'Landscape 4:Temple' 1988.
'Temple' consisted of a recycled timber tower of seven levels with copper dome; a recycled timber pavilion with a meditation platform; living plants; an irrigation system; 80 stone cairns, 80 pinch pot oil lamps; 22 sentinel shrines/lanterns; fire; a 22 metre reflection pool surfaced with terra cotta tiles, water; rock platforms, equinox sighting; ritual performances, and ongoing caretakership.
From the distance the installation appeared as a (hyper)real temple complex. On closer examination discrepancies registered, expectations were disrupted. The temple pavilion was an open skeletal structure enshrining a profusion of plants. What appeared monumental was revealed as fragile and vulnerable.
The installation became the site of a performance over the three nights of Easter. Fire ascended the tower representing a Kundalini-like non specific living spirit. The resurrection called for was of an holistic 'nature'. The installation and performances invoked an ecological paradigm.
The scale of the work required a lot of planning, scheduling and assistance from other artists and eventually intense collaboration with the Mildura community, thus exemplifying issues of interconnectedness and interdependency. I employed three artists to help construct the work; Virginia Barratt; Sharon O'Brien; and local artist, Sue Border. I worked closely with The Mildura City Council and their engineer, Perecini to make the foundations and erect the structures. The pinch pots were made to my design by the art students at the Sunraysia College of TAFE; The cairns were proudly produced by a group of disabled children and teenagers; The plants were supplied by the Forestry Dept and a local Sunraysia Nursery; The irrigation was sponsored by Sunraysia Irrigation; the fire sticks were made to my design by a group of art students visiting the Triennial from Ballarat Art College, and they also performed in the rituals. After the three months of exhibition the community organised a petition to have the work stay. This was not feasible. However, it did exemplify how the community had, through their personal involvement, come to feel ownership of the work and to accept the work into their community.
