Daniel Drury- Final Blog Post

 

Framing Statement:

For our final piece Functions and Fundamentals we decided to wrap half of Group room 2 in the university library. We chose this room due to the architectural features and material of brick, iron, concrete, glass and carpet. After discussion we decided to wrap only half the room to accentuate the materiality of group room two. To generate the performance component we used projections of our wrapping process throughout the module to display the expedition we have faced. Therefore when the audience enter the room in a small number they would be submerged with different visuals.

 Our process has always been evolved around the idea of architecture and how to transform what is around the structure. Our initials idea was to form the recreation of the train lines that was originally placed outside the library. This site specific work would have taught spectators about the history of the building and the surrounding area. We looked at different materiality for this project; however, cost was the implication, as well, we could not find the right material to aesthetically please. We then explored deeper and was influenced with House by Rachel Whiteread- the idea of casting a Victorian house with concrete. “A cast of an object traps it in time, eventually displaying two histories- its own past and the past of the object it replicates” (Whiteread 1995, p.50); we found this particularly interesting as we have always been interested in showing the old and new of the Great Central Library.

We then came up with the concept of ‘casting’ the North East windows with different materials from new to old- materials like grain bags and book pages; however, we came to the conclusion that this task could not of been constructed to the advance level we wanted it to be.  We were finally inspired by Christo and Jeanne- Claude; the idea of changing something substantial in stature and can be rehabilitated into another visual concept.  From this interesting piece we started exploring preservation, using foundational materials of the library, such as books, to preserve the functions of the library. Whilst wrapping these functions and objects, we found that the surroundings were aesthetically pleasing and alienated the objects being wrapped. We deliberately wrapped the fundamental functions of the library that are used every day, with being taken for granted, and possibly its’ natural beauty being ignored.

When it came to the performance on Friday 9^th of May at 10am, myself and Hannah- ‘library assistants’- were wrapping Anthony – the ‘librarian’ as we felt that “It’s not just about the place, but the people who normally inhabit and use that place” (Pearson, 2010, p.8) When spectators came up to the library assistants, we took the natural instinct within the library and whispered ‘would you like to see the library?’. Once they have replied we would ask for their name and inform the librarian; almost robotically and unemotionally, the library picked up a wrapped book to give to the library user.

Following the instructions above they went to group room two, where they were greeted by Laura, another library assistant. Asking for the name was repeated, and she asked them to take their shoes to help the preservation and to “tread carefully”. They were told that they could observe the room as long as they desire; reading the book pages or watching the process videos. Once they are ready to leave, they place their books on the trolley provided and left the room.

 

Analysis of Process:

 

Libraries are stereotypically a quiet place to study; some libraries even provide silent areas. However, I am just about to contradict this, as ironically, my findings whilst listening to the surroundings was anything but quiet. I based myself in new computer room (on the right hand side as you enter the library). Whilst sitting there, listening, I found myself quite distressed due to the noise. Firstly, the turnstiles at the entrance were constantly turning, forever making a clunking noise every time, as well as the insistent beep when every student was scanning their student ID cards. On top of this, there is a coffee stand near this area, with two female baristas laughing and chatting loudly about their similarities of their hectic mornings. Following on from this, the coffee stand was making other noises. The women clanking their equipment when making a drink for passers-by, as well as the intense steam sound, when releasing a valve in the machine. Although this juxtapose the quiet place of study, it was nice to hear these sounds and relate them back to the railway history which this Great Central Library holds. These initial findings helped us with our original idea, of reconstructing the railway lines that has one ran between the Great Central Warehouse and the Engine Shed.

 

Picture 2. Drawing of train track plan. (February 2014)

As this project was based on materiality, we researched and went to Homebase for our findings.

 

Image 3. Copper pipes- inspiration for our site. (3rd March 2014)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our plan was to create a durational piece, of working during the night to create the rail way lines- to depict the railway engineers, who had to work over night due to protocol- and perform during the day. However, we felt that this plan was not solid enough and did not have enough analysis to back us up. As well as this, when going around Homebase, we quickly realised that money was an implication as the material that would look aesthetically pleasing to this piece, we simply could not afford- as we could only really afford bamboo sticks to create the lines, which we secretly knew it would not do. (Look at image 6 and 7).  We then had the idea of covering all the North East windows of the library, with different material that was used in this building, throughout its history, to allow spectators to learn about the building’s history. However, when pitching this idea to our module leader and the library staff, we soon came to realise that this idea was too ambitious, which would have caused our quality of work to lack. Again, money for this project was an interference, as we simply could not afford all of the materials. In the result of our previous plans we came to the realisation that we wanted to play around with the idea of wrapping, which caused us to think about why is wrapping important. After a brain storm, we came up with the concept of preservation, which our final performance is based on.

 

As a group, we observed the most important fundamental objects in the library, which we could wrap. We connected each fundamental of the library with a function, hence the name of our piece. The fundamentals are as following:

-Digitalisation

-Activator

-Intimacy

– Accessibility

– Outlook

– Storage

 

‘Digitalisation’ was the use of computers, with the modernistic aspect with e-books and tablets used around the library; we therefore wrapped a whole column of computers on the ground floor. The ‘Activator’ is a person that uses the library to keep this building active, hence we wrapped a person. ‘Intimacy’ came to attention when we noticed the social behaviours of the activators in the building. We especially noticed this reserved nature of people in the lift due to being a confined place, and people shared intimacy in unison. ‘Accessibility’ was connected with the stairs of the library. The stairs are accessible, allowing the activators to travel to each floor without experience intimate moments in the lift. Tim Etchells describes the lift as a place that holds “strange intimacies” and believes that “the fascination of these moments is simple- that our machines have brought us together and held us apart” (1999, p.79). ‘Outlook’ is with relation to the windows of the library. We found these windows important to wrap because, internally, the library provides knowledge, which everybody on the outside is fed. After looking at photos of GCW at the Lincolnshire Achieves, we noticed that these single glazed windows were the original windows, once when it was a grain warehouse. We wrapped the panes of glass; however we wanted to leave the natural beauty of the window, so we left frame of the windows as they were. ‘Storage’ was a particular important fundamental to exhibit, as not only are we talking about the shelves which store the book, but also connecting back to digitalization, all the book information are ‘stored’ on the library database with the dewy decimal system.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Through our process of Fundamentals and Functions we were extremely experimental with the use of materiality we used. Originally we started off with the idea of tracing paper as a result of the transparency of the material. We were so engrossed with the architecture of the building, which we wanted to wrap the fundamentals, although to still be seen by the spectators. However, after our exploration with this material, we found that it would not give us the effect that we desire. The tracing paper functioned perfectly with large flat objects, however smaller items (photo of stool) were not suitable for the tracing paper as it creased easily and looked too messy.

 

As our process is immeasurably inspired by Christo and Jeanne Claude piece of wrapping the Reichstag, we decided to sit down as a group and observe the YouTube video again. We collaborated on the idea of using fabric. We found that the fabric was easily manipulated around objects, big or small. We decided that this material was suitable as we explained that these sheets could be symbolised as dust sheets; a material that is used when objects are being protected. However, we showed this stage of wrapping to our peers, and we were told that ‘something was missing’ and ‘the bandages gave off the wrong impression’. After this, we sat down and had talked about what wrapping really means, and to specifically be careful of the connotations.  We were certain that the bandages generated a medical connation, which had no implications towards our performance. Even though the fabric was easily manipulated, it did not give us the detail and definition we were looking for. Being careful with connotations of material, it was apt to use materials that are used in the library- which led us back to paper. We liked the idea of using paper maché, as we would use cling-film, as a material to preserve, and ripped up book pages as a ‘new’ layer of history or architecture (Look at Image 14). However, paper maché was not a suitable outcome as it provided a depiction of substandard craft-making.  Finally when exploring with paper maché, it inspired us to our solid plan of book pages; they are durable, easily manipulated and produced our desired idea. We loved the fact that we are almost ‘recycling’, as we are preserving the Great Central Library preserves the books, and we are using the books as a mean of persevering the library.  “Materials may be of the nature of the site … or they may not. This may or may not be important“ (Pearson, 2010, 115). This quote had made us think a lot about materiality- was it important to use material from the nature of the site? Originally we thought now; however we came around to the fact that the materials on site our extremely important.

 

 

 

 

With our naivety, we did not truly take into consideration how long this wrapping process would take. Wrapping each fundamental object took us a minimum of three hours. As the labour of wrapping was an integral part of our process, we found it significant to display our wrapping during our performance, through the use of projection. Similarly to Christo and Jeanne Claude piece, we witnessed the project develop over a matter of days, within a five minute video. We wanted our audience to witness the techniques and process of our wrapping, within a wrapped room, to engage with the full extent of our labour.

We wanted to present two videos side by side. One of these videos would be a ‘work-in-progress’ visual as we were wrapping the important fundamental object, and the second video is an edited video of the finish product. These videos would help visualise to the spectators the importance of the fundamental functions, even after the performance, once all of our development was absent. We were also influenced by The Alter by Janet Cardiff. She cleverly used technology to guide audience members through her performance by using only their mobile phone and ear phones, which were used to guide them around my strict instructions. Even though we did not present instructions audible, I felt the visual effect that Janet Cardiff had used, was extremely similar to our idea of projecting our process.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pVwNoIGnto&list=PLTxSEDfx1dRD-cA3PiG5RHpmJQRr4–iq&index=2

 

For our final performance we finally decided on the concept of wrapping half of group room two. We wanted people to experience something that they have never witness before. To allow this effect to work we had to train ourselves with wrapping. When wrapping this room every piece of detail was thought about. We wanted the room to have the similar dimensions and shapes before, but to be completely immersed with book pages. We particularly looked into detail with the unique shapes on the iron structure, the skirting board, and the white board edges. We also strategically placed book pages on the floor, and only allowed audience members to enter the room without shoes, so they could experience the room with other senses, not only through the use of sight. We found it important to only wrap half of the room to focus on the artistic form of the stark contrast. This contrast allowed the spectators to view the different materials of iron, brick, glass and carpet in a different form when it has been immersed with book pages. However, wrapping half the room was also to do with practicality. We decided as a group that we wanted to spend the time wrapping a perfected half a room, rather than doing a whole room, which takes away from our materiality aesthetics, as well as due to time restraints, if we did the whole room, it would not of been to the standard that we have trained for.

 

Evaluation:

 

This process has to have been one of the hardest tasks that I had to endure. It was both mentally and physically exhausting. Our original plan was to create our piece over three days and perform on the third day; however due to the high demand of room bookings we could only have group room two for eight hours during the day. We had to result with the time we had got, working over night from 11pm-10am, when the room was not in use. This challenge had made us ill due to the heat of the room and the time pressure; resulting in Laura vomiting three times, and the rest of us feeling nauseous and having headaches. We never expected that putting up book pages on every surface, which can make us appreciate that there, was an involuntary factor of labour within our project.  Never the less, we were all proud of the amount of work we put in, and were determined to get our project finished on time.  With us being slightly ambitious that we would wrap both Anthony and the room in 11 hours, we did run out of time to wrap Anthony, which resulting in wrapping and persevering ‘the librarian’-Anthony, during our three hour performance. Although things did not go to plan for us, the wrapping on Anthony was still justified and fit in accommodated our concept that preserving is always an ongoing process. This visual act on the ground floor accentuated our performance and drew interested spectators in, and we did not regret our choice in doing so.

 

 

If we re-approached this project again, I would certainly change things to enhance our process as well as our performance. Even though group room two was perfect for our project, I would experiment and wrap different rooms in the library, especially the worth room. I believe that the worth room is a validated room to wrap because of being a glass box that is aesthetically pleasing from the inside and out. The fact that it is structured with glass would allow people to observe our piece internally, as well as externally. Secondly, I would change our piece into a durational performance without any time restrictions, as we felt that staying up all night took away from our performing. As well as this, people would be able to observe the process of Functions and Fundamentals at different stages and would be able to experience different visuals as the material ascends.  Finally, I would take use of the David Chiddick building, to place a projector in that building, that would project next to the worth room. Another idea I had would be keep our performance exactly the same. Janet Cardiff performance of An Alter Bahnhof has influenced my idea of having an additional audio tour once they have experience ‘the library’, inviting spectators to go around to each fundamental object that we have previously wrapped, and observe the space.

 

Overall we were extremely proud of our piece (Look at Image 16). As we have never rehearsed putting up all the pages in one go, and we were astounded with our work when the project was finished. Other than us, our feedback from spectators were positive- ranging from a simple ‘well done’, to a deeper level of understanding which we haven’t even thought about ourselves. For example, a member of our audience informed us that the wrapped room reminded him of the opening credits of the film The Matrix, which is an interesting spin. We were always asked if we deliberately chose the books intentionally, as some spectators were looking at individual pages and were inspired by certain quotes.  At first, I was not impressed with the location of our site, and was confused by the idea of Site-Specific performance; however after this process I have learnt that any site can be transformed with an imaginative and creative way.

 

 

 

Work Cited:

 

Pearson, Mike (2007) Site-Specific Performance, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan

 

Whiteread, Rachel (1995) House, London: Phaindon Press Limited

 

Etchells, Tim (1999) Certain Fragments: Contemporary Performance and Forced Entertainment, London: Routledge.