Dattner's structure are themselves derivative in some ways of Isamu Noguchi's Octetra, originally cast in concrete and installed near the Spoleto Cathedral in Italy in 1968 and then subsequently re-made in fiberglass and installed at numerous locations around the world (I'm not quite sure how this works...are all of these considered 'Noguchi's'?) While honoring Noguchi as a sculptor, one must be careful of being too deferential to him as a playground designer. Octetra is scaled for monumentality rather than for children; compare its size to Dattner's construct. And the need to set it up on blocks to enable entry from beneath is an awkward compromise between the sculpture and the play. (Note that the later fiberglass versions simply rest on the ground; improving the sculpture but removing a play feature).
Someday I will have the time to write an entire blogpost on Noguchi's playgrounds, but today, waiting for a train in Paddington Station, is not that day. For now I will just say that as with Octetra, it is the sculptural qualities that drive even his play designs, not the play experience itself, which leads to an uneasy rapprochement between the visual and the play experience.
This is an important issue in the design of public features intended to be experienced both as sculpture and as playscape. Which part of that experience is most important? Is it possible to reach a greater unity between them than Noguchi did with Octetra? Do you know of public play sculptures that do?
No comments:
Post a Comment