Painted steel, corroded copper pennies, and silicone adhesive
Each sphere 60 inches in diameter

Photography not permitted
Lent by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Purchase, Louis and Bessie Adler Foundation, Inc. Gift (Seymour M. Klein, President), 1988

Location: East of COM on Inner Campus Drive
GPS: 30.285636,-97.738276

Like the Dada artists of the 1910s and Pop artists of the 1960s, Donald Lipski uses readymade objects from daily life and assembles them in whimsical and surprising ways. He is best known for extensive arrangements of found objects that appear to have little or nothing in common, often using humorous and perplexing titles to provoke a range of interpretations. Unlike formalist artists whose goal is visual beauty, Lipski’s approach to art is primarily conceptual; by juxtaposing unrelated objects, he divorces them from their familiar context and creates new situations for contemplation. 

The West consists of two spherical buoys, each measuring five feet in diameter. Such buoys mark deep-water shipping channels and are often used to indicate where large commercial and military ships are permitted to anchor offshore. The sculpture dates from a period when Lipski was preoccupied with military and transportation technologies. In 1986, he was invited to work at the Grumman Aerospace Corporation in Bethpage, New York. Using discarded components and scrap metal from their salvage yard as well as material acquired from a federal Defense Department surplus warehouse, Lipski made a series of sculptures that suggest wartime manufacture and the obsolescence of outdated equipment.

Instead of providing secure anchorage to ships, the two buoys are shackled uselessly to each other. To their surfaces Lipski glued regular pennies that he deliberately patinated, perhaps alluding to the predominance of capitalism in Western societies and the global reach of the American dollar. A certain conversation starter, The West invites the viewer to engage in the mental work of supposing. For some, the title implies uncharted territory, while the suggestive shape of the buoys hints at the brute force and masculine energy needed to conquer the unknown. The pennies attached to the surface of the sculpture—heads on one buoy and tails on the other—suggest the odds of a great gamble. Like much of Lipski’s sculpture, understanding The West is like teasing apart a poem—multiple meanings can be coaxed out and revealed over time. 


Silhouette of sculpture

The West


Donald Lipski

American, born 1947

Subject: Repetition and juxtaposition

Activity: Creating a sculpture using repetition

Materials: A large number of small objects, such as bottle caps or push pins

Vocabulary: conceptual artist, elaborate, found objects, irony, juxtaposition, pun


A native of Chicago, Donald Lipski attended the University of Wisconsin in Madison. He then earned a Master of Fine Arts (MFA) degree in ceramics from the Cranbrook Academy of Art in Michigan. He now lives in New York. Lipski is best known for his elaborate arrangements of ordinary found objects on white walls of galleries. The objects he uses for these pieces usually appear to have little or nothing in common, but often the juxtaposition of objects can imply meanings. For instance, in Med-i-vac, Lipski covered a medical rescue device with razor blades. The juxtaposition of an object intended to heal with objects intended to harm, creates contrast and irony.

Lipski often uses repetition of identical items in his work. Here, he used silicone adhesive to attach pennies to the surface of two steel buoys found in a Seattle junkyard. Many art historians consider Lipski to be a conceptual artist. In other words, he is trying to express ideas in his work. However, Lipski’s art is also visually stunning. As he says of his own public work: “I try to make something seductive, that immediately pulls you in and makes you take notice; and at the same time, I want to make something that, if you’re seeing it daily year after year, has the capacity to grow and develop new meanings.”


What are the different properties of pennies and buoys? How do they juxtapose? What do you think the juxtaposition means?

Why do you think the piece is titled The West? What objects or ideas do you associate with the west? Which “West” do you think Lipski is referring to? The western hemisphere? The American West? Seattle? Discuss the reasons for your answer.

What is different about the pennies on one ball and the pennies on the other? Why is the orientation of the pennies significant?

Do you think Lipski is a conceptual artist? Why or why not?


Gather one type of small object; for instance, push pins or tacks, bottle caps, yogurt cups, plastic spoons, toothpicks, etc. Collect as many as you can, and place the objects together to create your own sculpture. Try to add at least one element or object that contrasts with the other objects.


Lipski made another sculpture of a single buoy and covered its surface with gaming dice. He titled that work Bad Buoy—a pun alluding to the casinos on cruise ships that operate offshore where American gambling laws do not apply. 

Look again

The West was originally shown indoors, in a commercial gallery. With a diameter of five feet, the buoys are about life-size; they neither tower over the viewer nor appear as mere objects. Yet their placement, whether indoors or out, seems to impact the viewer’s perception. What if The West was exhibited indoors? How would that change your interaction with the sculpture? Would it seem larger? Smaller? Does a sculpture’s placement or architectural context matter? Why do you think some Landmarks sculptures are located indoors and others outside? Use examples. 


Conceptual artist - an artist concerned first with concepts or thoughts

Elaborate - complex, ornate; fullness of detail

Found objects - disparate objects found by chance in the environment

Irony - an expression (words or images) that has the opposite of the literal meaning

Juxtaposition - the act of placing two or more things side by side

Pun - the humorous use of a word in a way that suggests two or more of its meanings or the meaning of another word similar in sound


A native of Chicago, Donald Lipski attended the University of Wisconsin in Madison, then earned an MFA in ceramics from the Cranbrook Academy of Art in Michigan. After teaching art at the University of Oklahoma from 1973 to 1977, he moved to New York.

Like the Dada artists of the 1910s and 1920s and the pop artists of the 1960s and 1970s, Lipski uses ordinary objects from daily life—things easily recognized but not necessarily having a single or specific intended meaning. He is best known for extensive arrangements of found objects on the white walls of galleries. Usually they appear to have little or nothing in common, and Lipski’s humorous and perplexing titles may enhance or mask meanings, such as Xalupax (1980–88) and Rodin Rodinadanna (2000).

Some juxtapositions present more direct implications, as in Med-i-vac, a medical rescue device that Lipski covered with razor blades. His Broken Wings sculptures in 1986 were made from dismantled airplane parts. The locale in which a sculpture was conceived can sometimes be directly relevant, as it was for Tobaccolage, made during Lipski’s residency in Winston-Salem, North Carolina; the composition consists entirely of objects related to the making and marketing of cigarettes.

Unlike formalist artists, whose goal is visual beauty, Lipski’s approach to art is primarily conceptual; that is, he seeks to express ideas and elicit viewer reactions. The visual appeal, however, remains strong and tantalizing.

The West, 1987

Because Lipski uses found objects not merely for their visual attributes but more importantly for the associations that viewers might make in response to them, his sculptures invite speculation. The West consists of two spherical buoys, each measuring five feet in diameter. Such buoys can mark deepwater shipping channels and are often used to indicate where large commercial and military ships may anchor offshore. Their normal place is floating on open bodies of water. Now situated on dry land, the buoys are no longer functional, like fish out of water. Instead of providing secure anchorage to ships, the two buoys are shackled uselessly to each other.

To the blank surfaces of the metal buoys Lipski glued brand-new pennies. But the artist deliberately corroded them, perhaps an allusion to how quickly things become outdated. By incorporating actual money into this sculpture, Lipski invites us to speculate on possible meanings. Pennies are the smallest denomination of American currency and therefore may be considered the foundation of our affluence, even though we tend to ignore pennies as being of no importance.

Lipski made another sculpture of a single buoy, its surface covered with gaming dice. He titled that work Bad Buoy —a whimsical pun alluding to the casinos on cruise ships that operate offshore where American gambling laws do not apply.

The title of The West is less easy to decipher. As a term in American culture and geography, it refers to the western half of the United States, but this sculpture does not suggest the frontier West of cowboys and cattle. More likely, the title refers to the military and commercial ports of Long Beach, San Diego, San Francisco, and Seattle. In fact, Lipski obtained the buoys from Seattle harbor.

But Lipski’s art is not about mere facts. “The West” may refer to the broader political usage, meaning any European-based culture. In that context, the pennies could allude to the predominance of capitalism in Western values or the global reach of the American dollar.

Valerie Fletcher is Senior Curator at the Hirshhorn Museum in Washington, DC. Her research on groundbreaking aspects of international, globalized, and transnational art have resulted in numerous exhibitions and publications. 


Fleischman, Stephen, and Terrie Sultan. Donald Lipski: A Brief History of Twine. Madison, WI: Madison Art Center, 2000.

Freedman Gallery, Albright College. Donald Lipski: Poetic Sculpture. Reading, PA, 1990. Text by David S. Rubin.

Hillwood Art Gallery, Long Island University. Broken Wings: Donald Lipski at Grumman. Brookville, NY, 1987. Text by Judy Collischan Van Wagner.

Kaufman, Leslie. “Appreciating the Physical World: A Conversation with Donald Lipski.” Sculpture 26 (November 2007): 28–35.

Kuspit, Donald. Donald Lipski: Building Steam (New York: Germans Van Eck Gallery, 1985).

Princenthal, Nancy. “Reweaving Old Glory.” Art in America 79 (May 1991): 136–41, 182.

Saunders, Wade. “Talking Objects: Interviews with Ten Younger Sculptors.” Art in America 73 (November 1985): 110–37.

Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art. Donald Lipski: Oral History. Winston Salem, NC, 1994.

Yau, John. Donald Lipski: Who’s Afraid of Red, White, and Blue? Philadelphia: Fabric Workshop, 1991.

View Donald Lipski’s website


The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York generously loaned twenty-eight modern and contemporary sculptures to Landmarks for display throughout the Austin campus. The collection represents a broad array of artists working in the second half of the twentieth century. The initial sculptures were installed throughout the main campus in September 2008, and a second, smaller group were unveiled at the renovated Bass Concert Hall in January 2009.

Funding for the loan was provided by the Office of the President. This project was the result of a collaborative effort among many, including:


Andrée Bober and Landmarks
Pat Clubb and University Operations
Douglas Dempster and the College of Fine Arts
Landmarks Advisory Committee
William Powers and the Office of the President
David Rea and the Office of Campus Planning
Bill Throop and Project Management and Construction Services
Gary Tinterow and the Metropolitan Museum of Art
Samuel Wilson and the Faculty Building Advisory Committee

Project Team

Chuck Agro, transportation, Metropolitan Museum of Art
Andrée Bober, curator and director, Landmarks
Caitlin Corrigan, registrar, Metropolitan Museum of Art
Cynthia Iavarone, collections manager, Metropolitan Museum of Art
Cliff Koeninger, architect
Ricardo Puemape, Project Management and Construction Services
Kendra Roth, conservator, Metropolitan Museum of Art
Patrick Sheehy, installation services
Nicole Vlado, project manager, Landmarks

Special Thanks

Valerie Fletcher, curatorial contributor
Beth Palazzolo, administrative coordination, University Operations
Russell Pinkston, composer


What’s Past Is Prologue: Inaugurating Landmarks with the Metropolitan Sculptures

With the arrival of twenty-eight modern sculptures on long-term loan from New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Landmarks program has begun. Their installation throughout the Austin campus offers a remarkable opportunity to survey some of the major trends in art during the second half of the twentieth century. These sculptures allow us to witness the distinctly modern dialogue between representation and abstraction, as well as the contest between natural and industrial materials. Most of all, we can celebrate their presence as an unprecedented chance to experience works of art first-hand––to appreciate their forms and to understand the underlying ideas.

The Landmarks program perpetuates in Austin one of civilization’s oldest and most enduring traditions: the placing of art in public areas, accessible to nearly everyone and expressive of collectively held ideas. More than five thousand years ago, the cultures of Egypt and Mesopotamia produced sculptures for urban plazas, government buildings, and places of worship to express political, secular, and religious values. Grand monuments endorsed the ruling elite and commemorated military victories, while images of deities symbolized spiritual beliefs. The original purposes of public art were primarily ideological and didactic, but what has endured through the ages is the physical beauty of the art. In modern times the contexts and goals for public art have changed considerably. In many parts of the world democracy and egalitarianism have supplanted absolute rulers, and explicit religious power has yielded to secular humanism. During the mid-to-late twentieth century (the era when the Metropolitan’s sculptures were created), globalization has redefined the entire world. Societies in Europe and the Americas have became so diverse that cultural authorities can no longer be sure of which systems of meaning and which values, let alone which individuals, should be honored in the traditional ways of public art.

A schism has developed between traditionalists and modernists. In a rapidly changing world those who wanted to preserve the familiar in art have continued to commission representational statues. Modernists, on the other hand, have embraced change and gladly jettisoned the old ways in favor of abstraction. The schism is exemplified by two famous memorials in Washington, D.C., both intended to commemorate the heroic sacrifices of American armed forces. The Marine Corps Memorial (1954) consists of a superbly realistic representation of soldiers struggling to raise the American flag on Iwo Jima in 1945. In contrast, the Vietnam Memorial (1982) consists of a massive V-shaped wedge of polished black stone inscribed with What’s Past Is Prologue: Inaugurating Landmarks with the Metropolitan Sculptures July 2008 the names of the dead. At the time it was inaugurated, this monument shocked nearly everyone outside the art world and outraged many of those it intended to commemorate. In response, a group of bronze figures of soldiers was added. But soon, precisely because of its universal form and absence of imagery, the original memorial became a powerful place where all Americans could go to grieve, remember, and pay homage. To most of the art world, this demonstrated beyond a doubt the viability of abstract sculpture for public places.

With America’s increasing wealth and social consciousness in the 1960s many towns began to institute programs of commissioning sculptures for public places. By requiring that 1 or 2 percent of each building’s construction budget be used for art, urban planners sought to improve the living and working environment for millions of people. The main difficulty was agreeing on what kind of art was visually pleasing and, just as important, potentially meaningful to the general public. Two highly publicized examples were the huge, abstract, metal sculptures by Pablo Picasso and Alexander Calder, in Chicago and Grand Rapids respectively, which at first provoked derision but gradually became a source of community identity and pride.

One way to approach works of art is to consider the historical context in which they were created. During the first half of the twentieth century, life and art underwent radical transformations. Industrial manufacturing supplanted agriculture as the dominant mode of production, people migrated from rural areas to urban centers, women and minorities gained equal rights, warfare expanded to an unprecedented global scale, and technology accelerated the pace of life—and art changed in tandem.


Early in the modern era, many artists believed that a new visual language was needed to replace the Greco-Roman classical figurative traditions that had persisted through two millennia. Photography had made mimesis (accurate depiction of reality) unnecessary in painting and sculpture for the first time in history. Artists were free to conceive radically new approaches, and so abstraction was born, emerging from 1910 to 1920 in Europe. Initially artists simplified and stylized observed reality into organic and angular forms. That first phase soon evolved into making “pure” abstractions with no recognizable sources. From the outset, abstract art carried implicit meanings recognized by artists and informed viewers but largely lost on the general public.

Early abstractionists intended their art to convey their commitment to an ongoing transformation of society. Like Morse code in telegraphy and other new modes of communication fundamentally different from the traditional written word, abstract forms in art could convey meanings—not narrative or literal ones but broad ideas that could speak to an international audience and help advance human consciousness.

During the 1920s and 1930s, artists developed two broad types of abstraction: geometric and biomorphic. Geometry denotes mathematics and suggests such related disciplines as architecture, design, engineering, and logic as well as intangible qualities like analytical thinking and precision—desirable attributes for a rational, communal society. Artists devised a new language of geometry in art: horizontal and vertical elements can convey calm, harmony, and stability (see Harmonious Triad by Beverly Pepper), while rising diagonals can suggest energy and optimism (see Column of Peace by Antoine Pevsner and Square Tilt by Joel Perlman).

In contrast to geometric abstraction, a number of artists favored softer forms and curving contours. Inspired by sources in nature, biomorphic abstractions evoke natural phenomena, biological processes, growth, and ambiguity (see Big Indian Mountain by Raoul Hague, Source by Hans Hokanson, and Untitled [Seven Mountains] by Ursula von Rydingsvard). Such works stand in general opposition to the industrial and technological aspects of modern life; they remind us of the fundamental importance of the natural world. Biomorphism was invented and advocated by the surrealists, who believed in the importance of the unconscious mind in creating and understanding modern art. Relying on the Freudian concept of free association, such artists expect viewers to generate their own unique responses to abstract art.

The two types of abstraction began as competing and opposing philosophies, but by the 1950s many artists expertly combined them to suit their expressive needs (see the rhythmic contours of Veduggio Glimpse by Anthony Caro and the disconcerting, hulking forms of Catacombs and Guardian by Seymour Lipton).

By the 1960s, the original philosophical meanings underlying abstraction had mostly faded away, leaving “formalist” aesthetics: the creation and appreciation of pure nonreferential beauty. Formalism dominated much artistic practice from the 1950s through the 1970s, particularly in the United States in the circle around the critic Clement Greenberg. Geometric sculptures became ubiquitous in public places—some complex and sophisticated and some merely competent. A group known as the minimalists advocated an intellectually rigorous, austerely reductivist approach (see Amaryllis by Tony Smith). Other artists went in the opposite direction, toward complexity and a decorative verve (see Kingfish by Peter Reginato). From those extremes emerged the postminimalists, who infused organic vitality into simple, singular forms (see Curve and Shadow No. 2 by Juan Hamilton).


Despite the enthusiasm for abstraction in midcentury, a number of artists insisted on maintaining recognizable human content in their works. Abstraction had alienated many viewers who found it remote or incomprehensible. Yet few artists returned to traditional realism, preferring instead to explore new and evocative modes of representation.

The strongest resurgence occurred in the aftermath of World War II. Many artists, especially in Europe, wanted to pay homage to the sufferings experienced by so many people during the war and to their struggles to rebuild their lives and societies amidst the new fears engendered by the nuclear age and the Cold War. This atmosphere of postwar existential anxiety was poignantly expressed in two museum exhibitions in the 1950s: models for a never-realized Monument to the Unknown Political Prisoner at London’s Tate Gallery in 1953 and the avowedly humanist theme of the New Images of Man installation at New York’s Museum of Modern Art in 1959.

Many postwar sculptors expressed their angst by portraying figures or fragments of bodies as falling, broken, injured, or partially robotic (see Augustus by Bernard Meadows and Figure by Eduardo Paolozzi). Some erudite artists reinterpreted classical myths, particularly those in which a hero challenged the gods and were punished: Icarus, Hephaestus, Prometheus, Sisyphus (see works by Koren der Harootian and Frederick Kiesler). Seymour Lipton created a particularly effective amalgam of figure references within abstract forms that harbor dark inner spaces (see Pioneer, Catacombs, and Guardian).

Representational sculpture was submerged by the tidal wave of abstraction in the 1960s and 1970s, but a new generation insisted on a legible humanist content in art, addressing issues of personal identity and isolation in an impersonal world (see Eyes by Louise Bourgeois and Figure on a Trunk by Magdalena Abakanowicz).

Materials and Methods

Modern sculptors also introduced a new language of materials and methods. In the late nineteenth century, sculpture making had entered a new phase of mass production made possible through technology: bronzes could be produced in large editions by skilled technicians from an artist’s original. The Thinker by Auguste Rodin, for example, was made in several editions, ranging from a dozen life-size bronzes to hundreds of smaller casts. This mechanization and concomitant commodification of art prompted a reaction. Appearing simultaneously in several countries, the “direct carve” movement advocated older craft-based methods and sought to enhance the intrinsic characteristics of natural materials: the color and grain of exotic woods or the veining and crystalline structure of unusual stones. By the 1920s, this aesthetic had gained international prominence, and it persists to this day.

The first generation of direct carvers admired prehistoric, African, Oceanic, and indigenous American artifacts. By adapting the hieratic frontality and stylized forms of those sources to the sleekly refined forms of abstraction, modern sculptors could represent simplified figures linked in sophisticated linear rhythms (see works by Koren der Harootian and Anita Weschler). Recent artists of this orientation tend to work on a larger scale and may roughly cut and hew wood to achieve expressionistic textures (see works by Hans Hokanson and Ursula von Rydingsvard).

Carvers remained a relatively small minority in modern sculpture, far outnumbered by “direct metal” sculptors. Their approach emerged in prewar Europe and burgeoned into an international movement in the 1950s and 1960s. Seeking materials and methods appropriate to the modern Machine Age, artists looked to engineering and construction for inspiration. Instead of using chisels to carve wood and stone, constructivists preferred welding torches to cut and join pieces of metal. Their structures ranged from elegant abstractions to assemblages of cast-off objects.

The industrial analogy and model extended to the sculptors’ own studios, which resembled factory spaces with heavy-duty equipment. Some—like Anthony Caro, Willard Boepple, and Robert Murray—found inspiration in working spontaneously and experimentally with sheet metal: cutting, folding, rolling, welding, soldering, and sometimes painting or burnishing it. Other sculptors, notably Tony Smith, were comfortable with sending models to factories for professional fabrication. Both methods were considered appropriate for a modern world that had been so fundamentally reshaped by industrial manufacture.

In contrast, many sculptors preferred to make assemblages from miscellaneous bits and pieces of scrap, sometimes irreverently called “junk sculpture.” Although artists had experimented with this approach as early as the 1910s, it became a widespread tendency only decades later in the 1950s and 1960s, when sculptors made three-dimensional collages from the detritus of industrial manufacture and mass consumption: rusty machinery, old car parts, squished used paint tubes, broken musical instruments, virtually anything. The motivations for using trash range from simple necessity (when an artist has no money to buy new materials) to antimaterialistic social criticism and environmentalism (sculptors started recycling long before the idea occurred to others).

Regardless of the motivations, a found-object sculpture possesses an inherent dual identity: its former reality as a useful thing and its new reality as art. That dualism inevitably poses an intellectual and visual conundrum for us. Do we see Deborah Butterfield’s Vermillion primarily as a lifelike depiction of a horse or as a composition of rusty, crumpled bits of metal thrown out by a wasteful consumerist society? And what are we to understand from Donald Lipski’s seemingly abstract The West, which consists of decontextualized harbor buoys and lots of corroded pennies? The artists offer clues and hope that we will use our own eyes, intellect, intuition, and imagination to make connections and create meanings.

Landmarks: Sculptures for Inquiring Minds

Unlike works in private collections or even museums, public sculptures exist in our daily environment, interact with our activities, and enter our awareness repeatedly and variously. Beyond the pleasure they bring to viewers already acquainted with art, they can stimulate curiosity and spark new perceptions in the minds of passersby who might otherwise not have much aesthetic experience. As the university’s population seeks knowledge in classes, libraries, and laboratories, the Landmark sculptures can offer other kinds of discoveries. Visitors to the Perry Castañeda-Library, the Nano Science Technology Building, the School of Law, and elsewhere on the campus can now see immediately that the visual arts have a prominent place and come away enriched. Very few campuses or cities can boast so many sculptures of such quality that are free and accessible to all. The twenty-eight sculptures from the Metropolitan Museum of Art proclaim the broad purpose of the Landmarks program: to bring an important new dimension to the life of the university, to the everyday experience of its students, faculty and staff, the citizens of Austin and beyond, and to any person who just crosses the campus.

Download the PDF.

Valerie Fletcher is Senior Curator at the Hirshhorn Museum in Washington, D.C. Her research on groundbreaking aspects of international, globalized, and transnational art have resulted in numerous exhibitions and publications.