PEANA OFF-SITE
MÖBIUS HOUSE, CDMX, MX.
An off-site exhibition at the Möbius House of Ernesto Gómez Gallardo. Hosted by PEANA during Condo Complex 2019. Curated by Jose Esparza Chong Cuy.
A group exhibition presenting works by Leonor Antunes, Francisco Artigas, ASMA, Dr. Atl, Manuela de Laborde, Frida Escobedo, Claudia Fernández y Proyecto Meteoro, Mario García Torres, Ernesto Gómez Gallardo, Jill Magid, Esther McCoy, Carlos Mérida, Mario Navarro, Juan O’Gorman, Clara Porset, Pedro Reyes, Armando Salas Portugal, Cooking Sections, and Tezontle.
This exhibition presents itself as a case study that looks into the legal framework of heritage and legacy. Presented at the iconic home of architect Ernesto Gómez Gallardo, built from 1974-1978 and which is now for sale, this curatorial exercise brings forth questions concerning the politics of preservation of significant contributions towards the built environment in a crucial moment of “limbo,” where there are no laws in place to protect their ongoing existence.
This exhibition is also an opportunity to visit the house and studio of the Mexican modernist architect Ernesto Gómez Gallardo, which will be open to the public for the first time.
On September 28th, 2019 an open panel about built heritage was discussed at the Möbius House located at Pino 43, Lomas Quebradas, Mexico City. Participants: Mario Ballesteros, Ana Pérez Escoto, Dolores Martínez Orralde, Carlos H. Matos, and Pedro Reyes. Moderated by José Esparza Chong Cuy.
LEGACY CONSIDERATIONS OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
José Esparza Chong Cuy and Cooking Sections with the legal support of Carla Patricia Calderón.
This is an open invitation to take action and question the legal frameworks that protect the artistic legacy of our built environment. This initiative seeks to widely communicate the socio-historical value of properties whose artistic contribution is outstanding in fostering a culture of care, preservation and appreciation of architectural heritage.
In Mexico, there are laws that protect its built heritage, and regulations established by the government indicate the year 1900 as the legal turning point for differentiating “historic” from “modern” real estate. Terms such as “artistic monument” are also used to distinguish buildings of exceptional artistic value. However, these regulations leave out a myriad of properties that are at risk of disappearing. The architectural production of the twentieth century contributed directly to the generation of a unique identity and visual language during a period of national development. In recent years we have seen how many of these renowned properties have changed in use and ownership. What happens when these constructions are subject to the market?
Being conscious of the subjectivity of what is considered to be of artistic value, we ask ourselves to what extent the existing regulations are designed in a generalized manner and can be counterproductive and restrictive, preventing in many cases that the properties acquire a second life. What are the criteria used to decide what is preserved and what is not? And once an architecture is declared worthy of protection, how is it conserved without being conservative?
