In 'comments' you will find the text legibly posted
Friday, May 8, 2009
.jpg)
Monday, April 20, 2009
PERSONAL CURATORIAL PERSPECTIVE + COMMENTARY
I would like to firstly comment that I was content with the way our dry-run presentation went last Tuesday, in terms of appearance/organization along with the mock and preliminary information and research displayed. That is to say, in the small window of time from the agreement on format and material to the pin-up (less than 2 weeks,) we collectively pieced together a fairly coherent and exciting glimpse into what the exhibition potentially will develop into. Perhaps I have an instinctive personal bias; after all I joined the COMD team, and had the unique advantage of working back and forth with the architecture and design students cooperatively. I don’t want to sound defensive, as I played a role in the overall design, but I remain confident in everything we have produced and presented thus far, and with refinement and tweaking, I would like to believe a successful outcome will be rendered.
As far as visual aspects are concerned, an example I found fault with was that the streetscape needs to be more legible and not cluttered with distracting surrounding material, as it is the main integral component. Overall however, It is important to understand conceptually that a blue plywood construction partition wall in Brooklyn and New York City in general usually gets coated in a uniquely haphazard manner with elements like graffiti, advertisements and artwork; so I am not against the semi-organic organization executed in the pin-up, as I think it’s intended to be an interpretation of this authentic aforementioned condition. It is also of the essence to recognize that what we are presenting in the exhibit should embody and ‘personify’ the matters at hand itself. In other words, the appearance of our exhibit should most certainly, in my opinion, be a conglomeration of a wide variety of substance and topics, as this is precisely what each site we have looked at is quintessentially. I would argue the organization needs to be harnessed in a more sophisticated fashion (not just slap this here and that there in a post-it manner) and still maintain clarity for the average visitor to recognize and comprehend. This all being said, I embrace that there is a vast amount and wide range of material that must be presented; and I would not disagree that there should be more of an overall focus or thesis, but I always thought the title along with the intro panel to the show (Brooklyn ExCHANGEs) certainly provided at the least a reasoned prologue and explanation for what the exhibits intentions are.
I am not interested in relocating major elements of the exhibit e.g. timelines, current hierarchical elements; what I would like to see however, is a more exciting use of the blue wall in the space as far as why it’s there and how it interacts with the visitor. At the moment, I would not agree that there is an excess of major material displayed in general, I would say there are some scalar issues, specifically with type that is giving the illusion of clutter; the massing of all our research together will provide for a very exciting and informative exhibit. There are of course some elements to re-evaluate as well, such as the layering of imagery or text or the inclusion of certain components that are not imperative to the wall, e.g. surveys, questionnaires, large post-it style commentary.
I would also like to advocate keeping the same streetscape format and overall organization for each site. I strongly feel that the difference of each site will be legible through the imagery itself. Within each blue wall of course, is where more specific narratives will arise, pertaining solely to each site. I believe the overall aesthetic of the exhibit should remain true throughout, and the research and aesthetics should be the main provocative instruments utilized. Additionally, I think what is misconstrued about the future images being behind the blue wall (barely any of the image is blocked by the blue wall) is the underlying concept. The overall objective is to have the blue wall chockfull of research and relevant information that presents the significance and relevance of the history and present condition in order to instigate and catalyze a discussion or reaction about what might be (the large renderings looming behind the wall representing this.)
As far as visual aspects are concerned, an example I found fault with was that the streetscape needs to be more legible and not cluttered with distracting surrounding material, as it is the main integral component. Overall however, It is important to understand conceptually that a blue plywood construction partition wall in Brooklyn and New York City in general usually gets coated in a uniquely haphazard manner with elements like graffiti, advertisements and artwork; so I am not against the semi-organic organization executed in the pin-up, as I think it’s intended to be an interpretation of this authentic aforementioned condition. It is also of the essence to recognize that what we are presenting in the exhibit should embody and ‘personify’ the matters at hand itself. In other words, the appearance of our exhibit should most certainly, in my opinion, be a conglomeration of a wide variety of substance and topics, as this is precisely what each site we have looked at is quintessentially. I would argue the organization needs to be harnessed in a more sophisticated fashion (not just slap this here and that there in a post-it manner) and still maintain clarity for the average visitor to recognize and comprehend. This all being said, I embrace that there is a vast amount and wide range of material that must be presented; and I would not disagree that there should be more of an overall focus or thesis, but I always thought the title along with the intro panel to the show (Brooklyn ExCHANGEs) certainly provided at the least a reasoned prologue and explanation for what the exhibits intentions are.
I am not interested in relocating major elements of the exhibit e.g. timelines, current hierarchical elements; what I would like to see however, is a more exciting use of the blue wall in the space as far as why it’s there and how it interacts with the visitor. At the moment, I would not agree that there is an excess of major material displayed in general, I would say there are some scalar issues, specifically with type that is giving the illusion of clutter; the massing of all our research together will provide for a very exciting and informative exhibit. There are of course some elements to re-evaluate as well, such as the layering of imagery or text or the inclusion of certain components that are not imperative to the wall, e.g. surveys, questionnaires, large post-it style commentary.
I would also like to advocate keeping the same streetscape format and overall organization for each site. I strongly feel that the difference of each site will be legible through the imagery itself. Within each blue wall of course, is where more specific narratives will arise, pertaining solely to each site. I believe the overall aesthetic of the exhibit should remain true throughout, and the research and aesthetics should be the main provocative instruments utilized. Additionally, I think what is misconstrued about the future images being behind the blue wall (barely any of the image is blocked by the blue wall) is the underlying concept. The overall objective is to have the blue wall chockfull of research and relevant information that presents the significance and relevance of the history and present condition in order to instigate and catalyze a discussion or reaction about what might be (the large renderings looming behind the wall representing this.)
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Exhibition Prologue
note: the color and resolution is always a tad off when I convert the image to a jpeg and post it on the blog!
Here you will find an in process edition of the intro board (full size is 24"x36") to the exhibit. Included are graphically rich text, images, timelines and an essay (the text here is not mine currently and is meant to serve solely as a graphic representation to what the board will potentially look like.) My essay will ultimately be a concise conglomeration of the historical alterations and transformations that have taken place in modern-era Brooklyn. This will be examined in terms of the social, cultural, infrastructural (and ensuing emotional) impacts, when dissecting the architecture, planning, street scenes and the people who occupied them.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg){kind=link}
