The history of the Pagoda’s roots lie within early Stupa architecture. The first were simple burial mounds which looked like man made hills and during the great course of Indian architecture became extremely tall and elaborate yet retained their identity as metaphor for mound or mountain. The connection between structure/landscape was for me becoming nearly interchangeable as I progressed with a series of sculptures which were not merely about the role of building on the landscape but rather both entities existing within their respective context. But the truly fascinating phenomenon was to look back at the first Chinese mountains I had carved some ten years earlier and to observe how strikingly architectonic their stylization was. During the next few years the content of the architecture which I was using gradually changed to an abstracted version of ancient city plans. Axis and section became vital structural elements in my designs and the bas-relief of massive and complex cityscapes became the dominant theme. The more I bore into the details of cityscape representation it became apparent that the subtractive method of carving was particularly unsuited to representing that which is complexly constructed. So I began a series of wood constructions which in time became more about the geometry of the built landscape and referred less to the natural landscape. And in time these constructions became very much about modern architectural idioms and the look and feel of the constructions began to be hard edged and precise. A further transformation began to take hold during this time as the format for delivery of surface articulation translated into a series of cubes and pillars; the former being a compacting of design while the latter saw an elongation and more elegant almost figurative development.

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11