Architecture (up)set in motion

REALITY SCULPTURE CONSTRUCTION DESIGN CONSIOUSLY CONSTRUCTION CREATING ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING SUBVERSION (UP)SET IN MOTION SPECTACLE or Re-Constituting the Built Environment: Construction SCALE ART & Process in the Work of Richard Wilson, Alex Chinneck & Art Engaging with Architecture THEATRICALITYMAGIC PROCESS ARCHITECTURE ADAPTATION PHILOSOPHY ACCESSIBILITY SPECTACLE TRANSGRESSION CONSTRUCTION Rob Curley // 09439714 MArch | UCD Architecture 2014/15

Architecture (Up)set in Motion or Re-Constituting the Built Environment: Construction & Process in the Work of Richard Wilson, Alex Chinneck & Art Engaging with Architecture

Rob Curley // 09439714 MArch | UCD Architecture 2014/15

Abstract This research began as an investigative comparative study into how architects practice outside of architecture, and how artists and designers with a nonarchitectural background practice architecture, as a way to further understand the applications of an architectural education.

The dissertation approaches the topic with a specific interest in process & construction in contemporary sculpture engaging with architecture. The British artists Richard Wilson & Alex Chinneck work at a scale that parallels and surpasses architectural construction. However the purpose of their work is not utilitarian in its nature, in this way thwarting the most basic principles and tenets of architecture.

This freedom allows the artist(s) to explore their own disparate themes, however the artist like the architect is never truly free from the constraints of construction in their own context. Indeed they are often defined by their methods as much as their forms. Whilst still free to subvert architectural themes through construction.

This dissertation seeks to learn about the relevance of process & construction in creating sculpture that engages with and subverts themes of architecture. Part of the focus of the discourse is on discovering the variety and relevance of these themes to each artist, to ascertain commonalities & shared influences in the various artists’ works.

With thanks to my dissertation supervisor Hugh Campbell for his thoughtful insight and feedback throughout the process, NCAD & UCD libraries for the use of their resources, and a special thank you to Alex Chinneck, for taking time from his very busy schedule to respond to interview questions.

-Rob Curley

Contents 1

On Slipstream

2

Art, Architecture & Sculpture’s Expanded Field

3

Richard Wilson

4

Alex Chinneck

5

Reflection

1.1 Overview 11 1.2 Installation Art // Monumentality in Sculpture 13

2.1 Emergence of Installation Art 17

2.2 Christo & Jeanne-Claude // Process & Temporality 19

2.3 Rosalind Krauss & the Expanded Field 19 2.4 Anarchitecture & Gordon Matta-Clark 21

3.1 Learning from Sculpture’s Expanded Field

3.2 The Influence of Postmodern American Sculpture 3.3 Early Works 3.4 20:50

3.5 Modes of Practice: On Drawing & Maquettes

3.6 Turning the Place Over // Over Easy

3.7 Reflecting on Slipstream // Scale of Practice

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6

Exploring Territories Beyond Art Expansive Practie // Digital Nomad Fabricators // Small Scale Installations Modes of Practice: Collaboration & Technologies Conceptually Light, Sculpturally Complex Drawing Conclusions from Chinneck

25 27 31 33 35 37 39

41 43 45 45 49 49

5.1 Lessons for Architecture’s Expanded Field

5.2 Diagram - Scope of Practice // Temporality of Work 5.3 Conclusion

53 55 57

Bibliography

60

Appendix

Figures 1 2 3 4 5

Slipstream, Richard Wilson, 2013 Slipstream, Richard Wilson, 2013 Model, Slipstream, Richard Wilson, 2013 Butterfly, Richard Wilson, 2003 Process Drawing, Slipstream, 2013

10 10 12 14 14

6 Process Drawing, Christo & Jeanne-Claude, 1972 7 Rosalind Krauss, Klein Diagram for the classification of

postmodern sculpture. “Sculpture in the Expanded Field”, 1979 8 Author’s Interpretation of “From the Fire to the Light” by Michael Newman, 1993 9 Office Baroque, Gordon Matta-Clark, 1977

16 18

10 11 12

13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20

21

22

24 26 26

Slice of Reality, Richard Wilson, Greenwich, 2000 .

Interior, Office Baroque, Gordon Matta-Clark, 1977 Internal mechanism, Turning the Place Over, Richard Wilson, Liverpool, 2008 Splitting, Gordon Matta-Clark, 1974 She Came in Through the Bathroom Window, Richard Wilson, Matt’s Gallery, London, 1989 High Rise, Richard Wilson, Sao Paulo Biennial, 1989.

20:50, Richard Wilson, 1987 20:50, Richard Wilson, 1987 Drawing, Slice of Reality, Richard Wilson, 2000 Production Drawing, Water Table, Richard Wilson, 1994 Maquette, Turning the Place Over, Richard Wilson, The Grey Gallery, London, 2008 Maquette, Turning the Place Over, Richard Wilson, The Grey Gallery, London, 2008 Turning the Place Over, Richard Wilson, Liverpool, 2008

20 22

28 30 30 32 32 34 34 36 36 38

23

24 25

26

27

28 29 30

31

32

From the Knees of my Nose to the Belly of my Toes, Alex Chinneck, Margate, 2013 Telling the Truth Through False Teeth, Alex Chinneck, 2012 Brick Studies, Alex Chinneck, Fabricators Exhibition, Hannah Barry Gallery, London, 2013 Digital Sketch, From the Knees of My Nose to the Belly of My Toes, Alex Chinneck, Margate, 2013 Construction Drawings, From the Knees of My Nose to the Belly of My Toes, Alex Chinneck, Margate, 2013 Construction, A Pound of Flesh for 50p, Alex Chinneck, 2014 Melting, A Pound of Flesh for 50p, Alex Chinneck, 2014 Construction, Take my Lightning but Don’t Steal my Thunder, Alex Chinneck, Covent Garden, London, 2014 Part-Elevation, Take my Lightning but Don’t Steal my Thunder, Alex Chinneck, Covent Garden, London, 2014 Take my Lightning but Don’t Steal my Thunder, Alex Chinneck, Covent Garden, London, 2014

40

33 Architecture’s Expanded Field, Klein Diagram, Ila Berman Douglas Burnham 34 Schematic, Conical Intersect, Gordon Matta-Clark, 1975 35 Construction Drawings, From the Knees of my Nose to the Belly of

my Toes, United Projects for Alex Chinneck, 2013 36 House, Rachel Whiteread, 1993

52

42 44 46 46 48 48 50 50 50

56 56 58

1.

© Richard Wilson

© Richard Wilson

2. Evolving from a complex 3dimensional study of the motions of a Zivko Edge 540 stunt plane falling and moving through the volume of the airport terminal, Slipstream is the competition winning result of a site-specific brief for a sculpture for London Heathrow Airport’s new Terminal 2, by Luis Vidal + Architects (LVA). source: thedesignair.net 10

On Slipstream “Imagine filling the vast void of the central court of heathrow terminal 2 with clay. Now imagine a stunt plane moving through this mass of clay, somersaulting, spiralling, twisting and climbing. the spinning plane would create a void to be filled with fast setting plaster. when hard, imagine the hall is excavated of all clay to leave a suspended plaster form.

Imagine what this solid but fluid shape of the movement of the plane through space could look like built from, steel, wood and aluminium!” 1

1.1

Overview

Renowned for “20:50” (1987), an architectural intervention of reflective sump oil at Matt’s Gallery in east London, Richard Wilson is one of the UK’s foremost sculptors and installation artists in practice for nearly 40 years. Wilson’s description of his largest piece to date give us an insight into his excited mind at work. The artist talks of a need to capture an audience, and indeed his blunt descriptions paint a colourful and clear illustration of his intentions.

Slipstream is in fact a competition winning response to a brief for a sculptural piece to fill an element of architectural space, fulfilling the classical role of sculpture up to the end of the Modernist era. Much of Wilson’s career to date however has focused on “dabbling with architecture, playing with architecture, undoing it”. The piece is sited in accordance with “human scale, non-human scale and architectural scale”, and indeed the artist describes working at this scale in this kind of space “requires of me to work like an architect”. 2

“Slipstream is rooted in location. This work is a metaphor for travel; it is a time-based work. Art that moves in time and space coming from the past to the current; different experiences at either end. Sensations of velocity, acceleration and deceleration follow us at every undulation of the form” 3 In beginning to decipher how Wilson writes about his own work, we might think he has a rather simple understanding of what might be “architecture” or “architectural space”.

There is an innocence to how the artist discusses his work, and his need to “excite”, “dazzle” and “arouse” an audience, which Wilson admits is “a little rude in the sculpture world.”

Simultaneously, he is conscious of the potential for reaction from the architecture world to his subversive, playful work. “It’s not an attack, it’s not an act of vandalism. I’m not the mad axe man coming in to attack architecture, as has been written about me.” 3 Indeed, perhaps his playful nature is “a little rude” in the architecture world as well. Wilson’s installation work has been described as having “unravelled the relationship between

1. “Richard Wilson: Slipstream at Heathrow International Airport,” DesignBoom, May 2012, accessed Nov 3, 2014, http://www.designboom.com/art/richard-wilson-slipstream-at-heathrow-international-airport/ 2. Ragesh Punj, “Richard Wilson: Acting Alone”, Regard Au Pluriel, May 2014, accessed Nov 26, 2014, http://www.regardaupluriel.com/richard-wilson-acting-alone-interview/ 3. “Twice World Champion Stunt Pilot Paul Bonhomme Recreates the Tumble of Richard Wilson’s Slipstream”, Heathrow Airport, July 2013, accessed Dec 10, 2014, http://mediacentre.heathrowairport.com/Press-releases/Twice-world-champion-stunt-pilot-Paul-Bonhomme-recreates-the-tumble-ofRichard-Wilson-s-Slipstream-5b9.aspx

11

© Richard Wilson

3. Display Model for Slipstream. The brief dictated that the sculpture could only be supported off of the terminal’s columns, Wilson opted to use 4 of 11 of these columns, utilising he estimates 1/3 of the building’s supports for the ceiling. source: regardaupluriel.com 12

conceptualised space - the space of plans, architects’ drawings and indeed of memory and the real three dimensional space in which we move, bumping into things and taking it all for granted” 1. Slipstream, while obviously a homage and a monument to the industry of air travel, arguably fails to unravel or excite these concepts referred to. Rather, it appears as a static monument, shackled to its sense of place.

1.2 Installation Art // Monumentality in Sculpture “Heathrow hopes the work will “improve the passenger experience”, which it no doubt will, but it also feels airport-ready, somewhat neutered of any greater power – the result of a brief to fill a space, which could be anywhere. It is a frequent outcome for site-specific work, which began in the late 1960s as a reaction to the growing commodification of art, but during the 80s and 90s was all too often a ready-made garnish for corporate lobbies and commercial piazzas – what American architect James Wines summed up as the ‘turd on the plaza’.” 2 The “neutered” nature of Wilson’s work may be a possible consequence of its monumental nature. In many ways, Slipstream is a sculpture in the purist sense, however its stasis drastically departs from the animated work which made Wilson’s reputation. The excitement of movement found in the design process appears to be lost in the work’s finished form. Is this an inevitable consequence for commissioned site specific work?

“When sculpture diverged from its figurative form, and when architecture acquired more bodily presence, the two disciplines had less use for each other. As sculpture loses the certainty of the figurative or semi-figurative monolith, its relationship with architecture becomes less secure.” 3 The notion of Slipstream as a static monument is perhaps unquestionable, but what is of interest is how we question this innate monumentality today. The evolution of sculpture beyond the Modernist era has resulted in a myriad of alternative explorations outside of the archaic understanding of a sculpture as a monument sited within architectural space. In many ways Slipstream, planted on the UK’s doorstep 4 is however a direct reference to this notion of the classical monument, while still incorporating aspects of the evolution of the discipline, as well as advances in technology that have been explored over the course of Wilson’s career.

“When the two disciplines converge - as sculpture becomes less different from architecture, or vice-versa -their combination makes less sense. Sculptors can make their own pavilions, or architects their own sculpture. As sculpture adopts the means of the architect, the only figure to be added to the space is our own.” 3 Much of Wilson’s work to date has been about inquiry and experiment, with the goal of creating a sense of childlike wonder in his audience. While the piece may hold a wow factor reminiscent of the artist’s early memory of encounter with a blue whale in a natural history museum, 2 what is most intriguing about Slipstream relative to his previous body of work is that so much of its power is drawn and perhaps locked into the process of design and construction.

1. James Roberts, Richard Wilson, exh. cat. (Berlin: DAAD, Druckhaus Hentrich, 1993) 2. Oliver Wainright, “Richard Wilson: My Giant Heathrow Sculpture Started in a Vat of Margarine”, The Guardian, April 23, 2014, accessed Nov 3, 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/apr/23/richard-wilson-slipstream-heathrow-installation 3. Penelope Curtis, Patio & Pavilion. The Place of Sculpture in Moden Architecture (London: Ridinghouse, 2007). p.9-10 4. Jonny Clark, “Heathrow’s Terminal 2’s Slipstream Is An Artistic Achievement”,The Design Air, April 2014, accessed Nov 3, 2014, http://thedesignair.net/2014/04/24/heathrows-terminal-2s-slipstream-is-an-artistic-achievement/

13

© Richard Wilson

4. On Butterfly (2003) “Once the plane had been returned to as near to its original shape... the plane was manhandled out of its central position in the gallery and crashed to the ground at the rear of the space. A large screen was then suspended from the ceiling almost concealing the plane in the now darkened gallery. The recovery process had been continuously documented by time-lapse photography and these were now edited together to produce a film documenting the unfurling of the plane in compressed time that was projected onto the screen.” source: richardwilsonsculptor.com

© Richard Wilson

5. Process Drawing, Slipstream, Richard Wilson, 2013.

Suspended 20m in the air, composed of 77 tonnes of aluminium & measuring 78m in length, Slipstream, Europe’s longest and one of its largest permanent public sculptures is an artwork of monumental proportions. source: richardwilsonsculptor.com 14

The sculpture was made possible through the long consultation and construction process around Heathrow airport’s £11bn expansion, finances for the artwork secured through the work of Mark Davy, founder of Futurecity, the UK’s largest public arts agency, 1 “an organisation dedicated to ‘intervening early on in big capital projects and carving out a budget for art as part of the whole process, rather than seeing it as a bolt-on afterthought.’”

2 To realise the concept, Wilson’s own skillset and use of drawings, models and maquettes (including endeavours with model spitfires in vats of margarine and hamster balls) failed to produce the desired effect, and it was only through collaboration with engineers Price and Myers and their use of a digital model that life was breathed into the concept.

This emphasis on collaboration recalls Wilson’s last work with aircraft, “Butterfly” (2003) which saw a scrapped Cessena stripped and crushed into a ball only to be reanimated by a team of helpers, the recorded process itself being the artwork as much as the Cessena was.

3 To realise Slipstream’s shear scale and intricacy, the digitally modelled piece was sent to specialist fabricators Commercial Systems International in Hull, and finally transported to London in 23 separate pieces, being “shuttled across the runways by night.” 2 By analysing the depth of the process behind the piece, we can decipher how Slipstream seems to expand on Wilson’s earlier work. It is perhaps coming full circle then, that the artist’s most monumental piece –and with a £2.5million price tag also his most expensive 2 – lacks some of the playfulness and theatricality of his earlier animated installation pieces.

To further understand and appreciate the artists’s work and process, and ascertain what relevance it might have to architecture, we could first decipher how this particular brand of installation art engaging with architecture has emerged within the genealogical timeline of post-modern sculpture.

1. Turner Contemporary Margate. “Art Debate - Public Art”. YouTube video, 1.29:25, accessed 7 Jan 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drCkrzHDlGo 2. Oliver Wainright, “Richard Wilson: My Giant Heathrow Sculpture Started in a Vat of Margarine”, The Guardian 3. “Butterfly”, Richard Wilson Sculptor, accessed Dec 10, 2014, http://www.richardwilsonsculptor.com/projects/butterfly.html

15

Š Christo & Jeanne-Claude

6. Process Drawing, Running Fence, Christo & Jeanne-Claude, 1972-6 source: christojeanneclaude.net

16

Art, Architecture & Sculpture’s Expanded Field 2.1 Emergence of Installation Art Richard Wilson is just one example of an artist whose work forms part of an ever evolving trend in the field of sculpture that appropriates and reconstitutes architecture as a medium.

Much as there are currents within the culture of architecture that seek to work at an analogous scale as designers or artists, there is a current within the art world that uses architecture as its canvas. This movement is part of an evolution in postmodernist art, and by its very nature adds to the discourse on how we live today.

“As sculpture takes on the vocabulary and scale of architecture, so architecture turns increasingly to the vocabulary of sculpture. As architects adopted an increasingly curvaceous (organic) vocabulary (which has often been described as sculptural), sculptors adopted the rectilinear structures more traditionally associated with architecture.” 1 Our understanding of contemporary living has been drastically shaped by the Modernist movement, which dominated the established fields of art and architecture, as well as literature and philosophy, for much of the 20th century. Modernism, with its insistence on functionalism & purity encouraged and embraced the separateness and continued separation of artistic mediums. Postmodernism, partly evolving from malaise with the consumer society in the 1960s and 70s, began to push for the relocation of energies beyond the strict defintion of artistic medium. By this understanding, “practie is not defined in relation to a given medium - sculpture - but rather in relation to the logical operations on a set of cultural terms, for which any medium - photography, books, lines on walls, mirrors, or sculpture itself - might be used.” 2 Since the 1960s, much energy has been exerted to push the boundaries of sculpture far beyond an understanding of monumental representation, and to an ever closer and complex set of interrelationships with the fields of architecture and landscape. The work of the American Land artists such as Robert Smithson (Partially Buried Woodshed & Spiral Jetty, 1970), Mary Miss (Perimeters/Pavillion/Decoys, 1978), Richard Serra (Tilted Arc, 1981-89), James Turrell (Roden Crater, 1979 - ongoing) and a host of others infer a sense of greater artistic freedom and tendancy towards experimentation with scale, structure, landscape, and permanence, expounding the notion of scale of the piece as commensurate to the scale of the space.

1. Penelope Curtis, Patio & Pavilion. The Place of Sculpture in Moden Architecture (London: Ridinghouse, 2007). p.137-138 2. Rosalind Krauss, “Sculpture in the Expanded Field”, October, Vol. 8 (Spring, 1979): 30-44, accessed Nov 24, 2014, http://www.jstor.org/stable/778224

17

© Rosalind Krauss

7. Rosalind Krauss’ Original Krauss-Klein Diagram for the classification of postmodern sculpture.“Sculpture in the Expanded Field”, 1979 source: onedaysculpture.org.nz/assets/images/reading/Krauss.pdf

18

2.2 Christo & Jeanne-Claude // Process & Temporality Similar efforts were explored by the European artists Christo & Jeanne-Claude, famous for their use of fabric and wrapping of buildings. Their work, such as Running Fence, a 5.5m fence of fabric, running 39.4km explored the ideas of temporality, and expressed the bulk of its energy in the collaborative process of incessant logistics and planning. First envisioned in 1972, it took over 3 and a half years of collaborative effort to get on site, “involving 18 public hearings, three sessions at the Superior Courts of California [as well as] the drafting of a 450-page Environmental Impact Report” while the project existed on site in the Californian countryside for a mere 14 days in 1976. 1 In part, to create such artistic spectacle on an architectural scale requires an understanding of construction technique, certain economic processes as well as the ability to navigate the logistics of planning laws, “magic” tricks in their own regard. In the case of Christo & Jeanne-Claude, the pair self funded their radical artistic projects, by utilising the work of volunteers, raising money through drawings and selling their expired works after the fact in a piecemeal fashion. Part of the inherent value of each piece emerging from this notion of temporality.

“The proposition is this: Is something wonderful that lasts a brief time more valuable than the drone of permanent objects conveying themselves into the future? In a world cluttered by things, is impermanence a kind of grace? I believe it is. What traces does the vanished installation leave behind, beyond those insecurely lodged in a small community of memory?” 2

2.3 Rosalind Krauss & the Expanded Field In interpreting these new, emergent sculptural endeavours, the art theorist and historian Rosalind Krauss developed a model, mathematical Klein diagram to quantify and understand this new, complex series of interrelationships. Her work is some of the first, and most important in post-modern efforts in understanding the new dialectic of the shared space between art and architecture.

Krauss’ “expanded field” model for sculpture infers the placement of sculpture as a negative, existing as the product of that which is not landscape, and that which is not architecture. In so doing, she unwittingly or otherwise defines “pure” sculpture as “neuter”, or less politely -useless. By this understanding, pure sculpture, such as Wilson’s Slipstream, is understood as “useless” as it is lacking in utilitarian purpose, is inarguably not-architecture nor landscape, and is also incapable of occupation, the spectators removed as it were from the spectacle he seeks to construct. This “useless-ness” does not however negate the piece of any merit, as Christo & Jeanne-Claude expounded “everything contained in the great arc from the first idea to its completion -and aftermath- is not part of the artwork but the artwork itself.” 3

“The logic of sculpture, it would seem, is inseparable from the logic of the monument. By virtue of this logic a sculpture is a commemorative representation. It sits in a particular place and speaks in a symbolical tongue about the meaning or use of that place.” 4

1. “Running Fence”, Christo & Jeanne Claude, accessed Jan 6 2014, http://christojeanneclaude.net/projects/running-fence#.VJiOV8AjmA 2. Brian O’Doherty, Christo & Jeanne-Claude. Remembering the Running Fence (London: University of California Press, 2010). p. 53 3. Brian O’Doherty, Christo & Jeanne-Claude. Remembering the Running Fence , p. 60.

4. Rosalind Krauss, “Sculpture in the Expanded Field”

19

INEVITABLE RESPONSE OF ART TO ADVANCEMENTS IN PRODUCTION, CIRCULATION AND CONSUMPTION OF COMMODITIES [CONSUMERISM] -> LOSS OF SITE ->

->MODERNISM

(most radical transformation)

(use of “shock tactics”)

(interest in aesthetics and design)

->DADAISM/SURREALISM ->POP ART

-> ARTE POVERA -> MINIMALISM -> CONCEPTUAL ART

= INSTALLATION ART

8. Author’s Interpretation of “From the Fire to the Light” on Richard Wilson’s installations

by Michael Newman, 1989 20

2.4 Anarchitecture & Gordon Matta-Clark Stephen Walker’s essay “The field and the table” relates the notion of Krauss’ “expanded field” with the practices of the Anarchitecture group of the 1970s.

“...the implications of Anarchitecture’s ‘field’ not only expose aspects of traditional architectural operations that are not usually revealed to the uninitiated, but that they also raise questions regarding the authority of the discipline itself and the ways in which it expects its products to be received and judged.” 1 Anarchitecture, originating in the US in the 1970s presented architecture as a political act.

The movement was less focused on architecture as a means to deliver material results, but rather as a medium that in itself needed to be abstracted, played with and teased, as part of a wider discourse on society. Architecture was seen as a “weak discipline”, to be exploited because its subject did not coincide with its object, that is to say the relationship between the architecture discipline, its field and its products is unstable. 1

“Mark Cousins has described architecture as a ‘weak’ discipline, in contrast to ‘strong’ disciplines such as the physical sciences, with their clear concern for objects (and he also includes law here). Weak disciplines include architecture and psychoanalysis: ‘the elements of the [weak] practice’, he writes, ‘neither authorise nor constitute the practice as such’. Putting this another way, we could say that the subject of architecture does not coincide with its object, or that there’s an unstable relationship between the discipline of architecture and both its field and its products.” 1 As the sculpture discpline moved to incorporate and appropriate the “weak” discipline of architecture, similarly their emerged a trend from within architecture itself that sought to renegotiate, reinterpret and subvert the terms of our relationship with the built environment.

Gordon Matta-Clark is one such example of an individual whose mode of practice evolved from his own background and training as an architect. His work explored sculptural concepts of negative space, cutting and removing, and in so doing transcended the concept of architecture, creating axiomatic structures, abridged between architecture and sculpture. Importantly for Matta-Clark; Architecture was the artist’s medium through which he can make a political statement, encapsulated in a sculptural form. The wider Anarchitecture movement however, defied categorisation in the limited or “finite” manner in which Krauss’ Klein diagram sought, as to admit categorisation might “reduce [the] ‘wonderful’ chaos of the world to a polite surface or bounded field.” 1

“Architecture did not start out being the main point for any of us, even for Gordon. But we soon realized […] that architecture could be used to symbolize all the hard-shelled cultural reality we meant to push against, and not just building or ‘architecture’ itself.

That was the context in which Gordon came up with the term Anarchitecture. And that, perhaps, suggests the meaning we all gave it.” 1 One hallmark of the anarchitecture movement was that it was a loosely organised social gathering of individual artists and architects, and as such was decried as an eclectic genre by its critics, much as the land artists in the “expanded field” had been. 2 However,

1. Stephen Walker, “The Field and the Table: Rosalind Krauss’ ‘Expanded Field” and the Anarchitecture Group”, Architectural Research Quarterly, 15 (2011): 347-358, accessed Nov 24, 2014, http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1359135512000115 2. Rosalind Krauss, “Sculpture in the Expanded Field”

21

Š Gordon Matta-Clark

9. Office Baroque, Gordon Matta-Clark, 1977 source: artobserved.com/artimages/2010/07/mattaclark_11.jpg 22

this quality of decentralised movement is inherent to the ideals the group embodied.

That is to say the work produced by members of the group was inherently individualist as anarchitecture as a political philosophy if it can be described as such -correlates with ideas of anarchy and individualisim. This is attested to in the work of Lebbeus Woods, who, working independent of the movement, developed many fictitious proposals for an autonomous anarchic form of architecture. This open natured philosophy, focused on individualism allows the movement influence beyond the defined trends of art or architecture at a specific moment in post modernist thinking in the 1970s and later.

“There was no clearly articulated collective goal for Anarchitecture beyond its role as a forum for individual artists to explore ideas and issues.” 1 The work of individual artists involved in the anarchitecture movement as well as the land artists, showcase increasing rapprochement between the field of sculpture and architecture since the advent of postmodernism. From this brief analysis of the work of sculpture based artists and architects, a number of subjects and issues unique to this undefined realm of art/architecture crossover arise. Most importantly perhaps, we see a recurring emphasis on the importance of logistics and planning as a subject of focus in and of itself. To varying degrees we see a repeating thematic pattern of subversion and appropriation & explorations on the subject of scale. One recurring issue regarding scale and context is the relevance of the human figure to scale. There appears however to be no clearly defined parameters relating to the relevance of context, or indeed the interdependence of context in the myriad of “parasitic” works one finds in the shared space. This is a defining feature of the field, as it allows for a large degree of autonomy, and interpretation by individual artists, such as Richard Wilson.

1. Stephen Walker, “The Field and the Table: Rosalind Krauss’ ‘Expanded Field’ and the Anarchitecture Group”

23

Š Richard Wilson

10. Slice of Reality, Greenwich, 2000. source: richardwilsonsculptor.com 24

Richard Wilson “I think, what all my work attempts to do is to challenge the preconceptions we have of our world today” 1

3.1 Learning from Sculpture’s Expanded Field The themes of spectacle, subversion and the logistics of planning, consultation and construction feature prominently in the work of the British artist, Richard Wilson. For the land artists, the anarchitects and later Wilson and his contemporaries and successors, architecture was and is the most wide reaching medium through which to make a statement on society, political or otherwise. What then is involved in the logistics and planning of such artworks of spectacle today? What can Wilson’s work reveal about the evolution of this undefined & subversive field?

Richard Wilson envisages his own work as art that broadly engages with the conversation on how we live. In this way he views architecture as his medium or a canvas, as a means to explore his ideas, often in a very literal or simplistic interpretation that seeks to find the broadest audience possible. Wilson’s interest in architecture is part of an inherent discourse in his work that seeks to break things down as a means to understand them. In this way he routinely responds to the ordered formality of architecture by abstracting it with kinetic alterations stark in their contrast to our understanding of how an architecture operates.

This stands in contrast to Gordon Matta-Clark for example, who’s work was more explicit in its commentary on the relations of power built into the contemporary urban landscape, Wilson’s work is certainly less forthcoming in its social-critique, nor is Wilson indeed a critique of architecture as Matta Clark was. Wilson has nonetheless established mainstream acclaim through his sculptural work which transcends architecture, utilising it as a medium to explore his own disparate themes and interests, such as scale and volume of space. Like the anarchitecture movement, his work has the individual at centre, often playing on our perceptions of spatial praxis and understanding.

“Gordon Matta-Clark’s building cuts were exercises in revealing views, turning architecture into “grand baroque sculptures which, shortly afterward, were demolished.” 2

1. Liverpool Biennale TV. “Interview with Richard Wilson”. YouTube video, 9:48, accessed Nov 3 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56vJOH4B-V8 2. Michael Newman, “From the Fire to the Light: On Richard Wilson’s Installations”, in Richard Wilson. exh. cat. (London, Oxford and Bristol: Matt’s Gallery, Museum of Modern Art and Arnolfini, 1989), p. 3

25

Š Gordon Matta-Clark

11. Office Baroque, Gordon Matta Clark, 1977 interior. source: bouteillealamer.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/mc3.jpg?w=500&h=400

Š Richard Wilson

12. Turning the Place Over, Richard Wilson, Liverpool, 2008 internal mechanism. source: 24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mazgpaLjdp1qe31lco5_1280.jpg 26

3.2 The Influence of Postmodern American Sculpture “I became very involved in the American artists at art college. Very involved in Land Art, and I become very involved with scale. (Richard) Serra, Mark di Suvero, and some of the other big land artists, Walter de Maria, Michael Heizer among them. And I came to Gordon Matta Clark very late, after college. But that kind of bravado, the idea that scale and the very American idea that rather than use the path you know, get off the path and make your own trail. That idea that you have something to say, say it; and don’t follow the conservative trend, break away and be your own person; be your own ideas. And I always thought there was something wrong, that if anyone was making work like you that that was wrong; and for me it was about being unique.” 1 Michael Newman argues that Wilson’s art “contains a tension between nature and production [that] differentiates [his] work from the ‘land art’ of Robert Smithson and Walter de Maria, which reproduces mastery by transforming the landscape into an aesthetic resource, and that of Richard Long, whcih simply avoids confronting the real effects of production.” 2 Wilson’s work is perhaps a more playful exploration of the false expectations, failed delivery of freedom or autonomy promised by the emergence of mechanised processes, ie. the failures of modernism. His is a commentary, that might suggest in its processes and experiential quality a naive hint at what progress could be, how it might have been, what it may become. Newman puts forward the case that installation art “was one response by art to the quantum leap in the production, circulation and consumption of commodities during the post-war economic boom. A way in which artists attempted to secure the autonomy of art, which the commodification of the art object itself in a burgeoning market threatened to reveal as nothing but illusory, was by extending it and tying it to the specific site.” 3

“A profound ambivalence towards tradition, including the tradition of technological mastery which is central to modernization, is crystallised in the art of our time. Much of it is pessimistic and defeatist, content merely to mimic - to ‘simulate’ - the identity forming devices of the publicity machine. Richard Wilson’s work, by contrast, remains hopeful, in that it keeps alive the possibility of the transformation of given conditions towards another relation with the world” 4 Wilson’s work reaches parallels with the work of Gordon Matta-Clark in that it often deals with existing structures and forms in the built environment. In this way his work can be described as falling under the “expanded field” categories of site-construction and axiomatic structures. Matta-Clark, in his House project cut open a slice in a typical American home, so as to allow the passage of light. At this moment of transgression where light passes through the layers of structure, the architecture becomes sculpture.

“By undoing a building ... [I] open a a state of enclosure which has been preconditioned not only by physical necessity but by the industry that proliferates suburban and urban boxes as a pretext for ensuring a passive, isolated consumer.” 5

1. Ragesh Punj, “Richard Wilson: Acting Alone”, Regard Au Pluriel 2. Michael Newman, “From the Fire to the Light: On Richard Wilson’s Installations”, p. 7 3. Michael Newman, “From the Fire to the Light: On Richard Wilson’s Installations”, p. 3 4. Michael Newman, “From the Fire to the Light: On Richard Wilson’s Installations”, p. 11 5. Gordon Matta-Clark in Florent Bex ed., Gordon Matta-Clark, exh. cat. (Antwerp International Cultureel Centrum, 1977)

27

Š Gordon Matta-Clark

13. Splitting, Gordon Matta-Clark, 1974.

source: neuegalerie-archiv.at/07/foto/bilder/matta_clark01_rgb.jpg

28

Similarly Wilson makes his cuts and slices through the built environment, which he does as a means to bring attention and add to the dialogue on our understanding of that same built environment, as described through architecture as an artistic medium. He plays with spaces, scales and volume as part of this dialogue and discourse, making investigations relative to the human scale and experiential spatial qualities. At the same time Wilson animates the architecture he appropriates, abstracting facades as kinetic structures/ sculptures. The provocation of the architecture occurs at this moment of transcendance.

“Transcendence is not achieved beyond the here and now but through memory and anticipation, the past and future which make the present moment ‘ex-static’, always behind and ahead of itself - a finite transcendence. Thus the installation as a temporal experience of ‘being in’, de-objectifies and mobilises the body in its relation to the world: art provides a domain in which such experience is not immediately appropriated for instrumental meansend relations.“ 1 Wilson’s body of work suggests new life beyond what is typically considered an architecture or of architecture. The power of this work of grandiose scale, and its contradictory lack of subtlety yet sublime nature seems to evoke a far stronger emotional response than allowed or expected in the architectural profession. Architects can however respond to this work and learn from its almost vulgar or blunt exploration of theme, that is simply not possible or allowed in the architecture profession due to its utilitarian nature.

In this way, Wilson’s art is unambiguously provocative, and in so attempts to find or place its purpose, the inherent nature of art being free from practicality, art unlike architecture reveals, raises and answers questions relevant to the work of architects. Being bounded by practicality however, architecture unlike art reveals, raises and answers questions relevant to the work of artists. In this way, we may find merit in Wilson’s contrasting approach to the discipline as an artist, as an alternate to Matta-Clark as an architect.

Wilson’s words speak about acts of provocation. He consistently alludes to a desire to stop the commuter in his tracks as he traverses the built environment. The built environment after all is the most blatant embodiment of societal rules. His then is a world full of excitement and spectacle. Wilson’s art calls for a “wow factor”. In many ways this “wow factor” in his art is the first in a sequence of moves, a system of sorts seen in many of his works. The “wow” or “hmm” factor or rarer still the coveted “wow + hmm” moment is a means to draw in an audience. Once that audience is captivated, “they get excited!”

-Wilson begins “unfolding the idea on many levels, including challenging your typical preconceptions of our world and how it’s built.” 2 Part of this culture of architecture appropriated or mediated for artistic endeavour relates to our understanding of the lives of structures beyond their intended use or lifespan. This in turn feeds back into the conversation on temporality in architecture.

“A ruin is just another uncalculated state for architecture to exist as. All architecture has a lifespan and all architecture exists as a slow event in time. The ruin is part of that event.” 3

1. Michael Newman, “From the Fire to the Light: On Richard Wilson’s Installations”, p. 5 2. Siobhan Andrews. “Richard Wilson. Conversations with leading cultural figures.” AnOther Magazine, July 2013, accessed Nov 3 2014, http://www.anothermag.com/current/view/2886/Richard_Wilson 3. Gabrielle Berlin. “Richard Wilson on destruction”. Horst und Edeltraut, 2012, accessed Jan 5 2015, http://www.horstundedeltraut.com/2012/02/richard-wilson-on-destruction/

29

© Richard Wilson

14. She Came in Through the Bathroom Window, Matt’s Gallery, London, 1989 source: richardwilsonsculptor.com

© Richard Wilson

15. High Rise, 1989, Sao Paulo Biennial. Glass greenhouse, existing wall, steel beams, 2 insect-o-cutors 244 x 396 x 366 cm. source: saatchigallery.com 30

3.3 Early Works // Architectural Interventions Wilson has declared his work as being heavily influenced by Land Art and the sculptural endeavours emerging from the United States in the 1970s. Many of these artists sought to reject the siteless nature of modern art, and the gallery. Michael Newman discusses a “hostility” towards the gallery in 60s & 70s. While Wilson didn’t share this negative reaction explicity, his first site-specific installation “[Big Dipper] was arrived at out of its manufacturing processes, and it was built not on the scale of an object, but of the room itself.” 1 This first piece illustrates the budding association with architecture, as a consequence of site-specific installation, part of the reaction against “siteless” modernist sculpture. The piece, comprising “a hoop of aluminium poured into a sand mould supported on a wooden structure which encircled a column supporting the ceiling” was genereated in part by the history of the site, the warehouse having suffered a fire which left a lingering smell of burnt materials, as well as black soot stains. Big Dipper then was conceived as a spatial experience, born of the fire as reference to the space. The experience interrupted by the column, creating a need to explore the piece from many angles. 2

“The processes of making, which in society is always for a reason which is other to the process itself - this is the meaning of instrumental means-end rationality - is here for its own sake, like the game which players play for the sake of playing” 3 Wilson’s early work at Matt’s gallery was of crucial importance in his developing philosophy & process. The gallery space encouraged the use of the site-specific, creating installations that were intrinsically linked to their (built) environment. Wilson explored this theme for a number of years early in his career. Pieces like, “She Came in Through the Bathroom Window” (1989), “Return to Sender” (1992), “I’ve Started so I’ll Finish” (1992) & “High Rise” (1989, Sao Paolo Biennale) are examples of installation works intrinsically linked to the existing architecture of the space. In “She Came in Through the Bathroom Window” for example, the artist starts by moving a window, and concealing the (re)construction to mimic the language of the gallery space. This piece makes particular reference to notions of inside and outside space, while simultaneously playing with the concept of scale. 4

“Return to Sender” sees Wilson toying with the window and its constituent parts, removing them and pulling them into the space, supported off the in-situ heater whose copper pipes were pulled across the room. By playing with the heat system, Wilson plays with the “arterial flow of liquid through the space”, 5 which is in itself another means or commentary on this theme of inside/outside. By working with such a mundane device as a radiator, Wilson is adding to the commentary on modern life, very clearly making a spectacle of those mod cons which we take for granted. 6 Similarly in “I’ve Started so I’ll Finish”, the radiator becomes almost “unfunctional” or certainly is perceived as such, being transformed (temporarily) into a sculptural piece.

Meanwhile the functional chair is perceived as unusable, becoming (temporarily) redundant. We can not or do not or do not want to read the (un)functional chair as sculpture, yet the abstracted radiator, “a functioning necessity of everyday life [...still] generates heat and does exactly what it was cast to do”. 5

1. Simon Morrissey. Tate Modern Aritsts: Richard Wilson. (London: Tate Publishing) p. 23 2. Michael Newman, “From the Fire to the Light: On Richard Wilson’s Installations”, p. 3 3. Michael Newman, “From the Fire to the Light: On Richard Wilson’s Installations”, p. 5-6 4. Michael Archer, Simon Morrissey, Harry Stocks. Richard Wilson (London: Merrell, 2001). p. 66 5. James Roberts, Richard Wilson, exh. cat. Berlin: DAAD 6. Archer, Morrissey, Stocks. Richard Wilson. p. 96

31

16. “20:50” in Gallery 13, Saatchi Gallery, London source: saatchigallery.com

© Richard Wilson

© Richard Wilson

17. “20:50”, Saatchi Gallery, 1987. Used sump oil and steel.

“The work is the only permanent installation at the Saatchi Gallery and has been continuously shown in each of the gallery’s venues since 1991. Currently on display in Gallery 13 – a room custom built for the piece – 20:50 transforms the gallery into a site of epic illusion.” source: saatchigallery.com 32

3.4 20:50 // Multi-Site Specific Installation “The work is unusual in that it is a site specific piece, that is able to specify to almost any site, so to speak. In its various reincarnations it has turned the spaces it has occupied into worlds where the mundane industrial materials - used sump oil and steel sheeting - open up an entirely different sense of space that belongs to the imagination of the everyday.” 1 Like much of Wilson’s early work, “20:50” explores & highlights architectural features by literally adding more, pulling in the feature, or in the case of “20:50” doubling the perception of the space presented. “20:50” is similarly an example of how Wilson’s work appropriates space. Scale is relevant as the human figure is ever central in his work, while the slope in the space is a subversion, or an illusion to the reality of the archtiecture. The reference to the human figure is ever present, but more so is the reference to the mundane reality of the architectural space.

“Wilson’s installation and sculptural work illuminates many of the ways in which the spaces we inhabit function; the things that are taken for granted: that the floor is level, that outside is outside and inside is inside, and that space is neatly self-contained, are confounded. For example, whenever 20:50 is exhibited, you can be sure that in addition to the experience of the work itself, the viewer will come away with an extensive knowledge of the ceiling structure of the gallery; because that, inevitably, is what the eye focusses on, knowingly or not, through the reflection in the oil. Most importantly, Richard Wilson demonstrates that it is still possible to transform the world” 1 In his works at Matt’s Gallery as much as in “20:50”, Wilson is seen to be objectifying the everyday, the periphery of our perception and perspective. There is a reference to the notion of the commensurate between the scale of the piece and the scale of the space.

Of particular note however, is the notion of the placement or origin of these works within the gallery. While far removed from the modernist notion of the nomadic artwork, a consequence of the “fetishization of the base”, 2 these early works are less powerful in their agency than the boldness of some of Wilson’s predecessors. What comes to the fore thematically, is the “officialdom” of the appropriation of the gallery. His subversion of architecture, or architectural space is somewhat neutered of its power by this use of these official channels. One can not help but consider the chasm between the nature of such work, and the work of Matta-Clark in particular.

“Long gone are the days when someone would be able to enter an industrial building, work for two months, and make huge cuts to a building’s exterior. These days, getting in would be impossible because the structure would be in heavy use, security would be tight, and the activity would be interpreted as some new form of terrorism. Today, a work like this can only be recreated in a museum; the conditions that would support its location outdoors have been erased.” 3

1. James Roberts, Richard Wilson, exh. cat. Berlin: DAAD 2. Rosalind Krauss, “Sculpture in the Expanded Field” 3. Josh Rubin, “Tropolism Exhibitions: Gordon Matta-Clark You Are The Measure.” Tropolism, February 2007, accessed Nov 26 2014, http://www.tropolism.com/2007/02/tropolism_exhibitions_gordon_m.php

33

18. Drawing for Slice of Reality, 2000. source: richardwilsonsculptor.com

© Richard Wilson

© Richard Wilson

19. Process Drawing, Water Table, Matt’s Gallery, Richard Wilson, 1994. source: tate.org.uk/art/images/work/T/T12/T12489_10.jpg

34

3.5 Modes of Practice: On Drawing & Maquettes Perhaps, we could analyse Wilson’s process to find the weight and brevity behind his work. In discussing the relevance of drawing to his process, Richard Wilson takes a simple approach, stating “any drawing that is done to explain something is a drawing done well” and “all good drawing is about communicating ideas and information”. 1 The artists often utilises drawing with words as a tool in his design process. Indeed, Wilson’s drawings are impressive, and the artist originally considered a career as graphic designer, undertaking a foundation course at the London College of Printing. 2 As an artist, he considers the importance of drawing from observation as a valuable experience. Wilson states that the medium of drawing is fundamental to practice as a sculptor, though he himself does not draw in any traditional “architectural” sense, working rather with a range of mixed media, pencil, pen and ink, collage etc. which very much relates to the sculpture’s palette of materials.

Drawing is used to generate the “right way in which an idea should work”, 1 as a process to pin down the idea which first comes through thinking, playing, toying, scribbling. When the idea arrives, the practice of drawing is very intense, moving first to sketcbook and later to larger format. Working as an artist rather than an architect, Wilson is very comfortable working at the scale of A2 and A1, dismissing smaller paper sizes as “scribbles”. 1 These large format drawings are essential in capturing the idea in the artists’ mind. Similarly to Christo & Jeanne-Claude’s process they are also crafted pieces of work that could be seen as standalone artworks in themselves, however Wilson does not appear to treat the production of such drawings as a generator of economy for his projects in the same manner. This may indeed be a pragmatic consequence of producing commissioned works, which in turn may also influence the aesthetic character of the production drawings.

Overall, his work method could be described as assemblage. Drawing is the first act. The assemblage also contains models, maquettes as more intuitive means for the sculptor to develop the idea but the process always begins with drawing, as a way to look at & examine the idea. To continue the process, Wilson asks, “how can the idea be made?” 1 He begins to investigate the drawing at a more technical level, which as an artist includes the use of photographs, collaging, cutting out and sticking down, juxtaposing them in the drawings. This can be seen in the generative work for “Slipstream”. Wilson is also a believer in being able to take away from the drawing, the subtraction in the sculpture, being able to remove from the imagery you have collaged etc.

While drawing is part of his working process, the artist also stresses the pleasure of drawing, reminiscing about the hypnotic effect of drawing from observation as a child -drawing for enjoyment, but also with the goal to explaining something. Drawings are done for the artist’s own enjoyment, but also for the architect, the engineer, as a means to share an idea. The shared nature of the drawings is clear to see in the construction of “Slice of Reality” where the artist would take drawings every week to the engineers. Wilson stresses how “everyone can get involved in the drawing”. As a language, it is one with little to no inhibition, and in the working process everyone was able to draw together, place their statement as a “visual mark that could be referred to”. 1 Similarly he refers to scale as a language for use in conveying technical data to architects or engineers, but for most people the drawing is just an image based medium, a use to convey an idea.

1. Martin Barrett “Richard Wilson - On Drawing”. YouTube video, 14:55, accessed Nov 3 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcMtfbcXvIw 2. Simon Morrissey. Tate Modern Aritsts: Richard Wilson. p. 22

35

Š Richard Wilson

20. Turning The Place Over (Maquette) by Richard Wilson at The Grey Gallery, London source: flickrhivemind.net/Tags/thegreygallery/Interesting

Š Richard Wilson

21. Turning The Place Over (Mechano Maquette) #2 by Richard Wilson at The Grey Gallery, London. source: flickrhivemind.net/Tags/thegreygallery/Interesting 36

“Sometimes a drawing is better than words.” 1

3.6 Turning the Place Over // Over Easy “Over Easy”, (Stockton-Upon-Tees,1998) sister piece and precedent to “Turning the Place Over”, (Liverpool, 2008) are examples of Wilson’s work engaging with social, cultural and political exclusion. The oscillating disc, where art meets the architecture of the building.

Movement gives it life which ties it to the lives of those who pass, enter and circulate within. The reference is always back to the scale and perception of the human figure.

The development of the concept highlights a number of themes unique to Wilson’s work.

The central idea behind “Turning the Place Over” was to place a bearing into facade that it could move in one plane only, 300 degrees back and forth. Wilson describes the work as an answer to many briefs for the City of Liverpool. The fundamental point in the work is the idea of spectacle -“architecture as event”. Wilson wanted to see kinetic architecture, architecture that moves, kinetic structure, something that the public could see, and in a very formal way wanted it to be materials we don’t associate with movement. Glass, stone, brick, concrete and other “architectural” materials are not thought of as kinetic materials.

The piece then was a metaphor for the city of Liverpool where, “things were being turned upside down, things were being changed”. 2

“Whenever I start a piece of work I start the process by trying to understand the particular nature of the site and the reason for making the work. For me that’s the springboard that starts me towards an idea.” 3 As the project developed, the work engulfed in Wilson’s own thematic concerns is part of a bigger idea that attempts to challenge the preconceptions we have of our built environment. Wilson wanted to turn rules and regulations on their head, by abstracting something that’s specifically about rules and regulations -the facade -the built environment -architecture. In a very obvious way then, the artist abstracts the idea of the building itself, the canvas as being about repetition and order, due to the nature of its facade composition, much as Matta-Clark’s building cuts embodied the breaking of order. This was seen as an interesting precedent for Wilson’s idea to “seize” the building as a phenomenon.

Wilson states, with large scale works of public art, such as “Turning the Place Over” it’s very difficult to get it perfect, as you can’t make the work in the studio - rather “You’ve got to pretty much wing it on drawings and models”. One unpredictable notion in this particular sculpture was the speed of the oscillation. The artist intended for the piece to run at 3rpm so as not to obviously reference the movement of a clock (1rpm). However, at this speed, people walked by in the street. when it was turned down to 1rpm, people stopped and watched. The audience dictated the speed as an element of the sculpture. Furthermore, in reflection on his large-scale installation Wilson states; “I like the notion of spectacle.

Some artists don’t seem to like that word, but for me spectacle is often missing in our lives because of health and safety.” Whilst simultaneously accepting “We get away with theatrical tricks because we know that the engineers have made sure it’s safe.” 4

1. Martin Barrett “Richard Wilson - On Drawing” 2. Liverpool Biennale TV. “Interview with Richard Wilson” 3. Jess Winterstein, “London School of Economics: LSE unveils new Richard Wilson sculpture, Square the Block”. LSE, 2009, accessed Nov 3 2014, http://www.lse.ac.uk/newsandmedia/news/archives/2009/09/richardwilson.aspx 4. Siobhan Andrews. “Richard Wilson. Conversations with leading cultural figures.”

37

Š Richard Wilson

22. Turning the Place Over, Liverpool, 2008. source: liverpoolecho.co.uk 38

3.7 Reflecting on Slipstream // Scale of Practice “With both candor and generosity, Wilson narrated Slice’s development: from sourcing, slicing and transporting the vessel from a shipping yard in the north of England, to its afterlife as kind of speakeasy with an uncertain future. [...] Conversation soon turned to his transformation of an ocean-going sand dredger into an intriguing work of art that is technically high-reaching, experientially melancholy and increasingly charged with ongoing issues related to readymades and recycling in the face of global warming.” 1 The evolution of Wilson’s work from small scale interventionist installations into a cohesive sculptural language of large scale contemplative, at times awe inspiring, thoughtful artworks displays how his fascination with architecture as a medium can produce works of art that inspire and defy classification. The notion of producing work that is tied to its context at an architectural scale that is unforgiving for exhibition and reproduction on a grand, commercial or indeed profitable scale is indeed food for thought.

The importance of process to Wilson’s work is also very intiriguing in this regard when you compare it to the work of Christo & Jeanne-Claude for example, whose work transcended the scale of land art, but maintains the idea of temporality of the finished piece. For them, the scale of their work informs the length of their process, the execution of the finished piece is just one part of it. This is common with most artistst but the weight of merit to the work is transformed somewhat when they enter the formality and responsibility of a more commercial design/studio environment.

“Wilson advocates for more rudimentary principles, referring to ‘honesty’ and ‘integrity’, ideals that he argues are slipping away from a lot of leading artist’s practices now, in favour of more commercial interests. All of which makes Wilson a sculptor in the purist sense.” 2 Beyond Slipstream, Richard Wilson himself has reflected on the ongoing expansion of his practice and studio. The artist talks about the idea of increasing commercialisisation and expansion of his studio, moving away from spectacle for the sake of spectacle and rather focusing on a more profitable format of practice reminiscent of his contemporaries Antony Gormley & Anish Kapoor.

“He says he wants to do bigger work, and more of it, having seen his contemporaries, such as Anish Kapoor and Antony Gormley, rocket into the lucrative world of vast commissions and big gallery shows. He also cites Thomas Heatherwick and Olafur Eliasson as models, both of whom run big commercially successful offices staffed heavily by architects.” 3 Perhaps the most intriguing idea of this expansive “in-house” approach to an art-led expanded practice is its reliance on architects. This illustrates one direct approach of how to merge artistic practice with the architecture discipline and in time we may see more clearly how this might affect the evolution of Wilson’s work. This change in the formula to a more “utilitarian” practice that delivers products and functional architectural products a la Thomas Heatherwick may in time see the artist move away from the production of such spectacle where the process is as central to the integrity of the work. The idea furthermore makes one ponders the question if there are others investigating different approaches to producing architecture-focused works of sculpture, which may be worthy of discussion.

1. “Tea and a Slice of Reality with Richard Wilson” Pangaea Sculptors Centre, June 2013, accessed Jan 12, 2015, http://www.pangaeasculptorscentre.com/tea-and-a-slice/ 2. Ragesh Punj, “Richard Wilson: Acting Alone”, Regard Au Pluriel 3. Oliver Wainright, “Richard Wilson: My Giant Heathrow Sculpture Started in a Vat of Margarine”, The Guardian

39

Š Alex Chinneck

23. From the Knees of My Nose to the Belly of My Toes, 2013. source: dezeen.com 40

Alex Chinneck “A fabricator is someone who makes things. He or she might be an engineer, a welder of a bridge-maker... Alex Chinneck... [is] interested in how things are made, how they function and the properties of materials. The result for the viewer is the possibility of new ways to think about sculpture... Chinneck... [is] challenging our perceptions of sculpture, and pushing its boundaries.” 1

4.1 Exploring Territories Beyond Art Like Richard Wilson, London based artist Alex Chinneck uses architecture as a medium to create expressive work that questions our understanding and attitudes to the structures we encounter in our built environment. Chinneck similarly underwent formal training as an artist, graduating from Chelsea College of Art & Design. Like many, his career in art began with painting, however this was ultimately frustrating for the artist, owing to the limited exposure to other areas and disciplines of interest. For Chinneck, his interests did not stop at one closed definition of art but rather extend into other areas including architecture, manufacturing, design, industry, engineering & construction. 2, 3

“The only thing art school gave me was a complex about my work. I felt totally creatively caged and I felt it wasn’t an environment that facilitated creative thinking and freedom, it was... quite suffocating creatively. Leaving art school I found incredibly liberating, because it allowed me to explore territories that weren’t typically associated with art making and artists” 3 Ultimately stymied by the culture of art school, Chinneck rather found his interest in practice that engaged with more collaborative work. His first taste of this kind of collaborative work came about from necessity. His artistic training did not give him the digital, or technological skillset needed to create the kinds of interactive sculptures he sought to create. To deliver part of his final showcase in Chelsea College, ultimately led him to a kind of “forced collaboration” with a group from Imperial College London which had been set up to explore the applications of new digital technologies. 3 Like many artists, his career after art school then began by working as a studio assistant for a number of years with Conrad Shawcross, which Chinneck acknowledges imparted on him a great sense of ambition, which eventually led the artist to branch out on his own. 3

1. Alma Zevi, “Fabricators - Hannah Barry Gallery, London.” Horst und Edeltraut, 2012, accessed Jan 5 2015, http://horstundedeltraut.com/2012/02/fabricators-hannah-barry-gallery-london/ 2. Chinneck, Alex. Interview by author. Email correspondence, December, 2014.

3. Daniel Lingham, “Size Matters. Interview with Alex Chinneck.” SculptorVox, January 2014, accessed Dec 1, 2014, http://sculptorvox.com/alex-chinneck/

41

Š Alex Chinneck

24. Telling the Truth Through False Teeth, 2012. source: alexchinneck.com 42

4.2 Expansive Practice // Digital Nomad Chinneck describes his as an expansive practice, or one of expansive thematic interest. His core interest lies in “the extraordinary” everyday, distorting familiarity with fantasy. This is achieved by blurring the distinctions between creative genres through collaborations with specialists. Thematically, his own body of work is a combination of appropriated architectural icons, engaging with ideas of inhabitation, dabbling with how we value property, and our built environment, executed in a light hearted manner.

“This project always evolved with consideration to sculpture, architecture and engineering but ultimately I like the simple idea of performing a magic trick on such a scale.” 1 The launch of his own practice did not lead to the creation of a typical studio set-up for Chinneck, as one might expect of a contemporary sculptor. Rather, the artist works alone as a “digital nomad” of sorts, constantly collaborating with large groups of specialists, working on projects with teams of architectural consultants, engineers, and others. The artist has purposely opted to outsource work outside his expertise. In delivering a project, Chinneck describes his process of collaboration:

“...It really requires my ‘go to’ team of engineers and consultants. They are able to balance out the creative drive to produce things with necessary levels of professionalism.” 2 There is an interesting current derived from this particular approach. As an artist working at the architectural scale in the realm of public art, he must work through & with the same official channels as architects in order to construct his visionary, exploratory installations.

That is to say, that to produce work that questions our values and connections to architecture and the built environment, Chinneck’s work must utilise the same channels and cooperative processes in construction as used by architects. Like Richard Wilson’s relationship with engineers Price & Myers for example, Chinneck relies on the work of architectural consultancy firm, United Projects3 to deliver his works.

“The problem of scale and money really are the enemy of ambition and to create sculpture of architectural size and language requires a certain level of ambition. But it is getting easier. The more I make, the better the team gets and experience is incredibly important.

For Covent Garden, for example we’ve done about ten different elevations of the design, we’ve done site plans. OS maps, floor plans, roof plans, design and access statement, illustrations and onsite schedules. The amount of work is considerable but its getting easier as we recognise it as the process and part of the practice. When I did the Sliding House I didn’t have a clue what was going on, I’d never done a planning application before, I’d never worked with building control before.....” 3

1. Alice Vincent, “How do you make Covent Garden float?” The Telegraph, October 2014, accessed Nov 3, 2014, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/11118808/How-do-you-make-Covent-Garden-float.html 2. Chinneck, Alex. Interview by author.

3. Nina Azzarello. “Alex Chinneck on his Architectural Intervention at London’s Covent Garden.” DesignBoom, September 2014, accessed Nov 24, 2014 http://www.designboom.com/art/alex-chinneck-intervention-london-covent-garden-09-22-2014/

43

Š Alex Chinneck

25. Brick Studies, Fabricators Exhibition, Hannah Barry Gallery, London, 2013. source: alexchinneck.com

44

4.3 Fabricators // Small Scale Installations Like Wilson before him, Alex Chinneck’s independent career began with a series of small scale installations and studies that appropriated construction materials such as chipboard & timber products, brick & masonry. His work as part of the “Fabricators” Exhibition (London, 2013) attest to this fact. Playing with material, the artist made a series of studies that involved the use of a water-jet cutter to push the boundaries of our understanding of what a material (brick in this instance) might be capable of.

“By using cutting-edge technology, materials and processes these artists have transformed the fabrication of their sculpture to achieve the extraordinary from the ordinary.” 1 This common emphasis on collaboration with the construction industry is implied with a greater, or perhaps more direct investigation of emergent technologies in Chinneck’s work.

These brick studies attest to this interest in manufacturing techniques, and emphasise the depths of his own investigation, and in many ways his indebtedness to the construction and manufacturing industry to see his projects realised. Like Wilson, the ideas explored in these small scale works could be adapted to his larger scale projects.

“When art meets manufacturing, it opens up possibilities.”

2

4.4 Modes of Practice: Collaboration & Technologies “The industry evolution and personal discovery of new materials and processes gives birth to new sculptural possibilities. With this in mind, I invest great time meeting new manufacturers and specialists. It is almost always these discoveries that generate my ideas, I simply introduce the potential of industry into artistic narratives and theatrical contexts. “ 3 Alex Chinneck’s work is an example of how changes in construction practice and philosophy at the emergence of the digital age have created a new set of tools for use in architectural applications, as well as art. By appropriating digital fabrication techniques, he is able to mass produce seemingly random forms, such as in “Telling the Truth Through False Teeth” where each individual window, identically smashed, is actually made from 4 separate pieces of glass.

In another recent work making Covent Garden float, “Take My Lightning but Don’t Steal My Thunder”, the artist worked with a team of over 100 collaborators,4 including architects and architectural consultants, to navigate building regulations, planning consent, planning control and planning permission; as well as engineers to work out loadings; and fabricators and scenic artists to produce building material. Chinneck describes his role;

1. Alma Zevi, “Fabricators - Hannah Barry Gallery, London.”

2. Chinneck, Alex. Interview by author.

3. Eoin Redahan, “Innovate to accumulate - BDA Innovation Day” Clay Technology Magazine, April 2013, accessed Jan 6, 2015. http://www.iom3.org/news/innovate-accumulate-bda-innovation-day 4. Nina Azzarello. “Alex Chinneck on his Architectural Intervention at London’s Covent Garden.”

45

© Alex Chinneck

26. Digital Sketch; From the Knees of My Nose to the Belly of My Toes, 2013. source: alexchinneck.com

© Alex Chinneck

27. Construction Drawings; From the Knees of My Nose to the Belly of My Toes, 2013. source: alexchinneck.com

46

“I play the role of a project manager and collaborate with a spectrum of companies, consultants and specialists. The production team for this project includes structural engineers (smith & wallwork engineers), architectural consultants (united projects), planning consultants, steelworkers (severfield rowen), carpenters (scott fleary productions), carvers (cordek), scenic artists (richard nutbourne scenic studio), 3D modelers and 5-axis robots. The number of people involved in this project has been vast and comfortably beyond 100 contributors. without the experience, expertise and enthusiasm of these parties this project would be unquestionably unachievable.” 1 Similarly, his melting house project “A Pound of Flesh for 50p” illustrates how his work is influenced by, and aided by such processes. A small study (1:1) was made at the instigation of the project. In building his 6’ test wall for ”A Pound of Flesh...” using 150 wax bricks, Chinneck was able to make 8 bricks a day. Later the proportions and ambition were increased as the project progressed. Working on the full scale version, over 200 bricks were made in the space of a few hours, owing to the power of collaborative work and his use of digital fabrication processes. The wax bricks took 3-4 hours to cure, with sand used in the process of the mold as a way to get unique bricks from the same mold. Bricks were frozen after setting. There was a large amount of off site fabrication involved in this particular work, reminiscent of some of Wilson’s larger pieces, such as Slipstream. 2

“At the end of the day, we’re creating an illusion. The strength of the illusion lies in its believability, and so every single detail has to be thoroughly considered. Which is why we worked with the best scenic studio in the country, Richard Nutbourne. He added this roof which had to be extremely light, but simultaneously extremely visually convincing and they’ve achieved it brilliantly” 2 In many ways the artist’s approach to the execution and quality of his pieces is aided by a quite hands on attitude. Much like Wilson’s earlier work, Chinneck works directly with the construction, pouring the wax and air drying it, taking a direct hand in the production of the later assemblage. Rapidly however, Chinneck’s work becomes more about planning a piece as the scope and scale of his own practice increases with each new commission.

“In order to realise my creative ambitions, my day to day process is consumed by logistics and administration. Public artworks of an architectural context are 5% creative and 95% planning, preparation and management. Where I was previously hands on, I now work with huge teams to execute each project. [...] Where previously I would work alone, my ideas and ambitions are now beyond my physical capacity and technical ability to produce them. Collaboration is therefore a necessity for growth and the realisation of my ideas and objectives.” 3

1. Nina Azzarello. “Alex Chinneck on his Architectural Intervention at London’s Covent Garden.”

2. Angie Dixon. “Alex Chinneck - Behind the Scenes of a Pound of Flesh for 50p” Vimeo video, 8:09, accessed Nov 3, 2014 https://vimeo.com/104550664 3. Chinneck, Alex. Interview by author.

47

28. Construction, A Pound of Flesh for 50p, 2014.

source: londonliving.at/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Melting-House-frame-work-finished-and-up.jpg

Š Alex Chinneck

Š Alex Chinneck

29. A Pound of Flesh for 50p, 2014. source: theopengates.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/p1000670.jpg 48

4.5 Conceptually Light, Sculpturally Complex Much of his work is that of fantastical theatre, with conceptual, visual and material decisions in the projects defined by the context “so the outcome harmoniously intertwines with the surroundings despite its significant size. This philosophy underpins my approach to public art.” 1 Chinneck lists Wilson as well as Rachel Whiteread’s 1993 “House” project as influences on his approach to public art. 2

“By using the kind of material and the structures and the scale and aesthetics of the everyday world that surrounds everyone, you are immediately discussing and exploring a subject matter that anyone can relate to and understand... In that respect everyone has an equal chance of undertanding, enjoying and hopefully being mesmerized by the experience. I think illusions are the distortion of our perception of the physical world that surrounds us, therefore architectural illusions make a lot of sense to me in that respect.” 3 On Rosalind Krauss’ Klein diagram of the expanded field of sculpture, Chinneck’s work might be categorised as site-construction & axiomatic structures, though he is less engaged with the experiential nature of the architecture, more so with its impression on the wider context. While describing his work as less than overtly political, many of the pieces can be said to highlight the political and economic undertones and zeitgesit of the era, whilst also needing to work within the regulations and official channels in construction.

“My projects are the amalgamation and product of different interests. What is important is that despite their debt to the disciplines of architecture, construction and engineering they remain void of physical function. I personally find function a cage to creative freedom and feel creatively liberated by distancing myself from this responsibility. Like Wilson and Matta-Clark, the work is architectural in both scale and visual language but does not have a responsibility to functionality, which is the wonderful freedom of art.” 3

4.6 Drawing Conclusions from Chinneck “I don’t understand at what point the experience needed this intellectual justification to be an important and valuable one,” he says. “I’m often criticized for this lack of conceptual content. But what we lose in conceptual content we make up for in structural and sculptural complexity.” 4 Alex Chinneck then is perhaps a less politically charged contemporary stylistic response reminiscent of Matta-Clark’s work with great emphasis on interdisciplinary collaboration to produce work that is less than overtly subversive. This is of course a reality of creating built work through commission and planning law. Alex Chinneck’s thematic exploration of spectacle, theatricality and “magic” are perhaps byproducts, or luxuries of the unlimited artistic freedom found in non-utilitarian artwork. They do however lend a more human approach that is of interest to an architecture discipline that is often criticised as overly self referential.

1. Nina Azzarello. “Alex Chinneck on his Architectural Intervention at London’s Covent Garden.”

2. Turner Contemporary Margate, “Art Debate - Public Art”. Youtube video, 1:29:25, accessed Jan 7, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drCkrzHDlGo 3. Chinneck, Alex. Interview by author.

4. Allyssia Alleyne. “Strange Case of the Melting House: Alex Chinneck’s Mind-Bending Buildings” CNN Style, January 2015, accessed Jan 4, 2015, http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/25/world/alex-chinneck-mind-bending-buildings/

49

30. Construction

source: cdn.designrulz.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/ floating-market-designrulz-16.jpg

31. Part-elevation. source: alexchinneck.com

Š Alex Chinneck

32. Take my Lightning but Don’t Steal my Thunder,Covent Garden, 2014. source: alexchinneck.com 50

The practicalities of using architecture as a medium in artistic expression means the artist must work with and understand the principles of architectural design and construction, but also importantly planning and logistics. In analysing a selection of work by Wilson and Chinneck, we can see how there is no clearly defined approach to how contemporary sculpture might engage with architecture. Common themes are found in their exploratory works of grandiose scale, often informed by the practical conditions each installation must engage with to pull off a performance that will define it within the realm of sculpture, in the expanded field, as that which is not architecture but derived from it.

The nature of Chinneck’s lone-wolf approach to his practice may in time prove to be a phase, much as the artist describes his current body of work as his “architecture phase” 1 What will be intriguing to see is how the evolution of his practice beyond this “architecture phase” may or may not in time see Chinneck, like Wilson before him, alter his approach to a more commercial-design practice, like his influences Heatherwick & Gormley. His unique approach, as an individual artist leading the creative and practical execution of his ideas, does add a certain indespensible quality to his position. It also adds a consideration for the notion of self-limited scale of practie that is reminiscent of architects such as Glenn Murcutt or Peter Zumthor.

Irrelevant of whether Chinneck moves his collaborative operations in house or otherwise, his emphasis on the philosophy of collaboration inevitably adds to the conversation on the nature of inter-disciplinary art/architecture practice.

1. Allyssia Alleyne. “Strange Case of the Melting House: Alex Chinneck’s Mind-Bending Buildings”

51

© Ila Berman Douglas Burnham

33. “Architecture in the Expanded Field” (Klein Diagram)-Ila Berman/ Douglas Burnham.

This diagram aims to update Krauss’ diagram to conceptualize today’s expanded field of architectural installation practice. source: wba3.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/expfielddiagram2.png 52

Reflection 5.1

Lessons for Architecture’s Expanded Field

“It is perhaps not too much of an exaggeration to state that this expanded field for achitecture owes greatly to the previous expansion of the sculptural field. Thus, the spatial arts now come together in their superimposed expanded fields, less in order to blur distinctions or erode purity than to construct new versions that, for the first time, may constitute a truly ecological aesthetics.” 1 Anthony Vidler writes about the evolving nature of architecture’s expanded field as having been influenced by the evolution of sculpture some years before. As such, contemporary sculpture engaging with architecture is increasingly relevant in this conversation on how we operate as a profession in architecture’s own “expanded field”.

Much as sculpture as a discipline has changed utterly since the 1960s, so too it is argued, architecture is presently evolving due to a number of issues, including the advent of new technologies and mediums, and greater access to information. Simultaneously, the expansion of architecture’s field is aided by the advent of sculpture’s own expansion, as artists like Wilson and Chinneck widen the discourse on not only what architecture or domestic space should be, but by letting us question who is an architect, and what are the limits of non-utilitarian endeavours in architecture. The installation becomes the architecture, while architecture becomes installation. Ila Berman and Douglas Burnham run a studio program at the Wattis Center of the California College for the Arts. Through their work they have attempted to further classify some of the other artistic endeavours currently emerging from the field of architecture.

“Over the last three decades, the blurred boundaries between art and architecture have generated a series of works known as installations, whose conceptual, spatial and material trajectories have produced a new and expanding network of relations between the domains of architecture, sculpture, interiors and landscape. These installations, emerging from both architects and artists, operate on the fundamental conditions of the architectural, without producing buildings.” 2

1. Anthony Vidler, “Architecture’s Expanded Field”, Artforum, 42, no.8 (2004) 2. Ila Berman, Douglas Burnham, “Architecture in the Expanded Field”, CCA Wattis WBA3, 2011-12, accessed Nov 17, 2014, https://wba3.wordpress.com/page/3/

53

5.2 Diagram - Scope of Practice // Temporality of Work (for all cited works)

EXPANDED PRAC

PAVILLIONS

PERIMETERS (1978) TAKE MY LIGHTNING BUT DON’T STEAL MY THUNDER (2014) SHE CAME IN THROUGH THE BATHROOM WINDOW (1989)

TEMPORARY

HIGH RISE (1989) OFFICE BAROQUE (1977) 20:50 (1987)

SPLITTING (1974)

PARTIALLY BURIED WOODSHED (1970) OVER EASY (1988) WATER TABLE (1994)

TIL

TURNING THE PLACE OVER (2008)

FROM THE KNEES OF MY NOSE TO THE BELLY OF MY TOES TELLING THE TRUTH THROUGH FALSE TEETH (2012) THE RUNNING FENCE (1976)

A POUND OF FLESH FOR 50P (201

BUTTERFLY (2003) I’VE STARTED SO I’LL FINISH (1992) BRICK STUDIES (2013)

INSTALLATIONS

HOUSE, RACHEL WHITEREAD (1993) RETURN TO SENDER (1992)

ART PRACTIC

CTICE

ARCHITECTURE

RICHARD WILSON ALEX CHINNECK GORDON MATTACLARK

CLOUD GATE, ANISH KAPOOR (2006) SPIRAL JETTY (1970)

CE

OTHERS

PERMANENT

14)

LAND ARTISTS

RODEN CRATER (1979)

LTED ARC (1981)

S

WORKS BY ARTIST // ARCHITECT:

SLICE OF REALITY (2000)

THE ANGEL OF THE NORTH, ANTONY GORMLEY (1998) SLIPSTREAM (2013)

MONUMENTS

© Gordon Matta-Clark

34. Schematic for Conical Intersect, Gordon Matta-Clark, 1975. source: arts.uwaterloo.ca/~abstract/images/TP/SpectresOfAPlane-3.jpg

© Alex Chinneck

35. Construction Drawings for “From the Knees of my Nose to the Belly of my Toes”, United Projects for Alex Chinneck, 2013. source: alexchinneck.com 56

5.3

Conclusion

“One does not participate by following the crisis of change, but by being part of its initiation” 1 In classifying these forms of sculpture, and to understand their relevance to the architectural profession, part of the focus of the discourse has been on discovering the variety and relevance of subjects found in the artists’ work, to ascertain overlapping themes and discover where such work may find itself in any “expanded field” model, and ultimately the relevance of the works to the architecture discipline, as it contemplates its own expanded field.

The work of both Richard Wilson and Alex Chinneck clearly builds on the legacy of Gordon Matta-Clark, as well as the Land Artists, whose influence has been documented by Rosalind Krauss as a crucial moment in art history and the continued dialogue between the spatial arts. In many ways, both artists’ practice exemplifies many of the concerns of these artists who preceded them, with the emphasis on theatricality, the public nature of the works and most importantly the long process of consultation and construction involved in creating interventions in built form.

The work of Richard Wilson and Alex Chinneck as artists, helps us to broaden our horizons about how architecture can be interpreted, what it can explore, and how one might go about such exploration. The nature of the artists’ practice as one of intervention is of interest to the architecture discipline. The kinetic nature of Wilson’s work for instance, exemplified in pieces such as “Turning the Place Over”, and captured as a snapshot in the monumental “Slipstream” highlights an intriguing moment of reflection between the art and architecture disciplines. For the artist, the transformation from stasis to an architecture of kinetic structure mimics the architectural ideal of a built envirionment animated through occupation.

“Abandoned architecture, not waiting to be filled but serene in its transcendence architecture that transmits the feel of movements and shifts, resonating with every force applied to it, because it both resists and gives way - architecture that moves, the better to gain its poise.” 2 Chinneck’s own brand of animated architectural form is a more fluid model. Finding intrigue in these contrasting approach might allow architects to similarly adapt or tap into the inherent & potential energies in our built environment. Perhaps though, this could be achieved only be removing the limitations of creative freedom imposed by pragmatic architectural practice.

Both artists’ work is obviously anti-utilitarian in its nature, this being part of the nature of art practice. Their work, while appropriating architecture, clearly thwarts one of the most basic principles and tenets of architecture. This lends a unique perspective into the discourse on how architecture operates.

1. Lebbeus Woods, “Underground Berlin” in Anarchitecture: Architecture is a Political Act (London: Academy Editions, 1992) 2. Lebbeus Woods, “Turbulence” in Anarchitecture: Architecture is a Political Act

57

Š Rachel Whiteread

36. House, Rachel Whiteread, 1993.

58

source: labics.it/img/research/detail/22_uk_artists_a.jpg

This freedom allows the artist to explore their own disparate themes, however the artist like the architect is never truly free from the constraints of construction in their own context.

Indeed, as we have seen they are often defined by their methods as much as their forms, whilst still free to subvert architectural themes through construction. Wilson and Chinneck’s work reminds us that architecture, as an embodiment of societal order, should be open to interpretation and investigation as an artistic medium.

Importantly, while artists and architects may go through different training and practical experience; as both fields expand their use of the same, or similar techniques and digital technologies, and as more artists utilise planning methods of architectural drawing and logistics in our ever more formalised built environment - the shared space between architectural work and sculpture expands as the sharp divisions between the two fields becomes increasingly blurred.

The question remains if, how, or when the grey area between architecture and sculpture might ever be formalised into a distinct discipline of its own in a world where careers are increasingly specialised. However, perhaps the very nature of freedom of expression and expression of freedom found in the work of these artists informs us that the field will remain undefined, as it is by its very nature, up for interpretation, by artists, architects or others with a myriad of professional and educational backgrounds, and interests. Any creative who wishes to make a wider societal statement may follow this trend, with a simple understanding of architecture as the physical embodiment of society’s rules, and art as a medium for free, creative expression.

59

Bibliography Books // Exhibition Catalogues Archer, M., Morrissey, S., Stocks, H. Richard Wilson. London: Merrell Publishers. 2001 Cadwell, M. Strange Details. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2007 Curtis, P. Patio and Pavilion. The Place of Sculpture in Modern Architecture. London: Ridinghouse, 2007 Krauss, R. Richard Serra/ Sculpture. New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1986 Morrissey, S. Tate Modern Artists: Richard Wilson. London: Tate Publishing, 2006 Newman, M. “From the Fire to the Light: On Richard Wilson’s Installations”, in Richard Wilson, exh. cat.

(London, Oxford and Bristol: Matt’s Gallery, Museum of Modern Art and Arnolfini), 1989 O’Doherty, B. Christo and Jeanne-Claude. Remembering the Running Fence. London: University of California Press, Ltd. 2010 Papadakis, A. (ed.) Lebbeus Woods. Anarchitecture: Architecture is a Political Act. London: Academy Editions. 1992 Roberts, J. Richard Wilson, exh. cat. Berlin: DAAD, Druckhaus Hentrich. 1993 Walker, S. Gordon Matta-Clark. art, architecture and the attack on modernism. London: I. B. Tauris & Co. 2009 Wilson, A. Richard Wilson Jamming Gears, exh. cat., Serpentine Gallery. 1996

Essays // Journals // Web Articles Alleyne, A. Strange Case of the Melting House: Alex Chinneck’s. Mind-Bending Buildings. CNN Style.

25th November 2014 [Online] Available from: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/25/world/alexchinneck-mind-bending-buildings/ [Accessed 4th January 2015] Andrews, S. Richard Wilson. Conversations with leading cultural figures. AnOther Magazine. (23rd July 2013 [Online] Available from http://www.anothermag.com/current/view/2886/Richard_Wilson [Accessed 3rd November 2014] Azzarello, N. Alex Chinneck on his Architectural Intervention at London’s Covent Garden. DesignBoom.

22nd September 2014 [Online] Available from http://www.designboom.com/art/alex-chinneckintervention-london-covent-garden-09-22-2014/ [Accessed 24th November 2014]

60

Berlin, G. “Richard Wilson on destruction”. Horst und Edeltraut. 2012 [Online] http://www.horstundedeltraut.com/2012/02/richard-wilson-on-destruction/ [Accessed 4th January 2015] Christo. Running Fence. Christo & Jeanne-Claude. [Online] Available from: http://christojeanneclaude. net/projects/running-fence#.VJiOV8AjmA [Accessed 20th December 2014] Clark, J. Heathrow’s Terminal 2’s Slipstream Is An Artistic Achievement. The Design Air. 2014 [Online] Available from: http://thedesignair.net/2014/04/24/heathrows-terminal-2s-slipstream-is-an-artisticachievement/ [Accessed 3rd November 2014] DB, L.. Richard Wilson: Slipstream at Heathrow International Airport. DesignBoom. 2012 [Online] Available from: http://www.designboom.com/art/richard-wilson-slipstream-at-heathrowinternational-airport/ [Accessed 3rd November 2014] Heathrow Airport Media Centre. Twice world champion stunt pilot Paul Bonhomme recreates the tumble of Richard Wilson’s Slipstream. 3rd July 2013 [Online] Available from: http://mediacentre. heathrowairport.com/Press-releases/Twice-world-champion-stunt-pilot-Paul-Bonhomme-recreatesthe-tumble-of-Richard-Wilson-s-Slipstream-5b9.aspx [Accessed 10th December 2014] Jencks, C. Jencks’ Theory of Evolution, an Overview of 20th Century Architecture. Architectural Review.

2000 [Online] Available from: http://www.architectural-review.com/archive/2000-july-jencks-theory-ofevolution-an-overview-of-20th-century-architecture/8623596.article [Accessed 10th December 2014] Krauss, R. Sculpture in the Expanded Field. 1979 [Online] Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Available from http://www.jstor.org/stable/778224 [Accessed 24th November 2014].

Lingham, D. Size Matters. Interview with Alex Chinneck. SculptorVox. 26th January 2014 [Online] Available from: http://sculptorvox.com/alex-chinneck/ [Accessed 1st December 2014] McCallum, K. Alex Chinneck’s A Pound of Flesh for 50p - Planning permission for the unexpected. 13th November 2014 [Online] Available from http://www.theartblog.org/2014/11/alex-chinnecks-a-poundof-flesh-for-50p-planning-permission-for-the-unexpected/ [Accessed 3rd December 2014] Pangaea Sculptors Centre. Tea and A Slice of Reality with Richard Wilson. June 2013 [Online] Available from: http://www.pangaeasculptorscentre.com/tea-and-a-slice/ [Accessed 12th January 2014] Punj, R. Richard Wilson - Acting Alone - Interview. Regard Au Pluriel. May 2014 [Online] Available from http://www.regardaupluriel.com/richard-wilson-acting-alone-interview/ [Accessed 26th November 2014] Redahan, E. Innovate to accumulate - BDA Innovation Day. Clay Technology Magazine. 18 April 2013 [Online] Available from: http://www.iom3.org/news/innovate-accumulate-bda-innovation-day [Accessed 6th January 2015] Richard Wilson Sculptor. Available from: http://www.richardwilsonsculptor.com/ [Accessed 10th December 2014] Rubin, J. Tropolism Exhibitions: Gordon Matta-Clark You Are The Measure. Tropolism. 23 February 2007 [Online] Available from http://www.tropolism.com/2007/02/tropolism_exhibitions_gordon_m.php [Accessed 26th November 2014]

Salman, S. Things that make you go hmmm... The Guardian. 1st October 2008 [Online] Available from http://www.theguardian.com/society/2008/oct/01/regeneration.public.art [Accessed 3rd November 2014] Vidler, A. Architecture’s Expanded Field. Artforum, 42 no.8, 2004 Vincent, A. How do you make Covent Garden float? The Telegraph. 2014 [Online] Available from http:// www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/11118808/How-do-you-make-Covent-Garden-float.html [Accessed 3rd November 2014] Wainwright, O. Richard Wilson: my giant Heathrow sculpture started in a vat of margarine. The Guardian. 23rd April 2014 [Online] Available from: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/ apr/23/richard-wilson-slipstream-heathrow-installation [Accessed 3rd November 2014] Walker, S. The field and the table: Rosalind Krauss’ ‘expanded field’ and the Anarchitecture group.

Architectural Research Quarterly. 2011 [Online] 15, pp 347-358. Available from http://journals. cambridge.org/abstract_S1359135512000115 [Accessed 24th November 2014].

Winterstein, J. London School of Economics: LSE unveils new Richard Wilson sculpture, Square the Block. LSE website. 2009 [Online] Available from: http://www.lse.ac.uk/newsandmedia/news/ archives/2009/09/richardwilson.aspx [Accessed 3rd November 2014].

Zevi, A. Fabricators – Hannah Barry Gallery, London. Horst und Edeltraut. 2012 [Online] Available from: http://horstundedeltraut.com/2012/02/fabricators-hannah-barry-gallery-london/ [Accessed 5th January 2015]

Videos ARTtube. Gordon Matta-Clark: Office Baroque. 2013 [Online] Available from: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=raVCWi2DyP8 [Accessed 8th December 2014] Barrett, M. Richard Wilson - On Drawing. 2011 [Online] Available from: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=vcMtfbcXvIw [Accessed 3rd November 2014] Dixon, A. Alex Chinneck- Behind the Scenes of A pound of flesh for 50p by Angie Dixon for Merge Festival 2014. 2014 [Online] Available from: https://vimeo.com/104550664 [Accessed 3rd November 2014] Liverpool Biennale TV. Interview with Richard Wilson. 2008 [Online] Available from: https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=56vJOH4B-V8 [Accessed 3rd November 2014] Prebble, H. From the knees of my nose to the belly of my toes. 2013 [Online] Available from: https:// vimeo.com/75760193 [Accessed 3rd November 2014] Turner Contemporary Margate. Art Debate - Public Art. 2014 [Online] Available from: https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=drCkrzHDlGo [Accessed 7th January 2014] Vogt, Peter (ed.) James Turrell’s Roden Crater for LACMA. 2013 [Online] Available from: https://vimeo. com/67926427 [Accessed 7th December 2014]

62

64

Appendix 1

Interview with Alex Chinneck

1.1 Influences 1.2 Methodology 1.3 Working with Architects

2

Diagrams - Architecture’s Expanded Field

3

Reference Diagrams

2.1 2.2

3.1 3.2

Dualism // Modernity in Art & Architecture New Models in Architecture Today

Architecture’s Evolutionary Tree Architecture’s Expanded Field - Klein Diagram

66

Interview with Alex Chinneck 1.1 Influences 1. How familiar are you with the work of Richard Wilson & to what degree would you consider his work as an influence?

I am familiar with Richard Wilson’s work. I believe ‘Turning the place over’ and ‘20:50’ to be amongst the most exciting artworks ever produced by a British sculptor. I find inspiration in the ambition of others and the work of Richard Wilson has therefore been an important stimulus in the evolution of my creative practise and philosophies.

2. Similarly, are you familiar with the work of Gordon Matta-Clark & the “anarchitecture” group? Do you consider this work of influence to you/indeed do you follow architecture trends as a reference to your work? Otherwise, how might you classify your work in any genealogical timetable of art/sculpture/architecture?

I am also familiar with Matta-Clark. The work is powerful in so many ways. Every project feels like it was conceived, created and presented with a large dose of rebellion, which lends it such an exciting dynamic.

I do not follow architectural trends but do reference the architectural language of a district when conceiving a site-specific idea. I follow developments in materials and our ability to manipulate them because new possibilities give birth to new ideas.

My projects are the amalgamation and product of different interests. What is important is that despite their debt to the disciplines of architecture, construction and engineering they remain void of physical function. I personally find function a cage to creative freedom and feel creatively liberated by distancing myself from this responsibility. Like Wilson and Matta-Clark, the work is architectural in both scale and visual language but does not have a responsibility to functionality, which is the wonderful freedom of art.

1.2 Methodology 3. How has your work process & methodology evolved from project to project? Eg. moving from something much more discrete such as “telling the truth through false teeth”, to something much more public such as “take my lightning but don’t steal my thunder” Experience becomes increasingly important when realising projects of this scale, ambition and complexity to deliver them safely, on time and within budget.

Experience and a portfolio of previous accomplishments also helps to attract and ease possible commissioners.

At the same time, naivety is the mother of ambition: Having the experience and foresight to anticipate complications and obstacles can sometimes kill an idea before it has an opportunity to evolve.

I attempt to balance the above.

My ideas now evolve with logistical considerations in mind from the outset. These include plant access, planning consents, building regulations, structural loadings (wind, snow and slab) and of course finance.

The scale and ambitions of my projects have been allowed to evolve as budgets and opportunities have risen.

In order to realise my creative ambitions, my day to day process is consumed by logistics and administration. Public artworks of an architectural context are 5% creative and 95% planning, preparation and management. Where I was previously hands on, I now work with huge teams to execute each project. I collaborate closely with structural engineers, architectural consultants, fabricators, contractors, material manufacturers, planning consultants, commissioners and councils.

Where previously I would work alone, my ideas and ambitions are now beyond my physical capacity and technical ability to produce them. Collaboration is therefore a necessity for growth and the realisation of my ideas and objectives.

4. It appears from your published work, you often use “digital” sketches, At what point does this medium enter the process? Indeed, how is your work influenced by digital processes and fabrication?

With the scale and complexity of the projects that we are now producing the technical considerations are a very early part of the development process. Those particular considerations are primarily and principally structural.

Ideas are limitless but reality is limited to physics and finance. Calculations and digital drawings are managed by my engineers to establish if and how each idea is possible. I speak with my engineer almost every day.

68

The industry evolution and personal discovery of new materials and processes gives birth to new sculptural possibilities. With this in mind, I invest great time meeting new manufacturers and specialists. It is almost always these discoveries that generate my ideas, I simply introduce the potential of industry into artistic narratives and theatrical contexts.

The digital, technological and scientific elements within the process are therefore extremely important as it is the potential and limitations of these different areas that define the outcome of the project.

1.3 Working with Architects 5.To what degree do you work with architects/ Do you have architects working in the studio directly? OR is it purely in a consultancy/ secondary basis (as a necessity)?

I have the philosophy that the broader the pool of collaborators, the wider the realms of creative possibilities. I therefore always seek to work with new people in new ways.

I keep nothing and nobody in house so that I feel liberated from the responsibility to work the same person, same tool and most importantly same method each time.

I of course have repeat collaborators and that is principally my engineers. I work with the structural engineering practise Smith and Wallwork and Simon Smith, the Director, is my most important and regular collaborator.

My work with architectural consultants has been to liberate me from the administrational pressure a large scale very public artwork demands. This includes building regulation approval, planning consent, elevation studies and subcontractor relationships.

2.1 Dualism // Modernity in Art & Architecture

Author’s Interpretation of “Architecture’s Expanded Field” by Anthony Vidler, Art Forum 42, no.8 (2004)

ARCHITECTURE, ART & APPROPRIATE USE FOR EACH // THE DUAL CO “ARCHITECTURE IS THE EMBELLISHED MASK OF OUR GREATEST NEE “ARCHITECTURE HAS STRUGGLED TO REDUCE THIS DUALISM TO A S METAPHYSICAL UPLIFT OR ONE OF PURE FUNCTIONALISM AND ALL T PHASE OF MODERNISM HAS JUGGLED THE EQUATION ACCORDING TO

MODERNISM’S DUALISTIC MODEL

1 FUNCTION -> STRUCTURAL IN 2 METAPHYSICS -> SPIRITUAL U CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE’S SINGULAR MODEL

1 PROGRAM

“THE REAL AMBIGUITY BETWEEN SCULPTURE AND ARCHITECTURE E ABSTRACTION AS THE FORMAL LANGUAGE OF BOTH”

MODERNISM -> ABSTRACTION

“NOW, WITH THE INSTALLATION OF SCULPTURE IN THE PUBLIC REALM OF, SAY, RICHARD SERRA’S TORQUED ELLIPSES BY THE MOVING BOD TRADITIONALLY DEFINED ARE THROWN INTO DOUBT.”

ONFLICT IN ARCHITECTURE BETWEEN ART AND LIFE. ED” - JEAN LE ROND D’AMERBERT. SINGULARITY. THUS THE APPEALS TO AN ARCHITECTURE OF PURE THE SHADES OF FUNCTIONALIST AESTHETIC IN BETWEEN. EACH O ITS OWN STANDARDS OF POLITICS OR AESTHETICS.”

NTEGRITY/SPATIAL ECONOMY UPLIFT/SUBLIME EFFECT

EMERGED, OF COURSE; WITH THE MODERNIST ADOPTION OF

/ARCHITECTURE ->useful (language) \SCULPTURE ->useless

M AS A SPATIAL CONSTRUCTION AND THE NECESSARY OCCUPATION DY AS WELL AS THE PERCEIVING EYE, QUESTIONS OF “USE” AS

2.2 New Models in Architecture Today

Author’s Interpretation of “Architecture’s Expanded Field” by Anthony Vidler, Art Forum 42, no.8 (2004)

NEW MODELS IN ARCHITECTUR

LANDSCAPE -> A MODE OF ENVISAGING THE CONTINUUM OF THE B

THE BUILDING, THE CITY, THE SITE, THE TERRITORY

SCULPTURE -> A WAY OF DEFINING A NEW MONUMENTALITY, MONU

CHALLENGING THE POLITICAL CONNOTATIONS OF T

LANDSCAPE -> THE CONTINUU SCULPTURE -> NEW MONUMEN

FOLLOWING SEVERAL DECADES OF SELF-IMPOSED AUTONOMY, ARCH AGAINST NEORATIONALISM, PURE LANGUAGE THEORY, AND POSTMO DECADES EARLIER -HAS FOUND NEW FORMAL AND PROGRAMMATIC FROM LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE TO DIGITAL ANIMATION. - VIDLER

GRIDS -> FLOWS STRUCTURES -> NETWORKS HISTORY -> MAPS

RE’S EXPANDING FIELD TODAY:

BUILT & THE NATURAL, Y

UMENTALITY OF THE INFORME, THE OLD MONUMENT

UM OF THE BUILT/NATURAL NTALITY

HITECTURE HAS RECENTLY ENTERED A GREATLY EXPANDED FIELD. ODERN CITATION FEVER, ARCHITECTURE -LIKE SCULPTURE SOME INSPIRATION IN A HOST OF DISCIPLINES AND TECHNOLOGIES,

3.1 Architecture’s Evolutionary Tree - Charles Jencks

Charles Jencks, Architecture’s Evolutionary Tree (21st century edition) -original from Modern Movements in Architecture, 1973.This diagram highlights the complexity and difficulty in classifying the myriad of stylistic and disciplinary approaches in 20th century architecture.

3.2 Installation Art: Architecture in the Expanded Field

Ila Bermann & Douglas Bermann. Diagram relating Architecture to sculptrual endeavours including Installation Art. This diagram references and expands on Rosalind Krauss’ Original (1979) Klein Diagram.