Topic: cube

The cube caracteristic is exactly this that he doesn't allow anthropomorphism. He is too fat for his height, too tall for his width.
The quality of the cube for me is that it reduces form to an abstract symbol but a symbol for something that is yet to come, yet to be defined. This quality gives it automatically an ideological charge or a religious one. Maybe more a religious. In 2001, Space Odyssey the monkeys are busy with surviving. Suddenly appears a black monolith changing everything, giving an impulse for civilization to start. Of course this is a very simplistic explanation for the birth of intelligence and everything that came along. But what is interesting about this monolith is his radical difference, its radical strangeness, its alterity. The cube also has this alterity. It has this alterity in the bare pre-human nature but it has also this alterity in our ultra modern city landscapes. It remains different, from another planet. A form, an abstract symbol that if descended from the sky  for sure would not remain bare and innocent for long. People would make it theirs. And most probably people would make it their deity.
Gregor Schneider set a Black square in a wall into the masonry of the Frankfurt Museum für Moderne Kunst. It was just an ordinary cube. Nothing was differentiating it from any other cube but the contract made personally with the museum director. According to this contract the work must remain in the museum wall for fifty years then be personnally collected by the artist. In 2052, Schneider will be older than eighty and the Museum Director responsible for the square over ninety: vita brevis, ars longa.
Whether it is a work of art or a sacred space depends on the eye of the viewer.
An object without narration. How to give a narration to an object who doesn't have one? What could this narration be?
Of course it has a narration. Its narration is its referentiality. But what to do with that?