Exhibition Design

From 2008/09 Exhibition Development Seminar

Jump to: navigation, search
EDSMain Page

CASEBOOK for X TeamEvaluation PageX-SpecsExhibition Design Team FilesExhibition Design Team Area
Please refer to this helpful links bar to navigate the X-team Files and work areas like a maverick does.



Evaluation for Summary for Casebook

In regards to the evaluation of the final product of this exhibition the X team has evaluated the show by piece, explaining the strength and weakness in the context of our proposed roles and vision of the show. Please refer to the piece by piece evaluation for more specific details.

The Exhibition Development Seminar is a unique experience for each class and show in which they develop. It is not a class anyone can necessarily prepared for, but one where we learn how to react and cooperate as a class to achieve the given problem. The Laure Drogoul exhibition was overall a fun experience for all who were involved. It was a challenging project, and however successful it was, it must be examined closely in order for us and our mentors to learn. The emphasis is the development here. Our proposed roles included constructing an environment that will facilitate the interactive, multi-sensory, and theatrical/psychological experience the viewers will have the work. We sought to alter the common gallery experience by changing the colors of the walls, adding textures and lighting that would tie the various spaces together into a "total work." We were in charge of considering the physical aspects of the works and the logistics of its placement. We coordinated with the exhibitions department a budget and a production schedule for installation. We communicated our concepts through virtual models, maps and sketches.

All parties and teams involved should feel the amazing success of the opening. The timing and coordination and the means by which the artist works had made the last moments a intense struggle to complete the show on time. Due to this there was a some areas of the exhibition that were not fully realized. The major points that lack in the exhibition are the Hive, the Cafe Doris Activation Concepts, and the area between the Fugue Chamber and the Haussners Ball of String. Other general issues which must be examined are the crowdedness of works like The Shepod, the craftsmanship of the Writing Device and the Keane Wall, and the over wall lack of content in the Hive.

The successes of the exhibition that were proposed and realized include the installation of Dolly, Scentorium, and Bozo Prison. From our initial proposal of the Dolly we sought to site the work in a space that would exhibit its grand scale and confront the viewer on psychological level, creating a feeling of smallness and awe. Dolly and the Scentorium we see as the most realized parts of the exhibition based on our teams proposal. Bozo Prison when activated during the Opening was a treat for the normally quiet and tame Cohen Plaza. It opened the show with a humorous vulgarity that one may say is an important element in the Artist's work. There was however a post-facto agreement during our final product conversation between the Artist, Curator, and our team that the piece would have been better sited where we had proposed it to be. As part of our criticism of the process it is evident that the Curator and the Artist had a louder voice than members of the class.

The X Team's critique of the process is mostly directed at the way our team and the Exhibitions department, Curator, and Artist interacted. We are concerned about how our role was followed through during the installation. It was evident that the curator and artist made the final decisions on site when most of the class was away. The most helpful interactions were during the three gallery walk-throughs. It was then that we could collaborate on ways to place the work. The fact of the matter was that there were many changes that were made with out regards to the class voice, favoring the vision of the Curator and the Artist. It is hard to criticize however due to the nature of the beast and the overwhelming success. As a project with EDS it is a shame that our team lost influence in the process. It would have been more beneficial to have had the roles of the Artist and the Curator expressed in the beginning as each of the teams had done. At times the work we performed seemed to be disregarded with no explanation. The most prime example is the execution of the Hive. The Hive concept (initially conceived as the Dr. Ogoul Laboratory) was a laborious discussion for the class. It was a cross-team endeavor to realize how the Hive was to be, what was in it, how it would be contextualized with information about Drogoul's collections and process, and how it would be spatial experienced. The design and plan for its execution was proposed and approved by the class. We believed that the closed form that was built is inferior in effect and interest to the Hiveway, multi-passage space. The Hive as it is lacks the texture and content to give the overwhelming, maximalist aesthetic proposed by the Curator and Curatorial Team. The single closed form is more static, having two portals, with only one vantage point of another key piece. We would also attribute the lack of success to the Curatorial Team's specificity of the content. The content was discussed often in class, without a defined catalog of work/collections to be installed. Again the nature of the beast.

It should be stressed to future Curatorial teams that the research of objects and works must be more thorough. It became a major stress and backlog of our duty to bring this work into experience without the facts and an expression of how the work WAS TO BE experienced. We feel that the curator's role is to supply this ground work, and in the future there needs to be a stronger relationship between the Artist, Curator and Team, and the Exhibit Design Team earlier. A primary focus on how work is to be experience and the individual parts of work needs to be known. There were a significant amount of questions marks about the dimensions and existence of major parts of the Curators selection. It is the Artist's responsibility to know the works physical aspects and to keep records and documentation. For example the Fugue Chamber was not well described, leading to many logistical dilemmas regarding placement and construction. It was never communicated that there was an inner chamber of the Fugue until one of the final walk throughs with the Artist.

Product Evaluation for 3/23/09

Roles and Responsibilities

  • Design and orchestrate the installation of Laure Drogoul’s work in a manner that creates an open, interactive, and multi-sensual experience for the audience.
  • Create an environment for the work by treating the walls and floors by applying textures, colors, fabrics, graphics and lighting
  • Lighting Concept
  • Placement of and design Wall Text with Graphic Design Team
  • Address permission of installation in public spaces with Anne South
  • Model Concept for installation.
  • Create a production Schedule for Students

What aspects of your team's product were MORE successful?

  • The placement of "Shepod" at the entrance of the Decker the HOOK
  • "Apperatus for Orchestral Knitting" under the bulkhead in relation to Phantom Sleeve and interactive elements
  • "Dolly" - placement and Atmosphere - Placement was good as an appropriately exaggerated the Spacial relationship of the piece to room.
  • "Scentorium" - Realization from the proposal - A thorough installation. Had a good feeling in terms of lighting, placement of all components including participant placement.
  • Measurements of space and logistical understanding of Space - Objects well measured given the circumstances of some of the work, comparing the works to the space.
  • "Bozo Prison" in the Plaza - Served as a beacon to announce the show.
  • There were "theatrical" moments of the exhibition that came of really well, including the curtains around Dolly, Housner's and Frequencies. Also the continuation of performers in Fugue chamber made the exhibition more theatrical than most.
  • Army of fools came to fruition pretty well and the sound penetrated the minds of many students. The works transcended the space through sound

What aspects of your team's product were LESS successful?

  • Securing the vision of the Hive as it was proposed and approved by the class. Lacks texture and maximalist aesthetic.
  • Placement of Hausners Ball of String (sound pollution and strange white wall with errant spotlight.
  • Positioning of the Shepod in relation to the wall and the Hive. Not ADA compliant.
  • Cafe Doris Execution fell short of what was proposed.
  • Arrows on the floor.
  • Timing of installation during break.
  • Disrupting the white cube. Lack of texture.
  • Economy of space and walls used as evident in Hausner's installation

What recommendations do you have that would increase the effectiveness of future EDS teams with similar responsibilities?

  • Define the roles of the Artist, Curators and the Exhibition Design Team more clearly and stick to them.
    • To ensure that all party's time is spent in a efficient meaningful way.
  • Perhaps working with a shared model/ floorplan rather than proposing finished ones that were subject to change.
    • To make the placement more collaborative.


Personal tools