Brick WINDOW Brick: The Welcome Collective
Hannah Purvey-Tyrer and Aaron Prior: The welcome Collective.
‘Brick window brick’
By Graham Mathwin
By Graham Mathwin
Modernism and its use of concrete
are often drawn up out of the past to pay tribute to the work of those perhaps
most influential of modernists – the architects. The reason this may still be
relevant is because concrete is hardly relegated to the past, and modernism, if
we are to take The Pompidou centre’s inauguration of their ‘plural modernities’
exhibition seriously - is also not over yet. Rather, both have diversified. This
exhibition is something of that diversification. Here concrete takes on the
strangely pleasing shapes of teacups and necklaces and paintings and bulging
cubes - concrete, it seems, has mellowed in time. The delicate vessels, the teacups,
cast in a parody of the industrial production of goods, some of them felted
with black fibres, are small ornaments that deliberately falter in their
practical, heavy materiality. Everything Loos would have detested. Yet the
ornamentation is so mild, so modest, that it takes on the appearance of
something almost organic in the space. It seems like the least ornamental
ornament that could be made. It implies a certain regard for the paring back
associated with modernism, but applied to the development of something without
a purpose, something to regard, and something outside the implied directness of
modern arts strategies.
The softness of the black fibres
stuck to the exterior of certain objects, and that form the hard-edged shapes
on the large concrete ‘slab-paintings’ is another element in the mix, an odd,
craft-like juxtaposition, it domesticates concrete further, covering it in fur,
softening its gaps and lines into a soft, flat matte black. Craft is present
throughout the entire show. Everything is crafted (though it sits on the edge
of industrial processes like casting) and the dialogue of the home, the
domestic, is constantly brought into play through it.
It is not against the nature of
concrete for these things to occur. Concrete is such a pliable material that it
is capable of a poetics beyond the narrow aims of the modernists. I am
frequently entranced by the bridges of our city, especially driving under
uncompleted ones, where curved concrete pillars stand as strange monuments to
practicality, currently presenting only their beauty as forms to the world. Even
if these structures will eventually be the pillars of our supremely practical
road infrastructure, there is a moment, a small space, wherein concrete can be
appreciated for something other than its incredible strength and ability. This
anonymous grey material is the building product that enables almost anything to
occur. Even Le Corbusier, with his wooden-plank cast exteriors, knew that
concrete took on the qualities of whatever material it was pressed into. Like a
superior plaster it could become anything, a copy of whatever you chose, yet be
able to stand through rain, hail and flood. It has resilience and plasticity.
It is the tension of these things that runs through a lot of the work here too,
and gives something of the idea that plasticity, though it is perhaps
overlooked, is worth as much in concrete as anywhere. It is difficult to
articulate exactly what is pleasing about this show, but I am sure that it
rests in this materiality. For it is here that its strongest ideas are
presented. It is the delicacy and uncommon, homely joy that is ascribed to
these objects made of concrete that brings home its strongest points, that
concrete jungles, in which we all live, may eventually become just that – an
ecosystem, diversified, a great, living rainforest made of concrete and metal
and glass. There is no hope of going backwards, this is certain, but how we
will go forwards could perhaps use some thought.
The entire show is replete
with a kind of hope that is quite distinct from Modernity’s ‘purity’ and social
engineering. It is a corrupt, sweet, awkward architecture that the future
holds, and what hope it can bring is up for debate. It is certain that what it
has been missing, and what this show provides us, is some of the people that
will have to inhabit it. People who have grown up in times long after
modernism, and for whom it is another language, amongst many, and for whom the
strangely idiosyncratic domestic, undervalued and underappreciated for a
century, in favour of boldness and broad thinking, has a new importance. The
strength to be perfectly idiosyncratic and happy in this choice runs throughout
the show. It is not a troubling, unpleasant topic, nor a particularly dangerous
one, but perhaps one with a subtle pull like the curves of this bulging
concrete.
Comments
Post a Comment