The Plan Journal 0 (0): 97-110, 2016
doi: 10.15274/TPJ-2016-10008
CASTING CALL:
SPATIAL IMPRESSIONS
IN THE WORK
OF RACHEL WHITEREAD
CROSS-DISCIPLINARY STUDIES
PETER L. WONG
Rachel Whiteread, Ghost, 1990.
98
Casting Call: Spatial Impressions in the Work of Rachel Whiteread Peter L. Wong
ABSTRACT - For more than 20 years, Rachel Whiteread has situated
her sculpture inside the realm of architecture. Her constructions elicit a
connection between: things and space, matter and memory, assemblage
and wholeness by drawing us toward a reciprocal relationship between
objects and their settings. Her chosen means of casting solids from “readymade”
objects reflect a process of visual estrangement that is dependent
on the original artifact. The space beneath a table, the volume of a water
tank, or the hollow undersides of a porcelain sink serve as examples of
a technique that aligns objet-trouvé with a reverence for the everyday.
The products of this method, now rendered as space, acquire their own
autonomous presence as the formwork of things is replaced by space as it
solidifies and congeals. The effect is both reliant and independent, familiar
yet strange. Much of the writing about Whiteread’s work occurs in the
form of art criticism and exhibition reviews. Her work is frequently under
scrutiny, fueled by the popular press and those holding strict values and
expectations of public art. Little is mentioned of the architectural relevance
of her process, though her more controversial pieces are derived from
buildings themselves – e,g, the casting of surfaces (Floor, 1995), rooms
(Ghost, 1990 and The Nameless Library, 2000), or entire buildings (House,
1993). From an architect’s perspective, Whiteread offers an unsettling
interpretation of architectural space, one that is dependent on filling space
to the brim, barring life from entering or holding it in suspended animation
from within. This paper argues that architectural form, whether fashioned
from contingencies or autonomous acts, has reached a saturation point
in architectural criticism. The work of Whiteread helps forge an alternative
reading that embraces the object-oriented methods inherent in design by
turning the tables on our fascination of figural form and the obsession of
substance. The essay analyzes several of Whiteread’s projects in order
to explain the meaning and techniques of her work, and places them
within the context of Luigi Moretti’s 1953 essay on the “Structures and
Sequences of Spaces.” It concludes with research work that attempts to use
Whiteread’s method to better understand the figural and material attributes
of architectural space.
Keywords: architectural space, Adolf Loos, figuration, Gestalt, Rachel Whiteread
The object is again under scrutiny in the realm of architecture. As
educators and designers we have made it the “object of focus” as we
help others, and ourselves, decipher how to observe, interpret, analyze,
write, and design. As architects we are drawn to the object’s power to
attract and repulse, to inspire the sublime or to inflict alternate conditions
by influence. From Luis Buñuel’s tragically romantic “obscure object of
desire” to Heidegger’s rumination on the nature of “things,” the fetish of
objects continues to lie squarely in the path of architecture.
Exercises by Peter Eisenman brought us to appreciate the internalization
of the architectural object, an attractive play of form and syntax on
The Plan Journal 0 (0): 97-110, 2016 - doi: 10.15274/TPJ-2016-10008
99
www.theplanjournal.com
architecture’s own terms – perhaps the closest definition of autonomy that
we have. The response: an era of design when architecture, landscape,
and urbanism aspired to find sources in localities, contextual clues,
existing practices, and interdisciplinary concerns, as in the work of Ian
McHarg, Jane Jacobs, Kenneth Frampton and Vittorio Gregotti.
Our current situation, in the undertow of computational tools, promises an
alternative view of objects: an appreciation of nucleic things, particulate
matter composed of simple forms with rules that generate, randomize,
mutate, and/or optimize architectural space. In this instance objects, like
cells, are semi-autonomous, adapting in either positive or negative ways
as they populate specific contexts or environments. Absent of hierarchy,
these objects present themselves as elements, primitives or pixels. They
steer clear of ranked order and privilege local interactions, accretions, or
filling voids to meet the needs of a system of emerging form. Any claim to
orders of importance may be taken as a sign of autonomous malevolence
or a view that favors top-down measures.
The question of architecture’s objecthood is a tricky one. Indeed, what
often starts as a movement of rootedness and contingent goodwill can
grow to be redundant, over-used, or worse, over-valued – all signs of
growing autonomy. As new interpretations take to the stage, the debate is
certain to continue.
SPACE AS OBJECT
Rachel Whiteread’s sculptural work from the late-1980s to 2000 helps us
trace the status of architecture as an object-making discourse. Whiteread’s
approach to art suggests an infatuation with objects but also with space.
Her castings create an impression of not only everyday things but also of
the space around them, more precisely, the space that remains after the
outer shell is peeled away.
The choice of everyday objects as a source for sculpture leaves familiar
yet foreign impressions on our perception and memory. By using normative
objects for these casting events, Whiteread aligns herself within the objettrouvé
traditions of Paolozzi, Duchamp, Beuys, and Johns, yet departs
from this methodology by offering objects as surrogates, impressions that
deny any material significance embodied by the found object in favor of a
more neutral, often white, substitution. This neutral interpretation provides
a means to inspect the spatial condition of the object, representing the
atmosphere that thinly adheres to its surface, a type of outer coating that
has been lifted from it. Whiteread often writes about the memory and
provocations these objects inspire, reaching especially to objects from
her childhood. These motives are common to modern art, where artistic
inspiration frequently reflects life experiences. A closer reading however
suggests a more nuanced approach for Whiteread, one that may help us
know the dynamics of architectural space through static things.
100
Casting Call: Spatial Impressions in the Work of Rachel Whiteread Peter L. Wong
Figure 1. Rachel Whiteread, Ghost, 1990.
THREE IMPRESSIONS
Whiteread’s objects leave impressions on us in three ways: 1) her castings
maintain close affinity with the use and function of the original object, 2)
the resulting sculpture often draws our attention to unseen traits of the
original object, and 3) the work of art can be rhetorical, asking us to make
sense of it within the context that it is situated or to form an opinion about
a specific cultural condition.
The first impression of Whiteread’s sculpture involves its operation within
the capacities of the original object. The instrumentality of the object’s
function is transferred to the casting: the space from the underside of a
table becomes a table surface or plinth; the complementary casting of
a four-legged stool becomes a seat. The casting of a clawfoot bathtub
results in a similar vessel that may contain water (e.g., the volume of
the tub becomes the bath). There thus remains a double function to the
artistic object, which retains a shadow of its use. We see this also in the
design of furniture by Charles and Ray Eames. For example Ray Eames’s
1960 solid walnut stool for the Time-Life Building lobby in New York is a
monolithic piece spun on a lathe from a single piece of wood and, like
Whiteread’s work, is marked by strong Gestalt lines between the profile of
its shape and the space that surrounds it. On first balance these objects
cast doubt over what their original uses might be. Are they art or furniture,
a machine part removed from its context, or …? In what way do these
The Plan Journal 0 (0): 97-110, 2016 - doi: 10.15274/TPJ-2016-10008
101
www.theplanjournal.com
Figure 2. Rachel Whiteread, Ghost, 1990, detail.
objects come to our consciousness as useful things, and is this playful
state of recognition part of Whiteread’s intention for us as viewers? Our
first impression of an autonomous sculptural object becomes a recognition
then of a useful piece of furniture, a latent meaning of the object that
emerges after a debate about its use.
The second reading encompassing an object’s form is less evident. This
occurs when voids and crevices are exposed: the bottom of a porcelain
sink or the space re-presented from the firebox of a coal-burning fireplace.
The resulting objects in this instance reveal the process of their making:
sand casting patterns and original production molds are brought to life in
the reversal process, exposing an inquiry about the value or meaning of
everyday things through re-contextualized form. These objects are like
hands covered by gloves, a version of the body that is offered again in
a different context (hand protection or perhaps elegant evening attire!).
The notion of objet-trouvé or Duchamp’s “ready-mades” from the 1950s
is in full play as art embraces ironies and inconsistencies that kick back
contradictions from dispassionate white sculptural form.
The last application of Whiteread’s work is more pointed. In this instance
the artist taps popular or political subjects that force a reading that is
controversial or provocative. Some of these approaches are ironic, while
others take clues from material culture – an alignment of associative
imagery with popular tastes, recalling familiar iconography. For example,
102
Casting Call: Spatial Impressions in the Work of Rachel Whiteread Peter L. Wong
Figure 3. Rachel Whiteread, Judenplatz Holocaust Memorial, 2000.
Whiteread’s 2000 Vienna Holocaust Memorial recalls 1930s Nazi German/
Austrian public book burnings. The nature of the memorial – a concrete cast
room where the textured edges and pages of books become the outward
texture and surface of the monument function to present a traditional
memorial that Adolf Loos would describe as art’s ability “to shake people
from their lethargy.” 1
This work challenges our norms and expectations by
drawing upon our memories while expanding our thinking (Fig. 3).
In contrast to the traditional art piece, Whiteread’s Embankment project
in the Turbine Hall of the Tate Modern operates on a different rhetorical
level. As part of a temporary art program, the 2005 installation challenged
the artist to control the 35-meter high x 152-meter long space by installing
space itself. An array of cardboard boxes of differing sizes were used
to cast 14,000 polyethylene forms that alter the light and density of the
vast hall. Whiteread’s study of luminance of the vast 115 foot high space
also remarks on how she thought simple paper boxes symbolize the use
of natural resources, global and economic trade, as well as improvised
shelters for the homeless amongst other commentaries (Fig. 4).
ANTI-ARCHITECTURE
Given this analysis of Whiteread’s work, we could position her as the
anti-architect, building space by liberating it from the surfaces of the
architectural context. Still, while her work is autonomous once formwork
is removed, it remains dependent on the form-making surface for its
The Plan Journal 0 (0): 97-110, 2016 - doi: 10.15274/TPJ-2016-10008
103
www.theplanjournal.com
expression and life. Space as object is, in itself, the objective. Architects aim
to capture and tame space, but are often distracted by the seductiveness
of form, material, and substance. Whiteread is more patient, she slows
the speed of space as it stretches and tugs at the walls and ceilings of
architecture. There is a sense of the overall volumetric configuration when
we stand and see her work from a distance, yet we are rewarded also
with detail, texture, and mass as we close in and approach her sculptures.
In working her first architecturally scaled piece, Ghost (1990) (Figs. 1,2),
Whiteread lends us an account of this very impression. She writes:
I spent three months searching for a room in North London, very
close to where I grew up. I spent about four months working in this
room, casting the piece, and placing it against the wall as it was
cast. I really had no sense of what it was until I relocated it in the
studio. By looking at the light switch, I had suddenly realized what
I had done. I had made the viewer become the wall. 2
A figure-ground reversal occurs as architecture and space are personified.
In Whiteread’s work of cast transparent resin we see the potential of
“becoming the wall.” In these pieces we peer through to the other side,
a type of frozen space with suspended color and optical occlusions. For
Water Tower (1998), Whiteread was interested in the way light passed
through a cylindrical resin cast of a typical lower-Manhattan water tank.
Vessel space levitating above domestic space, presented as a bright
beacon and then as a vessel for pressurized plumbing, Water Tower is an
example of sculpture that holds functional affinities to the original (Fig. 5).
Another example using the same material strategy but employing rhetorical
Figure 4. Rachel Whiteread, Embankment, 2005.
104
Casting Call: Spatial Impressions in the Work of Rachel Whiteread Peter L. Wong
commentary is Monument (2001), a proposal for a temporary piece on the
empty “fourth plinth” in Trafalgar Square. 3
Whiteread replicated the existing
plinth in clear resin, then inverted its orientation and placed it atop the
original. A “ready-made” ironic gesture in its own right leaving individuals
with a sense of what it means, “to place a plinth upon a pedestal.” The
rhetorical gesture underscored what contemporary art can accomplish in
the public arena of British war heroes and royalty. Whiteread explains that
she wanted to calm the noise and traffic of the square’s bustle by offering
a distraction of form and light. But it is not hard to imagine that the position
of her sculpture – in its inverted and contrary orientation – was intended to
upset the masculine and military history of the British status quo. 4
Figure 5. Rachel Whiteread, Water Tower, 1998.
The Plan Journal 0 (0): 97-110, 2016 - doi: 10.15274/TPJ-2016-10008
105
www.theplanjournal.com
Figure 6. Spatial maquettes of 18 Houses by Adolf Loos. 3d printed models as part of a
research seminar course taught by the Author at University of North Carolina, Charlotte.
THE STRUCTURE OF SPACE
In the 1952 essay, “The Structure and Sequence of Space,” Luigi Moretti
argued that “empty space” in buildings, in contrast to their constructive and
formal perperties, is central to understanding the nascent and full impact
of the architectural experience. 5
In making this claim for complementarity
between space and object, Moretti relied on the idea of space as a
hollow that not only contains but houses dynamic elements that alter
our interpretation and use of the spatial realm. This, Moretti claimed, is
accomplished by the use of movements, compressions, entries, and exits.
He assigned four principles upon which we might judge the effectiveness
of the spatial interior: (1) “dimension,” or the physical quantity of the
absolute volume, (2) “density,” the perceived effects based on the quantity
of light entering a spatial volume, (3) “pressure” or “energetic charge,”
pertaining to the relative ways that various points in space are influenced
by the bounding enclosure, and (4) “quality,” which he described as
analogous to the fluidity of space embodying energies that are restricted or
released as they move freely within the interior.
Moretti’s notion of “empty space,” along with his description of volume
as a stage for kinetic experience, can be applied to the energies in
Whiteread’s castings. We see this “energetic charge” of space in
context to her choice of “ready-mades,” although in Moretti’s case the
environments are the ruins of Rome and the weathered surfaces of the
Italian Baroque. His creation of figure/ground model reversals in plaster
of Hadrian’s Villa and Guarino Guarini’s project for Santa Maria Divina
Providenza in Lisbon in the 1950s were some of the first modern studies
of architecture and space. With these, along with his dense prose, Moretti
characterized an autonomous spatial reading of architecture not unlike
Eisenman’s argument for pure architectural syntax in the 1960s and
1970s.
106
Casting Call: Spatial Impressions in the Work of Rachel Whiteread Peter L. Wong
Figure 8. Spatial maquette of the Fleischner House by Adolf Loos.
Figure 7. Spatial maquette of the main staircase of the Tristian Tzara House by Adolf Loos.
The Plan Journal 0 (0): 97-110, 2016 - doi: 10.15274/TPJ-2016-10008
107
www.theplanjournal.com
FIGURES TRAVELING THROUGH PLANES OF CONTEMPORARY
SPACE
Placing Moretti’s architecture and writing within the context of Whiteread’s
spatial objects conjures further debate about the spatial role of
architecture. The focus on space as an agent of modern architecture
shares its history with the rise of Gestalt psychology and the liberation
of cultural space from the stratification of Western spatial practice. Le
Corbusier’s plan libre enabled a new democratic space, built on eroding
the limits of spatial order with freedoms afforded by new structural
principles. Wright’s preference for the horizontal confirmed a new plane
for domestic space and its connection to the landscape. Both of these
architects argued for the dynamic use of space, whether traveling an
architectural promenade or scanning the prairie with moving eyes to spy
Figure 9. Spatial maquette of the stair space in Sou Fujimoto’s H House. Model by Ian
McIver and Rafael Lopez for a course taught by the Author.
108
Casting Call: Spatial Impressions in the Work of Rachel Whiteread Peter L. Wong
views of the distant horizon. Modern space embraced time, motion, travel,
and distances beyond.
In order to understand figural space in conjunction with the architectural
promenade, a team of students and myself studied and fabricated a series
of Whiteread-like castings. Choosing several built and unbuilt houses by
Adolf Loos, we investigated the entry sequences and social patterns of
four interrelated spaces typical of his domestic work: foyer, washroom and
coat alcoves, living/music rooms, and formal meal areas. The raumplan
organization of the Loosian interior was chosen specifically to understand
transitions through the house that occur not only as door/threshold
conditions but also by way of stair ascensions and subtle floor level
changes. (Fig. 6,7,8)
The arrangement of Loos’s rooms reflects codes and etiquettes of the
social structure of the times. Many of these houses were serviced by
domestic help, therefore the arrangement of interior spaces reflect strict
lines of public and private. From the earliest houses to the more recent
shared arrangements, demonstrate a regard for the entry sequence. Foyer
spaces were frequently not grand. These opened onto larger, light-filled
rooms for dispensing heavy outerwear. The equipment in these spaces
tell the story of intimate domestic rituals matched to the architecture –
the removal of damp coats to be hung on brass metal hooks, built-in
mirror glass so guests could check their appearance before engaging the
pleasantries of social exchange with hosts, etc. Often there were simple
porcelain sinks to wash up at, plumbing fixtures that Loos favored and
openly exhibited in these introductory spaces of the house. 6
3-D printed maquettes describe a volumetric sequence. In the raumplan
these spaces are often connected via an ascending stair. Voids and
incisions in the resulting form denote space that would be occupied by
floors and walls. Windows and doors are seen as surface reliefs and
indicate apertures where inside and outside thresholds occur. Notable
features of these volumes (unlike the drawings that generated them)
illuminate how the architect tailored each space according to the correct
height to plan ratio in much the same way a suit is fitted to the body.
When viewed from below, we see how stair space is thrust from below
into destination spaces, exposing how dramatic vertical thresholds were
created and introducing space as a series of dynamic social occurrences
as inhabitants moved up and through the building’s section.
In the spirit of Rachel Whiteread’s inversion of form into readable space, the
resulting objects from our study reveal themselves as volumetric imprints
exposing the limits of raumplan room arrangements. The castings allow
us to inspect closely the balance of habitable mass against slim surface
features. Along the faces of these models exist the texture of interior walls
and ceiling soffits. Windows, doors and other openings understood in relief
are oriented outwards, pushing their way through of the void (Fig. 9).
The Plan Journal 0 (0): 97-110, 2016 - doi: 10.15274/TPJ-2016-10008
109
www.theplanjournal.com
DOUBLE AGENCY
The value of Whiteread’s artistic technique may, in the end, not be directly
transferable to architecture or architectural space. Rather, the influence
of her method could be thought of as semi-autonomous, a contingent
pause that enables a reflexive view of space, and a reminder that
architecture as object is often taken for granted. Our discipline’s continued
obsession with overt and aggressive form making is not entirely without
precedent however. Each generation of new design thinking has turned
to architecture’s formal expressiveness. New means of architectural
production have driven this trend and our current explorations with
complex and exciting formal play are influenced significantly by such
innovation. The question of how to remain mindful of space (artistic,
cultural, or otherwise) during these changing conditions is critical. A
perspective from all sides is required even though it is not always clear.
Could we think of Rachel Whiteread’s process as a sort of double-agency
in the architectural design, moving back and forth between allegiances of
objects and space, autonomy and contingency, form and culture while also
negotiating a bigger picture? Michael Hays’s reminder that architecture
must remain critical for this to occur, and that a designer’s responsibility
for representing the working knowledge of the discipline runs parallel to
its production. 7
With this insight we should consider Whiteread’s artistic
technique as a potential instrument for this mode of practice.
110
Casting Call: Spatial Impressions in the Work of Rachel Whiteread Peter L. Wong
Notes
1	 Adolf Loos, “Architecture” (1910), translated by H. F. Mallgrave, in Midgård, vol. 1, no.
1, 1987, 54.
2	 Rachel Whiteread, “Working Notes”, Looking Up: Rachel Whiteread’s Water Tower,
edited by Louise Neri (New York: Scalo, 1999), 139.
3	 See details and past works for this temporary London art program at: https://www.
london.gov.uk/priorities/arts-culture/fourth-plinth, (accessed October 10, 2015). The
inversion of the plinth could also be interpreted as a body casket invoking another
alternative reading for the viewer.
4	 Interview by the BBC News, (June 4, 2001), http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/
hientertainment/1359423.stm, /accessed October 10, 2015).
5	 Luigi Moretti, “The Structure and Sequence of Space”, Spazio, no. 7, 1952-53.
6	 The expression of these utilitarian objects were part of Loos’s manifesto and favorite
subjects of his early essays in which the conveniences and modern features of a house
should be a part of everyday life. For example, he was particularly appreciative of
English and American plumbing.
7	 Michael Hays, Critical Architecture: Between Culture and Form, Perspecta, vol. 21,
1984, 27, doi: 10.2307/1567078.
Credits
Figures 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9: Photo by the Author (© All Rights Reserved).
Figure 3: Photo by Johannes Ortner.
Figure 4: Photo by Horace Ko.
Figure 5: Photo by Mark Schlemmer
Peter L. Wong is an architect and Associate Professor at the School of Architecture
of the College of Arts + Architecture at University of North Carolina-Charlotte, where
he has taught architectural design, history, and theory since 1988. He holds degrees
from the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Washington. His design work
was recognized with awards from the National Organization of Minority Architects and
AIACharlotte. Among his writings is the translation of Vittorio Gregotti’s Inside Architecture
(with F. Zaccheo, MIT Press, 1996). In Fall 2011 he was a visiting scholar and lecturer at
the College of Architecture and Urban Planning at Tongji University in Shanghai. An essay
featuring his research done while at Tongji was recently published in Diversity and Design:
Understanding Hidden Consequences (Routledge, 2015). E-mail: plwong@uncc.edu