by: Jessica Sheridan Assoc. AIA LEED AP
One of four of Eliasson’s “The New York City Waterfalls.”
Jessica Sheridan
“The New York City Waterfalls” by Danish artist Olafur Eliasson and presented by the Public Art Fund opened June 26, featuring four 90- to 120-foot-tall waterfalls constructed with scaffolding and the East River. This summer’s other public art projects include David Byrne’s “Playing the Building” and the many happenings and events hosted by Figment on Governors Island. While I feel those are very successful, I have mixed reviews of the Eliasson installation.
The waterfalls are engaging viewers with the East River in a new way. They are taking boat tours and seeking out new vantage points along the shoreline. The city has opened the incomplete Brooklyn Bridge Park as a temporary park designed by Brooklyn-based dlandstudio solely for people to observe the waterfalls. While the Brooklyn Bridge and Governors Island sites are more obvious locations for the installation, the Brooklyn Bridge Park and Pier 35 sites draw attention to areas in the city that usually go unnoticed. At night, they are illuminated with LEDs, creating a unique addition to the already multi-layered city lights.
One problem I have with the Brooklyn Bridge Park and Pier 35 sites is their remoteness. Only those who fetishistically seek out public art will be willing to find access points. The waterfalls themselves are at a surprisingly small scale, and the four sites seem disjointed. Yes, they are all located on the East River, but that is all that links them. They exist in neighborhoods of different scales with varied histories and services. Who knows why Eliasson chose those places over ones that are closer together, that relate historically, or link current uses; and one cannot tell why he chose four locations instead of more or fewer.
The waterfalls are being touted as “environmental sculpture,” emphasizing sustainable design. Intake filter pools have a mesh cover to protect aquatic life. LEDs use less energy than other types of lighting. All of the electricity used during its operation is 100% offset by “green power,” states the website. While I appreciate the conscientious effort, I feel that if Eliasson is going to publicize the project as being “green,” it needs to push the envelope further. Maybe there could have been a way to tap into the energy created by the river currents (those under the Brooklyn Bridge are notorious for creating problems in the shipping industry). The energy created by the 35,000 gallons of water per minute that cycle through the structure could have possibly been used to light the LEDs. Questions remain, such as: what is “green power?” All this leads me to be skeptical. Still, it’s a worthy effort, and a cooling presence in a long, hot summer.