"Land art is made directly in the landscape by sculpting the land itself or by making structures in the landscape with natural materials. "
How I understand the art of the land is an expression with land as the subject, not necessarily in the way of making art on the land.
"Environmental art is a range of artistic practices encompassing both historical approaches to nature in art and more recent ecological and politically motivated types of works.“
These three forms of art are all directly and deeply engaged with the natural world showcasing the topic of human-nature relationships to some extent. They are also all relatively new in the history of art, challenging traditional art practices by moving beyond the confines of galleries and museums into the broad outdoor field. Naturally, another thing these art forms share in common is that they are distinctly strong in provoking thought, sparking conversations, and evoking emotional responses related to nature, the land, and human impact on the environment.
According to Wikipedia, land art, art of the land, and environmental art are just three different ways of referring to the same notion. But in my opinion, they are more like three concepts with intersections as well as distinctions.
Might sound over-simplified, but I think the most straightforward difference between land art and the art of the land is that land is usually used as the canvas for the artists to engrave on for land art while it's more likely to be the center subject of the whole art conversation in the language of the art of the land. For example, the Wheatfield-a Confrontation by Agnes Denes, a two-acre amber field of grain in the shadow of the Twin Towers in New York, not with an obvious "drawing" on the land, but used this piece of land as a flag against global warming and economic inequality, which is, in my eyes, a typical "art of the land". With this intention, this artwork is also obviously an environmental art that fits in the intersections of the two notions. What makes environmental art still a different genre is that those artworks without direct connections with the land (or the environment) but address the topic of the environment are also part of environmental art, including Waterloo Bridge by Claude Monet, Waters Glacier and Bucks by Diane Burko, etc.
Another major difference people have talked about is the different intentions behind those different forms of art. As Jason Asenap argued in the article Hubris in Art Form, Land Art is sometimes considered a privileged action to nature which draws a serious line in front of environmental art. Jason Asenap put a very sharp question at the end of the article "Why would one person create something so bombastic on a land that doesn’t ask for it? Is it simply to say, I too was here? " which seems to indicate land art as a selfish expression from the artists. I personally really like how this article provokes my thoughts on Indigenous art with a radical but fresh point of view on land art. However, I don't think the relationship between the land and the artist is so intense in land art. Andy Goldsworthy is definitely a representative of land art artists. His works, more like "paintings" in nature, provide marvelous views that could enhance our appreciation of the land from a refreshing angle. Instead of exploiting the land to mark his own existence, it's more like a cooperation that is beautiful and natural.
"Sites can bear the imprints of past conflicts, whether historical, social, or environmental. These conflicts may manifest as tensions between development and preservation, struggles for power and control, or clashes between different cultural or social narratives associated with the site."--explanation from Google. The Wheat -a Confrontation by Agnes Denes is again a great example. lt is planting a field of wheat on a property worth $4.5 billion created a powerful irony. The field referred to mismanagement, waste, ecological concerns, and world hunger. This specific site in the center of New York is definitely a key element in stressing the conflict of the world's misplaced priorities.
The atmosphere of a site can evoke a range of emotions, such as tranquility, nostalgia, unease, wonder, or melancholy. This atmosphere is shaped by factors like the physical landscape, architectural elements, lighting, sounds, and human activities that occur within or around the site. In the article 15 Essential Works of Land Art, from Great Salt Lakes to Dusty Fields of Lightning, the Storm King Wavefield by Maya Lin is described as magnificent to walk on. This is largely about the atmosphere of the work. Surrounding by mountains and undisturbed nature is essential to the effect.
"The point of view of a site reflects the perspectives, values, and narratives that are projected onto it by individuals or communities. Different stakeholders may have divergent interpretations of the site, influenced by their personal histories, cultural backgrounds, and experiences." --explanation from Google. As Heizer said of his childhood in a New York Times Magazine profile in 2005: “I didn’t have many friends. I wasn’t a sports guy, a team player. The only sport I liked as I grew up was riding motorcycles, and you do that alone.” That's why the motorcycle was the tool he used to draw Circular Surface Planar Displacement Drawing. This is a very concrete example of how personal experiences influence the artwork. But surely I think this factor can be better explained from viewers' different experiences.
Maya Lin, Storm King Wavefield, 2009.
Jerry L. Thompson/©Maya Lin/Courtesy Pace Gallery
Michael Heizer, Circular Surface Planar Displacement Drawing, 1970
Site-specific arts respond directly to the psychological texture of a site. These interventions can highlight hidden narratives, provoke reflection on conflicts or tensions, or evoke specific emotions associated with the site.
Wise material choice can resonate with the psychological texture of the site, reflecting its history, context, or symbolism. Using materials sourced from the site itself or materials that carry cultural significance can deepen the connection between the artwork and the site.
Time is another element I think can be used to enhance visibility since it helps fix the art on a very specific moment and enlarges the experience of that moment. Temporary art installations or performances can dynamically capture the evolving psychological texture of a site over time. These interventions can respond to seasonal changes, cultural events, or shifts in the site's usage, emphasizing the site's transitory nature.
Michelle Stuart, Niagara Gorge Path Relocated, 1975. ©STUART STUDIO ARCHIVE
Michelle Stuart’s Niagara Gorge Path Relocated was a 460-foot-long roll of paper descended down a gorge
“the original location of Niagara Falls at the time of the last glacier approximately 12,000 years ago.”
This is a great example of material and time awareness in land art.
https://www.artandantiquesmag.com/land-art-earthworks-postwar-american-art/
https://umfa.utah.edu/land-art/about
https://publicdelivery.org/agnes-denes-wheatfield/
https://conasur.com/environmental-art-raising-awareness-earths-tomorrow/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_art
https://www.altaonline.com/culture/art/a42042641/land-art-jason-asenap/
https://www.artnews.com/feature/essential-works-land-art-1202682741/