- Venue
- Kunst-Werke Berlin e.V.
- Location
- Germany
Vorspannkino (Cinema of Titles): 54 Film Titles, KW Institute, Berlin
Berlin was filled with an incredible array of video work which proved invaluable to me conceptually, using well considered methods of presentation within the individual galleries they occupied. I was lucky in that ‘Vorspannkino’ was contextually pertinent for me, using appropriated film footage, projected onto the vast walls of each of the buildings four vast floors. Dealing with the challenge surrounding the creation of opening titles for films; each film beginning used was a a masterpiece of its genre, subtly hinting at the plot of the film that would follow it through often using imagery, suggestion and metaphors. There was one room that I was particularly taken with, which contained eight projections about two meters in diameter spread evenly across the walls, each one in turn playing a different film introduction sequence. The relevance of the videos shown within this space was a bonus, but the general presentation of the whole experience and the way in which this was achieved was the most interesting thing about the exhibition.
Despite all the classic cinematic tones of the gallery, it also has unique characteristics of installation, encouraging a new dynamic of looking at video work. The floor had been layered in five inches of soft foam, encourages an interaction straight away upon entering. I must admit to stumbling slightly as I walked onto the spongy floor, like when you are walking up the stairs without paying attention and you anticipate taking one final step, but instead you end up falling slightly through midair. This analogy aside, the actual experience was a pleasurable surprise once you had found your footing. The viewer is psychologically encouraged to sprawl at the foot of the projections, rather than awkwardly standing in front of them. The projects sit along the entirely of the walls, each one commencing as another one finishes. The nature of this layout means that you are unaware which area you will be looking at next. This means you have to turn over and rearrange yourself so you can see the next video which may now be playing across the otherwise of the room. This automatically breaks down and barriers between the work and the audience, making it a closer bond where connections to the work can be formed easier. The ins and outs of convincing the public to interact with a piece of work that isn’t simply looking at something on a wall is a process I am always trying to tackle in a better way. The approach to this problem needs to be subtle enough so that any directions do not detract from the work, but obvious enough so that it is fully engaged with.
For instance, the screens were placed in a way that helped convince the audience of where they are supposed to be located within the room. Entering from the door from the left, the projections were located on the far right corner, so you instinctively head over to that area and put yourself in the optimum viewing position. This is well considered use of the space, the viewer reacting intuitively to the suggestive layout they are presented with. Walking into the space you are first met with the distant flicker of projected lights on the far side of the room, as you take a step forward you sink into the foam that coated the floor. This reaction is foreign but enjoyable, provoking elation, laughter and a bizarre sensation of walking through marshmallow. The experience on the whole can only be described as unique, bewildering and enjoyable.
One of the exhibition spaces within this cinema/gallery was laid out more as you would expect, wooden retractable seating in strips across the floor, screen positioned lower down and further forward. A very traditional room, but as a result of this it lacked a great sense of involvement with the work. Whether or not this was the intention, you were very aware of a great sense of distance from the work, both in terms of measurement but also you felt a detachment from emotional connection. The piece that I was more interested in took a step away from the classical cinematic settings in a direction that people would be less accustomed too. Its easy enough to just think that a video should be shown as a projection on a wall, or played on a monitor in the middle of a room which people are expected to just hover in front of before moving onto another piece. The work has a friendlier existence when it is removed from the quintessential ’white cube’ monitor on a plinth idea. Once the work has another angle too it which could be as easy as stimulating a less conventional position of observation.
My current word really needs to utilize methods of spatial interaction composing primarily of video orientated work, so seeing and experiencing a piece that does such, in a unique way has been invaluable to me. People need to feel welcome – to an extent – when they enter into a work, it needs to invite them to explore. This can be as simple as arranging the space in a way that promotes a willing journey into it, positioning the screens or projections so that they beckon a closer, lingering look. This was achieved so well by the work at KW in Berlin that I stayed there for the duration of the full 54 videos, which must have lasted at least an two hours, which is a huge compliment to both the work and the way it was laid out.
