© Gerrit Rietveld AcademieGraduation show6 – 10 July 2016

JURY REPORTGRA AWARDS 2016

The juries for applied arts and autonomous arts of this year have noticed that graduating at Rietveld does not only mean producing good work. It is about making context-aware works. Studying and graduating at Rietveld seems to stand for questioning the means and media surrounding a topic or field of expertise. All departments are searching for limits and stretching boundaries.

Niel

s He

ndrik

s

Nico

las

Chua

rd

Mar

iann

a La

drey

t, ph

oto

by K

lem

en Il

ovarAPPLIED

ARTSKristine Bech Sørensen (designLAB)

‘EPIC FORM - PART ONE’The jury found the subject of this thesis very special: horses. The thesis is rich in language and Bech Sørensen plays freely with associa-tions. She creates her own logic, which seems at times incoherent, but the subject holds it together. The jury did wonder what the connection was be-tween horses and design. Bech Sørensen has created a nice book of ideas, that is wonderful to read.

Nicolina Eklund (VAV – Moving Image)‘HOLES IN THE CHEESE OF MY LIFE’

Her thesis is a charming story about the hole. The story starts from a very personal motive, but Eklund combines that with a reflection on all the holes artists have been digging through-out art history. Eklund combines her personal fascination with art history. Inspired by this, the jury came up with other examples that could have been included, but that did not diminish their enthusiasm for this very entertaining, yet moving story. They also very much liked the design, in which Eklund attached a string to the booklet, so the reader can always find her way out of the hole.

Inger Heeschen (Fine Arts)‘MOUNTAIN’

As a contrast to the thesis of Eklund, Inger Heeschen has written about mountains. It is a very pleasant text to read with a nice balance be-tween references and personal perspective. She

has given the mountains witty names, like the “Fouca” and “Ult”. In text and image Heeschen tells about her journey into the treacherous grounds of theory and knowledge. And, accord-ing to the jury, in the end she shows that she has become an experienced traveler, that knows how to find her way and give others directions.

Sae Honda (Jewellery)‘EVERYBODY NEEDS A ROCK’

Just as the three nominees previously mentioned, Sae Honda writes about objects/things. But in her case it is about objects that we normally do not see: stones. The stones lead her to exam-ples from her Japanese background that made the jury wonder and laugh out loud. The thesis is nicely designed and very well written. It is also the only thesis in which a student makes a subtle but clarifying connection to her own work.

Medeina Musteikytė (Graphic Design)‘PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE AS

A SYSTEM OF THOUGHT’The jury found her thesis so extraordinary that it almost seemed too good to be true. The jury, not being completely at the same level of digital wisdom of the writer, found it hard to judge how much of a contribution to the field Musteikyte’s thesis makes. Musteikyte tries to get to the foundation of the algorithm and questions if programmers should control the algorithm or let it go. It is without a doubt a very interesting subject, well-written and outstanding among the other theses.

WINNER: Sae Honda (Jewellery)

NOMINEES:

This year the jury consisted of Barbara Visser, visual artist and chair of the Society of Arts, Hans den Hartog Jager, writer and art critic for NRC Handelsblad and Jeroen Boomgaard, Professor of art and public space at the Gerrit Rietveld Academie.

The jury was impressed with the quality of the writing. Most students have clearly followed their own interests in their research, although the subject matter was sometimes too vast to manage. There are theses that attempt to be academic, but also ones that are written from the personal perspective of the student. The theses often made the jury curious about the work of the students, especially when the connection to the work was not entirely clear. It was also nice to see how much attention students had given to the design and how in some cases this related to the subject of the thesis.

* * *

This year it was a very close call between the winner and the runner-up. It was hard to compare the two theses, one being classical and the other more experimental. In the end the jury decided to choose the thesis that can serve as an example to the whole academy.

A special nomination for her great combination of experimental content and design goes to: Medeina Musteikyte.

But the winner is, because it clearly is this year’s best thesis: Sae Honda.

THESIS The jury for applied arts this year consists of Kirsten Algera and Lernert & Sander. Kirsten Algera is the editor-in-chief of MacGuffin magazine and is a researcher and critic in design history. Lernert & Sander have been working as a duo since 1997, producing a variety of work that is known for its aesthetics and humor.

The jury was greatly impressed by the possibilities that Rietveld’s applied arts departments offer for collaborations that reach outside of the academy. It wishes to specially mention the Fashion Department, as it sees it as the new front-runner in Dutch fashion education. Within the excellently orchestrated and magnificent Fashion Show, it still allows students to follow their individual interests, helping them in editing concepts into tangible, showable collections without only pleasing the fashion world. According to the jury, the Fashion Department should try to find a way of transforming the excitement of the Fashion Show into the presentation that we may see at the Graduation Show today.

NOMINEES:

Nicolas Chuard (designLAB)‘MORE IS MORE & MORE’

Is it possible to receive a fine for a car without doors? The jury was amazed by the sheer mag-nitude of work Nicolas has put into his end exam and the works shown, forming a show in itself. On the border of “it is what it is”, Nicolas shows that things can be slightly different. It is not as easy as it seems to make a car into a work that still surprises us. Yet the amount and size of work is not all: Nicolas produces freely and shamelessly, using humor and simplicity to comment on the field of design itself. He makes us ask ourselves: can a mention in the Guinness Book of Records be as important as a major design prize?

Niels Hendriks (Inter-Architecture)‘UNDER THE SKIN OF THE BUILDING’

‘MNEMONIC’Niels’ beautiful, well-edited and considerate work showcases the potential role of the department that he is graduating from: being a mediator be-tween space and material, and providing a sen-sory experience of space. He shows us rubber molds of parts of the Rietveld building, hung as if a timeline of the best moments of the building’s

history. In two works he explores the potential of the much used yet excellently chosen mate-rial in two ways: that of revealing the building’s imperfection and that of the building as a per-sonal timeline. The jury commends Niels on that he uses the very moment of his graduation as a topic, as if saying “I will leave this building, yet I will forever have these physical memories to take with me”.

Marianna Ladreyt (Fashion)‘PLANISPHERE’

Although the jury was very impressed by the collections and works of all Fashion students, both in and after the Fashion Show, there is one collection that stands out. This is the collection of Marianna Ladreyt. Her collection shows just some more ‘guts’, as it shows not only perfect execution yet also mysterious, personal choices. Her work flirts with an idea and allows us to flirt with it, rather than confronting us with a closed, repetitive system. It triggered the jury on many levels: moving from tent to toga, from known to unknown, from flat to wearable and being socially rooted and recognizable without being pushy or literal.

WINNER: Niels Hendriks (Inter-Architecture)

AUTONOMOUS ARTS

Mile

na N

aef

Sash

a A. B

ricea

g

Sim

on B

ecks

The jury for autonomous arts this year consists of Radna Rumping, Johan Gustavsson and Nico Feragnoli. Radna Rumping is an independent cultural programmer and current resident at the Van Eyck academy. Johan Gustavsson and Nico Feragnoli are directors at 1646, a project space for contemporary art in The Hague.

The jury notices a highly developed awareness of space throughout the works of autonomous art students. The works made show that any gesture within a space and in between other works is a gesture that is shaped by and shaping its environment. It also appreciates that the Glass department in particular has facilitated such daring, autonomous works, using the medium of glass as a starting point, rather than as a result.

NOMINEES:

Sasha A. Briceag (VAV – Moving Image)‘THE PURSUIT OF REALNESS’

Sasha’s work shows an eagerness and energy that radiates onto the viewer. We might con stantly cry out: “What is she going to do now?!”. In her video, she has made a collage of found footage and home-made iPhone and GoPro videos. Such a collage is often used in contemporary video art yet mostly fails to convince. Sasha’s work is an exception to this, as it excellently captures the frenzy of our time in search of reality. It does so using humor that is not over-directed or scripted and acknowledges that quality of imagery is a means rather than a goal. The imperfection of material is a choice that emphasizes the content of her work.

Milena Naef (Glass)‘WEIGHT OF FOUR GENERATIONS’

‘FLEETING PARTS’‘AMNESIA’

Milena has found a way to shine a different, personal and physical light on such an old and charged material as marble. Her work is visually beautiful but is not made prettier than it should be. The jury is impressed by Milena’s choice for not staging a performance at set times, which would reduce the work to being too theatrical. The marble and MDF objects that she shows

casually lean against the walls, waiting to be used by Milena, but the object uses Milena as well: shaping her body, ultimately folding body into slabs of marble, which is a sensation to see. It would be tempting to say that Milena’s work has nothing do with glass as a material. In her work, however, the jury recognizes awareness of the sensitivity to materials in their density, rang-ing from fluid to solid.

Simon Becks (Fine Arts)‘GENERAL, GENERAL, DULL, DULL, DULL, AND THE HUMDRUM HO HUM

COMMONPLACE’At first, encountering Simon’s work, we might think: I have seen this type of work before. A wooden structure, its wooden building mate-rials showing on the outside, waits for us to enter. Upon entering this thought disappears. The smell of sweaty clothes and a waiting- or changing-room-like space is luring us in. Nothing happens yet a chain of observations is set in mo-tion. Moving through the space, thoughts pile up, change what we have seen, and start to connect, as if being a closed, evolving, enigmatic system. As if Simon has made a three-dimensional de-scription of a space from memory, with all its imperfections. What the hell is this place? It is a work hard to forget.

WINNER: Milena Naef (Glass)