The inventive work of Shigeru Ban

The inventive work of Shigeru Ban

The inventive work of Shigeru Ban

Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation Sydney

The inventive work of Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation 25 March — 1 July 2017

Contents

19

Preface

27

The Passion of Shigeru Ban Dr Julian Worrall

38

SCAF Project 34 Paper Log House Paper Log House

86

Shigeru Ban

Kobe, Japan, 1995 Ecuador, 2016

SCAF Project 35 Cardboard Cathedral Japan Pavilion Expo 2000 Paper Emergency Shelters for UNHCR Paper Log House, Turkey Paper Log House, India Hualin Temporary Elementary School Centre d’Interprétation du Canal de Bourgogne Paper Partition System 4 GC Osaka Building Centre Pompidou-Metz Tamedia New Office Building Nepal Project

124 136 146 156 162

SCAF Projects 34 & 35

Dr Gene Sherman

166 180 188 198 206 214 224

Biography Contributors Acknowledgements

235 236 237

17

Preface Dr Gene Sherman Chairman and Executive Director Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation

Shigeru Ban’s projects at Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation (SCAF), installed in both the Courtyard Garden and exhibition space, conclude the Foundation’s decade-long programme. Working with artists, architects, designers and filmmakers, SCAF has developed 29 large scale, newly commissioned projects, which include four incredibly diverse and innovative architectural pavilions designed and created under the rubric of SCAF’s Fugitive Structures series. In addition, a six-part Collection+ suite of solo exhibitions was programmed, shining light on artists’ work sourced from the Gene & Brian Sherman Collection and simultaneously from a range of collections worldwide.

The SCAF initiative was launched in 2008 with a monumental installation by Ai Weiwei. An artist who today barely needs introduction, Ai Weiwei now stands amongst a handful of core prominent artists on the world stage. Shigeru Ban’s architectural project a decade later bookends Ai Weiwei’s Through which, on an enormous scale, reconfigured wooden beams and antique tables into complex contemporary relationships.1 Ai Weiwei and Shigeru Ban, born into two post-war Asian powerhouse economies, China and Japan respectively, stand as internationally celebrated creative titans, precisely aligned in age (both born in August 1957), and further aligned in terms of their international engagement with intractable social justice issues. Both work, via visual practice, to build symbolic and functional structures whilst reaching out to sophisticated audiences across the globe, as well as being accessible to the more general art-curious public.

Now to Shigeru Ban himself ... What drew me to his work?

Where do our interests and concerns mesh and overlap? And how does his disaster relief architecture sit within SCAF’s vision and programming?

Shigeru Ban has a two-pronged reputation. His practice encompasses a variety of architectural projects — from major cultural institutions, to churches, schools, corporate buildings, commercial stores and homes, as well as furniture. Projects include La Seine musicale (2017); Aspen Art Museum (2014); Tamedia New 19

Office Building (2013); Centre Pompidou-Metz (2010); and Curtain Wall House (1995). These acclaimed projects bear testimony to his interest in making things, his ingenuity in finding original solutions to long-explored problems and his self-proclaimed solo approach which sees him sit outside architectural schools and collegial fraternities. He is a man of few words and intense action; a doer, rather than a theoriser; impatient to further the conversation in his dialogue with architectural issues and to push the agenda forward worldwide. He is quick to respond to a brief and quick to execute.

The second and perhaps more riveting part of his practice revolves around disaster relief and temporary housing — essentially his not-for-profit work. In this space, Shigeru Ban reigns supreme and has done so since the mid-1990s. For over two decades he has made his architectural expertise and precious time available to assist disparate groups and communities who, as a result of natural disasters, have lost a lifetime’s accumulated possessions including the mainstay of stable living, their places of abode, their very homes.

According to many current accounts, displaced and therefore homeless human beings crisscross the planet in their largest numbers since the Second World War. Why would Shigeru Ban focus mostly on natural disaster relief as opposed to applying his formidable talent more specifically to the massive dislocation of over 60 million displaced people?

Shigeru Ban began the second layer of his practice during the Rwandan crisis of 1994. When contemplating the problem of temporary shelters, his ideas were swiftly activated in 1995 when Kobe, Japan, was hit with a huge 6.9 magnitude earthquake. His not-for-profit, temporary shelter practice continued via various global catastrophes to Christchurch, New Zealand in 2013, and most recently in 2016, when Shigeru Ban applied his experience in disaster relief both to Ecuador and Kumamoto.2 The rise of ISIS/Daesh, the war in Syria and rekindling of significant unrest in the Middle East, have thrown up a parallel, but without doubt a separate need for temporary structures, which inevitably gives rise to contentious and highly politicised responses that natural disaster cataclysms are largely able to avoid. Japan is a country where the threat of earthquakes and tsunamis has been ever-present. Shigeru Ban has long thrown in his lot with the needs of those people, in his own country and far beyond, who have been felled by proverbial acts of God or, in secular terms, in this era of environmental change, by Nature’s revenge.

Shigeru Ban’s disaster work has been recognised by the United Nations, his volunteer expertise has been given formal expression via a role as consultant to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (1995–99) and his work has been expanded 20

and amplified through a consortium of like-minded architects who group under the banner of the Voluntary Architects’ Network founded by Shigeru Ban. What binds this multifaceted practice together and how precisely does Shigeru Ban’s work mesh with SCAF’s agenda and my personal vision?

I believe the key to Shigeru Ban’s modus vivendi and modus operandi lies in his abhorrence of waste. His schedule is crowded to saturation point, allowing little or no flexibility for the unforeseen or personal enjoyment. His preferred timetables literally take one’s breath away with regard to the turnover of appointments and compressed meeting times. Our commissioned writer, Dr Julian Worrall, was fortunate to be allocated an hour and a half to interview Shigeru Ban for a substantial essay after travelling to Tokyo specifically to meet him.

At SCAF we experienced a similar minimalist approach.

Shigeru Ban’s initial decision was to come for the exhibition opening and leave on a late-night flight without enjoying the post-opening celebratory dinner in his honour at our residence. We persuaded him otherwise — but changing his mind took perseverance and tact in equal measure.

A central tenet of his commitment to SCAF was and remains the promise that no element of the construction, or the project as a whole, will be discarded. Every shelter, including the two outdoor structures and the scaled reimagining of Cardboard Cathedral (2013) within the exhibition space, must be reused in some way. ‘Waste not want not’ is held dear by Shigeru Ban — a maxim that defined many generations across the world — and to which Song Dong gave expression in Waste Not (2005), the artist’s immense and powerfully moving installation of his mother’s precious collection of soap, buttons, kettles, fabric fragments, rolls of cord and more. Forming a lifetime hoard of potentially useful household items, the objects were gathered by the artist’s mother who lived through China’s communist era and the particularly dark days of the Cultural Revolution.

My own attitude to living is not dissimilar. Details of how and what to retain inevitably differ. I am certainly not frugal, enjoying comfortable travel conditions, thousands of books in an extensive library, a wonderful art collection and special family holidays. However, waste is an anathema. What I cannot use, others might find great pleasure in, and need is out there if one takes time to look and take action.

My wearing wardrobe comprises 40 coathangers; my clothes (all blouses, skirts and slacks) speak to a single palette (mostly black with shades of navy and grey). When I acquire a new item, I immediately retire a garment, which then finds its way either to the Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences (MAAS) collection in Sydney where the Centre for Fashion is homed, a pre-loved garment 21

store or passed on to enthusiastic friends. Food in our home is also never thrown out. Ronni Kahn established OzHarvest in 2004, an innovative and hugely admired food rescue organisation that collects perishable food from restaurants delivering the inevitable daily excess to charities across Australian cities.

Ronni, a former fellow South African, serves as a role model to many in this space.

In short, Shigeru Ban, like Ai Weiwei, Alfredo and Isabel Aquilizan, Dinh Q. Lê, Jonathan Jones, Jitish Kallat, Mikhael Subotzky and many other commissioned SCAF artists, works within a context that speaks to mending the world in sometimes subtle, and occasionally more overt ways.

I am proud and thrilled that we managed to persuade Shigeru Ban to interrupt his punishing schedule in order to give Sydney, for the first time ever, a glimpse of his acclaimed and highly significant work.

We are planning a rich, diverse and expansive suite of Culture+Ideas programmes to complement, amplify and enhance Shigeru Ban’s SCAF installations: panel discussions, films, Culture 4 Kids events, workshops and more. Culture+Ideas will explore architecture in all its facets: the democratisation of architectural designs, affordable housing, the ethics of disaster relief and the materiality of building construction. This programme will last until 1 July 2017, at which time the Foundation will morph into a contemporary centre for ideas and culture; an original, related, but newly conceived entity. *** In relation to The inventive work of Shigeru Ban there are many wonderful people to thank.

Firstly and most importantly a huge thank you to Akira and Tomoko Nakayama, SCAF Advisory Board members, whose contribution to the Foundation has been exceptional and exemplary, particularly but not exclusively in relation to our Japanese exhibitions: The inventive work of Shigeru Ban (2017), Feel & Think: A New Era of Tokyo Fashion (2013) and Tokujin Yoshioka: Waterfall (2011).

Joni Waka played a key early role in connecting me with Shigeru Ban as well as providing continuous assistance in supporting artists in the lead up to almost every SCAF project.

Joni’s intuitive responses to each and every idea that crosses his path remains precious to me — as does his friendship.

Sam Meers, as a friend and SCAF Advisory Board member, has consistently maintained a commitment to my artistic vision and to the management of this vision by SCAF’s expert and highly trained team. Our Culture+Ideas programme was enhanced, beyond measure, as a result of Sam’s support and considerably extended through the engagement of the Nelson Meers Foundation.

22

In this our final SCAF publication, I acknowledge and honour the SCAF team, past and present, without whom our 35 projects simply could not have been activated in the highly dedicated and professional manner that has characterised our programme.

Dolla Merrillees and Amanda Henry played key roles in different ways and at different times. Dolla has gone on to great heights in the museum sector as Director of MAAS. I thank her for all she did for SCAF as well as for her friendship.

Amanda managed SCAF’s installations until Project 14 and Sherman Galleries’ installations for a total of 18 years with meticulous professionalism.

Danielle Devery, General Manager, first interacted with the Sherman Group through Voiceless, the animal protection institute run by Brian and our daughter Ondine. From Voiceless to SCAF, Danielle has flourished in her role and upheld top-tier quality across the board in every one of SCAF’s projects under her remit.

Michael Moran, Exhibitions Manager, has worked at SCAF on and off since 2002. Michael should be immensely proud of the multiple creative exhibition installations he has conceived and built. Amongst my all time favourites are HOME: Chen Chiehjen & Chien-Chi Chang (2014), Mikhael Subotzky: WYE (2016), and Collection+: Greg Semu (2016).

Dr Aaron de Souza, longstanding Collections Manager, now ably and expertly assisted by Alison Renwick, has diligently served me with care and accuracy. He has worked for the Foundation across several areas including events management and registration.

Aaron has, at all times, been a loyal and superbly capable member of our team.

Sophie Holvast, our people’s person has handled communications, events and in-house media responsibilities with excellent planning, thoughtfulness and importantly, sincere warmth and friendliness.

Emily Rolfe, Assistant Curator, has grown into her role with distinction and will go on, no doubt, to create and manage respected exhibitions far into the future.

Rebecca McLean-Chan has kept the flag flying — attending to multiple tasks including management of our catalogues and fundraising with poise and dedication to detail.

Hannah Brunskill, Executive Assistant, has been my unflappable, courteous and efficient right hand and right eye.

I am not sure how I could have managed without her.

I thank Laura Brandon, my former assistant and now Archivist, who has undertaken the highly focused job of sorting and cataloguing many years of accrued material.

In addition, I thank our designer extraordinaire Mark Gowing and his team; editors and proofreaders — Fiona Egan, Laura Murray Cree, Julie Rose and Marni Williams; talented installers; Patrons’ Circle members; our esteemed and generous Board members 23

who have been attentive, engaged and supportive for the best part of ten years. Heartfelt thanks to each and every one of you.

Over SCAF’s decade-long adventure I have valued your presence and input immensely.

Brian remains the backbone of all my endeavours: cultural, professional and personal. He has been a one-in-a-million husband, a superb father and generous benefactor. We have been together almost half a century and as partner and friend, I could not imagine any one person I could have respected and loved more.

1.

2.

Through was commissioned by SCAF and exhibited alongside Ai Weiwei’s film Fairytale (2007). Campbelltown Arts Centre partnered with SCAF for Ai Weiwei: Under Construction in 2008, presenting a survey exhibition of the artist’s work.

A list of Shigeru Ban’s disaster relief projects can be found on Shigeru Ban Architects’ website. See http://www.shigerubanarchitects.com/works.html

24

The Passion of Shigeru Ban Dr Julian Worrall

Introduction A drama lies at the heart of architecture: the eternal struggle between utility and beauty. Le Corbusier, the paragon and avatar of modernism in architecture, expressed it as follows: You work with stone, with wood, with concrete; you make them into houses and palaces; this is construction. Ingenuity is at work. But suddenly you touch my heart, you do me good, I am happy, I say: ‘It is beautiful.’ This is Architecture.

Art is present.1 In Le Corbusier’s formulation, construction, involving ingenuity, is distinguished from architecture, involving art.

The architectural dimension of the constructed environment is encountered when the emotions are triggered and an aesthetic experience occurs. But while this aesthetic experience can be distinguished from the satisfaction of the function or purpose of a building, it cannot be separated or rendered independently from it. In short, you cannot bottle it.

The work of Shigeru Ban participates fully in this drama, enmeshed in the tension between construction and art; ingenuity and beauty. In doing so, regardless of the particulars of the time and place that he finds himself in, his work occupies the centre of the long river of the discipline. But, as for any architect, it is in the details of his negotiation of these terms — construction; art; ingenuity; beauty – that his distinctiveness is to be found.

This essay explores Ban’s work and position in architecture through five sections: ‘Sources’ focuses on his education and formative influences; ‘Architecture’ expands on the spatial, constructional and material aspects of his work; ‘Shelter’ discusses his architectural contributions to humanitarian causes; and ‘Japan’ considers his position in relation to the architectural world of his homeland. Finally ‘Ethics’ concludes with a summation of the significance of his work for contemporary architecture today.

Sources Unlike the majority of Japanese architects with international profiles based in Japan, Ban was educated outside Japan, in the United States. This biographical detail has allowed 27

him to penetrate the intangible membrane woven from language, discourse and sensibility that often appears to separate Japanese architects from their peers internationally. His formation in architecture does not begin with Japan and progressively extend outwards, but starts with a wide view of the global landscape of architecture, albeit seen through the tinted windscreen of the American higher education system.

His education at the storied Cooper Union in New York, between 1980 and 1984, was preceded by three years at Sci-Arc in Los Angeles, an upstart school whose subsequent global reputation had yet to form. The atmospheres and experiences of both places were formative in different ways. In Southern California, the example of the modernist Case Study Houses, with their unfolding horizontality and openness to the warm climate, was a strong influence. Of this antecedent, Ban says: ‘When people talk about my Japanese influence, this came from the Case Study Houses,2 which were influenced by Japanese architecture. So my influence from Japanese architecture is not direct, but rather through these Case Study Houses in Southern California.’3 The architecture school at the Cooper Union was a far less amenable environment; Ban describes the experience as positively traumatic. ‘I suffered the education of the Cooper Union,’ Ban told me; ‘but because I suffered, I think I learned a lot’.4 John Hejduk, the dean of the school, a poetic modernist and a legendary educator, was his principal inspiration; while Peter Eisenman, a dry, powerful intellectual who sought to inject theoretical precision into architecture’s habits and procedures, was a nemesis. Ban and Eisenman fought often; Eisenman was so antagonistic to Ban’s work that he failed his thesis project, delaying his graduation.5 But the hermetic formalism advocated by these teachers in those years, in which a coherent architectural idea was advanced and sustained through strategies of geometric order and disturbance, is clearly visible in Ban’s early houses, and continues to invest his design thinking with a formal rigour.

Exhaustion drove him back to Japan in 1982, where he worked for Arata Isozaki’s office in Tokyo. The early 1980s were marked by the ascendance of postmodernism in architecture, and Isozaki was the tendency’s chief theorist and exponent in Japan, completing in that year his emblematic Tsukuba Center Building, replete with historical allusions, erudite quotations and visual puns. If the abstract formalism of Eisenman’s modernism was unpalatable for Ban, Isozaki’s postmodern spinning of architectural fictions from abstruse sources, although proceeding in the opposite direction, was equally unappealing. Isozaki’s influence on Ban was not through his architecture, but through his persona and the way he operated his office; his posture as a sweeping international figure, 28

building around the world, and contributing to the global architectural conversation.

Ultimately it was Ban’s discovery of Alvar Aalto on his travels assisting architectural photographer Yukio Futagawa in 1984, and deepening engagement with Aalto’s work through his design and installation of an exhibition on Aalto in Tokyo in 1986,6 that has proved most inspirational and enduring for Ban’s architecture. Aalto’s gentle and generous architecture, which Ban finds ‘in perfect harmony with its context, local climate, and materials’,7 is experienced as a kind of salve for the young architect’s bruised spirit; and it is with the spirit of Aalto that Ban’s oeuvre most closely resonates. Aalto’s sensitivity for site and context; his innovations with materials; and his abiding concern for the inhabitants and users of his buildings all leave their mark on Ban’s work and approach. Perhaps most fatefully, the Aalto exhibition was the first occasion for Ban to employ paper tubes as architectural elements, which went on to become Ban’s signature innovation.

Architecture Ban’s portfolio is remarkably varied. Elegant private houses; audacious landmark museums; high-street retail stores; churches; schools; offices; exhibition halls; and, not least, temporary shelters for disaster victims. While the nominally ‘temporary’ works using paper tubes in situations of disaster and adversity have gained attention for their innovative material, these constitute only a small proportion of Ban’s oeuvre. What unifies this great range of work?

Of all these building types, the house is a good starting point to explore this question. Because they involve an extensive process of close communication with individual clients, and have generally similar programmatic requirements, the problem of the private single-family house is the arena in which architects’ ideas are often rendered most directly and clearly. They are also the most common commissions at the start of a career, and so capture the early ideas that animate the narrative of a life’s work. While some abandon houses as their careers progress, Ban’s houses have been a constant presence in his practice, allowing the evolution of his architecture to be traced through this building type.

Three key aspects of Ban’s architecture can be traced through his houses: ‘space’, which tends towards the increasingly flexible and undivided; ‘enclosure’, which aims, as much as possible, to disappear while still offering protection when needed; and ‘structure’, which is an integral aspect of the built work, but ultimately finds its fullest expression through an overarching roof element.

Ban’s earliest houses, built during the first five years of establishing his practice on his return to Japan in 1985, are 29

vaguely reminiscent of the language of the grouping of architects known as the New York Five, which included Hedjuk and Eisenman, as well as Michael Graves, Charles Gwathmey, and Richard Meier.8 As it was with the Five, white, an index of abstraction, is the preferred colour of Ban’s early houses, with compositions formed as rectilinear patternings of solid and void in pure volumes with geometrical primitives such as cylinders and cubes deployed in counterpoint to a dominant order. Increasingly however, the compositional format divides into two main fractions; a larger overarching space established by a structurally expressive system providing the shelter, with an independent system of spacedefining walls or elements dividing up the interior space. This approach can be seen clearly in Villa Torii (1990) with freestanding walls braced by guy cables supporting the over-sailing roof plane, beneath which curved masonry walls distinguish the domestic functional zones. At Villa Kuru (1991) a cube and cylinder which divide the interior space into functional areas, serve as structural supports, and yet are expressed as penetrating right through the roof to imply compositional independence.

As Ban’s practice establishes itself, and a steady stream of residential work starts to flow, these strategies become conscious formulas to investigate and refine. The PC Pile House (1992) clearly distinguishes the elements of platform, roof, pilotis and enclosure, giving each a distinct role in a rectilinear architectural composition. The series of houses known as the Furniture Houses developed between 1995 and 1998, advance an approach in which furniture modules provide the structural support between the floor platform and a parallel flat roof.

Here storage elements are employed as both space definition and structural support. In their reduction to a simple square plan form, and their careful distinction between structural, enclosure, and programmatic elements, these houses have resonances with the early nine-square house studies of Hejduk;9 and of Mies van der Rohe’s purified language of slab, column and lightweight panel.

These sources are explicitly present in the Nine Square Grid House (1997) in which the deep walls of the furniture elements harbour sliding panels that can freely divide up the square plan according to use or occasion; the Sagaponac House (2006) an interpretation of Mies’ unbuilt Brick Country House (1924); and most recently in Solid Cedar House (2015), another interpretation of Mies.

These manoeuvres achieve their apotheosis in Wall-Less House (1997), in which the house has been reduced to two parallel and rigidly connected horizontal slabs defining the floor and ceiling, with the slenderest of columns to take only the remaining vertical forces. Internal partitions have atrophied here to a mere gesture, with a series of tracks in the floor and ceiling to accommodate sliding panels if needed; and one furniture module for storage, as if orphaned from the Furniture Houses. Photographs of this 30

house present an extraordinarily abstract scene, with a verdant slice of nature intruding into a white field, and a freestanding toilet and bath marooned in the space like Duchampian readymade installations. These images betray no trace of human occupation or broader urban context: the lack of walls and uniform white floor renders the spatial patterning of domestic occupation mute; while all accretions of lived existence, save a chair or two from Ban’s own paper collection, have been banished.

By continuing this trajectory towards an abstract volume for free habitation — eschewing the rigid divisions usually established by structural supporting partitions or enclosures and allowing independent spaces for occupation — flexible, even mobile rooms can develop their own relationships with each other and the surrounding space. Such is the spatial strategy of Naked House (2000). The dwelling consists of a large, two-storey high volume, softly illuminated through translucent fibre-reinforced plastic external walls, which contain several smaller room-sized, tatamifloored open boxes on castors. These individual spaces can be moved freely around the living spaces, or even positioned outside, like gigantic pieces of furniture.

For those who come to Ban’s work through his innovative use of recycled materials, his articulated structures, or his humanitarian interventions, the purified abstraction of this corner of his oeuvre feels anomalous; yet it is in these works that Ban’s enduring architectural concerns about space are rendered most visible.

Simultaneously with these spatial experiments Ban starts to develop increasingly innovative ways of controlling the enclosure. Curtain Wall House (1995), made famous by its image of curtains billowing magnificently as if on a modernist ship sailing through the Tokyo suburbs, comprises two-storey high curtains hung on tracks from an extended eave-line to wrap both sides of a corner building, creating a protected exterior space. Glass Shutter House (2003) makes use of three-storey high glazed roller shutters to allow the house to ‘change clothes’ as the season or weather changes. Retractable shutters as enclosure controls continue to reappear in other projects, such as Shutter House for a Photographer (2003) and Metal Shutter House (2010) in New York.

As with the evolution of spatial strategies, the general objective is the freeing of constraint upon how the building opens itself to the environment, allowing divisions between inside and outside to blur and facilitating a flexible pattern of occupation.

The release of the floor plan and the enclosure from the obstructions of supporting walls, or the incorporation of other functions such as storage into the structural scheme, typically results in the provision of a great sheltering roof. The roof often exhibits structural and material innovation that is spatially and structurally independent of the internal spatial organisation 31

beneath. This has resulted in arching forms, domed forms, space frames and other long-span solutions using paper tubes and other ‘weak’ materials, often in collaboration with celebrated engineers such as Frei Otto, with prominent examples being the Japan Pavilion at the Hanover Expo in 2000; Paper Arch at MoMA in 2000, and the paper tube space frame for the Singapore Biennale Pavilion of 2006. In developing and exploring these innovative structural systems, Ban gives particular credit to Gengo Matsui, a famous structural engineer who was willing to collaborate with the young architect free of charge. Ban recounts: ‘Matsui told me so many interesting structural stories. I learned a lot. He was not like typical structural engineers, [who] are kind of a black box. But Matsui calculated in front of me. He was totally transparent. So I knew how to manipulate the structural design by talking to him directly, without using the computer.’10 The distinction between overarching roof and independent living enclosure reaches a particular apogee in the unbuilt Wickerwork House of 2002, in which a woven domed roof of plywood panels is placed like a wicker basket over a glass box. This small, unbuilt project can be seen as the first in a line of productive innovations on woven timber structures; a connection felt in the exquisite bamboo basket that graces Ban’s meeting room. This ongoing line of structural innovation includes the development of laminated veneer lumber (LVL) systems, such as the Vasarely Pavilion (2006) and Heasley Nine Bridges Golf Club (2010) in France and Korea respectively.

By the mid 2000s, Ban’s mature work had settled on an approach combining flexible interior spaces, operable enclosures, and structurally and materially innovative roofs. In a dense urban site such integration can be demonstrated in the Nicolas G. Hayek Center (2006) in Tokyo. But the most audacious culmination, for now, is found in the Centre Pompidou-Metz in France:11 a new contemporary art museum, built on an open site, with an undulating roof built from LVL timber ‘like a Chinese bamboo hat’;12 beneath which are three large tubular volumes, each 90 by 15 metres, forming a contextually responsive ensemble of gallery rooms with glazed walls framing spectacular exterior views; which in turn are propped above an open-ground plane with large operable walls consisting of glazed roller shutters. All the strategies of Ban’s architecture are incorporated at Metz: the materially innovative and structurally audacious roof, the large, open, interior spaces, and the openness to the exterior through flexible enclosures — here all deployed in the service of art.

Shelter Disasters are clarifying events. The shock they deliver throws a society back to basics, revealing its essential qualities and patterns, and focusing attention on what is genuinely 32

important. Ban’s celebrated humanitarian work providing temporary housing in disaster areas constitutes not only an extension of charity and the fulfilment of an instinctive sense of compassion; it also represents an implicit critique of the values of a profession that has lost sight of its underlying raison d’être — the provision of shelter.

Ban’s engagement with the provision of emergency shelters began with a response to refugees fleeing the genocidal convulsion in Rwanda in 1994. The temporary shelters provided by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, which comprised plastic sheeting and aluminium supports, were problematic, as the impoverished occupants would sell the aluminium tubes for cash, replacing them with branches from cut-down trees, exacerbating deforestation. Ban’s proposal, taken on his own initiative, to use paper tubes as structural replacements for the aluminium poles solved a number of problems (economic, environmental, structural) with one stroke, and was eagerly adopted and tested as a prototype.

Since then, this humanitarian work has extended across the world, responding to disasters in Japan, Turkey, India, the United States of America, China, Sri Lanka, Haiti, Italy, New Zealand, the Philippines and Nepal. The precise details of the response vary from place to place, reflecting climatic conditions, access and material availability, local capacities and resources.

Typically, a foundation is prepared using weighted recyclable crates; a structural frame consisting of paper tubes is erected, and enclosure materials (which may also comprise paper tubes, plastic or textile sheeting, or local building materials made from readily available vegetation, stones, or mud) is attached to this frame. Solutions using paper tubes have been employed for internal partitioning systems to provide privacy and a defensible space for family units in larger facilities providing mass disaster relief housing, such as school halls. Ban has also developed strategies for more large-scale, medium-term housing solutions to accommodate residents while reconstruction proceeds, using arrangements of stacked shipping containers. Recently, Ban has collaborated with building material manufacturers to develop a prefabricated system of fibre-reinforced plastic panels, called the New Temporary House (NTH) system, providing robust, highquality, low-cost housing that can be useful both in post-disaster reconstruction zones as well as in conditions of transition and displacement in developing countries.

After disasters, the provision of housing addresses the immediate physical need for shelter, but often aid agencies are ill-equipped to address an equally important need in the wake of tragedy: that of finding psychological and spiritual solace. It is in his temporary church projects for communities that have suffered disasters that Ban is able to most convincingly reunite the twin 33

dimensions of utility and beauty essential for architecture. The Paper Church was erected as a temporary space of worship after the Kobe quake in 1995. A simple yet profound structure formed from 58 columnar paper tubes arranged in an ellipse pattern, it was so beloved by its community that it lasted ten years before being disassembled and re-erected in Taiwan as a permanent structure.

A similar story can be told of the Cardboard Cathedral, erected as a temporary space for worship for the Anglican faithful of Christchurch after their devastating earthquake in 2011. The enduring life of these buildings upends our conventional notions of transience and permanence, and demonstrates a striking truth: the lifespan of a building is not a property of material durability, but of emotional investment. As Ban observes: ‘In order to be a permanent building, it has to be loved by people. Even a concrete building, if that building is to make money, is very temporary.

That is my definition of what is temporary and what is permanent.’13 There is a core ethical and constructive principle in operation in all these projects, one that permeates Ban’s oeuvre: the principle of economy of means. This arises from deep within Ban’s own makeup: his hatred of waste was the compulsion that caused his initial discovery of the paper tube as a construction material. This principle, which can be restated as the maximisation of utility, resonates with the axioms of the modern movement, such as truth to materials, formal simplicity and functional adequacy.

In addition, making do with less, or reusing what you already have, are powerful drivers of design innovation at the level of materials and construction systems. These days, such ambitions are typically listed under the banner of ‘sustainability’, but Ban’s commitment to this principle in contemporary architecture has reminded the profession of a wellspring of modern ideals that, at the time he entered it, appeared to have been forgotten.

Japan In Japan, genealogy is often destiny. A family tree of master and disciple connects the most celebrated of Japanese architects: Arata Isozaki to Kenzo Tange to Kunio Maekawa to Le Corbusier; Junya Ishigami to Kazuyo Sejima to Toyo Ito to Kiyonori Kikutake. Those who are positioned outside such lineages, whether by chance or intention, risk obscurity; their struggle for recognition is correspondingly more intense. Some of these rōnin (masterless samurai), like Tadao Ando or Sou Fujimoto, have deliberately avoided such affiliations in order to preserve a freedom of action; others, such as Takaharu Tezuka, find themselves swimming free after long excursions abroad. Ban is in this latter category.

Ban once told me ‘I’m not part of the club. I’m not working for Japan’.14 This reflects Ban’s view that for many prominent Japanese architects, emphatically underscoring the fact of being 34

Japanese constitutes a kind of crutch, one whose deployment is both convenient at home and highly consumable abroad, but risks becoming an alibi to avoid direct engagement with the universals of architecture. Ban describes the world of Japanese architecture as being a closed box: the key schools, the chief publications, the leading patrons and critics, and the network of obligations linking masters and pupils constitute a bounded world, generating work of sometimes remarkable quality, but ultimately limited in its aspirations and potential.

This is related to the irritating if understandable reflex among casual external observers of contemporary Japanese architecture to seek explanations in traditional sources that can be named ‘Japanese’. For example, Ban’s innovative use of paper as a construction material is sometimes linked to its use in sliding shoji and fusuma door panels in the Japanese architectural traditions of shoin and sukiya. This is merely coincidental. As the above analysis makes clear, in Ban’s work paper tubes are usually employed as structural elements rather than enclosure elements and, where they work in space-defining ways, it is always through serial arrangements that form static wall-like elements to fix spatial boundaries rather than erase them.

Ban’s commitment to a model of global practice, unconstrained by national boundaries, is underscored by his maintaining a regular presence at his Tokyo, Paris and New York offices. Ban claims that this dispersal and mobility is, paradoxically, motivated by the need to stay close to the ground and to the local people engaged with implementing his projects.

This desire to stay close to ‘locals’, to whom Ban is nonetheless a stranger, reveals curiosity as an animating impetus of his interest in building for other people in other places. ‘It’s not just building,’ Ban told me, ‘it’s learning the culture and the lifestyle — this is part of the enjoyment of architecture. I love to continue learning and accumulating different cultures — that’s my biggest interest.’15 It is the great wide world, rather than one narrow patch called Japan, that inspires Ban. Ethics The choice of Le Corbusier to give initial voice to the ideas deployed in this essay was deliberate. Le Corbusier is the emblematic figure of twentieth-century modernism in architecture; he is also considered, through his protégés, to be the most consequential figure in the development of architectural modernism in Japan.16 In both sensibility and technique, Ban continues the quest of modernism into the twenty-first century. But the significance of Ban’s architecture lies less in its concern with modernist aims ‘internal’ to the discipline — its spatial language; its approach to material and construction — than in its dogged pursuit of goals facing ‘outward’ to the world at 35

large: the role of the architect in society, and the broader mission of the profession. Ban’s work reminds us that the ethical agenda of modernism is integral to its constitution. For the apostles of modernism, the equitable provision of adequate shelter through design intelligence and the ennoblement of the everyday environment through the furnishing of aesthetic quality are not separable goals. Utility must be married to beauty, because both are key dimensions of the good.

Yet architecture today has largely abandoned the goal of the provision of shelter, the realm of utility. Powerful forces and inexorable tendencies have contributed to this abandonment, such as the privatisation of former collective or state mandates for housing provision; the commodification and financialisation of real estate; and the emphasis of capitalist economies on novelty and mass consumption rather than on the satisfaction of human needs of longer duration and slower rhythm. Ban’s example demonstrates, however, that architects themselves have also contributed to this situation, by choosing to ignore the egregious lack of provision of adequate shelter to those in our midst cast, by disaster or conflict, into homelessness or poverty. Choosing instead to focus the profession’s attentions on the goal of aesthetic improvement to the built environment may seem to constitute a specialisation in the area of the architect’s particular skill and competitive advantage. Yet, however desirable this goal may be in itself, its motivation becomes hollow and its sources thin when the underlying purpose of the profession is abandoned. As the history of modern architecture itself teaches, once something loses its underlying purpose it becomes ornamental, and hence ultimately dispensable.

Ban warns us to avoid the fate of ornaments.

There is evidence that a shift in perception may be underway. In Japan, after the Kobe quake of 1995, very few architects got professionally involved in the emergency response; yet since the 11 March 2011 ‘triple disaster’, seemingly every architect in the country is engaged in temporary shelter or community reconstruction in the devastated areas. And Ban reports from his lectures to audiences around the world that there is far more interest in humanitarian work among architecture students today than when he first started in this line of activity. Ban suggests that underlying this shift is a sense of profound unease.

‘I think generally speaking, the people recognise that our future is in danger. Maybe until the so-called Japanese “bubble period”, people thought that society was developing further and further, but after the Kobe earthquake, we recognise that the world or future is not so hopeful any more; there are so many environmental problems, and even economically many crises. I think we recognise that the future is not so bright. This is why I think young people have started being interested in more realistic issues, such as the environment, refugees, natural disasters.’17 36

With the global stature that his recent Pritzker Prize bestows, and the consequent clamour from a raft of fresh clients with large, gaudy projects, the challenge now for Shigeru Ban is to resist diluting the vision that his work has outlined for architecture today, and to continue to strengthen its productive union of utility and beauty; innovation and art. Ban’s cautious response to the honour is mindful of potential pitfalls: ‘I must be careful. I must continue to listen to the people I work for.

I see this prize as encouragement for me to keep doing what I am doing — not to change what I am doing, but to grow.’18 Despite his success, the quest continues.

1.

Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles (2007), p. 233. Translated by John Goodman. Originally published as Vers une Architecture, G. Crès, Paris (1923).

2.

For more on this influential experiment of regional modernism, see Peter Gossel (ed.), Case Study Houses, Taschen, New York (2009).

3.

Shigeru Ban. Interview by the author, Tokyo, 11 November 2016.

4. ibid.

5.

Ban exacted gentle revenge in his 2014 Pritzker Prize acceptance speech, describing Eisenman’s teaching as ‘brainwashing’.

6.

The exhibition was a reinstall of the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) show Alvar Aalto: Furniture and Glass, 26 September — 27 November 1984. Ban worked closely on another Aalto show in 2007 at the Barbican Art Gallery in London, Alvar Aalto: Through the Eyes of Shigeru Ban, explicitly highlighting his debt to the Finnish master.

7.

Shigeru Ban, 2014 Pritzker Prize acceptance speech, Amsterdam, 13 June 2014.

8.

The grouping was brought together in 1969 by MoMA, and the moniker was popularised by the title of a book first published in 1972.

9.

For a detailed excavation of these unbuilt projects from the 1950s, see Kenneth Frampton, John Hejduk: 7 Houses, Institute for Architecture and Urban Studies, New York (1980).

10.

Shigeru Ban. Interview by the author, Tokyo, 11 November 2016.

11.

Taro Igarashi, a prominent Japanese architectural historian, described this building as ‘the compilation of Shigeru Ban’s works in architecture’, in ‘What makes Japanese Architects So Significant?’, Vol. 03, Xamoschi accessed 11 December 2016.

12.

Project description on Shigeru Ban Architects website, www.shigerubanarchitects.com accessed 14 December 2016.

13.

Shigeru Ban. Interview by the author, Tokyo, 11 November 2016.

14.

Shigeru Ban. Interview by the author, Tokyo, 10 April 2013.

15.

Shigeru Ban. Interview by the author, Tokyo, 11 November 2016.

16.

The most influential of Le Corbusier’s Japanese protégés are Kunio Maekawa, Junzo Sakakura, and Takamasa Yoshizaka.

17.

Shigeru Ban. Interview by the author, Tokyo, 11 November 2016.

18. ibid.

37

Paper Log House Kobe Japan

On 17 January 1995, Kobe was hit with a devastating earthquake measuring 6.9 on the magnitude scale and 7.3 on the Richter scale.

Taking place in the early hours of the morning, the earthquake claimed upwards of 6400 lives and left 300,000 without homes.

Fires following the earthquake spread rapidly through Kobe’s narrow streets lined with old wooden houses.

The severity and scale of the disaster caught the Japanese government unawares, prompting unprecedented public action.

Japanese citizens from across the country gave time, energy and expertise to the afflicted communities. Over a million volunteers converged on Kobe to help with the relief effort. Subsequently the Japanese government made disaster prevention a priority and requirement for the construction of new buildings.

Shigeru Ban had been contemplating the problem of providing shelter for victims of disaster since the 1994 Rwandan genocide.

His response to the plight of refugees from this conflict was to provide practical, innovative emergency shelters. The Kobe earthquake spurred him to join the wave of volunteers and to immediately implement his ideas and sketches for low-cost, temporary housing. In 1995, he established the non-governmental organisation, Voluntary Architects’ Network.

In designing these temporary shelters, Shigeru Ban established a set of criteria for the constructions. They were to be: • built from inexpensive materials • simple to construct • sufficiently insulated and • aesthetically pleasing.

His team fulfilled this brief by using a foundation of sand-filled beer crates, paper tubes and tent material, all of which imitated in part a log cabin. Shigeru Ban designed the 16m2 houses so that spaces between the dwellings could be used as common areas. The materials cost less than US$2000 per house.

Paper Log House Kobe, Japan, 1995 Paper tubes, timber, high-density polyethylene crates, sand bags, waterproof paint, butyl tape, threaded rod, steel wire, hinges, steel angle, tarpaulin, rope 3515 × 4612 × 4612 mm

1995 39

Paper Log House Ecuador

On 16 April 2016, an earthquake of 7.8 magnitude struck off the central coast of Ecuador killing over 650 people. The disaster left 73,000 Ecuadorians, asylum seekers and Colombian refugees displaced — and a number of communities cut off from vital supplies. Water systems were destroyed, health centres rendered inoperative and thousands of buildings damaged. Housed in shelters, makeshift tents, camps or with host families, people endured a number of aftershocks, some measuring as strong as 6 on the Richter scale.

Shigeru Ban visited the region two weeks later, meeting with locals and inspecting their improvised shelters and basic accommodation. Shigeru Ban established a project team in collaboration with the region’s mayors, city officials and local architects, to work in partnership with his Voluntary Architects’ Network.

Owing to the similar tropical climates of the Ecuadorian coast and the Philippines, the design of the paper log house for Ecuador was based on the previous design for the Philippines. To ensure costs remained low, the design was adapted using materials sourced locally in Ecuador. Reflecting on previous paper log houses, including those of Kobe, Shigeru Ban came to the conclusion that these were overly complicated and time-consuming to build in large volumes. As a result, the Ecuadorian Paper Log House incorporates Shigeru Ban’s paper tube connectors from his Paper Partition System, which greatly simplifies and accelerates the construction process. Designs were first tested by architectural students in Keio University, Japan and then in Quito, Ecuador.

Paper Log House Ecuador, 2016 Paper tubes, high-density polyethylene crates, sand bags, tarpaulin, bamboo cladding, bamboo sheet, steel wire, hinges, steel angle, rope 3800 × 5250 × 3285 mm

2016 87

SCAF Project 34

SCAF Project 35

Pages 124—135 Cardboard Cathedral Christchurch, New Zealand, 2013

Pages 136—145 Japan Pavilion Expo 2000 Hanover, Germany, 2000

Pages 146—155 Paper Emergency Shelters for UNHCR Gihembe Refugee Camp, Byumba, Rwanda, 1999

Pages 156—161 Paper Log House Turkey, 2000

Pages 162—165 Paper Log House India, 2001

Pages 166—179 Hualin Temporary Elementary School Chengdu, China, 2008

Pages 180—187 Centre d’Interprétation du Canal de Bourgogne Pouilly-en-Auxois, France, 2005

Pages 188—197 Paper Partition System 4 Iwate, Japan, 2011

Pages 198—205 GC Osaka Building Osaka, Japan, 2000

Pages 206—213 Centre Pompidou-Metz Metz, France, 2010

Pages 214—223 Tamedia New Office Building Zurich, Switzerland, 2013

Pages 224—233 Nepal Project Nepal, 2015

Shigeru Ban

List of Works

Paper Log House Kobe, Japan, 1995 Concept sketches, plans, production images, pages 40—77: Shigeru Ban Architects Photos, pages 78—85: Hiroyuki Hirai Paper Log House Ecuador, 2016 Concept sketches, plans, production images, pages 88—117: Shigeru Ban Architects Cardboard Cathedral Christchurch, New Zealand, 2013 Photos, pages 124—125, 130—135: Stephen Goodenough Concept sketches, plans, pages 126—129: Shigeru Ban Architects Japan Pavilion Expo 2000 Hanover, Germany, 2000 Concept sketches, plans, production images, pages 136—143: Shigeru Ban Architects Photo, pages 144—45: Hiroyuki Hirai Paper Emergency Shelters for UNHCR Gihembe Refugee Camp, Byumba, Rwanda, 1999 Concept sketches, production images, pages 146—155: Shigeru Ban Architects Paper Log House Turkey, 2000 Plans, production images, pages 156—161: Shigeru Ban Architects Paper Log House India, 2001 Photo, pages 162—163: Kartikeya Shodhan Plans, pages 164—165: Shigeru Ban Architects

Centre d’Interprétation du Canal de Bourgogne Pouilly-en-Auxois, France, 2005 Photos, pages 180—181, 184—187: Didier Boy de la Tour Concept sketches, pages 182—183: Shigeru Ban Architects Paper Partition System 4 Iwate, Japan, 2011 Photos, pages 188—189, 192—197: Voluntary Architects’ Network Concept sketches, pages 190—191: Shigeru Ban Architects GC Osaka Building Osaka, Japan, 2000 Production images, plans, pages 198—201: Shigeru Ban Architects Photos, pages 202—205: Hiroyuki Hirai Centre Pompidou-Metz Metz, France, 2010 Photos, pages 206—207, 212—213: Didier Boy de la Tour Plans, pages 208—211: Shigeru Ban Architects Tamedia New Office Building Zurich, Switzerland, 2013 Concept sketches, plans, production images, pages 214—219, 222—223: Shigeru Ban Architects Photo, pages 220—221: Blumer-Lehmann AG Nepal Project Nepal, 2015 Concept sketches, production images, pages 224—233: Shigeru Ban Architects

Shigeru Ban was born in Tokyo in 1957.

Before graduating from the Cooper Union, New York, Ban worked for Arata Isozaki & Associates in 1982, after which he established his firm Shigeru Ban Architects in 1985. Between 1995 and 1999, Ban was a consultant to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) working to improve temporary shelters.

In 1995, Ban initiated the non-governmental organisation, Voluntary Architects’ Network (VAN) to continue the development of disasterrelief shelters. VAN has helped build temporary housing in Haiti, India, Japan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Turkey; a school in Sichuan, China; and a concert hall in L’Aquila, Italy, amongst other places.

Shigeru Ban Architects’ selected works include Nicolas G. Hayek Center, Tokyo (2007); Centre Pompidou-Metz (2010); Aspen Art Museum (2014); Oita Prefectural Art Museum (2015) and La Seine musicale (2017).

Ban is the recipient of numerous awards, including Grande Médaille d’or de l’Académie d’architecture (2004); Arnold W. Brunner Memorial Prize in Architecture (2005); Grand Prize of the Architectural Institute of Japan (2009); honorary doctorate from Technische Universität München (2009); Officier de l’Ordre des Arts et des Lettres (2010); Auguste Perret Prize

Hualin Temporary Elementary School Chengdu, China, 2008 Concept sketches, plans, production images, pages 166-173: Shigeru Ban Architects Photos, pages 174—179: Li Jun

235

(2011); Art Prize from the Agency for Cultural Affairs, Japan (2012); Commandeur de l’Ordre des Arts et des Lettres (2014); and Japan Institute of Architects Grand Prix (2016). In 2014, Ban was named the 2014 Pritzker Architecture Prize Laureate, the most prestigious prize in architecture.

Ban has served as Professor at Keio University (2001—08, 2015— present), and Visiting Professor at both Harvard and Cornell universities in 2010. He has been Professor at Kyoto University of Art and Design since 2011.

Ban is a pioneer in disaster relief shelters and an internationally respected lecturer and teacher.

Contributors

Dr Gene Sherman AM is Chairman and Executive Director of Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation. She was formerly Director and Proprietor of Sherman Galleries, representing major artists across Australia and the Asia-Pacific region (1986–2007).

She is Adjunct Professor, UNSW Art & Design (formerly COFA); inaugural patron of the Designers Circle for the MAAS Centre for Fashion; and a board member of the Australian Institute of Art History, University of Melbourne (since 2013) and Sydney Contemporary (since 2014). Dr Sherman is Co-Chair of the Tate Asia-Pacific Acquisitions Committee and a member of the Tate International Council; a member of the International Association of Art Critics; and an Asialink Asia Literacy Ambassador. Dr Sherman’s awards include the B’nai B’rith award (2014), Member of the Order of Australia in 2010 for her cultural philanthropy and her support of emerging and established artists, a Doctorate of Letters honoris causa University of Sydney (2008) and an Honorary Doctorate of Design, University of Technology Sydney (2017). The French Government has acknowledged Dr Sherman with two awards: the Officier de l’Ordre des Arts et des Lettres (2016) and the Chevalier de l’Ordre des Arts et des Lettres (2003).

236

Acknowledgements

Dr Julian Worrall is an Australian architect, scholar and critic with an international reputation as an interpreter of the architecture and urbanism of contemporary Japan. He is currently Associate Professor of Architecture and Urban Design at the University of Adelaide. His work, pursued through a mix of scholarly research, critical writing, and design practice, is broadly concerned with the construction of alternative modernities, particularly as seen through the lens of the East Asian metropolis. Holding a PhD in Architecture from the University of Tokyo, and widely published and translated, he has contributed to major institutions of architectural culture and education globally, including OMA (Office for Metropolitan Architecture), Rotterdam; V&A (Victoria and Albert Museum), London; MAK (University of Applied Arts), Vienna; Strelka Institute, Moscow; University of Tokyo; Architecture Biennale, Venice; and MoMA (Museum of Modern Art), New York. He resides in Adelaide and Tokyo.

SCAF thanks our exhibiting architect Shigeru Ban and his team, who have afforded us the opportunity to present The inventive work of Shigeru Ban (SCAF Projects 34 and 35) in Australia. We are delighted to have had Ban address audiences in Brisbane and Sydney, providing personal and unique insights into his practice and philosophy. In particular, we thank Reiji Watabe and Kyoko Ueno from Shigeru Ban Architects for their assistance across all levels of the project.

For over five years, the BVN team have partnered with us to help develop and deliver several remarkable architectural projects. James Grose, Phillip Rossington, Melanie Mury, Susanne Mayer and many more at BVN have provided us with expert advice and invaluable assistance.

Warmest thanks to Cameron Bruhn and Architecture Media our enthusiastic and highly valued collaborators, who share our vision of celebrating excellence in architecture and innovation across Australia and the world. Cameron has worked tirelessly to help promote Ban’s visit and ensure the widest audience and greatest access possible.

We are thrilled with the catalogue essay in which Dr Julian Worrall has skilfully probed Ban’s ideas and mind. Julian’s experience of working in Japan and knowledge of architectural practice is clearly evident in his highly informed analysis of Ban’s work.

We thank Dr Julian Worrall for officially opening The inventive work of Shigeru Ban at SCAF and providing a superb beginning to these projects.

Where to begin with regard to SCAF’s exceptional, active and engaged Advisory Board members: Andrew Cameron AM, John Kaldor AO, Sam Meers, Akira Nakayama, Tomoko Nakayama, Dr Claire Roberts and Michael Whitworth. Each and every member of the group has dedicated considerable time over a decade to supporting SCAF’s vision. Their

237

friendship and wise advice have given flight to the Foundation’s programme.

Heartfelt thanks to Sam Meers and her family’s wonderful foundation, Nelson Meers Foundation (NMF). SCAF has enjoyed the support of NMF for many years, which has enabled us to creatively amplify SCAF’s Culture+Ideas programme. Their significant and generous support has been timely and supremely meaningful.

The Patrons’ Circle, a group of art lovers, enthusiastic learners and risk-taking experimenters, have been generous to the core. We thank each member of the group, who have been a part of our intimate community and journeyed with us to explore visual culture in Australia and in our region. Heartfelt thanks to past and present members: Past: Michelle Belgiorno-Nettis & Guido Belgiorno-Nettis AM Adam & Vicki Liberman Joanna & Richard Collins Fraser Hopkins Present: Geoff Ainsworth AM & Johanna Featherstone Teresa & Andre Biet Bambi & Derek Blumberg Martin Browne Andrew Cameron AM & Cathy Cameron Abraham & Helen James Leslie & Ginny Green Jennifer Hillman & Suzy Spira Sam Meers & Richard Kuo Kiong Lee & Richard Funston Hon. Justice Melissa Perry Peter Polovin & Shaun Sergay Penelope Seidler AM Kathy & Greg Shand Joseph Skrzynski AO & Roslyn Horin Mark & Louise Nelson We thank Barry Sechos who has been a superb legal advisor and consultant to the Sherman family, across art, film and animal protection

endeavours for over 25 years.

Words cannot express adequately our gratitude. Barry has been a star.

Max Homaei’s excellent short films, produced first in 2013 (SCAF Project 18), have significantly extended the reach of our projects.

The following organisations and individuals have assisted with this project. We thank you individually and collectively: The ART Foundation, Tokyo Gordon Darling Foundation Ishibashi Foundation The Japan Foundation Konica Minolta; David Cooke Laura Murray Cree Sherman Group; Lily Yuan

Brian Sherman has been an unwavering champion of SCAF’s programme. Gene and the SCAF team offer our heartfelt thanks.

Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation

Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation (SCAF) was established in April 2008 as a not-for-profit organisation to champion research, education and exhibitions of significant and innovative contemporary art primarily from Australia, the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle East. SCAF works closely with creative practitioners in commissioning new work and developing exhibitions that energise and respond to the gallery’s four-part complex comprising a large exhibition area, mini ‘out-site’ space, versatile theatre annexe and Courtyard Garden.

Extensive projects are developed through partnerships with public art institutions at a regional, state and national level while broad public engagement with contemporary art is fostered through publishing and forum programmes. In addition, Sherman Visual Arts Residency (SVAR), located directly across the road from the gallery, offers a supportive environment and accommodation for visiting artists, filmmakers, architects, writers, curators and scholars. The experience of developing Sherman Galleries (1986–2007) as a respected commercial and educational enterprise within the international art world underpins the Foundation at both a conceptual and practical level.

Dr Gene Sherman AM, SCAF Chairman and Executive Director, drew on her extensive international networks

Exhibition History

to establish the Foundation, and initiates and guides its activities in collaboration with an advisory board of respected peers: Andrew Cameron AM, John Kaldor AO, Sam Meers, Akira Nakayama, Tomoko Nakayama, Dr Claire Roberts and Michael Whitworth. SCAF is a member of CIMAM, the International Committee for Museums and Collections of Modern Art.

2012

2008

2015

Project 1

Project 13

Project 24

Ai Weiwei: Under Construction In partnership with Campbelltown Arts Centre, Sydney

Janet Laurence: After Eden

Shaun Gladwell: The Lacrima Chair

Project 14

Project 25

Alfredo Juan Aquilizan and Isabel Gaudinez-Aquilizan In-Habit: Project Another Country

Collection+: Shaun Gladwell Curated by Dr Barbara Polla and Prof. Paul Ardenne In association with UNSW Galleries

Project 2

Jonathan Jones: untitled (the tyranny of distance) Project 3

Jitish Kallat: Aquasaurus 2009

Project 15

Go Figure!

Contemporary Chinese Portraiture In partnership with National Portrait Gallery, Canberra

Project 4

The View from Elsewhere In partnership with Queensland Art Gallery/ Gallery of Modern Art, Brisbane Project 5

Kazuyo Sejima + Ryue Nishizawa / SANAA Project 6

Charwei Tsai: Water, Earth and Air 2010 Project 7

Fiona Tan: Coming Home In association with National Art School, Sydney

2013 Project 16

Fugitive Structures 2013 / Andrew Burns: Crescent House In association with BVN Donovan Hill Olafur Eliasson: The cubic structural evolution project, 2004 Collection: Queensland Art Gallery Project 17

Collection+: Chiharu Shiota Curated by Doug Hall AM Project 18

Brook Andrew: The Cell In association with Institute of Modern Art, Brisbane

Feel & Think: A New Era of Tokyo Fashion In association with National Art School, Sydney

Project 9

Project 19

Project 8

Contemporary Art for Contemporary Kids In partnership with Queensland Art Gallery/ Gallery of Modern Art, Brisbane 2011 Project 10

Yang Fudong: No Snow on the Broken Bridge Project 11

Dinh Q. Lê: Erasure Project 12

Tokujin Yoshioka: Waterfall

Collection+: Sopheap Pich Curated by SCAF and Erin Gleeson 2014 Project 20

Project 26

Yang Zhichao: Chinese Bible Curated by Dr Claire Roberts as part of Go East: The Gene & Brian Sherman Contemporary Asian Art Collection Curated by Suhanya Raffel In partnership with the Art Gallery of New South Wales, Sydney Project 27

Fugitive Structures 2015 / Sack and Reicher + Muller with Eyal Zur: Sway In association with BVN Architecture Project 28

Hugo Moline and Heidi Axelsen: Owner Occupy Project 29

Collection+: Christian Thompson Curated by Alana Kushnir 2016 Project 30

Mikhael Subotzky: WYE Project 31

Fugitive Structures 2016 / Vo Trong Nghia Architects: Green Ladder In association with BVN Architecture

Fugitive Structures 2014 / AR-MA: Trifolium In association with BVN Donovan Hill

Project 32

Project 21

Project 33

Fugitive Structures 2014 / Tomahawk // Archer Breakspear: Poly In association with BVN Donovan Hill Project 22

Jompet Kuswidananto: After Voices Curated by Alia Swastika Collection+: Greg Semu Curated by Mark Feary Projects 34 & 35

The inventive work of Shigeru Ban

HOME: Chien-Chi Chang and Chen Chieh-jen In association with National Art School, Sydney Project 23

Collection+: Pinaree Sanpitak Curated by Jasmin Stephens For project details and touring schedule, visit sherman-scaf.org.au

238

239

The inventive work of Shigeru Ban Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation 25 March — 1 July 2017 SCAF Projects 34 & 35 Published by Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation 16—20 Goodhope Street Paddington NSW 2021 ABN 25 122 280 200 www.sherman-scaf.org.au © 2017 Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation Copyright in the text is held by the authors. Copyright in the images is held by the artist unless otherwise indicated.

The material in this publication is under copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission from Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation. Where applicable, every effort has been made to contact copyright holders and acknowledge the source material. Errors or omissions are unintentional.

National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Title: The inventive work of Shigeru Ban / Julian Worrall (essayist); Gene Sherman (contributor); Shigeru Ban (architect) ISBN: 9780994417442 (hardback) Subjects: Ban, Shigeru, 1957— Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation— Exhibitions.

Installations (Art)—Exhibitions.

Art and architecture—Exhibitions.

Art, Modern—21st century—Exhibitions.

Architecture—Australia.

Architecture—Japan.

Shelters for the homeless.

Other Creators/Contributors: Sherman, Gene.

Ban, Shigeru, 1957— Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation, issuing body.

Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation is a not-for-profit organisation providing a platform for innovative visual artists primarily from Asia, Australia and the Pacific Rim. All donations over $2 are tax deductible and will support our exhibition, educational, public and artist-inresidence programmes.

Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation 16–20 Goodhope Street, Paddington Sydney NSW 2021 Australia ABN 25 122 280 200 sherman-scaf.org.au

Exhibition Partner

Exhibition Supporters

Media Partner

In-kind support

Opening Event Partner

Culture+Ideas proudly supported by

Publication Supporter

Sherman Contemporary Art Foundation Chairman, Executive Director Dr Gene Sherman AM General Manager Danielle Devery Exhibitions Manager Michael Moran Communications and Events Manager Sophie Holvast Collections Manager Aaron de Souza Collections Manager Alison Renwick Assistant Curator Emily Rolfe Coordinator — Programmes and Publications Rebecca McLean-Chan Executive Assistant to Gene Sherman Hannah Brunskill Gallery Archivist Laura Brandon Exhibition and catalogue management Danielle Devery and Michael Moran Advisory Board Andrew Cameron AM, John Kaldor AO, Sam Meers, Akira Nakayama, Tomoko Nakayama, Dr Claire Roberts, Michael Whitworth Media Consultancy Articulate Digital Media Consultant Ross Colebatch Partnerships Consultant Bambi Blumberg Design Mark Gowing Studio Editor Laura Murray Cree, SCAF Typeset in Formist Boulder Printed in Australia by Ligare