Artist Lecture Response – Dr. Ruth Anne Phillips

“Inca Stone in the Round; Performative Boulders and Wise Water" ////////// Dr. Ruth Anne Phillips is a visiting professor that traveled around South America to study “performative boulders” built by the Incas. Comparing finds in well-known Machu Picchu to lesser-known Chachabamba, both sacred Inca sites, Dr. Phillips noticed many curious aspects about the “huacas” (any feature on a landscape) that she saw. Much of the stone at these sites seamlessly meld into Inca architecture. These bits of architecture seem to amplify, highlight, or set apart natural features of the landscapes. They are also almost always intertwined with natural waterways. ////////// Dr. Phillips thought it was important to understand why and how rocks and water were considered sacred to the Incas. Natural stone caves were associated with the origin myth and creator god. The water running through such caves was said to be the voices of some of the oracles. Then there are stories of people turning to stone when they did something wrong and the act of pouring water into the earth was a common part of rituals. A place where two waters merged was also considered a place of harmony. ////////// Aside from these facts on stone and water, Dr. Phillips tried to explain her examination of a certain “performative boulder” she found near the Chachabamba river that had a long seat and a pattern of steps next to that seat. It also had semi formed walls at the top of the boulder. She was trying to uncover what it was used for and if there were more like it that existed. ////////// I have to admit that this lecture was a bit unorganized. I’m pretty sure the main point of the lecture was to talk about Dr. Phillips work studying the one stone she found (that I mentioned in the previous paragraph), but there were so many random facts thrown in and out that it was hard to understand what was important and most relevant to her research. She also went on a ten-minute tangent about how she couldn’t get into the site one day and while we all found this amusing, it further distracted from the point of her lecture. I think my main critique would be that I never fully understood why she thought this one rock was so important and what the implications of finding out what it was used for could be. I’m not typically one to say this, but I really just did not understand the point of what she was doing – or at least trying to get across to us in the lecture.