HARTAIXX2016-V013500

Summary

The video script explores Jean Baudrillard's perspective on the Centre Pompidou as an embodiment of the third order of simulacra, a building that both attracts and repels art and culture. It contrasts this with the Whitney Museum in New York, designed to protect the sincerity and profundity of art from the encroachment of consumerism. The Centre Pompidou is seen as a spectacle inviting the masses, while the Whitney aims to maintain an elite artistic experience.

Takeaways

• 🏛 The Centre Pompidou in Paris is described by Baudrillard as an example of architecture in the third order of simulacra, embodying a series of contradictions.
• 🎨 For Baudrillard, the Centre Pompidou is not a traditional museum or monument, but a building with a dual nature that both attracts and repels culture and art.
• ⚛️ He compares the Centre Pompidou to a nuclear power plant, suggesting it draws in cultural energy but also deters art through its security-focused design.
• 🛢️ The building's design is likened to an oil refinery on the outside and a warehouse on the inside, reflecting a curatorial problem on what kind of art to house.
• 👥 Baudrillard notes the Centre Pompidou's ability to draw a mass audience, but criticizes the resulting spectacle as being devoid of actual art.
• 💥 He suggests that the Centre Pompidou promises a revolutionary event, but instead leads to a cultural implosion under the weight of its own expectations.
• 🗼 Baudrillard draws a comparison between the Centre Pompidou and the Eiffel Tower, both marking a place but not housing a museum, creating a spectacle rather than a monument to art.
• 🏢 In contrast, the Whitney Museum in New York, designed by Marcel Breuer, was intended to convey the sincerity and profundity of art against the backdrop of growing consumerism.
• 🛡️ Breuer's design for the Whitney was a defense against the encroachment of consumerism, aiming to protect the elite space of art from commercial influences.
• 🏡 The Whitney Museum's interior, captured by photographer Ezra Stoller, reflects a domesticity that aligns with its origins in a residential area, emphasizing a personal and group art experience.
• 🏛️ The Whitney's design with its moat and granite cladding is seen as an effort to safeguard an elite understanding of art and its preciousness, in stark contrast to the Centre Pompidou's mass appeal.

Q & A

What is Baudrillard's view on the Centre Pompidou as an example of the architecture of the third order of the simulacra?

Baudrillard sees the Centre Pompidou as a building with inherent contradictions, not strictly a museum or a monument. He likens it to a nuclear power plant drawing in cultural energy and attention with the promise of art, yet also deterring culture and surrounding itself with a security zone to protect the art inside.

How does Baudrillard describe the functional contradiction of the Centre Pompidou?

Baudrillard describes the Centre Pompidou as having a contradictory idea about functionality and storage. It resembles an oil refinery from the outside but has an interior like a warehouse, which is supposed to house art, creating a curatorial problem.

What does Baudrillard suggest about the audience experience at the Centre Pompidou?

Baudrillard suggests that the Centre Pompidou produces a mass audience, inviting the masses to witness art. However, when they arrive, they experience a spectacle rather than art, which he sees as a radical cultural implosion instead of the promised explosion or revolutionary event.

How does Baudrillard compare the Centre Pompidou to the Eiffel Tower?

Baudrillard compares the Centre Pompidou to the Eiffel Tower by stating that both are monumental structures that mark a place and create a spectacle but are not monuments to anything specific, such as art. He refers to the Eiffel Tower as a 'monument to nothing' and the Centre Pompidou as 'monumentally anti-monumental'.

What is the counter-example provided to understand Baudrillard's claims about the Centre Pompidou?

The counter-example provided is the Whitney Museum in New York, designed by Marcel Breuer in 1966. It represents a different approach to museum design, focusing on conveying the sincerity and profundity of art and protecting the artistic experience from consumerism.

What was Marcel Breuer's initial question when designing the Whitney Museum?

Marcel Breuer's initial question was 'What should a museum look like in New York City?' and 'What should be the relationship of a museum to the city, to a city like Manhattan?'

How did Marcel Breuer want the Whitney Museum to contrast with its surroundings?

Breuer wanted the Whitney Museum to contrast with its surroundings by not resembling a business or an office building. He aimed to convey the vitality of the street into the sincerity and profundity of art, protecting the elite power of the artistic experience.

What was Peter Blake's perspective on the Whitney Museum's role in the context of Madison Avenue?

Peter Blake viewed the Whitney Museum as art's answer to the huckster on Madison Avenue. He believed the museum would be a refuge for art, a defense mechanism against the encroaching consumerism symbolized by the avenue's ad agencies and boutiques.

How did the photographer Ezra Stoller capture the essence of the Whitney Museum's interior?

Ezra Stoller captured the essence of the Whitney Museum's interior by emphasizing its domesticity. Despite the large spaces, his photographs conveyed the idea that the experience of art was personal and group-oriented, akin to what would happen in a parlor or living room.

What is the main contrast between the Whitney Museum and the Centre Pompidou in terms of audience engagement?

The main contrast lies in the Whitney Museum's elitism, aiming to protect a very elite understanding of art and its preciousness, versus the Centre Pompidou's approach of inviting the masses and the populace into art, creating a different kind of audience experience.

Outlines

00:00

🏛️ Baudrillard's Perspective on the Centre Pompidou

In this paragraph, K. Michael Hays discusses the Centre Pompidou in Paris through the lens of Jean Baudrillard's concept of simulacra. Baudrillard views the Centre Pompidou as a third-order simulacrum, a building that defies conventional definitions of a museum or monument. He likens it to a nuclear power plant, drawing cultural energy but also deterring culture through its security-like enclosure. The building's design, which resembles an oil refinery and a warehouse, presents a curatorial challenge for the art it houses. Baudrillard suggests that the Centre Pompidou's mass appeal results in a spectacle rather than an art experience. He contrasts it with the Eiffel Tower, another monument to nothing, and suggests that the Centre Pompidou is an anti-monument, representing the power of art and culture that isn't actually present. The Whitney Museum in New York is presented as a counter-example, designed to convey the sincerity and profundity of art against the backdrop of 1960s consumerism.

05:05

🏛️ The Whitney Museum: A Refuge for Art Against Consumerism

This paragraph contrasts the Centre Pompidou with the Whitney Museum in New York, focusing on the museum's role as a refuge for art. The Whitney is described as an elitist institution designed to protect the artistic experience from the encroachment of consumerism, symbolized by its location on Madison Avenue. Architect Marcel Breuer's intention was to create a space that converts the vitality of the street into a profound art experience, avoiding the commercial aesthetics of the surrounding area. The Whitney's design, with its moat and granite cladding, is meant to invite pedestrians in while maintaining the preciousness and sincerity of art. The paragraph also references the photographer Ezra Stoller's work capturing the domesticity of the Whitney's galleries, reflecting the museum's origins in a residential setting and the desire to replicate a personal and group art experience akin to that of a living room or parlor.

Keywords

💡Simulacra

Simulacra refers to copies or representations that have no original, or where the line between the original and the copy is blurred. In the video, Baudrillard uses the term 'third order of the simulacra' to describe the Centre Pompidou, suggesting that the building is a representation of a museum rather than a museum itself, embodying the concept of a cultural institution without actually being one.

💡Contradictions

Contradictions in this context highlight the conflicting aspects of the Centre Pompidou's design and purpose. The building is described as being like a nuclear power plant drawing in cultural energy, yet also as a security zone deterring culture. This contradiction is central to Baudrillard's critique of the building's identity and function.

💡Cultural Energy

Cultural energy is a metaphor used to describe the allure or attraction that the Centre Pompidou has on people, drawing them in with the promise of art. It's a concept that ties into the idea of the building as a spectacle rather than a traditional museum, emphasizing the power of its architectural presence.

💡Spectacle

Spectacle in the video denotes the visual display or event that the Centre Pompidou creates, which is more about the mass arrival of people than the art itself. It's a key term that contrasts the actual experience of the masses with the building's intended purpose of showcasing art.

💡Implosion

Implosion is used to describe the opposite of what the Centre Pompidou promises—a collapse under its own weight rather than an explosion of cultural activity. It symbolizes the failure of the building to live up to its revolutionary potential, as described by Baudrillard.

💡Eiffel Tower

The Eiffel Tower is brought up as a comparison to the Centre Pompidou, serving as a monument to nothing specific but creating a spectacle by its mere presence. It helps to illustrate Baudrillard's point about the Centre Pompidou being a 'degree zero of monument,' marking a place without housing a specific cultural purpose.

💡Monumentality

Monumentality refers to the grandness or significance of a structure, often associated with historical or cultural importance. The video discusses how the Centre Pompidou, despite its size, fails to achieve true monumentality in terms of art and culture, instead becoming an anti-monument.

💡Whitney Museum

The Whitney Museum in New York is presented as a counter-example to the Centre Pompidou. Designed by Marcel Breuer, it was intended to convey the sincerity and profundity of art, contrasting with the Centre Pompidou's approach to art and audience engagement.

💡Elitism

Elitism in the context of the Whitney Museum refers to the idea of protecting and preserving an exclusive understanding and experience of art. The museum's design and philosophy aim to shield the art from the perceived vulgarity of consumerism, as opposed to the Centre Pompidou's mass appeal.

💡Consumerism

Consumerism is the driving force of affluence and materialism critiqued in the video, particularly in relation to the Whitney Museum's location on Madison Avenue. The term highlights the tension between art and commercialism, with the Whitney designed to resist the encroachment of consumerist values on the art world.

💡Domesticity

Domesticity in the script refers to the intimate, home-like atmosphere that the Whitney Museum aimed to maintain in its galleries. This concept is important as it reflects the museum's origins in a residential area and its desire to create a personal and group experience of art, akin to what might happen in a living room or parlor.

Highlights

The Centre Pompidou in Paris exemplifies Baudrillard's concept of the third order of simulacra.

Baudrillard views the Centre Pompidou as a contradictory building, both attracting and deterring culture.

The Centre Pompidou is likened to a nuclear power plant, drawing cultural energy while also being a security zone.

The building's design is described as both an oil refinery and a warehouse, embodying a curatorial problem for art display.

Baudrillard suggests the Centre Pompidou produces a mass audience but only delivers a spectacle rather than art.

The building promises a revolutionary event but results in a cultural implosion instead.

Baudrillard compares the Centre Pompidou to the Eiffel Tower, a monument to nothing, creating a spectacle.

The Centre Pompidou is considered monumentally anti-monumental, a 'degree zero of monument'.

A counter-example is the Whitney Museum in New York, designed to convey sincerity and profundity of art.

Marcel Breuer, the architect of the Whitney, aimed to differentiate the museum from commercial buildings.

Breuer's design reflects concerns about consumerism encroaching upon the elite space of art.

Peter Blake describes the Whitney as art's answer to the huckster, contrasting with commercial architecture.

The Whitney's design, with its moat and granite cladding, is meant to protect the preciousness and elite understanding of art.

Ezra Stoller's photographs capture the domesticity intended by Breuer for the Whitney's galleries.

The Whitney Museum began in a residential area, aiming to replicate the personal and group experience of art in a parlor or living room.

The contrast between the Whitney's elitism and the Centre Pompidou's mass invitation illustrates different approaches to art and culture.

Transcripts

K. MICHAEL HAYS: The Centre Pompidou in the city of Paris is Baudrillard's example of the architecture

in the third order of the simulacra.

For Baudrillard, the Centre Pompidou is a museum that's not a museum.

It's a sort of monument that's not a monument.

He sees the Centre Pompidou as a building embedded in a series of contradictions.

On the one hand, he sees the building, he says, like a kind of nuclear power plant.

It draws in cultural energy from outside.

It pulls people's attention in, with the promise of art.

And yet at the same time, he sees it as is dissuading art, as deterring culture.

It surrounds itself, he says, like a security zone, just like a nuclear reactor surrounds

itself with security, to protect the art that's inside.

He says that on the one hand, it looks like an oil refinery, and on the other hand, its

interior is like a warehouse.

So it is a contradictory idea about functionality, about storage.

But then it promises to house art.

So it's a curatorial problem that Baudrillard finds contradictory.

What kind of art do you put in a building like this?

The building produces a mass audience.

It invites all of the masses to come to witness the art.

And yet when they arrive in this enormous plaza, what happens is just a spectacle.

It's not art at all.

It's just a spectacle of the mass arrival.

The building promises an explosion, a kind of revolutionary event, he says.

But when the masses arrive, the opposite happens.

It's an implosion.

The whole thing begins to collapse under its own weight, a radical cultural implosion.

I think it's helpful that Baudrillard actually compares the Centre Pompidou

to the Eiffel Tower.

The Eiffel Tower is a monument, but it's a monument to nothing.

It doesn't house a museum.

It just marks a place.

But by marking that place so monumentally, it creates, too, a spectacle.

Baudrillard doesn't mention, it but Roland Barthes, another French philosopher, talks

about the Eiffel Tower as being the degree zero of monumentality.

The Centre Pompidou does something very similar.

It marks a place.

It announces a spectacle.

And yet it's not really a monument to art.

It's monumentally anti-monumental.

It's a sort of degree zero of monument.

It tries to represent the power of an art and a culture which is not actually there.

To understand Baudrillard's claims about the Centre Pompidou, it would be helpful to have

a counter-example.

Let's take the Whitney Museum in New York by comparison.

It was designed in 1966 by Marcel Breuer.

It was the first museum in Manhattan after Frank Lloyd Wright's Guggenheim Museum.

And when Breuer recounted his first ideas for the museum, he said he asked himself this

question-- what should a museum look like in New York City?

What should be the relationship of a museum to the city, to a city like Manhattan?

Then he answers his question.

He says, well, it's easier to say what it shouldn't be.

He said, it should not be like a business.

It should not be like an office building.

It should not be a commercial building.

It should convey the sincerity and profundity of art.

It should convert, he said, the vitality of the street into the sincerity and profundity

of art.

Breuer's reflections, although they maybe seem a little bland at first, they actually

take on an urgency if you think about the context.

At this moment American affluence in the 1960s was the motor of a growing consumerism like

the world had never seen.

And of course, Madison Avenue, which was the site of the Whitney, symbolized through its

ad agencies, through its boutiques, this growing consumerism.

And it was this consumerism that Breuer was afraid would encroach upon art, would invade

the more elite space of art.

Breuer wasn't the only one concerned about what he called the sincerity and profundity

of art as a sort of defense against consumerism.

The critic Peter Blake had this to say about the Whitney Museum.

"Here on Madison Avenue, Breuer is about to mount a massive attack on all those who have

made the name of this avenue synonymous with their racket.

The new Whitney will be art's answer to the huckster, where the ad agencies operate behind

flimsy glass walls, the Whitney will be wrapped in concrete faced with granite; where the

commercial ziggurats push the pedestrians off the sidewalk, the Whitney will invite

them in; and where the right-side-up ziggurats down the avenue"-- the ziggurats he is referring

to are products of the Manhattan zoning laws that require buildings to step back to allow

light down in.

So "the right-side-up ziggurats," he said, "now symbolize the huckster's perversion of

art, whereas the Whitney's upside-down monolith becomes a powerful symbol of sailing against

the current of the time."

So it's funny, sort of 1950s, 1960s language about hucksters and their racket.

But you see the point, that the Whitney would become a refuge for art.

The Whitney would be a defense mechanism to protect the elite power of artistic experience.

The photographer Ezra Stoller took the photographs of the interior.

And even though some of these spaces are very, very large, Stoller is able to capture what

I think was Breuer's intent, was that it was almost a domesticity to the Whitney's galleries.

This is important, because the Whitney Museum actually began in a residential area, in a

residential building, in downtown Manhattan.

And when they moved up on Madison Avenue, they wanted to keep this idea that the experience

of art, both personal and as a group, was something that would happen in the parlor.

It's something that would happen in the living room.

So the Whitney is actually-- with the moat around it, with its cladding of granite, of

stone-- is actually trying to protect a very elite understanding of art and the preciousness

of art.

The contrast between the Whitney's elitism and the Centre Pompidou's inviting the masses

and the populace into art could not be more different.