rachel whiteread’s “house”: the rejective resonance

She was the first female artist to win the annual Turner Prize in 1993. However, the piece that brought her fame and success is considered to be highly controversial. The work was called House, which was a concrete cast of a house with the use of industrial materials like rubber, metal, and plaster. The sculpture itself was only visible to passers-by as a wall of hardened concrete which was mimicking the structure of an urban house that used to be standing on that same piece of land, but was demolished by the government. Because the meaning of House was left open for interpretation, reactions to it varied widely. These circumstances caused a huge public resonance, a drastic part of which was highly negative.

One of the first personas whose opinion on Rachel Whiteread’s work is quite known to be cited is the opinion of Mr. Gale, an evicted resident of the house that used to stand on the land where Whiteread later created her art. He said - “They’re taking the wee-wee.’ He questioned, ‘How can they get grants for arts projects when we can’t get grants for homes? I could have bought a new home for my family with this money.” From Mr. Gale’s words it can be assumed that he didn’t quite take interest in art. When mentioning the issue of money, he is referring to the grants that Rachel Whiteread got for this sculpture, which were: The Turner prize in size of £20,000 pounds and another grant from the K foundation in size of £40,000.

While at first, the government was working towards a peaceful solution, later on, an order was given to complete the demolition of House in a shorter period of time, which only gave the sculpture eighty days to live. On January 11th 1994, the sculpture was fully removed within a short time of two hours. Eric Flounders, head of the Bow Neighbourhood Council, revealed his thoughts on Whiteread’s artwork, he called it “utter rubbish” and proclaimed it to be “... a little entertainment for the gallery-going classes of Hampstead”. The work was removed with the use of an earthmover and the worker operating it, Joe Cullen, had a very strong opinion on the matter of the creation of House: “It's not art, it's a lump of concrete”, he said.

Joe Cullen and Mr. Gale were not the only “commoners” who expressed their point of view regarding Rachel Whiteread’s sculpture in public. A graffiti appeared on the artwork itself saying “WOT FOR?”. Shortly, someone else replied by adding another phrase to the wall - “WHY NOT”.

… it raised pressing questions regarding degrading housing stock and what should be done with it, the creeping gentrification of a historically tight working class community and skepticism towards the authority of those instigating change for the supposed ‘greater good’. In whose name was this change really for? And poignantly, it confronted these questions on its own material terms – concrete being the material used to fix the original Victorian House’s bricks… 

(Thacker, 2015)

The questions written on the side of House are almost pursuing passersby to reflect on the purpose of the sculpture on their own, they are making the public take a side through their personal analysis of the current scene.Through public reactions, the sculpture almost “undressed” the political figures that were behind demolishing houses in old neighbourhoods, and unveiled their way of thinking and critical analysis.

read more:

Artangel.org.uk. (2019). House. [online] Available at: https://www.artangel.org.uk/project/house/.

Barnes, R. (8AD). No more house work: With House, Rachel Whiteread joined politics, art and anger. Now she has a new work. The Guardian, p.28.

Dazed Media, Gavin, F. and Pearch, O. (2013). Rachel Whiteread. [online] Dazed. Available at: https://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/16859/1/rachel-whiteread.

Higgins, C. (2007). Rachel Whiteread. [online] The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2007/sep/08/art10.

Hoffman, D. (1993). Wot For? Why Not? [Photo] romsnrosdlondon.com. Available at: https://romanroadlondon.com/rachel-whitereads-house-bows-legacy/.

John, D. (1993). House. [Photo] Public Delivery.

Lingwood, J. and Phaidon Press Limited (1995). Making House. Artangel.

Lister, D. (1993). Turner Prize won by “worst” artist. [online] The Independent. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/turner-prize-won-by-worst-artist-1506249.html.

public delivery.org. (2021). Why Did Rachel Whiteread’s House Earn Her the Title Worst Artist? – Public Delivery. [online] Available at: https://publicdelivery.org/rachel-whiteread-house/#The_audience_wondering_what_the_meaning_could_be.

Takac, B. (2020). Re-Inhabiting the Rachel Whiteread House | Widewalls. [online] www.widewalls.ch. Available at: https://www.widewalls.ch/magazine/rachel-whiteread-house.

Thacker, S. (2015). Why was Rachel Whiteread’s House demolished? | Roman Road LONDON. [online] Roman Road LONDON. Available at: https://romanroadlondon.com/rachel-whitereads-house-bows-legacy/.

Warde-Aldam, D. (2013). Ghost House: 20 Years since Rachel Whiteread’s “House” | Apollo Magazine. [online] Apollo Magazine. Available at: https://www.apollo-magazine.com/house/.