Hey all,
So I went to see Of Other Spaces at the CCAD gallery, curated by James Voorhies.
The idea behind Of Other Spaces is based on a lecture given by Michel Foucault in which he argues that there are two types of society's relationship to space/ time:
Those that (1) conform to space time (heterotopias) or (2) do not conform to space time.
A quick summary of those that do not conform to space/ time:
1) Sacred and forbidden places
2) Places where people are placed when they do not conform to the norm, including rest homes, psychiatric hospitals, and prisons.
3) They are linked with a break in traditional time, identifying spaces that represent either a quasi-eternity, like museums, or are temporal, like fairgrounds;
A quick summary of those that do conform to space/ time:
1.) All cultures constitute heterotopias;
2.) Heterotopias can change function within a single society;
3.) They may take the form of contradictory sites, such as the representation of a sacred garden as a microcosm of the world in the patterns of a Persian rug;
4.) 5.) Heterotopias are not freely accessible, they are entered either by compulsory means, such as jail, or their entry is based on ritual or purification, like Scandinavian saunas, and Moslem hammans."
Entertaining Foucault's lecture and considering how it relates to a gallery space, an inititial question poses itself: Is a gallery the sort of entity to conform to space/ time? The answer is not obvious. Is it a sacred space? If so, then according to focoult it does not abide by space time. Voorish, sees this ambiguity and, right on point, places a subtle work by TJ Norris with Scott Wayne Indiana which, through use of a neon sign gently prods the listener by containing both "mausoleum" and "museum."
The first room is a combination of pieces on prisons (Sarah Schönfeld) and uninhabited spaces left by development in New Zealand (Mary Jo Bole, Laura Lisbon). While each piece stands on their own, I could help but feel a little clostrophobic and even suffocated by the ambiance created by the combination of the pieces.
According to Focoult's reasoning, society judges a certain space to be apportioned to a given activity and the activity will then dictate the spaces' relationship to space/ time. Enter forgotten circuses
how do we consider the landscape of a forgotten circus? the picture, taken from a New Zealand field where once there was a circus. The long grass now covers most of the circus rides. How do we reconcile this space ot which society has obviously apportioned a purpose and then, if nothing else but neglect, seemed to revoke the same status? What does Focoult say to these spaces?
It strikes me that this may be a complexity that Focoult did not anticipate. While these images certainly deserve a space at the exhibit. I wonder if Vorrish did not show his hand too quickly.
The next room is lighter and brings the viewer into the world of language, learning, and educational centers on both a micro and macro levels; collective and individual.
Two pieces presented opposite each other bring out, on macro scale the role of the institutions of the library. We see the library as a place of common meeting in one which shows a grand old library reminicent of those found at harvard with seating for many hunderds at a single time. The opposite brings us to a smaller room where, presumably the individual is better suited to consider her place in the institution, but , at the same time, an image of a globe suggests the international nature of learning. Here we have the paradox of the library; at once an individual activity, often experiences en mass, and at its most personal a global activity.
Even more macro is the analysis of just a few lines by Franx Kafka. Spread out across the floor, at first the piece appear to be just a few scraps of wood. Upon further consideration we see the wood is used represent as a means of diciphering meaning by linguists.
The next room over in a short film, A 17th century townhouse in Paris has a hole 12 feet in diameter drilled through it. The result is a testimony to the strength with which such houses were built and a reminder of the constantly changing face of urbanity as it is modernize. Inside the room a toy train races through similiar holes in the wall violating both time and space of the art space.
In the largest installation of the space, we explore a pseudo set of a 70s film complete with basically unsittable chairs, and wild carpet. A sound bubble that rests upon the viewer's head provides sound. In the final room, we see a return to questions about sacred space and new spaces.
No comments:
Post a Comment