The idea of alternative spaces not only relates to architecture, but also is aimed at generating a mentality or ideology as an alternative to the market-driven gallery system on the one hand and the intransigence of museum spaces on the permanent versatility, temporariness and movement are indispensable components of free space.
After the restoration of essential facilities, GOOD should come to function as an open space where people could work, discuss and present, using the existing architectural space to revitalize memory in the present.
This reusing of space does not stem from nostalgic desire, but is sparked by the understanding that things lie concealed in the folds of recent history which have to be actively exposed in order for us to be able to move on. To resist memory loss and to avoid falling into the trap of repetition, conservatism or even fundamentalism, people‘ s activities (which after all make and determine history) must first be consumed and digested. In this way progression and change can truly be generated and made possible. The implications of the notion of ’possession‘ are reversed, turned inside out by once again using deserted or ’ uninteresting’ places.
Not by adding yet another new idea to the cycle of production and consumption, but by revising an existing situation. Reconstruction as opposed to destruction.
The house, which is open 24-hours-a-day, challenges the meanings of such things as ownership rights, openness, responsibility, trust and even vandalism by literally, consciously and deliberately making the space vulnerable and open to everyone. Information about urban development and the idealized New York art scene of the 1960s and ’70s can be brought into focus in this space, thereby establishing connections and functioning as a laboratory for ideas and practices.
The name GOOD is derived from the name FOOD. FOOD was the restaurant opened in 1971 by Gordon Matta-Clark, Caroline Goodden, Tina Girourd, Suzanne Harris and Rachel Lew at 127 Spring Street, New York. To show and document their work, to support themselves and others, these artists organized themselves into a cooperative community network which led to FOOD as the meeting place and centre of discussion.