Fernando Guillermo Vázquez Ramos | Architecture exhibitions: chronology of a modern cultural phenomenon and some inquietude
Architecture exhibitions: chronology of a modern cultural phenomenon and some inquietude Fernando Guillermo Vázquez Ramos* Translation: Confraria de Textos
*Adjunct Professor in the Abstract Course and in the Post-Gra- This paper discusses the history of architecture exhibitions (and exhibitions about architecture), which, duate Program in Architecture having originated in the beginning of the twentieth century, accompany us to this day as physically- and Urbanism of the Universi- constituted statements or spatially-determined narratives on the creativity of modern architects, for it dade São Judas Tadeu. Doc- was in the Modern Age that such events developed. It argues that the exhibitions were, and still are, a tor (Polytechnic University of stage for the experimentation and courage evidenced by avant-garde and consensually-consolidated Madrid, 1992); Master in Aes- styles architectural (and urbanistic) production, but which also respond to didactic purposes as well as thetics and Theory of Arts (Ins- propaganda for cultural, governmental and/or private institutions of all sorts. It also comments on the titute of Aesthetics and Theory different forms that exhibitions assumed in the last 100 years, depending on the organizers’ (artists or of Arts, 1990); Technician in curators) will, to then question their intentions, or the intentions they should have, nowadays. The article Urbanism (National Institute of also serves as introduction to the exhibition and curatorship theme, which arq.urb magazine defined as Public Administration, 1988); subject for issue 20, the last one of 2017. Architect (National University of Buenos Aires, 1979). Keywords: Curatorship. History of modern architecture. Art and architecture. Museums. Art Galleries. usjt • arq.urb • issue 20 | september - december 2017 121 Fernando Guillermo Vázquez Ramos | Architecture exhibitions: chronology of a modern cultural phenomenon and some inquietude
Architecture exhibitions are relatively modern. more manifestation in the comprehensive proposal There were a few in the nineteenth century, no- of Arts & Crafts. Thus, the view of architecture was tably in England, which produced the first world’s attached to the craft and design work the mem- fair in 1851, whose main exhibition object was bers produced in a collaborative way. Albeit of the very building where it took place, the Crystal much reduced proportions, the movement’s exhi- Palace, by Joseph Paxton. However, to properly bitions had similar goals to those of the great fairs speak of exhibitions of architecture or where ar- (international or universal) of the second half of chitecture was shown in some way, we must wait the nineteenth century, with Europeans (especially until the promotion and propagation of the Arts & French and British, but also Germans) showcas- Crafts movement, especially those connected to ing the advances of science and art promoted by William Morris’s group, The Arts & Crafts Exhibi- Western civilization and industrial capitalism. tion Society, which began in 1888, at the recently- inaugurated New Gallery (Figure 1). This cultural To speak of architecture exhibitions stricto sensu, organization sought to promote the innovative art we must enter the twentieth century, who saw at the time (mainly Pre-Raphaelite) to expand the them rise. The first exhibitions truly dedicated to view and the influence of art on other fields, such architecture (and the construction of the city) were Figure 1. The New Gallery Central Hall, London, 1888. Avai- as design, which started to flourish on the works promoted in Austria and in Germany. The Austrian lable at:
art exhibition, specially painting and sculpture. In place in 1914, in Cologne, where the first works this sense, it still closely follows the tradition of by Walter Gropius (Fagus Factory) and Bruno Taut the British exhibitions of Arts & Crafts, but in this (Glass Pavilion) were presented. However, fo- case the centrality of architecture, which allegori- cusing specifically on exhibitions of architecture cally “includes” the other arts, is evident. (buildings, but also projects) in general, and not of some buildings, the first significant proposal The German case is different; not because it does could be “Ausstellung für unbekannte Architek- not recognize or manifest the connection between ten” (Exhibition of Unknown Architects), of 1919, the arts, especially painting, but because the cen- product of the collaborative work of the Arbeitsrat Figure 2. Drawing of the Secession building (Wiener Seces- trality of architecture is evidenced in its predomi- für Kunst (Work Council for Art), directed by ar- sionsgebäude). Joseph Maria Olbrich, 1897. Available at: nance. The first striking exhibition certainly was chitect Bruno Taut and critic Adolf Behne, which
tecture and city. The exhibition reached its great- Berlin” (“Berlin Construction Exhibition”), where est political vocation in 1920, when Arbeitsrat für the show “Die Wohnung Unserer Zeit” (“The dwell- Kunst took it to the workers boroughs of Berlin, ing of our time”) was located, in 1931. An im- “dedicating it to the proletarians”. portant event, where projects (architectural and urban, which were not rare at the time) and innova- Although imbued with the principle of unity of the tions of the vigorous German construction industry arts – so much so it is appropriate to mention the and even natural-scale models of modern build- presence of members of Brücke and Der Blaue ings were presented, such as one of Mies van der Reiter (Bridge and The Blue Rider, both associa- Rohe’s famous houses. (Figure 4) All these shows tions of expressionists painters, more naturalist wagered on experimental proposals, attesting that the first and more abstract the second, which had the architectural thinking was advanced in relation as members Ludwig Kirchner and Erich Heckel, to the physical architecture production of the time. as well as Wassily Kandinsky and Franz Marc, re- spectively) and the influence of magazines such as Sturm and Die Aktion (The Storm and The Figure 3. “Ausstellung für unbekannte Architekten” catalogue, Action) – the work of these architects and crit- 1919. Available at:
From these expressionist shows, others began to develop, in a considerable varied manner, but al- ways in Germany. Some more complex and huge, such as Weissenhofsiedlung’s, where the show “Die Wohnung” (“The Dwelling”) took place, in Figure 4. Inside of “Deutsche Bauausstellung Berlin”, 1931. Stuttgart, 1927, following the model of borough To the lower right, Mies van der Rohe’s experimental house. Available at:
On the other hand, there were the exhibitions of The exhibition “De Stijl” (Figure 5), which Van avant-garde quality, also experimental, but which Doesburg and Cornelis van Eesteren held at sought to give and see critical (and spiritual) ad- Léonce Rosenberg’s Galerie l’Effort Moderne, in vancement of modern architecture in the cultural 1923 Paris, may be considered one of the great- sphere, more than its relation to industrial produc- est exponents of such conceptual modality, hav- tion. These exhibitions were less institutional and, ing elevated architecture to a superior level of thus, more challenging, usually connected to art idealization and formalization hitherto unexplored galleries. Artists of the caliber of El Lissitzky (La- and which appeared in the exhibition’s produc- zar Markovich Lissitzky) or Theo Van Doesburg tion. The impact of the work presented by the (Christian Emil Marie Küpper) were core figures in organizers was enormous, especially due to the the formulation of proposals both innovative and representation systems, imposing axonometry as of great impact on the consolidation of architec- an emblematic communication form of the new tural and urbanistic thinking of the time. In 1922, architectural conception. Predominantly in the El Lissitzky organized the constructivist session drawings presented by the duo for the projects (“Erste Russische Kunstauesstellung”) of Van Die- of their experimental houses (La Maison Particu- men Gallery, in Berlin, showcasing for the first time lière, or The Private House, La Maison d’Artiste, the avant-garde Russian production that resulted or Artist’s House, and L’Hôtel Particulière, or The from the Revolution of October 1917 and from the Private Residence), axonometry was adopted as consolidation of cubist, constructivist, and supre- normative representation by the architects con- matist groups. El Lissitzky defined two types of ex- nected to De Stijl, by modern masters, as in the hibition: passive and active. The former presented case of Le Corbusier and Walter Gropius, and by what had already been done. In this sense, they other Bauhaus students and teachers. It became were historiographic and educational, traditional the representation most used by the modern dur- exhibitions, including those of the plastic arts, such ing the 1920-30s and even vigorously returned as the ones exhibited since the nineteenth century in experimental works of the 1960-70s, by archi- until the 1920s. The active ones were thought more tects such as Peter Eisenman, for example. as installations, even though the term would only appear five decades later. They were supposed to The European effort to build an architectural and be spaces dedicated to experimentation and to urbanistic thinking by means of exhibitions would the construction of the new in art, whether plastic, continue until the early 1930s. Gradually, they be- graphic or architectural. The exhibition itself would came a way of disseminating modern thinking and be an open work of art, popular and communica- its architecture and city conceptualization, which tive: pure reflective propaganda. ended up structuring an institutional propaganda usjt • arq.urb • issue 20 | september - december 2017 125 Fernando Guillermo Vázquez Ramos | Architecture exhibitions: chronology of a modern cultural phenomenon and some inquietude
whose apex may be the Congrès Internationaux proposal on the works of the movement’s “found- d’Architecture Moderne (CIAM), a combination of ers”: Le Corbusier, Walter Gropius, Mies van der work meeting and commented exhibition of the Rohe, and J. J. P. Oud, as well as Frank Lloyd works produced by the protagonists of the mod- Wright. Many other followers from over 15 coun- ern movement in architecture. tries complemented the show, from Spain to Rus- sia and Japan, from Italy to Czechoslovakia and Across the Atlantic, architecture exhibitions England, displaying how the phenomenon had al- were less important and much rarer. Concern- ready disseminated throughout the world, reach- ing architecture, European effervescence had no ing the USA, which also appeared in the showing precedent anywhere else in the world during the with works by Raymond Hood and the Bowman interwar years. Nevertheless, North Americans Brothers office. In the catalogue, critical texts by Figure 5. Interior of “De Stijl” exhibition, Paris, Galerie l’Effort developed another type of exhibition, of a didac- Alfred H. Barr Jr., Henry-Russell Hitchcock Jr., Moderne, 1923. In the front, the model of the Private Residen- tic quality (not only for architecture, but for the Philip Johnson, and Lewis Mumford. ce, Theo Van Doesburg and Cor van Eesteren. Available at:
apex of this educational modality on (modern) ar- USA: The Post-War Architecture”), on movements chitecture in the USA. It circulated in two formats, (“The Bauhaus: How It Worked”), or on architec- visiting over 80 places between 1938 and 1945, ture by renowned architects (Mies van der Rohe and it even originated a catalogue-book pub- at MoMA in 1947, 1960, 1966, 1969, 1975, 1977, lished in 1942, with a print run of 10,000 copies, 1986, 1993, 1998, and 2001) started to integrate and a revised edition in 1946. Between 1962 and everyday life in large cities. 1970, Arthur Drexler revisited the proposal, visit- ing 45 places and originating the exhibition and In Brazil, these exhibitions started through the ef- the book Transformation in Modern Architecture, forts of Museu de Arte de São Paulo-MASP (São from 1979, which already included late moderns Paulo Art Museum) and Bienal Internacional de such as Louis Kahn, brutalists such as Paul Ru- Arte de São Paulo (São Paulo International Art Bi-
Figure 7. Interior of “Novo mundo do espaço de Le Corbu- dolph, and post-moderns such as Robert Venturi ennial). Founded in 1948, MASP hosted, in 1950, sier” exhibition, São Paulo, MASP, 1950. Source: Habitat, n. or Richard Meier. Even though only the 1979 one still in the Sete de Setembro street headquarters, 1, 1950, p. 39. was presented at MoMA, which saved itself for the exhibition “Novo mundo do espaço de Le Cor- the most sophisticated exhibits, its curators’ in- busier” (New world of Le Corbusier’s space) (Fig- tention is evident, of amplifying the cultural base ure 7), where not only the architectural production (number of people sensitive to the movement) and by the French-Swiss master was presented, but general understanding on modernity through di- also his plastic opus, paintings, watercolors and dactic exhibitions, which facilitated appreciation gouache, as well as drawings and travel croquis. of the “new style” (The International Style, which the museum had already presented in 1932, and São Paulo Biennial, whose first edition took place even its variations after the 1960s). in 1951, kept ever since an architecture session (“Exposições Internacionais de Arquitetura”, or With changes due to World War II, the exhibitions “International Architecture Exhibitions”), with were diversified, and other forms of presentation projects by 150 Brazilian and foreign architects were created; not only the artists and architects, and, as early as the II Biennial, 1953, already but also critics and even historians started to pro- had the presence of relevant world modern ar- mote architecture exhibitions. In general, they took chitecture figures such as Mies van der Rohe place in museums, which, with framework prepared (who had a special room at the V Biennial), Wal- for developing art exhibitions, could perfectly do it ter Gropius, Le Corbusier, Marcel Breuer, Alvar with the architecture theme – always through im- Aalto, and Charles Eames. With the collabora- ages and models. Therefore, exhibitions on archi- tion of MoMA, it was also able to present part tecture from countries (“Brazil Builds” or “Built in of the “Built in USA” exhibition (called in Brazil usjt • arq.urb • issue 20 | september - december 2017 127 Fernando Guillermo Vázquez Ramos | Architecture exhibitions: chronology of a modern cultural phenomenon and some inquietude
“Estados Unidos: Arquitetura do Após Guerra”), temporary Art (ICA), founded by Roland Penrose, which congregated works by Eero Saarinen, Herbert Read and E. L. T. Mesens, represented Frank Lloyd Wright, Philip Johnson, and Richard the apex of this movement of consolidation of Neutra, amongst others. Sigfried Giedion, Junzo modern principles, on whose surroundings artists Sakakura, Mario Pani and Walter Gropius, Alvar and movements who transformed the British and, Aalto and Ernesto Rogers, participated in the ju- by extension, Western cultural panorama gravi- ries of the I and II editions, respectively. tated. One of them was the Independent Group, fundamental for the reformulation of post-war In 1973, Fundação Bienal (Biennial Foundation) architectural issues. The exhibition, which gave and Instituto de Arquitetos do Brasil-IAB (Brazil the group great visibility, also made way for the Architects Institute) organized the “I Bienal de Ar- consecration of a new form of architectural ex-
Figure 8. Interior of “This is Tomorrow” exhibition, London, Whi- quitetura de São Paulo” (I São Paulo Architecture pression, Brutalism. It took place in 1956, at the techapel Art Gallery, 1956. Group 6 stand: Nigel Henderson, Biennial), abandoning the relationship of over 20 Whitechapel Art Gallery, under the title “This is Eduardo Paolozzi, Alison Smithson, and Peter Smithson. Avai- years with the plastic arts and relating itself to the Tomorrow”, and had the unconditional support lable at:
Leipzig, 1913); the Glass Pavilion, by Bruno Taut 1970, where the Brazilian pavilion stood out, work (Deutsche Werkbund Exhibition, Cologne, 1914); of Paulo Mendes da Rocha, Flávio Motta, Júlio the Makhorka pavilion, by Konstantin Melnikov Katinsky, Ruy Ohtake, and Jorge Caron, and that (All-Russian Agriculture and Industrial Exhibition, had the collaboration of artists Marcello Nitsche Moscow, 1923); by the same architect, the Soviet and Carmela Gross. Union pavilion at the Paris Exhibition of Deco- rative Arts, 1925, where Le Corbusier’s L’Esprit In the 1980s, attention turns yet again to the sub- Nouveau pavilion was also built; the German pa- ject’s autonomous issues; the concern is not so vilion at the Barcelona International Exposition, much building, but thinking about architecture: 1929, by Mies van der Rohe; Les Temps Mod- not so much on the accomplishments, but on ernes pavilion, by Le Corbusier, at the Paris In- the projects. It turns to drawing, to the utopian ternational Exposition, 1937, which also had pa- or fantastic proposals; it goes into the whale’s vilions from the Spanish Republic, by Josep Lluís womb and reviews the interior of architecture, Sert and Luis Lacasa, and from Finland, by Alvar trying to expose its essence – in this case, an es- and Aino Aalto; the Brazilian pavilion, by Oscar sence which reclaims history. The starting sign of Niemeyer, Lúcio Costa, and Roberto Burle Marx such cultural upheaval is also an exhibition, the (International Exposition, New York, 1939); the Venice Biennial exhibit (1980), the “Strada Novis- Breda pavilion, by Luciano Baldessari (Milan In- sima” (Figure 10), under the direction of Paolo ternational Fair, 1952); and the Philips pavilion, Le Portoghesi, whose theme was La Presenza del Poème Électronique, by Le Corbusier (Universal Passato (The Presence of the Past). This exhibi- Exposition, Brussels, 1958). tion launched the post-modernism issue into the global debate and put on the agenda the works In 1967, the Montreal “World Exhibitions”, known of architects such as Robert A. M. Stern, Michael as “Expo’67”, stands out; it gathered from the Graves, Oswald Mathias Ungers, Thomas Gordon USA pavilion, with its enormous geodesic, work Smith, Venturi, Rauch and Scott Brown, Stan- of Buckminster Fuller and S. Sadao, to Habitat’67 ley Tigerman, Franco Purini and Laura Thermes, (Figure 9), a housing complex designed by Moshe Massimo Scolari, Arata Isozaki, and Frank O. Safdie, which became the symbol for architec- Gehry. It was a gigantic show, which had yet the tural change in the modernity experimental ambit participation of critics of the caliber of Vincent Figure 9. Assembling of Habitat’67, Montreal, 1967. Avai- and for the abandonment of functionalist pre- Scully, Christian Norberg-Schulz, and Charles lable at:
tions became fairly common, even if none of them Hitchcock Jr. and Philip Johnson, The International would repeat this one’s impact. Style, expression that became a brand for a gener- ation that included architects such as Mies van der The 1980s were prodigal in architectural draw- Rohe and Richard Neutra, other exhibitions did the ings exhibitions, which became greatly popular. same in the second half of the twentieth century. So much so the expression “paper architectures” One of the most known cases, by the impact on was coined to designate the work of utopian the subject discussions in the last 20 years of the quality, imaginative or innovative, unattached to century, was the “Deconstructivist Architecture” the construction practices architecture had al- (Figure 11), at MoMA, in 1988, under curatorship of ways developed. Often compared to the works Mark Wigley and Philip Johnson. Surpassing the of revolutionary architects (such as Étienne-Louis post-modernism view, eight years after “Strada Boullée and Claude-Nicolas Ledoux), the works Novissima”, MoMA launches a new crop of archi- displayed an enormous vitality of ideas and of tects: Peter Eisenman, Frank Gehry, Zaha Hadid, critique (ideological, political, social, cultural Coop Himmelblau, Rem Koolhaas, Daniel Libes- etc.). In Europe, in the USA, or in Japan, galleries kind, and Bernard Tschumi, whose works recover developed exhibitions of different sizes and im- those of Russian constructivists and Van Does- pact to showcase the works of these architects. burg’s axonometry and deflagrate a fragmented Groups who raised a furor in the 1960-70s stood and non-historical approach of architecture. out, such as Superstudio or Archigram, but also Figura 10. Interior da exposição “Strada Novissima”, Ve- architects who used drawing as an instrument neza, 1980. Detalhe da revista Domus, n. 605. Fachada de of critique, such as Peter Eisenman, Aldo Rossi, Hans Hollein. Disponível em:
But, following the trail of tendency formation in- All these exhibitions were thought out by cura- augurated in 1922 by the work of Henry-Russell tors, who at times were the artists themselves, usjt • arq.urb • issue 20 | september - december 2017 130 Fernando Guillermo Vázquez Ramos | Architecture exhibitions: chronology of a modern cultural phenomenon and some inquietude
as in “De Stijl”, by Van Doesburg (Paris, 1923), morrow” as an inflexion point on the perception sometimes professional curators, like at MoMA, and the making of the works of art. But when we sometimes art historians, critics or specialists of must answer to and understand the curator’s in- all sorts, as in the case of Paolo Portoghesi and tention, this situation is more obscure. Philip Johnson (with every nuance, for Johnson was many things besides a specialist). Regardless Some issues that arise in this case pertain to of the type of curator, the task is always the same: these professionals’ standpoint, and it is impor- select works by one or several artists (in our case, tant to understand them, for, as previously seen, architects, landscape artists, urban planners, de- architecture exhibitions may have a great im- signers) and showcase them to a varied public, pact on subject formation, on how we see and composed, however, of a significant number of comprehend architecture and, by extension, city laymen. Yet, it matters whether the exhibition is and society. Exhibitions so close in time and of done by an important museum institution, such such different approaches, such as “Transforma- as MoMA or Pompidou, for instance, or by an art tion in Modern Architecture” (MoMA, 1979) and gallery, as important as it may be. Normally, in- “Strada Novissima” (Venice, 1980) showcase, at stitutions have specific collections they may use the same time, the vitality and the multiplicity of (the case of Mies van der Rohe at MoMA, who standpoints they may present. Consequence of keeps his archive, or even RIBA or Bauhaus, who intelligent and very well-informed curators, these also have material about the architect). In these exhibitions perceived (and presented) the world cases, exhibitions usually have a comprehensive (of architecture) in completely opposite manners, museum quality and present panoramic and edu- providing totalizing views of reality, consume as cational views on the artist or movement they ad- such by their visitors, but that do not necessarily dress. Exhibitions at galleries or small art centers constitute reality itself. The responsibility for the are almost always of much modest dimensions selection of reality is the curator, as well as the and address specific issues; they may be educa- presented world view. The visitor easily accepts tional (although it is not common), but they gener- this institutionalized proposal. ally intend to raise some specific issue or theme. This always depends on the curator’s standpoint. For this reason, it is important to know how the When exhibitions were organized by the artists definition of an exhibition theme came to be. In themselves, this aspect was more evident: there the old exhibitions, of the 1920-30s, the needs is no doubt on Van Doesburg’s intentions in “De were propagandist. As well as manifests, which Stijl” exhibition, for example, or the Independent were the conceptual (or dogmatic) pieces used Group’s, in the attempt of situating “This is To- by avant-garde architects (and artists) to gain ad- usjt • arq.urb • issue 20 | september - december 2017 131 Fernando Guillermo Vázquez Ramos | Architecture exhibitions: chronology of a modern cultural phenomenon and some inquietude
hesion to the new ways of comprehending and of them transformed into great media spectacles assimilating art, exhibitions were formal and op- due to these professionals’ intentions and work. erative manifestations of presentation and per- Institutions also profit from this type of situation, suasion. They were pièce de résistance. Ideologi- for events of a strong personal nature tend to at- cal propagation and political positioning always tract considerable public. accompanied these forms of artistic work display. The decision became didactic when great cultural But what do they intend this public to see in institutions took on the showcasing initiative and an architecture exhibition? When we talk about pure official propaganda replaced theme defini- built work, which, as seen before, were many tion when the states promoted universal exposi- since the beginning of the exhibitions, in the first tions and fairs. But the world today is extremely years of the twentieth century, and that remain diversified; the last great international event may important, judging, for instance, by the suc- have been Sevilla’92, or Hannover’2000, but the cess of the Serpentine Galleries pavilions, the exhibitions do appear in the world cultural spec- experience seems evident and immediate. But trum, and transparency on the reasons that make what happens when the public must deal with an institution carry out an architecture exhibition architectural representations? Do they recognize are very relevant. What is the interest in support- in drawings, photographs, collages, montages, ing or hosting an exhibition with a theme devoted physical models and nowadays digital represen- to the field of architecture? tations and videos, the determining characteris- tics of what is, or what should be, architecture or Once this aspect is defined, the issue arises on do they only see pictures and drawings? Except how a “concept” to be developed at an archi- for didactic exhibitions, such as those promoted tecture exhibition was chosen, which is a more by MoMA with the Circulating Exhibitions, how personal than institutional trait. Although it is to conjugate the laymen’s and the specialist’s evident that an institution invites a curator to or- understanding, the common architect’s and the ganize an exhibition considering that their char- critic’s or historian’s? Who is the real target of an acteristics (all of them, from political to aesthet- architecture exhibition? ic, from professional to personal) match those of the institution, there is an enormous leeway These questions – why do we exhibit? what for? that may affect this development, especially to whom do we exhibit? – confront the curator because, in the course of time, the curators ac- with the world, since he [curator] is responsible quired great power and weight on the decisions for what is shown and for the way it is done. Do that affect the final result of an exhibition, some we exhibit because the theme is important or usjt • arq.urb • issue 20 | september - december 2017 132 Fernando Guillermo Vázquez Ramos | Architecture exhibitions: chronology of a modern cultural phenomenon and some inquietude
because the curator is important? What is im- cialist on the exhibited theme? Their selections of portant: what is exhibited or what the curator the material forming the documental base for the thinks about the theme? The exhibition speaks exhibition theme is pertinent because they know of the curator or of its theme? When the material everything about the theme or because they have is selected, an interpretative option is evidenced a special sensibility that leads them to find de- (Drexler v. Portoghesi): there is a curator who is terminant pieces for the narrative production they building a work – the exhibition – whose clear are assembling? theme may be very important, but a segmented theme is a political and aesthetic option that Are we, the public, conscious of all this con- identifies whom? The curator, the promoting in- ceptual and political, educational and propa- stitution or the object of the exhibition? gandist, individual and public plot, when we are at an architecture exhibition? Evidently not. Each on the exhibitions mentioned here adopt- We are mere consumers of a cultural product ed a precise standpoint, because each one was which, historically determined, has followed us historically built, as the world of exhibitions was for over 100 years and to which we are resil- iently accustomed, adapting ourselves without constructed. The first ones were indeed natural thinking much about what is presented to us. continuity of the artist’s production; the institu- We see a Peter Eisenman exhibition and think tional ones were done as ideological construc- we are seeing Peter Eisenman, but we forget tions which supported the formation of a soci- the curator’s mediation. On the other hand, we ety’s cultural understanding, or at least part of see a scenographically exhibition assembled a society – commonly, the part who had access by Bia Lessa, and what is being presented is al- to culture. The ones who responded to specific most indifferent. Exhibitions (of architecture or interests were almost always intended to use, of anything else) are orchestrated and precise- in a more or less commercial manner, a plastic ly thought-out actions, professional in almost subproduct, notably drawings and similar repre- every case, intended to produce very specific sentations, whose purpose was more financial effects. We cannot think of them as mere naïve than cultural. cultural events. They force us – or should force us – to take sides, because they have sides, What are, then, the challenges faced by the cura- always historically positioned. tors? What type of material was researched, what was chosen, and what was showcased at the ex- Today, before an irrational conservative fury (yet hibition? A curator is or may be considered a spe- politically directed, which is not irrational at all), usjt • arq.urb • issue 20 | september - december 2017 133 Fernando Guillermo Vázquez Ramos | Architecture exhibitions: chronology of a modern cultural phenomenon and some inquietude
our focus on exhibitions should go back to be- For these reasons and aware of the great impor- ing self-conscious, i.e., we should pay attention tance of architecture exhibitions and all they en- to what they propose, what they induce, teach tail (artists, curators, institutions, and public) for or provoke. Conservative anger sheds light on the knowledge and the perception of architec- a crucial cultural experience of modern society. ture, we invited an important group of curators to Exhibitions were born with this society, they are expose what they think about the subject on this consubstantial part of the patterns and needs of special issue of arq.urb. modern society, they are libertarian or education- al aspects, commercial or promotional, enriching or depleting, which accompany us in cultural for- mation. Being conscious of their historical, politi- cal and cultural dimensions fulfills us as citizens.
usjt • arq.urb • issue 20 | september - december 2017 134