HUESCA, SPAIN.- Per Kirkeby studied Geology at the University of Copenhaguen and later he enrolled in the School of Experimental Art ('Ex-School') of Copenhagen, where he opted for the painting, the graphical design, the cinema in 8 mm and the performance. His profound engagement with nature has enabled him to use it as a tool to present his particular form of viewing the world.

In 1973 Kirkeby decided to make sculptures with a little used material: brick, and made the first in a series of architecturally looking “public art” works in Ikast (Jutland) which, subtended by a strong intentionality, have since been disseminated throughout the whole of Europe.

Per Kirkeby’s works not only push back the limits of sculptural techniques towards construction, appropriating brick, the core charismatic material of architectural creations, but they also allow the spectator to enter into their defunctionalised interiors. These works neither celebrate nor commemorate events but instead signpost a place and call attention to the surroundings in which they are located.

This work created specifically for Plan is based on the intersection of two equal squares whose intersection creates another smaller square inside, in such a way that, with this simple play of geometry, three spaces are created which can be entered through a series of openings mimicking the doors of a house. In this regard, and though it lacks any functional potential, we could draw a parallel between the openings in the upper part and the idea of windows, even though it is impossible to look through them. One should not seek for the meaning of the work in architecture, its styles and construction techniques. This sculpture’s relationship with architecture is purely incidental, and its meaning must be sought in the postmodern development of abstract forms that have stepped beyond the limits of the arts and the premises of the avant-gardes in order to reinforce the autonomy of a work of art with respect to other objects in the world. Nonetheless, this work is already inseparable from the place, and through its openings we discover fragments of Peña Mediodía, Peña Lisa, Peña Cuezo, Punta Llerga and the sky in the Pyrenees, further enhancing its singularity.

The work that is and is not there at the same time. One has no need to circumvent because it offers the possibility of entering. That has a solid and yet transparent appearance. That looks like a building, but is not a building. That is not an expanded sculpture, nor does it fluctuate between building and sculpture. It is entirely what it is, and it does not pose those questions. But it could put forward other ones. About the glimpsed fragment of sky. About the perennial nature of walls, the precariousness of houses. About human wisdom freed from intellectual loads. About playing hide-and-seek and having a wall against which to play ballgames.