Ge (the second character in the Chinese phrase for “interval”): 1. Separation. Being separated by a river. 2. Distance: be at a far distance.
Keeping Jian and Ge separate in the Chinese title guarantees the presence of both meanings. Meanwhile, they can be regarded as two elements in one relationship, sharing each other.
The title “Interval” enables us to keep up a microcosmic approach towards this project from the very onset. “Interval” is equally about such tactics as laying aside, termination, and dispersal. This kind of attitude is intended to extend the direct notion of time in our world whose black and white is preset, and to put off the decisions we have to make. It brings us back to the gray zone between light and shade and reminds us to redefine and reconsider those reasons and distinctions for brightness and darkness. Perhaps we can categorize and transfer the elements in the makeup of things so as to reduce the innate chain, before it’s possible for us to re-evaluate the connections among them. “Interval” makes us aware of the hidden space and makes it possible for us to have a pause in the process of learning.
Linking up in the Space (Continuity)
We can view “Interval” as an event, since it unfolds on the complex platform of socialized production, containing the concept of neo-cultural property development, the experiment of future space production methods, the use of urban functional space. All of them are present as the preconditions for “Interval”. (Background plus theoretical premise) Facing such a continuous public space, we stick to not cleaning up the existing order of the space but preserving its inherent continuity. We consistently stick with two evolving parts of the space, the visible and the invisible - on one hand, its design, function, size, price, direction, materials, which are visible and on the other hand, the invisible designer, the decision-maker of its function, and the incentive behind its development…? We believe that the continuity of the space provides an inexplicit venue for experiments.
Linking up in the Space (Non-continuity)
Based on the above statement, we will change the regular organizational and production routines as well as the law of spatial categorization. We’ve chosen the etymological aspect of “Interval” as the entry point. We will also utilize the project elevator that links up the entire space as a certain methodological metaphor, as the transportation tool for construction materials and workers, as the path for visitors to enter the exhibition, and as the passage for project production and the means of communications for artistic production. It is a “multiple” space, a space with multiple functions, which are also open to each other - An exhibition space? A construction site? A display? A show home?
We hope that this kind of outlook doesn’t signify any existing connections (even though we don’t completely approve of the rationality of these connections). But as a prerequisite, we insist on the legitimacy of these connections, from which we go about our work - to give this space another dimension in the process of continuation and non-continuation. This third dimension could be a certain object (from the material world) or more specifically, a ‘model’. But it could also be an outlook, set in Utopian fables. This added aspect allows the experiment on the space to be twofold: it complies with our initial promise concerning the space - that is we would keep many more options open for the space; while keeping this promise is just one of the options.
Simultaneously, we should tolerate the power in anything to contain more than two kinds of relationships without sorting them out by order. Thus it’s impossible for us to arbitrarily classify all kinds of connections in accordance to one kind of standard. We should be able to prevent corrupt customs from contaminating all over the unsatisfying moral world and place emotional and ethical judgments appropriately. Hence it’s possible for us to discover that while things are full of contradictions and absurdity, their connections are even more inconceivable. Once we discover this flaw, we may gain a new base. When the borderline between order and disorder becomes extremely flimsy, we can re-examine the order that we account for and believe in. When we become awkward and lost in the familiar order, we will then be able to get ready for the potential world.
The Ideal Model of “Interval” (1)
“Interval” is about new approaches to space and time. The space between Jian and Ge is not all “clean”. As the “middle ground’, it reserves part of its former significance while provides a forecast for the future. It acts as the turning point, joint, and transition, similar to the intervals in theatre. In-between the two ends of this transition is our empirical world. Is there any exception to the ‘transitional’ space? Before other meanings come into play, it is the “full” meaning that gives the space exclusivity or the one and only function.
A mixed space makes its start-up “unpredictable”. It is only temporarily “borrowed”. From the viewpoint of relationships, ‘borrowing’ is simply one of or ‘part’ of many current connections. Naturally, we can present it as a methodology we’ve adopted concerning space and spatial relationships. It makes it possible to retain the traces of the process in the exhibition space. “Entry” and “withdrawal” are no more than a form of this space. It also simultaneously displays implications influenced by a certain inclination for the excuse of non-interference and invasion.
The Ideal Model of “Interval” (2)
Any action during “Interval” has N kinds of explanation. They are temporarily set at a certain point and place during a period of time, like a frame in a videotape. It’s fixed, unperturbed by any implication. Our treatment of the interior of the space is not an involuntary response to a certain theoretical persuasion, neither is it another attempt to conduct programmed practice of contemporary art. We are talking about a silent space - conjunctions and connections.
The Prerequisites for “Interval”
The construction site, an ongoing space, also acts as a provisional place for installing, except that it still has the appearance of a ‘construction site’.
This space is both continuous and split. We do not deny the experience of architects and artists but we don’t use it as a certain kind of qualification for them to enter the space. It is in a state of hesitation, occasional caution and occasional excitement that we access and learn about the space. This process of action, full of uncertainty and constant readjustments, is captured in the space to various degrees. It is perhaps something that has been transplanted to a certain place by an architect or installed on a vertical wall by an artist. Placement is only momentary. It’s constantly ready to make room for many more options. It is always ready to withdraw - maybe more interesting stories will take its place.
Simulation of Archeology?
We seem to be under suspicion of conducting archeology, as we enter this space in a rather tentative state. We don’t disapprove or approve of the inherent nature of this space. We give up the act of raising our hands to vote, because we don’t trust the kind of cheap truth that can be bought with such simple labor as raising one’s hands. Neither do we bring along any destructive tools to make a statement in a revolutionary manner. But we can be fair and even exchange our opinions “in private”. We don’t quite believe ourselves either, because we share the same educational machine.
We only wrap up the space for the time being. We have no intention to do any active or passive harm to it - another kind of reality? We don’t preset any conceptual “enemy”; neither do we expect to speak for some kind of concept. Another feature of the Utopia has laid foundation for experiments of spatial language. It provides another reference in relation to the reality we are in. It’s possible for us to discover the other face of reality through comparison - maybe it is more interesting, perhaps more evil. Having lost the reality as a reference, we can only conceal the entire reality with the explanation of exclusivity. We might end up being lost in the uncontrollable contest for authority.
Visual Field
This space may not be all pleasant, as we know that the value we trade it for is not equivalent. At the same time, we must reject simple clarity, even though it could be profitable for us. We want to give those areas abandoned by our knowledge a chance to prove themselves, using the ambiguous and unclear space as a starting point for our work, because we can’t verify the purity of a space. There is no way for us to exemplify the inevitability between the space and a certain logic or theory. All through our process from entry to retreat, we don’t go about artificially categorizing simple victories and defeats similar to those between ‘winners’ and ‘enemies’.
The Methods of “Interval”
“Interval” includes four different spaces as the basic sites for experiments. A pair of an architect and an artist is assigned to work on each space. Through the interaction between architects and artists, they must keep up the overall concept of the space while producing their own interrelations, so that this collaboration can further develop into a possibility for spatial innovation. The meaning of a space is transformed from linear connections into synchronized creations.
“Interval” Project No 1: Wu Zhaohui, Lu Hao
Wu Zhaohui’s rationality as an architect is evenly distributed among visible materials - the same material (neon lights), of the same height (60cm), which is set as the backbone for his work - a world ruled by orders and regulations. On this field of densely placed objects of growth, his world quietly meets Lu Hao’s symbolic world. It neither draws back nor caters to it. It arms us with Wu Zhaohui’s “composed” eyes to read Lu Hao’s perceptual world…Lu Hao places the cutoff furniture and globe in the center of the space like pieces of evidence (His choice of the position has strong implication?), alongside with other sharp physical and spiritual weapons. It’s a “conspicuous”, and even a bit over the top “descriptive” and “narrative” approach. To confront with the architect’s composure, Lu Hao insists on or opts for both symbolic materials and support from the Utopian world - all kinds of classics, teachings, and fables in text are displayed on the table, allowing the audience to read them in a designed space.
Wu Zhaohui and Lu Hao use two translucent partitions to “connect” two individual working areas. Feathers are sealed off in a see-through space. The stirring of the machine causes the same hand-dyed feathers to move passively. The transparent divisions visually dissimilate the spatial relationship.
“Interval” Project No. 2: Yu Jia, Zhang Hui
As the only female architect in this event, Yu Jia comes across her argument for entering the space from the fantasy of a “wall-penetrator”. As a visionary traveling in between the illusionary and actual spaces, she reorganizes the space conceptually. An extremely sensitive visionary, she imparts the space with an imaginary sense of oppression. With rich experience in theatre, Zhang Hui coincides with Yu Jia’s structure with a ritual space through video and “focusing”. Their collaboration is progressive and constantly enhances the notion of sharing the space - through exchange of identities and overlapping of functions.
Yu Jia’s fabrication of the space enables Zhang Hui to deal with the space in a theatrical style; while on Zhang Hui’s stage, Yu Jia creates a dug down section of a working environment: a performance of working in an office? Working in an office? A worker? A resident? A performer? These roles can be exchanged and interact with each other. “Everyday” behaviors (in the bathroom, the kitchen, the office) are translated into graphics and two-dimensional spatial reality and subsequently placed in an authentic three-dimensional space. The “authenticity” of the video and the “fabrication” of the outer space make it possible for multimedia to find the “fitting” position. The common behaviors demonstrate the artist’s attitude towards the space and the architect’s psychological process. What’s more, it offers new possibilities for the viewer to construct everyday life.
The employment of multimedia is restricted to the function of switching. Quite the opposite, limiting its use can add to the diversity of the space. The imagery partition empowers the space with a gray force.
“Interval” Project No. 3: Wang Jiahao, Wang Luyan
In this space, an architect and an artist translate the flow of “System Theory” from a concept into ways of behavior, which form an integral system with the space. They provide purposes for each other - this kind of motivation is not only about collaboration but also from challenging each other. As a result, they establish a new connection. They cause the notion of the “valve” in the system to be so clearly “exposed” through materialization. The flow in this space includes: 1. The basic meaning has come from the design of a “non-present” designer, but what this “absent” hand provides is the most standard and popular idea of interior design for living arrangements. 2. With a 90-degree adjustment, the space is forced to rotate so that the original plan for the interior “goes onto the wall” from the floor. This kind of positional modification makes this interior design plan become “an object of admiration” (to quote Wang Luyan) in addition to its practicability. 3. Wang Jiahao gives it an extra “90 degree” conceptual revision. He “covers up” the most typical environment for real estate sales practice in this readable and usable dual space. All the texts he uses provide the anonymous person another connection to come out to - Social? Somebody else’s? Others’?
“Interval” Project No. 4: Wang Hui, He An
“One millimeter” is the basic element, which makes the primitive meaning of the space become inactive. It eliminates excessive metaphor. When “one millimeter” is considered as a quantitative material, it begins to continuously grow, expand and take on new forms in the space. Is it a suspended net? Or a bridge in the air? This shape must be affiliated to the space for support. Wang Hui has discovered the “irrevocable” explanation to prove another characteristic of the space generated by connections - it is not universal so it refuses to be read from the most essential meaning.
Since the features of this parasite that grows on “the other” space conform to regular standards, you can freely but not stably use it. This continuity of “parasiting” on each other passes from one end of the exhibition space to the other. Based on the same criterion of “one millimeter”, He An continues to use the number of “one millimeter” as a biological standard - the height of ants. They can conduct the same kind of behavior on the same physical level. When their collective behavior is pre-coded, an organic continuity can be produced. He An has written down the messages he exchanges with his Internet mates with honey. The characters typed by the keyboard are translated into sweet temptations. Thousands of ants driven by purely biological impulses will travel over the entire writing with their bodies. The work becomes a series of words formed by the bodies of ants. On this chain of constant inter-translation, there is an invisible “plot”, which comes from He An’s reading of Chinese historical stories.
The linking up in “Interval” may have two differing possibilities - on one hand, it is possible to be terminated by the objects added by the artists and architects to the space. There could be confrontations and delights derived from an erratic power and the balance of power. On the other hand, they rub shoulders and walk past each other, becoming intertwined, overlapped while carrying on their individual practice. Maybe this is a true “middle ground”. Those confident ideals are not yet realized but are still in the process and on the way. For this very reason, this ground appears to be exceptionally unusual, including its very irregular condition and extreme instability. In this exhibition, we express our attitude towards culture with this kind of reflections. Is it possible for our “extraordinary” expressions to produce meaning in the “ordinary” circumstance that we care for? Is it possible to establish a certain cultural connection on any social division?
March 10, 2005
间在《新华字典》的第一种解释是：间——中间，两段时间或两种事物相接的地方。
隔：1.隔开，隔着一条河，2.距离：相隔很远。
间、隔的分开使用，保证了两个意义的阐释在场，同时，它被作为一种关系的两个元素，彼此共享。
《间·隔》使我们的工作从初始状态保持一种微观的进入方式。《间·隔》同样是搁置、终止、分散的工作态度，这种工作态度是企图延长我们已经确定的黑白世界的直接时间，并且延缓对事物所作的决定，让我们回到光与影之间的灰色地带，重新去分割与考虑我们那些光明的理由与黑暗的决心，也许，我们还可以将事物的元素分类与移植，让原有的链条自然脱落，我们才有可能再次判断事物关联的过程。《间·隔》让我们对隐性的空间有所察觉，它让我们有可能在我们的认知过程中停顿下来。
现场连接（连续性）
我们可以将《间·隔》理解为一个事件，因为它是在一个社会化生产的综合平台上展开，包括新文化地产的概念、未来空间产生方式的实验、城市功能空间的使用，它们作为《间·隔》的基本先期性的在场。面对这样一个连续性的公共空间，我们坚持不对空间已有的秩序进行清理，并保持空间原有属性的连续性，我们始终保持空间作为看得见与看不见的两个部分的进行时态，包括它看得见的样式设计、使用功能、尺度、价格、朝向、现场材料，以及看不见的设计者？功能的决定者？开发的动机------？我们认为现场的连续性提供了一个暧昧的实验场所。
现场连接（非连续性）
在此基础上，我们将改变惯行的组织方式与生产方法以及空间的分类法原则，我们选择了《间·隔》的词源学方法作为进入的理由，并将连接这整个现场的工程电梯作为某种方法论隐喻，作为建筑材料与工人的输送工具，也作为展览参观者的路径；作为项目生产的通道与艺术生产的传递方法，一个“重叠的空间”，一个功能共享的空间，并保持彼此互相开放——展览？工地？陈示？样板间？
我们希望这样一种态度并不指向任何现存的关系（尽管我们并不完全同意这些关系的合理性），但是作为前设，我们坚持以这些关系存在合法性的态度，去对待我们要做的工作——在连续性与非连续的过程中给予这个空间另一种维度。它也许可以作为某种事物（物质世界）或者更具体的说，可能提供一个“模型”，但同时，他又可以作为一种态度，停止在乌托邦的寓言中，这个维度使空间的实验具有双重性，它符合我们初始对空间的承诺——即我们保持对空间更多的可能性，而且，坚持它只是其中之一。
同时，我们应该允许任何事物有存在两个以上关系的权力，并不依先后去排列它们的顺序，如此以来，我们也无法用一种标准将各种关系任意划分为等级。我们应该有能力去阻止我们在不甚满意的道德世界中的陋习四处传染，把情感与道德判断控制在合适的位置，这样一来，我们就有可能发现在事物充满了矛盾与荒诞的同时，它们之间的联结更为荒诞。既然我们发现了这个漏洞，我们就可能获得了这样一个新的基础，有序与无序的界线变得非常不可靠，我们可以重新检验我们对理由充分、信心百倍的秩序，当我们在熟悉的秩序中变得生涩和茫然，我们就有可能为我们的可能性世界作好准备。
《间·隔》的理想模型（一）
《间·隔》是关于空间与时间新的使用方式，间与隔的空间不是“清白”的，作为“中间地带”，它既保留了以前的部分意义，又提供了一种未来的预测，相对于“剧场效应”的幕间状态，作为转折、启合与过渡，在这个过渡的两端是我们的经验世界。“过渡”空间是否有例外？在其它意义尚未进入之前，它作为“全部”意义使空间具有唯一性，或者唯一的功能使用性。
不纯粹的空间使空间的启始变得“测不准”，它暂时的、临时性的被“借用”，如果我们从关系的角度去思考的话，“借用”只是属于此时众多关系的一种或者“局部”，当然，我们也可以以此作为我们对空间与包绕着空间关系的方法论呈现。它使这个现场保留过程的属性，“进入”与“撤出”只是这个空间的一种方式，同时，它以不干涉与侵略性作为理由，并把受到某种倾向性支配的暗示同时排列在现场。
《间·隔》的理想模型（二）
《间·隔》之间的任何行为，存在着任意次的解释，他们在某时、某地临时的固定在一段时间内，就像一段影像带，它只是其中的一桢。固定的方式不受到任何暗示，我们对空间内部的处理不是受到某种理论诱惑而不由自主的流露，也不是要再做一次当代艺术的程序化操练，而是在谈论一个沉默的空间——关联与关系。
《间·隔》的条件句
工地，这个进行时的空间，除了它仍然有作为“工地”属性的外观，还表现在它作为一个暂时的安置场所。
这个空间既连续又断裂，我们并没有宣布建筑师与艺术家的经验无效，我们也没有以此作为某种进入空间的资格，我们是在犹犹豫豫的时而谨慎、时而激动的状态中去接近和认识这个空间，这个充满了不确定和不断调节的行为过程，都不同程度的残留在这个现场，它也许被建筑师移植在某一处空间，或者被艺术家安置在一个垂直的墙面。停放仅仅是短暂的，它时刻准备为其它更多的可能性留下进入的空间，它随时准备撤离——也许有更有趣的故事进入。
模拟考古？
我们似乎有某种考古的嫌疑，因为我们是在一种不十分放心的状态下进入了这个空间，我们对这个空间原有的属性既不反对，也不赞成，我们放弃举手表决，因为我们不相信通过举手这种简单劳动换来的廉价真理，但是我们也没有携带任何毁灭性工具，以革命的方式在此作一次宣言，但我们可以平等甚至“私下”交换我们彼此的看法，我们也不十分相信我们自己，因为我们是在共享同一架教育机器。
我们对空间只是暂时的覆盖，我们无意去造成任何主动或被动的伤害——现实的另一种？我们没有预设任何观念的“敌人”，同时也不期待代表某种观念发言，乌托邦的另一个特征支持了空间话语实验的准备，它提供了相对于我们身处的现实的另一种参照，有可能使我们在对比中发现现实的另一面——也许更有趣，也许更万恶。失去参照的现实，只能在唯一性的解释中掩盖现实的全部，我们也许会深陷失去制衡的话语权力的争夺中。
视界
这个空间也许并不赏心悦目，因为我们知道用它去换取的价值的不平等，同时，我们必须拒绝简单的明确性，尽管它可能让我们获利。我们想给那些被我们知识所抛弃的一些地带一个证明的机会，在模糊的、不清不楚的空间中作为我们工作的一个起始点，因为我们无法证明空间的纯粹性，我们无法举例去说明空间与某种逻辑或理论的必然性，包括我们从进入到退出的过程，不去人为的划分类似“胜利者”与“敌人”之间简单的谁胜谁负。
《间·隔》的方法
《间·隔》由四个不同的空间作为实验的基本场所，每个空间由一位建筑师与一位艺术家的组合方式构成 ，通过建筑师与艺术家的互动，使空间在保持整体概念的同时又构成了自身的相互关联，从而扩大为一种空间创新的能力，空间的意义从线型的连接转变为共时性的创造。
《间·隔》之一：吴朝晖、卢昊
吴朝辉的建筑师理性思考被均衡的分配在所有看得见的材料上，同一材料（霓虹灯）、同一高度（60cm）、并以此作为他预设的指向——一个被秩序与规则所支配的世界，在这块缜密的生长之物中悄然与卢昊的象征世界相遇，既没有退却，也没有迎合，同时它使我们可以用吴朝辉的“冷静”之眼去阅读卢昊的感性世界------。被切割的家具和地球仪，被卢昊证据般摆放在空间的中央（这个位置具有强烈的隐喻？），还包括各种物理利器和精神利器， “显性”甚至有点张扬的“描述”与“叙事”方法。他坚持或者选择了与建筑师的冷静对峙，不仅仅是充满了象征性的物质，还有来自于乌托邦世界的支持——各种经典、教义、寓言的文本都被陈示在桌面上，供人们在一个被设计的空间中阅读。
吴朝辉、卢昊以二个透明的隔断来“连接”两个个体工作现场，羽毛被封闭在透明的空间，机器操纵的搅动使同样被人工染上颜色的羽毛只能被动运动，透明的隔离使空间的关系在视觉效果中被异化。
《间·隔》之二：余加、张慧
作为唯一的女性建筑师余加，从一个“穿墙者”的幻想中找到进入空间的理由，游走在幻觉与实在的空间，作为一个“意念者”，对这个空间重新进行了概念整理，一个极其敏感的“意念者”使空间有一种虚构的压迫感，而有舞台经验的张慧将一个仪式的空间通过影像和“聚焦”重合在余加的结构上，他（她）们的合作是以递进式的方式，使空间共享概念被不断的加强——通过身份的互换和功能的重叠。
余加对空间的虚构使张慧获得了对空间的戏剧化处理，而在张慧的舞台平面上，余加制造了一个下沉的工作截面，表演办公？正在办公？工作者、生活者、表演者？既可以互换，又可以互动。“日常状态”的行为（卫生间、厨房、办公室）被图像转化了二维空间事实，再安置在真实的三维空间。影像内部的“真实”与外部空间的“虚构”，使多媒体恰如其分的找到了“准确”的位置，行为方式的共享，既表明了艺术家的空间态度与建筑师的心理过程，同时，它又给以观众去建构日常生活新的可能。
多媒体使用被控制在转化的功能上，这种限制使用的方法，反过来增加了空间的多样性，影像的间离使空间有一种灰色的力量。
《间·隔》之三：王家浩、王鲁炎
在这个空间里，一位建筑师与一位艺术家将“系统论”的流程从概念转化为了行为方式，行为方式与空间又构成整体的系统。他们互相给予对方以理由——这种理由不仅仅是合作，而同样来自相互质疑，从而建立了新的关联空间，他们使系统“阀”的这个概念如此清晰地通过物质化过程被“揭发”，这个空间流程包括1、基础意义的提供者来自一个“不在现场”的设计，但这个“不在场”的手提供的是最标准、流行的居住装饰方案。2、改变90度，空间被强制性“旋转”，使这个方案从地上“走上了墙”，这种位置的改变，使这个方案的实用性上又添加了可以被作为“崇拜之物”（王鲁炎语）。3、王家浩再次给以这个它“概念上的90度”的修正，将最经典的售楼仪式的现场“覆盖”在这个既可读又可用的双重空间，而他使用的所有文本，再次为匿名者提供一种关系出场——社会的？别人的？其它的？
《间·隔》之四：王晖、何岸
“一毫米”作为基本元素，他使空间的初始意义变得平静，它排除了过度的隐喻， 当“一毫米”作为一个量化物质，开始在空间不断地发展、放大，并获得了新空间的形态，是悬置的网？还是空中的桥？而这个形态必须依附在这个空间作为支持，王晖找到了“不可替代”的理由，以证明关系所产生的空间的另一特征——他不具有普遍性，进而拒绝从本质的意义上去阅读。
这个生长在“它者”空间基础上的寄生物，因为它的各项指标符合标准，你可以放心的但不稳定的使用它，这种互相“寄生”的连续性从现场的一端传递到另一端。同样是以“1毫米”为理由，何岸把这一数字延续为生物的标准——蚂蚁的“身高”，它们在同一种高度产生同样的行为，当他们的集体行为被预设，一个有机的连续性被制造出来，何岸与网友们互相传递的信息，被何岸用蜂蜜书写在墙上，键盘字符被转译为甜蜜的诱惑，成千上万只蚂蚁受到纯粹生物的驱动，用它们的身体覆盖了书写现场的同时，现场变成了由蚂蚁身体构成的文字。在这个连续性的互相转化的链条上，还有一个看不见的“证据”，这一方法来自于何岸对中国历史故事的阅读。
《间·隔》的联接性也许有二个不同的方向——在空间中被艺术与建筑师提供的物所终止，形成对峙，一个可变权力与均致权力后的愉悦；还有另一种可能，他们擦肩而过，互相穿插，形成重叠，并继续在各自的经验中。这也许是一个真正的“中间地带”，那些自信的理想尚无法到达或在运动与途中，正因为如此，这个地带显得异常，包括它的非常规状态和极不稳定。在《间·隔》的展览中，我们用这样的一种思考表明我们对文化的态度，我们的“异常”表现在我们关注于“常态”下，是否有生产意义的可能？是否有在任意一个社会截面中去建立某种文化联接的可能？
2005．3．10
*designed by Li Zhenhua