Currently working again on the drawings of the models.

The model and the drawings are two faces of the same coin. One put forward the notion of the fragments and the different realities we can create with these fragment (real-like or more abstract), whereas the other [the model] talk about the ensemble, the final montage, materiality. They are tools of a side-system [from when the fragments are taken out of the cycle of consumption] that produces but never consumes its components.

In that sense, the model (which is photograph and presented in one unique print) depicted  a reality and can be consider as an end-product while the drawing presents the process of assemblage, the mechanism of staging.

If the classical cycle of consumption can be represent as a circle around which the fragments turn again and again and again, the model i am proposing act more as a never ending line where fragments are constinuously being assemble, de-assemble, re-assemble,… creating narratives. It is a mean for me to critic the economy of recycling – taking pieces out of it and exhibit their narratives. I am starting to see the models as still lives.

In a way this follows up what i explain during the december jury, about the fact that the models are one possible reality but that some other may exist as well. Back then, I explained that the drawing were also representing the fact that each pieces / fragments has its own referential, but put together the fragments compose together a bigger picture.

If you put to bottles next to each other, you have a line of production, if you put next to each other a bottle and a glass, you have a narrative‘ Thomas Demand (AA files conversation)

I would also like to give the pictures a send of urgency in order for them to be closer to the ‘real’ – and match a concern that is not only about the composition of the image itself but also address the issue of consumption in the production of the built environment. Otherwise it is harder to make it really critical – which i really want it to be. Perhaps a way – for the next model/set of drawings – could be to identify more closely and in a very accurate way the identity of the fragments (where are they from, what did their previous owners used them for, for what purpose were they produce…). ?

To be continued…

Here is the set of drawings I made today, but there is still a lot of work to do :

T-01 T-02 T-03 T-04 T-05 T-06 T-07 T-08 T-09 T-10 T-11 T-12 T-13 T-14


Drawing of the last model in progress + potential iteration hand drawn




Quick photoshop of what another iteration/reality could be for the very first model :

Test SL


And a few references [Filip Dujardin, 1-2-3; Onorato & Krebs, 4,5; unknown, 6; Nacho Alegre, 7]

Dujardin F,

Dujardin F, 02

Dujardin F, Deauville


Onorato Krebs, 01

Onorato Krebs, 02


Alegre N., 11



This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.