As civic spectacles go, Olafur Eliasson’s New York City Waterfalls don’t quite deliver the awesomeness promised by the renderings that have been circulating since—well, since seemingly forever. But then, the same could be said of any number of recent—and more permanent—additions to the skyline (Times building, anyone?).
As for how they do as artworks, from most vantage points, the scaffolding and risers used to create the Waterfalls are far too visible to allow the project to resolve into anything truly sublime, though that is intentional on Eliasson’s part; his brand of showmanship depends on revealing the man behind the curtain. Unfortunately, deconstruction on this scale just doesn’t fly: Instead of a critique of the “experience industry,” as Eliasson once described his approach, we get a feat of hydrological engineering that’s more dry than wet.
More than anything else, however, the Waterfalls are an unintentional reminder that once upon a time, the city would routinely witness all manner of weird and wonderful things that seemed to spontaneously transpire—think for instance of Philippe Petit walking the tightrope between the Twin Towers. Nowadays, such events, when they do happen, are ordered from the top down.









The Waterfall also cause backups on the BQE by Brooklyn Heights.
OMG YES! Was stuck in horrible “falls watching” traffic on the bqe saturday night; it was early only 7 pm and the traffic eased as soon as we passed the falls. They are pretty but i dont think rubber necking was ever taken into account…its gonna be a loooong summer driving.
It completely depends on where you view the waterfalls. View it from a slight off-angle and the clear view of the pipe scaffolding behind the waterfall kind of puts a damper on the artistic effect. I’m pretty sure they were placed in such a way that there are “prime” viewing spots, i.e. Brooklyn Promenade.
Samantha Lowry, waterfall art,
its time to five, samantha lowry
five days, five weeks, five months, five hours