Earlier this week (late Sunday night) John posted one of numerous quotes addressing the site pictures I had posted. In the comment, he mentioned the diversity of the site, the gentle scenes created in the residential area, the trees, the grass, the homes, but also the street being 'sucked' below the site, exposing many layers. He asked the question of how will this diversity be addressed within the program. I guess, as I mentioned last pin-up, the aim is to provide a continually changing appearance/layout/possibly program, to provide for a constant movement throughout the site. This calls into question the issues of temporality and flexibility. Installation art provides both of these conditions within its adjacent context. True, some installations are, or seem to be permanent (Smithson, etc.) but most remain on constant tours of many museums and other facilities world wide. Edge intervention that parallels that of, or even becomes a type of installation art, is a way of dealing with the diversity of the site. Change, continuous movement, spatial flow and other elements and temporary forms convey the notion of diversity.
Just a quick thought while stuck on my narrative...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Yes, indeed, I like what you write. Diversity of site qualities and characteristics- much to be encouraged. Who would want to devote 200 acres to anything homogenous? And the notion of it continually evolving and changing is a positive to be encouraged- its clear that some single-minded notion of utopian vision and grandious scale is not going to easily happen in poor little Reading. So, let the vision accomodate diversity of interventions....and let site usage evolve in tandem with a Reading that will be evolving in tandem with site usage. Indeed, the idea of a wonderful unlimited setting for installation art on the east coast does seem to be a great opportunity- and that can take the form of re-installing of known works, travelling from place to place, from venue to venue, by known artists travelling. But it can also be an opportunity for artists to seek grant money and seed money to be challenged to conceive and create new installations unique to Reading (to the history of the city, to its themes, to its evolving populations) and THOSE installations could be temporary, semi-permanent or permanent constructs that, then, become an infrastructure for the rest of Reading to move into, occupy, populate and infill with new programmed uses- and so Reading grows and changes and gradually optimizes that 200 acre site (and this includes the RR taking advantage of the highest optimal returns on its real estate. So, maybe what is worthwhile to do, if you buy this tweaking of your vision, is that you DO have to decide- on those 200 acres- what is non-negotiable, what is an important part of its heritage and its history and what ought to minimally never disappear ("preserving those selected memories"- some built forms- can they continue to fall into ruin, some bridges, some RR yards, whatever), while everything else will evolve within a designed infrastructure of your choosing- Reading-and-Installation-Art-Park.
Excellent work so far, and making, I sense, really good progess. I am writing this maybe as just one scenario of trying to put it all together in some balanced, mutually-reinforcing proposal that will give you a very interesting springtime design pursuit. jp
Post a Comment