Discontiguous Permanency by Kim Võ

DISCONTIGUOUS PERMANENCY

STUDIO 8

CATALOGUE

HAOYU CHEN

Studio 8

Triplicate: Stirling at Ca’ Corner Della Regina “The institutional setting of the museum functions paradoxically as the place for the generation, display and disappearance of architecture, at once affirming and suspending any evidence of architecture actually ‘being’ there. This architecture in pseudo-absentia has an uneasy relationship with the museum’s institutional order – it’s codes, practices, perceptual histories and blockbuster exhibitions. Architecture’s unease in the museum buttresses claims for the disciplinary autonomy of architecture and supposes the probability of the museum interior as a site for the emergence of new architectural modalities, co-dependent, and perhaps even independent of the museum. …Architecture born in the museum. Students will work with material from the James Stirling Archive at the Canadian Centre for Architecture (CCA), drawings and other documentation of the Venetian Palazzo Ca’ Corner della Regina (the Fondazione Prada venue in Venice), and catalogues of the current exhibition on show at Fondazione Prada Venezia titled Stop Painting (conceived by artist Peter Fischli).” Introduction by Scott Woods and Kim Vo

Led by Scott Woods and Kim Vo With Armature Globale Semester 2, 2021 Melbourne School of Design

Studio 8: Triplicate

Contents Prologue

Wayfinding Plans

Interview

Material

Works

Critics Review

Appendix I: Index

Appendix II: Notes

Knowledge Bank

102

Bibliography

110

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Prologue Venice is a floating city. Not only from its appearance, but also from the inside. Its buildings are like islands, inserted to the soft soil beneath, with long and indirect foundations. The exhibition, to the same extent, floats on the “container” of Ca’ Corner della Regina. The inserted system introduces a sense of flow to the heavy, monumental structures of Ca’ Corner, by creating both connection and blockage to the original circulation system. The two systems intersect and overlap; thus visitors experience uncertainty and distraction when moving around the collections. As a response to the idea of Stop Painting, some artworks can only be viewed in a state of movement while some are viewed standing still, some collections are inter-connected optically whiled blocked literally... The flow of people is the temporality, the Ca’ Corner being the permanency, and the exhibition is the mediator. The museum is intervened in this process of formulating the exhibition. The elements from Stirling’s museums became the phenomenal motifs within this exhibition. The heaviness of Ca’ Corner is scattered by the uncertainty and temporality of the exhibition; while the exhibition becomes permanent; it becomes something else: a building of discontiguous permanency. Haoyu Chen, October 2021 4

Studio 8: Triplicate

Photography from Armature Globale

Discontiguous Permanency Haoyu Chen | Studio D | 981016 Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Wayfinding Plans

Collection I

b g

10m

Studio 8: Triplicate

Let’s Go and Say No

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Boris Lurie, Untitled (NO Sprayed), 1963

Blinky Palermo, Untitled, 1967

Francis Picabla, Soleils, 1949

John Smith, Untitled, 2012

Merlin Carpenter, The Opening: Intrinsic Value: 5, 2009

Henry Flynt and Jack Smith protesting at The Museum of Modern Art, New York, 2007

Alberto Burri, Plastica, 1962

Wayfinding Plans Collection II

c b

a d

10m

Studio 8: Triplicate

Word Versus Image

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Pino Pascall, Lettera (C), 1964

John Baldessari, What is Painting, 1966-68

Jim Shaw, Hand Impaled by Knife with Melting Watch Out Window, 2020

Alighiero Boetti, Mimetico, 1967

Jim Shaw, Vines and Flowers, 2020

Wayfinding Plans Collection III

a e

10m

Studio 8: Triplicate

Mensch Maschine

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Piero Manzoni, Impronta pollice sinistro, 1960

Andrea Fraser, Untitled (de Kooning|Raphael) #1, 1984

Pinot Gallizio, Le acque del Nilo non passarono ad Alba, 1958

Merlin Carpenter, The Opening: Intrinsic Value: 5, 2009

Niki de Saint Phalle, Old Master (non tire), c. 1961

John Kelsey, Server Farm, 2013

Wayfinding Plans Collection IV

b e c f

10m

Studio 8: Triplicate

Readymades Belong to Everyone

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Marcel Dunchamp, Apolinere Enameled, 1916-17

Richard Hamilton, A Little Bit of Roy Lichtenstein for..., 1964

Morag Keil, Untitled (Piss Painting 1), 2014

Genoveva Filipovic, Daniel Murnaghan, Untitled, 2016

Ben Vautier, Buvez Coca Cola frais, 1960

Sturtevant, Johns Flag, 1966

“Andy Warhol BMW Art Car #4”, 1979

Wayfinding Plans Collection V

f g

10m

Studio 8: Triplicate

Spelling Backwards

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Marcel Dunchamp, DEP-MK-033, 2017

Josh Smith, Untitled, 2006

Puppies Puppies, Painting to Pay for My Healthcare, 2019

Ushio Shinohara, Drink More, 1965

Gerhard Richter, Farbtafel, 1966

Josh Smith, Untitled, 2006

John Armleder, Untitled, 1979-80

Wayfinding Plans Collection VI

c d

e f

10m

Studio 8: Triplicate

Next to Nothing

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Ben Vautire, Banane, 1970

Francis Picabia, Point, 1951

Gene Beery, As Long As There Are Walls There will be Paintings!, 1986

Martin Barre, 67-Z-18-43x40, 1967

Lucio Fontana, lo sono un santo, 1958

Ben Vautire, Banane, 1959

Ben Vautire, Banane, 1958

Wayfinding Plans Collection VII

b c d

10m

Studio 8: Triplicate

Die Hard: Stirb Langsam, Duri a Morire

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Asger Jorn, Anisi on s’Ensor, 1962

Asger Jorn, The Sweet Life II, 1962

Boris Lurie, NO-ON, 1962

Kurf Schwitters, Still Life in Gray, 1914-15

Kurf Schwitters, Still Life with Flowers and Tin Plate, 1914

Boris Lurie, Stenciled NOs, 1969

Wayfinding Plans Collection VIII

10m

Studio 8: Triplicate

Delirium of Negation

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

James Clerk Maxwell, Print from a set of tri-color separation negatives reproducing a tartan rosette, 1930

Kurf Schwitters, Untitled, 1934

Paul Delaroche, Cromwell and Charles 1st, after 1831

Kurf Schwitters, A Dim Bulb, 1947

Lucio Fontana, lo sono un santo, 1958

Interview

Q + A with Francis Robert Burne Thompson Francis Thompson (T): What did you find most challenging when working with sterling's material from the CCA Archive? Haoyu Chen (C): It is the facts that the design moves or the attitude between Sterling’s work are vastly differentiated from the Ca’ Corner della Regina. The latter has a lot of historical reference to the Venetian context while the former is mostly theoretical. So, yeah, I think it's how to find the kind of link of the past and combining this to a different, modern attitude to form a singularity of project that’s most challenging. T: Do you think styling is still relevant for contemporary discourse? C: Yeah, I think his personality or attitude is relevant to today’s architecture in a theoretical way. You remember that in the archive there was a “selfie” of him with collage of his eyes of red colour? Yes. Because I think it's quite avant-garde, right? It's almost like the profile image of some contemporary social media influencers. And that’s quite advanced of his time. He also had a lot of writings about the theoretical backgrounds of many of his buildings, design moves. And these never die! T: And what do you think are the challenges of thinking the museum beyond the container for art? What is exhibited and what does the exhibition in your museum project? Is it that simple?

C: Surely its challenging. I think the biggest challenge is to really get into the Stop Painting archive. Because we are not just repeating the exhibition, but the new exhibition also becomes the formulation of the new building. It's actually changing the whole projects a lot especially when I was dealing with the temporality of the exhibition and the permanency of the Ca’ Corner building. It is hard to find a justification for the choice: whether I focus on the exhibition of all the paintings, artworks, or the permanent entity, you know, a monument. T: So, what are the challenges that you've encountered when working with the Ca’ Corner building? C: I think the Venetian context is the most challenging thing. I have been working with this project in a state of autonomy. By which, I mean, I tried to combine the Sterling’s elements, the archive, and the theoretical ideas into one entity, but regardless of Venetian context, which is something I think I like, and should be there, which I didn't think a lot. The other thing is when I was thinking of the bank, the canal, and the alleys, they are all coming together, linking the building. So this kind of micro circulations also formulated the building, which is insightful for me. T: And in terms of the role of technology in exhibition, design, how concerned are you with it for your design? And in what capacity? C: Yeah, I think technology is very important. Well not because of the use of these high-tech things to represent the artworks in the exhibition, but the way that technology has an important role in the is the idea of forming the system.

Studio 8: Triplicate

Because the overuse of technology is the major concern for the ideals of Stop Painting, when we have the reproducibility of artefacts, this kind of accessibility of paintings, so people have an ignorance of the context of the paintings, which formed this idea. Yes, I got the back story of the Stop Painting, which becomes roughly the formulation of the project. So yes, I think it is a big thing. T: And does the idea of exhibition or display technology, change your conception of museum architecture as a whole? C: Yes, to some extents, but not the overall formulation or the overall composition of the project, but in terms of the little moments of the apparatus inside. I think it is the display [of the exhibition] that connects the permanency and the temporality of projects all together within the different moments where I was considering how the scenographic view of the visitors would be inside these rooms, inside the building. So yeah, I think it's a very good question, and it changed the conceptual of, you know, the moments. T: How would you describe an architecture that exists solely inside the museum? And how could that architecture be different architecture that exists? Outside the museum. C: This is a hard one. [laughter] I would probably align my project with the La Congiunta Museum in Switzerland, by Peter Markli. I think architecture can exist solely inside the museum, but it has to have some kind of iconography, or monumentality, that makes itself beyond the appearance. It has to have some kind of soul that doesn’t have to link to the exhibition, but has its own concept. For example, the memory of the building, the image of the building.

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Despite the form, its soul, its iconography, should go beyond and expand itself to take its position inside the city; not only a museum that works as a container. So yeah, I think to go beyond this idea of museum, architecture has to become monument rather than container. Yeah, this idea not only exists in museum, right? Even it's not a museum, it must have an image that goes beyond its original function which makes it nuanced, as a building inside the city. T: Has your project for museum, changed your position or attitude to architecture more generally? If yes, how? C: Inevitably, yes. Although I try not to, [laughter] because I want to keep some of my own ideas, my own styles to perform the project. But inevitably yes, because I think this project has forced me to think more of the urban context, the Venice. To think about the relationship between the forms of final project and the concept, the big idea behind Stop Painting. I think it's very interesting that this project is not formed by some kind of architecture theory but a theory from many modern artists, like the essays written for Stop Painting. So when I try to combine the form of the project and the big idea, this is the challenge and it is different from any project that I have done before, which yeah, which makes me to think about this idea more and the importance of this kind of relation between my form and the justification behind it, you know? So yes. This kind of linkage has formulated my ideas more generally.

Material

Stirling archive materials from CCA

Studio 8: Triplicate

Material 1:

Nordrhein-Westfalen Museum, Dusseldorf, Germany

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Studio 8: Triplicate

Material 2:

Clore Gallery

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Material 3:

Staatsgalerie Stuttgart

Studio 8: Triplicate

Readings on Clore Gallery

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Works Discontiguous Permanency It is a permanency created not by the heaviness or the monumentality of the old Venetian Palazzo, but by the uncertainty and blockage from the inserted systems. The original exhibition in Ca’ Corner has a sense of certainty which involves its orthogonal division of rooms. However, the introduced circulation system, which originates from the small, hidden room of Ca’ Corner, has formed a distraction to the original subdivision, the artworks. In this era of social media and technologies, artworks have often been viewed in this state of distraction - people stopped caring about the narratives, stories - paintings are in crisis. This insertion takes the opportunities of distraction, and puts the visitors on movement when viewing the paintings: the collections are located in the middle of the circulations, stairs, corridors. The constant flow of people and the stillness of the painting have come to a contrast, becoming a mechanism of temporality and permanency. Both flow and blockage are formed with the distracting circulations between collections. The collections “float” on the vessel of Ca’ Corner like the way Venetian Palazzos float on the water: the foundations of the buildings are made without knowing the uncertain depth of the stiff soil below. The exhibitions, however, extend their extremities to the ground level, to the city, becoming a permanent collection. The exhibition intervenes this blockage and contrast, between the permanency of city, ruins, paintings, and the constant flow of people, technology, and distraction. 32

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Museum Office Museum Office

Model of Ca'Corner

Main Entrance

Archive

Courtyard

Elevator Lobby Warehouse

Side Entrance

Calle Corner

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

10m

1:200 @a3 35

Plan - Piano Ammezzato 36

Studio 8: Triplicate

a - Die Hard: Stirb Langsam, Duri a Morire b - Spelling Backwards c - Readymades Belong to Everyone d - Mensch Maschine 1

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

10m

1:200 @a3 37

Plan - Piano 1st Noble 38

Studio 8: Triplicate

a - Delirium of Negation b - Die Hard: Stirb Langsam, Duri a Morire c - Next to Nothing d - Spelling Backwards e - Readymades Belong to Everyone f - Mensch Maschine g - Word Versus Image h - Let’s Go and Say No 1

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

10m

1:200 @a3 39

Plan - Piano 2nd Noble 40

Studio 8: Triplicate

a - Delirium of Negation b - Die Hard: Stirb Langsam, Duri a Morire c - Next to Nothing d - Readymades Belong to Everyone e - Mensch Maschine f - Word Versus Image g - Let’s Go and Say No 1

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

10m

1:200 @a3 41

Section A

Studio 8: Triplicate

1 2

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

10m

Section B

Studio 8: Triplicate

1 2

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

10m

Section C

Section D

Studio 8: Triplicate

Section E

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

1 2

10m

Apparatus 1

Studio 8: Triplicate

City and domesticated system

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Apparatus 2

Studio 8: Triplicate

The overlapped systems

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Apparatus 3

Studio 8: Triplicate

The miniature

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Critic’s review Written by George Willmott

Haoyu Chen’s redevelopment of the palazzo Ca’ Corner della Regina begins to redistribute and collage both the tangible physical material of the building with it’s intangible connections to Architect James Stirling, and the Museum as an architectural typology. The result is an architecture of repetition and interruption; lucidity and disorientation. In the project, reference is engaged primarily as image. All relationships are retained, while manipulated through the intricate relationships Haoyu develops between them. The museum reads as both the existing Venetian Palazzo and several uncanny versions of the building, drifting through one another with moments of convergence, cinched, fastened, and built upon. These moments are without clear hierarchy and operate almost as frescoes. These compositions of reference and site nested within the project, exist between tectonic assemblage and still-life. These constructed scenes act as a structure for the museum’s modes of display and exhibition. With their autonomy obscuring distinctions between installation and architecture and their associated transience. Instead, the exhibition materialises as the most lucid component of the new museum, with a permanence directly tied to a perceived impermanence of the museum’s architecture. Walls shift and break through existing datum in service of the new permanent collection. The dissonance between the Ca’ Corner and Stirling Archive (CAA) rather than being processed at a micro scale is ignored and instead left to eerily manifest at project scale. In the sense that the project chooses to include and associate even the disparate, then allow both connections, overlaps and incongruities to manifest between scenes. Haoyu’s bricolage can be traced to the Stirling archive. Stirling compasses scenes of collaged object exhibited in field. These scenes have been collected, multiplied, and recomposed as a field of fields or compositions of precomposed. October 2021 54

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Appendix I: index Phase 1: Objects

Object 1

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Object 2

Studio 8: Triplicate

Object 3

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Studio 8: Triplicate

The Thresholds i. Resistance - Asymmetry of Rotation and Frontality ii. Transparency - Disjunction of Literal and Phenomenal Transparency iii. Operation - Flexibility of Folding/Offsetting/Projection

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Appendix I: index Phase 2: Museum

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Main Section

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Facade Elevation

Studio 8: Triplicate

Perspectives

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

The objects - on ground

Studio 8: Triplicate

“Tectonic” Drawings

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Appendix II: notes Week 1

Studio 8: Triplicate

Images from Notes on the Modern Museum (left) Progress on Object (right)

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Reading notes

Anthony Vidler Losing Face: Notes on the Modern Museum “Renaissance building owed its special qualities as an architecture of humanism to its direct analogies, in theory and physical presence, to the human body.” In this sense, the way Stirling designed the Staatsgalerie in Stuttgart is not a humanist way, for the facade (face) is missing in this building, hence it’s a body without a face. However, Colin Rowe also argued that the façades are “inevitably as risk” because of the invention of Maison Domini by Le Corbusier. The free plan, self-standing columns and horizontal slabs have eliminated the necessity of “façades”. Hence the façades have became a light, permeable structure such as curtain walls. So can we argue the façades have become unnecessary in modern architecture, or it has become something else? Renaissance architects tend to take “humanism” a little “too literally”, ie. they are trying to find more direct analogies between a “facade” and a “face”, the glazing being eyes, the gate being the mouth etc. So the facade of the building should be a “mirror” of its interior because “the face is the mirror of the soul”, and the missing of a facade is a missing of “personalities”. Take the Altes Museum in Berlin (figure 3)as another example, according to Rowe, it’s the same idea as Stirling’s Staatsgalerie but with a facade. They both have a “Pantheon”-like rotunda at the centre, and the stairs at the front directing people to the upper levels. But does the existence of a facade make the Altes Museum so different from the Staatsgalerie? The facade of Altes Museum, is just a “colonnade”, with a “permeability hardly indicative if the thick and vertical wall-plane”. Yes it is revealing its “soul” as a face, but it’s not hiding the interior as a face. Therefore we can argue, the “facade” of the Altes Museum is a veil rather than a face. It face lies in somewhere inside - its internal walls, stairs etc. So does this mean the design of Staatsgalerie is not “humanist”? Because all it’s missing is just a veil, but not a face. It’s face should still be somewhere inside, being both “veiling and unveiling”.

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 2

Reading notes

Pages from Ca Corner della Regina_FP_2011 In the previous pages I showed an image on the interior of the Ca’ Corner Della Regina building to relate to the descriptions on the transparency of the facade. However, the model I have made of the windows was based on the exterior of the building, which caused some confusions in class. This tells us the interior and exterior of the facade actually gave people very different feelings that people can’t recognize the same element from the two sides. If the facade is the veil of a building and the interior being its soul, the veil must have some sort of control over the form, to create these different feelings. From the exterior, the power of the facade is much bigger than the body of the building, and the geometry of the body is completely clinging to the face, being controlled. But from the interior, the situation is different. It is not about controlling or being controlled. But there are some detachment between the geometry of the facade and the inner parts. We can still tell a facade is a facade because of the light it provides from the glazing, and the revealing of outside views. The decorations of the interior elements are extended to the inner side of the facade wall, making it coherent. So on the interior, the powers of the face and the body are equal. This is similar to the case of the Axonometric drawing by Stirling. Although the “Rotunda” is an element he was trying to highlight, there is no controlling of a geometry on another. All elements seem to be broken up with no specific hierarchy. This “breaking up” of elements is reflected by the ambiguity of the walls and the absence of the facades in his drawing. The 2nd iteration has portrayed the object as a re-defined entrance of the museum. As argued previously, the connection between the “face” and the “soul” should be a Stoa for visitors. So the focus here is the hierarchy between the face, soul and Stoa. The geometry from the outside of the entrance is predominantly controlled by the element of the face - the window of Ca’ Corner. The elements on the behind seem to be clinging on the facade, and hidden behind the frames. The structure of the rotunda is carved by the curves of the arch. And on the inside, the elements are scattered. The geometries are broken apart, eliminating the influence of the face. So the hierarchy here is not between the “face” and ‘Soul” anymore. But it’s a hierarchy between the symbolisms. The power of the Stoa is controlling the Acropolis part or the face of the building. The entrance of the museum becomes a place for people to play around, to occupy and to have a glance at the soul of the museum.

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Studio 8: Triplicate

Progress on Object

Exterior

Interior Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 3

Studio 8: Triplicate

Images from L’Architecture dans le Boudoir

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 4

Reading notes

Manfredo Tafuri L’Architecture dans le Boudoir How Manfredo Tafuri used the word “reassemblage” to describe Stirling’s approach of designing. (While Colin Rowe used the word “bricolage”.) I think reassemblage is more spatial - his works have a lot of references (most of them are conceptual) to history, modernism, avant-garde, but these references are dealt with in a gentle way - an “ambiguous and wry dialogue with history”, etc. (For example, The Civic Centre in Derby.) This is why Tafuri has been describing Stirling’s works as “texts” or dialogues rather than a “explosion of imaginary utopia”. The Leicester University is a perfect example of such “reassemblage”. There is an irony or conceptual destruction in the colliding of two volumes in this building. The tower of the laboratory is a volume that is meant to be monumental, for it stands as a gate facing the visitors. The larger volume at the back is a shed covering the office blocks, is meant to be an element of light, thin and “de-materialised”. The two volumes act just like the “Acropolis” and “Stoa” part of a museum, one is for its monumental meanings, the other is for interactions and functions. However, Stirling treated the “monumental tower” with thin, permeable glass surfaces, while treated the other volume with “prisms” - a form of some kind of symbol. The two forms are colliding each other, but ironically. This doorway of Ca’ Corner’s courtyard has a very similar assemblage as the Leicester University building. The columns and the entablature are heavy, solid and monumental elements, but the door and glazings at the behind are very thin and transparent. I took the two elements and made them into a “reassemblage”. The heavy entablature of the courtyard is replaced with the “prisms” from Leicester building. So the literal void of these light structures takes the place of the conceptual heavy or solid of the entablatures. The glazed doorway on the behind, is intervened with the solid brick walls of the Leicester building - literal solid takes place of the conceptual void. The tilting of bricks is a reference to the tilting of the old facade of Civic Centre of Derby. Its a reverse of solid and void of elements, and a reverse of symbolic meanings of elements and their literal forms, to make it a reassemblage. 80

Studio 8: Triplicate

Working progress on the objects

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 5

Studio 8: Triplicate

Working progress on the objects

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 6

Studio 8: Triplicate

Pages from The Cunning Of Cosmetics by Kipnis

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 7

Studio 8: Triplicate

Neues Museum on Berlin’s Museum Island Friedrich August Stüler

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 8

Studio 8: Triplicate

Working progress on the museum

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 9

Studio 8: Triplicate

Images from The office copier and baptism by colour: working for Rossi in the 1990s

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Studio 8: Triplicate

Images from The office copier and baptism by colour: working for Rossi in the 1990s

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 10

Studio 8: Triplicate

Images of La Congiunta Museum in Switzerland, by Peter Markli (left) Working progress on the exhibition (right)

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 11

Studio 8: Triplicate

Page from The Manhattan Transcripts (left) Working progress on the drawings (right)

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

Week 12

100

Studio 8: Triplicate

The foundations of Venetian palazzos (left) Working progress on the drawings (right)

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

101

Knowledge Bank

102

Studio 8: Triplicate

Pages from L’Architecture dans le Boudoir Manfredo Tafuri

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

103

104

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

105

Pages from The Narrative of the End’s coming to an End or is it Sarah Lehrer-Graiwer

106

Studio 8: Triplicate

Pages from Frontality vs. Rotation Kenneth Frampton

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

107

Pages from Losing Face: Notes on the Modern Museum

Anthony Vidler

108

Studio 8: Triplicate

Pages from The Cultural Logic of the Late Capitalist Museum

Rosalind Krauss

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

109

Bibliography Eisenman, Peter, Michael Graves, and Charles Gwathmey. 1975. Five Architects. New York: Oxford University Press. Krauss, Rosalind. 1990. “The Cultural Logic Of The Late Capitalist Museum”. October 54: 3. doi:10.2307/778666. Krauss, Rosalind E. 2010. The Originality Of The Avant-Garde And Other Modernist Myths. Cambridge, Mass. u.a.: MIT Press Rowe, Colin, and Robert Slutzky. 1963. “Transparency: Literal And Phenomenal”. Perspecta 8: 45. doi:10.2307/1566901. Tafuri, Manfredo. 1980. L’architettura Dell’umanesimo. Roma: Laterza. Tschumi, Bernard, and Robert Young. 1994. Bernard Tschumi, The Manhattan Transcripts. London: Academy Ed. Vidler, Anthony. 2010. James Frazer Stirling. New Haven: Yale Center for British Art. Vidler, Anthony. “Losing Face: Notes on the Modern Museum.” Assemblage, no. 9 (1989): 41–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/3171151.

110

Studio 8: Triplicate

Haoyu Chen | Discontiguous Permanency

111