece of artwork known by people who follow Michael Heizer's work. Michael Heizer has been building City for over 40 years now -- it's not a new thing.

People have been to Michael Heizer's City and people have seen it. The parts of the artwork seen in the pictures are real -- not photoshopped.


[edit on 9/1/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by BaronVonGodzilla
...2) Yes, it's a secret base. Look at it. Way out in the desert, can only be seen from above, and it looks just like a city, which is why it's called that. I think it's just like those bases they cover with camo tarps and pretend it's not there. It's there. If that isn't a military base, I'd be shocked and awed....

I think that if the U.S. built a secret underground base in the Nevada desert, it would look like this at the surface:


I'm certain they have the ability to make the surface above an underground base look totally undisturbed and look like any other of the 20,000 square miles of the Mojave desert -- so why wouldn't they.

Why would they cover it with artwork when they can make it look like just plain old desert?

...and I don't believe in the "hidden in plain sight" argument. Obviously (as evidenced by this thread) hiding under a piece of artwork is not as good as an idea of just hiding under regular "unremarkable" and indistinguishable desert -- so why do it?

Originally posted by threekings
reply to post by ArMaP

 

So why the hell would he be showing pictures of it. Anyone I know that does art doesn't want to show it half done, including pictures of it.

Why would he release pictures if he doesn't want anyone to see it before it's completed. To the point where he will shoot or have arrested anyone that looks.?

Why would he show pictures if it was an alien base (or some other evil establishment)?

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Wouldn't they have to excavate the area firs before turning it into the image you posted? If they were excavating, someone might notice it, where as if the project was slated for an “Art Project” they could build the base with a guise.

reply to post by AlienCarnage


I'm talking about tunnels and digging under the surface.

Regarding excavation: wouldn't the same be true for any base under Michael Heizer's City? If they dug a dig hole to build a base, wouldn't the big hole have been visible instead of Heizers's artwork?

And if they started building a base 37 years ago when Heizer started his project, I would think that the base would be completed by now. So why wouldn't they just tell Heizer to move on away from the site?


[edit on 9/1/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

the biggest red flag right here

Visiting City is NOT currently possible. Citing safety and artistic reasons, Heizer has disallowed all visitation of the work in progress. Heizer owns all of the property around the work and has marked the access to the site with a sign that prohibits trespassing. TheDia Foundation has indicated that once the work is completed, it will be open it to the publc

Interweb article

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


They could have dug a small shaft, and started digging the actual chambers after about 10 or 20 meters deep.

[edit on 1-9-2009 by drsmooth23]

When I first read this thread I thought of Ed Leedskalnin and what people would have thought of Ed when he was working relative seclusion.

Although I'm not trying to correlate Ed and this piece/base together. I'm merely stating that's what this thread pointed me in the direction of thought

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


It could be possible that they welcomed the art to be used as subterfuge.

Not that I necessarily buy it being a base, but trying to look at it from both sides.

I too, believe it is just an ambitious bit of landscape art. It would no sense to make a "secret base" so... obvious and noticeable. Unless of course, the base has been operational for 40 years, and this is just a coverup for activity there, and a reason to keep it closed to the public. Almost sounds like a Scooby Do episode.

I'm going to say art tho.

It would be the perfect cover-up as no-one on ATS thinks its a cover up

Originally posted by drsmooth23
the biggest red flag right here

Visiting City is NOT currently possible. Citing safety and artistic reasons, Heizer has disallowed all visitation of the work in progress. Heizer owns all of the property around the work and has marked the access to the site with a sign that prohibits trespassing. TheDia Foundation has indicated that once the work is completed, it will be open it to the publc

Interweb article

So the artist may be a brooding, crotchety and a very private individual. How is that at all not expected from artists -- especially a landscape artists who has worked on a project for 37 years?

How is an artist who is an "extremely private person" a red flag? Perhaps I'm thinking of the stereotypical artiste who can be difficult person at times, but I don't see it as a red flag that he doesn't want too many people near his uncompleted artwork.

In fact, I would be quite surprised if he wasn't an extremely private individual who doesn't want people visiting his "studio" while he was at work.

How many artists have their working studios open to the public? There aren't even very many "average people" who have their places of work open to the public.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

They could have dug a small shaft, and started digging the actual chambers after about 10 or 20 meters deep.

They could have done that in a pole barn.



[edit on 9/1/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by threekings


The question was asked, why would an artist put art where no one can see it, as though this were unprecedented. The link points to just a few examples of various artists doing this.

Boy i think it would be great if artists were working in this way. I make art, films etc and it would be pretty cool if one day i made the real big time and the CIA said, hey, we're gonna tell you the truth about E.T.

I don't see that happening - artists, filmmakers etc are infamously bad at keeping secrets - they are communicators and exhibitionists by nature.

Also, as someone else humorously pointed out with a pic, i imagine the surface of a base would be anonymous scrubland - why would advanced aliens, or advanced terrestrial aircraft need such a land mark to find their way?

If folk really wanted to question this, the thing they should be asking is why would E.T or advanced aircraft need this naked display of architecture?