Page 1

Rehabilitation

Dirk Snauwaert Rehabilitation

0. Leonor Antunes

(p. 117-122)

(p. 123-130)

Dieter Roelstraete, Home Is Where The Art Is 1. (p. 131-138)

Alexandra Leykauf

4. Falke Pisano

(p. 153-160)

5. Tobias Putrih

(p. 161-166)

pia rønicke

6.

(p. 167-174)

7. Oscar Tuazon

(p. 175-184)

8. (p. 185-208) Armando Andrade Tudela

2. David Maljkovic

(p. 139-144)

Gigiotto Del Vecchio, David Maljkovic

Suely Rolnik, The Body’s Contagious Memory. Lygia Clark’s Return to the Museum

3. Manfred Pernice

(p. 145-152)

UP

9.

(p. 209-216)


Experience and Poverty

0.

in : Michael W. Jennings (ed.), Walter Benjamin. Selected Writings. Volume 2, part 2, 1931-1934 (Cambridge, London : The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 731-736.

1


Rehabilitation

2


3


4


5


6


Henry-Russel Hitchcock The International Style Twenty Years After

1.

Architectural Record 8 (1951), pp. 89-97.

7


8


9


10


11


12


13


14


15


Alan Colquhoun The Modern Movement in Architecture The British Journal of Aesthetics 1 (1962), pp. 59-65.

16

2.


17


18


André Rottmann Reflexive systems of reference. Approximations to ‘referentialism’ in contemporary art

13.

Texte zur Kunst 71 (2008), pp. 155-164.

97


98


99


100


101


102


103


104


105


106


Rehabilitation. The legacy of the Modern Movement. An anthology of 13 +1 texts

0. This book collects texts dealing with the legacy of the modernist architecture that knew its heyday somewhere between 1920 and 1950. The selection makes no claim to be exhaustive; the main aim is to reconstruct a theoretical and historical evolution. Therefore, this anthology does not try to define what architectural modernism ‘really’ was - instead, it looks at the way writers, historians, critics, architects and philosophers have positioned themselves and their era in connection to and in confrontation with this Modern Movement. That is why texts written between 1920 and 1950 are mostly absent. Many famous authors were an eyewitness to the beginnings of modernity, modernism and the Modern Movement in architecture. But very few of them have succeeded in combining these revolutionary events with the immediate construction of a historical perspective. Walter Benjamin is one of them: his short essay ‘Experience and Poverty’, written in 1933, combines the happy and progressive undertones of modernism, with a subtle but unmistakable criticism of modernity. Benjamin explains how the architecture of Adolf Loos and Le Corbusier is unthinkable

without the atrocities of World War I and the abstractions of the Industrial Revolution. Modernism is rooted in a profound ‘poverty’ and in an impossibility of truly human - or at least classic and old-fashioned - ‘experience’. Although this state does lead to new beginnings and affirmative possibilities - it goes hand in hand with ‘a total absence of illusion’ and with inhuman situations. This dialectic has, even in our time, not reached a synthesis; these two extremes are the poles that have defined the magnetic field of our dealings with the Modern Movement. It was Benjamin who first understood that this field is modern life itself, and that every reaction to modernity in general, crystallizes and is most eminently present in a reaction to modernist architecture. It is, in other words, quite possible to say: tell me what you think about modernist architecture, and I will tell you who you are. ‘They have “devoured” everything,’ Benjamin writes, ‘both “culture and people”, and they have had such a surfeit that it has exhausted them.’ The modernists have swallowed and digested history, and this has enabled them to make a clean break, and develop their radical modernist architecture. Nowadays, at the beginning of the 21th century, the impression might develop that we, in our turn, have ‘devoured and digested’ modernism and modernity itself. The texts that are gathered in this collection show testimonies of this process of diges-

107


tion, and hint at the amount of material that is still waiting to be effectively devoured. 1. The enormous enterprise of coming to terms with modernist architecture starts at an early stage, at a time when many of the emblematic realisations are not yet conceived. In 1931, the director of the still very young Museum of Modern Art in New York, Alfred Barr, asks architect Philip Johnson and architectural historian Henry-Russell Hitchcock to organize an international exhibition of modern architecture. Hitchcock and Johnson coin one of the many terms that have circulated since the thirties to point at modernist architecture: the International Style. As this epithet indicates, they regard modernist architecture as one of the first truly global, or at least transatlantic, cultural phenomena. The exhibition and the catalogue show works from European and American pioneers, but it does also include a section devoted to the ‘Extent of Modern Architecture’ in which lesser-known and more nationally diverse work is shown. In the article that is reproduced here, Henry-Russell Hitchcock looks back on ‘The International Style’ in 1951, by commenting directly on his introduction from 1931. Calling a style international seems an impossible or paradoxical thing to do: a style is a set of features that define something or someone, and that install a clear distinction from everyone or everything else. When a style is

108

international, it belongs to everyone, and it is no longer a style. As early as 1951, Hitchcock is putting the generalizing aspects of the Modern Movement into perspective: it should not ‘be considered the only proper pattern or program for modern architecture.’ So modernism is a style after all: one can chose for it, but one can neglect it as well. Directly after World War II, the revolutionary and all-embracing aspects of modernist architecture are left behind. The modernists are not to be followed irrationally; ‘The mistake made by many readers’, writes Hitchcock, ‘was to assume that what the authors offered as a diagnosis and a prognosis was intended to be used as an academic rule-book.’ Nevertheless, this is exactly what happens in the fifties and sixties: modernism becomes a style in the pejorative sense of the word: it is reproduced endlessly in the form of second-rate versions; it soon is truly ‘international’, but it has lost most of its value in the process. 2. It might seem strange that the fate and the evolution of modern architecture are inextricably bound up with its own historiography. On the other hand, architecture does not exist when it is not spoken about; what we talk about when we talk about architecture is an equal and undeniable part of architecture itself. The re-evaluation of the strange but wonderful buildings that were built by such confident individuals during the twenties and the thirties, takes up a lot of space


in architectural thought ever since. Immediately, however, the criticism of historiography emerges: not only is the architecture of the recent past evaluated, historians compare and weigh each other’s methods. In 1962, the British critic and architect Alan Colquhoun reviews Theory and Design in the First Machine Age, published in 1960 by Reyner Banham. Banham’s book is one of the first post-war histories of the Modern Movement, and as the title states, it interprets modernist architecture as an embodiment of the conditions of its own era. By preferring the architecture of the futurists and of Buckminster Fuller to that of Le Corbusier and Mies van der Rohe, Banham wants to underscore that modernist architecture was never modern enough. It always presented a compromise between tradition and progress, and therefore could never unfold its truly utopian potential. Colquhoun does not follow Banham in his disapproval of this halfheartedness: ‘Banham has demonstrated that many of the overt aims of the movement were not achieved; but it may as well be that these aims themselves were often of doubtful value, and that the true meaning of the movement lies in the unconscious substratum of the theory and is to be recognized in the works themselves.’ 3. The most joyful and grateful homage that has been paid to modernist architecture is written down in 1965

by Alison and Peter Smithson. Already in 1959, the Smithsons start, together with architects such as Aldo van Eyck or Giancarlo de Carlo, the splinter group Team X. This faction tears itself off from the institutionalized CIAM (the ‘Congrès International d’Architecture Moderne’) in order to keep alive the true progressive and social nature of modernist architecture. In their own publication ‘The Heroic Period of Modern Architecture’, The Smithsons are first in developing a method of dealing with the Modern Movement that still stands strong today, and that is already apparent in the review by Alan Colquhoun. Modernist architecture should not be regarded and preserved as a whole; it is not a coherent and comprehensive theory or an ideological view on society or the future of mankind - the legacy of the Modern Movement is intrinsically architectural. It involves itself with design methods, formal characteristics, and programmatic decisions. Not by accident, the most famous and most quoted fragment of Le Corbusier’s many writings, would become this one (from Vers une architecture from 1923): ‘L’architecture est le jeu, savant, correcte et magnifique des volumes sous la lumière.’ The Smithsons start their heroic period of the Modern Movement in 1910 - and already close it up in 1929, ‘when absolute conviction in the movement died’. They select a canon of images of realisations - by Loos, Gropius, Le Corbusier, Perret and Oud - but do not explicitly theorize the movement as

109


a movement. What matters to them, and to many subsequent generations of architects, are the concrete works in itself, as emblematic and heroic examples. ‘The Heroic Period of Modern Architecture is the rock on which we stand,’ they write. ‘Through it we feel the continuity of history and the necessity of achieving our own idea of order.’ The modernist architecture presented here, however, is no such thing as a rock made by natural history - it more likely resembles a neatly built wall, in which the individual buildings are the bricks. 4. From that point onwards, the evaluation of contemporary architecture will necessarily be grounded on a comparison with the avant-garde of the twenties and the thirties. It is as if architecture is defined in these decennia: every new form of architecture can be different or not, but it can never succeed in being not relative to the Modern Movement. The British but Americanised architectural historian Colin Rowe shows the extent of this predicament very clearly in his introduction to the book Five Architects, the catalogue to an exhibition that presents (in 1967 and again in the MoMa) the work of five emerging American architectural practices, later on known as the New York Five: Peter Eisenman, Michael Graves, Charles Gwathmey, John Hedjuk and Richard Meier. Rowe announces two features that in the seventies and the eighties would start to dominate

110

the architectural debate - and overshadow the Modern Movement. Firstly: modernist architecture was not concerned with the production of meaning; and secondly: since World War II modernist architecture has started to dominate the world in a watereddown, commercial and worthless form. Rowe counters these arguments by calling into life something that could be called the architectural ‘author’: the architect does not simply follow or execute the demands of society or of technological developments. This position - indeed exemplified by the New York Five - paves the way for a specific kind of architectural autonomy that does not explicitly concern itself with utopian or social objectives. ‘It is an argument’, Rowe writes, ‘largely about the physique of building and only indirectly about its morale.’ One could, in retrospect and as a blow-up of Rowe’s writings, define the time of the Modern Movement as the last era in which the physique and the morale of architecture succeeded in appearing to be one and the same. 5. Like every patricide, the attack on and the critique of modernist architecture has always been a way of trying to justify the inevitable condition of contemporary architecture. Because contemporary architecture can no longer resemble the modernist examples, the ancestors, or at least their legacies, are condemned and murdered. No one has popularized - and caricatured in spite of himself -


this attitude more attractively than the American architectural theoretician Charles Jencks. In a way, Jencks does to the critique and the evaluation of modernism, what the building industry and the property development do to the Modern Movement. In fact, Charles Jencks succeeded in defining the exact beginning of what came to be known as postmodernism - in the most literal sense the end of modernism or at least the condition that emerges ‘after’ modernism. ‘Modern architecture’, he writes in his many times republished book The language of post-modern architecture, ‘expired finally and completely in 1972, after having been flogged to death remorselessly for ten years by critics such as Jane Jacobs; and the fact that many so-called modern architects can still go around practising a trade as if it were alive can be taken as one of the great curiosities of our age.’ According to Jencks, modern architecture died in St Louis, Missouri on July 15, 1972 at 3:32 p.m. when the ‘infamous PruittIgoe scheme, or rather several of its slab blocks, were given the final coup de grâce by dynamite.’ The rise of postmodernist architecture can begin. 6. And still, in more sophisticated intellectual milieus, the debate on modernist architecture continues. As it proved impossible to define an era or a style without referring to modernism, even in a time when ‘historicizing’ architecture seems the rule, the

design methods of for example Le Corbusier keep on provoking interest and wonder. The American architect Peter Eisenman presents in his writings and in his architecture, a highly conscious and cerebral appropriation of the attainments of modernism. In his essay ‘Aspects of Modernism: Maison Dom-ino and the Self-Referential Sign’, Eisenman describes ‘the birth of a Modernist sensibility that is to parallel and even supersede classical Western thought’. The Maison Domino was developed in 1914 by Le Corbusier as the building principle of the ‘free plan’ or the ‘plan libre’. By radically simplifying the building structure, it became possible for architects to create a floor plan that was by no means whatsoever bound by external obligations or conditions. On the one hand, the free plan made it possible, in an era of post-war reconstruction, to build houses quickly and rationally. On the other hand, the architectural program could be developed flexibly and at free will. Eisenman interprets the oeuvre of Le Corbusier in particular and of the Modern Movement in general as ‘an architecture about architecture’: it is no longer concerned with social or historical ideals, but refers only to itself. In a reaction to earlier readings of modernism (by, for example, Colin Rowe), Eisenman hollows out the classic and humanist utopian potential of modernism, and rescues it for a self-conscious and realist era, far beyond any form of illusion.

111


7. It becomes clear that many of the postwar (and post-sixties) disillusions, that only sharpened and severed in the seventies, use the Modern Movement as a means of expression. The tiredness of the modernists of which Benjamin spoke repeats itself in this decade - this time not as a manifestation of a radical new program for architecture, but as a regression to much older architectural traditions, or to a refutation of the more active and progressive reaction to tiredness: modernism. Many is the magazine, the book or the round-table conference that is devoted to ‘the end of modernism and thereafter’. In 1980, students of the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University, set up a new magazine called The Harvard Architecture Review - volume 1 is called: ‘Beyond the Modern Movement’. In the editorial, the negative influence of modernist architecture is clearly realized: ‘architecture “Beyond the Modern Movement” can thus be understood as a reactionary phenomenon opposed to a commonly perceived antagonist, with its roots in a long line of criticism of Modern Movement Architecture.’ The magazine, as the editorial explains, devotes itself to complicate this statement: as nobody really knows for sure what the ‘Modern Movement’ was, how could a reaction to it be univocal? The themes that are discussed, remain manysided: history, cultural allusionism, anti-utopianism, contextualism, formal

112

concerns - and again the battle with the angel of meaning and referential form: ‘What is architecture to signify beyond its own self-explication?’ 8. Many individual architects have embodied these questions, evolutions and issues in their own oeuvre - certainly in the United States where, in a certain sense, every new architectural phase was ‘imported’ from abroad. Like his more famous colleague Frank O. Gehry from Los Angeles, Stanley Tigerman is an architect from Chicago whose architectural output went through some dramatic and improbable changes. And again all these changes rotated around the Modern Movement, and the question how to deal with it. As Tigerman’s book Versus. An American architect’s alternatives from 1982 shows, he has built in every possible style and every possible way - from orthodox modernism over eclectic postmodernism to vernacular pop-architecture. In Versus, Tigerman reproduces a photo-collage from 1978, entitled ‘The Titanic’. It depicts Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’s iconic Crown Hall for the Illinois Institute of Technology - which houses the School of Architecture - sinking into Lake Michigan. It is not architecture proper that is perishing - it is the education of architecture that is drowning: the older generation of architects does no longer know how to instruct its successors. A letter to Mies accompanies the drawing. ‘Dear Mies,’ writes Tiger-


parts of the tradition of the Modern Movement that took shape between 1920 and 1950, are rehabilitated and reactivated - with both boring and thrilling results. The difficult process of positioning architecture ‘beyond the Modern Movement’ is, together with all the theoretic debates and stylistic excesses that it caused, put aside with one singular reaction: nevermind, what was it anyway? To refer to Benjamin, again: the architects have finally ‘devoured’ everything, and what is left is a somewhat pluralist architectural practice that still contains many taboos (no referentiality, no historicism, no grandscale projects, no utopian tendencies) - but the taboos are not theorized or positively argued, and it would, as a matter of fact, be quite difficult to explain them without falling back on categories of convention or style. A rare example of a new attempt at gaining entrance to the sources of all this contemporary architecture that cannot really explain or justify itself (outside, that is, of the position of every singular realization), takes place at the end of the century in Germany. Heinrich Klötz, architectural historian and (at the time) director of the Deutsches Architekturmuseum, applies the term ‘zweite Moderne’ in 1996 to describe contemporary art and architecture; the term itself is coined by German sociologist Ulrich Beck. This ‘second modernity’ is much more reflexive than the first one; it does not have the same hopes or illusions in changing the world,

but it still uses the same techniques or strategies. The German architecture magazine Archplus publishes in October 1998 an issue on ‘Entwürfe zur Zweiten Moderne’, to show architectural practices that are exponents of this ‘reflexive Modern Movement’. In April 1999, a second number follows with even more theoretical stances and more design examples. In this anthology, the title pages of each chapter of this second issue are reproduced, together with important but often contradictory quotes, coming from the main participants in the debate. 13. After sixty years of evaluating the legacy of modernist architecture that was produced between 1920 and 1950, the Modern Movement has without a doubt gained a mythical status. The classic critical reflex of abolishing every form of myth, has here, as good as elsewhere, become redundant. Of course it is still important to distinguish denotation from connotation, and to understand what the ‘Modern Movement’ stands for and what it really, underneath it all, represents but then rather to strengthen the myth than to weaken it. We cannot do without the Modern Movement in architecture, and that is why we need to know what we, ourselves, and others, are thinking, dreaming and talking about. The place to examine this architectural mythology is probably no longer architecture itself. The past does not return in daily

115


life, but in a dream; in an age where architecture simply is modern, the modernist architecture returns in the museum. The works of the artists that are on show in Rehabilitation belong to a tradition in contemporary art that could be called ‘referentialism’. As André Rottmann points out in an article on these artistic practices (first published in Texte zur Kunst, and reproduced here as an afterthought to the anthology): ‘there has been far too little interrogation of historic signs and reflexive references.’ The strange thing with the exhibition Rehabilitation is that the art works on show all refer to an architecture that, as becomes clear in the 13 preceding texts, does - initially - not refer to anything but itself. Art that points a finger at architecture that points only at itself? Or is, ultimately, self-referential architecture mainly showing the massive amount of human activities that it could shelter, produce or stage? Trying to elucidate the reasons behind these artistic references to architecture is, in an oblique way, trying to explain what we want modernity and the Modern Movement to mean today. Modernist architecture has always tried to be as inclusive and as definite as possible: it wanted to involve everything and everyone - once and for all. Given this fatal and conclusive historical position, rehabilitating the Modern Movement remains anything but a superfluous activity. Christophe Van Gerrewey

116


117


Rehabilitation

The medical overtones of the word came three to fours years after the initial conception of this exhibition project, which remain most appropriate regarding the initial focus and scope, i.e. the metamorphosis of a utilitarian architecture into something else, an industrial brewing hall into a post-industrial platform for contemporary art. The long, problematic trajectory of this ‘re-affectation’, with it’s financial and political implications and loopholes, makes the use of medical terminology even more appropriate, since the resurrection from its ruinous condition of the late 1990s to a functional public place in 2007, implied different operations to extend the renovation programme beyond the limitations posed by industrial heritage and landmark preservation. The clinical word ‘rehabilitation’ as used daily by restoration specialists, therefore perfectly applies, indicating the reversion of the advanced state of entropy into which the Blomme building had fallen, and the almost medical ‘curing’ of its remaining elements into the basic structure of the contemporary art centre that would inhabit it in the future. The relatively short period allotted for planning and renovation (2003-2007), implies the questioning of its former function and future use. In opposition to earlier

118

generations of artistic investigation into possible platforms for production and presentation, the re-use of derelict post-industrial warehouse or production plant has become a classic solution for these types of spaces. Its potential as an alternative to the aseptic and a-historic white cube making the neutrality of skeletal concrete structures a better solution for a place as well as a space for arts and symbolic exchange, has already created its genealogy. This now includes former SoHo lofts, the collection at Schaffhausen, Dia Chelsea, and innumerable examples of post-industrial-style institutional, private and alternative art spaces. Its hailed neutrality is induced by its texture of rough concrete and orthogonal structure, covering-up the left-over sediment of economical and social spaces with layers of white and grey paint. Post-industrial architecture has - for better or for worse - become a stylistic residue of the era of late capitalism or super-modernity. Its longing for purity or sincerity in the light of the surface-tension of consumer culture, has become a norm, in for genuineness and authenticity. The exhibition project Rehabilitation is not trying to re-open the discussion by bringing a new chapter on the appropriateness of a certain type of high-modernist or post-modernist interpretation of white cubes as art spaces, nor of post-industrial buildings as being the ideal alternative. The clinical nature of the white cube as a discursive and rhetorical entity has installed itself


as a unique parameter against which one can evaluate the appropriateness of a space as a platform for its function as a presentation space or a critical space for visual propositions of different kinds, in both contemporary art and visual culture. Besides its pertinence as a rhetorical entity, nothing holds but the reality of specific interpretations, in terms of the approaches and variations on this ‘canonical’ horizon, concluding its value on paper as fiction, not as a phenomenon situated in everyday reality. Just as ‘modernism’ was once hailed or despised, its spectrum is constituted by nothing but slightly deviant interpretations and translations of the ‘canon’ or ‘standard’ one usually associates with modernism or modernist style architecture. The post-industrial space designed by Adrian Blomme in the 1930s as the prestigious extension of a brewery, hence rehabilitated into Wiels, is also one of these famous ‘interpretations’ of the modernist language, making it into a bizarre ‘icon’ on the outside, while remarkably functional for several types and forms of visual arts inside. Its dimensions, proportions, and the robustness of its physical elements, perfectly validate its claim as cultural and artistic platform, a new example and argument for such a type of space. The genealogy of this type of ‘rehabilitated’ postindustrial space is also paired by a genealogy of exhibitions investigating what it means for the visual arts to ‘inhabit’ such ‘inappropriate’ and non-

intentionally conceived spaces, as per projects ranging from the early days of P.S.1 Institute For Art and Urban Resources, Inc. when moving into its new premises in 1976, to numerous site-specific installations that since became the model for most spaces and institutions. Therefore, at the early stage of moving into the ‘renovated’ industrial Blomme building that now hosts Wiels, it was an automatic reflex to address this fact, albeit not through the eyes or the aspirations of the late 1970S and 80s. Investigations in the new ‘nature’ of a space, obviously come with a questioning of which orientation in artistic practice and ideas is most pertinent and in sync with critical approaches of today. What differs fundamentally from the founding idea of this exhibition and other similar ones is the consciousness of the change in art-historical and artists’ practice, making site- or place specificity a reaction that has obtained limited critical potential since its methodology lost its unpredictability by repetition, seemingly having voided out the interest of its surviving pioneers and the young alert investigators of architectural conditions. Younger practitioners show an enormous interest in the legacy of modernity, with a particular focus on less-canonical examples in the global history of modernism and modernity. Expansion throughout the world, and the formal diversity of modernist movements, have been the origin of numerous exhibitions over recent years, making it the most

119


looked-at phenomenon in critical reception within the visual arts. As such, it becomes obvious to overlap or view the synchronicity of the rehabilitation of a physical modernist ‘icon’ like the Blomme building, with that of the rehabilitation of the less legendary moments of modernism’s distribution and evolution throughout the world. The artists who were asked to respond to the conceptual and physical framework of this exhibition and the accompanying publication, have a trajectory of investigations and a particular interest and sensitivity for the rehabilitation of lesser visible modern structures and figures.

120

Thus we reoriented the scope of our concept and selection towards artists who investigate the ‘utopian’ potential of avant-garde modernistic architecture and design. The difference with former generation is not so much their interest in the way architecture shapes public space and individual place, but more the way this interest ‘appears’ in their work, be it in tectonic physical sculptures, with forms and techniques ensuing from modernist angular or orthogonal compositions, or in the re-evaluation of ideological formations that serve as the foundation for the programmatic applications in the constructions, and for their expansion.


What strikes one now is the omnipresence of references to the pioneering or avant-garde years of modernism, and the manner in which the references are being treated as a clear reference, whereas in former generations the use of reference was either dealt with as the appropriation, citation, copying, sampling, reframing or indexing of reference materials in high modernism, or eventually as genre, pastiche and parody in post-modernism, while we may be facing a new approach in current generations. The tectonics and programmes are appearing as sheer ‘references’ to the subject matter, and are not, as should have been the way, according to modernist ideals of transforming, metamorphosing or transcending. Contrarily, several artists in the exhibition use reference materials in a literally self-evident way, such that it becomes relevant to ask about what actually happens here, what operations are followed in relation to former generations who combined ‘abstracting’ and ‘recognising’ in a very different way. Here the appearance of referential signs and the actual content to which they refer, are intentionally made obvious, almost tangible, or only slightly abstracted, so as to allow us to mentally visit these spaces of modernity, these imaginary spaces of which several have actually been constructed in the real world. This discrepancy between initial intentions and actual function and condition is probably the distance that is indicated in the referencing, a distance that wants to be bridged, this trajectory as an echo of

becoming, of subjective re-appropriation of that past and its ideals. In that sense, ‘rehabilitation’ is the appropriate title, in that it’s not just the restoration of the physical integrity of historical facts, but the reassessment of the imaginary potential of these signs and symbols. Now that this operational mode has been labelled ‘referentiality’, in a devaluating way, since it is considered to contradict the ‘progress’ doxa of modernism. On the other hand, one should evaluate the potential as cultural-historical reactivation that is embedded in the manner and will to research and rescrutinise the immediate past not yet considered ‘history’. When the artist Koenraad Dedobbeleer and Kris Kimpe publish photo reportages on remarkable architecture, their bizarre operation is some sort of fanzine of a building, here the façade of an art gallery designed by Richard Artschwager. The topos of legendary buildings and their long-time undervalued programmatic statements is revisited with Eileen Gray’s E-1207 by both Leonor Antunes and Falke Pisano, but, interestingly enough, with very different conceptual and formal approaches and motivations founding them. Other topos that are stepping stones for modernism include Elysian Park in Los Angeles, whose history Pia Rønicke visits in one of her arresting lecture projections. David Maljkovic addresses the signification of ‘monuments’ and their supporting ideologies, with an example of a late descendant of Italian rationalism, a pavillion by Giuseppe Sambito, memory of an

121


international exhibition. The Lingotto factory that Mattè Trucco built for Fiat in Turin in the early 1920s and which Manfred Pernice arouses as a mental backdrop for one of his architectural sculptures, scrutinises the presence and techniques of forms, surfaces and materials from everyday popular imagery in large plannings and designed environments. Oscar Tuazon looks to vernacular builders and non-architects for creating hybrid structures that use other engineering methods as their rationale. Tobias Puthrih is evenly fascinated by alternative construction methods and the shapes they can generate. Here he looks at the design possibilities for bent plywood sheets and applies that to furniture typologies which Adrian Blomme had designed in his time. Questioning the meaning of design also provides the subject matter for the film made by Armando Andrade Tudela at the Synanon Foundation, set up in 1958 in Santa Monica, California by Charles E. Dederich; his intention was to build a community based on self-help and a vision of life as a constant rehabilitation exercise. By the mid-1990s, Synanon had disappeared without trace, aside from a few social activities that included secondhand furniture stores. Tudela films one such store where furniture and other artefacts have ended up, giving rise to an accumulation of forms. These forms - designed by man - are an integral part of the history of ‘design’ - the history of the adaptation of form in order to create styles, worlds. The multiple references to historic spaces

122

and their programmes is self-evident in the artificiality and décor-like way Alexandra Leykauf applies it in her illusionistic and spatial kaleidoscopes of photo-montages and murals. I wish to thank Christophe Van Gerrewey for having accepted our invitation and for having responded with this selection of seminal texts on the topics of architectural discussion over the last decades. Also, for having pointed-out and included a text that attempts to define and thematise the consequence of the omnipresence of referencing in contemporary art. Not unlike the automatism linked with making everything into a new ‘label’, the art magazine that published the text will be acknowledged for turning a method into a new style ‘ism’ - referentialism and creating the widespread phenomenon of referencing, which this exhibition project subjects to speculation by using it as a prism to analyse and formulate certain hypothetical theses and contradictions in the practice of contemporary visual art. Emilie Dotheij and Kwinten Lavigne are herewith thanked for assisting and constructing all the elements that form the exhibition, and Elena Filipovic for offering continual feedback and dialogue on the selection of artists and on the hypothetical ideas that underpin this endeavour. Dirk Snauwaert


LEONOR ANTUNES 0.

Home Is Where The Art Is. Dieter Roelstraete Ponders the Work of Leonor Antunes - and Its Surrounds Cahier Purple, Numero 1, 2010 Edited by Elein Fleiss

My wife, who, like myself, thoroughly enjoys looking at her, often likens the dazzling features of Leonor Antunes to those of a Picasso model: here is a woman who, without a doubt, would have been painted by Pablo Picasso, if only he would have been able to lay his eyes on her. I realize this is a dubious qualification: many of his portraits of Olga, Marie-Thérèse, Dora, Jacqueline or Françoise are not necessarily flattering, nor are they exclusively expressions of the artist’s love for his subject or admiration of their beauty - many of these portraits depict ‘his’ women in tears, lacerated by anguish. Dora Maar - Jewish-French, of Serbian descent, Argentine by temperament - has become especially famed as the “woman of sorrows”: she was the most gifted, the most beautiful, the most enigmatic, and even a protracted treatment by Jacques Lacan (Picasso’s personal doctor in the immediate post-war years) could not help her digest the humiliating end of her affair ditched, inevitably, for a much younger blonde - with the protean painter. Dora Maar lying on Lacan’s couch in Rue de Lille, number 5 - that certainly is a potent image. But what did this couch look like? Let me briefly leaf through a book I bought at the Sigmund Freud Museum in Vienna some years ago: Die Couch. Von Denken im Liegen, which features a series of photographs, made by one Shellburne Thurber, of empty consulting rooms occupied by psychoanalysts around the globe - well, mostly Massachusetts and (indeed) Buenos Aires. Certain elementary motifs recur: portraits of Freud, unsurprisingly (but none of Lacan), archaeological

trinkets, an Eames chair, a clock and a box of tissues (!). As for the couches themselves… Well, some are covered with oriental rugs, quite a few show the sagging traces of long hours of maieutic silence, but none even remotely resemble what I take to be the standard, genuine article - the couches manufactured by the Seattle-based Analytic Couch Company: 3,500 US dollars a piece, excluding transportation expenses. And come to think of it: all in all, it strikes me as rather odd that none of the twentieth century’s great, iconic designers - Aalto, Breuer, Eames, Gray, Le Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe - ever conceived of a couch made especially and specifically for psychoanalytic practice, that highly theatricalized form of dialogue intérieure which has done so much to shape the psychological, therapeutic imagination of that very same century: an unfortunate symbol, perhaps, of interior design’s ultimate inability (and in this respect it is clearly distinct from art) to truly grasp, penetrate or shape the only ‘interior’ that really matters in life - that of the lone individual’s inner (‘mental’) space. Indeed, nothing mars most twentieth-century design more thoroughly than its poor psychology, or at least its poor insight into the fundamentals of the human psyche (the corresponding ‘problem’ in most twentieth-century architecture concerns its poor understanding of mass psychology); this is probably the reason why Freud himself, although an inexhaustibly adventurous, unrelenting explorer of the darkened inner recesses of the mind, was a man of robustly old-fashioned tastes when it came down to interior decoration: very little in the famous photographs made by Edmund Engelman of his ornate home and office in Vienna shortly before the old man’s escape to London in 1938, helps to remind us that Freud had spent his entire life in the same city that had produced the likes of Josef Hoffmann and Adolf Loos, that had seen the building of Ludwig Wittgenstein’s fabled house for his sister in the Kundmanngasse as well as the publication of Loos’ widely-read proto-modernist manifesto “Ornament and Crime,” containing

123


the epochal statement that “the evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornamentation from objects of everyday use.” If the proverbial insides of people’s heads are such terrific messes, the father of depth psychology must have thought, then why can’t my office be? Throughout the twentieth century, the home the interior of a house that I can call ‘mine’, that we can call ‘ours’ - has often been the theatre where warring ideologies meet and battle it out: home is not just where the heart (or the art) is, but also where a certain communal vision of the world is given its shape and form fit for everyday living. Contrary to the nineteenth-century fantasy of a domesticity that is wholly detached from the public world of politics and its continuation with other means in warfare, the modern interior is essentially porous, unable (or unwilling) to withstand the meddling pressures from the outside world - hence the abundant use of glass and other materials suggestive of total transparency in so much groundbreaking twentieth-century architecture (hence, conversely, the profusion of ‘hiding’ and sheathing techniques in the nineteenth-century interior, which was always cluttered with covers, curtains, draperies and étuis of all kinds): insofar as Mies van der Rohe’s Barcelona pavilion is meant to ‘say’ or mean anything at all, it does so by inviting the outside world to flood its interior spaces - and with the worldly flood of daylight come real politics, ideologies, ideas, utopias, all vying for our attention and allegiance, all needing our bodily commitment to become actively lived experience. One particularly memorable encounter between two rivalling world-views intent on penetrating and colonizing the very fabric of daily life that is contained within the banal domain of interior design was staged in an open kitchen during the American National Exhibition held in Moscow in 1959: subsequently called the “kitchen debate,” it pitted Richard Nixon against Nikita Khrushchev, and signalled the moment when the world-historical battle for global domina-

124

tion between communism and capitalism was finally brought back (after long years spent in the stratosphere of nuclear warfare) to the decidedly human scale of the domestic chores and many menial house tasks that constitute everyday life. [It quickly became clear to all that the capitalists had the better kitchens, hence the superior world-view.] Yet this was only one instance of the politicization of interior design for quotidian living, and a rather late one at that: the entire political history of twentieth century culture is suffused with utopian calls for ‘better’ living that ultimately boil down to aesthetic injunctions first and foremost - to an aestheticization of everyday life through the production of ‘good’, honest, morally sound and solid objects. This project has long been known as a defining feature of applied modernism: the production of the artful home, an art of the home (as well as a home to art), as both a political and ethical gesture. And the rarefied realm of fine arts, finally, has been singularly inspirational to this process precisely because of its command of such gestures, because of the genial nonchalance of its own mode of production - the magisterial, effortless ease with which, back in the forties and fifties, Jackson Pollock would splash his tears of paint across a horizontal stretch of canvas or Pablo Picasso would weld together a bicycle steering wheel and seat to produce a bull’s head, was soon reflected in the art of the deliberate placement of a lamp, for instance, in the spatial art of furniture arrangement and the laying out of various household objects across the surface of a living space (it is no coincidence that the likes of Picasso and Pollock were featured with such frequency in lifestyle and home furnishings publications throughout much of the period referred to above - the high-water mark of mid-century modern). “The deliberate art of placement”: this may perhaps not be the best description of Leonor Antunes’ practice and working method - but it goes a long way towards explaining the centrality of gesture (or measure) in the art-


ist’s work, as well as of the time and actual (manual) labour spent arranging the various objects that constitute her multifaceted sculptural work, which essentially revolves around the transformation of any given ‘art’ space into a possible or potential home or “dwelling place” (as one title of an exhibition organized in Turin in 2007 had it). In this exhibition, which seemed haunted in part by the wary ghost of Eva Hesse, ‘living’ as ‘dwelling’ appeared as Antunes’ overriding concern in art: how can we learn to inhabit the world and make it our own? The answers to this question are free to vary wildly according to the individual’s inspiration of the moment, but it is clear that in both my and Antunes’s world-view, art is there to help - and to help shape the world into a better, accommodating whole: home. Some time ago, I published an essay in which I considered the marked rise in interest in all matters architecture- and design-related among a generation of artists coming of age in the midst of the epochal changes of globalization, speculating that the new reality of incessant intercontinental air travel had led many artists, seemingly doomed to an endless life on the road trudging from one biennial to the next, to indulge in the melancholy fantasy of homeliness away from home - one reason, I ventured, why some ten years or so ago the global art world was literally awash in huts, houses and adobe sheltering structures of all kinds, why there seemed to be so much cocooning in the gallery and the museum space. Leonor Antunes continues to lead such a life of frequent travel, commuting between an address in Berlin, one in Lisbon and so many road stops along the way of the international art circuit (it is not very different from mine in that respect): I’m not sure which of these places she would call ‘home’ at all - but perhaps her art decides such things in her stead. This is certainly what I thought when I saw Antunes install her work in an exhibition I had invited her to participate in this spring, serenely and measuredly contemplating the various modalities of making this alien envi-

ronment ours (that is to say, not just hers), if only for the few hours spent inside. And this process of making one’s self at home, finally, is ultimately also a manual one - not just an art of placement, then, but definitely also a craft of placement, of measuring space according to the scale of the human hand. In the winter of 2008-2009, Antunes’ work was also on view at Le Crédac, an art space in the Parisian banlieu, in a solo exhibition titled “Original is Full of Doubts” and loosely based on Eileen Gray’s designs for the famous E-1207 vacation house in Roquebrune-CapMartin - a well-known example of the existential holism typical of mid-century design as outlined above: an exhibition conceived as a homage in which the homophony of homage and home produced a fortuitous complication of meanings. Now as to this question of meaning: what exactly does the title of Leonor Antunes’ exhibition at Le Crédac “Original is Full of Doubts” mean? Where, in this clipped clarion call of modernist anxiety, does the emphasis lie - on the original, the work of originality, or on its doubts and doubtfulness? It would seem disingenuous to claim that ‘originality’, long deemed no more than a mere “avant-gardist myth”, no longer matters to us: even if riddled with doubt, even if burdened by the long history of its deconstruction, it is clear that we’d rather aspire to (or plainly have) originality than the elaborately argued proof of its impossibility. We’d rather have the real thing first, and doubt its realness later - and the reality (materiality, physicality, sensuality) of the thing is of course of the greatest importance here. [I italicize the notion of sensuality here because sensuousness seems to be an all-important feature of Antunes’ artwork - the quality of its touch, which is of course not for the anonymous viewer to savour.] One way in which a renewed desire for an experience of originality and/or authenticity has manifested itself in recent years, is in a return of a notion of craft in the expanded

125


field of contemporary art and culture: a renewed appreciation and revaluation of manual labour and handiwork as well as of material culture more generally - made apparent, in Antunes’ art, through the use of certain ‘rich’ materials such as rare tropical woods, copper alloys, hand-knotted rope and, above all, leather. And it is the trace or imprint of the craftsman’s hand in the production of these materials, whether imagined or not, which is the guarantor of doubt - and hence also of ‘originality’, of a certain craft’s ultimate, materially embedded ‘truth’. ‘Doubt, erring, flaw, hesitation: these were the epistemological touchstones of one of the nineteenth century’s greatest apologist of craft, John Ruskin - the accidental hero of a recent study published by American social philosopher Richard Sennett simply titled “The Craftsman”: “for Ruskin, the craftsman serves as an emblem for all people in the very need of the opportunity for “hesitation… mistakes”; the craftsman must transcend working by the “lamp” of the machine, become in his or her doubts more than an animated tool. (…) Ruskin, in sum, sought to assert the claims of the work that is neither amateur nor virtuoso. This middle ground of work is craftsmanship. And this figure of the craftsman, as a worker both defiant and doomed, has passed down from Ruskin’s time to our own” - to reappear as both a certain type of artist and a certain artist, period.

126


original is full doubts, 2008 Installation view: Le Credac, Ivry Sur Seine, Paris

l — r : “the sensation of being out-doors”; “a spine-wall suppressed all draughts”; “avoiding the mistral wind”; “paving stones cross the entire garden”; “the lacquer screen of E.G.”

l — r : “the lacquer screen of E.G”; “paving stones cross the entire garden”; “the sensation of being out-doors”; “a spine-wall suppressed all draughts”; “avoiding the mistral wind”

127


original is full doubts, 2008 Installation view: Le Credac, Ivry Sur Seine, Paris

l — r : “avoiding the mistral wind”; “a spine-wall suppressed all draughts”

l — r : “the tiles are black in the studio area”, “avoiding the mistral wind”; “the lacquer screen of E.G”; “paving stones cross the entire garden”; “the sensation of being out-doors”; “a spine-wall suppressed all draugts”; “folded back against the pillars” 128


original is full doubts, 2008 Installation view: Le Credac, Ivry Sur Seine, Paris

l — r : “the lacquer screen of E.G”;“avoiding the mistral wind”; “a spine-wall suppressed all draugts”

129


original is full doubts, 2008 Installation view: Le Credac, Ivry Sur Seine, Paris

front to back, l-r : “a spine-wall suppressed all draugts”; “the lacquer screen of E.G”; “avoiding the mistral wind”; “folded back against the pillars” All photographs: © André Morin / le Crédac

130


ALEXANDRA LEYKAUF 1.

Alexandra Leykauf in Conversation with Kathleen Rahn, edited excerpt from “Château de Bagatelle”. Musée d’Art moderne de la Ville de Paris, Gallery Martin van Zomeren, Amsterdam, Verlag für moderne Kunst Nürnberg, 2010

Kathleen Rahn: You use found photographs for your films, collages, and installations, which you then either copy or photograph and then rearrange. How do you actually go about finding the images you use? Alexandra Leykauf: I spent a great deal of time in libraries and archives. I start with a vague idea, browse through the books, come across something here or there which then absorbs me. It’s not necessarily the best books on a subject that are of interest to me. Often enough it’s the superficial images or details not directly associated with the essentials in question. Whilst browsing, I’ll come across an image that catches my eye and draws me to it without my knowing why. Months later, I’ll remember it and then it turns out that the image fits perfectly into a collage or becomes the starting point for a whole series. It has something to do with intuition as well. My intuition is definitely better than my planning and my powers of imagination. Searching and finding are two entirely

different categories. Sometimes I am looking for a particular motif and am disappointed when I find it, but whilst searching, I’ll maybe come across an image that will find a use at a later date in another work. (…) KR: Another important thematic area, which crops up in your work is the theatre—the stage and the auditorium as spaces. You have compiled information in your research about several theatre fires, which you have used in different versions. Somehow, the narrated story burns down, that is to say, disintegrates into ashes. What is noticeable is that you have chosen photographs that show the totality of scene from the relatively objective, reasonably unemotional point of view of the observer. The ruin that emerges from the devastation is placed centrestage rather than the activities of those fighting the fire and, indeed, the catastrophe itself. AL: In reality, a theatre fire is most definitely a terrible thing in itself. However in art, it facilitates perhaps precisely those hopes and utopian projections you are talking about. There is a spark, which ignites the matter in the true sense of the word, and the viewer’s physical here and now or present, emerges from the representation in the moment of destruction. The images are, on the one hand, a documentation of a catastrophe, which occurred

131


in the past; it is easy to read which period we are dealing with in the photographs. I tend to come across the overall view in older photographs. On the other hand, they show the moment in which the theatrical performance breaks through the status of representation and coincides with the here and now of the viewer. I wanted to use theatre fires as a backdrop. The actual drama is taking place in front of the backdrop, that is to say in the exhibition space where the viewer is both protagonist and audience at the same time; it is not contained within the backdrop itself. KR: You often build models made from cardboard with photocopies and photos pasted on to them, and then you take photographs of them. This gives rise to a shift in perspective. You also erect settings like this for your films, such as »Filmriss« (2006) for example, in which several models of theatre fires are placed on a stage and ultimately what you see is the burning of the film material used to film this miniature stage. AL: The actual event of a film tearing is similar to a theatre fire. What happens in the cinema when the film tears? The members of the audience experience the destruction of the film on the screen and become aware of themselves in the

132

darkened auditorium. They turn to look towards the projection room, towards the projector. A new sense of space emerges. The film performance can be thought of as an inverted perspective drawing. The projector functions as the vanishing point and the screen as the image plane. Extrapolate this idea further, then the viewer is caught in the image and the tear in the film not only liberates the actors on the screen, but also the viewer. »Filmriss« is a film about just that, a tear in the film. It is the document of an unrepeatable process, namely a self-destructing film performance. KR: We are witnesses to a fire, to destruction … AL: Destruction or liberation? In order to reach a new condition, first of all the old one has to melt away, disintegrate. Whether this experience of transition is perceived metaphysically or not, it nevertheless crops up metaphorically in very different ways. Be it divine illumination, ecstasy, existential experience during wartime, or a lacerated screen. KR: The viewer becomes a witness to an ending and a beginning. At the same time, you make the visitor walk a bit, i.e. you arrange your installation in such a way that you walk around it because you project the films onto the backs of display boards, which are


then arranged as perspective compositions. AL: My works revolve around the search for an individual standpoint, the standpoint of the viewer in front of an image, but also in general about one’s individual standpoint in the world. I am attracted to the theatre because it is a condensed form of reality. Where am I exactly in relation to what is being enacted? Can I glimpse behind the scenes or am I stuck in my seat in the auditorium? How does my perspective change if I leave my seat? Does the space outside the constructed reality of a play or a film have other qualities that touch upon the period, character, and meaning of the space? Is there a direct experience, an immediate view, a possibility to disrupt the representation? And what remains then when the representation—that is to say a depiction of something attached to a medium—suddenly falls away? (…)

AL: I am fundamentally interested in things concealed in joins, in the curvature of space, the element of the unknown behind it … It all started when I was a student. I photographed images in books at that time that were printed across double pages and so inevitable were interrupted, disjointed. Part of the motif disappears in the join between the pages. The join disrupts the image and shows the surface of the reproduction as a surface; it prevents entry into the pictorial space by making it apparent that one is dealing with a book that has been photographed and no longer a landscape. However, in my selection, the join alters and extends it at the same time as a motif. Sometimes the join produces a concealed place out of which details of the image seem to emerge, but also disappear at the same time; sometimes the join has an extremely graphic compositional effect.

KR: The assembling of images reKR: I discern a questioning of curs in all your work, be it the poster given perspectives in all your work; books, the films, but also in this book. for example, via the fact that you Similarly, as I asked you at the outset, create perspective arrangements from I am interested in your search critemany standpoints or that you bring ria, the way you determine the sehitherto concealed entities to the fore quence of images? once more, such as colour from beAL: This book is derived from neath the black surface layer. What a slide show in which I rerole do joins and layering have in sorted and exchanged individual your work? Where does this aspect images over and over again. come from? I arranged the sequence of

133


images formally, but also associatively, that is to say, certain forms run through a sequence of images and through different epochs and contexts from which the images derive. However, I also arrange motifs in relation to one another in terms of their content. A psychological test, comprising a handful of wooden triangles (to be ordered by test subjects) is juxtaposed with triangular segments of a gothic arch, a building by Walter Gropius alongside stage scenery for Rheingold, but an image from a paper activities book can also be placed side by side with a page from a book I have folded, despite the dissimilarity of the forms. I consider the totality of the images to be a kaleidoscope; the individual facets stand as equals side by side and constantly generate new points of contact. There is no development, no narrative—for example, nothing which might chart an architectural history. The kaleidoscope image or indeed, that of a round dance, sums it up very nicely! English translation: Timothy Connell

134


135


136


137


138


UP 9.

209


210


211


212


BIOGRAPHIES Leonor Antunes

DUO EXHIBITIONS

2010

Born in 1972, Lisbon Lives and works in Berlin and Lisbon

2006 Upcoming solo exhibitions 2011 2010

Reina Sofia, Madrid Serralves Museum, Porto Kunstverein Dusseldorf El Eco, Museum, México City C.N.E.A.I, Ille des Impressionistes

SOLO EXHIBITIONS 2008

2007

2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

2000 1998

original is full of doubts, Le Credac, Centre d’art contemporain Ivry Sur Seine, Paris 1763/2008, Gallery Isabella Bortolozzi, Berlin architectura, Galeria do Lago, Museu da Republica, Rio de Janeiro villa A 7812, Chiado 8, Fidelidade Seguros, Culturgest, Lisbon dwelling place. Associazione Barriera, Turin the space of the window, Galerie Air de Paris, Paris uncertainty and delight in the unknown, Dicksmith Gallery, London your private sky, Isabella Bortolozzi Galerie, Berlin duplicate, Kunstlerhaus Bethanien, Berlin apotoméus, Casa da Cerca, Almada fichet, Culturgest, Caixa Geral de Depósitos, Porto 20th Calçada da Estrela, front door, Lisboa 20 Gallery, Lisbon ante-sala, Museum of Antique Art, Lisbon Home is where you are, Public art installation, Norwich circus rope, Staatliche Akademie der Bildenden Kunste, Karlsruhe step by step, Staatliche Akademie der Bildenden Kunste, Karlsruhe

Alongside, Leonor Antunes and Amalia Pica, Marc Foxx Gallery, Los Angeles 51 Avenue de Iéna, Centre Culturel Calouste Gulbenkian, Paris

GROUP EXHIBITIONS 2010

per form, Francesca Pia Gallery, Zurich le carillon big ben, Galerie des Multiples, Paris. Curated by Claire les Restiff CAPC, Bordeaux. Curated by Aurelie Volz. Centro Cultural de Montehermoso, Victoria Gasteiz 2009 Drawing Sculpture, Daimler Contemporary, Berlin La importancia del Pez Cebra, Gallery Parra & Romero, Madrid La Recherche I, Galerie Air de Paris, Paris The Actuality of the Idea, Gallery Stuart Shave Modern Art, London Beaufort 03, Oostende/Knokke. Curated by Phillip Van den Bossche The Thing, Cultural Centre Mechelen. Curated by Dieter Roelstrate Itenerarios 07-08, Fundacion Marcelino Botín, Santander 2008 Phoenix VS Babel, Fondation Paul Ricard, Paris. Curated by Patrice Joly transformational grammars, Galeria Francesca Kaufmann, Milano articulações, Fábrica da Cerveja, Faro 2007 acquisitions récentes, Musée d’Art moderne de la Ville de Paris Minimalism and Applied, DaimlerChrysler, Haus Huth, Berlin Oú? Scènes du Sud: Espagne, Italie, Carré d’Art, Musee d’Art Contemporain, Nimes 2006 public- une retro perspective, Public, Paris 1:1 Leonor Antunes e Didier

Fiuza Faustino, Serralves Foundation at the Portugal Pavillion, Coimbra 2005 le principe de incertitude, Public, Paris seducidos por el acidente, Fundación Luis Seoane, La Coruña untitled, Kunstlerhaus Bethanien, Berlin ticket 9, Gallery Carlier Gebauer, Berlin outras arquitecturas, outras alternativas, outros artistas, Carlos Carvalho gallery, Lisbon prémios EDP, Centro Cultural da Cidade de Tavira 2004 europeen space, Sculpture Quadriennal Riga 2004, Riga’s City Museum, Riga 2003 Tabaqueira Art Prize, Casa dos Bicos, Lisbon a dois. Francisco Tavares Proença Junior Museum, Castelo Branco continuação 5, alguns fragmentos do universo, Sines Cultural Center, Sines Bienal da Maia, Maia Colecção de Arte Contemporânea da Caixa Geral de Depósitos. MEIAC, Badajoz crussed objects, Experimenta Design, FIL, Lisbon outras alternativas, Vigo Museum 2002 Arte Público, Serralves Museum of Contemporary Art, Porto culturgest collection, Cultur­ gest, Caixa Geral de Depositos, Lisbon interpress exibit A, Interpress building, Lisbon See you at the Premiere-Fair, Kongresszentrum, Berlin 2001 Disseminações, Culturgest, Caixa Geral de Depósitos, Lisbon City Desk Prize, Cascais Cultural Centre, Cascais Arte Público, Público, daily newspaper União Latina Prize, Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, Lisbon Squatters/Ocupações, Porto 2001, Serralves House, Porto

217


Biographies Introdução, Electricity Museum, EDP, Lisbon situation zero, Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, San Francisco Lisboa Capital do Nada, public art in Marvila, Lisbon 2000 Noah is going to London, Norwich Gallery, Norwich Microart, book shops Assírio Liquida, Bulhosa e Livreiros, Barata, Bucholz, Lisbon O impulso pedestre, Arte Ibérica magazine, Reality Check, Year 4, n. 35, May 2000 Microart, Expo 2000, Hannover Olhar da Contemporaneidade, Lisbon Cerimonies, Art Attack project in Lisbon, Rosa Palace, Lisbon Alquimías das Artes, S. Francisco Monastery, Coimbra Southern Exposure, ZDB gallery, San Francisco Plano XXI, Glasgow Contaminantes Comunicantes, 10 artists+10 architects, Fine Arts National Society, Lisbon Depósito, Fernando Pessoa House, Lisbon 1999 Foot Notes, Caldas da Rainha Ceramic Museum, Art Attack, Caldas da Rainha Wc Container, Porto WorkSHOP SUEY II, Amadora Gardens Bienal da Maia, Maia 7 artistas ao 10 mês, Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, Lisbon Os eléctricos que vão para Antuérpia. Public art installation, Rua da Conceição, tram line n. 28, Lisbon Outro Manual de Uso, Número magazine, n. 4

ALEXANDRA LEYKAUF

Born in 1976 in Nürnberg Lives and works in Berlin

Solo exhibitions 2010

218

Salle noire at Musée d’Art moderne de la Ville de Paris, Paris

2009

2008 2006 2005 2004

Cadre/Cache, Galerie Barbara Wien, Berlin Cache/Cadre, Galerie Sassa Trülzsch, Berlin Frame, Frieze Artfair, London, with Galerie Sassa Trülzsch Kunstverein Nürnberg, together with Michele di Menna, Nürnberg Souterrain, together with Alicja Kwade, Berlin Galerie Martin van Zomeren, Amsterdam FOAM Fotografiemuseum, with Lisa Oppenheim, Amsterdam Galerie Martin van Zomeren, Amsterdam Galerie Barbara Wien, Berlin Voyage d’Urien 2, ASPN, Leipzig Hotel des Grottes, Martin van Zomeren, Amsterdam Voyage d’Urien Autocenter, Berlin (together with HannMari Blencke)

Group exhibitions Papier Photo, Galerie Chez Valentin, Paris 2009 Aura, Castrum Peregrini Foundation, Amsterdam The Last Session, Brakke Grond, Amsterdam Galerie Lucile Corty, Paris EXPECTATIONS, De is Ka & de verzameling, Amsterdam Natuurlijk verloop, KPN Art Collection, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam 2008 Schattenspiel (I), Schatten der Dinge, together with Ei Awakara and Reiner Ruthenbeck, Studio Sassa Trülzsch Illy award, Art Rotterdam, Rotterdam 2007 berlin_nl A Choice from KPN art collection, Niederländische Botschaft, Berlin The order of the present is the disorder of the future, Museum De Hallen, Haarlem Berlin - Amsterdam, folded or tilted realities curated by Erika Hoffmann, Amsterdam Gruppenausstellung KFZGelände, Berlin

Thieme Award Candidates exhibition, Amsterdam 2005 Gruppenaussellung, Galerie Kolenhof, Neurenberg 2004 Galerie Barbara Wein, Berlin März Projectraum Schleifmühl­gasse, Vienna Documentary Evidence, Gallery Chez Valentin, Paris Freefall, Martin van Zomeren, Amsterdam Open Ateliers, Rijksakademie van Beeldende Kunsten, Amsterdam 2003 Open Ataliers, Rijksakademie van Beeldende Kunsten, Amsterdam Gespot, Arti e Amicitiae, Amsterdam Grants, scholarships 2008 2006

Illy-award, Rotterdam Scholarship Fonds BKVB, Amsterdam 2003, 2004 Rijksakademie van Beeldende Kunsten, Amsterdam 1998 Förderpreis des Bayrischen Staates

2010

Publications 2010

2007

2004 2003 2002

Château de Bagatelle, offset, edition of 1000 Production: Musée d’Art moderne de la Ville de Paris, Gallery Martin van Zomeren. Publisher: Verlag für moderne Kunst, Nürnberg NRC Handelsblad, September 2007 (The Present Order is the Disorder of the Future) Kunstbeeld, Berlin-Amsterdam, 31/07/2007, p. 47 Artforum: December 2007 Het Parool, May 2007 was warum, offset, edition of 500 Rosinen, silk screen, edition of 30 Posterbuch, offset, edition of 500

DAVID MALJKOVIC

Born in 1973, Rijeka, Croatia Lives and works in Zagreb


SOLO EXHIBITIONS

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

Mala galerija, Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana Glasgow International Festival of Contemporary Visual Art, Glasgow Sprüth Magers, Berlin Fondazione Morra Greco Largo, Napoli (2009-2010) Out of Projection, Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofía, Madrid (2009-2010) After the Fair, Georg Kargl Box, Vienna Retired Compositions, Metro Pictures, New York Nothing Disappears Without a Trace, ARCO, Madrid Lost Review, Le Plateau, Paris Handed Over, (in collaboration with Rosa Barba), Project Arts Centre, Dublin Lost Memories from These Days, Annet Gelink Gallery, Amsterdam Kunstverein Nürnberg, Nürnberg Parallel Compositions, Bergen Kunsthall, Bergen Shadow Should Not Exceed, (with Jan St Werner), Pinksummer Contemporary, Genova These Days, Present Future, Artissima 14, Torino Almost Here, Kunstverein in Hamburg, Hamburg Scene for New Heritage III, Art Unlimited, Art Basel 38, Basel P.S.1 Contemporary Art Center, New York Scene for New Heritage Trilogy, Whitechapel Art Gallery, London Days Below Memory, CAPC, Musee D’art Contemporain, Bordeaux Scene for New Heritage Trilogy, The Physics Room, Christchurch Salon of Museum of Contemporary Art, Belgrade Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, Rijeka These Days, Gallery Nova, Zagreb

2005 2002

2001 2000

It’s Gonna Happen, with Rosa Barba, Croy Nielsen, Berlin Scene for New Heritage II, Centre de Creation Contemporaine, Tours Waiting Tomorrow, Annet Gelink Gallery, Amsterdam 90s without 90s, MMC Palach, Rijeka Scene for New Heritage, Van Abbemuseum, Eindhoven Paintings for Everyday Use, Miroslav Kraljevic Gallery, Zagreb Your Moment is your Heritage, Minimal, Ljubljana Space of Painting, Moria, Stari Grad Transplantation, Kordic Gallery, Velika Gorica Three Paintings isn’t a Trilogy, Beck Gallery, Zagreb Juraj Klovic Gallery, with Tomislav Curkovic, Rijeka

2007

GROUP EXHIBITIONS

2010

2009

2008

Star City: An Archeology of Communist Futures, curated by Alex Farquharson, Lukasz Les Promesses du Passé, Centre Pompidou, Paris Mondernologies: Contemporary Artists Researching Modernity and Modernism, Museu d’Art Contemporani, Barcelona; Museum of Modern Art, Warsaw (2009-2010) (cat.) Utopia and Monument I, Platz der Freiwilligen Schützen, Graz Lunar Distance, De Hallen Haarlem, Haarlem What Keeps Mankind Alive, 11th International Istanbul Biennial Transitory Objects, ThyssenBornemisza Art Contemporary, Vienna (cat.) A Pair of Left Shoes, Kunstmuseum Bochum Solaris, Gió Marconi Gallery, Milan New Acquisitions: Rarely Seen Work, Ludwig Museum of Contemporary Art, Budapest Try Again, Fail Again, Fail Again Better, Mucsarnok Kunsthalle, Budapest

2006

Rendez-vous Nowhere, Montehermoso Cultural Center, Vitoria-Gasteiz (2008-2009) Zero Gravity: The Architecture of the Social Space, Art Today Association Center for Contemporary Art, Plovdiv Anna Helwing Gallery, Los Angeles Lost Worlds: An Archeology of Future, Centre d’Art Bastille, Grenoble When Things Cast No Shadow, 5th Berlin Biennial for Contemporary Art, Berlin (cat.) Cohabitation, Galleria Francesca Kaufmann, Milan Can Art Do More?, 5th Art Focus, Talpiot Beit Benit Congress Centre, Jerusalem Behind, Monitor Gallery, Roma Eyes Wide Open, Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam (2007-2008) Magellanic Cloud, Centre Pompidou, Paris Elephant Cemetery, Artist Space, New York Der Prozess, Prague Biennial 3, Prague Verbalno vokalno, Galerija SC, Zagreb Inbetweeness, Complesso di San Michele, Rome Ground Lost, Gallery Nova, Zagreb On Lost Worlds, CAPC Musée d’art Contemporain, Bordeaux Artist in the wonderland, Gdansk Made In, Schloss Ringerberg, Ringerberg The Line of Time and the Plane of Now, Harris Lieberman, New York Kapitaler Glanz, Kunstverein Dusseldorf, Dusseldorf Stalking with Stories, Apexart, New York Nature & Society: Parallel Lines, Gliptoteque of the Academy of Sciences and Arts, Zagreb Nature & Society: Parallel Lines, Muzej Rupe, Dubrovnik All Dresed-up with Nowhere to Go, Transit Display, Prague Contemporary Surrealists, Mali salon, Rijeka

219


Biographies

2005

2004

2003

220

New Ghost Entetaiment-Entitled, Kunsthaus Dresden, Dresden Art is Always Somewhere Else, 2nd Biennial of Young Artists, Bukarest 47th October Art Salon, Belgrade Everywhere, Busan Biennale Downloads from Future, Kunsthalle Winterthur, Winterthur Ideal City-Invisible Cities, Zamoch Monument to Nikola Tesla, Gallery Nova, Zagreb Phantom, Charlottenborg, Copenhagen Modern Lovers, Three Colts Gallery, London Mercury in Retrograde, De Appel, Amsterdam Again for Tomorrow, Royal College of Art, London (cat.) Interrupted Histories, Gallery of Modern Art, Ljubljana A Picture of War is not War, Wilkinson Gallery, London Wild Man in the Looking Glass, Art 2102, Los Angeles Synergy, 40th Zagreb Salon, Zagreb Mixed Pickles, K3 Project Space, Zurich Go Inside, Tirana Biennale 3, Tirana Insert, Retrospective of Croatian Video Art, Museum of Contemporary Art, Zagreb Artists Books, Art 36 Basel, Basel International Biennial of Contemporary Art, National Gallery, Prague La Plateau, with Joan Jonas, Paris The Imaginary Number, KW Institute for Contemporary Art, Berlin (cat.) Love it or leave it, Cetinje Biennial 5, Cetinje Exhibition of Nature and Society, Exit Gallery, Kosovo Open studios, Rijksakademie van beeldende kunsten, Amsterdam Dislocation, Town Museum of Zagreb Open studios, Rijksakademie van beeldende kunsten, Amsterdam

2002

2001

2000

36th Zagreb Salon, Zagreb Slow Watching, Casal Balaguer, Palma de Mallorca Start, Mestna Gallery, Ljubljana Filip Trade Collection of Contemporary Croatian Art, Manes Gallery, Prague Here Tomorrow, Museum of Contemporary Art, Zagreb 26th Salon of Young Artists, Michal Kolocek and Slaven Tolj, Zagreb 2nd Salon of Young Artists, Sisak 4th International Student Biennial, Skopje New Beginning, SC Club, Zagreb Vice chancel prize, Vladimir Nazor Gallery, Zagreb

Bibliography (selection) 2009

2008

Sabine Breitwieser (ed.), Modernologies: Contemporary Artists Researching Modernity and Modernism, Museu D’Art Contemporani, Barcelona, pp. 140-141 Johannes Porsch and Daniela Zyman (ed.), Transitory Objects, Verlag der Buchhand­ lung Walther König, Köln, pp. 162-167 Rachel Wolff, David Maljkovic: Metro Pictures, Art News, Summer, pp. 126-128 Jenny Brownrigg, But To Go Back, MAP Magazine, Spring #17, pp. 74-77 Ana Janevski, The elusive past, Mousse, Issue #15, pp. 63-65 Exat 51 & David Maljkovic, Immobile Space Between Yesterday and Tomorrow, Piktogram, Issue #11, pp. 20-27 David Maljkovic, Lost Memories From These Days, Piktogram, Issue #11, pp. 28-37 Céline Kopp, Freezed Images, Domus, May, pp. 33-35 When Things Cast No Shadow, 5th Berlin Biennial for Contemporary Art, KW Institute for Contemporary Art, pp. 24-25

MANFRED PERNICE

Born in 1963, Hildesheim, Germany Lives and works in Berlin

Solo Exhibitions 2009 2008

Regen Projects, Los Angeles Pelikan, Stella Lohaus Gallery/Antwerp Sculpture Show, Antwerp After the Butcher, Berlin (Thomas Erdelmeier & Manfred Pernice) Que-Sah, Neues Museum, Nürnberg Neue Arbeiten, Galerie Neu, Berlin Diary, Anton Kern, New York Allgemeine Verkstatt Ausstellung, Schinkel Pavillon, Berlin 2007 Haldensleben…, Museum Ludwig, Cologne Zweite Hand, Mai 36 Galerie, Zurich 2006 COSTA CLASSICA, Modern Institute, Glasgow Rückriem/Böll-Peilung, Leopold-Hoesch-Museum, Düren exscape, Regen Projects, Los Angeles bancomat, house of art, Budwies 2005 interieur, Galerie Konrad Fischer, Düsseldorf park & ride, Galeria Heinrich Ehrhardt, Madrid 2004 hässliche Luise, Galerie Neu, Berlin bugnato, Galleria Fonti, Naples Commerzbank, Anton Kern Gallery, New York Small works 1994-2004, Storefront for Art and Architecture, New York U5, Galerie Nächst St. Stephan, Vienna 2003 Treuetaler, Stella Lohaus, Antwerp Die Erfindung der Vergangenheit, Pinakothek der Moderne, Munich Verkr.2, Kabinett für Aktuelle Kunst, Bremerhaven Banane, Galleria Massimo


The Dense Object, Mock and other superstitions 1, Formcontent, London, 2008 The Dense Object, Palais de Tokyo website, 2008 A Sculpture turning into a conversation, TEXT (Andreas van Düren), 2008 Some (in)formal notes on reading “What is Consciousness, essay, ‘What is Consciousness?’ by Benoit Maire (Revolver/Gavin Wade), 2007 A Sculpture turning into a Conversation, Casco Issues X: The Great Method, 2007 FR DAVID, guest editor 1st issue, De Appel, Amsterdam, 2007

2007

CURATED EVENTS/EXHIBITIONS (selection)

2006 2005 2004 2003

2002

As Yet, event with lectures, film and performance around the idea of ‘speculation’, De Appel Amsterdam, Feb 2007 (with Will Holder) falkeandcharlotte, programme of presentations, events and publication, Dolores/EdB Projects (with Charlotte Moth), 2006-2007 curator Dolores, project-space of Ellen de Bruijne Projects, Amsterdam, 2003/04 and 2006/07

2001

2007

2006

2010

2009

Born in 1972 in Kranj, Slovenia. Lives and works in Cambridge and New York 2008

SOLO EXHIBITIONS 2009 BALTIC Center for Contemporary Art, Gateshead Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam Espace 315, Centre Pompidou, Paris 2008 Kunsthaus, Zurich (with Runa Islam) White Cube, London (cat.)

GROUP EXHIBITIONS

Tobias Putrih

Quasi-Random, Neuberger Museum of Art, Purchase, New York (cat.) Repertoire, Max Protetch Gallery, New York Paradise, Galleria Pinksummer, Genova Max Protetch Gallery - Project Space, New York A Place by Two, Galerija Gregor Podnar, Ljubljana Laumeier Sculpture Park, St. Louis Max Protetch Gallery, New York Grazer Kunstverein, Graz (with Toby Paterson) Galerie Almine Rech, Paris Max Protetch Gallery, New York Mala galerija, Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana Science Fiction, Bezigrajska Galerija, Ljubljana Movie Tales, Galerija Skuc, Ljubljana (with Ziga Kariz)

The Promises of the Past. A discontinuous history of art in Eastern Europe, Pompidou Centre, Paris Here I am doesn´t exist, Printemps de Septembre Festival, Les Abattoirs, Toulouse - Go East II, MUDAM, Musée d´Art Moderne Grand-Duc Jean, Luxemburg Warsaw under Construction, Museum of Modern Art, Warsaw Science versus Fiction, Betonsalon, Paris MACBA, Museum of Contemporary Art, Barcelona cinéma attitudes, attitudes, Geneva (cat.) Re-projection, Galerija Gregor Podnar, Berlin Lost Cinema Lost, Galeria Civica, Modena (with Runa Islam) (cat.) Restless Subject, Kunsthaus Zürich and Museum Folkwang, Essen (with Runa Islam) Mega Structure Reloaded,

2005

2004

2003

Former State Mint, Berlin Runa Islam: featuring Tobias Putrih, White Cube, London Peripheral look an collective body, Museion Bolzano Psyco Buildings: Artists and Architecture, The Hayward Southbank Center, London transmediale.08, Transmediale Berlin Fast-Forward, Projectspace 176, London Anachronism & The Otolith Group, Argos, Brussel Erzählung, Kunsthaus Graz 52nd Venice Biennial, Venice Multiplex: Directions in Art, 970 to now, Museum of Modern Art, New York Art Unlimited, Art Basel, Basel Studio, Musée d´Art Moderne Grand-Duc Jean, Luxemburg Dialogo II, Galleria Enrico Fornello, Prato (curator Simone Menegoi) Eldorado, Musée dArt Moderne Grand-Duc Jean (Mudam), Luxembourg Erzählungen, -35/65+ Zwei Generationen, Kunsthaus Graz (curators Katrin Bucher Trantow, Katia Schurel) Certain Tendencies in Representation, Thomas Dane Gallery, London Greater New York, PS1, New York Monument for America, Wattis Institute for Contemporary Arts, San Francisco Trend, Mestna galerija, Ljubljana Collective Effort, Baltimore Museum of Art, Baltimore Mediteraneo, MACRO Contemporary Art Museum, Rome Den Haag Skulptuur, Den Haag Seven Sins, Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana Art Unlimited, Art Basel, Basel In the Gorges of the Balkans, Kunsthalle Fridericianum, Kassel U3, Museum of Modern Art, Ljubljana

223


Biographies 2007

Me, Howard House, Seattle Where I lived and what I lived For, Module, Palais de Tokyo, Paris I’d rather be gone, Standard, Oslo Oscar Tuazon / Mike Freeman, Castillo/Corrales Gallery, Paris Voluntary Non vulnerable, Bodgers and Kludgers, Vancouver

2006

GROUP EXHIBITIONS 2009

2008

2007

226

Evento, CAPC, Bordeaux Prix Ricard, Espace Paul Ricard, Paris Display With Sound, IPS, Birmingham LMCC Sculpture Park, New York Free As Air And Water, Cooper Union Houghton Gallery, New York Wood, Maccarone, New York Gennariello, Balice Hertling, Paris I was a Stranger, Isabella Bortolozzi, Berlin Mirrors, Marco, Vigo. Curated by Gyonata Bonvicini. September Show, Tanya Leighton, Berlin Degrees of Remove: Landscape and Affect, Sculpture Center, Long Island Paul Klee Zentrum, Bern You Complete Me, Western Bridge, Seattle Transformational Grammar, Francesca Kaufmann, Milan Sack of Bones (Los Angeles), Peres Projects, Los Angeles Group show, Dependance, Brussels Contemporary Northwest Art Awards, Reed College, Portland Exposition N°1, Galerie Balice Hertling, Paris Documenta 12 Magazine Projects, under the auspices of Metronome, Kassel Compound Values Affirming Denial, Standard, Oslo / Art Rotterdam Hello Goodbye Thank You, Castillo/Corrales, Paris

2005

2004

2003

The Elementary Particles (The Paperback Edition), Standard, Oslo Minotaur Blood, Fortescue Avenue/Johnathan Viner, London Just Move On, project for CLUI Wendover, Wendover Down By Law, The Wrong Gallery, Whitney Biennial, Whitney Museum of American Art, New York An Open Operation, Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh for Death, Halle 14, Leipzig The Culture of Fear, ACC Galerie, Weimar Metronome no. 10, Portland Institute for Contemporary Art, Portland Living Underground, Siuslaw National Forest, Oregon Secret Room, Kanazawa Baroque Geode, Sundown Salon, Los Angeles Bridges, University of Colorado, Denver Slouching Towards Bethlehem, The Project, New York Xtreme Houses, Lothringer13, Munich and ‘Halle 14’, Leipzig Human, Fucking Human, Lofoten International Art Festival, Bergen Adaptations, Kunsthalle Fridericianum, Kassel Our Mirror, Lower Manhattan Cultural Council, New York Urban Renewal: City Without a Ghetto, Temporary Services, Chicago Urban Renewal: City Without a Ghetto, Princeton School of Architecture, Princeton, New Jersey The Subsidized Landscape, The Center for Architecture, New York Sprawl, Hudson Clearing, New York Adaptations, with Richard Fischbeck, Apex Art, New York, New York Wight Biennial, with Richard Fischbeck, UCLA, Los Angeles 24/7, CAC, Vilnius

2002

2001

Float, Socrates Sculpture Park, New York Deathtime, 27 Canal, New York Whitney Independent Study Program, Galapagos, Brooklyn, New York Whitney Independent Study Program, with Bea Schlingel­ hoff, New York Totally Motivated, with Gardar Eide Einarsson, Kunst­verein Munich Between the Lines, with Gardar Eide Einarsson, Apex Art, New York City Without a Ghetto, Artists Space, New York, New York Inscribing the Temporal, Kunsthalle Exnergasse, Vienna STRIKE, Wolverhampton Art Gallery, Wolverhampton Coming Soon, Whitney Independent Study Program, New York Museum of the White Man, New York and Suquamish, Washington Programmable City, Storefront for Art and Architecture, New York Landlords Instant Cash!, P.S.1 Center for Contemporary Art, New York Building Codes, Lower East Side Tenement Museum, New York

Bibliography 2009

Vitamin 3D, Phaidon Press. Interview with Francesca di Nardo, Mousse Magazine, Dec./Jan. 2004 ‘Slouching Towards Bethlehem,’ Roberta Smith, The New York Times, Aug. 13 ‘Slouching Towards Bethlehem,’ Howard Halle, Time Out New York ‘Adaptations,’ Craig Buckley, Adaptations Catalogue, ApexArt ‘Adaptations,’ Holland Cotter, The New York Times, Jan. 30, 2003 ‘Sculpture Forever,’ Flash Art International, Aug. ‘Exhibit Visits Urban Re-


2002

newal’s ‘Scenes of Crime’,’ Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow, Metropolis, Oct. ‘After the Utopian Reflex,’ Kirsten Everberg, The 2003 Wight Biennial Catalogue, Department of Art, UCLA, Aug.; ‘Body and the Archive,’ Holland Cotter, The New York Times, Feb. 14, ‘Civic Boosters,’ Carly Berwick, Damon Rich, Metropolis Carly Berwick, Damon Rich, ‘Civic Boosters,’ Metropolis, Feb.

Armando Andrade Tudela

Born in 1975, Lima, Perú. Currently lives and works in St Etienne, France

Solo exhibitions 2010

Museu d’ Art Contemporani de Barcelona, Barcelona FRAC Bourgogne 2009 DAAD, Berlin Ikon Gallery, Birmingham 2008 Gamblers Die Broke, Frankfurter Kunstverein Gamblers Die Broke, Kunsthalle Basel 2007 Les Signaux de L’ Ame, Annet Gelink Gallery, Amsterdam 2006 Inka Snow, Counter Gallery, London 2004 Camión, Counter Gallery, London Group exhibitions 2009

Panorama da Arte Brasileira, Museu de Arte Moderno, Sao Paulo Warsaw Under Construction, Museum of Modern Art, Warsaw Modernologies, Museu d’Art Contemporani de Barcelona, Barcelona, September 2009 and Museum of Modern Art, Warsaw, February 2010 Time as Matter, New Acquistions, Museu d’ Art Contem-

porani de Barcelona Yellow and Green, MMK, Frankfurt Second Hand, curated by Jasper Sharp, Engholm Englehorn Gallery, Vienna 2008 Neutre Intense, La Maison Populaire, Paris Armando Andrade Tudela, two-person show with Florian Pumhosl, Krobath Wimmer Galerie, Vienna 2007 Brave New Worlds, Walker Art Centre, Minneapolis Lyon Biennial, Lyon Curación Geométrica, The Reliance, London 2006 Shanghai Biennial, selected by Jonathan Watkins, China Sao Paulo Biennial, selected by Adriano Pedrosa, Brazil 2005 Tropical Abstraction, Stedelijk Museum Bureau, Amsterdam, curated by Roos Gortzak Farsites, inSITE 05, curated by Adriano Pedrosa, Tijuana / San Diego Museum of Art Torino Trienniale, T1, selected by Carolyn Christov-Bakargiev & Francesco Bonami, Various venues, Torino 2004 Rheinschau Projects, Cologne PR04, Puerto Rico Biennale, Rincón, Puerto Rico The Concert In The Egg, The Ship, London To Be Political It Has To Look Nice, Apex Art, New York 2003 The Bakery, Annet Gelink Gallery, Amsterdam Retriever, Pearl Projects, London The Progressive Future, Platform Gallery, London The Protective Clothing Company, Knox Gallery, London El Paso, Casa Cultura Mario Quintana, Porto Alegre 2002 Interim Show, Royal College of Art, London Diversion, 291 Gallery, London 2001 X Concurso Patronato de la Telefónica, Sala Fundación Telefónica del Perú, Lima XI Concurso Pasaporte Para Un Artista, Sala Centro

2000

Cultural Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima Proyecto Terreno De Experiencia 1, Sala Luis Miro Quesada Garland, Lima

UP

Up is a fanzine started by Koenraad Dedobbeleer and Kris Kimpe dedicated to remarkable buildings and other structures. To date, eight issues have been published and distri­ buted freely.

227


Colophon This book is published on the occasion of the exhibition titled ‘Rehabilitation’ held at Wiels Contemporary Art Centre Bruxelles-Brussel from May 28 - August 15, 2010 including artworks and projects by Leonor Antunes, Alexandra Leykauf, David Maljkovic, Manfred Pernice, Falke Pisano, Tobias Putrih, Pia Rønicke, Oscar Tuazon, Armando Andrade Tudela, Up (Koenraad Dedobbeleer & Kris Kimpe) Curated by Dirk Snauwaert with Elena Filipovic Production & presentation: Kwinten Lavigne Intern curatorial assistance: Emilie Dotheij Installation team: Olivier Ernould, Frederic Oulieu, Fredji Hayebin, Jonas Schmitt, Charles Gohy, Wannes De Bruycker, Stanislas Lahaut, Jure Mezek

Wiels would like to thank all the participating artists, lenders and also Charles Bosser, Elein Fleiss Purple Journal; Gigiotto Del Vecchio; Chus Martinez; Anders Kreuger, Stella Lohaus Gallery Antwerpen; Galerie Almine Rech Paris-Bruxelles/Brussel; Galerie Dépendance Bruxelles/Brussel; Standard Oslo; Gb Agency, Paris; Galerie Balice Hertling Paris; Jonathan Viner Gallery London; Galerie Neu, Berlin; Galerie Air de Paris; Hollybush Gardens London; Ellen de Bruijne Projects Amsterdam; Annet Gelink Gallery, Amsterdam; Frac Bourgogne, Dijon; Museu d’Art Contemporani Barcelona; Galerie Martin van Zomeren, Amsterdam; Galerie und Buchhandlung Barbara Wien; Galerie Sassa Trülzsch, Berlin; Galerie Isabella Bortolozzi, Berlin; Nationale Plantentuin van België, Meise; Christoph Van Damme, Saint-Gobain Glass Solutions, Vidi-Square

228

Wiels Board of Administrators President: Herman J. Daled Vice-president: Pierre Iserbyt Members: Ann Veronica Janssens, Sophie Le Clercq, Bruno van Lierde, Michel Moortgat, Luc Tuymans Director: Dirk Snauwaert Financial Manager: Paul Delvaux Assisitant Manager: Sophie Rocca Curator: Elena Filipovic Production & Presentation: Charles Gohy Education & Mediation: Frédérique Versaen Residency Programme: Devrim Bayar Press & Communication: Angie Vandycke Sponsoring & Partnerships: Lena Dubois-François, Michèle RolléLejeune, Martine de Limburg Stirum Presentation & Production & technical support: Fredji Hayebin, Kwinten Lavigne Building Coordinator: Michaël Dewit Ticketing & Coordination Mediation: Nadia Essouayah Bookshop: Wim Clauwaert Security: Youseph El Akel Wiels is supported by: Vlaamse Gemeenschap, Communauté française de Belgique, Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, Brussels Hoofdstedelijke Gewest, Vlaamse Gemeenschapscommissie, Loterie Nationale / Nationale Loterij, Duvel Moortgat, Maroquinerie Delvaux, Puilaetco Dewaay Private Bankers, Leon Eeckman, Levis, Fondation Bernheim Stichting, Mais il est ou le soleil ?

Wiels Centre d’Art Contemporain Centrum voor Hedendaagse Kunst Contemporary Art Centre Avenue Van Volxemlaan, 354 B-1190 Brussel Bruxelles T +32(0) 2 340 00 50 www.wiels.org The exhibition receives special support by the Mondriaan Foundation, Danish Art Council, DGArtesCalouste Gulbenkian Foundation Lisbon

Concept: Dirk Snauwaert, Luc Derycke Editor of the anthology: Christophe Van Gerrewey Graphic design: Luc Derycke & Jeroen Wille, Studio Luc Derycke Copy-editor: Jodie Hruby Printed by Lannoo, Tielt ISBN 9789078937111 D/2010/7852/87 © The artists and the authors © Wiels Contemporary Art Centre © MER. Paper Kunsthalle Published by: MER. Paper Kunsthalle vzw. Geldmunt 36 B-9000 Gent T. +32 (0)9 329 31 22 info@merpaperkunsthalle.org www.merpaperkunsthalle.org Texts reprinted with kind permission from the original publishers or authors. All possible effort has been made to trace the copyright holders of the material in this anthology. If any rights have been omitted, please contact the publisher.


0. Walter Benjamin Experience and Poverty

(p. 1-6)

in : Michael W. Jennings (ed.), Walter Benjamin. Selected Writings. Volume 2, part 2, 1931-1934 (Cambridge, London : The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 731-736.

1. (p. 7-15) Henry-Russel Hitchcock The International Style Twenty Years After Architectural Record 8 (1951), pp. 89-97.

2. (p. 16-22) Alan Colquhoun The Modern Movement in Architecture The British Journal of Aesthetics 1 (1962), pp. 59-65.

3. (p. 23-26) Alison and Peter Smithson The Heroic Period of Modern Architecture Architectural Design 12 (1965), pp. 587-590.

4. (p. 27-36) Colin Rowe Introduction to Five Architects in : Five Architects (New York : Oxford University Press, 1975), pp. 3-7.

5. (p. 37) Charles Jencks The Death of Modern Architecture in : Charles Jencks, The language of post-modern architecture (London : Academy Editions, 1977), p. 9.

8. Stanley Tigerman The Sinking of the Titanic. Letter to Mies

(p. 60-68)

in : Stanley Tigerman, Versus. An American architect’s alternatives (New York : Rizzoli, 1982), pp. 27-30.

9. Manfredo Tafuri Architecture and ‘Poverty’

(p. 69-71)

Architectural Design 7-8 (1982), pp. 57-58.

10. (p. 72-79) Geert Bekaert Leçons du modernisme belge : l’enracinement dans le réel Lecture, colloquium Modernism and the City, KULeuven, 25th october 1986. in : André Loeckx (ed.), Colloquium Modernisme en de stad. Leuven 23-25 oktober 1986, (Leuven : Werkgroep Architectuur-Geschiedenis en -Theorie, Afdeling Architectuur, KULeuven, 1986), pp. 287-293.

11. (p. 80-88) Stanislaus von Moos Dutch Group Portrait. Notes on OMA’s City Hall Project for The Hague A+U 217 (1988), pp. 86-94.

12. (p. 89-96) AAVV Zweite Moderne, Reflexive Modernisierung, Design after Mies, Die Masken der Moderne Arch+ 146 (1999), pp. 14-15, 34-35, 48-49, 76-77.

6. (p. 38-53) Peter Eisenman Aspects of Modernism : Maison Dom-ino and the Self-Referential Sign

13. (p. 97-106) André Rottmann Reflexive systems of reference. Appro­ ximations to ‘referentialism’ in contemporary art

Oppositions 15-16 (1979), pp. 118-128.

Texte zur Kunst 71 (2008), pp. 155-164.

7. (p. 54-59) N.N. Beyond the Modern Movement. Editorial The Harvard Architecture Review 1 (1980), pp. 4-9.

(p. 107-116) Christophe Van Gerrewey THE LEGACY OF THE MODERN MOVEMENT

Profile for Studio Luc Derycke

Rehabilitation (sample pages)  

Rehabilitation. Exhibition in Wiels. Sample pages.

Rehabilitation (sample pages)  

Rehabilitation. Exhibition in Wiels. Sample pages.

Advertisement