Return to flip book view

Message Space Residues

volume I Bartlett School of Architecture, UCLSpace Residues November 2024Júlia Moreno Villaça Major Project MA Situated PracticeSpaceon

para mamis, papis, Lólis e Dona Palmyra

Acknowledgements

If not for Dona Palmyra, I would have no studio to work in, make my portfolio and get accepted into the MASP ● If not for my parents, I would never believe I was able to move to and live by myself in another country ● If not for my sister, I would already be dead from missing Laika and Django ● If not for Mô, I would not be aware of the importance of space (word) ● If not for Nathalie, I would not have a place to call home and this essay would be far less readable ● If not for Beam, I would not have the coconut turtle from Whitstable or the spectacular photographs in this work ● If not for Hiram, I would probably have dropped the installation in someone’s head at CAP ● If not for tio Sylas and for Ana, I would have no installation at the CAP, in the first place ● If not for the amazing MASP cohort, I would not have a family in London ● If not for Polly, I would be paralysed by anxiety at this moment ● If not for James, David, Henri and Merijn, I would not have been able to achieve this level of work. I have done nothing but to bring this work into existence. The real merit goes to the people mentioned above, who actually made it all happen. If not for them, you would not be reading this. ● Thank you all, truly ●

Contents

Introduction1NotesBibliographyImages394143Space as a conceptPhilosophies of spaceSpace as a word and a paradox6414Shaping spaceArchitecture and space Sculpting space Residual spaces20222834

xphilosophies of spaceIntroduction

1space as a conceptSpace Residues is the result of the research project conducted during the MA Situated Practice programme, at the Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL. The focus of the work was to discuss the concept of space—the only abstract concept that relies on a physical manifestation in order to exist—by having the investigation of residual spaces through a series of site-specific installations.This publication represents the totality of the work and is divided in two complementary volumes: ‘on Space’ and ‘about its Residues’, respectively. The first volume composes the theoretical basis of the work and has two main chapters. ‘Philosophies of space’ introduces the main conceptions, thoughts, paradoxes and theories about the nature of space. ‘Shaping space’ then proceeds with the analysis of different types of actions

2philosophies of spaceintroductiontowards spaces, ultimately presenting the concept of residual spaces and their choice as the research objects. Volume II continues with the practical part of the work presenting each one of the four site-specific installations, the ideas behind them and schemes on how to best display the works out of their original contexts.

I. Philosophies of space

Space as a conceptthe different approaches to the concept across multiple areas of knowledgeSpace as a word and a paradoxanalising the definitions of the term ‘space’ and its contradictionsI.iiI.i

I.i Space as a concept

Everything exists in space. It is impossible to run away from it. We are all tied to space, and therefore every liv-ing thing must experience it. Furthermore, no single way of experiencing space is the same for two people, for its ap-prehension depends on multiple factors, such as: physical characteristics, cultural background, first language(s), life experiences, field of study, etc.[1]The definition of space is highly abstract, one which humanity might never be able to find a definitive answer to. Throughout history, there has never been a common agreement as to what space is, being differently conceptu-alised from one discipline to another, and sometimes even inside the same. Space is after all, an incredibly complex concept, and it is only expected that it would always raise so many reflections and contradictions amongst different areas of knowledge.Max Brückner’s Collection of Polyhedral Models

8philosophies of spaceAcross many fields that actively study and act on ‘space’, architecture is most closely associated with it—viewing space as a tangible thing that can be shaped and manipu-lated. The relationship between architecture and space will be discussed in more detail in the chapter Architecture and space. For the present chapter, I shall present philosophy and physics’ approach to the concept. In physics, the two main views towards the nature of the universe depend on the understanding of what space is. While Substantivalism understands space as an entity on its own, something in which the existence of the universe depends on, together with a second entity, time, and all of the existing material objects. Relationism assumes that the universe is a consequence of the spatial relations be-tween physical objects, rejecting space as an independent concept1. In addition, each of these views can be subdivided into more precise categories. For Substantivalism alone, we have three categories: • Relational substantivalism: space and material objects are equally basic types of entity; there is a primitive relationship of “spatial locatedness” that holds between objects and places within space.• Container substantivalism: space and material objects are equally basic types of entity; material things are enclosed by or embedded within substantival space, but there is space only outside and between material things.• Super-substantivalism: space is the basic material ob-ject; other material objects consist of this space taking on 1 Barry Dainton, Time and Space, 2nd ed (Routledge, 2010), 151-157.

9space as a conceptvarious properties. Objects are thus “adjectival” on space; space is the only basic physical entity.2;Whilst the two groups of relationists are divided in:• Realist relationists: true statements about space are made true by facts about material bodies and the way they are related.• Idealist relationists: true statements about space are made true by facts about human minds and/or patterns of sensory experience.3 [2]If physics, a subject considered to be an exact science, has such a hard time defining only one concept, we can only expect a wider and more complicated discussion from philosophy. After centuries of Aristotle’s seemingly uncontested concept of space that classified it simply as a tool[3] “Descartes had brought to an end the Aristotelian tradition which held that space and time were among those cat-egories which facilitated the naming and classing of the evidence of the senses”.4 According to the philosopher, by following Cartesian logic, space ceases to be a tool and acquires absolute characteristics, something almost di-vine, that holds everything that there is. In consequence of that statement, space makes its triumphant entry into phi-losophy and being widely discussed by thinkers ever since. 2 Dainton, Time and Space, 152-153.3 Dainton, Time and Space, 1574 Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space, trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith (Blackwell, 1991), 1.

10philosophies of spaceFollowing Descartes’ footsteps, Spinoza “treats this ab-solute space as an attribute or mode of absolute being – that is, of God”5. Leibniz goes even further, attaching to space the status of indiscernible and stating that ‘space ‘in itself, space as such, is neither ‘nothing’ nor ‘something’’6. He also declares that, although indiscernible, space is not independent, which assumes that it must be occupied and that axial relations between those objects must exist. In addition, Kant states that space is but a consequence of our perception, a result of our conscience, meaning it is not an object nor entity by itself, but rather a social construct.[4] Finally, Heidegger approaches the concept of space by analysing the etymology of the word in Ger-man. In his lecture ‘Building Dwelling Thinking’ (Darmstadt, 1951) he states that: Only things that are locations in this manner allow for spaces. What the word for space, Raum, Rum, desig-nates is said by its ancient meaning. Raum means a place cleared or freed for settlement and lodging. A space is something that has been made room for, something that- namely within a boundary, Greek peras. A boundary is not that at which something stops but, as the Greeks recog-nized, the boundary is that from which something begins its presencing. That is why the concept is that of horismos, that is, the horizon, the boundary. Space is in essence that for which room has been made, that which is let into its bounds. That for which room is made is always granted and hence is joined, that is, gathered, by virtue of a location, 5 Lefebvre, The Production of Space, 169.6 Lefebvre, The Production of Space, 169.

11space as a concept“You may if you please, call a partial View of Immensity, or without much Impropriety perhaps, a finite View of Infinity”, p. 83“The Object of that incomprehensible Being, which alone and in himself comprehends and constitutes supreme Perfection”, p. 11Engraving, etching and mezzotint. in An Original Theory or New Hypothesis of the Universe, Thomas Wright

12philosophies of spacethat is, by such a thing as the bridge. Accordingly, spaces receive their being from locations and not from “space.”7Heidegger’s use of linguistics to think about space as a concept presents an interesting conclusion: if we consider that, in every existing language, a word is only created to represent a known object or a concept already understood and apprehended, it is curious to think about how, by the sheer amount of varying interpretations of the term, we have a very faint idea of what space actually is. A more concrete way of finding an answer to this question is by looking closely at what the term ‘space’ refers to. 7 Martin Heidegger, Building Dwelling Thinking, trans. Albert Hofstadter (Harper Colophon Books, 1971).

I.ii Space as a word and a paradox

Illustrations from Sidereus Nuncius by Galileo GalileiWhile some, upon listening to the word space, may imme-diately associate it with emptiness and void, others may think of ‘all of that which surrounds us’ (whatever that means), not to mention the ones that will directly link it to sidereal space. From a historical context, the word comes from the Latin word: spatium8 . It is important to point out that the concept of space has evolved much from its Latin ori-gins [5]. Throughout the years, space has acquired many meanings, becoming a word able to represent numerous different things. 8 Alessandro Calvi Rollino. 2019. “Back to the Origins of Space and Place.” Rethinking Space and Place. https://rethinkingspaceandplace.com/2019/09/09/back-to-the-origins-of-space-and-place/.

16philosophies of spaceThe Oxford English Dictionary lists 34 active meanings to the word—along with 10 labelled ‘obsolete’. In this dis-sertation, I am interested in the definition of space as a “three dimensional unlimited extent which holds every ma-terial object” best represented in OED as: II.i.7.a. - Physical extent or area; extent in two or three dimensions.9II.i.10 - The physical expanse which surrounds something; extent in all directions from a given point or object. Fre-quently with into or in.109 Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “space (n.1), sense II.i.7.a,” June 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/4317346804.10 Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “space (n.1), sense II.i.10,” June 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/1697379738.Milton’s cosmography in Paradise Lost, Homer B. Sprague

17space as a word and a paradoxThese definitions highlight some of the most important aspects of space: its physicality. Yet, the word ‘space’ de-notes an abstract noun, which according to the Oxford Dictionary is: 1.b. - Existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence; conceptual. Frequently op-posed to ‘concrete’.11If space is “the unlimited three-dimensional expanse in which all material objects are located”—from which we can suppose there is no space without materiality—and at the same time an abstract concept—which implies “not hav-ing a physical or concrete existence”—we can only assume that space is indeed a paradoxical concept.In his book ‘Architecture and Disjunction’, Bernard Tschumi poses a series of rhetorical questions about space, presenting amongst them yet another paradox: “1.4 If, etymologically, “defining” space is both making space distinct and stating the precise nature of space, is this an essential paradox of space?”12. The four next questions in Tschumi’s list introduce the subject of architecture as the theme on which the subse-quent ones circle around. Even though I am aware that there are multiple interpretations to answering:1.5 Architecturally, if dening space is making space dis-tinct, does making space distinct dene space?11 Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “abstract (adj.), sense 1.b,” June 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/3721869434.12 Tschumi, Architecture and disjunction, 55

18philosophies of space1.51 If architecture is the art of making space distinct, is it also the art of stating the precise nature of space?1.6 Is architecture the concept of space, the space, and the denition of space?1.61 If the concept of space is not a space, is the materi-alization of the concept of space a space?13I would like to reflect on the matters presented by these questions in the next chapters of this essay by thinking about them along with some of my own: Should space have a shape? Is it possible to define only one shape for such a broad concept? After all, is it possible to shape space? 13 Tschumi, Architecture and disjunction, 55

II. Shaping space

Architecture and spaceanalising architecture’s insistance on ‘shaping space’Sculpting spaceinvestigating the consequences of acting on space in an abstract wayResidual spacesresidual spaces as the most concrete representation of the abstract conceptII.iii II.ii II.i

II.i Architecture and space

Staatsgalerie worm’s-eye and bird’s-eye axonometrics, James StirlingEvery space is nothing but a ‘space’ until a use is attri-buted to it. From the moment it receives a function, that which was referred to as a ‘space’ ceases to be a ‘space’ to become a ‘living room’, a ‘theatre’, a ‘bedroom’, a ‘nur-sery’, etc. In architecture school, we are taught to design buildings to fulfil certain needs. It is common that, during an asses-sed design project, a very precise list of functions is pro-vided in order to guide the design, and we follow the same pattern as we proceed towards a professional practice. Architecture likes to think of itself as a practice that most acts with, towards, and around space, and by con-sequence, the one that is most closely associated with it. Maybe by arrogance, maybe by innocence, architects have a conviction that they are shaping space itself, without ever

shaping space 24realising that creating a spatial shape that corresponds to a specific use is not the same thing as shaping space itself. The expression ‘to shape space’ carries the assumption that a person, in their cosmic insignificance, has the power to manipulate a concept so broad, omnipresent and ‘divi-ne’ as space itself. It also assumes that space is an object that can be moulded, conveying it a concreteness that can not be presupposed. It is only possible to imagine the interesting consequen-ces for architecture if it ceased to insist on referring to the practice as ‘shaping space’ and assumed a more appro-priate idea of sculpting it. Even though he never used the verb ‘sculpt’ in order to refer directly to the practice, Tschumi’s Crossprogramming is probably the closest architecture as a practice has ever gotten to the act of ‘sculpting space’ instead of ‘shaping’ it. Arguing against the notions of ‘form follows function’ and ‘function followers form’, Bernard Tschumi defends the idea in his essay ‘Six Concepts’: If architecture is both concept and experience, space and use, structure and supercial image –non-hierarchically –then architecture should cease to separate these categories and instead merge them into unprecedented combinations of programs and spaces.1By assuming a non-programmed design of a space, no single use or name can be attributed to it, and therefore it will forever remain a space. 1 Bernard Tchumi, Architecture and disjunction (The MIT Press, 1996), 253-254.

architecture and space25Illustration from The Manhattan Transcripts, Bernard Tschumi

shaping space 26Lina Bo Bardi is another architect that frequently crea-ted ‘flexible’ spaces in her designs. Even having a different approach towards it than that of Tschumi’s, some of her most famous and fascinating buildings contain spaces with no specific uses that can be occupied in multiple ways. The belvedere under the MASP (Museu de Arte de São Paulo) and the communal area inside Sesc Pompeia’s main fac-tory building are some examples, with different activities being represented in the architect’s drawings. It is not a coincidence that the term ‘sculpting’ was ne-ver formally adopted by architecture. Since architecture li-kes to think of itself as a concrete practice, in the border of the so-called ‘exact sciences’, it struggles with assuming the abstract connotation that ‘sculpting’ carries, oftenly re-lated to artistic practice.

architecture and space27above Drawing of exhibition plan ‘Caipiras Capiaus: Pau A Pique’, Lina Bo Bardi below Drawing of MASP belvedere, Lina Bo Bardi

II.ii Sculpting space

Spatial Compositions, Katarzyna KobroThere is a fundamental difference between shaping space and sculpting space: to shape space implies that it does not exist until someone decides to shape it into existence. While one might argue in favour of speaking in terms of shaping ‘a space’—as opposed to shaping ‘space’ in ge-neral—this would imply that a ‘new space’ is to be created inside the already existing space, which, by following the Euclidean idea of space, would be impossible. That is precisely the reason for me to defend the use of the verb ‘sculpt’ when referring to any action towards space. For ‘sculpting’ implies the idea of reshaping that which already exists, rather than assuming one will be cre-ating a new object, in a sense of bringing it to existence.

shaping space 30According to sculptor Katarzyna Kobro and painter Wła-dysław Strzemiński, in their manifesto ‘Composing Space’: Since space everywhere is undierentiated and indivisi-ble, there can be no substantive reason to isolate a part of it from the rest, to set that part aside and pretend that nothing exists beyond its borders. The fundamental law of three dimensional construction is a lack of natural borders: sculpture unfolds in unlimited space.1It is probably because of such an understanding that Kobro’s series ‘Spatial Compositions’ was able to achieve such a precise way of sculpting space, for ‘the interrela-tionship between space and structure is completely equal: they shape each other, it seems, and there is no hierarchi-cal distinction between the two’2. It was never her intention to give a precise shape to space nor to mould it according to her will. There are numerous other ways in which to sculpt space itself, most of them by using non-concrete/three dimen-sional elements. While Helio Oiticica has done so by using colour in his Penetráveis (1961-1980) series, Gego’s Reti-culárea (1969-1982) sculpts space with lines. 1 Katarzyna Kobro, Władysław Strzemiński; Composing Space/Calculating Space-Time Rhythms. October 2016; (156): 12–74. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/OCTO_a_00251.2 Ernst van Alphen, Seven Logics of Sculpture: Encountering Objects Through the Senses (Valiz, 2023), 113.

sculpting space31above Reticulárea, Gego below O Grande Núcleo, Hélio Oiticica

shaping space 32Rachel Whiteread sculpted space by highlighting the void in House (1993). Richard Serra has his own distinct way of dissolving his installation in space as a means of sculpting it. Lygia Pape’s Ttéia 1C, from 2002, carries the concept of ‘weaving space’, first investigated with her students in 1969. Carl Andre uses the material as a way of cutting space, while Donald Judd often seeks to create a connection between the interior and exterior space in his sculptures. Having the works of this artist as main references, I decided to attempt to sculpt space in my own way, by ke-eping in mind architecture’s approach to the concept. For that reason, the sites selected to host the pieces were all residual spaces.images: above House, Rachel Whiteread centre East-West/West-East, Richard Serra below Ttéia 1C, Lygia Pape

sculpting space33

Disegni per i destini dell’uomo: è molto difficile disegnare un pavimento lucido, quasi un miracolo, come camminare sull’acqua, Design Metaphors series, by Ettore SottsassII.iii Residual spaces

Pseudo architettura and Costruzione di un architettura distrutaIt is natural for architecture to maximise space use with each project, yet spatial residues are not rare findings. Residual spaces can come into existence as soon as the building is built, or as a previously used space loses its function for a series of reasons. However, they can not be created on purpose. Their residualityness is usually a consequence of design choices, errors in the construction process or programma-tic changes in the building over a long period of time, and the residual aspect of these spaces relies on the fact that, inside the logic of the building in which they exist, they are of no use whatsoever. It is important to notice that a space that has not be-come a ‘classroom’, a ‘playground’, or a ‘kitchen’ has not had its spatial condition overlapped by a function, and so

shaping space 36it has never ceased to be merely a space. By following that logic, we can also assume that residual spaces are the clo-sest we can get to defining a precise shape for the abstract concept of space. Although this statement may seem to go against what I have been writing throughout this essay, I must remind you that there are numerous types of residual spaces, and besides the fact that they are constantly appearing and di-sappearing, each one has its own distinct shape and form. My interest in residual spaces relies on the fact that they are all around us, and yet it is highly unusual for most pe-ople to take any notice of them. I cannot precisely state when or how I started to be attentive to residual spaces, yet I am sure that they have always been present in my life, even when I was not actively looking for them. For the physical part of the research, I have chosen to act directly on residual spaces. Consisting of four site-spe-cific installations in four different residual spaces, the sites have uses, scales, materialities, and contexts that largely differ from one another. By these means, I was able to analyse how each piece responds to its site, how they activate these spaces, how the spaces’ materiality influences their form and how much they can push the boundaries of the spaces residuality. The goal of the intervention series is to draw attention to these spaces in a subtle way, making people realise they never took notice of its existence. All of the pieces are pre-sented in the second part of this book, together with a brief analysis of how they should be presented in the context of a gallery.

notes39[1] There are multiple examples of different approaches to space. A trivial one is taller people having different perceptions of space simply because they can see it from above. In more specific situations we could mention how the concept of ‘Ma’ is easily understood by anyone inside Japanese culture, but people from other countries struggle to fully comprehend what it means, or how people born and raised in Rio de Janeiro struggle to adapt to São Paulo because it has no view to the horizon. [2] I am a mere astronomy enthusiast, with no deep knowledge of physics. For a much more detailed explanation of these concepts and their consequences to the field, I suggest the reading of Time and Space, by Barry Dainton. [3] Aristotle often spoke more of space in a concrete interpretation of the term, which we now relate to the word ‘place’. For him, space/place was not a concept of extreme relevance for philosophy, once it was seen at the time as a physical object, like a ‘chair’. notes

notes40[4] These are brief introductions to each of the mentioned philosophers’ interpretations of the concept. Since I am unable to discuss all interpretations in detail, I highly suggest closer research on each of them. [5] In his article ‘Back to the Origins of Space and Place’, Alessandro Calvi Rollino describes the evolution of the term in both its etymological and conceptual spheres in much more detail than I could achieve in this dissertation. I highly recommend the reading for anyone interested in the subject. - Back to the Origins of Space and Place By Alessandro Calvi Rollino September 9, 2019 https://rethinkingspaceandplace.com/2019/09/09/back-to-the-origins-of-space-and-place

bibliography41Alessandro Calvi Rollino. 2019. “Back to the Origins of Space and Place.” Rethinking Space and Place. Alessandro Calvi Rollino. September 9, 2019. https://rethinkingspaceandplace.com/2019/09/09/back-to-the-origins-of-space-and-place/.Alphen, Ernst van. Seven Logics of Sculpture: Encountering Objects through the Senses. Valiz, 2023.Dainton, Barry. Time and Space. Routledge, 2010.Heidegger, Martin. Poetry, Language, Thought. Translated by Albert Hofstadter, Harper Colophon Books, 1971.Kobro, Katarzyna, and Władysław Strzemiński. 2016. “Composing Space/Calculating Space-Time Rhythms.” October 156 (156): 12–74. https://doi.org/10.1162/octo_a_00251. Lefebvre, Henri. The Production of Space. Translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith. Blackwell, 1991.bibliography

bibliography42Caldara, Elena, ed. Ettore Sottsass: Design Metaphors. Dario Cimorelli Editore, 2023.Tschumi, Bernard. Architecture and Disjunction The Mit Press, 1996.Wright, Thomas. An Original Theory or New Hypothesis of the Universe, 1750. https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/an-original-theory-or-new-hypothesis-of-the-universe/.

images43page 6Max Brückner, Collection of Polyhedral Models, 1900, photograph; https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/max-bruckner-s-collection-of-polyhedral-models-1900/page 11Thomas Wright, illustrations at An Original Theory or New Hypothesis of the Universe, 1750; In https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/an-original-theory-or-new-hypothesis-of-the-universe/.page 14-15Galileu Galilei, illustration at the original copy of Sidereus Nuncius, 1610; https://archive.org/details/Sidereusnuncius00Gali/mode/1uppage 16Homer B. Sprague, Vertical section showing Milton’s cosmography, in Milton’s Paradise Lost, Book Second, 1879; https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/the-universe-as-pictured-in-miltons-paradise-lost/ images

images44page 22James Stirling, Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart, Germany: Worm’s-eye axonometric, 1977-1984, James Stirling/Michael Wilford fonds / Collection Centre Canadien d’Architecture / Canadian Centre for Architecture, Montréal, ref. no. AP140.S2.SS1.D52.P11.2; https://www.cca.qc.ca/en/search/details/collection/object/392100page 23James Stirling, Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart, Germany: Birds’s-eye axonometric, 1977-1984, James Stirling/Michael Wilford fonds / Collection Centre Canadien d’Architecture / Canadian Centre for Architecture, Montréal, ref. no. AP140.S2.SS1.D52.P11.3; https://www.cca.qc.ca/en/search/details/collection/object/392101page 25page 25Bernard Tschumi, from The Manhattan Transcripts, 1977-1981; in Tschumi, Bernard, Architecture and Disjunction, The Mit Press, 1996. page 27above Lina Bo Bardi, Perspectiva vista indicando Bosque de Paus-Mastro e Grande Parede, 1984, Instituto Bardi / Casa de Vidro, ref. no. 111ARQd0019; https://acervo.institutobardi.org.br/collections/drawings/result?project=Exposi%C3%A7%C3%A3o+-+Caipiras+Capiaus%3A+Pau+A+Pique&date=below Lina Bo Bardi, MASP, 1968; In Oliveira, Olivia de. Sutis substâncias da arquitetura. Romano Guerra, 2006.

images45page 28Katarzyna Kobro, Spatial Compositions, 1929; in Ewa Sapka-Pawliczak & Muzeum Sztuki in Łódź’; http://artsterritory.org/music-and-sound/jemp-2019-mechanical-three-sound-sculptures-choir-wojtek-blecharz-vocal-constructivistspage 31above Gego, Reticulárea, 1969; Exhibited in ‘Exposición Latin American: New Painting and Sculpture’, at the Center for Interamerican Relation Art Gallery, New York. Photo by Martha Holmes, Archivo Fundación Gego; https://gegoartista.com/portfolio/reticularea/below Hélio Oiticica, Grande Núcleo, NC3, NC4, NC6, “Manifestação Ambiental N. 2”, 1960-1963. https://www.dopropriobolso.com.br/images/stories/caixa/arte1.jpgpage 33above Richard Serra, East-West/West-East, 2014, permanently installed at Brouq Nature Reserve, Zekreet Desert, Qatar. Photo by Cristiano Mascaro; https://gagosian.com/artists/richard-serra/centre Rachel Whiteread, House, 1993. Photo by John Davies; https://gagosian.com/quarterly/2017/11/03/solid-recollections-rachel-whiteread/below Lygia Pape, Ttéia 1 C, 2002; In exhibition at Galeria Lygia Pape, Instituto Inhotim, Brumadinho. Photo by William Gomes. https://www.inhotim.org.br/item-do-acervo/galeria-lygia-pape/

page 34Ettore Sottsass, Disegni per i destini dell’uomo: è molto difficile disegnare un pavimento lucido, quasi un miracolo, come camminare sull’acqua, 1973; In Caldara, Elena, ed. Ettore Sottsass: Design Metaphors. Dario Cimorelli Editore, 2023.page 35left Ettore Sottsass, Pseudo Architettura, 1973; In Caldara, Elena, ed. Ettore Sottsass: Design Metaphors. Dario Cimorelli Editore, 2023.right Ettore Sottsass, Costruzione di un architettura distruta, 1973; In Caldara, Elena, ed. Ettore Sottsass: Design Metaphors. Dario Cimorelli Editore, 2023.images46

images47

Residues

Bartlett School of Architecture, UCLSpace Residues November 2024Júlia Moreno Villaça Major Project MA Situated PracticeResiduesabout itsvolume II

iv

vContents1394143434343IntroductionSpace Residue ISpace Residue IISpace Residue IIISpace Residue IVCollecting ResiduesNotes

The second section of this book presents the concrete part that followed the theoretical research. The project was developed in four stages, each one resulting in a different site--specific installation, and can be divided into three parts: the introductory work, main ins-tallations, and exhibition planning. Composed of Space Residue I and Space Residue II, the introductory work presents the first two pieces made. Their simpler charac-teristics evidence that they were presented in the earliest stages of the research process, being responsible for laying the foundation for the next steps. The main installations, Space Residue III and Space Residue IV, are the biggest and most complex of the four works. Although more do-cumented than the previous two, they would never be achieved without the reflections and ideas generated in the first steps. As mentioned in the last paragraphs of the previous section, the intervention series’ main objective is to draw attention to residual spa-ces, highlighting their existence in a delicate and not so obvious manner, while trying to cre-ate a new way of sculpting space. Introduction

Space Residue Isite Here East, London, United Kingdomdate May 2024size 100cm x 0.8cm materials 0.8cm aluminium tube, 0.5mm fishing linefirst iteration

4Those who arrive at the UCL campus at Here East, loca-ted in East London’s Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, would rarely ever notice the space to the left of the entrance door. In a dead end corridor formed by a metal panel of building proportions, a wall composed of metal grids with inserted tube lights and a glass window that conducts one’s view to an office room, there is a residual space. Maybe, if the metal panel was not there, the space would never be regarded as residual. But there it is, and it is hi-ghly unlikely that it will ever cease to be just that. There are no benches, no chairs. It can be used as a passage during rainy days, but the small distance that se-parates the building and panel is not enough for one to pass comfortably through—many times I have seen people preferring the rain over crossing that way.It is there, at that curious leftover of a place, that we may find—if we are so lucky—the installation that represents the first iteration of this project. Formed by a single thin metal tube and two fishing lines, it is the simplest of the four pieces. The lines, tied at each end to its surroundings, sustain the tube in the air, as if it is floating. It is difficult to notice the piece is there, but once it is done, it can not be unseen. For, at first sight, it seems that something is off within that space, but the similar materials from the tube and the grid camouflage it just enough for the optical illusion to be created.

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

site UCL Institute of Education, London, United Kingdomdate June 2024size 70cm x 6cm materials 0.8cm aluminium tube, 0.5mm fishing lineSpace Residue IIsecond iteration

14The second iteration takes place in a different part of London. Although in a different location,it is also a residual space to the left of the entrance to a UCL facility. We are now under a single flight of stairs. It remains a mystery as to where the stairs lead. It is not a passage, nor is it directly by one. A true dead end. A metal grid closes up the space under the stairs, transforming it into some sort of inverted cage, intended to keep things out, not in. The installation piece defies this purpose. In some way, it has gotten through the grid and entered the space under the stairs. How has it done that? Also a mystery. By entering the space, the piece highlights it. Its shiny and clean aspect makes clear that the aluminium circle does not belong to that place. Being suspended from the floor by three almost invisible fishing lines, one wonders how a single and lose piece of alluminum wire holds the its apparent floating state seems to defy gravity.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

site Club Athlético Paulistano, São Paulo, Brazildate July - August 2024size 210cm x 54cm x 0.5cmmaterials 1484 ceramic tiles (2x2cm), 0.3 mm stainless steelthird iterationSpace Residue III

24Iteration number three happens in a much different context from the previous ones. The change in the city, country and continent is the most obvious change, but not the most important one. The main contrast between each of the sites relies on the fact that the one chosen for the third iteration was not born as a residual space, but became one with time. Located at the Club Athletico Paulistano, the Main Building—designed by Gregori Warchavchik and completed in 1947—was originally the centre of the club’s activities[1]. With the development and growth of the club’s facilities in the following years and the inauguration of two new buildings, Warchavchik’s structure was gradually converted into a space for temporary activities (balls, parties and smaller concerts) and administrative headquarters, to which members rarely go to. The monumental facade and the tro-pical gardens in front of it became a secondary space in the whole complex, and contrary tothe rest of the club, are usually empty. Part of the Brazilian modernist architecture movement, the buil-ding carries some of its most common characteristics, being the accessramps and tall pillars some of its most striking elements. It is impossible to not get impressed by the scale of these elements, and photographs rarely do justice to the beauty of this space.[2]

25

26

27The two main characteristics for the installation piece are drawn from the two fundamental elements of the site: the pillars and ramps. More than 10 metres tall and measuring 54 centimetres in diameter, the pillars give an impression of being much li-ghter than they are. Completely covered in small square tiles of a pale green tone, they border the outer side ot the building. The first section of the ramp is atta-ched to the pillars, and divides itself into two opposite directions after the landing at the end of the first section. The softness of the rounded pillars strongly contrasts to the straight and dense volume of the ramp, but instead of looking like twwo very distinct non-matching objects, they perfectly com-plement each other. Highlighting the apparent softness of the pillars in contrast to their real density was one of the main goals of this installation. This contrast is present in the installation object, which looks and feels like a textile piece, and yet is clearly built with the same tiles that adorn the pillars. Carefully laid over the ramp’s landing guardrail, it is not possible to not associate it with the two pillars by its side.

28The piece was made of 1,484 ceramic tiles in total. The tiles were paired and glued together in between two pieces of metal wire—horizontal and vertical—in order to create a unit out of single parts. The result was a 210 cm tall piece, 54 cm wide, in which the gaps between tiles con-veyed a strong sense of transparency and lightness. Even being the biggest piece I ever pro-duced as an artist, the installation seemed small given the scale of the site. This compa-rison was followed by some questions: how big can a residual space be? Does it have a maximum or minimum size? Also, how big does an installation need to be in propor-tion to its site in order to achieve a balance between them? If it had the same height as the pillars, how would this piece look once installed? Would a 12 metre long tiled-textile be too much for that space?I am afraid that many more years of re-search and practice as an artist are needed before I can find the appropriate answers. Yet, I can assure that the search for them continued in the following iteration, the fourth and last installation in this work.

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

site UCL Institute of Education, London, United Kingdomdate October 2024size 508cm x 268cm x 40cmmaterials 0.3mm - 1.0mm aluminium wire fourth iterationSpace Residue IV

46In contrast to the site in São Paulo, the one chosen in London to host the installation was a residual space since the completion of the building. Designed by Sir Denys Lasdun and completed in 1977, UCL’s Institute of Education is one of the most emblematic examples of the Brutalist movement, having some of its essential features. Bru-talism is known for its visually heavy buildings, with rough surfaces and blocked forms, which emphasise the materiality of the struc-ture, giving to it a dramatic sense of scale and weight. When thinking about the IOE, it is almost impossible for the ico-nic set of external stairs not to come to mind. Cascading down the side of the building, the stepped staircase immediately draws attention to itself. It is not by chance that the stairs leave such a remarkable impression—one can still sense its inconspicuous li-ghtness despite what is suggested by the strong geometry and weight of the concrete. Conducting one’s view towards its top—and eventually reaching the sky in the background—it performs an action almost contrary to the rest of the building, which looks den-ser and grounded.

47

48

49The fact that the volume of the lower set of stairs does not touch directly the ground floor adds to this visual effect. Yet, at the same time, it creates a strange purposeless gap under the stairs—a true residual space. Currently enclosed by a steel grid, the site can only be accessed when the locked gate is opened, which happens only upon previously approved request.[3] While drawing attention to its upper sections, the stairs contribute to the space’s residuality, and by being so rarely cleaned, the accumulation of dried leaves, spiderwebs and dust contributes to making peoples’ eyes avert it.It is, though, the most interesting of spaces. Placed right next to the footpath between IOE’s patio and the SOAS Library, in the heart of London’s academic cen-tre, it is only expected that, amongst the huge number of passersby not many would notice such a place. Yet, during my time working there, few people looked at the space by instinct, not drawn by my move-ments or noise. In order to highlight, occupy, and sculpt the space at the same time, I decided to three dimensionally replicate the bidimen-sional grid inside the cage-like structure using nothing but metal wire.

50By gradually tying each end to paral-lel grids, the 168 individual pieces of thin lines eventually acquired the visual weight needed to become a single solid object. Variations in tones of polished gold, sil-ver and copper contribute to the shiny lines contrasting from the rough, opaque, and worn out materials in the background, while the different sizes give the piece its unique texture. The installation is composed of two sections: a longer side measuring appro-ximately 5.10 metres, and a shorter one, around 2.65 metres long. At the point in which the two parts are perpendicularly intersected by one another, the wires are woven together, creating a spatial tapestry. It was interesting to notice how the act of ‘weaving’ the installation is a cru-cial aspect of the work. As a researcher with such an intense approach to archi-tecture, it took me a long time to deeply associate the piece with the building. Bru-talist architecture is often associated with ‘masculine’ characteristics—straight lines, massive volumes, and strong materials—all of which are present in the site. In this uninviting space for women, having a piece made with a technique so closely linked to femininity is a statement of defiance.

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

86Hiram Latorre pp. 32-33Tejesvini Saranga Ravi p. 7, 18, 20-21Sasiwimon Paosanmuang p p. 16-17, 19, 52, 56-57, 65, 66-67, 70-71, 72-73Júlia Moreno Villaça p. 6, 8-9, 10-11, 15, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36-37, 38-39, 40-41, 42-43, 48, 51, 53, 54-55, 58, 59, 60-61, 62-63, 64, 68-69Donald Mill p. 47; from Lasdun Archive / RIBA Collections, in https://www.ribapix.com/Tim Crocker p.5; from https://www.ribaj.com/buildings/fertile-ground-for-creativity-here-east-ucl-hawkins-brownImage credits