VANISHING | SPACE
a reflection by Anja Billion and Helena Sileghem on texts on the contemporary pavilion by Sylvia Lavin and other authors, showcasing Aldo Van Eycks ’65 Sonsbeek pavilion
On View January 19–February 11, 2018
The Sonsbeek 2018 Van Eyck pavilion exhibition, ‘revisiting the pavilion’ , explores the striking experiential nature of this ’65 building. Exhibiting the monumentalized pavilion, a reflection is made on its status as an art-showcasing tool as well as its part in the conversation with the visitor itself. The exhibition features the pavilion orchestrating conversations between iconic works of art, while at the same time demanding attention for it’s pure materiality and monumentality.
Focusing on how the showcased pavilion may differ from its original temporal form it is suggested through the representation by a metaphorical image that some fundamental elements may have been lost through time. Being presented in winter time, the metaphorical picture is put into question.
The exhibition showcases approximately thirty artworks by a variety of artists and has the pavilion as its main trump. Being confronted by the reconstruction of the pavilion the visitor is confronted with the image of the architectural work, the art and the architecture in its very presence itself. The pavilion as the leading theme, the new experience is put into question. Space, as the confrontation between the leading image and a new confrontation with the pavilion, naked in its presence, is the question. Whether the fundamental core of the pavilion, or the layer that vanishes, is up to the visitor.
The ’65 Sonsbeek pavilion in Arnhem may have been a perfect exhibition of artworks, as well as of itself. A drawing, a metaphor on the city – a new experience in the presentation of art- has given rise to this temporary pavilion in Sonsbeek, which forms a temporary tribute to architecture. A point of focus. The architecture, with its traditional grounded character, exhibits itself in situ. The exhibition of course, by the very nature of its temporary condition after time had to fade
In an attempt to salvage the pavilion from its condition of temporality, a permanent built memory in the Kröller Müller park has been created. Some functional additions generate the ability to visit artworks even in winter time and underneath a new roof, made for durability. A restoration based purely on the architectural form of the pavilion, yet failing in this attempt by an incorrect reduction of the crucial elements making up the pavilion. A solution for temporality is provided, while in fact the presentation of artworks remains very temporal. Half of the year, the pavilion presents itself as a naked object, devoid of the very relational experience it was designed for. One might call it a messianic attempt to free the pavilion from a condition that might not have needed saving.
The balance between the components of art and architecture in the pavilion is scrutinized today. With the proliferation of pavilions, it becomes hard to legitimize the pavilion for its criticality, as Sylvia Lavin argues In response, some authors (leading paper conference ‘inside|outside, trading between art and architecture) say this condition of the pavilion is creating a new cultural norm in the categorization of art and architecture disciplines
Whatever meaning the pavilion ends up carrying, recent academic work has seemed to agree on putting the architectural component in the background. Traditionally often represented by the same iconic image, the pavilion showcasing spectacular architecture, the thesis now thus that the architecturalcomponent becomes trivial in the pavilion Having no program, the question diverts towards the extra layer, the meaning, the art of the architecture, has to be displayed. Whether a result of academics’ perspective on the matter, the pavilions reduction to its art-component is questioned.
‘Architecture doesn’t need to exhibited, it’s already public’ (openings debate conference ‘inside|outside, trading between art and architecture) indeed is a rightly debatable statement. The architecture of the pavilion may be wrongly put in the shade. In the Van Eyck pavilion the urban conversation designed between people and artworks needs the pavilion as a mediator, but it is just as well as a partner in the conversation. One is confronted with architecture. A meeting with the art, becomes a meeting with the pavilion. Space as part of the conversation. In a distracted world, the pavilion showcases architecture. In contrast to works of visual art, that can be reproduced on location, architecture stays presented as rooted in locality.
In its restoration, a first representation of the original glory of the pavilion is created On the other hand, the drawing, as an alternative representation, can be a second one. The pavilion circulates as a narrative of images. Mostly images of its physical appearance, equally flawed as its built permanent restored state. However, an alternative narrative exists in another drawing: the drawing of design intentions. Van Eycks envisioned experience: art in the city Undone of physical representation, the drawing stays true to every intention. Although then again, devoid of physical manifestation, none of them get to be developed.
The pavilion as a referential event, in site and on paper – an announcement in the city. Both a narrative on the Van Eyck pavilion, both equally flawed. Ironically, both flawed in their representation of the fundamental architecture. The copy-paste action has both times failed to capture elements. Once by eliminating part of the art-layer by eliminating crucial architectural eliminating, once by completing eliminating the architectural layer in an attempt to restore its purity.
The event as fundamentally flawed Architecture as overlooked. The image question the pavilions need for its physical carrier. How to restore what was present in the pavilions very temporal form? Back to the image? Yes. But also back to the world. The pavilion deserves to be exhibited.
What’s left is to create a poster, with the city as it’s carrier. An event is showcased, an event arises in conversation. The intended experience as a possible replacement for the architecture. An urban conversation between people, artworks and architecture, glued together by the buildings of the city. An invitation to revisit the pavilion. The pavilion purely as its essence, materialized through conversation. Focused or dispersed, present nonetheless. Conversation in the city, exhibition in the Kröller-Müller park. Which one do you attend?