TOUCHING THE BEYOND by Anna Mokhova
Chelsea College of Art and Design Interior and Spatial Design 2011
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The time spent on this course was devoted to the most exciting research. I was enjoying myself and my own development throughput the year and though I feel that I would love to put more time into my project I am yet happy with the result I achieved. I would like to say thank you to Ken Wilder for his sincere support during the year. I am grateful to him for his dedication to his work with students and the organisation of the group trip to Rome, which let me not only explore some of the architectural spaces, but gain a better understanding of my work. Kristina Kotov for her involvement in my project and freedom of making she encouraged in me. Peter Stickland for his significant influence on my development without whom I would not learn to be brave and this work would not happen to be. I would like to thank Gwendolyn Leick for her lectures and talks which came up with a great effect on my thoughts during this year and a period of time before. I am appreciative of the help of my beloved family and their belief in me and my talents. I express grattitude to my dearest groupmates and friends, especially Anna Dmitrieva, who has always been a support for me during all my time in London and Anastasia Koroto, who was makimg an impact on my design development throughout a period of time. This project was a long journey, which brought me to a new understanding of my work and an exceptional inspiration for future progress.
CONTENT Introduction Part One. Experiencing the Outside Part Two. Body as an Instrument Part Three. Image-Experience of the ‘Outside’ Part Four. Mediation on the Threshold Conclusion
...Everything takes form, even infinity G. Bachelard, p.212
INTRODUCTION
Fig.1 Section and Plan of Saint Paul’s Cathedral, Sir Christopher Wren, 1675 - 1709
In a quest for immensity I find its image in a place, where people have been in a revelation: appeal to heaven about desire, fear and guilt. I am fascinated by how we in our attempt to assimilate the tremendous nature of the outer reality interpret it by creating the narratives. The whole story of going through the lonely journey towards the heavenly transcendence exists regardless of cultural canon and time1. In the Western World it was embellished in the religious architecture and in its paintings. The depictions on the dome are representative of Heaven, symbolically separated from the narratives of the terrestrial and this element of church architecture stands for the heavenly skies above and beyond. Being captivated by the sensations achieved when exploring the space from underneath the dome, being on the inner side, the real shift in my own perception actually happened at the point when I reached in my experiences the corporeality of the interstitial lacuna of the dome (Wren, 1765, fig.1). There was no Heaven, but there was the space. I realized that the element, which seemed celestial, could be actually touched. By this, the dome, which was at some point a part of my own phantasy, became sensed physically and brought with it a number of experiential effects. Thus, in my work I am not interested in the religious, historical or political significance of cupola architecture, but in its imaginative value. I intend to probe on the sensations formed by the perception. In this research I aim to investigate the engagement of the figure and the space as a process of mediation between the physical and metaphysical spatial experiences. I seek to determine the processes that form both domains of the perception and I am interested in the moment of their shift. How does perception change on the threshold and where is that point which triggers imaginary experiences? Can it be determined at all? Architecturally the dome forms the opposition of the inside, outside and the space in-between; simultaneously its surface is possessed by a pictorial space. Thereby I shall start with surveying physical perception, proceeding with the vision of the body as the instrument for this, and then go onto the imaginative realm and shifting experiences, which bring us back to the preceding.
1
Jung, C.G. (1964) Man and his Symbols. London: Penguin Group.
PART ONE Experiencing the Outside
Entering the cathedral and moving through the vaults, the viewer finds himself underneath the dome. Inevitably he changes his physical position and turns his head up in order to contemplate the space above. As the dome itself sits on the base and is distant from our body, we are able to grasp the whole of it with the help of our vision (2010, fig.2).
Fig.2 View of the dome, Saint Peter’s Basilica, Rome
Detail View
In The Eyes of the Skin Pallasmaa states: ‘The gaze implies an unconscious touch…visual apprehension of materiality, distance and spatial depth would not be possible at all without the cooperation of the haptic memory…vision reveals what the touch already knows. We could think of the sense of touch as the unconscious of vision’1. Furthermore, in his affirmations the architect provides a critique of the ‘ocularcentrism’ and states the significance of peripheral and unfocused vision for formation of the ‘essence of the lived experience’2. This means that the previous physical spatial experiences are playing a crucial part in forming our current perceptive process and the peripheral vision steps out as an instrument, which transforms visual into bodily sensations, unconsciously involving our previous experiential knowledge into this process. Outside the inner tissue of the dome, between the inside and the outside, lies the interstitial space. It can be encountered and the adventure it allows is bewildering. Personally coming across this engagement I could hardly analyse my objective position according to the whole building. The narrowness in-between the Saint Peter’s Basilica in Rome focuses our vision on the ‘endless’ skirting staircase of 320 steps and provides our sight with the unevenly curved surfaces of the walls on both sides (2010, fig.3). In Saint Paul’s Cathedral in London my experiences in-between the outer and the middle dome are spacious and hold a number of connected iron spiral staircases. There we gaze at the path we have to go through upwards or downstairs, while peripheral vision is surrounded by enclosure of space, the shape of which is not determinable by visual means (2011, fig.4). I experienced being off balance, almost vertiginous, and only holding the rails of the staircase and persuading myself that there is a physical force of gravitation let me stand on my feet.
Fig.3 View in-between the dome of Saint Peter’s Basilica, Rome
1 2
Pallasmaa, J. (2005) The Eyes of the Skin. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd., p.42 Ibid p.10
Fig.4 Vertical view in-between the outer and the middle dome in Saint Paul’s Cathedral, London
Horizontal view in-between the outer and the middle dome in Saint Paul’s Cathedral, London
So if there is a space positioned outside the inner fabric of the dome and it can be experienced in some way, I imagined that we could sense it from the position of being underneath a dome? Shaping the models, I referred to the section of the dome of Saint Paul’s Cathedral, which is formed by three spherical structures. I referenced the composition of architectural fabric and sought to lighten the weight of the substance. For that I used wax. The light pattern, normally concealed in-between the heavy layers of structure revealed itself through the use of translucent material. Moreover, this attempt made the layers behind the inner one more tangible to the eye. While the interstitial space is imprisoned between the inside and the outside and could not be experienced directly, there is a way to ‘see’ it: with the help of unconsciously imagined touch, formed by the memory of previous experiences (fig.5).
Fig.5 Vertical view in-between the outer and the middle dome in Saint Paul’s Cathedral, London
Object # 1, Inside view
Object # 1, Top view
Top view, central horizontal section
Inside view, central vertical section
Object # 2, Inside view
Object # 2, Top view
Top view, central horizontal section
Inside view, central vertical section
Object # 3, Inside view
Object # 3, Top view
Top view, central horizontal section
Inside view, central vertical section
Object # 4, Inside view
Object # 4, Top view
Top view, central horizontal section
Inside view, central vertical section
Object # 5, Inside view
Object # 5, Top view
Top view, central horizontal section
Inside view, central vertical section
PART TWO Body as an Instrument
Merleau-Ponty in his Phenomenology of Perception is questioning the understanding of ‘sensation’; he doubts the success of the ‘purely subjective’ (impression belonging to the subject, to us) or ‘purely objective’ (determined quality of the object) understandings of sensation of the ‘objective world’ to prove themselves1. While this understanding is formed by analytic thought, he states that ‘pure sensations’ are formed by experience of undifferentiated nature. Probably then we should deny the analytical approach in favour of the investigation of the ‘pre-objective realm’. Moreover, Ehrenzweig in The Hidden Order of Art discusses the ‘wholeness’ of appearance without regard to detail opposed to the ordinary analytic perception2. He states that the notion of initial approach of starting the work with colour may be a step towards the ‘syncretistic’ vision, which is the quality of child art: ‘The infant experiments boldly with form and colour in representing all forms of objects…His vision is still global and takes the entire whole which remains undifferentiated as to its component details’3. Among artists, Mark Rothko denied the conventional colour task and in his search for something ‘beyond’ discovered the locus of interaction of colour and scale in his works when their dialogue takes up the whole of the vision and the edges blur in the field of peripheral sight (Waldman, 1978, fig.6). His works gain more power if perceived not from the long distance in order to grasp the formed image with a focusing point of composition, but from the short one so we become the participants: ‘…The events on the canvas have the psychological effect of drawing the viewer into its space’4.
Fig.6 Untitled, Mark Rothko, 1953
1 Merleau-Ponty (2002) Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge.Neumann, E. (1959) Art and the Creative Unconscious. 3rd ed. Translated from German by R. Manheim. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp.3-14 2 Ehrenzweig, A. (1967) The Hidden Order of Art. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. 3 Ibid p.6 4 Ashton, D. (1996) About Rothko. New York: DA CAPO PRESS, p.157
Referring back to Ehrenzweig’s judgement on the use of colour, the peculiar fact is that Rothko, using this instrument in the context of the vocabulary of volume, e.g. ‘weights’ and ‘movements’ rather than forms and colours’1, did not aim to form a representation of the objects. He was more concerned with creating a feeling, which he stated in a mural with a consistent concept and then developed in the series of works2. For that he used the “substance” of colour. He extensively used a very complicated technique of layering, of which he rarely talked3, creating an effect of ‘curving inwards’, which is a spatial term again. This experience is stated to be ‘opening a door into an internal realm’4, which is beyond the painting, but is within us. Working with wax became compelling in terms of experimenting with layering and levels of plasticity in combination with other substances, e.g. vaseline and oil. The material is the medium, which due to its qualities makes a strong statement of its own. It ‘loses the edge’ due to the way the light goes through it and has a very soft translucency (fig.7), reminding us of familiar bodily substances, e.g. fat or skin.
Fig.7 Wax mixed with vaseline and brushed on latex
1
Ibid p.178
4
Ashton, D. (1996) About Rothko. New York: DA CAPO PRESS, p.191
2 Ibid p.158 3 Cage, J. (1998) Rothko: Color as Subject. In: Weiss, J. Mark Rothko. New Heaven and London: Yale University Press, p.250
Metal mesh dipped into warm wax, single colour
Hemisphere constructed of warm wax pieces, binded by hot knife
I have created a series of objects (fig.8) and while returning every time to the same motif in my work, I have made changes in each of them, experimenting with the layers behind the concave. I have changed the body of the layer inbetween as well as size, shape and position of its openings. I made an attempt to grade the colour in some of the objects and to form it from a number of colour patches. I came to all of these actions by means of my own ‘feeling’ for the process instead of the analytical approach. These experiments have let me shape a variety of light patterns ‘seen’ from the inside on the inner surface. In the process I made an attempt to explore the correlation of inside, outside and the threshold in-between in an abstract way, analogically to the structural model of the psyche. This approach let me to detatch the objects from their first reference and investigate them as something of their own.
Fig.8 Unit one show
Objects with stretched out interstitial space
View on the objects from the angle, reminding of their appearance from the architectural section
Richard Serra, a sculptor, states that in his works there is a peculiar, strange, vertiginous feeling that is evoked by the interaction with the object, which lacks control of the thought over it and ‘gestalt’ understanding of it, as mentioned by one of the visitors: ‘I gave my head the most terrible bump when walking inside. Suddenly, the wall was nowhere where I thought it was and I went crash into it with my head’ (Freguson, 1999, p.190). Serra states that his works could not be grasped haptically and one has to position oneself towards the work in order to experience it through the bodily attitude. What I find interesting is that in his working process he states that these objects are not drawn or even pre-imagined: ‘The building method is based on hand manipulation’ (Guse, 1985, p.141). He works with the piece with his bodily experiences, experimenting until he starts to feel that the object is doing something (Ferguson, 1999, fig.9). I may suggest that exactly this approach pre-determines our physical response to his works (2010, fig.10).
Fig.9 Models for the Torqued Ellipses III, II, & I, Richard Serra,1996
Fig.10 Torqued Ellipses, Richard Serra
The stunning thing is that the real space of the dome evokes our physical response being a vast actuality, but in some cases the feeling of sublimity is experienced in smaller spaces depending only on the way we perceive it. Richard Serra creates human scale objects in some cases and his work still arouses a physical reaction as it challenges our perception and triggers some particular moment of indeterminacy in our hapticity. While this moment induces a desire to examine the piece by a touch in order to reach comprehension, the understanding might not take its place and clear cognition might not replace this feeling even after examining the piece. So then why should I refer to sublimity or any other strong emotion as a response to expansiveness? In my work developing a construction for the piece I proposed a spatial structure, which takes up the whole of the vision and engulfs the viewer with colour and light (fig.11). However, I intend to examine whether the object or space should actually be substantial enough to immerse the spectator’s body and take up the whole of one’s vision or whether there is another manner in which to approach the feeling of colour and light rather than seizing it bodily? Inspired, I have created a series of smaller structures, which become like a “cocoon” for the body (fig.12).
Fig.11 Sections of the two installation in relation to the human figure
Fig.12 Front view of the second installation in relation to the human figure
Model for the first installation, view from the inside
Model for the first installation, view from the outside
Technical drawing, top view and grid
Technical drawing, central horizontal section
Technical drawing, horizontal section
Technical drawing, front view
Technical drawing, central vertical section
3D Model, Inside view, lights off
3D Model, Inside view, lights on
3D Model, Outside view, lights off
3D Model, Outside view, lights on
3D Model, Outside view, changes in colour of the inner layer, snapshot # 0
Snapshot # 100
Snapshot # 50
Snapshot # 150
3D Model, animation of the 24 hour changes, snapshot # 0
Snapshot # 60
Snapshot # 30
Snapshot # 90
Snapshot # 120
Snapshot # 180
Snapshot # 150
Snapshot # 210
Technical drawing, front view of the series
Technical drawing, front view
Technical drawing, front view with the construction, back view
Technical drawing, vertical sections
Technical drawing, horizontal sections
Technical drawing, details
Technical drawing, sample
PART THREE Image-Experience of the ‘Outside’
Bachelard in the Poetics of Space states that the geometrical division formed by inside and outside is too sharp to form the dialectics of their metaphorical domains1. Referring to Hyppolite he proclaims that ‘…myth of outside and inside… should not be studied by attributing to it the false light of geometrical intuitions…’This side’ and ‘beyond’ are faint repetitions of the dialectics of inside and outside’, as in geometry ‘limits are barriers’2. So then what is the metaphorical ‘outside’ of the dome is if it could not be determined by the geometrical approach? Is it formed by the depicted image or by the body of the dome? Or neither and there is the third substance to form it? As was discussed previously, a dome bears a depiction of Heaven. Damisch in A Theory of /Cloud/ claims that the space of the cupola is a ‘space directed towards infinity...form is dissolved in favour of the magic spell of light – the highest manifestation of the painterly’3. Is not the moment of contemplation of the depiction concerned more with the patterns formed in the imagination and dreams, rather than with actual image? In this case we imagine the outside of the cupola as a limitless space, but coming back to the matter of sensations of the unbounded, let us refer to the imaginative process: Imagination is always considered as a faculty of forming images. But it is rather the faculty of deforming the images offered by perception, of freeing ourselves from the immediate images; it is especially the faculty of changing images... The value of an image is measured by the extent of its imaginary radiance Bachelard, 1971, p.19 The sensations are not only about physical perception, but imagination takes up a significant role. Yet, I believe that there should be particular techniques of forming the image. As discussed in the previous chapter, in order to draw the viewer into the painting, the spatiality of it is to be perceived by peripheral vision from the physiological point of view, while the dialectics of the one-point perspective painting assumes that the viewer is outside the painting, looking at it as out in the space through a frame. Nevertheless, Damisch claims that the cupola solution Vision of Saint John (Eskerdjian, 1997, fig.14) by Correggio in San Giovanni Evangelista was to negate the fact of a closed space or even the existence of the building itself by creating an image of a ‘fake opening into sky that is itself painted in trompe l’oeil’4. I could state that this could be determined by the intuitive or unconsciously physical approach of the creator in the techniques of trompe l’oeil and di sotto in su. Nevertheless, painting in a more examined technique of 17th century quadratura, which was employed for the creation of the illusionistic domes on the flat surface, seen from the right perspective seems to our vision to be a three-dimensional dome (fig.15). Moving away from the correct standing point it reveals its geometrical flatness. To experience the “magic” we have to exist in a particular relation to the “dome” and in this case the element does not have to exist physically. It has sufficient qualities even being a picture on a plane in a particular physical relation to us in order to fool our perception and provoke the imaginary as the real dome would. 1 Bachelard, G. (1994) The Poetics of Space. Translated from the French by I. Jolas, M. Boston: Beacon Press, pp.211-212 2 Ibid p.215 3 Damisch, H. (2002) A theory of /Cloud/. Toward a History of Painting. Translated from the French by Lloyd, J. Stanford: Stanford University Press, p.4 4 Ibid p.1
Fig.14 Vision of Saint John, San Giovanni Evangelista, Antonio Allegri da Correggio, 1520 - 1522
Fig.15 The illusionistic dome in Sant’Ignazio, Andrea Pozzo, 1685
Another way of formation of the dome-image is observation of the inner surface of the dome through a mirror positioned in a particular angle, so we can experience the pictorial space of the ceiling for a long time without taking a physically uncomfortable position. I contemplated the ceiling in The Church of the Jesus in Rome in the big mirror, which was permanently installed (fig.16). Furthermore, in my own experience this was the way of studying the vaulted ceiling in the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican, where some of the visitors used their own personal mirrors to be able to see the vaulted ceiling and its paintings. I could also say that we observe the mirror in this case as if it was a picture plane with a depiction of the dome and in this case all other context disappears from our vision. Though the position may be more comfortable for observation, by the laws of perspective, the space becomes further from us and, by doing so, scales in size to our eyes.
Fig.16 Reflection of Triumph of the Name of Jesus, Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Church of the Jesus, 1672-1679
Panofsky in Perspective as Symbolic Form explores the concept of perspective and claims that it is that matter that isolates the religious art from the domains of magical, dogmatic and symbolic1. It exposes it to the realm of visionary and by this the viewer grasps the miraculous of the work as a direct experience. In this device the mirror is positioned so that by the laws of perspective, if it is seen from a particular distance, the object behind takes the whole space of its surface. Without a light the viewer looks into the mirrored image of his eye, while when the light appears the mirror becomes transparent and gradually reveals the object behind it, starting with the central point, which lets the light through. By this the object becomes the image on the surface, at the same time revealing the geometry of its inner layers (fig. 17-18).
Fig.17 Image obtained by using the device
1 Panofsky, E. (1997) Perspective as Symbolic Form. Translated from the German by Wood, C. New York: Zone Books, p.72
Sketch for the idea
Technical drawing for the apparatus
Fig.18 The apparatus used for filming
Position of the apparatus in correlation with ‘eye’ (camera) and light
Stills from a video made with the apparatus, without the mirror. Snapshot # 460
Snapshot # 462
Snapshot # 461
Snapshot # 463
Stills from the video made with the apparatus, with the mirror. Snapshot # 500
Snapshot # 600
Snapshot # 550
Snapshot # 650
Snapshot # 700
Snapshot # 800
Snapshot # 750
Snapshot # 850
Snapshot # 900
Snapshot # 1000
Snapshot # 950
Snapshot # 1050
Snapshot # 1100
Snapshot # 1200
Snapshot # 1150
Snapshot # 1250
Still, whatever dome we are underneath and however we choose to explore it, our body is always in a particular relation to it in order to form the image. In his argument about the perspective in space and on the pictorial plane, Holm puts across that Brunelleschi’s demonstration of the principles of perspective states that the space of the piazza with the Florentine Baptistery is to be brought into reality to look in perspective the same as if it is observed as a framed picture of a space1 (fig.19). Here the occupant is the spectator and is thought mainly to be positioned outside the picture plane. Nevertheless, the viewer is the participant of the depicted space as the image would not ‘fuse’ with reality in perspective of the space without the gaze of the eye, which depends on the particular position of the body in accordance to the built environment: ‘The viewer will occupy the space as if s/he was standing front centre, motionless, facing forward, looking towards the end of the space (towards baptistery, altar) as if s/he could walk there’2. By this I wish to say that unlike any other Renaissance painting, the dome painting, using the same instrument of onepoint perspective as in Brunelleschi’s experiment, is more drawing the viewer into its space rather than leaving him outside. Hence the depicted virtual space of the dome requires attention from a particular point, it doe not exist without a spectator on the opposite side. That means that even focused vision may attain an important role in the forming of the imaginative relation, which is basically provided by the painting on the surface of the dome. The techniques of dome painting are performed vertically according to particular rules and the vanishing point, to which all the vertical lines aspire, is above us. At the same time, this precise tool denies its own existence, “opening up” the skies above us, which drops the physical and attains the metaphysical.
Fig.19 Demonstration of the Principles of Perspective, Filippo Brunelleschi
1 Holm, L. (2010) Brunelleschi, Lacan, Le Corbusier. Architecture, Space and the Construction of Subjectivity. London and New York: Routledge, p.104 2 Ibid p.104
Considering the fact that normally we investigate the space by moving our head and eyes, for the picture plane to become the whole of our vision it does not need to enlarge in scale. In the proposed devices (fig.20), the vision of one eye can be supressed in favour of the other, so the visual field decreases. The position of the head is fixed to provide the particular angles for the observation, repeating the physical position of being underneath the dome. The focal point, which is a portal for the eye towards the outside, is suggested to concentrate the vision. Space can take up the whole of the sight not by being vast, but by affecting the visionary experiences by reducing their opportunities for investigation and becoming the whole of what we see. By using the laws of perspective I make an attempt to form an imaginative relation between the viewer and the space, which would deny the fact of the presence of perspective at all, as the latter is the corporeal subject, which imposes the frame of perception according to its laws. The significant outcome of this interaction is the imaginative, but still spatial relation, which shapes the phantasy of the infinite by evoking the deeply imprinted, almost physical image of limitless height.
Fig.20 Sketch for the Device # 1 Interaction with one mirror and one model
Sketch for the Device # 2, interaction with one model and two mirrors (one of them semi-transparent), artificial light
Sketch for the Device # 3, interaction with two models and one mirror, artificial light
Sketch for the Device # 4 Interaction with one model and one semi-transparent mirror, change of the physical position, artificial light
Sketch for the Device # 5 Interaction with one model and three mirrors, change of the physical position, natural light
Mirror-image of the model # 1
Mirror-image of the model # 2
Mirror-image of the model # 1, mirror position # 1
Mirror-image of the model # 2, mirror position # 1
Mirror position # 1
Mirror-image of the model # 2, mirror position # 2
Mirror-image of the model # 1, mirror position # 3
Mirror position # 2
Mirror position # 3
PART FOUR Mediation on the Threshold
Lerup describes the journey through the gap in the walls of the Pantheon: ‘The inner gap is a mould between two outsides – it is a space of transformation…The tear in the descriptive-conceptual tissue is…both a gap and a place, but more important it is a locus of transit, like a tunnel between two worlds’1. To understand the shift between the two opposites I intend to look into the process of transformation. Merleau-Ponty in Phenomenology of Perception states: ‘The object is made determinate as identifiable being only through a whole open series of possible experiences, and exists only for subject who carries out identification’2. Bachelard states that created image and perceived image are different substances and he calls the latter the imagined image. He claims that emotions do not approach us from the object, but that they are reawakened in the subject, the viewer3. Basically, I may state that the artist, by means of the plastic components of the work provides us with a “substance” for a dream and this matter becomes a recalling image for an archetypal image. Bachelard states that this is the only way to dream in depth: The voyage into distant worlds of the imaginary truly conducts a dynamic psyche only if it takes the shape of a voyage into the land of infinite. In the realm of imagination, every immense takes on a transcendence. The very law of poetic expression is to go beyond thought Bachelard, 1971, p.23 However, the bodily is inevitably connected to the psychic. Thus, can the infinite distance be determined with the help of the haptic memory according to our previous experiences? It seems that we are not able to divulge the imaginative experiences from our memory or perception: there is an absence of fleshy living through the infinite. So how do we imagine it? From the point of view of practitioner, e.g. Richard Serra, it is more of a lack of determination of something, which was not experienced by ones body earlier4. Yet referring to Bachelard the situation is induced into our souls by the narrator and the emotions and revived in us, in the subject. By this, the situation itself occurs in the inner reality of us and is it not a reminiscence of the previously experienced, but that ‘type of reverie deeply engraved in our inner nature’5 is on the verge of giving one almost a physical experience. By this the sensation seems to be more of an illusion, as it is subjective and exists internally in the subject. Space acquires its qualities because we impose them regarding the limited amount of our previous lived experiences. Then, probably in order to shift the experience, we have to shift the ‘normal’ experience, that the subject is used to.
1 Lerup, L. (2000) After the City. Massachusetts: The MIT Press, p.38 2 Merleau-Ponty (2002) Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge.Neumann, E. (1959) Art and the Creative Unconscious. 3rd ed. Translated from German by R. Manheim. Princeton: Princeton University Press, p.246 3 Bahelard, G. (1971) Creative Imagination and Language. In: Bachelad, G. On Poetic Imagination and Reverie. Translated from the French by Gaudin, C. Dallas, Spring Publicatins Inc, p.13 4Ferguson, R., McCall A. & Weyergraf-Serra C. (1999) Richard Serra Sculpture 1985 – 1998. Sylvester D. Interview. Los Angeles: The Museum of Contemporary Art, p.191 5 Bachelard, G. (1971) Creative Imagination and Language. In: Bachelad, G. On Poetic Imagination and Reverie. Translated from the French by Gaudin, C. Dallas, Spring Publicatins Inc, pp.14-15
In his work, the Piz Uter Skyspace, (Haldemann, 2010, fig.21) James Turrell, by means of the change in the brightness and tone (playing on the contrast) of artificial light, shifts the perception. He questions the moment of division between the physiology and psychology, between inside and outside. When focusing on the vast space of the sky captured in an opening it turns into a substance itself instead of being normally a background for other things. In the process the viewer loses himself in what he is aiming to perceive, as the object is not identifiable. When the artificial light fades, the view of the sky through the opening turns back in our perception to normal from virtual (Haldemann, 2010, p.26). Moreover, the viewer is the first and the foremost participant in the shifting imaginative process. an opening it turns into a substance itself instead of being normally a background for other things. In the process the viewer loses himself in what he is aiming to perceive, as the object is not identifiable. When the artificial light fades, the view of the sky through the opening turns back in our perception to normal from virtual (Haldemann, 2010, p.26). Moreover, the viewer is the first and the foremost participant in the shifting imaginative process.
Fig.21 Piz Uter Skyspace, James Turrell, 2005
As the infinite is not placed in a realm of our lived experience, the moment of the shift and of experiencing the virtual is the occasion when we can experience the common in a divergent way. At this point probably we can feel the infinite and the bodily attitude towards the space as a changing experience. For my final proposal I am developing a device, which by capturing the whole of sight would influence the entire of visionary experience. One could observe the space with the help of the object physically and contemplate oneself emotionally from the inside by receiving the experiences of the external nature. So, the perception could shift from the analytical observation of the object to the ‘pre-objective’ impressions formed by the further engagement with the device. Physically, natural light, not artificial, would pass through the layers of the object itself and form the support for the locus in the middle to shift its perceptive qualities coming from the outside. This is the same reality but perceived or I would say ‘imagined’ in a new way.
Sketch model for the Device # 2
Sketches of human-scale construction in relation to the viewer
Work in progress
Viewing position, standing in Saint Peter’s Basilica, Vatican
Close-up of the viewer
Viewing position with the help of a mirror in Church of Jesus, Rome
Close-up of the viewer
Viewing position on knees in Saint Paul’s Cathedral, London
Close-up of the viewer
Experiment for the joint for the wax #1
Experiment for the joint for the wax #2
Joint for the light
Joint for the mirror
In my object the image is formed by two domes positioned in opposite directions. Their inner curves of different dimensions face each other and become a reflection of the same size on the surface of the mirror. Here the space of the same configuration but different in size becomes one image, which is seen through an occulus is formed by the reflection of the inside of the concave and the eye of the viewer. With a change of light the mirror becomes translucent and a mirage of another inner surface appears on it. Moreover, the new image contains traces of light determined by the layers behind the one we see. The dfference in colour of the middle layer and perforations in it impose a light pattern which could not be seen directly, but could be only ‘felt’ through another layer. The inside of the bigger structure is seen from the outside as a reflection on the surface of the mirror, so it becomes an image. Another inside is seen as a real image because of transparency. Nevertheless, according to experiences of viewers it does not seem real. The apparatus presupposes physical engagement with the viewer as the image could be attained only in that way. Interaction causes particular uncomfortable feelings in knees and neck and seeing another person dealing with it seems like if he was possessed or caught into this apparatus, though actually the viewer is engaging with it himself, w to controlling the power of light, which means the level of the ‘power’ of the apparatus and the image the viewer obtains.
Engagement with the device
Snapshot # 000
Snapshot # 160
Snapshot # 140
Snapshot # 180
Snapshot # 200
Snapshot # 240
Snapshot # 220
Snapshot # 260
Snapshot # 280
Snapshot # 320
Snapshot # 300
Snapshot # 340
Snapshot # 460
Snapshot # 500
Snapshot # 480
Snapshot # 520
Snapshot # 540
Snapshot # 580
Snapshot # 560
Snapshot # 600
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the work throughout the year went through a series of transformations and the character of my experiences of both physical and emotional nature, evoked by the objects, changed. I assume that light, colour and perspective could take up an important role in forming these experiences. Nevertheless, the main point stays the same: the most significant and influential changes that are happening in the perception are happening within ourselves.
Ashton, D. (1996) About Rothko. New York: DA CAPO PRESS. Bachelard, G. (1994) The Poetics of Space. Translated from the French by I. Jolas, M. Boston: Beacon Press. Bachelard, G. (1971) Creative Imagination and Language. In: Bachelad, G. On Poetic Imagination and Reverie. Translated from the French by Gaudin, C. Dallas, Spring Publicatins Inc. Cage, J. (1998) Rothko: Color as Subject. In: Weiss, J. Mark Rothko. New Heaven and London: Yale University Press. Damisch, H. (2002) A theory of /Cloud/. Toward a History of Painting. Translated from the French by Lloyd, J. Stanford: Stanford University Press Ehrenzweig, A. (1967) The Hidden Order of Art. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Ekserdjian, D. (1997) Correggio. New Heaven and London: Yale University Press. Ferguson, R., McCall A. & Weyergraf-Serra C. (1999) Richard Serra Sculpture 1985 – 1998. Sylvester D. Interview. Los Angeles: The Museum of Contemporary Art. Frampton, K. (1995) Studies in tectonic culture: the poetics of construction in nineteenth and twentieth century architecture. London: MIT Press Freud, S. (1961) The Future of an Illusion. Civilization and its Discontents and Other Works. Translated from German by J. Strachey in collaboration with A. Freud. London: Vintage. Gundry, M. (2006) Beyond Psyche. Symbol and Transcendence in C. G. Jung. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc. Guse E. (1985) Richard Serra. New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc. Haldemann, M. (2010) James Turrell Zug Zous. Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz Verlag. Holl, S., Pallasmaa, J. & Perez-Gomez, A. (1998) Questions of Perception. Phenomenology of Architecture. 2nd ed. Tokyo, a + u Publishing Co., Ltd. Holm, L. (2010) Brunelleschi, Lacan, Le Corbusier. Architecture, Space and the Construction of Subjectivity. London and New York: Routledge. Jung, C.G. (1964) Man and his Symbols. London: Penguin Group. Jung, C. G. (1984) The Spirit in Man, Art and Literature. 2nd ed. London: ARC Paperbacks. Knox, J. (2003) Archetype, attachment, analysis : Jungian psychology and the emergent mind. Hove : BrunnerRoutledge. Lerup, L. (2000) After the City. Massachusetts: The MIT Press. Levine, Z. S. (2008) Lacan Reframed. London: I.B. Tauris & Co. Littlefield, D. (2007) Architectural Voices: Listening to Old Buildings. Chichester : Wiley-Academy. McShine K. (2007) Richard Serra Sculpture: Forty Years. New York: The Museum of Modern Art. Merleau-Ponty (2002) Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge.Neumann, E. (1959) Art and the Creative Unconscious. 3rd ed. Translated from German by R. Manheim. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Pallasmaa, J. (2005) The Eyes of the Skin. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Panofsky, E. (1997) Perspective as Symbolic Form. Translated from the German by Wood, C. New York: Zone Books. Richard Serra: Man of Steel (2008) Presented by Alan Yentob, BBC1, 50 mins [video: DVD] Segal, R.A. (1998) Jung on Mythology. London: Routledge. Teyssot, G. (2008) Mapping the Threshold: A Theory of Design and Interface. AA Files, 57, p. 2 Turrell, J. (2011) James Turrell Interview by Michael Govan, Los Angeles, 1 July 2011. Turrell, J. (2010) James Turrell. London: Gagosian Gallery. 13 October – 10 December 2010. Van Gennep, A. (1960) The Rites of Passage. London: Routledge.
Waldman D. (1978) Mark Rothko, 1903 – 1970. A Retrospective. New York: Narry N. Abrams, Inc. West, S. (1996) Reference Section: A – Z entries. In: Guide to Art. London: Bloomsberry Publishing Plc. On-line Images: Demonstration of the Principles of Perspective, Filippo Brunelleschi (2011). [online image]. Available at: <http://timelinewritingwiki.wikispaces.com/file/view/brunelleschilinear_perspective.jpg/219875086/brunelleschilinear_perspective. jpg > [23.07.2011] Illusionistic dome in Sant’Ignazio (2011). [online image]. Available at: <http://toonistansviews.wordpress.com/category/creativity/art/> [23.07.2011] In-between the domes in Saint Peter’s Basilica (2010). [online image]. Available at: <http://lh4.ggpht.com/-z2UcfyNhYT0/SaQO-WMaEhI/AAAAAAAAFuI/koi7WyuXwBM/s640/CIMG0065-1.JPG> [23.07.2011] Reflected Ceiling in Church of the Jesus (2011). [online image]. Available at: <http://www.flickr.com/photos/ cri300/5061380351/> [23.07.2011] Torqued Ellipses (2011). [online image]. Available at: <http://www.revistaexclama.com/revista/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/web-5-SER_Torqued-Ellipses-hi-res.jpg> [23.07.2011] View of the dome in Saint Peter’s Basilica (2010). [online image]. Available at: <http://www.travelpod.com/travelblog-entries/carofoley/1/1282588558/tpod.html#pbrowser/carofoley/1/1282588558/filename=st-peter-s-dome.jpg> [23.07.2011] Wren C., Saint Paul’s Cathedral, London - plan and section (1675-1709). [Online image]. Available at: <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Christopher_Wren,_Saint_Paul%27s_Cathedral,_London_(plan_and_section).JPG>. [09.01.2010]
+44 (0) 207884232899 anna.mokhova1@gmail.com