© 2017 Martin Alexandre

MARTIN ALEXANDRE Part one: The artist Paul Thek (US, 1933) taught Sculptureat thenewyorker art school Cooper Union between 1978 and 1983. The trust in the potential of this exhibition is born from a Text professor Thek prepared for his students. On the one hand, this pieceis madeout of avast amount ofquestionslikefor instance“​Do you believe in abortion? Do your parents? ”. Andon the other hand it consists of more direct assignments such as “​Make a large folded-paper airplane, paint on it a slogan which you think will revolutionize your life ”. It is necessary to make an extensive research, in order to find the exact alumni whohadto deal with the Text as students, back in the days. The exhibition’s frame will propose these graduates to revisit the old class assignment in order to generate the show’s content. “​Remember I’m going to mark you, it’s my great pleasure to reward real effort, it’s my great pleasure to punish stupidity, laziness and insincerity. These marks won’t make much difference in your later life, but my reaction to you will, but the reaction of your classmates to what you do, will. Your classmates are your world, your future will be like this now, as you relate with your present, you will relate with your future. Recognise your weakness and do something about it ”. How professor Thek ends the Text. Link to see the entire source material: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxlcG9ydGZ vbGlvZXRwNDI2fGd4OjFlZjMwMWY1ZDU4YzBkMzE Title of the exhibition​: “​What happens after art school professor Thek? ”. This exhibitionis as much a tribute to Paul Thek’s imagination to have come up with such questions; as it’s a quest for its answers. By answering these questions, the personal history of eachindividual of this group is reflected. Through the personal history, we get to know the trajectory: what happened from after art school until now? How have the questions been lived? Artist(s)​: Paul Thek (US 1933) and the Unknown Yet (the group of students whohadhimin the seminar where this text was proposed as an assignment). Cooper Union’s policy of admission back in the days which wasn’t constrainedby any sort of tuitionfee, andstudents were only admitted inthebasis of their artistic talent. This permittedthat peoplebelongingto minority social groups atthetime, couldtakepartinaprestigious art program. Sincetheaim of the exhibition is to track the trajectory of this people over the pass of 40 years; this questionnaire can work as a vehicle to reflect the microhistory of this human beings. Also, these questions were made for them, meaning that the text and the students are interdependent. The other core interest of the project, is to know more about Paul Thek’s influence as a teacher. Thus, this particular group of people become a first hand source in the research. Type of work​: Text (the set of questions), plus the students’ reaction which still is to be confirmed and executed. Location​: Whitney Museum of American Art. This institution organized a retrospective exhibition on Paul Thek, in 2011. By organizing another one (in 2018, 40 years after Paul Thek became a teacher at Cooper Union), would contribute to continue the effort this institution begun when preparing the retrospective exhibition, that of enriching the artist’s legacy and of American art. Now, with this new project, it will take a look at the repercussions on a younger generation through his activity as an art professor. Duration​: Usual time lapse of exhibitions at Whitney Museum. (3 months?). Audience​: Standard art interested, current and exceptional visitors of Whitney Museum, people struck with the documentary. Documentation​: Make a documentary and a published catalog that would collect the following stages: Finding and meeting the alumni in their respective homes. Any possible information about those who haven’t been able to participate - if possible to publish such thing (speaking of privacy terms). Draw a map of their geographic situation. What are their jobs, tell us about your lives; interview. Making off: the works and building up of the exhibition. Group casual talk, anecdotes? Opening, celebration. Repercussion of the exhibition. Interview how has been participating in this project for you? Goodbye. Archive pictures. Communication​: Whitney Museum PR apparatus, Cooper Union alumni, release ateaser of the first part of the documentary one month before the exhibition. Part two: De Appel arts center seen from the street: The color of its façade -covering the bricks- reveals that the building has gone through a renovation. Bearing this in mind, together with the decorative elements that connectthetop of the façadetotheroof;suggestthat thebuildingis ahistorical one: belongingtoaprevious period in time and by this, its integrity might be protected by a law of heritage of some kind. A staircase connects the entrance of the building and the street. Thebuilding’s groundfloor is above the street’s floor level. Accordingtothegroupof windows,vertically thereseems to be four floors or three and a basement. Horizontally, four windows per floor, except in the ground floor level, where the second window starting from the left side is a door. Once inside: After going through the door, if we divide the space in four -according to the amount of windows- we would be in the middle left side of thegroundfloor. If our backis stuckagainst the door (which would be difficult since at opening times the door is never closed) weseea corridor with a smooth, white and marble-looking floor. On our left, walking a bit, we find a space in the wall to enter a room. Its lightened from the outside, through the windowfacing the street. It has the same floor as the corridor. This roomis thebookshop, andthecounter is installed here: to sell tickets and provide the visitor with practical information. Back in the corridor, right next to the door, on the opposite side to the shop, there is an entrance filteredfromtoptobottomwiththick,translucid, plastic curtains (liketheones found in industrial meat freezer storages). The space we’ve entered, corresponds with the two windows on the right (if we remember the façade’s view). It’s dark inside thanks to a partition wall set in front of the twowindows, blocking all light from the outside. (Except for an eye-ball size device mechanically-functioning as a camera’s shutter- where the viewer can see through, the outside). The plastic curtains, the partition wall, and the gadget seem to be temporary installed elements to improve the exhibition’s quality. Also a carpet modifies to floor’s temperature and texture. This room hosts a video work projected through a beemer. The video shows a musical string quartet. The musicians are behind a white wall. Some parts of their bodies and instruments are visible, coming to the surface through a series of holes. The musicians have a conversation in russian (subtitled in english) behind the wall, meanwhile they’re playing the musical piece. The setting is atypical for a string quartet concert and more similar to an exhibition space: the audience is standing in an interior (but not a stage or concert place) in front of a white wall, perceiving awork.This work relates to the exhibition space I’m describing: behind the wall where the video is projected, there is a room. There is no door to access this room, just an entrance in the left side of the wall opposite to the windows’ side. The space beyond the projection is full -from my shoulders’ height (160 cm) up to the ceiling- of objects attached to the walls not belonging to any evident, underlying category. These pieces (sheets of paper with text and images, musical instruments and other) are connected with coloured threads. I can identify pictures of the four musicians playing in the video. The space has the width as the room before, and the length could be measured by the fact that I could touch both opposite walls with my two hands at the same time. A general view of the building again: Looking at the floor level from above, from a bird’s view, it can bedividedintwo: fromthedoor until wherethecorridor ends is onehalf, andthe other half would be from that point, up to the windows leading to the backyard garden. In the right sideofthefirst half thereis thedarkenedexhibitionspacewiththeprojectionand the room behind. In the left side, closer to the façade, there is the room with the bookshop and counter. In that same side, further from the façade and teared from the entrance room with awall,thereisthecloakroomandtoilets.Thetoilet’s doorspaintedinred, as well as the walls of that room: red is the color of DeAppel’s apple. Theentrancetothis other roomis to the left, walking through the corridor, leaving the counter behind. (Parallel to the video projection backroom). In this new space, there is no door, the entrance is just open. On one of the partition walls dividing the space from the corridor, there is a tv screen withavideocombininginformation (such as text with names), together with an assemblage of diverse non informative images. Where the corridor ends, the same floor continues. A hall begins unifying the width of the entire ground floor. There is a staircase in the lefthand side; toaccessbothat thetopfloors and the basement. Next to the stairs, totheright, there’s anelevator. Thereis anA4printed sheet stuck next to it. It has its bottom partcut intopieces,eachcontainingthesamephone number (with prefix oftheUnitedStates).This is acommonformat toadvertisesomethingin a DIY way: interested people can grab one of those pieces of paper and call you. Some of these pieces had been grabbed already. Then a wall in front of us, creates another space between this hall and the spacebehindit, where the windows facing the garden, are. This wall crosses the entire width of the ground floor, from side to side except for a part in the left that allows the visitors access this last space. Heightwise, it goes fromthefloor uptothis level’s ceiling. It’s visiblethat this partition wall has been added to the architecture: it differs from the arches above the threshold. The arches look the same material and color (white) as the permanent walls and ceiling; while the partitionwallisalsowhite, but thedarklineamongthesetwoelements reveals they have been put next to each other. At times a higher-pitched whistle or even birdly sound irrupts through the space. To the right, a white geometrical object is leaning on the ground, andagainstthewall tothe right. Its width: way longer than my body lying ontheground, 2’50m?It’s wider thanthicker. Its thickness (like the distance from your elbow to the end of your second finger’s nail, maybe even a bit more).Definitely higher thanwider.Theobjectgoes beyondtherestof the room’s ceiling height: This room’s ceiling doesn’t cover this part. (From the façade’s view: this part corresponds to the window on the extreme right). The object’s top goes up to the second floor. This object is not standing parallel to the wall. Both sides are at different distances from the wall, which makes it lean vertically on one single point. On what we could call the “back” of this object, there is an A4 print containing some information concerning a hotel reservation, and a handwritten note. This exceptional height, doesn’t apply to the contiguous room which faces the garden. The arches and pillar relative to the permanent architecture, divide in two the space facing the garden. We would enter it, from the hall, throughanopenspaceontheleft sideof thepillar. This pillar has a prolongation in this room: dividingit (incompletely)intwo. By incompletely I mean that the annex partition wall don’t reach the side of the room where thewindowsare: so it’s possible to transit from one side to the other. Looking at the garde, in this side, there is a bigger proportion of window than wall. The room’s width seems to be the entire ground floor. Thewalls arewhite. Thefloor is thesame as in the hall and corridor. Among other artworks, I can recall, a four-legged surface with a wooden modular construction on. The modular structure allowed me to see through the interior of the construction. The work’s body was a solid cube a big taller than myself (180 cm). It was possible to walk around it. It was close to the middle left window, and the partition wall. On the other side,mymemorycanonly highlight astereomusic player fromthepreusbera. Probably from the 90’s or early 2000’s; equipped toplay CD’s andtapes.It was standingon the ground, against the partition wall that made the access to the hall, impossible from that side. Upstairs, on the second floor, we find a wall in front of us.Toaccesstherestof thefloor we have to go left and straight through the corridor and when the elevator is on our left, turn right. A distance ofaround10steps.Thefloor is different here. Onceweenteredthis room, I see the wall from the ground floor in front of me. Also the white geometrical object of remarkable height. The wall that impededus fromenteringthespacedirectly fromthestairs, holds a work. Rectangular and black. The ground floor can be seen from above, through the space that allows the geometrical object’s height. There’s another A4 DIY advertisement located at the same place as downstairs. You go down a metal ramp to enter the space on the second floor facing the garden. The floor is different than the space we’ve just been. Bluishlightly coloured, concrete(?). There are mountains of sand not taller than 50 cm (approximately theheight differenceamongthe two spaces) distributed all over thespace. Onbothoppositewalls that areneither that of the entrance nor the wall holding the windows, there is a an arrangement of coloured cables coming out of a hole in the wall standing at my eye’s height. To enter the space above the corridor, you have to go up a metal ramp and go through either (my memory and imagination aren’t helping me in this one) “gothrougheither” plastic curtains like the ones downstairs I referred to before, and/or open a metal door. You enter a wide dark space. (Aswideas theentirefloor?).Atbothsides thereis agroupof wooden chairs on each side. Their legs have been cut, so their height varies. The work in front of us is an assemblage of vitrines around 50x30x30 cm. Altogether they occupy almost all the space in that wall: horizontally and vertically. There’re some black curtains behind this work. Probably there’s alsoapartitionwall behindthis curtains,blocking the entrance of lightintotheroom;sincewe’refacingthefaçade’s side, andtheroomis very obscure. Each vitrine displayed an object/s within a particular surrounding. This piecealsocontains a dynamic mechanism to light the vitrines in different combinations of: rhythm (inrelationwith the auditive component of the piece), and also varying the amount of vitrines lit each time. (This only source of light in the room). Bearing in mind that this piece include sound, probably there is a door at the entrance of this space. After clarifying an old uncertainty, I can’t help myself including a new one: I bet the floor was wooden, but I can’t confirm it. In the basement, after descending the stairs, to the left there was a preambulary space where two white walls converged announcing on them another exhibition, and included a brief textual explanation of what was it about. Walking to the adjacent room (following the direction towards the garden), I enter a room with table-like vitrines (4 of them). A small window on the top, lit the room from the garden. There was also complementary artificial lighting in the room. The floor, from the stairs to this point was homogeneously rough (stone/concrete), in contrast to the floor in the ground level. The vitrines hosted notebooks -amongother objects andstones-withdrawings andwritings, graphics, analog printed (mostly black & white) pictures of clouds. It all belongedtoadutch meteorologist. It was possible to circulate around the vitrines the proportion of free space andtables (ratio 1:1 approximately) created paths along the room. I would like to know if there was a fabric standing underneath the objects exposed in the vitrines. Van Abbemuseum From the entrance you see the old part of the building. It’s a building from the 1930’s, a paradigmatic representation of an architectural movement in the Netherlands, common at the time, who praised for the values of tradition, (for instance using brick), materials and formal style typical of the own regional/national area. Vertically it can be divided in two: ground floor and roof. Horizontally, it’s divided in three sections: as we enter, in the hall we can observe how the central and the left section, preserve the original structure. Meanwhile, theright wing, opens up(down), thearchitectural modification carried out in the 2000’s. Movinginthesamedirection-fromtheentrancetothebackof themuseum- theright andleft section differ vertically: The right wing develops downwards to what could be called the ground floor of the modern part. To finishwiththeoldsection, theoriginal tiledfloor is beenpreservedalongthetwovertically constant sections (the central and left).Thebrickedwall of theinterior, is coveredby awhite surface. The left section moves towards theendof thebuildinguninterruptedly,turningright, rounding thecentralsectionlikeanabside. Theceilingof this part is alsocoveredinwhite, in contrast to the central one, where the glass ceiling enlights the room. The right ally, moves downstairs and leaves us in the giftshop. We can continue straight or we can go right, following a path leading tothecafeteriaandexit of themuseum. The decreaseinverticality leaves this areawithabigger height fromfloor toceiling. Thelight comes from above, through the also translucent architectural materials of the restoration. If we continue straight, leaving thegiftshopbehind, we’ll gothroughacorridor whose ceiling’s height has diminished in comparison to the spacewejustleft. Ontheleft, wefinda room with a soft floor and boxes to sit on. The height of theceilingvaries,fromthecorridor, to the room on the lefthand side. (I’m just trying to describe the most relevant change from the old part to the new one; that of the ceiling’s height, or the verticality of the space). The height of this room on the left is double again: our ceiling here is that of the old building. We’re right next to the central section, just one floor under. If we continue through the corridor again, we can access through a staircase an emergent basement floor on the righthand side. It hosted -at the time of my visit- an exhibition of art, the former founder of the museum particularly liked to acquire: coeval, flemish, realist paintings. In a way, this museum has gone through heterogeneous performances according to its director at the time and its strategy: When these paintings were collected, it was done with the hope of giving the industrialized city of Eindhoven a certain symbolic capital, to acquire a distinctive position within the bourgeois standards of the time. These paintings werehungonthewall at thelefthandsideas youwent downstairs to the basement. This wall goes from the basement up to the ground floor of the restored building. If we don’t go downstairs, and we continue walking in the same direction as before (leaving the giftshop behind), we find another entrance on the left, with two rooms. These are parallel to the adjacent space with the soft floor and the high ceiling. These two rooms have a single and not double ceiling height, which allows the building to have another floor just above them. Back to these two rooms we just found on the lefthand sideof thecorridor. They hostavant garde paintings; it was the second museum director, who had the intention of concealing Van Abbemuseum a broader artistic relevance, within the realm of european collections of modern art. Continuing straight until the end of the corridor, we enter a room which takes the corridor’s width plus the width of the two rooms with avant garde paintings. Inside, it hosts artworks from the period that had Rudi Fuchs as director of Van Abbemuseum: Marcel Broodthaers, Lawrence Weiner, Joseph Beuys, an installationof RichardLonginthemiddle of the room’s floor. This director was crucial to many Conceptual and Minimal artists in the 70’s (specially from the US) since he started bestowing them with the opportunity to make soloshows,whatdefinitely developtheworksof anartistdealingwithspaceandconstrained to group exhibitions. In contrast, they are sharing the space in this room. Coming out of the door we just entered, to the left, we can go upstairs. I cannot clearly distinguish in what part of the museum I find myself in. We are moving increasingly vertical which makes sense according to the remarkable tower of the architectural restoration. It’s herewherethecurrent strategy of VanAbbemuseumtakes place: aninterest for collecting and curating a geographical diversity set of artworks, and an inclusive policy towards the audience; which tries to captivate more visitors, by transgressing certain museum rules like for instance the permission to touch and arrange artworks.
Part one: The artist Paul Thek (US, 1933) taught Sculptureat thenewyorker art school Cooper Union between 1978 and 1983. The trust in the potential of this exhibition is born from a Text professor Thek prepared for his students. On the one hand, this pieceis madeout of avast amount ofquestionslikefor instance“​Do you believe in abortion? Do your parents? ”. Andon the other hand it consists of more direct assignments such as “​Make a large folded-paper airplane, paint on it a slogan which you think will revolutionize your life ”. It is necessary to make an extensive research, in order to find the exact alumni whohadto deal with the Text as students, back in the days. The exhibition’s frame will propose these graduates to revisit the old class assignment in order to generate the show’s content. “​Remember I’m going to mark you, it’s my great pleasure to reward real effort, it’s my great pleasure to punish stupidity, laziness and insincerity. These marks won’t make much difference in your later life, but my reaction to you will, but the reaction of your classmates to what you do, will. Your classmates are your world, your future will be like this now, as you relate with your present, you will relate with your future. Recognise your weakness and do something about it ”. How professor Thek ends the Text. Link to see the entire source material: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxlcG9ydGZ vbGlvZXRwNDI2fGd4OjFlZjMwMWY1ZDU4YzBkMzE Title of the exhibition​: “​What happens after art school professor Thek? ”. This exhibitionis as much a tribute to Paul Thek’s imagination to have come up with such questions; as it’s a quest for its answers. By answering these questions, the personal history of eachindividual of this group is reflected. Through the personal history, we get to know the trajectory: what happened from after art school until now? How have the questions been lived? Artist(s)​: Paul Thek (US 1933) and the Unknown Yet (the group of students whohadhimin the seminar where this text was proposed as an assignment). Cooper Union’s policy of admission back in the days which wasn’t constrainedby any sort of tuitionfee, andstudents were only admitted inthebasis of their artistic talent. This permittedthat peoplebelongingto minority social groups atthetime, couldtakepartinaprestigious art program. Sincetheaim of the exhibition is to track the trajectory of this people over the pass of 40 years; this questionnaire can work as a vehicle to reflect the microhistory of this human beings. Also, these questions were made for them, meaning that the text and the students are interdependent. The other core interest of the project, is to know more about Paul Thek’s influence as a teacher. Thus, this particular group of people become a first hand source in the research. Type of work​: Text (the set of questions), plus the students’ reaction which still is to be confirmed and executed. Location​: Whitney Museum of American Art. This institution organized a retrospective exhibition on Paul Thek, in 2011. By organizing another one (in 2018, 40 years after Paul Thek became a teacher at Cooper Union), would contribute to continue the effort this institution begun when preparing the retrospective exhibition, that of enriching the artist’s legacy and of American art. Now, with this new project, it will take a look at the repercussions on a younger generation through his activity as an art professor. Duration​: Usual time lapse of exhibitions at Whitney Museum. (3 months?). Audience​: Standard art interested, current and exceptional visitors of Whitney Museum, people struck with the documentary. Documentation​: Make a documentary and a published catalog that would collect the following stages: Finding and meeting the alumni in their respective homes. Any possible information about those who haven’t been able to participate - if possible to publish such thing (speaking of privacy terms). Draw a map of their geographic situation. What are their jobs, tell us about your lives; interview. Making off: the works and building up of the exhibition. Group casual talk, anecdotes? Opening, celebration. Repercussion of the exhibition. Interview how has been participating in this project for you? Goodbye. Archive pictures. Communication​: Whitney Museum PR apparatus, Cooper Union alumni, release ateaser of the first part of the documentary one month before the exhibition. Part two: De Appel arts center seen from the street: The color of its façade -covering the bricks- reveals that the building has gone through a renovation. Bearing this in mind, together with the decorative elements that connectthetop of the façadetotheroof;suggestthat thebuildingis ahistorical one: belongingtoaprevious period in time and by this, its integrity might be protected by a law of heritage of some kind. A staircase connects the entrance of the building and the street. Thebuilding’s groundfloor is above the street’s floor level. Accordingtothegroupof windows,vertically thereseems to be four floors or three and a basement. Horizontally, four windows per floor, except in the ground floor level, where the second window starting from the left side is a door. Once inside: After going through the door, if we divide the space in four -according to the amount of windows- we would be in the middle left side of thegroundfloor. If our backis stuckagainst the door (which would be difficult since at opening times the door is never closed) weseea corridor with a smooth, white and marble-looking floor. On our left, walking a bit, we find a space in the wall to enter a room. Its lightened from the outside, through the windowfacing the street. It has the same floor as the corridor. This roomis thebookshop, andthecounter is installed here: to sell tickets and provide the visitor with practical information. Back in the corridor, right next to the door, on the opposite side to the shop, there is an entrance filteredfromtoptobottomwiththick,translucid, plastic curtains (liketheones found in industrial meat freezer storages). The space we’ve entered, corresponds with the two windows on the right (if we remember the façade’s view). It’s dark inside thanks to a partition wall set in front of the twowindows, blocking all light from the outside. (Except for an eye-ball size device mechanically-functioning as a camera’s shutter- where the viewer can see through, the outside). The plastic curtains, the partition wall, and the gadget seem to be temporary installed elements to improve the exhibition’s quality. Also a carpet modifies to floor’s temperature and texture. This room hosts a video work projected through a beemer. The video shows a musical string quartet. The musicians are behind a white wall. Some parts of their bodies and instruments are visible, coming to the surface through a series of holes. The musicians have a conversation in russian (subtitled in english) behind the wall, meanwhile they’re playing the musical piece. The setting is atypical for a string quartet concert and more similar to an exhibition space: the audience is standing in an interior (but not a stage or concert place) in front of a white wall, perceiving awork.This work relates to the exhibition space I’m describing: behind the wall where the video is projected, there is a room. There is no door to access this room, just an entrance in the left side of the wall opposite to the windows’ side. The space beyond the projection is full -from my shoulders’ height (160 cm) up to the ceiling- of objects attached to the walls not belonging to any evident, underlying category. These pieces (sheets of paper with text and images, musical instruments and other) are connected with coloured threads. I can identify pictures of the four musicians playing in the video. The space has the width as the room before, and the length could be measured by the fact that I could touch both opposite walls with my two hands at the same time. A general view of the building again: Looking at the floor level from above, from a bird’s view, it can bedividedintwo: fromthedoor until wherethecorridor ends is onehalf, andthe other half would be from that point, up to the windows leading to the backyard garden. In the right sideofthefirst half thereis thedarkenedexhibitionspacewiththeprojectionand the room behind. In the left side, closer to the façade, there is the room with the bookshop and counter. In that same side, further from the façade and teared from the entrance room with awall,thereisthecloakroomandtoilets.Thetoilet’s doorspaintedinred, as well as the walls of that room: red is the color of DeAppel’s apple. Theentrancetothis other roomis to the left, walking through the corridor, leaving the counter behind. (Parallel to the video projection backroom). In this new space, there is no door, the entrance is just open. On one of the partition walls dividing the space from the corridor, there is a tv screen withavideocombininginformation (such as text with names), together with an assemblage of diverse non informative images. Where the corridor ends, the same floor continues. A hall begins unifying the width of the entire ground floor. There is a staircase in the lefthand side; toaccessbothat thetopfloors and the basement. Next to the stairs, totheright, there’s anelevator. Thereis anA4printed sheet stuck next to it. It has its bottom partcut intopieces,eachcontainingthesamephone number (with prefix oftheUnitedStates).This is acommonformat toadvertisesomethingin a DIY way: interested people can grab one of those pieces of paper and call you. Some of these pieces had been grabbed already. Then a wall in front of us, creates another space between this hall and the spacebehindit, where the windows facing the garden, are. This wall crosses the entire width of the ground floor, from side to side except for a part in the left that allows the visitors access this last space. Heightwise, it goes fromthefloor uptothis level’s ceiling. It’s visiblethat this partition wall has been added to the architecture: it differs from the arches above the threshold. The arches look the same material and color (white) as the permanent walls and ceiling; while the partitionwallisalsowhite, but thedarklineamongthesetwoelements reveals they have been put next to each other. At times a higher-pitched whistle or even birdly sound irrupts through the space. To the right, a white geometrical object is leaning on the ground, andagainstthewall tothe right. Its width: way longer than my body lying ontheground, 2’50m?It’s wider thanthicker. Its thickness (like the distance from your elbow to the end of your second finger’s nail, maybe even a bit more).Definitely higher thanwider.Theobjectgoes beyondtherestof the room’s ceiling height: This room’s ceiling doesn’t cover this part. (From the façade’s view: this part corresponds to the window on the extreme right). The object’s top goes up to the second floor. This object is not standing parallel to the wall. Both sides are at different distances from the wall, which makes it lean vertically on one single point. On what we could call the “back” of this object, there is an A4 print containing some information concerning a hotel reservation, and a handwritten note. This exceptional height, doesn’t apply to the contiguous room which faces the garden. The arches and pillar relative to the permanent architecture, divide in two the space facing the garden. We would enter it, from the hall, throughanopenspaceontheleft sideof thepillar. This pillar has a prolongation in this room: dividingit (incompletely)intwo. By incompletely I mean that the annex partition wall don’t reach the side of the room where thewindowsare: so it’s possible to transit from one side to the other. Looking at the garde, in this side, there is a bigger proportion of window than wall. The room’s width seems to be the entire ground floor. Thewalls arewhite. Thefloor is thesame as in the hall and corridor. Among other artworks, I can recall, a four-legged surface with a wooden modular construction on. The modular structure allowed me to see through the interior of the construction. The work’s body was a solid cube a big taller than myself (180 cm). It was possible to walk around it. It was close to the middle left window, and the partition wall. On the other side,mymemorycanonly highlight astereomusic player fromthepreusbera. Probably from the 90’s or early 2000’s; equipped toplay CD’s andtapes.It was standingon the ground, against the partition wall that made the access to the hall, impossible from that side. Upstairs, on the second floor, we find a wall in front of us.Toaccesstherestof thefloor we have to go left and straight through the corridor and when the elevator is on our left, turn right. A distance ofaround10steps.Thefloor is different here. Onceweenteredthis room, I see the wall from the ground floor in front of me. Also the white geometrical object of remarkable height. The wall that impededus fromenteringthespacedirectly fromthestairs, holds a work. Rectangular and black. The ground floor can be seen from above, through the space that allows the geometrical object’s height. There’s another A4 DIY advertisement located at the same place as downstairs. You go down a metal ramp to enter the space on the second floor facing the garden. The floor is different than the space we’ve just been. Bluishlightly coloured, concrete(?). There are mountains of sand not taller than 50 cm (approximately theheight differenceamongthe two spaces) distributed all over thespace. Onbothoppositewalls that areneither that of the entrance nor the wall holding the windows, there is a an arrangement of coloured cables coming out of a hole in the wall standing at my eye’s height. To enter the space above the corridor, you have to go up a metal ramp and go through either (my memory and imagination aren’t helping me in this one) “gothrougheither” plastic curtains like the ones downstairs I referred to before, and/or open a metal door. You enter a wide dark space. (Aswideas theentirefloor?).Atbothsides thereis agroupof wooden chairs on each side. Their legs have been cut, so their height varies. The work in front of us is an assemblage of vitrines around 50x30x30 cm. Altogether they occupy almost all the space in that wall: horizontally and vertically. There’re some black curtains behind this work. Probably there’s alsoapartitionwall behindthis curtains,blocking the entrance of lightintotheroom;sincewe’refacingthefaçade’s side, andtheroomis very obscure. Each vitrine displayed an object/s within a particular surrounding. This piecealsocontains a dynamic mechanism to light the vitrines in different combinations of: rhythm (inrelationwith the auditive component of the piece), and also varying the amount of vitrines lit each time. (This only source of light in the room). Bearing in mind that this piece include sound, probably there is a door at the entrance of this space. After clarifying an old uncertainty, I can’t help myself including a new one: I bet the floor was wooden, but I can’t confirm it. In the basement, after descending the stairs, to the left there was a preambulary space where two white walls converged announcing on them another exhibition, and included a brief textual explanation of what was it about. Walking to the adjacent room (following the direction towards the garden), I enter a room with table-like vitrines (4 of them). A small window on the top, lit the room from the garden. There was also complementary artificial lighting in the room. The floor, from the stairs to this point was homogeneously rough (stone/concrete), in contrast to the floor in the ground level. The vitrines hosted notebooks -amongother objects andstones-withdrawings andwritings, graphics, analog printed (mostly black & white) pictures of clouds. It all belongedtoadutch meteorologist. It was possible to circulate around the vitrines the proportion of free space andtables (ratio 1:1 approximately) created paths along the room. I would like to know if there was a fabric standing underneath the objects exposed in the vitrines. Van Abbemuseum From the entrance you see the old part of the building. It’s a building from the 1930’s, a paradigmatic representation of an architectural movement in the Netherlands, common at the time, who praised for the values of tradition, (for instance using brick), materials and formal style typical of the own regional/national area. Vertically it can be divided in two: ground floor and roof. Horizontally, it’s divided in three sections: as we enter, in the hall we can observe how the central and the left section, preserve the original structure. Meanwhile, theright wing, opens up(down), thearchitectural modification carried out in the 2000’s. Movinginthesamedirection-fromtheentrancetothebackof themuseum- theright andleft section differ vertically: The right wing develops downwards to what could be called the ground floor of the modern part. To finishwiththeoldsection, theoriginal tiledfloor is beenpreservedalongthetwovertically constant sections (the central and left).Thebrickedwall of theinterior, is coveredby awhite surface. The left section moves towards theendof thebuildinguninterruptedly,turningright, rounding thecentralsectionlikeanabside. Theceilingof this part is alsocoveredinwhite, in contrast to the central one, where the glass ceiling enlights the room. The right ally, moves downstairs and leaves us in the giftshop. We can continue straight or we can go right, following a path leading tothecafeteriaandexit of themuseum. The decreaseinverticality leaves this areawithabigger height fromfloor toceiling. Thelight comes from above, through the also translucent architectural materials of the restoration. If we continue straight, leaving thegiftshopbehind, we’ll gothroughacorridor whose ceiling’s height has diminished in comparison to the spacewejustleft. Ontheleft, wefinda room with a soft floor and boxes to sit on. The height of theceilingvaries,fromthecorridor, to the room on the lefthand side. (I’m just trying to describe the most relevant change from the old part to the new one; that of the ceiling’s height, or the verticality of the space). The height of this room on the left is double again: our ceiling here is that of the old building. We’re right next to the central section, just one floor under. If we continue through the corridor again, we can access through a staircase an emergent basement floor on the righthand side. It hosted -at the time of my visit- an exhibition of art, the former founder of the museum particularly liked to acquire: coeval, flemish, realist paintings. In a way, this museum has gone through heterogeneous performances according to its director at the time and its strategy: When these paintings were collected, it was done with the hope of giving the industrialized city of Eindhoven a certain symbolic capital, to acquire a distinctive position within the bourgeois standards of the time. These paintings werehungonthewall at thelefthandsideas youwent downstairs to the basement. This wall goes from the basement up to the ground floor of the restored building. If we don’t go downstairs, and we continue walking in the same direction as before (leaving the giftshop behind), we find another entrance on the left, with two rooms. These are parallel to the adjacent space with the soft floor and the high ceiling. These two rooms have a single and not double ceiling height, which allows the building to have another floor just above them. Back to these two rooms we just found on the lefthand sideof thecorridor. They hostavant garde paintings; it was the second museum director, who had the intention of concealing Van Abbemuseum a broader artistic relevance, within the realm of european collections of modern art. Continuing straight until the end of the corridor, we enter a room which takes the corridor’s width plus the width of the two rooms with avant garde paintings. Inside, it hosts artworks from the period that had Rudi Fuchs as director of Van Abbemuseum: Marcel Broodthaers, Lawrence Weiner, Joseph Beuys, an installationof RichardLonginthemiddle of the room’s floor. This director was crucial to many Conceptual and Minimal artists in the 70’s (specially from the US) since he started bestowing them with the opportunity to make soloshows,whatdefinitely developtheworksof anartistdealingwithspaceandconstrained to group exhibitions. In contrast, they are sharing the space in this room. Coming out of the door we just entered, to the left, we can go upstairs. I cannot clearly distinguish in what part of the museum I find myself in. We are moving increasingly vertical which makes sense according to the remarkable tower of the architectural restoration. It’s herewherethecurrent strategy of VanAbbemuseumtakes place: aninterest for collecting and curating a geographical diversity set of artworks, and an inclusive policy towards the audience; which tries to captivate more visitors, by transgressing certain museum rules like for instance the permission to touch and arrange artworks. MARTIN ALEXANDRE