Dove Tower and UConn’s issue with pointless architecture 

The other week I asked a friend at the University of Connecticut: “What is the Dove Tower and Inverted Pyramid?” The response: “I have no clue what that is.” When I proclaimed it was the upside-down stone obelisk and square set of stairs that sits behind the business school and next to the Recreational Center, they pondered, then exclaimed, “oh yeah… I still have no clue what it is.”  

If this sounds like you, your confusion and bewilderment is valid. The slightly askew and porous pillar is a sight that is too obscure to be thought provoking and too bland to be interesting. The artwork has no way of communicating its meaning to the general public, doesn’t serve any functional purpose and lacks any simple description around it, it fails to have any semblance of practicality. In summation, because it lacks any good rationale to exist, it should probably be replaced for something that could actually be appreciated.  

If one did want to begin to understand the art, it would be important to know the context in which it was made. Created in 2004 by Ilan Averbuch, the impetus of the work was “to counterbalance the technical world of the students of the Information Technology and Engineering Building with a world of imagination and fantasy.” Meant to look like an old dovecote, the artist proclaims that “the project creates a complete array of emotional passages,” and that the work is meant to be unsettling to look at. Unfortunately for Averbuch, the only emotion running through my head when I see the granite structure is complete and utter confusion. 

Art can be confusing, and it should provoke debate and internal discourse. For that rationale, abstract art is one of the world’s most valued commodities; it encourages thought. Furthermore, art does not need to be some profound masterpiece to be appreciated: There’s a reason why a child’s doodle and a Van Gogh are both art. Why one is more technically better than the other, but both are acceptable because they encourage thinking. 

For our case, if our very own “leaning tower of Pisa clone” can’t even encourage discussion outside of “do you know what this is?” and “No,” it means it has reached such a level of confusion and obscurity that it’s not worthwhile. Much of modern art faces this conundrum, where it is abstract solely for the sake of being abstract. One can contrast this work to the Stone Book Universe outside the Dodd Center. That sculpture works because it connects to the place it is made to represent, combining abstractness and accessibility to allow the viewer to contrive thought from it. In essence: it is conceptual but grounded in reality. It actually aligns with the ethos of the environment in a productive manner. It is an adequate summation of the Dodd center and looking closer at it, or even feeling it, you can derive meaning. 

The “Inverted Pyramid” that lays juxtaposed to the stone shaft I can actually appreciate. Meant to offer “a quiet and contemplative place to rest in”, as Averbuch put it, I often find many people fraternizing and conversing upon its stairs. For this reason, the artwork is a successful use of space and a successful creative endeavor. People can derive meaning from it and obtain simple emotion, and so it works as art.  

This logic does not apply to the Dove Tower. Even if you now know the artist’s intent with the piece because I have explained it to you, the artwork still serves no purpose to your life because its brutalist nature counteracts any intended “fantasy.” Also, the phallic and obscene comparisons that have been made vastly outweigh the fewer intellectual thoughts directed at the tower. The concept behind it is so obscure and poorly explained that it becomes a joke. One does not need to walk away from every work of art they see whith a euphoric revelation about our place on earth or our space in the universe, but one shouldn’t walk away thinking about nothing, especially from this piece. If the original intent was to have engineers envelop themselves in a world of fantasy and the Dove Tower actively distracts from that, it may be time to go back to the drawing board.  

There is no debate that the University of Connecticut should continue to build art and sculpture in and around campus. Art fosters intellectual discussion and forward progression in society, so it is a necessity that the whole world continues to invest in the arts. UConn should commission work more in line with the “Stone Book Universe” than the Dove Tower, because at the end of the day, while both are art, one is simply more potent than the other.