HUMAN_ANTONY GORMLEY

N

N

human antony gormley 103 life-size cast iron bodyforms installed across the Forte di Belvedere, Florence

Art Direction Sergio Risaliti Curated by Arabella Natalini and Sergio Risaliti

5 Foreword Dario Nardella 9 Human: Antony Gormley at the Forte di Belvedere Sergio Risaliti 21 An interview between Antony Gormley and Arabella Natalini 43 Human Figures: Antony Gormley’s Human Andrew Benjamin 89 The Stone Fortress and the Iron Fortress Mario Codognato 105 Inhabiting the Forte Marco Casamonti 168 List of Works 174 Selected Exhibitions 178 Selected Bibliography 182 Acknowledgements

6

7

8

Human Antony Gormley at the Forte di Belvedere I

Sergio Risaliti

I have set you at the centre of the world, so that from there you may more easily survey whatever is in the world. We have made you neither heavenly nor earthly, neither mortal nor immortal, so that, more freely and more honourably the moulder and maker of yourself, you may fashion yourself in whatever form you may prefer. You shall be able to descend among the lower forms of being, which are brute beasts; you shall be able to be reborn out of the judgement of your own soul into the higher beings, which are divine.

Giovanni Pico della Mirandola1

There are only two subjects that interest me: body and space, or experience and extension. The human condition can only be addressed through issues of architecture and the body.

Antony Gormley 2

Since the 17th century, the city of Florence has been the ideal destination for rich, cultured travellers drawn South by a reverence for beauty and harmony, and by proof of man’s divine lineage and dominion over nature. In the works of Botticelli and Michelangelo, these sensitive, enthusiastic devotees disembarking in Genoa and Livorno, or crossing the Alps and the Apennines, found proof essential for understanding theophany in Renaissance art and architecture, and found evidence of the supremacy of man, made in God’s likeness, over nature.

On leaving Tuscany, these initiates then spread the Neoclassical and Neoplatonic aesthetic across Europe and beyond. The art of the Renaissance helped to establish European culture and society with its political and religious institutions, and with its advanced technology, its principles and values based on the power of Reason, throughout the world. The supremacy of Western man and the myths and codes of art were introduced to, or imposed upon the entire planet. The myth of the ideal man and the ideal city, which took hold in the 15th and 16th centuries, still exerts a great fascination for those who, centuries later, retrace the steps of the Grand Tour and come in their turn to Florence to admire their Renaissance heritage.

The Grand Tour – a term coined by Richard Lassels in his Complete Journey through Italy (1670) – survives to this day and perpetuates amongst the hordes of tourists who flock to Florence, lured by the beauty of David and the mysterious significance of the Primavera. Fortunately, cultural sympathy or empathy between peoples is growing constantly thanks to art and because of ‘l’amour de l’art’, as Pierre Bourdieu famously described it. This helps put an end to alienation and intolerance, terror and mistrust. The Forte di Belvedere has a special place in this centuriesold affair as it is a truly unique open-air museum where the art of our time can be enjoyed. It is a place of contemplation; it complements the Piazza della Signoria and the Loggia dei Lanzi, with their revelatory theatre of works including Hercules and Cacus, Perseus, The Rape of the Sabine Women, Judith and David. Even though the defensive nature of the Forte di Belvedere is still evident and clearly perceptible in its structure­, the architectural masses and pointed bastions, its meditative function now holds sway. This is essentially the result of a way of looking at and perceiving the art and architecture of Florence in terms of the sublime and the picturesque, the imposing and the almost eternal, which became established in the 17th and especially in the 18th century. Grand Duke Peter Leopold of Tuscany (1747–92) democratically opened the terrace to the public so that his subjects and cultured travellers could look out over Florence. Since then, nothing has changed: this is the reason for the addition of the word ‘Belvedere’ to ‘Forte’. Since the villa-fortress was turned into a stage from which the eternal beauty of the Renaissance could be enjoyed, it is hard, if not impossible not to be drawn into the vortex of contemplation and become the victim of the emotion and fascination of the picturesque. In 1817, in the Piazza Santa Croce, the French author Stendhal was overcome by the beauty all around him. The Forte di Belvedere is another place that could bring about the very syndrome named after the author. The presence of art in this fortified villa thus plays an essentially maieutic role here: as in the myth of Plato’s cave, the art of our own time can reveal the spectacular deception of the ideal city, and also of an ideal man. It returns us to the discourse on art and architecture, and its relation to man and public space, from its lofty heights to the less rhetorical level of everyday life.

II

The exhibition centre of the Forte di Belvedere, previously known as the Fortezza di Santa Maria in San Giorgio, opened in 1972 with a solo exhibition of works

9

20

An interview between Antony Gormley and Arabella Natalini

Reading or listening to an artist’s words is a desire often shared by scholars, Arabella Natalini: insiders and the public, who regularly seek out captions and explanations prior to even having encountered a work. Although this need for direction is legitimate and comprehensible, I do wonder whether it is a symptom of a failure of contemporary art, validating a passive attitude in front of it, allowing us to avoid activating our own imagination and thoughts. However, I believe that things are more complicated, and while on the one hand your work is so telling that doesn’t require further explanation, on the other, I think it would be useful to discuss your position concerning what you are making. My impression is that you are extremely involved in your work and at the same time, capable of taking a detached view of the creative process. How would you assess the relationship between your works and your words? Do you actually feel the need to express yourself further, or is this something that you simply do, surrendering to the endless invitations to speak about your work?

I have always agreed to talk not because I think that talking is necessary or a Antony Gormley: prerequisite for the understanding of the work but it can illuminate approaches and fundamental assumptions: the challenges of and responsibility to the inspirations of making. Unlike painting, sculpture does not require walls and the shelter of a roof in order to do its work, and of all of the visual arts, sculpture engages a collective response in collective space. So sculpture, of its nature and particularly when in nature, invades collective space. If you are responsible for putting a work in the desert, by the sea, or on the roofs of New York, people have a legitimate reason to ask what your basis for doing so is. I accept and wish to examine the social responsibility of sculpture.

Apart from all of those issues, the thought structure of art is a tool and, as one might go into the workshop of a violin maker and understand the nature of the instrument through looking at the workbench at which these instruments are made, so examining the conceptual structure out of which a work arises is not a bad thing to do – not just for the public but also for me. As we have started this conversation before I have begun installing the work, the exhibition may be improved because I may sharpen my understanding of the challenges.

Of course this whole ekphrasis issue, of narration and reflection on a work, can be dismissed by phrases such as ‘if I could explain it, I wouldn’t need to make it’. I want to make it very clear that I do not do interviews to explain what it is that people might be looking at. The works I make come from an urgency that is beyond my control. In many ways the works dictate themselves, every work being the mother of the subsequent one. They dictate how they should be made and my assistants and I are slaves to the works determinism. It is true that invention favours the wellprepared mind. I think that both the intellectual structure out of which a project comes, as well as the physical condition of the studio in which it is made, are the two poles by which work of clarity comes and both are worthy of examination. Brancusi said something like ‘things are not difficult to make; what is difficult is putting ourselves in the state of mind to make them’. I believe that. The integration in the last years of digital imaging, model making, engineering and computing, along with the training of a group of creative individuals at the studio with a common aim to develop and push the varied languages of sculpture, has been an essential instrument in my work.

None of this explains the work – art is an open place, it is a place in which even I, as the maker, can enter an open place of interpretation. The work, when made, is simply there and the degree to which the work, in its silence and stillness, invites us to project onto it the thoughts and feelings relevant to that moment in our lives, is one of its major functions. The stillness and silence of sculpture is a foil against which the changing climate of our feelings and rational consciousness find a resonator.

21

42

Human Figures: Antony Gormley’s Human

Andrew Benjamin

Antony Gormley’s Human occupies a specific site: the Forte di Belvedere in Florence. In order to occupy the site Gormley constructed a scale model. A replica of architect Bernardo Buontalenti’s building was prepared. The late 16th century fortress and surrounds were recreated. That re-creation played an essential role in how the site was approached in order that it then be occupied by human figures.

Each figure allows the human to figure. The figure has a doubled quality. In the first instance, as a substantive and in the second, an activity. The doubling of the figure will prove decisive. The creation of the model of the Forte was an essential part of coming to an initial understating of the quality the site had, and thus of taking up the question of what would be at stake in its occupation by the figures.

These figures, whether on their own or in groups, do not simply occupy the places in which they are located, more significantly they transform both the site itself, as well as the individual locales of their placement. Prior to any engagement with that transformation – and the whole question of what it means for a site to be transformed is fundamental – it is essential to stay with the site’s own particularity.

As a historical location, the Forte di Belvedere had a number of functions.

It was created to symbolize the power of the Medici family. It was to be a place in which, were the city to come under attack, Florence would remain effectively governed and the Medici could seek refuge. As a site however, while it had a capacity to offer refuge, refuge was never sought. The site awaited use.

There is a strong sense in which that presence remains. While the site’s history is important, what has to be noted, in addition, is the way that it allows for an almost unique presentation of Florence. Both aspects of the site are fundamental to understanding its presence and the positioning of figures within it. The effect of the location of the Forte di Belvedere on a hill means that Florence is presented as a controlled and manageable entity before it. It constructs the city as there to be seen. It appears as a dynamic model. What is significant is that from its appearance as model there is a connection between the modular nature of the city as it appears before the Forte and the works that populate the site. Even though, for example, Brunelleschi’s dome on the Duomo still retains its visual significance, it too is drawn into the field of vision in which each element is positioned in relation to another. A form of singularity occurs in the precise sense that the city takes on a unified singular quality. While dynamic it is there to be seen. A type of continuity is created. As the day passes and the light changes, the unity that is created continues to be recreated. Each recreation reveals new and different qualities. From the Forte, Florence is there before the eye. While the presence of the Forte as a historical site has to be acknowledged, its presence as a site from which the city of Florence acquires – as an object of sight – a singular quality, has to be affirmed. The figures that come to occupy the Forte overlook a singular Florence. Integral to their power as works – integral, that is, to what these figures allow to figure – is, in part, given by their presence before this Florence. And yet, this juxtaposition is far more complex than first appears.

Once Florence registers the presence of that which, while singular, is recreated such that both light and time are effective, then Florence as an object is effected differently. In general terms, difference is placed within continuity. Differences in others words – and here difference would be the way the relation between the elements from which the city is constructed change with the passage of time – are positioned by the continuity of that which is given to be seen. This is what is seen.

Questions emerge at this precise point: What is it that is seen when these figures occupy the Forte? What do they figure? Fundamental to all of them is the question of the human. There can be no easy escape from the exigency that arises. While the figures form part of projects that had been named before, the Critical Mass and

43

68

69

80

81

88

The Stone Fortress and the Iron Fortress Mario Codognato

Successive civilizations – an ever-evolving definition and representation of human beings over many thousands of years – has led to what we truly are, to the relationships of power and coexistence between people. The body and its physical and perceptual limits constitute the basis of our experience of ourselves and of the world. The proportions, needs and potential of the human body, and the means to overcome it, form the very basis of culture, of scientific research, of architecture and, naturally, of art. Iconoclasm, specifically its rejection of any representation of the human body which has traversed many phases of history, has suddenly become, again, a topical issue in the territories occupied by so-called ISIL, and has, by contrast, reinforced its role and centrality. From its very core, the body extends out in relation with other bodies, thus forming our society and body politic.

Social life is based on the relationship between one’s own and other bodies, and power is established and defined by bodies and the relationships between them.

what would I do without this world faceless incurious where to be lasts but an instant where every instant spills in the void the ignorance of having been without this wave where in the end body and shadow together are engulfed what would I do without this silence where the murmurs die the pantings the frenzies toward succour towards love without this sky that soars above its ballast dust

In The Lost Ones, one of Samuel Beckett’s most renowned stories, the inhabitants are caught in the claustrophobic, geometrical space of a cylinder, fifty metres in diameter and sixteen metres high, conveying the idea of a humanity trapped within a mesh of power that has no single radiating centre. Rather, it is an entity whose functional nature is expressed by a whole range of different strategies which enter into and subjugate bodies, in order to exercise its control over all individual, subjective identities. The existence of the inhabitants is entirely exhausted in the spirit world and the bodies, having lost their standard postures, stiffen into atrocious poses: bodies placed back to back with their eyes looking backwards, crouching, or transfixed in an erect position.

what would I do what I did yesterday and the day before peering out of my deadlight looking for another wandering like me eddying far from all living in a convulsive space among the voices voiceless that throng my hiddenness

Samuel Beckett,

‘what would I do without this world’ in Samuel Beckett: Collected Poems in English and French, London: John Calder Ltd., 1977, p. 59.

Antony Gormley’s art takes the human body as its point of departure, as a universal, fundamental and accessible form (with all that this entails), and it becomes an instrument for defining and investigating both subjectivity and collectivity, and the inextricable and inescapable bond between them. In this sense, the casts of his body, like the figures in The Lost Ones, are repeated in every imaginable pose, becoming shadows of the journey and torment of humanity on Earth, irrespective of geopolitics or of any creed. It is not by coincidence that among the twelve positions of the sculptures from the series Critical Mass installed in a line as part of the installation Human at the Forte di Belvedere, the classic traditional postures for praying in the Muslim, Christian and Buddhist religions are represented. At the centre of the entire installation is a sculpture in which a human figure, in an act of existential abandonment, holds its head in its hands (see pp. 23 and 28). The resistance of the material, iron, contrasts with the fragility of the bones and muscles of the body and refocuses the exhibition space, in this case the Forte, becoming a dialectic catalyst, focusing on the contradictions of the humanity it symbolically represents.

Humankind, or rather the human condition, is the mainstay of his aesthetic and conceptual research. In an epoch in which mankind is no longer the fulcrum of the universe, but rather a disoriented, phantasmal being, and a simulacrum of apparitions, Gormley tries to convey different states of mind without giving answers but by posing questions. The human features of Gormley’s sculptures are also diametrically opposed to an aim for an anthropomorphic representation, for there is no naturalistic decoration but rather, a primitive aesthetic with a total lack of anatomical or physiognomic detail. In their gradual move towards abstraction, Gormley’s bodies are subject to the study of masses and volumes in space and to a desire to make sculpture the deployment of an inert ‘encumbrance’. This inspires viewers to reflect on their own body, simultaneously sensing its individual parts in a space-time experience, as in the work Feeling Material XIII (2004) made of a single

89

104

Inhabiting the Forte

Marco Casamonti

Looking down on Antony Gormley’s installation at the Forte di Belvedere from above, or examining an aerial view generated by Google Maps, a viewer might spot numerous tiny iron bodies dotted around this ancient defensive complex that is the endpoint in a series of architectural structures that begins with the Uffizi in the centre of Florence, and rises up through the Palazzo Pitti and the Boboli Gardens. The 16th century fortress recalls the geometrical perfection of a strident stellar body, as described by its architect Bernardo Buontalenti with typically graphic precision. The silent inhabitants arranged by Gormley interrogate its physical structure and the underlying violence of the late 16th century. He achieves this with forms of the body that are themselves transmuted into increasingly disrupted and abstract accumulations of cubes. Eschewing grand scale, they do not dominate their setting but are immersed within it.

Gormley’s intervention animates the transformation of defensive architecture in response to the evolution of cannon fire and ballistic capability. Mediaeval containing walls were perpendicular with right-angled corners and here are replaced by battered bastions and acutely angled corners. The design of the Forte is based both on the previous studies of the sculptor, architect and engineer Giuliano da Sangallo, and on those of artist, architectural theorist and military engineer Francesco di Giorgio Martini, by way of Leonardo, who owned their manuscripts. In particular, though, it is based on Michelangelo’s visions; he was at that time head engineer of fortifications of the city. We can see the mind of Michelangelo dealing with how architecture has to respond to the trajectories of cannon fire in a sequence of drawings on show at the Casa Buonarroti, where the relation between besieging fire and strategic defensive fire encourage the use of hidden redoubts: exactly what we find at the Forte di Belverdere.

Gormley has engaged a playful strategy in dealing with this context, setting a line of twelve rising human forms in different postures in contrast with seemingly randomly fallen piles of ‘bodyforms’ and singular works made up of those same postures. Together they form a serious and considered reflection on the dialectic that is expressed by power and money: violence and beauty. Gormley underscores the tension inherent in the very existence of a place intended for military action in the face of Florence, the ‘cradle of civilization’. By allowing free access to the Forte, a ‘theatre of the everyday’ occurs in which the work becomes hidden and then revealed in the return of these spaces to public experience – an experience made reflexive by the silent witnesses and testimonies distributed in all the spaces of the Forte.

The works seek neither mimesis nor dominance of their setting. Their most profound significance resides in their interrogation of the precepts of the Renaissance and a Humanism that unifies art and science, observation of nature and a vision of reality based on universal laws. Gormley’s reality-check on the aspirations of the grandeur of the Humanist vision of man as the measure of all things is an attempt to take account of the failure of humanist promises of ‘perfectabilty’ and an attempt to measure an individual man: a particular rather than a universal man. He introduces a note of dis-harmony, fracture, and the fallen as a counter to the ideal – an admission of the continued persistence of violence in the face of beauty.

Anthropomorphism has always been a source of inspiration for architecture. In his treatise on civil and military architecture, Giorgio Martini refers to the model for the city being the male body, with castle and market named as head and stomach.

What Gormley has effected is a reversal, where architecture becomes the organising principle of a deconstructed body. As the viewer progresses through the spaces

105

126

127

156

157

List of Works

Antony Gormley Human, 2015 An installation of 103 life-size cast iron bodyforms at the Forte di Belvedere, Florence.

The piece is made up of a selection of ‘Blockworks’ (2011–2015): 43 individual cast iron sculptures, and the work Critical Mass II (1995): 60 cast iron elements comprised of 12 individual repeated poses; all of variable dimensions, as itemised.

168

Works are listed in order of appearance in the catalogue.

Page numbers in italics indicate pages on which works are prominent in photographs.

Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 12 of 12: 197.2 x 49.7 x 38.2 cm (illus. pp. 7 and 15) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 3 of 12: 81 x 47.6 x 65 cm (illus. pp. 7, 15 and 19) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 7 of 12: 152.3 x 50.7 x 76.2 cm (illus. pp. 7 and 172–173) Relief II, 2012 Cast iron 33.5 x 198.5 x 42.5 cm (illus. pp. 16–17, 19 and 128–129) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 4 of 12: 108.8 x 50.3 x 119.1 cm (illus. pp. 16–17, 20, 38–39 and 40–41) Concern, 2014 Cast iron 70 x 72.5 x 62 cm (illus. pp. 20 and 35) Clamp III, 2014 Cast iron 175 x 60 x 53.5 cm (illus. pp. 23 and 28) Level II, 2011 Cast iron 24 x 204 x 56 cm (illus. pp. 23 and 24–25) Stop, 2014 Cast iron 53 x 46 x 80.5 cm (illus. pp. 37, 122–123, 128–129 and 136–137)

Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 9 of 12: 177.3 x 51.8 x 69.7 cm (illus. pp. 37, 46–47, 122–123 and 136–137) Push XIII, 2015 Cast iron 162.5 x 45.5 x 44.5 cm (illus. pp. 38–39 and 128–129) Stump II, 2012 Cast iron 116 x 44 x 103 cm (illus. pp. 40–41, 42 and 52–53) Hunch, 2015 Cast iron 185 x 43 x 31 cm (illus. pp. 40–41, 50 and 52–53) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 7 of 12: 152.3 x 50.7 x 76.2 cm (illus. pp. 44, 86–87, 92–93, 100–101 and 122–123) Contract, 2011 Cast iron 45.5 x 48.5 x 161 cm (illus. pp. 48–49, 76–77, 107, 118–119 and 136–137) Guard, 2015 Cast iron 189.5 x 42 x 41 cm (illus. pp. 48–49, 76–77, 107, 118–119 and 136–137) Push XI, 2013 Cast iron 170 x 47 x 45 cm (illus. pp. 48–49, 76–77, 107, 118–119 and 136–137) Gaze, 2014 Cast iron 190 x 47 x 30 cm (illus. p. 55) Crease, 2015 Cast iron 41 x 98 x 69 cm (illus. pp. 56–57)

Mean II, 2013 Cast iron 40.5 x 102.5 x 67 cm (illus. pp. 56–57) Mean IV, 2013 Cast iron 35 x 102 x 78 cm (illus. pp. 56–57) Shed, 2012 Cast iron 38 x 188 x 31 cm (illus. pp. 58–59) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 11 of 12: 197.9 x 52 x 38 cm (illus. pp. 58–59 and 60–61) Rest VI, 2013 Cast iron 58.5 x 131 x 99 cm (illus. pp. 58–59, 62–63, 128–129 and 136–137) Test III, 2013 Cast iron 95 x 49 x 58.5 cm (illus. pp. 58–59, 62–63, 128–129 and 136–137) Daze V, 2015 Cast iron 181.5 x 38.5 x 45.5 cm (illus. pp. 58–59, 62–63, 128–129 and 136–137) Strand, 2012 Cast iron 25.5 x 66.5 x 196.5 cm (illus. pp. 58–59 and 128–129) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 10 of 12: 192.6 x 50.2 x 45.5 cm (illus. pp. 64–65, 66–67, 172–173 and 180–181)

Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 5 of 12 (within the line): 122.4 x 50.5 x 58.3 cm (illus. pp. 64–65, 66–67, 68–69, 76–77, 82, 128–129, 136–137, 172–173 and 180–181)

Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 12 of 12 (within the line): 197.2 x 49.7 x 38.2 cm (illus. pp. 64–65, 66–67, 68–69, 76–77, 82, 128–129, 136–137, 172–173 and 180–181)

Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 7 of 12 (within the line): 152.3 x 50.7 x 76.2 cm (illus. pp. 64–65, 66–67, 68–69, 72–73, 76–77, 82, 128–129, 136–137, 172–173 and 180–181)

Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 1 of 12 (within the line): 51 x 54.8 x 109.2 cm (illus. pp. 66–67, 68–69, 70–71, 76–77, 128–129, 136–137 and 180–181)

Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 8 of 12 (within the line): 166.1 x 51.4 x 50.9 cm (illus. pp. 64–65, 66–67, 68–69, 74–75, 76–77, 82, 128–129, 136–137, 172–173 and 180–181) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 9 of 12 (within the line): 177.3 x 51.8 x 69.7 cm (illus. pp. 64–65, 66–67, 68–69, 74–75, 76–77, 128–129, 136–137, 172–173 and 180–181) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 10 of 12 (within the line): 192.6 x 50.2 x 45.5 cm (illus. pp. 64–65, 66–67, 68–69, 76–77, 128–129, 136–137, 172–173 and 180–181) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 11 of 12 (within the line): 197.9 x 52 x 38 cm (illus. pp. 64–65, 66–67, 68–69, 76–77, 82, 128–129, 136–137, 172–173 and 180–181)

Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 2 of 12 (within the line): 66.1 x 58.2 x 65.1 cm (illus. pp. 66–67, 68–69, 76–77, 128–129, 136–137 and 180–181) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 3 of 12 (within the line): 81 x 47.6 x 65 cm (illus. pp. 66–67, 68–69, 76–77, 128–129, 136–137 and 180–181) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 4 of 12 (within the line): 108.8 x 50.3 x 119.1 cm (illus. pp. 66–67, 68–69, 76–77, 82, 128–129, 136–137 and 180–181) Critical Mass II, 1995 Cast iron 60 life-size elements Overall dimensions variable Pose 6 of 12 (within the line): 147.1 x 50.4 x 74.9 cm (illus. pp. 66–67, 68–69, 76–77, 82, 128–129, 136–137, 172–173 and 180–181)

169

Selected Bibliography

Second Body (Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac Pantin, Paris, 2015); texts

by Guitemie Maldonado and William Forsythe. Antony Gormley interviewed by Hans Ulrich Obrist Room (Corbin & King, London, 2014); text by Margaret Iversen Expansion Field (Zentrum Paul Klee, Bern, Switzerland, 2014); texts by Rebecca Comay, Peter Fischer and Andrew Renton Meet (Galleri Andersson/Sandström, Stockholm 2014); text by Maaretta Jaukkuri Another Time Mardalsfossen, (Mardalsfossen 2014); texts by Marit Wadsten, Eckhard Schneider. Antony Gormley interviewed by Be Andr States and Conditions (White Cube, Hong Kong 2014); text by Huang Du. Antony Gormley and Richard Noble in Conversation according to a given mean (Xavier Hufkens, Brussels 2013); text by Jean Paul Van Bendegem. Antony Gormley and Mary Moore in Conversation Meter (Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac, Salzburg 2013); text by Martin Caiger-Smith Model (White Cube, London 2013); texts by Antony Gormley and Michael Newman Firmament and Other Forms (Middelheim Museum, Antwerp 2013); texts by Antony Gormley, Frank Maes and Sara Weyns Still Being / Corpos Presentes, 2nd ed (Centro Cultural Banco do Brasil, São Paulo 2013); texts by Marcello Dantas, Agnaldo Farias, W. J. T. Mitchell and Luiz Camillo Osorio. Antony Gormley interviewed by Marcello Dantas Still Being / Corpos Presentes (Centro Cultural Banco do Brasil, São Paolo 2012); texts by Marcello Dantas, Agnaldo Farias, WJT Mitchell and Luiz Camillo Osorio. Antony Gormley interviewed by Marcello Dantas Horizon Field Hamburg (Deichtorhallen, Hamburg; Snoeck, Cologne 2012); texts by Stephen Levinson, Dirk Luckow and Iain Boyd Whyte Vessel (Galleria Continua, San Gimignano 2012); texts by Mario Cristiani and Mario Codognato. Antony Gormley interviewed by Mario Cristiani. Conversation between Antony Gormley, Saskia Sassen and Richard Sennett Antony Gormley: Memes (Anna Schwartz Gallery, Melbourne 2011); text by Renata Salecl for the time being (Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac, Paris 2011); text by Pierre Tillet Horizon Field (Kunsthaus Bregenz 2011); texts by Yilmaz Dziewior, Eckhard Schneider, Martin Seel and Beat Wyss Still Standing (Fontanka, London 2011); texts by Margaret Iversen, Dimitri Ozerkov and Anna Trofimova IHME Contemporary Art Festival 2009 (Pro Arte Foundation, Helsinki 2011); introduction by Paula Topplia. Antony Gormley interviewed by Paulo Herkenhoff

178

Antony Gormley: Aperture (Xavier Hufkens, Brussels 2010); texts by Frank Maes and Roger Penrose Antony Gormley (Tate Publishing, London 2010); texts by Martin Caiger-Smith One and Other: Antony Gormley (Jonathan Cape, London 2010); texts by Hugh Brody, Lee Hall, Darian Leader, Alphonso Lingis and Hans Ulrich Obrist Antony Gormley: Exposure (The Municipality of Lelystad 2010); texts by Karel Ankerman and Christophe Van Gerrewey Antony Gormley: Drawing Space (Museo d’Arte Contemporanea Roma; Electa, Rome 2010); text by Anna Moszynska. Antony Gormley interviewed by Luca Massimo Barbero Ataxia II (Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac, Paris 2009); text by Rod Mengham Antony Gormley (Kunsthaus Bregenz 2009); texts by Antonio Damasio, Yilmaz Dziewior and Marcus Steinweg Acts, States, Times, Perspectives (World House Editions, Middlebury, Connecticut; Edition Copenhagen 2008); text by Poul Erik Tøjner Antony Gormley: Between You and Me (Kunsthal Rotterdam 2008); texts by Fernando Huici March and Rod Mengham.

Antony Gormley interviewed by Pierre Tillet Antony Gormley (Museo de Arte Contemporaneo, Monterrey, Mexico 2008); texts by Jorge Contreras and Mark Cousins.

Antony Gormley interviewed by Hans Ulrich Obrist Antony Gormley: Blind Light (Hayward Gallery Publishing, London 2007); texts by W.J.T. Mitchell, Susan Stewart and Anthony Vidler.

Conversation between Antony Gormley, Jacky Klein and Ralph Rugoff Antony Gormley (SteidlMack, London 2007); texts by Antony Gormley and Richard Noble Antony Gormley: Bodies in Space (Bernhard Heiliger Stiftung, Berlin 2007); texts by Sabine Heiliger, Manfred Schneckenburger and Marc Wellman Fai Spazio prendi posto / Making Space Taking Place (Gli Ori, Pistoia; Associazione Arte Continua, San Gimignano 2006); texts by Achille Bonito Oliva, Mario Cristiani, Antony Gormley, Alphonso Lingis, James Putnam and Vincenzo Ruggiero Antony Gormley: Asian Field (Institute of Contemporary Arts Singapore; LASALLE-SIA College of the Arts, Singapore 2006); texts by Tsutomu Mizusawa and Eugene Tan (trans. Kikuko Ogawa) Antony Gormley: Breathing Room (Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac, Paris 2006); texts by Michael Doser, Catherine Ferbos-Nakov, Antony Gormley, Ann Hindry, Marc Hindry, Paolo Molaro and David Quéré Intersezioni 2: Time Horizon (Parco Archeologico di Scolacium, Roccelletta di Borgia, Catanzaro 2006); texts by Bruno Corà, Alberto Fiz, Maria Grazia Aisa and Colin Renfrew Asian Field: Makers and Made (Hand Books, London 2006)

Antony Gormley: Inside Australia (Thames and Hudson, London 2005); texts by Anthony Bond, Hugh Brody, Shelagh Magadza and Finn Pederson Mass and Empathy (Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, Lisbon 2004); texts by Paolo Herkenhoff and Maria Filomena Molder. Antony Gormley interviewed by Jorge Molder Broken Column (Wigestrand Forlag; Rogaland Museum of Fine Arts, Stavanger, 2004); edited by Jan Inge Reilstad, texts by Stephan Bann, Trond Borgen, Kjartan Fløgstad and Siri Meyer Making Space (Hand Books, London 2004), texts by Darian Leader, Andrew Renton and Richard Sennett. Antony Gormley interviewed

by Jorge Molder Asian Field (The British Council, London 2003); texts by Hu Fang and Richard Noble. Antony Gormley interviewed by im Interview mit Sui Jianguo Antony Gormley: Standing Matter (Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac, Salzburg 2003); texts by Norman Rosenthal and Eckhard Schneider Antony Gormley (Centro Galego de Arte Contemporanea, Santiago de Compostela 2002); texts by Lisa Jardine and Michael Tarantino.

Antony Gormley interviewed by Enrique Juncosa Antony Gormley: Workbooks I: 1977 –1992 (Centro Galego de Arte Contemporanea, Santiago de Compostela 2002); texts and drawings

by Antony Gormley Antony Gormley: Drawing (The British Museum, London, 2002); text by Anna Moszynska

Museums, Tokyo 1996); texts by Stephen Bann, Daniel Birnbaum, Antony Gormley, Tadayasu Sakai and Kazuo Yamawaki Critical Mass (Stadtraum Remise, Vienna 1995); text by Andrew Renton. Antony Gormley interviewed by Edek Bartz. Excerpts from Crowds and Power by Elias Canetti Antony Gormley (Phaidon Press, London 1995); texts by Antony Gormley, John Hutchinson and Lela B. Njatin. Antony Gormley interviewed by Declan McGonagle. Antony Gormley in conversation with E. H. Gombrich Learning to See (Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac, Paris 1993); text by Yehuda Safran. Antony Gormley interviewed by Roger Bevan Antony Gormley (Malmö Konsthall; Tate Liverpool; Irish Museum of Modern Art, Dublin 1993); texts by Stephen Bann and Lewis Biggs. Antony Gormley interviewed by Declan McGonagle Field (The Montreal Museum of Fine Arts; Oktagon, Stuttgart 1993); texts by Antony Gormley, Thomas McEvilley, Gabriel Orozco and Pierre Théberge Antony Gormley (Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Humlebaek 1989); texts by Richard Calvocoressi and Oystein Hjort Antony Gormley: Five Works (Serpentine Gallery; Arts Council of Great Britain, London 1987) Antony Gormley: Drawings (Salvatore Ala Gallery, Milan 1985) Antony Gormley (Salvatore Ala Gallery, Milan 1984); text by Lynne Cooke

Some of the Facts (Tate St Ives, Cornwall 2001); texts by Iwona Blazwick, Stephen Levinson and Will Self States and Conditions (Orchard Gallery, Derry 2001); texts by Caoimhín Mac Giolla Léith, Brendan McMenamin and Declan McGonagle Quantum Clouds and Other Work (Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac, Paris 2000); texts by Anne Hindry and Ian Tromp Antony Gormley (Phaidon Press, London 2000); texts by Antony Gormley, John Hutchinson and Lela B. Njatin. Antony Gormley interviewed by Declan McGonagle; revised edition with additional essay by W.J.T. Mitchell. Antony Gormley in conversation with mit E.H. Gombrich Total Strangers (Verlag Hatje Cantz, Ostfildern 1999); texts by Antje von Graevenitz and Ingrid Mehmel. Antony Gormley interviewed by Udo Kittelman Gormley / Theweleit (Kunsthalle zu Kiel and Cuxhaven Kunstverein 1999); three-way discussion between Antony Gormley, Monika Kubale-Theweleit and Klaus Theweleit. Introduction by Hans-Werner Schmidt Making an Angel (Booth-Clibborn Editions, London 1998); texts by Gail-Nina Anderson, Stephanie Brown, Beatrix Campbell, Neil Carstairs, Antony Gormley and Iain Sinclair Still Moving: Works 1975 –1996 (Japan Association of Art

For a full list of Exhibitions and Catalogues, see the Artist’s website: antonygormley.com

179

Editorial project Forma Edizioni srl, Florence, Italy redazione@formaedizioni.it www.formaedizioni.it Editorial production Archea Associati Publishing and editorial coordination Laura Andreini in association with Rosalind Horne, Antony Gormley Studio Editorial staff Valentina Muscedra Maria Giulia Caliri Beatrice Papucci Elena Ronchi

Graphic design Elisa Balducci Vitoria Muzi Mauro Sampaolesi Translations Ilaria Ciccioni Katy Hannan Simon Turner Photolithography Art and Pixel srl, Florence, Italy Printing Cartografica Toscana srl, Pistoia, Italy

All works and digital renders © Antony Gormley Texts © the authors Photographs by the artist unless otherwise specified: © Elzbieta Bialkowska: cover, pp. 7, 15, 16–17, 19, 20, 28, 40–41, 46–47, 58–59, 66–67, 68–69, 72–73, 74–75, 76–77, 78–79, 82, 85, 86–87, 92–93, 94–95, 100–101, 103, 107, 112–113, 122–123, 126–127, 128–129, 131, 132–133, 136–137, 138–139, 140–141, 142–143, 144–145, 150–151, 156–157, 158–159, 160–161, 164–165, 167 and 180–181. © Pietro Savorelli / Benedetta Gori: pp. 23, 24–25, 35, 37, 38–39, 42, 48–49, 50, 62–63, 80–81, 108, 110, 111, 114–115, 116–117, 118–119, 121, 125, 147, 148–149, 152, 153, 155, 163 and 172–173. © Prudence Cuming Associates: p. 12. © Emiliano Cribari: pp. 52–53, 55, 56–57, 60–61, 104 and 135. © Associazione MetaMorfosi, Rome; Fondazione Casa Buonarroti, Florence – Photo by M. Menghini: p. 106.

Cover image: Antony Gormley, Human, 2015 at the Forte di Belvedere, Florence Endpapers (front): Map showing the locations of all 103 life-size cast iron bodyforms installed across the Forte di Belvedere, 2015 Endpapers (back): Working drawing by the artist: mapping the locations of works for Human at the Forte di Belvedere, 2015 www.gormleyfirenze.it

organised by

The editor is available to copyright holders for any questions about unidentified iconographic sources. © 2015 Forma Edizioni srl, Florence, Italy All rights reserved, no part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the prior permission in writing of the publisher.

First edition: June 2015 ISBN: 978-88-96780-98-5

supported by

with the patronage of

human antony gormley Florence, Forte di Belvedere 26 April – 27 September 2015

Art Direction Sergio Risaliti Curated by Arabella Natalini and Sergio Risaliti Promoted by Comune di Firenze With the support of Galleria Continua, San Gimignano / Beijing / Les Moulins and White Cube, Hong Kong / London / São Paulo Exhibition organisation and coordination by Associazione MUS.E Installation management Associazione MUS.E Federica Rotondo Once – Extraordinary Events

The curators would like to thank Antony Gormley, for his energy and generosity The staff at Antony Gormley Studio for their support and professional expertise And all those who made this exhibition possible: Associazione MUS.E Galleria Continua and White Cube The city administration offices and personnel Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Storici, Artistici ed Etnoantropologici della città di Firenze Once – Extraordinary Events Archea Associati and Forma Edizioni The companies involved in staging the exhibition

Staging management Associazione MUS.E Gabriele Fratini Once – Extraordinary Events

The sponsors and companies that have contributed to the exhibition

Structural project GPA Ingegneria srl

Special thanks to:

Staging graphics project Archea Associati Transport Mtec Communication Associazione MUS.E Press office Opera Laboratori Fiorentini – Gruppo Civita Salvatore La Spina, Barbara Izzo and Arianna Diana Galleria Continua Silvia Pichini

Giulia Contri and Mario Cristiani Laura Andreini, Elena Arsenio, Elisa Balducci, Andrea Batistini, Andrew Benjamin, Elzbieta Bialkowska, Andrea Bianchi, Massimo Billi, Philip Boot, Pamela Bralia, Pierpaolo Bruno, Daniela Carboni, Giovanni Carta, Marco Casamonti, Mario Codognato, Monica Consoli, Emily Constantinidi, Rita Corsini, Emiliano Cribari, Tamara Doncon, Giles Drayton, Lorenzo Fiaschi, Benedetta Gori, Francesca Grifoni, Ashley Hipkin, Rosalind Horne, Fred Howell, Adele Ippolito, Pierre Jusselme, Francis Lansing, Bryony McLennan, Marco Mino, Valentina Muscedra, Antonella Nicola, Alice O’Reilly, Leonardo Panci, Daniele Pasquini, Eleonora Perra, Ilaria Pigliafreddo, Barbara Rapaccini, Giacomo Ricci, Pierluigi Ricciardelli, Maurizio Rigillo, Pietro Savorelli, Silvia Tugnoli, Stefano Velotti, Dave Williams