Kazuyo Sejima
The president of the Venice Biennale, Paola Barrata, announced this morning that the director of the 12th International Architecture Exhibition will be Japanese architect Kazuyo Sejima of SANAA Architects. Last week, we reported rumors that the next director was going to be a woman—a first for this most important of international contemporary architecture expositions. The names most frequently bandied about for this major job were Sejima and Liz Diller.
In a formal statement, Sejima said, “The biennale has to be everything and all encompassing, a steady conversation with people who are doing things and the viewer or public who see what they are doing.” The 2008 Architecture Biennale was directed by Aaron Betsky whose selection was announced only in January of that year. In picking Sejima, the Biennale has chosen a practicing architect for the first time since Massimiliano Fuksas in 2000. The Biennale has also announced that the exhibition will open on August 29 (with previews starting on August 26) and run through November 21. Traditionally, the Biennale opening date has been mid September; an earlier date should allow many more people to attend the event.
Tags: Kazuyo Sejima, Liz Diller, SANAA, Venice Biennale
FROM SEJIMA–
The Biennale must be everything and anything, fundamentally inclusive, in dialogue with both contributors and visitors. Buildings, the atmosphere that they create and the way in which they are conceived, can be the central starting point of the coming Biennale. Very broadly, the process by which we design can be brought to bear on contemporary and future architectural discussion. I.e. we can select and arrange works such that they are understood as they are rather than as representations. This can be manifested with an architecture grounded in its use by people.
We are now well into the 21st Century. We can take this opportunity to step back and assess the zeitgeist of now through the process of the Biennale. This can clarify contemporary essentials of architecture and the importance of new relationships as we step into the future.
One potent point of departure could be the boundaries and adaptation of space. This might include the removal of boundaries, as well as their clarification. Any part of architecture’s inherent multiplicity of adjacencies can become a topic. It might be argued that contemporary architecture is a rethinking and perhaps softening of those borders.
inside and outside
individual and public
program and form (form and function)
physical and virtual
contemporary and classical
past and future
harmony and discord
structure partition
art and architecture
nature and man
Perhaps the oxymoron can represent a productive new paradigm; can these binaries (intersections of public/private, global/local, artificial/natural, monumental/mundane, complex/simple, symbolic/pragmatic, fake/authentic, active/passive, thickness/thinness) lead to a duality capable of blurring these boundaries? How can the unexpected interdependency of extraordinary spaces create a communal/symbiotic dialogue between adjacencies?
Equally, there is another thread of interest; people in architecture, human encounters in both public and private scenarios, both as creators and users. This is an issue of individual life in interplay with the community. It may be as simple as ‘people meet in architecture.’
In its totality the Biennale can both a new and active forum for contemporary ideas as well as a close reading of buildings themselves.
I am intrigued by Sejima’s initial comment that the “Biennale must be everything and anything, fundamentally inclusive, in dialogue with both contributors and visitors.” I am sympathetic to this trajectory, which seems at once necessary and ironic. It registers at once the importance of an inclusive sensibility but also the pervasive and underlying concern today as to whether the biennale can ever live up to the impossible charge of being everything and anything to everybody. Should it even aspire to be that? What would it mean if we were to acknowledge instead the very limitations of the exhibition format, particularly in a site such as Venice that is so over-determined by a touristic economy and socio-political capital? Into the Open, our project for the US Pavilion in 2008, sought to argue just that: namely, that an exhibition, while highly symbolic and at times internationally visible, can only do so much. One of the things that exhibitions are perhaps particularly good at, however, is engaging in thought experiments about how things might be otherwise. It is in a similar regard that I read Sejima’s remarks, which I think pose a series of interesting possibilities concerning “the importance of new relationships as we step into the future,” as she suggests, both within the field of architecture but also in its interface with the public.
Clearly, architecture today finds itself still caught between what Anthony Vidler has termed “the art of display and the accommodation of use.” This perhaps is just one more contribution to the list of binaries Sejima is interested in rethinking, softening, and “blurring,” as she remarks in her manifest. Following Vidler, I wonder if architecture as a discipline has arguably abandoned its historical aims and social ambitions in favor of celebrity and spectacularity; in the process, the line between art and design been eviscerated by the desire by leading architects to devise sculptural forms for purposes of trade and display. I am interested in what Sejima would say in response to this diagnosis, and whether she would see this perspective as unproductively polarizing. I for one feel that it is the urgent question of the day, although she is is clearly right in that we also need today another route, another approach of “interdependency” between adjacencies. Of course, this discussion is not restricted to architecture and concern curatorial practice as well, which is similarly caught up today in a desire for theatricality and spectacle, but also for reductivism and oppositional thinking.
What we perhaps also need today is a critique of curatorial practice that acknowledges not just the impossible expectations that the public brings to bear on the biennale itself, but also the political and economic entanglements it all too often breeds. We should engage in this critique from an affirmative perspective, with the express aim of exploring how exhibitions can incite new critical thinking about cultural practice and display. It would not necessarily be antithetical to Sejima’s project, after all, which closes with the hope that “the Biennale can be both a new and active forum for contemporary ideas as well as a close reading of buildings themselves.” I look forward to Sejima’s biennale and engaging with the issues it brings to the fore.
I love this Theme !
Thank you, Kazuyo Sejima
Dofus est un dofus kamas, le joueur incarne un ou plusieurs personnages. On y retrouve une multitude acheter des dofus kamas et d’¨¦quipements en tout genre, une vingtaine de m¨¦tiers diff¨¦rents et plus d’une centaine de monstres r¨¦partis en diff¨¦rentes zones sur les 10 000 dofus kamas pas cher (portions de carte, sur lesquelles l’on se d¨¦place d’ailleurs comme sur une carte) formant l’univers de achat dofus kamas, dont 99% ne sont accessibles qu’aux abonn¨¦s.
adultporn pg porn amateur anal porn
free porn pics amateur xxx lesbo porn porn dvd’s twins porn porn movie download
black pussy amateur anal porn porn trailers porn sharing porn video clips korean porn
granny sex free porn clips porn search engine
shemale porn movies lesbien porn porn dvd’s fetish sex porn fucking gay porn trailers