Organisers | GAA Foundation
Hosted by | European Cultural Centre
Location | Palazzo Bembo
Date | 26th May to 25th November 2018
We exist in the space between.
The dimension and quality of the containment of space on one hand delivers the function and the politic, and on the other hand the possibility to touch our emotions.
How do dimension and scale affect how we behave?
What is harmony and how do we know we are in it/ seeing it?
What is "sense of place"?
Is space political : the politics of space
Can the design of space nudge behaviours?
How does the design of our environments affect our wellbeing?
Do materials make a difference to how we feel?
What is our relationship with space?
Can design be in the toolbox for social change?
Can design be a catalyst for change?
Can it be measured?
If the design of the environment was driven soley by the corporeal; by the body. Would we be here now discussing “design”?
In so far as we “exist” the ergonomics are a given but the space that we occupy…is it just a question of function?
Is it really just about how much room we need between "action" A and "action" B?
What is the value of space?
Or what are the values of space?
What lies between?
Does it influence the performance or do we perform in it?
Subjectively one person’s value on space...
What semiphorics are communicated when a simple function is imbued with extra space?
What happens when you compress a “given” ergonomic? Say in Being John Malcovic.
How do we perform differently/ behave differently?
What happens when the observer sees space from a new angle? The act of the belvedere renegogiates one’s relation to the collective. The individual and the city.
How has technology and the individual and the collective altered our perceptions and norms on the use and size and presence of space.
Our very own awareness of our own self image is willed onto singular projects and masterminds persuasive and extensive spatial rules.
The performative arrangements of objects, surfaces and scales create powerful, political, divisive, celebratory, ritualistic, provocative anti-gravitional sequential spaces with configurations that recall ancient geometries and invoke provocations on established typologies.
As our lexicon of spatial typologies grows so too does the ability to allow the play of juxtaposition, overlap compression, scaling of these to create new performances, programmatic mash ups, allowing a new dance to unfold….
SO…..How conscious are we of the whispers that influence how much space we think we should have?
The socio political
Consumption versus need
Death of distance (star trek)
Laws of aesthetics
Time based experience: direct and the indirect...
The scenographic / old stories / new stories
In a dance between the subjective and objective we can provocate and interrogate the givens, we can listen and search wider and deeper to test out new notions.
In Venice, the spatial dance between the proportion of alleys, the cadence of stairs, the water’s edge, the visual span of the grand vista, the suspended moment on the flat peak of the Rialto, is almost intact from those days of Canaletto. Through the words of Calvino, the recordings of the vedutisti, Stendhal’s prognosis, the ultimate commercial flattery of a “replica” in Las Vegas, and now the proliferation of #s from those selfies, we can surmise that we really “like” Venice. But what is it that we like? Is it the desire to record in person those intact grand vistas first exported with the Grand Tourers?
In Las Vegas, at the Venetian, they inadvertently answered this question by building an architectural copy paste of those big hitters, engineering an image-capture-top-ten-journey to the belly of the Casino. But the Rialto (on travelator) segue to the first floor of the Doge’s Palace etc. misses the derive, the detournage, the getting lost, that augments and agglomerates. The deletion of the journeys between renders the opiate quest of finding the trophy view all too easy. In Vegas the engineered edit probably delivered what was intended.
In Venice, we are curious to study the spatial choreography of the unedited. We have created a site specific and interactive installation, occupying the rear view windows of the Palazzo Bembo, mapping an imaginary desire line from a dislocated view to its original siting. The layers of the route are viewed through the lens of human scale and the laws of reflection. The work we have started here in Venice illustrates a design process that we use in the studio. We apply these principals to internal and external situations and across diverse scales. At the centre of the approach is a curiosity about the effect that design has on the relationship we have with the scale and permeability of the containment of an atmosphere.
Design Team : Jenny Jones, Christina Huber, Mara Huber, Lucy Irvine, Dionne Griffith
Staircase : Shape Design & Build
Metalwork: Benedict Radcliffe & Tom Guitteraz
Window Reprographics : Insite Graphics
Note Pad Stair Reprographics: LT Print Group Ltd
Film Supply: Contravision Sponsorship
Canaletto Permission: Institute de France Musée Jacquemart-André Paris, MJAP-P 577-1© Studio Sébert Photographes
Special Thank you to: Dr Gian Luca Amadei Stephanie Buttle Paul Raeside Steve Wallington Tim Warren Nini Zhou all at GAA Foundation and Palazzo Bembi