Skip to Content Skip to Search Go to Top Navigation Go to Side Menu


Archive for October, 2010


Rietveld App


Sunday, October 31, 2010

The Rietveld Architecture iPhone application, which people can download via http://itunes.com/apps/rietveld, the App (free, version 1.2, developped by Vincent Verweij ©2010) will help you find all the Rietveld buildings and houses in the Netherlands that still exist.

The Centraal Museum has launched the Rietveld collection online. Visitors of the website will find more than 8000 objects by Gerrit Rietveld (1888-1964) kept by the Centraal Museum. The objects in question consist of mostly 8000 archive items and almost 300 museum objects, most of which furniture. Many people are familiar with the red-blue chair and the Rietveld Schröder House, but Rietveld designed many more pieces of furniture and houses. The website collectie.rietveldjaar.nl provides a complete overview of Rietveld’s entire oeuvre. It is quite unique that such a large part of a designer’s work has been retrieved.
The online Rietveld collection http://collectie.rietveldjaar.nl/ consists of almost 300 museum objects from the collection of the Centraal Museum and approximately 8000 archive items. The latter are owned by the Foundation Rietveld Schröder Archive and have been held by the Centraal Museum since 1985. The Rietveld Schröder Archive is the archive which was kept up to date by Truus Schröder at the Rietveld Schröder House in Utrecht. It consists of huge architectural drawings to personal scribbles on business cards.

Rietveld versus Calatrava


Saturday, October 30, 2010

Exploring Valencia (Spain) as a prologue to Manifesta8, most students of the Basic Year visited "The City of Arts & Sciences" designed by Santiago Calatrava. As inhabitants of The Gerrit Rietveld Academie designed by, and named after Gerrit Rietveld himself, a comparison became inevitable. What follows are their comments and images.

[comment by Alexandra Karpilovski]

Calatrava feels like something not for you and not for me, but for someone whom we do not see. It makes me feel small, but also nothing.
It makes me think of a monument over the times that has passed, something sculptural and grand and made to impress but fails in that and becomes something static and untouchable. That a buildng that takes up so much space is mostly used to see and not to be touched.
The difference between Calatrava and Rietveld is like comparing two different worlds. For me Rietveld represents a calm structure, everything fits effortless and live in symbiosis with each other, the whole mind behind the building is put into place, on the exact spot where they should be, the body of the houses is on the inside, while Calatrava on the other hand just goes manic and drags different forms into space, just to make it look interesting.
Calatrava makes me feel that someone is trying to say something, but of course I don´t understand, it is to big for me.

[comment by Michael Hautmulle]
Both Calatrava and Rietveld are known for the details in their work, and it shows in both their work. The way in which they both apply it is very different however, where Rietveld has designed beautiful buildings, they are beautifull because of their practicality, so that every detail is constructed to make the use of the building more clear and make the life and function of the occupant more clear. Calatrava has a very different approach, he uses details purely on an esthetic basis, his building may not be very practical, I do not say whether or not they are beautiful, that is an individual matter, but every centimeter has been specifically designed to create the image that he desires. Again I do not wish to say much on the matter of esthetics, but I do believe that the most beautiful design is that which serves a purpose, not for idle beauty but as an object, or building, that fulfills its purpose well. That is the most beautiful of all.

[comment by Titia Hoogendoorn]

While Calatrava’s architecture could be seen as a sculpture and sometimes almost as decoration for the surroundings, Rietveld’s buildings are anti-decorative and more an expression of architecture. They both include the environment in their works. One by fitting in (Calatrava) and the other by adding (Rietveld). The shapes and colours of Calatrava's buildings are flowing along with nature (blue and white/sea and air) in comparison to Rietveld who devides space accentuated by primary colours. The architectonic skeleton of his buildings coincide with the construction while the skeletons of Calatrava seem an effort to make them visible on the outside.

[comment by Anna Kinderman]


Inspired by organic beings Calatrava forms futuristic, abstract entities, which he covers with diverse details and additional figures. Many details are purely visual and omit practical ulterior motives. However, he is limiting to discreet colors like white, blue and azure. Inspirations: torso, bull ribs, foliage, wings. His buildings are more like sculptures than functional buildings.
In contrast Rietveld is interested in function. He was inspired directly by the materials and dealt with the use of the building. With the reduction of coloring to the primary
colors like red, yellow, blue, black and grey he wanted to emphasize the different layers/planes. His strict geometry and minimalistic tendency distinguishes him from Calatrava like black from white.

[comment by Lovie Peoples]

Rietveld and Calatrava are two totally different architectures to me, both in the way their buildings look and the feeling they mediate.




Calatravas buildings are like sculpture houses and bridges. Fixed artworks that was created to demonstrate what he wishes to show. His imaginations illustrated on the ground in a space. To me it doesn’t leave that much to my imagination you are in his world. Either you like it or you don’t.
Rietveld houses have an obvious presence, melting in to their environment instead of creating an environment totally in them self. Which makes them a part of it and lifts them up. They make a dialoged to the space around it and invite me to feel at ease with my own thoughts and feelings in them. A meeting point in what he has left as a building and the person in them. An open dialogue with the viewer.

[comment by Molnar Tamas]

The two architects represent opposite design philosophies and approaches to man and its created environment. While Rietveld takes man and its size as starting point and adjust details to this, Calatrava creates vast spaces and buildings to impress the viewer, making man’s size unimportant. The Spanish exaggerated “machosim” meets the cool and minimalist Dutch world. Experience vs. functionality.

However, both of them are lacking in cosiness, Rietveld’s sharp edges and grey colours are rather cold and not welcoming. Calatrava uses the huge size of his buildings to alienate the spectators, making them feel being in a church or at some futuristic place. His typical white colour also contributes to the sacred, church-like sensation, where one should feel devotion and its own littleness. The usage of forms is also different. Rietveld introduces forms derived from the cube, the “box”, making and industrial and artificial look. Calatrava prefers the organic shapes, however, those are clearly computer generated “natural” forms put in order which finally results in the experience of an artificial environment just like in the case of Rietveld.

[comment by Pieter Tensen]

Calatrava designs buildings you can hardly call buildings. They are more like sculptures you can visit.  This is something you really notice from the outside and is a major point where Calatrava confronts Rietveld in his designs. Rietveld cared about the outside of a building too, how it looks, but it appears obvious in that way.

In Rietveld’s buildings everything is build up out of 90 degrees corners. This was his main trademark. Natural shapes and the human body, on the other hand, inspires Calatrava. They have one major thing in comment. They both care a lot about details. Although the buildings they designed we’re big and impressive sometimes, the eye for detail is very specific for both.

[comment by Stefan Voets]

“Rietveld adored light and bright spaces without too much detail. This is why most of his buildings are made of primary colours and forms (squares, rectangles). According to Rietveld, a building has to be functional too (functionality is extremely present in his architecture). Calatrava’s work is differently shaped, because of the massive surfaces and the lesser subtility. The material is heavy-looking.”

Growth


Saturday, October 30, 2010

[comment by Joost van Loon]

Get the Flash Player to see this player.

It was an impossible but nice fantasy. Gerrit Rietveld and Santiago Calatrava were strolling side by side between the Hemisfèric and the Palau de les Arts. Looking at The City of Arts and Sciences. Gerrit Rietveld, hands on his back, gazed up at the highest peaks of the Palau and nodded his head.
“So.” Calatrava opened up the conversation. “ What do you think of my building?”
“It’s big.” Rietveld replied.”
“I know.” said Santiago puzzled. “But it grew naturally , almost like an independent living organism.”
“Really?”  Rietveld was lost in thoughts for a moment. “A smaller building can also be grand and then the people inside will do the growing.”
Calatrava looked at Rietveld in shock, but Rietveld didn’t noticed and continued. “Maybe you could add some colors?”
Now Santiago stopped walking, too perplexed to carry on.
The man that should be in heaven wandered on alone. Looking at the buildings he mused to himself . “Yes, some red and blue would be nice.”

first impressions


Saturday, October 30, 2010

[comment by Aisha Fouad]

What really struck me of the Rietveld buildings I first saw is the way of arranging views from inside the building. Rietveld buildings have a certain lightness, a perfect balance of open and closed. Somehow they blend in with the environment and the surroundings, even though the Rietveld buildings are modern, concrete and often built with straight lines.

The Calatrava building I saw in Valencia was the Palau de les Arts Reine Sofia. Me and a classmate decide to walk in stead of taking the bus, and we were excited at first when we discovered the building from a distance. It became more and more impressive when we approached it. Then, standing at the foot of the building, I felt disappointment. The greatness did not work for me. The building made me insecure, like a monster that was asleep but could wake up any minute and eat me. It did not fit in with the surrounding park I think, or even in Spain. I wish I could have gone inside to experience the building and the views from the inside. Then I could double check my thoughts of the building and the surroundings, maybe I would understand it then.

I prefer Rietveld over Calatrava, I like the modesty that Rietveld radiates in his architecture (intended or unintended). Almost as if the open space within and around the building is the main subject, and not the beams and concrete walls. Calatrava's buildings seem more bombastic to me, almost an arrogant show off of what can be done in architecture. The building I saw was impressive but it did not fit in the environment at all. I felt as if it was designed first and then placed randomly in the city. Opposed to Rietveld, I did not feel or understand Calatrava's intentions with this building.

Rietveld grey and Mediterranean blue


Saturday, October 30, 2010

[comment by Lyubov Matyunina]

In our life we often compare different meanings and objects. Peoples, animals, jobs, close, building – everything becomes a point of comparison. If we look at 2 buildings, what do we see? Many differences and some similar things. Let’s compare The Rietveld Academy and Calatrava's City of Art and Sciences on 4 points: Age, Function, Design and Practical use.

Age

The Rietveld Academie consists of two buildings: The main building was designed by Gerrit Rietveld between 1950 and 1963 and was finished in 1966. The new wing, designed by Benthem Crouwel Architects and built in 2003, is used by the fine arts departments. In our comparison, we will compare the main building, designed by Gerrit Rietveld.

The City of Arts and Sciences designed by Santiago Calatrava and Félix Candela, the project underwent the first stages of construction in July, 1996 and the finished "city" was inaugurated April 16, 1998 with the opening of L'Hemisfèric. The last great component of the City of the Arts and the Sciences, El Palau de les Arts Reina Sofía, was presented at October 9, 2005, Valencia's Community Day.

As we can see, Rietveld is older then Calatrava by 30 years. But both of their buildings looked modern for the time in which they were built. Actually, Calatrava City of Art & Sciences still looks modern and futuristic, while Rietveld design start to be popular and today we can see buildings inspired by Gerrit Rietveld.

(more...)

creating a performance


Saturday, October 30, 2010

[comment by Julia Estevao]

Calatrava /surrealistische sfeer
dit komt door de stilte, het water, de witte kleur van het ontwerp zelf in contrast met de donkere omgeving (bomen bijv.)en grijzige lucht, (grove, grootse) vormen, (grote) formaat. het doet denken aan een verlaten pretpark.
de mannen die het water schoonmaken, lijken een performance te geven; heel rustig lopen ze heen en weer.


Rietveld /
het enige door Gerrit Rietveld ontworpen gebouw, dat ik met eigen ogen heb gezien is de Gerrit Rietveld Academie.
wat me daaraan opgevallen is zijn de verschillende materialen; puur, grof en fijn, passend bij elkaar en lijnen, smal en breed. Fijn en eleganter, door de materialen en vormen. Het geheel oogt strak en simpel en is heel erg open. Ruimte om te creëren.

Een gevoel van openheid.

Santiago Calatrava


Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Santiago Calatrava is a unique architect. He is not only an architect, but also an engineer and sculptor. Because of this he has, next to architectural knowledge, also knowledge of constructions, mechanics and technical details. He is able to find boundaries of constructions.  At that point, the most special constructions can appear.

Bach de Roda Bridge
One of the designs that made Calatrava famous was the Bach de Roda Bridge in Barcelona. The human body inspires this bridge. This is something that Calatrava does often. He relates constructions to the human body. He makes model drawings of human bodies to study forms and relates these drawings to his design. After this he looks as an engineer at his drawing and tries to figure out how to it can be made.

The bridge has a total length of 128 metres. He combined powerful concrete supports, monolithic granite columns and a steel arch structure, which grows lighter as it rises. It shows that Calatrava made a hierarchy in materials and forms, chosen in relation to their distance from the ground.

The special thing about this structure is that there are two independent sets of arches and each is capable of carrying its own section of the bridge. Unlike steel bridges that have been built before, there is no structure above the roadway itself. Stability in the bridge is gained from the sloping outside arches, which have an extreme wide base at their ends. The bridge serves both pedestrians and automobiles and gives access to a beautiful park. He also made balconies, allowing pedestrians to stop along the bridge to enjoy the view.

His older work (like the Zurich railway station 1983-84) is often site related. He considers the surroundings. The reason that this bridge had to be built was to revitalize two poor areas of Barcelona. The city –at that time in 1992– was chosen to host the Olympic games  and the bridge was one the first stages of improvement reconnecting a large part of the city with the sea. With this he proved that peripheral urban areas could be regenerated by such a symbolic intervention.

Swimming pool
His early work was also very experimental and innovative in the field of technique and materials.  This floating swimming pool is a good example. It is made of plastic and hangs on 24 strings. The form is invented by a combination making models and mathematical calculations. The concept was to take a bath in naked space.

Ernsting’s warehouse [1983-85]
Another project that is innovative in technique, are the folding doors in Ernsting’s Warehouse in Germany. Here he also made some form study’s of the human body. As you can see the folding doors are inspired by the human eye. He decided to cover the structure with untreated aluminium, a typical industrial and light material. They are 13 by 5 metres and the aluminium ribs rise to form a arch that curves inside, creating a overhanging. The form became an experiment in kinetics.

The way Santiago Calatrava explores new forms by combining technique is unique and with this he creates his own recognizable style.


Monday, October 18, 2010

Rietveld > lib. 779.0 fer 1

Rietveld > lib. cat. no: 779.0 fer 1

Black and White for today


Monday, October 18, 2010

We could imagine that an artist who decides to make a book to present his works, will make the choice to present it in the most realist way. The works have to be shown as clear as possible, with all the details and from the best angle in a way that the public can figure the work out as better as possible. (more…)

Juxtaposition


Sunday, October 17, 2010



After a few days scanning through the book Radical Modernism
you start feeling a bit dizzy
from all the different theories within the development of design.
You head begins to feel swollen from all these different words and their definitions.
Paradigmatic, postnuclearism, electisism. All refering to the atitude and the meaning
that designing absorbs from.
But it all seems to lead to one specific word: Juxtaposition.
It triggers a linguistic imagination, a word scramble. Playfully putting things in the
wrong order
just to see if it can be better understood.
Drives you to imagine things such as twisted dictionaries, chaotic and senseless.
A whole other reality and a whole other perspective for the spectators
that are looking upon it.
Is juxtaposition the word that concludes the role of deisgners entering the 21th century?
Thus the solution lays in taking twist and turns until it's completely unrational.
Is that
the only
way we can
"rationalize"
all these enigmatic theories.
 
And if so,
Let's juxtapose ourselves in the flaws that embraced our creation.
A mental furniture in the waiting room of life perhaps?
Illustrating messages that aren't it's original meaning.
Collecting peoples confused gazes on what seems to be our contradictory selves.
Instead they will have to cope.
They will have to stand right beside what seems to drag them in confusion and frustration.
While thinking on how we use opposites to explain ourselves.
I wrap myself in this beautiful idea of being things that
can only be seen with eyes closed.
Feeling with just the mere idea of beauty.
My mind drifts in different directions.
I see myself becoming displaced messages to the universe.
Compelled by its matter.
So lets design a reason for our contradictions.
Let's yield to the aesthetic need of expression.
Let's design a symbol of the beauty our flaws reflect on while
we aren't starring or paying attention.


Rietveld>lib>cat.no: 772.9

Look for the unusual (2)


Sunday, October 10, 2010

book  (bOOk)

n.

1. A set of written, printed, or blank pages fastened along one side and encased between protective covers.

there were some books in the library that didn’t fit this description of a ‘usual’ book.I chose a rather mysterious one.

(more…)

>THE >PRACTICE >OF >MOVEMENT


Friday, October 8, 2010

Have you ever wondered if there is something in common between offices in

New York, desert tribes and living spaces of Amsterdam?
In order to find out the answer for this question I went to the Rietvedl’s library.
When I was looking for a book I was keeping in mind two key-words : “focused” and “imagination”.
I had an incredible finding – a book about nomadic design and architecture. It tells that in today’s dynamic and global world more and more people are departing from the settled family houses tradition, where all the things are heavily rooted in a single place and don’t change for generations.
In order to keep in synch with the pace of changes people gravitate towards more agile and lightweight lifestyle that eventually unfolds into it’s own new ecosystem.
This phenomena is known as “nomadic lifestyle” and it has been around for ages ever since the first nomad tribes roamed from place to place.http://www.nomadicarchitecture.com

Over decades people in western societies have experienced the world and their private lives as static with respect to their spatial and social coordinates. In the view of globalised and virtualised societies this felt security vanishes resulting in behaviour that falls back into strategies long assumed buried in the past: nomadism…One of the later stages of nomadism, called nomadic pastoralism. The concept of nomadic pastoralism celebrates its resurrection in industrialised nations in various forms, i.e. In management practices, social organization, or the composition of information. An example of nomadism in social organisation is the growing movement of RV lifestyle (RV = recreational vehicle), where people are interested in travelling and camping rather than living in one location.
"Nomadic Information in Social Environments".Frank Nack and Simon Jones HCS,  University of Amsterdam.

nomadic arch

Nomadic lifestyle develops it’s way in architecture and design starting from poorest neighbourhoods with homeless people all the way up to the yappy residential areas.
This design was inspired by utility of nomad life and has absorbed it’s plasticity to transform and adapt to the environment. It’s not trying to stand against something, it just follows the trend making any change easy and keeping it in human scale.
As proponents of the nomadic design say “We’ll share with you what we know about the process of going from work-at-home to work-anywhere-you-damn-well-please.”
http://www.knowmads.nl/

They call themselves “Technomads”.Technomads make use of work arrangements in which they enjoy limited flexibility in working location and hours, such as e-commuting, ework, telework, or telecommuting.
The main aspect is that the daily commute to a central place of work is replaced by telecommunication links. Many work from home,while others utilize mobile telecommunications technology to work from coffee shops or myriad other locations.

There are two core aspects of nomadism, namely mobility and individualism.
All nomadic design, architecture and lifestyle are about these very two words.Being inspired by this idea I’ve traveled to many places in Amsterdam from refugee areas to student campings and the downtown.
Here are a few moments:

If you want to read about how nomadic design develops itself in New York, try “New York. Nomadic design.” by Ronald Christ/Dennis Dollens.

Rietveld > lib. cat. no: 772.9 chr 1

wall paper wall paper wall paper wall


Thursday, October 7, 2010

Rietveld > lib. cat. no: 779 ent

FURTHER DOWN THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY


Wednesday, October 6, 2010


The size of the indexed World Wide Web is 15.66 billion pages (http://www.worldwidewebsize.com).

The year is 1924. That’s a long time ago. That’s why this book smells of old grandpa.


The title is intriguing. “Woodcuts, and some words”. An honest title. Plain simple. As if the phrase “what you see is what you get” was authored for this book only. It doesn’t have a fancy wordplay. Someone once upon a time spilled coffee on it. Maybe also dropped a cigarette on it. Drank coffee and smoked cigarettes, while glancing to it’s precious content. This book I’m holding in my hand is some book. Extraordinary. Classic. Both fragile and pretentious at the same time. The thick papers, the fine composition on each page. So elegant and authentic. So anti-industrial, so handmade. This book can teach you how to make woodcuts…

- It’s like an old school version of one of the many ‘how-to’ videos on YouTube. I’m actually holding an offline version of a ‘how-to’ video. It makes me think of information, and how we approach and handle the nonstop floating information on the WWW.

What is the actual difference between information in a book and information on the internet, besides the limited/unlimited amount? I recall my teacher saying something like: “I will recommend you all to buy the book and not make scans and read them on your computer… because… it’s nicer, you know”. What makes us grab a book instead of browsing the web?

What is the fuss about a book in general? Is it because it’s capable of generating a certain feeling or a certain “vibe” which will never be generated from the most awesome and well-made webpage? Is it the typography on the paper, the quality of the paper, the fact that you can touch it and that it isn’t ongoing?

There’s an enormous difference between getting information from a book and getting information from the internet. I, myself, is having a hard time keeping track on the endless amount of available information on the internet. It’s interesting that the information about any subject on the internet is unlimited. It’s like having unlimited access to ‘knowledge’. There’s always more. You’re never finished. It’s ongoing. It will always follow time, never become obsolete.

The information in a book is not developing. There’s a last page. A period. It’s printed and can’t be changed in a sec. No further links. No sudden brand new pages. No updates. No hidden information. What you see is what you get. And *that* somehow puts the whole ‘info on the internet’ in perspective. You never see what you get, until it’s there. Always floating, constantly changing. Eternal information.


Rietveld > lib. cat. no: 755.1

OUTDATED OR ANTIQUE?


Sunday, October 3, 2010

Once every often when browsing between the many beautiful glossy covers in libraries I come across a tattered old book that I feel I need to save. Especially when held together by peaces of tape and covered in coffee stains of it’s previous users, I am convinced it needs my love and attention. This book ticks all the boxes.

Inexplicably immediately memories pop up of me hovering at my fathers desk while he is working. Looking up to him and his work which I don’t fully understand. Then again, my father was a graphic designer and my associating him and that specific memory with a book on typography might not be that strange after all.

The book “Drukletters hun ontstaan en gebruik” (Printing types their origin and use) by M.H. Groenendaal is filled with old mysterious languages I can’t read. Worlds of knowledge I can only imagine. Wonderful shapes I love looking at. Shapes that take me to exotic places, inhibited by people you now only find in books. Or maybe the way words used to look before I could read. Wasn’t it a fascinating thing? Adults staring at pages covered with weird lines that didn’t make any sense for hours at a time. You could only imagine what these lines told them. It was almost like a secret society to me, and I couldn’t wait until I was invited in. This is what intrigues me most still, something I cannot understand and therefore let’s my fantasy run wild.

When you start reading the dry factual text, however, all mystery of meaning evaporates. Fantasy disappears and is replaced by hard fact. Being a hopeless dreamer, naturally I was let down a bit.

But then I come across delightful sentences that have now regretfully almost disappeared from use, and instantly I am charmed again.

The book by Groenendaal is actually a very thorough reference work on the history of typography. Dealing from the earliest types of passing on information; such as cave paintings; and the development of the alphabet, up until the most contemporary typographers of the seventies.

As the book is written before the computer age when the phototypesetting was hardly introduced yet, it’s not completely unfair to say it is heavily outdated.

However I am glad to find that the book is still widely used and it is often referred to in new publication to date. Also, earliest copies of “Drukletters” are now sold as book antiquities. It is safe to say that it really has no need for me to save it.

Rietveld > lib. cat. no: 757.3 1F

Considerations on the matter of drawing.


Sunday, October 3, 2010

What is drawing? Is it possible to define it as one of the basic way of expression of mankind? I think so. And as a so elementary medium it is also possibly the most versatile. That’s why I’m so fascinated by this powerful medium, I guess.

The sign traced on the ground, at first, and then on rock, paper and many other materials is the most immediate gesture, which remains for the future. It is something that survives the moment it is done, it’s time itself expressed, and gives the possibility of a general overlook on the process of tracing, and therefore of thoughts. As an expression of time it’s the best medium to communicate something of that moment, every idea, process, image. The zeitgeist of a precise moment. Applying the drawing process in history, humanity had described itself for millenniums, and the language didn’t replace this medium, and overpassed its power.

There’s a book who in which this process appears evident, a book who inspired these considerations: “The New Yorker Album of Drawings 1925-1975″ by Penguin Books (ISBN 0140049681). It is a collection of cartoons from the famous american magazine, all the cartoons from several artists, Saul Steinberg, William Steig, Richard Taylor, Peter Arno, Charles Barsotti, Geoge Booth, Barney Tobey, James Thurber and Charles Saxon among others, that contributed to its celebrity and authoritativeness. Many designers and artists worked and keep on working for the magazine, expressing by cartoons the daily facts, the ideas they had and their considerations on every topic that comes into their mind. The book as a powerful archive of human activity, a window open on a huge part of social, cultural, politic context of our times.

idea - gesture - sign

Through a closer look to its cartoons it is possible to spot many of the concepts i’ve mentioned in the first lines of this essay. For instance, this cartoon by Steinberg, in its essentiality, holds the articulated concept of the idea that becomes gesture and then sign, being able to disclose its nature. It happens, as in this case, that the sign itself tells much more than a thousand words. In fact, I won’t spend more words on this concept.

i say flower, what you get?

But drawing is also subjective, being the expression of a singularity. In this cartoon the dancing girl expresses something through her gesture (which, in this case, don’t concretizes itself into a sign), but every one of her class mates gets a different concept from the one she feels. It’s clear that, so as in tracing sign everyone puts something of him/herself, in acknowledging it the viewer puts what is part of his/her experience of the world. This causes the fact that drawing as a medium is also very personal, and even if is possible to state that there are not good drawers and bad drawers (the sign is not objective, but reflects the exact image of the drawer), is also possible to say that a good drawing, on the field of expression, is the one that communicates in the best way the concept that inspired it, and the purest it is, the better the idea goes straight into the viewer.

drawing is a personal and a collective processConsidering the history, thou, the drawing had always been the way to describe the zeitgeist of a period, through the widest range of expressions. Is it personal or or collective, then? Is it the personal expression of a singularity or the collective depiction of a society? I think that it is both, depending on the scales we can consider drawing, as the process that turns the expression of a singularity into a depiction of a society is also a collective process.

Another question. The culture influences the art of drawing and drawing itself builds consciousness and culture. Is there a good use we can make of it?

more police lines, please!

Rietveld > lib. cat. no: 738.8 new

The sensation of touching


Friday, October 1, 2010

Rietveld > lib. cat. no: 12928


Log in
subscribe