RAM Gallery
20th anniversary-exhibition

November 19th 2009 - February 14th 2010

The Re-Opening - a light construction breaking the security of the white cube

by James Carpenter & Davidson Norris (USA)

Vernissage Thusday November 19th at 7pm

Curator statement

One approach to the idea of ‘re-opening’ and ‘explosion of the white cube is: through the idea of context.

Meaning that ‘something’ from outside the cube enters the room and charges it with some sort of subjectivity that works against the idea of the ‘neutral architectural vacuum’ or ‘white Cube’. This ‘something’ enlarges the space of the ‘White Cube’ and links it to another context. The ‘White Cube’ is no more an isolated and autonomous architectural vacuum but a space that is linked and/or restrained to another awareness from outside of it. That this ‘something’ is mediated through the new opening, and it can be anything from daylight to the light of the night or the light brought from New York, etc.

The ‘re-opening’ is the medium to discuss the quality of light and hence atmosphere of the new space. Transition, transmitting, transformation, transmutation and transcendence are subjects belonging to the discussion of the re-opening as the tool or machine to create that new atmosphere.

Overall reflections/refractions about the light

This approach is (at least to me and from a curatorial point of view) a distinct strategi to explode the ‘White Cube’. I am sure that there are other approaches too, but the one mentioned I find very interesting and as delicate as sublime in order to explode Rémy Zaugg’s ‘White Cube’ with the use of the particular competence, interest and artistic as well architectural oeuvre of James Carpenter and Davidson Norris.

Overall views on the white cube

If we ideally consider the white cube to be an architectural vacuum, a completely neutral space, an invisible or endless spatial frame that shuts out all perturbing information and influence in order to create the undisturbed meeting between the autonomous piece of art and the autonomous spectator, we already have invented the architectural paradox.

We state that architecture, or architectural elements such as walls, ceilings, floors, corners etc, do have the power to make space distinct and exclude it from its surroundings. We actually agree on that those architectural elements do have the ability to create spatial atmosphere or spatial energy. …and further we state that this atmosphere is NOT to be found in the wall and ceilings etc but in the experienced excluded space – although it’s a vacuum and not a moody space we’re talking about a charged space – it’s a space that is charged with ‘nothingness’ or ‘neutrality’.

As a consequence we can conclude that the ideal white cube is as moody as the architectural opposite to it. We can say that the white cube is build of the same elements as its architectural antonym and we respond to it (its walls and space) like we respond to any other architecture that provides us with space. Yet, the White Cube is not in all circles considered as being ‘spatial’… in some circles it’s not even considered as being ‘architecture’…

Overall desires about the explosion or implosion of the white cube

This discussion is anchored in two discussions – art and architecture - with clear crossovers.

I prefer to see the explosion of the white cube as a layered event and a layered structure or construction that comments and questions each ‘layer’ through the two main discussions or ‘disciplines’ art and architecture – but all of it is based on the above paradox. …and it’s literally an in-depth discussion.

‘If the autonomous piece of art is ambiguous and points outwards of itself, the implosion of the white cube can never leave its interior and hence is not ambiguous but stratified and organized in depth by constructive layers within itself and on itself.’ 

To invite Carpenter and Norris to make a stand for the ‘re-opening’ of RAM Gallery is the starting point and the major act that conditions all further interventions in the space. The white cube will at the re-opening already be declared imploded/exploded. It is entirely up to you if you see your act as mere symbolic and/or intellectual one or if you choose to create a new ‘physical real’.  My desire is to name all interventions as constructive acts or as mere constructs that move the white cube into something else.

The idea of construction, the construct and/or the constructor avoids the art/architecture  or architect/artist critique and the work or alternation of the white cube can concentrate on the construction of the layers. The idea of construction is important because it somehow denies the ideas of application, exposition or piece of art placed ‘in the white cube’ – all becomes part of itself, all becomes part of a construction and all is part of a purpose and hence all interventions do have a function. The constructor is neither architect nor artist but somehow creative neutral, he or she is creative and constructs a construction…

On Time schedule and the construction of layers

The re-opening is announced as a work of Carpenter and Norris and is the starting point for the explosion of the white cube. The re-opening is both already installed and active on November 19th – or the ‘event’ of the re-opening is introduced by November 19th and completes itself not before two weeks later, two months later, at the end of the exhibition (February 14th 2010) …or it never completes itself.

Other ‘constructors’ (architects, artists etc) will after November 19th be invited to further construct on the explosion/implosion of the white cube. Some are invited to bring something into the space while others are invited to do something with it. …but what and who it is that will be invited to participate depends still on the opening act of Carpenter and Norris.

All interventions will be announced ahead and marked with a ‘minor opening’ in order to make the explosion of the white cube a transparent one. All interventions are registered and at the end of the exhibition term we plan to publish the works and discussions in a new booklet (maybe as polemic to Rémy Zaugg’s booklet, but that is not decided yet). This booklet is the 20th anniversary gift to the RAM Gallery from all the participating artists or constructors.

Oslo, September 2009

Rolf Gerstlauer

Biography

Rolf Gerstlauer is professor at The Oslo School of Architecture and Design and runs together with his partner a small atelier in Oslo. Studio Gerstlauer Molne’s works are on architecture, film, photography, dance/choreography and include now also noise-production. As an architect Gerstlauer has a love/hate relationship with the white cube, yet as a constructor and maker the extended exploded/imploded white cube represents the base for all of his creative works. Earlier confrontations with the white cube include works like: Momentum 2000 – nordic biennale of contemporary art Moss (with Moment Architecture), OslKunsthall – Oslo Art hall 2000-2003, Contiguity 1999 – AHO, Architecture as Infrastructure – National Museum for Architecture Oslo (with StudioB3), ‘Timeroomchamber’ - Uri/Switzerland and ‘Headhunting’ - DogA/Dansens hus Oslo.