Abstract/Prompt
A “true” vacuum describes a space that is entirely void of matter, the idea of which has been a frequent topic of philosophical debate since Greek antiquity. Plato and Aristotle were amongst the first to question and cast doubt upon the possibility of a vacuum, for if a void was constituted by nothingness, how could nothingness be proven to in fact “exist”? Unless we are to define a vacuum merely in terms of its opposite, how do we begin to conceptualize or document such a space? How do we describe a lack or an absence?
A vacuum need not necessarily refer to the unthinkable thinkable that is commonly associated with “void”. One way to resolve the conceptual paradox of the vacuum is to shift our understanding toward the idea of a “partial” vacuum, a space which possesses an atmospheric pressure so low that any particles existing within the space do not affect any other process or activity there. A vacuum typically develops in the wake of an acute concentration of matter to a single source, a plenum (filled space). This type of vacuum does not exist a priori, but rather emerges as a by-product of the accelerating expansion and contraction of matter. As either the space between sites of accumulation and activity or as an hermetically sealed chamber of intentional making, a vacuum is not necessarily defined by emptiness so much as inactivity or ineffectiveness.
For spatial and discursive practices alike, the vacuum implicates a inescapable set of problematics pertaining to the dichotomies of excess/scarcity, production/destruction, collection/displacement, accumulation/dissemination. What role does art and architecture play in the production of vacuums? Philosophically, aesthetically and ethically, how do we design, curate, and create within a vacuum?