Sara Miguélez. The space proposal was quite simple. At first we wanted to make clear the confrontation that had taken place between the irascibles and the institution of the Met, and to transfer this tension to space. To do this, we made a spatial sequence of three places throughout the room.
In this first space we found a series of tables with a simple language, which we designed thinking of the tables that were in the artists' studios, where all the documentation is distributed, because what we proposed was to place the two images directly on each side of the room so that the spectator could live in the midst of that tension.
Angela Juarranz. After this space comes the community area, where we wanted the eighteen works by the artists to live together.
Miguélez. In this space we found it interesting to play with a space in transition, in which was not clear exactly when the viewer enters, because it is a space that is not an artist's studio, it is not a museum, it is not a gallery, it moves in between constantly.
Juarranz. This lead us to think about some warm materials because let’s remember that their workshops were very American in their construction, based on a dry construction, balloon frame, with naked wooden finishes or even some metallic structures that were multifunctional, that served to support some boards and had a table, that those boards were the support of the painting.
Miguélez. The contrast that the spectator experiences when passing from that first zone of tension, where the walls are also painted in grey—because the images that we have, both of the irascibles and of the Met—are in black and white—, we wanted to make an “expanded image” play. On the other hand, when you enter the second space—the communal zone—the light and colour is totally different, it makes you feel as if it embraces you, you experience a warm feel in a space that is in between, it is not a gallery, nor is it a museum.
Once the viewer has travelled through that communal space, the natural exit takes him to a space, which is also in transition, and which is a little reminiscent of American living rooms. In this place, what we have done is to distribute all the photographs, all the pre-photography tests of Nina Leen—which is enlarged in space one—and there is also a comfortable space where they can sit and consult the catalogue, and be able to rest. It brings us a little closer again to that atelier of the artists, which was also housing: a hybrid space where everything coexisted.
Juarranz. This space can even go almost unnoticed, but it also has a meaning for those years, because Life magazine, brought us closer to these houses in the suburbs that exemplified everyday life, domesticity. They had large windows that looked out onto the street and showed the living rooms, where the neighbours could almost place themselves in, in a certain way.
The project did not want to hide the fact that this is a work of the 21st century because, despite the fact that we have this historical tradition—which has influenced us—of American dry construction based on wood, it has been done with birch, a type of wood more in fashion now. But it did help us to give a clear tone, which helped the proper display of the artworks.
It is a proposition with a certain boldness, but we believe that, if in 1950 artists worked in this space surrounded by wood—on the floor, walls and ceiling—why couldn't we now imagine it like this in the exhibition hall?