Object as Text as Function as Object

Not-standing… the assumption of ‘waiting’ mimes itself in Andrade’s chair piece. The foundations, the forms, we perceive as action ultimately decorate themselves before an overwhelmed rationality. Thus the chair is not asking the questions of who, what, where, when, why, and how. It is the viewer, the experience. After all, ‘waiting’ somewhat implies an inner dialogue, as do the self-interested functions of eating, reading, watching. The confrontation of the confrontation of self is at service here: we are presented with a sole object, not a dining room table with several places. There is no pause to existence, merely a constant shifting regardless of perceived motion or lack thereof. Motion and thought sharing similar complex origins, a thought being a motion of the mind, a question invoking thought, a motion sometimes put into language, and so on and so forth, continually confuting the self.
Andrade is carefully gluing the distinction between physical form (Pre-positions) and language (Causality). There essentially does not appear to be any conclusion from this distinction except for the fact that it exists, purely and substantially in every aspect of logic and language. Truth therefore ultimately cannot be rendered. The form of a question and the form of a chair: two distinct extensions of human form. Superficially, they appear opposite of each other in their entirety. But why should they be? The question, the interrogative, causing rest in the mind before action creates a scenario of conscious potentiality. The question could be called the mind’s chair. It rests but with the agitation, an acknowledgment of further existence. Further motion ahead of it to fulfill it’s existence. Absurdity becomes almost obsolete when sequence and origination are judged from this view.
The physical presence of the chair is doubled by its own (now textual) outline. A stage of reticence emerges from behind closed structures to reveal newer design, newer structure from inside the old. Andrade recreates the functionality of the chair, not by destroying or remodeling the chair’s contours, but by adding the slightest layer of text to the surface. The chair becomes a ‘soft’ object now that the text covering it has rendered it undecidable. As an object it is practically not an object. One would and does still call it a “chair”… but to what end? Any action/motion that could take place at/in the chair and the function of the chair itself (within a closed system) have been doubled by the layers of text. The doubling has almost made them infinite in nothingness.

--C. Lara