2/26 Responses

ANDREA ZITTEL
In what way does Andrea Zittel's work tell a spatial story? What are the characteristics of that story, and what does it suggest about her definition of space? In what way does Andrea Zittel's work deal with the constraints on the body that Foucault suggests? (Consider projects like mobile living units, uniform project, wagon stations, Time Lapse Studies). In what way does her work function to "authorize the establishment, displacement, or transcendence of limits" (de Certeau 123) in relation to various spatial and temporal constraints on the body?

Andrea Zittel works operate on a very personal level that creates a spatial story for individual people. Zittel’s creations are meant to be tailored to the bodies and spatial needs of individuals, which may appear as a very convenient thing. However, these perfectly tailored works in turn limit one’s body and subsequent spatial stories to be constricted only to the original intention. Zittel creates what is initially a helpful tool, yet becomes a limitation or boundary. Such effects are evident in Zittel’s works “Carpet Furniture” and “Mobile Living Units”.

In Andrea Zittel's work "Carpet Furniture", carpet designs show the top view of all sorts of furniture, namely beds, desks, and tables. Zittel even goes to the extent of completing the details by adding "true" elements to the carpets, for example putting a vase of flowers on the carpet desk. Interestingly, Zittel's carpet designs essentially imitate what an architecture plan showing the interior furniture would look like. However we know that this is a two dimensional representation and contains no solid volumes that form what we know as furniture. Still, the two dimensional outlines are still recognizable to us as furniture, thus the carpet is no longer just a carpet, but a divider of space. There is where the bed is, and where the desk is. As seen in Zittel's images, people are resting on the "beds". If I walked into this room and were to sleep, I would likely sleep on the "bed" instead of just anywhere on the rug as well. We are conditioned to set function and value to certain objects, even if it's an illusion.

In terms of De Certeau, Zittel's piece deals with the idea of spatial boundaries and its division. It is as if each outline creates a threshold that limits one's actions. People automatically attribute "spatial stories" to familiar objects, for instance as mentioned earlier, one would attribute "sleeping" to "bed", even if this space is not actually a bed. Zittel's work on carpet furniture really reminds me of Sanback's work - using simple visual illusion to divide space and limit one's spatial movement. Just because the carpet outlines certain furniture, people tend to associate its function with the three dimensional objects that are actually not present.


            Another example of establishing limits through the intention of bringing convenience is seen in Zittel’s work “Mobile Living Units”. This was a very personal project Zittel created for herself. She had been observing her own daily living needs in a small space, the boundaries inflicted on her, the boundaries she creates for herself, the spatial stories generated in these boundaries, and such. With this, Zittel designed and eventually perfected a small living unit that included everything she needed in the smallest amount of space. At a glance this is a very practical project that saves space, time, and energy. However, actually living in this small unit for a prolonged period of time could be very uncomfortable. By setting up one’s own daily spatial boundaries to such confined limits, Zittel’s work of convenience becomes a paralyzing boundary.

Zittel’s Mobile Living Unit serves to “authorize the establishment…of limits” (de Certeau 123). The fact that Zittel titled this piece a “mobile” living unit, shows how this unit has a very temporary and nomad quality to it. A self-inflicted limiting boundary, Zittel confines all her spatial actions into a few square feet. However at the same time, this living unit could be placed anywhere that could house it. In a sense Zittel has created a unit that is unlimited in its mobility, but very limited in its own spatial boundaries. Essentially this mobile living unit is a stage for Zittel’s daily spatial stories.

TRAIN DREAMS
In what way does Denis Johnson's book create a spatial story from the framework of  historical narrative that frames this book? What boundaries are marked or transgressed, how is the frontier established or confused?  Look at de Certeau to help you with the definitions of these terms. What does Johnson's narrative tell us about the various constraints on the body suggested by Foucault, especially in the framework  of American expansionism, and its concomitant stories of exploitation and loss? Consider the way Johnson uses narrative (and narrative figures like the "frontier and the bridge")  to "set and transgress limits" of the spatial history of the United States.

Denis Johnson’s “Train Dreams” illustrates the extraordinary time frame of the twentieth century in the American West. Robert Grainer, an ordinary man in this framework, tries to make sense of this historical period. Boundaries and frontiers in “Train Dreams” are the time frames. American expansionism was a period in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century where America believed it had to keep expanding its borders to continue running strong. What is interesting about Grainier’s character is that he has crossed the frontier because he has been to both sides, before and after the twentieth century and its changes. Another border in the novel is that between the Americans and foreigners. For example the Chinese man in the first chapter and the Kootenai Bob. The Americans obviously treated these foreigners with less value, as seen from the first chapter where Grainier and the other men did not have qualms about killing the Chinese man.  Another boundary is Grainier’s ties to the train and railroad. He has “been all over this country. Canada, too. Never a hundred yards from these rails and ties”. Grainier’s spatial activity is limited by the constant track of the train.

Critical Discussion Questions 

How is death and human suffering understood by Grainier?
What aspects of life in the West stayed the same for Grainier and what changed, did he change with these things?