Superposition of Architecture and Art. Architectural Sculpture
Through theoretical and practical investigations of encounters, intertwinings and methodological mannerisms of architecture and art, this Thesis defines the field between them. It consists of a series of written and empirical experiments, documented in the diary-based book format.
Master Thesis WiSe 2021/2022
Ksenija Tajsic
Supervision:
Prof. Ursula Damm - Faculty of Art and Design, Bauhaus University Weimar
Dr. Sabine Zierold - Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Bauhaus University Weimar
The introductory essay frames the interweaving of architectural and artistic discipline through the"exhibition practices” as the common denominator. It is making an overview of historically significant changes in visions of art and architecture, manifested through spatial changes in conceptual vision of the gallery as “content but not a container”. These changes are observed “from the inside” and “from the outside” (of the exhibition space), and are describing the cases of "space as an object/space as a subject", i.e. "art as a tool for conducting an architectural research/architecture as a tool for conducting an artistic research”.
The following "counter-essay" is constructed around the literature whose authors have sometimes similar, and sometimes completely opposite definitions of what architecture and art are and what they should be. By defining one discipline, they postulate another.
This "counter-essay" deals with the concepts of “architecturalization” (Peter Osborn), “conceptual art” (Sol LeWitt) and “conceptual architecture” (Peter Eisenmann). Extracted paragraphs and quotations are presented in their crudest, unchanged form, collaged together in a manner of curatorial-textural endeavour, leaving a new written document as a testimony.
The latter practical (empirical) research unveils a nuanced convergence/divergence between the “concept” (or the “concept of a concept”) and the creation of architecture/artwork. It flows through the (re)interpretation of the same terms while creating art and architecture (e.g. metabolism, morphogenesis, superorganism), and is brought into final methodological form by postulating the term of “INSTALLATION” (ИНСТАЛАЦИЈА) as the common denominator of the superposition of architecture and art, i.e. the neologism “ARCHITECTURAL SCULPTURE" which precisely explains and defines the by-product of their overlap.
Through various experiments in physical and virtual space, ИНСТАЛАЦИЈА acquires its final shape in its third iteration: ИНСТАЛАЦИЈА 3, and it serves as an apparatus for seeking answers to the following questions:
How an artistic artefact is created, how does it look like, and how is it perceived, if, for its creation, we use the same principles as when constructing architectural objects?
* this entails a strict and precise linear elaboration of the project through architectural drawings and models
How different contexts and different realities affect the diversity of perception of (the same) artefacts?
* implying to the relationship between the chronological stages of the triptych ИНСТАЛАЦИЈА 3:
- ИНСТАЛАЦИЈA 3.0.1 - virtual architectural sculpture presented in a virtual gallery space
(virtual speculation of sculpture in virtually speculated space) - ИНСТАЛАЦИЈA 3.1.1 - physically made architectural sculpture (according to architectural drawings of ИНСТАЛАЦИЈA 3.0.1) exhibited in the Čubra-space in Belgrade
(physical sculpture in physical space) - ИНСТАЛАЦИЈA 3.2.1 - replica of the physical architectural sculpture
(virtual sculpture returned into virtually speculated space) - ИНСТАЛАЦИЈA 3.2.2 - photogrammetrically scanned virtual sculpture
(virtual representation of virtually copied sculpture in virtually speculated space)