See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/339491816

Exhibition Review Essay and Reviews

Article  in  Museum Worlds · July 2019

DOI: 10.3167/armw.2019.070115

CITATION READS

1 3,357

4 authors, including:

Emily Stokes-Rees Blaire Moskowitz

Syracuse University University of Leicester
7 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS    3 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Emily Stokes-Rees on 28 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 IV
EXHIBITIONS
EXHIBITION REVIEW ESSAY

Exhibition without Boundaries

teamLab Borderless and the Digital Evolution of Gallery Space

As ridiculous as it might sound today, one might argue that the development of exhibitionary
space began with the ancient cave paintings of the Paleolithic era. The similarities between the
modern white-cube space and those first spaces exhibiting human art are undeniable when
one considers the use of space, location, and architectural structures. The caves in Asturias,
in northern Spain, for example, require a half-hour hike into the heart of the cave and away
from all sunlight before the extraordinary paintings can be seen (Neil 2018). This architectural
feature has been carried over into the modern white-cube space, which, being predominantly
windowless and set apart from nature and any visible connection to the outside world, relies
on artificial lighting to draw attention to the work. What happens outside of the gallery walls
has little impact on the contents; the art within the confines of the white-cube space maintains
a constant state of equilibrium, thus controlling the audience’s visit by presenting them with a
consistent, unchanging experience. Of course, as Brian O’Doherty famously asserted in his 1976
essay for Artforum, the implied “neutrality” of gallery space will forever be a myth; content and
context are intertwined, and both are historical constructs. This is in no way intended to criticize
the white-cube model, mind you, rather to place it in a wider historical context of exhibition
development. And indeed, on the contrary, it is arguable that many types of art are best presented
in a white-cube setting, such as that produced by the conceptual art movement of the 1960s and
1970s, which placed greater importance on the ideas behind the work and less importance on
the finished outcome. In this context, an unadorned space and blank background to display the
work against allowed the audience to reflect on the piece without distraction.
I do note, briefly, that the same cannot be said of the internal architecture of older institutions,
however, such as the National Portrait Gallery in London or the Metropolitan Museum of Art
in New York. Almost excessive in their opulence, the forbidding entrances, grand staircases,
expansive rooms, and even the rich use of color on the walls were designed to reflect the wealth
and power of empires, highlighting the objects and artworks bought and plundered from across
the globe. These seventeenth-, eighteenth-, and early-nineteenth-century institutions were much
more of a social meeting place than they are now, however, having existed for many decades as
places where people would congregate, hold picnics and social gatherings, and even teach their
children to walk—a stark contrast compared to many modern spaces with their implied and
explicit rules and regulations governing the way the space is used.

Museum Worlds: Advances in Research 7 (2019): 238–261 © Berghahn Books

doi:10.3167/armw.2019.070115
 Exhibitions  n 239

For years, the concept of monographic collecting and installation dominated exhibitionary
practice, particularly in museums dedicated to modern and contemporary art (Schubert 2009).
The Saatchi collection in London, for example, which opened in 1984, set the standard of its
day for the display of contemporary art. In an old factory converted by minimalist architect
Max Gordon, the gallery is thirty thousand square feet of pristine, uncluttered expansiveness
where often only a handful of works are displayed at a time (Schubert 2009). Such examples
fill the pages of Charlotte Klonk’s Spaces of Experience (2009), a historically rich account of
developments in gallery display over the past two centuries. Her analysis is directly concerned
with changes in the relationship between viewers and art, charting evolving practices and ideas
associated with display and their relationship to visitor experience. Klonk observes, for example,
that in the 1930s the strategic placement of walls and use of minimal seating in New York’s
Museum of Modern Art meant that visitors were unable to retrace their steps through the gallery,
creating a “dynamic and directed layout [that] exerted an inevitable forward thrust” (2009: 16).
She demonstrates how the idea of “flow” can keep an audience moving, set a pace, and control
one’s movement in a particular direction through the exhibit.
Over the last three decades or so, however, we have witnessed a shift from the traditional
model of a monolithic, static museum filled with cultural prototypes, to a more dynamic in-
stitution with a focus on facilitating dialogue and interaction with its audiences: “To keep a
collection alive [i]s no longer just a matter of adding to it, but [becomes] a question of com-
bining objects in forever changing and unexpected permutations in order to explore their
myriad meanings” (Schubert 2009: 135). The idea of a carefully directed master narrative and
universal, all-­encompassing exhibitions has increasingly become an outdated notion. In 2011,
Tiina R ­ oppola referred to an approaching “revolution in museology, which no longer views
museums simply as providing spaces for displaying objects but as environments for experience”
(­Roppola 2011: 38)—community social events, movie screenings, and even yoga classes offered
in the museum’s spaces. The injection of movement and interaction into the gallery transformed
the white-cube space into a social arena, providing a more vibrant and unique experience for
participants. The activities brought people from different communities together for a shared
experience, fostering new relationships through participation.
Nevertheless, for many of us, the gallery space continues to have negative associations, with
art viewed as elitist, galleries as exclusive, and the contents rendered almost incomprehensible
without expert curatorial guidance. It is hard to imagine a space more closely connected to
the prejudices and values—the snobbery—of the upper middle classes. Though the white-cube
remains the preferred mode of presentation in most contemporary galleries, artists and curators
are increasingly challenged to rethink the role of the viewer, giving them a new sense of agency.
It is within this frame that teamLab’s founders refer to the concept of “ultra-subjective space”—a
blurring of the concept of borders, of the relationship between art, exhibition, and audience.1 The
newest challenge to exhibitions, in other words, is how to maintain a museum’s relevance, how
to keep visitors and funding flowing in. The exhibition concept, it seems, has been challenged
to reinvent itself again.

Enter teamLab
Founded in 2001 by a group of Tokyo University graduates, teamLab has grown into an inter-
disciplinary group of close to five hundred “ultratechnologists,” consisting of artists, scientists,
engineers, mathematicians, computer graphics animators, and graphic designers. Their col-
laborative practice “seeks to navigate the confluence of art, science, technology, design and the
240  n  Exhibitions

natural world,” exploring new relationships between humans and nature, and between oneself
and others through art.2 Initially, teamLab took their work around the world, exhibiting their
installations in museums as diverse as San Francisco’s Asian Art Museum, Melbourne’s National
Gallery of Victoria, Istanbul’s Borusan Contemporary, and Singapore’s National Museum. The
collective has also staged many outdoor exhibitions over the last number of years, from smaller
single installations, such as at the Koboke Gorge in Tokushima, to large-scale shows in Beijing
and the Shibuya area of Tokyo.
Produced in collaboration with local urban landscape developer Mori Building Co. Ltd., the
group’s most significant project to date, teamLab Borderless, is billed as the world’s first digital
art museum, and was unveiled in Odaiba, Tokyo, on 21 June 2018 to much fanfare. The massive
(over 10,000 square meters) immersive institution features multiple 3-D spaces that revolve
around the theme of “borderless,” that point to the free-flowing nature of the boundary-free
installations that transcend the various rooms, and that communicate and even blend in with
other artworks. Using over five hundred computers and four hundred and fifty projectors, the
exhibition uses technology to project animations onto every available surface: walls and floors,
mirrors, and visitors. It is a complex feat, since the projectors, which are emitting images onto
a massive area, have to be meticulously engineered and programmed to work together while
computers render graphics on the spot.
The first floor of the museum is occupied by “Borderless World,” an installation area loosely
divided into several subspaces. Unlike the carefully directed paths of many traditional galleries,
there is no map or set course to follow, since all of the spaces are connected. Instead, visitors
are encouraged to “get lost” and figure out a route for themselves. Because the animations are
computer generated in real time, the artwork is fluid; the projections change and respond to
human interaction, allowing visitors to become part of the installation. In “Forest of Flowers
and People,” for example, animated flowers bloom around anyone who stays still for a moment,
and shed their petals if someone steps on them (Figures 1 and 2). At the same time, music is
used to create a sense of euphoria and adds to the multisensory experience. Elsewhere, visitors
physically climb up on to a rock at the bottom of a waterfall, becoming smaller rocks themselves
that change the flow of the water falling from the space above (Figure 3). Along the walls of the
corridors of the museum, one may encounter a tiger made of flowers or butterflies that have
escaped from the other rooms.
A key to the experience is a dedicated smartphone app that allows users to shape the envi-
ronment they are standing in: “When you control the app, the artwork reacts, helping visitors
create a scene that will never be repeated again,” says teamLab. “The internet connection is
what makes this artwork possible.”3 By making the visitor an integral part of the world’s first
digital art museum, teamLab demonstrates how technology and art can work together to bring
people closer. “Crystal Universe,” for example, which was created out of over 170,000 tiny LEDs
(light-emitting diodes), uses lights to create an immersive 4-D environment. Visitors interact
with elements of the installation using a smartphone, which might change the color or patterns
of the lights, but the installation is also influenced by the movement of every person inside it,
which means that one’s experience is always unique (Figure 4). Transcending traditional static
media, in other words, the visitor (and visitors together) becomes the protagonist, introducing
an entirely new way of experiencing the interior domain of the exhibition.
Compared to a traditional exhibition experienced as a passive observer, in other words,
“teamLab encourages people to find an increased awareness of those around them . . . the art
draws attention to and influences the relationship between the people observing and interacting
with it—the presence of visitors becomes part of the art itself ” (Senda 2018). Even further, many
of the works are able to spontaneously alter themselves, communicate with each other, and
 Exhibitions  n 241

Figures 1 and 2. In “Forest of Flowers and People,” digital flowers bloom around visitor who stand still
for a moment, and then react (shed their petals or disappear) when touched. Courtesy Stokes-Rees.

Figure 3. Images react to the presence of people, flowing and moving around
them like rocks obstructing a waterfall’s flow. Courtesy Stokes-Rees.
242  n  Exhibitions

Figure 4. In “Crystal Universe,” visitors interact with the artwork via a smartphone app, changing the
colors and patterns of 170,000 LEDs to create an immersive 4-D environment. Courtesy Stokes-Rees.

mutually penetrate each other, meaning that live and before visitors’ eyes more and more unique
works are created seemingly out of nothing, the final form of which is unknown to anyone.
Stepping out of the traditional material boundaries of canvas, paint, frame, and gallery, the entire
experience is about going on a journey of discovery, much of which inevitably happens through
one’s senses, rather than through being “told” what to think or know by an omnipresent narrator.
The second floor of the museum, “Athletics Forest,” is effectively a playground, with an uneven
floor and 3-D shapes, where visitors are encouraged to use their bodies to engage with the
artwork. Some of the spaces, such as “Boing Boing Universe,” require some significant phys-
ical effort as visitors “distort” the space by jumping or sliding to create nebulae and stars. In
“Weightless Forest of Resonating Life,” large balloons become interactive objects of light, chang-
ing color upon human touch, with nearby balloons copying the behavior of each other in a chain,
meaning that color traveling from balloon to balloon signals that someone else is there with
you (Figure 5). It is a space that encourages you to explore the surroundings with your body,
promoting creativity and spatial awareness: “Throwing one’s whole body into the art causes
the border established between oneself and an artwork to become ambiguous—to melt away”
(Aono 2018). Those preferring something more subdued flock to the “Sketch Aquarium,” where
paper and crayons are provided for the creation of sea creatures, and visitors can then have their
drawings scanned to become part of a digital aquarium—an act of experimental co-creation
(Figure 6). Across the museum, Toshiyuki Inoko (one of the five founders of teamLab) and the
team desire a connection between the visitors’ experience of the artwork and life outside it, where
the ability to manipulate and alter the surroundings, and the knock-on effect of this for other
visitors, serves to make people aware of their surroundings and the presence of others, and how
the world might be changed through collective action.
 Exhibitions  n 243

Figure 5. Changing color in reaction to human touch, “Weightless Forest of Resonating Life” invites
physical exploration, blurring boundaries between art/artist/visitor. Courtesy Stokes-Rees.

And indeed, in many ways it is impossible to visit the same museum twice. The museum is
not called Borderless for nothing—the art moves freely. Walking down hallways, you might find
yourself with interesting company, as a lively procession of performers joins you, only to fade as
you reach your destination. The art is dynamic and constantly in motion. In just a few minutes,
you can experience a change of scenery—a burst of purple flowers here, a shower of sunflowers
there—even while standing in the same spot. Step back into that same flower forest a little later,
and you might find that the seasons have changed. In another area, touching butterflies may
cause them to scatter, and down the hall tapping a samurai on the shoulder will make him turn
around, grunt, or fall asleep. One of the most popular works in the gallery is one of very few
installations that actually takes place in a separate closed room, where 64 light beams dance
together in a spectacular show. But, the animation sequence is only initiated when certain ob-
jects from other spaces, such as butterflies and crows, appear outside the room. In other words,
the work is created out of visitors’ interactions—their presence alters the surroundings and the
journey of the objects. In the words of Naoko Aono, one of the five founders of teamLab:
Normally, artworks in museums are separated by borders. In an exhibition of Van Gogh’s
works, for example, a display of one of his Sunflowers alongside his The Starry Night would
traditionally have the two separated by means of frames, a wall, and the like. At teamLab
Borderless, the artworks jump out of the room in which they are originally located and move
to another room, where they intermingle with the other works already there, and with the
space they had previously filled being taken up by another artwork newly coming in. Through
that act of intermingling and mixing with each other, communication results between the
various works. By eradicating the “frame” of the display, the whole space transforms into an
artwork that completely envelops all the viewers within. (Aono 2018)
244  n  Exhibitions

Figure 6. Visitors’ drawings instantly become a co-created element

of teamLab’s installation. Courtesy Stokes-Rees
 Exhibitions  n 245

Figure 7. Art is in transit from space to space alongside visitors, and can be
interacted with as an individual or group. Courtesy Stokes-Rees

As digital art exists outside of the constraints of materiality, in teamLab Borderless the building
may be a significant physical structure, but somehow its presence—its walls and corridors and
ceilings—melt into the background. There are no clearly defined or signposted spaces (other
than the bathrooms and a small tearoom); the different worlds seamlessly blend into each other,
and the function of the physical structure is rendered invisible. The effect is uncanny and stands
in stark contrast to the countless iconic museum buildings of the twentieth century. One only
need think of Solomon R. Guggenheim’s museum, designed in 1943 to house a collection of
abstract art on a 5th Avenue corner in Manhattan, to appreciate the extent to which museum
architecture in the twentieth century has frequently competed for attention with the collections
on display. In a city short on outdoor spaces, moreover, teamLab blurs the boundaries between
exterior and interior spaces—streetscapes are brought inside with parades of animals and musi-
cians up and down the corridors, parks abound with butterflies and flowers—each internal space
echoes the city’s traditional outdoor gathering places, opening a new perspective from which
to think about the interface between interior and exterior, and how we conceive of city spaces.
The creative use of every part of the building’s interior further draws attention to one’s own
movement from space to space—the act of transition—as if strolling down one of Tokyo’s busy
city streets. These are also spaces where many of the artworks are also “in transit,” commuting
from room to room as inhabitants move from place to place. Visitors might see parades of rabbits
carrying frogs, rivers of lotuses, or cherry blossoms drifting through, or wandering animals made
from golden flowers that scatter petals in their wake when touched (Figure 7). In incorporating
the act of touch as so central to the exhibit, teamLab encourages seeing the actions of other
people as part of the art. In an interview with designboom, teamLab commented that unlike in
246  n  Exhibitions

a traditional museum where being alone is a blessing, in Borderless one inevitably pays more
attention to the actions of other viewers—since the art is interactive—than you would looking at
a traditional painting. And indeed, teamLab desires visitors to experience the art together and to
interact with it both individually and as a group. They view this as an important unifying factor
both of art and of the effect of people living in cities—if only there were interactive art all over
the subways and crowded streets, teamLab suggests, perhaps we might all play with each other
a bit more! In the words of Shuhei Senda:
In modern cities, the presence of other people around us as well as their unpredictable and
uncontrollable behavior is often seen as an inconvenience to be endured. This is because the
presence of each person and those in their vicinity do not have a visible effect on the city. If
entire cities were to be wrapped in the type of digital art conceived of by teamLab, we believe that
people would begin to see the presence of other residents in a more positive light. (Senda 2018)

Without a doubt, a key characteristic of life in Tokyo is the strict separation of one’s workplace
and residence, and the monotonous, repetitive, and interactionless transition between the two.
This urban model results not only in long-distance commuting and consequent loss of free time
for people, but also in the gradual removal of lifestyle culture and greenery from the urban
environment. teamLab’s desire is to play a part in the rebuilding of an urban culture that goes
beyond providing a physical stage for the pursuit of economic activities, that requires citizens to
make eye contact, and that points to the necessity of human interaction in the creation of cities
that are more than the home–work divide and that also provide time to enjoy culture and restore
nature—vitality—to the urban environment.

Conclusion
Embarking on a journey inside teamLab Borderless, it is hard not to get the impression that
what one is experiencing is a completely new type of art and a new era of exhibitionary practice.
What is static and predictable in traditional museums and exhibitions has evolved into a multi-
dimensional, interactive experience stimulating the imagination and physical body in previously
unknown ways. Most importantly, the artworks presented in the Borderless interiors are not the
focus, but the people experiencing them and the world outside the exhibition’s walls. The creators
put visitors in the role of the “main character,” as they become the narrators and instigators of
modern art and of the future of the natural and urban environments.
Centering on the concept of understanding the world through the senses and thinking of
the world in 3D, Borderless presents us with a new genre of exhibit experience—an example
of an extremely interesting change that can be observed in many kinds of cultural spaces: the
transition from the role of a passive observer to participant and co-creator. teamLab’s vision
exemplifies a new conception of urban interiority that creates alternative spatial environments
and social experiences within the exhibit realm. Blurring the boundaries between spaces, art-
works, and the relationships between visitors, the art, and each other, moreover, teamLab’s use of
digital technology has allowed art to liberate itself from the physical and transcend boundaries.
­teamLab bridges the conceptual gap between humans and nature, and between oneself and
the world: “One is in the other and the other in one. Everything exists in a long, fragile yet
­miraculous, borderless continuity of life.”4

Emily Stokes-Rees,
Syracuse University
 Exhibitions  n 247

n NOTES
1. teamLab. n. d. “Ultrasubjective Space and Digital Art.” www.teamlab.art/?submit=Ultra+Subjective+
Space (accessed 1 August 2019).
2. teamLab. n. d. “Biography.” www.teamlab.art/about/ (accessed 1 August 2019).
3. Creative Europe Desk. 2019. “Inside the World’s First Digital Art Museum” https://transformwithceduk
.com/2019/11/25/inside-the-worlds-first-digital-art-museum/ (Accessed 1 November 2019).
4. Paraphrased from http://.borderless.teamlab.art (accessed 1 August 2019).

n REFERENCES
Aono, Naoko. 2018. “The Vision of Toshiyuki Inoko, a Founder of teamLab.” pen-online, 29 August.
https://pen-online.com/arts/the-vision-of-toshiyuki-inoko-a-founder-of-teamlab/?scrolled=1.
Klonk, Charlotte. 2009. Spaces of Experience: Art Gallery Interiors from 1800 to 2000. New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press.
Neil, Tim. 2018. “The Second Moment of Creation.” Episode 1 of the television series, Civilizations.
Arlington, VA: PBS.
O’Doherty, Brian. (1976) 1999. Inside the White Cube: The Ideology of the Gallery Space. Berkeley: Uni-
versity of California Press.
Roppola, Tiina. 2011. Designing for the Museum Visitor Experience. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Schubert, Karsten. 2009. The Curator’s Egg: The Evolution of the Museum Concept from the French Revo-
lution to the Present Day. London: Ridinghouse.
Senda, Shuhei. 2018. “Borderless and Brilliant: teamLab’s Dreamlike Digital Art Museum Is now Open.”
designboom, 15 July. www.designboom.com/art/teamlab-mori-building-digital-art-museum-open
-interview-07-15-2018.

View publication stats