Author: shuyiran

Reading Response_Henry Urban ‘Exhibition as atmosphere’

Henry Urban, curator of San Francisco Museum Of Modern Art, in his writing ‘Exhibition as atmosphere’, elucidates the importance of the ‘rest’ space in exhibitions apart from the object – selected works being presented. According to this curator, who has rich experience in exhibition, architecture and design in general, producing atmosphere was the main task of a curator.

Starting from illustrating vividly the fog whether in San Francisco, how people get used to the fearful yet predictable fog, the author lead readers compare it to the atmosphere of a space, which you experience unconsciously, something sudden yet palpable.

Then Urban gives a couple of works he did for a variety of different exhibitions, indicating the value of even the ‘negative space’, the rest space and features in an exhibition space.

‘Yet the dialogue between art and architecture in a museum…unpredictable results it can produce.’ It reminds me of my last travel to NYC, Guggenheims Museum. Personally I am more interested at the rest space of the museum, with purpose studying the architectural space rather than focusing on the objects being presented. Unpredictably, the whole exhibition which were all about modern/contemporary art in China totally overwhelmed my sensation, with a complex feeling like seeing though the twisted scope from the Western’s perspective. The presented arts selected with the language, the locations I am too familiar with, while the scene and interpretations made the whole experience alienated and strange for me. I guess I was totally shocked by the atmosphere, and my perception of the architecture was also influenced somehow.

At last the author suggests that such devised atmosphere may provide an opportunity to democratic life. The author aims to guide people think about the privatization of public experience, and it would appear that he is addressing his ideas to curators, set designers and a broader audience.

Reading Response_Brian O’Doherty ‘Inside the White Cube’

Brain O’Doherty, Irish art critic, in his writing ‘Inside the white cube’, discusses the ideology of the gallery space through a variety of art works since modernism age, and specifically discusses the Eye and the Spectator in the second chapter.

The constrains of language could be sensed during the reading, since the two opposite signified concepts sometimes intertwine, each going deeper and absorbing new meanings. To begin with, the author uses a series of metaphor to illustrate how arts, specifically paintings, were made so complicated and seemingly hard to grasp by some modernism artists. ‘Surface tension’ was translated from ‘deep space’. The author indicates the origin of the art form called collage, which developed from a lack of illusionism in the paintings, increasingly inspired by artist such as Picasso, and how collage affect the space we perceive.

The author uses Kurt Schiwitters’s Merzbau as an example, a room recognized as a collaged space, discusses the reciprocal value of this art piece, and how it resonate with (space of) gallery and the existence of gallery today. Since Kurt himself did have two extreme living ‘theatres’ – Merzbau, and the tiny little living space under the table in detention camp in Wright Island.

Looking back, the author have Picasso’s Still life on Chair Canning as example, stating that the multiple vanishing points and other twisted angles reveal the fact that humans actually live in the illusion that we thought we do have the picture of things we see, while probably that everything IS subject. To face the fact, or say, face the things seemed too familiar to us, we need to alienate ourselves from it at first. Art is being consumed and objectified, through which human nourish our nonexistent selves. It is likely that that’s exactly why people wandering in the spacious galleries, together with the Spectator Phantom.

Looking at present, we already have artists made art works directly from every life. Human-like sculptures presenting the human agony of couples, it must seems funny to the phantom that human needs to observe the Real through other’s eyes. Or say, with a bit more mercy, the whole act could provide a sense of ceremony, which formally alienate ourselves as well as connecting us back to our inner selves.

In the last part of the writing, the author discusses the fractured self and self-conscious given the circumstance that one viewing art pieces in gallery space. Overall, the author appears to be addressing his ideas that perception was a mere obsession in the recent human history to a broader audience who are interested in abstract art works, philosophy and spaces.

Reading Response_Walter Benjamin ‘The author as producer’

Walter Benjamin, in his writing ‘The author as producer’ in the book ‘Understanding Brecht’, touches a great range of topics including the progressive role of writer as producer in the process of social struggle. In the same time the transformation of art and publication forms were witnessed under the situation of technique development.

Benjamin starts with his statement that ‘right’ literary tendency is inevitable tied to political correctness. Here the author raises the inquiry of the relationship between the commitment and the quality of literary works. He demonstrates that the problem must be inserted into the context of living social relations, which are determined by production relations. The author proposes to ask the position within the work, before going further into the question of productive relations, which naturally leads to the literary technique of its time.

To my understanding, here we could extend the concerned to a larger range including more types of art forms: art movement, architectural movement etc. Without the leading technique which enable progressive thoughts, the revolutionary seeds would not have chance to grow in any other circumstances.

Benjamin then lists some example of Russia writers and new writing forms, namely, the newspaper. The writer, Sergey Tretyakov, implement his mission by both literary creation and active interaction undertaken with private farmers. (It reminds of me of Lu Xun, a leading figure of Chinese literature at almost the same time with Sergey Tretyakov, who regards himself as using pen as weapon aiming to waken the masses. Lu Xun, compared to the strategies implemented by Sergey, insisted the new language and was associate with social movement. While, according to Benjamin’s example of Sergey, Lu Xun and Sergey would be different from its political commitment.) According to Benjamin, any genres are cling to the situation of its time. The appearance and disappearance of certain literary forms could not be perceived as a solitude object.

Benjamin introduces two movements – Activism and New Objectivity in order to show that political commitment functions in a counter-revolutionary way as long as the writer experience his unity with the proletariat only in the minds and not as a producer.

He shows example of how modish techniques enable publication of different medias to serve political purpose, and increasingly the power of publication and reproduction becomes limited to smaller groups. Forms of music reproduction were seen being changed, the photographs were being consumed sometimes ridiculously based on human misery.

Then the author analysis what standards should be assessed as a writer, which is so much similar to the academic production today – the citation of one’s literary work which represent whether its eligible to be seen as model for other writers. (Here I would reserve my question: is it the only criteria to measure the accomplishment of a writer?)

It seems interesting that Benjamin turns to introduce Brecht’s idea of Epic Theatre seamlessly. Contrasting to traditional theatre which used to create illusion for audience, Epic theatre uncover conditions – conditions of living reality. It was realized by interrupting the dramatic process, compelling spectators to take up a position towards the actions. Such montage technique creates the unique viewpoints of exposing the present. Such effect may have the chance alienate both actors and audience from the roles they were set to play, thus for both of them it creates a detached feeling inside.

To conclude, Benjamin goes back to the inquiry he brings at the beginning, and confirms that when precisely one understands his position in the social process, he will less like be set off as an opposing character. Benjamin seems to be addressing his ideas to reactionary activists, literary producers and art- work producers.

Reading Response_Walter Benjamin ‘The work of Art in the age of its technological reproducibility’

Walter Benjamin, German philosopher, culture critic, in his writing ‘The work of art in the age of its technological reproducibility’, discusses the relationship between art and the development of technology, the authenticity of reproduction of art in modern ages, the approach taken by artist through new technologies and its impact on art itself.

To begin with, Benjamin states the reproducibility within the work of art, and developed method such as lithography which marked a fundamental new stage in the technology of making mass art products and publications. However, he questions whether this method of making art more accessible to the masses truly captures the authenticity and authority – the here and now, the real existence in a particular tradition – of the art works. The author emphasizes the ‘aura’ and ‘cult’, without which the reproduction could only be realized through the recipient and the copied projects were detached from the original one. Explaining the ‘aura’, the writer also indicates that reproduced work senses for all the sameness from differences, and the way art was reproduced and broadcast certainly changes the way of both thinking and perceptions.

Speaking from the art work itself, it has two opposite values, the cult value which do not seek human’s attention, and the exhibition value which could be used by third party for profit. Gradually human distance themselves from nature, and more advanced technology give people chance to alienate themselves even from themselves.

The author then uses lengthy pages making reference to film-making process, comparing the process to other art forms such as painting, sculpture, magicians and theater-acting. The editing approach forced by filming, the montage art form, exiles film actors from themselves, creates the alienating feeling one facing apparatus, and cross the barrier which exceed a certain social value.

The author points out that new technologies provide new forms and opportunities of viewpoints. It may cause psychotic characters; in the same time, it gives same level of immunization. The forming of art perception and transformation could be highly complex. The author also discusses the perception of architecture, and certain essence such as habit-forming, which could not be fully replaced by technologies.

By showing abstract views though comparing to other form of art, reminding readers the essence in traditional art forms before the existence of publication, the author tends to emphasized the value of work of art lying on authenticity, and remind people see both the benefits and drawbacks brought by technology. Benjamin aim to address his argument to artists, students and general public.

Reading Response_Martin Heidegger ‘Being, Dwelling, Thinking’

The book ‘Rethinking Architecture’ edited by British architect and theorist, Neil Leach, collects writings concerning architecture by philosophers and cultural critics whose main work would not be considered in the discipline of architecture. Among those external critiques, Martin Heidegger discusses the question of human’s inhabiting on the earth in his work ‘Being, Dwelling, Thinking’.

Heidegger self-answers two questions raised at the beginning of his descriptive writing, the definition of ‘to dwell’ and the how it comes to the relationship that building belong to dwelling. To answer the first question, in part one, he makes attempts to guide people to return humankind to a certain form of authentic existence. In doing so, he constantly traces ancient words in Greek, German, and Old Saxon in his writing, proving what the authentic meaning of what the words truly represents, and lead people not to stay around the signified foreground meanings. He also discusses the inversion of people’s mastery of language while language remains true master of human, and this illusion drives human nature into alienation. For instance, in studying one of the word for peace ‘fry’, which means preserved from harm and danger, he claims that ‘the fundamental character of dwelling is this sparing and preserving.’

Heidegger then develops the concept of fourfold- earth and sky, divinities and mortals. He explains in detail how those four come to oneness, and how the dwelling of Mortals makes the fourfold appear, how the act of staying with things is the only way in which the fourfold is accomplished in simple unity at any time.

For part two, in clarifying what the nature of dwelling really is, Heidegger gives examples of a bridge. The bridge makes-appear a site, brings-forth a location, and letting-show a space within the pre-exist surroundings of the fourfold, together with the extensions and dimensions to the further substantial area. A building, presumably is the making of such letting-dwell things.

The example of a farmhouse in the Black Forest used by the author places ‘thinking’ and ‘building’ in front of readers, indicating the similarity character-dwelling- embedded both. Even though the lengthy paragraphs appears more descriptive than analytical, Heidegger does take consideration of modern housing issue seriously, and he concedes that the real problem of housing shortage lies not on the seemingly apparent reasons, but on the real plight that man must learn to dwell.

Poem by Hölderlin had great influence on Heidegger’s thinking that the writing is largely concerned with the poem ‘In lovely blue’. Heidegger analyzes the poem sentence by sentence, word by word, tracing elements echoed to the fourfold specified in earlier pages. He uncovers the meaning of measure that man

use for measuring himself, which turn out to be the un-concealable unconcealed-ness guarded willingly by man. Returning back to the essence of dwelling on the earth, the poetic, not unhappily taking of measure was concluded as the base for the authentic building.

It is hard not to think of the similarity to doctrines by some religions as being both utterly submissive to an absolute authority that self-concealed and beyond man’s perception. The positivism permeated through the word like ‘Kindness’ may cause readers to unconsciously omit the reality and ignore the enduring journey to achieve such ideal condition.

In the last part, Heidegger discusses the relationship of art and space, with temples and sculptures. It discusses the making of places, which I think resonates with Laozi’s quotes, often cited as the emerging of space -‘The usefulness of a pot comes from its emptiness’. To empty and to gathering are like the face and tail of a coin and thus remain unsplittable.

The poem and the interpretation by Heidegger is breathtakingly beautiful and emotional-arousing to read through. The only concern I have for it to be an architectural theory material lies that it might appear to be slightly a bit abstract and remote from reality. After all, buildings cannot be dwelled without the consideration of form and function, and its complexity of make-come-true requires more than poetic illusions which can only possibly lead to the accomplishment of merely a mind-palace. However, it remains refreshing to get inspired, or say be reminded the authentic inhabiting actions by human beings in the precarious age, and the answers may lie on how the trace and what marks would us, both as architects and human beings leave on the earth.