Some things being simultaneously worked on:
Three ‘translations’ of Micromegas to come tomorrow, as well as an update on narrative. Trying to produce without overthinking!
the reference Charles gave about the three types of maps/globes. Philip Buach drew maps for ship navigation, complete with annotations referencing the first hand accounts of sailors, that he based the maps on and that were also kept in the same room.
Fascinating! But almost nothing exists about this on the web. Possible conclusion to recon, zooming out of drawing to realise it exists in a library and can only be understood through its referencing.
I am experimenting with depicting the micromegas views in different materialities.. right now the idea is for each plate to be an illustration of one topic that the drawings are “fighting” against. In this case, rendered in glass, you are supposed to lose sight of the figure as all the shapes merge into one another.
Ideas for plates are : materiality, ground, context (literal/theoretical), text, figure, narrative (cause and effect), architecture
In each plate, we see the protagonist (me?) holding various items with which to “read” (like the map-territory relationship)…
Update on text coming soon.
Apologies for another screen shot post but after 1282 hours on rhino, finally a 3D micromegas! Putting together a script + storyboard for narrative to discuss tomorrow…
You, the first-time observer, are lured in by their carefully crafted compositions and beautiful line weights; only to realise that you are able to read anything you want into them, and therefore nothing at all.
You are naturally inclined to search for a figure in their indefinite field of impossible geometries. And surely when you trace that dashed line back far enough it will lead to the object it’s indexing; otherwise it must be a contextual reference?
It seems however that their only common ground is respect towards the edge of the sheet on which they are drawn, which is what Libeskind urges you to realise after all. Read and project into them all you want, but in the end there is only paper.
Micromegas are anti-context, anti-figure, anti-representation. They mark Libeskind’s reaction against the work of his contemporaries; his argument being that the gap between representation and reality is decreasing, but the two should never be confused. The architect’s role is to create the disjunction between them, the extra bit of fiction. Just as Borge’s parable illustrates that the map is not the territory, so the drawing is not the architecture.
Micromegas are not the representation of a utopian project – they are a utopia.
In themselves, they define all the potentials of Libeskind’s future world.
How do you critique such a work, how do you get something new out of it? Either you try and ‘read’ them, only to come full circle in the realisation that there is nothing to read and in fact you have fallen into the very same trap that Libeskind is warning you against.
Or you subvert them. Give them a context. Visualize them in three dimensional technicolour and inhabit them.