The Museum Labyrinth

Aksel Gerrit (date unknown)

As Gramont tells us, the structural components that govern the essential nature of the labyrinth have been rigorously codified since, at least, the Interiorists. The work of Aaldi, and of course that of Magarelli, Oriolo and Ungarn, posits rigorous and well-substantiated schemas, elements of which have proved foundational for our current epoch's understanding of what is meant by labyrinth. Indeed, much of contemporary Western labyrinthology has been, in large part, a quest for extrication from the entanglements Gollesten's synthetic totalism. Our recent discussions of the late Kobrin have brought our attention to the school which John and I, as well as others in the field (most notably Philip Cunha, Jacques Oligreff and Wim Cruhs) have begun refer to as Acentrism. Recent findings offer compelling evidence that we should consider the work of the late Kobrin as emblematic of an aesthetic and ideological shift from neo-recursivism, a mode of which his early labyrinths proved archetypal, into this fascinating, even troubling, mode of construction.

In the last few weeks, I've become particularly curious about the extent to which the late Kobrin appears to be influenced by the controversial writings of Aksel Gerrit, prompting me to begin correspondence with the Dutch labyrinthologist Alvilda Jeppesen, translator of the definitive English volume of Gerrit's labyrinthology.

Jeppesen at the Bern Labyrinthological Circle Summit (2006)

Jeppesen, familiar with CORRIDOR's revamp of Kobrin's Basin labyrinth, had yet to hear of my harrowing navigation of the Manuas Cave Labyrinth. Once aware of my experience, as well as Cruemer's reports of the seemingly unnavigable structure of the Basin labyrinth, she immediately made the connection between the late Kobrin's "quasi-nihilistic" tendencies and Gerrit's call for the introduction of a fourth center as a fundamental structural component of the labyrinth. Alvilda has given consent for me to copy some elucidating thoughts from our exchange below:

Alex,

Indeed. The connections between Kobrin's labyrinthecture in the Amazon Basin and Gerrit's labyrinthology are profound. It appears that Kobrin attempted to enact in labyrinthecture Gerrit's purely theoretical notions about sovereignty and preservation. Gerrit was possessed by the idea that the labyrinth should never be navigated or "solved." Having studied in Malaysia with Ah-Pei, seeing the Monsoon Mud Labyrinths firsthand, his labyrinthology was simply engineered in that direction - towards the purposefully unnavigable, the "museum labyrinth" as some have dubbed it. As you've noted, Kobrin appears to have been attempting to realize a labyrinth with a fourth center - that is, a deceptively authentic telos point in which the navigator, thinking he has reached the center, finds himself with four previously unavailable navigational options, none of which allow for successful eggresion.

As Gerrit succinctly put it, "it is in the fourth center that the autonomy and superiority of the labyrinth, divorced from traditional and interiorist notions of form and structure, assert themselves most fully. The navigator has tread on sacred ground, but not on the most sacred of grounds, he is given false hope, he is made to believe the lie of navigation before making his ultimately final 'choice' as a walker." What is most alarming here, as you pointed out, is that, in the case of the late Kobrin, these ideas are enacted, disseminated into the realm of the navigatory.

Jeppesen will give a panel on "Gerrit and The Curved Juncture" at this year's NASCLS in Benesov. Details on the conference will be posted here once finalized.