“materials may be of the nature of the site … or they may not. This may or may not be important. “[1]
Having worked with the white cloth (figure 1) for many weeks, we decided to experiment with other materials. Materiality is central to our work and we wanted to ensure we had made the correct choice to provide a crisp definition and meaning. After all “materials create an ambience and provide texture or substance to architecture”[2] Whilst we liked the translucent nature and manipulability of the cloth, we felt it made objects seem somewhat decorative and pretty which is not our desired outcome.
After an experimental phase of using materials which gave clear definition such as paper mache – which seemed too much like amateur craft – and masking tape – which was too expensive for our project – we arrived at the use of book pages (figure 2).
Relevant to our site’s current function, the ripped out pages of books provide a good quality of definition, help ‘alienate’ the objects they encompass and look visually intriguing, which will help us in one our aims of highlighting objects to everyday users of the space encouraging them to ‘see’. That said, with the different material comes a different, preconceived set of associations and “the audience will search for, and generate, meaning in everything they see”[3]. Hence our original idea of wrapping and preservation, whilst not completely irrelevant, is now secondary to the materiality of our piece. When wrapping half of the performance space of Group Room 2, where our audience will view the process and performance videos, we felt the book pages commanded “a strongly material presence”[4]. As the found text of the books holds no meaning as a text alone, we have chosen them in order to create this presence generated through the “intrinsic characteristics and qualities: its appearance, patina, texture, feel [and] size”[5]. This could make the experience quite sensory for our audience, thus we are toying around with the idea of the audience being bare foot in the room so they can feel the texture of the book pages beneath their feet. This may enhance the viewing experience as it will not only involve seeing the materiality of the space, but interacting with it in another way through physical contact.
The “material presence” of material over material, for me, makes us “redirect our gaze to that which was an absence,”[6] such as the architecture underneath. This is particularly interesting in our chosen room due to the range of materials that compose the wall connecting the main framework of the library building to its modular extensions.
Another interesting concept to set in concrete in the final few weeks of our work is the idea that having ripped out book pages immersing objects and half of a room has quite a subversive nature when situated in a library. Through destroying the physical appearance of a book, this could potentially draw the audiences attentions towards the materiality of the site, rather than just the functionality.
[1] Pearson, Mike (2010) Site-Specific Performance, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 115.
[2] Farrelly, Lorraine (2009) Construction + Materiality, Switzerland: AVA Publishing, 6.
[3] Pearson, Mike (2010) Site-Specific Performance, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 119.
[4] Bradley, Fiona (1996) Introduction. In: Fiona Bradley (ed.) Rachel Whiteread: Shedding Life. London: Tate Gallery Publishing Ltd, 8.
[5] Pearson, Mike (2010) Site-Specific Performance, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 118.
[6] Dennison, Lisa (2001) A House Is Not A Home: The Sculpture of Rachel Whiteread. In: Rachel Whitread (ed.) Rachel Whiteread: Transient Spaces. New York: Guggenheim Museum Publications, 33.
