WAREHOUSE

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.

 

 

 

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

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 Bahnof Video Tour 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.

 

Janet Cardiff – The Alter Bahnof Video Tour (2012)

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.

 

 

Video: Wrapping of the Reichstag by Christo and Jeanne-Claude (1995)

 

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. 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.

 

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