Rorschach

Rorschach

Shown in part most recently in Chatter: Architecture Talks Back at the Museum of the Art Institute of Chicago, April – July 2015
Shown at ICA/MECA in Portland, ME August – October 2014
Initially shown at the Boston Society of Architects Design Biennial February – May 2013.

Produced with Project_ (Ana Miljacki and Lee Moreau)
Team: Oliver Wuttig, Alexander Marshall, Andrew Manto, Clay Anderson, George Lin.

Project_Rorschach presents an opening, a commentary, and an aesthetic object in its own right. It is charged with references to contemporary architecture, the ways in which we consume images, and the ways we reinterpret them. The most obvious among these is the invocation of the contentious Rorschach test. Once meticulously printed on a single antique press in Switzerland, the Rorschach images were sold only to licensed therapists. Having run out of copyright protection in the U.S., the test images are now available on Wikipedia for all to contemplate. We employ a reference to them as an invitation to follow and see (anew) images of contemporary architectural tropes.

Grouped by meme, ubiquitous images of architecture are layered into ten revised Rorschach cards. No longer inkblots, but retaining the symmetry that was originally constitutive of their figuration, thes architectural Rorschach images are super-saturated compositions of chimneys, robotic bricks, cantilevers, house piles, hyper-towers, circles, phalluses, beanie blobs, single surfaces, diagrids, and stacks. They are assembled from the digital archives that designers draw on when thirsty – such as Archinect, ArchDaily, or Dezeen – and reproduced here in the low-res flatness that is their currency.

This project invites architectural self-analysis while it simultaneously plays on the fact that the discipline of architecture is constituted, multiplied and advanced from constant projections onto its own archives. Although the inkblot revisions still might send the “chance image” signal, Project_Rorschach does not provide any means for authorial evaluation of the imaginations projected onto it. It speaks instead, and hopefully propels further, into an open-ended string of interpretations – some of architecture’s contemporary haunts.