Message forwarded from Verina Gfader:
Begin forwarded message:
> Hello everyone
> Just briefly to introduce myself: I am an artist and researcher,
> working on curatorial projects mainly in the fine art/media area
> and have recently joined the CRUMB team!
> Working on the current discussion list theme and catching up with a
> few recent shows and installations, I have not yet seen the Cyborg
> show Sarah was commenting on in her last post.
> Having been around London I made a visit though to this year’s
> Serpentine gallery pavilion, a helix-shaped piece of art/
> architecture designed by artist Olafur Eliasson and Norwegian
> architect Kjetil Thorsen (http://www.serpentinegallery.org/2007/01/
> ). So while Sarah focuses on questions around exhibition design, I
> would like to raise a few issues about art/architecture/design in
> public spaces and – dealing in some ways with spatial practice both
> on part of the artist/architect as well as on part of the audience
> – thinking about the idea of an “active building/installation”.
> If design/architecture is the work itself, in what way does it
> shape the experience of the audience? How is (inter)action by the
> viewer INVITED by design, and – in this case – by architectural
> devices? Can this piece of art/architecture be seen as an “object”
> or “process” - based?
> While approaching the pavilion on my way from South Kensington
> towards the Serpentine gallery, a link I immediately made was to
> the Monument to the Third International, envisioned by Russian
> artist and architect Vladimir Tatlin around 1917 (http://
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatlin's_Tower). As a helix-shaped
> construction the Tower was imagined to function as a media centre
> if you like, including spaces for conferences, lectures, and an
> information centre issuing manifestos via telegraph, radio and
> loudspeaker. Mechanical devices were designed to enable the visitor
> to be transported around.
> Entering the Serpentine pavilion via the beginning of the helix-
> shaped ramp, a guide about the project is handed over to you.
> Leading up to the major turn a central space opens up with a café
> and seats, surrounding an empty place in the centre, where the
> floor’s design is also that of a helix. Further up the spiral – and
> almost reaching the top – a door opens up towards the inside of the
> building from which you can take a look either down to the café or
> up the sky: the very top of the pavilion is a round glass revealing
> a fragment of the outside, clouds, blue sky....
> While wandering up and down, and glimpsing through openings and
> architectural cuts, it seems that this building not only produces a
> spatial experience based on an in- and out-ward movement and
> inconsistent openings, but also that the viewing is predicated on
> constantly communicating with an other visitor, so that the dynamic
> of the shape becomes also a dynamic inherent in perceptual
> registers. As an artwork, or designed object if you like, this
> could perhaps be seen as a piece that acts upon us in that our
> encounter lacks a resistance to the movement we perform.
> Has anyone on the list already experienced the pavilion? Any
> comments on the building as design, architecture, public
> intervention? As a kind of hybrid between construction and
> temporary artwork, how can its discursive site be described?
> Curating a work like the pavilion, what does intervening in
> “public” space mean: for the audience, the gallery hosting it, the
> More thoughts would also be around: “alternative architecture”,
> such as Nils Norman’s constructions…
> Or when the work is integrated in already existing buildings (e.g.
> Daniel Buren’s work), or when a public, communal and discursive
> site is enacted in projects such as Under Scan by artist Rafael
> Lozano-Hemmer http://www.lozano-hemmer.com/eproyecto.html