Jeu.
- Anna Lilli Garai
- Mar 14
- 8 min read
Jeu. is an experimental artist duo founded in 2020 by architect Hideaki Nishimura and artist Yumi Toyama, merging architecture, mathematics, and luxury fashion into a distinctive spatial practice. Their work explores space, structure, and perception through installations, animations, and architectural projects, guided by three core principles: Spatiality, Dynamicity, and Constructivity. Blurring the boundaries between painting and architecture, Jeu. introduces a dynamic, three-dimensional approach they call "Architectonic Painting." In works like "Suspended Gravity" and "Geometry of Restraint—Circle inside Reuleaux," they challenge the flatness of traditional painting, inviting viewers to engage from shifting spatial perspectives.
Q: Your work blends architecture, mathematics, and art. How did these diverse backgrounds come together to form the foundation of "Jeu."?
A: In contemporary society, where countless personal stories coexist and are shared—perpetuating an endless cycle of comparisons, hierarchies, and consumption—we are drawn not to works that prioritise self-expression or emotional storytelling, but to something that transcends individual subjectivity: an absolute, objective framework that defines space, order, and perception.
As essential foundations for this pursuit, mathematics, architecture, and art have been an inevitable presence throughout our context—not as an intended choice, but as a natural consequence.
We do not regard these domains as isolated fields to be merged, but rather as fundamental components of a single language that describes our world.
In this language, mathematical rules serve as grammar, architectural principles translate them into physical form, and artistic intervention introduces new layers of meaning and perception—broadening spatial experience and transforming static space into a dynamic field of thought and interpretation.
Through the interplay of these three elements, our work does not rely on subjective narratives but instead seeks to explore the underlying laws and rhythms inherent in space.
Q: "2.5-Dimensional Constructs" is one of your signature series, where tension force plays a significant role. How does the interaction between structure and tension influence the movement of the piece?
A: The interaction of structure and tension in "2.5-Dimensional Constructs" operates like a paradoxical mechanism—the force that threatens to tear the work apart is also the one that supports its form.
Whereas traditional sculpture shapes material directly through techniques such as carving or casting, our work defines its form through the dynamic equilibrium of tension, applied as an active generative force onto a meticulously designed wooden framework.
Within this construct, the traces of force and the reverberations of movement persist—an inherent dynamicity embedded within its static structure.
Furthermore, the interplay between structure and tension generates a void within the work.
Like the negative space in architecture or the rests in music, this void is not a passive absence but an active element that attunes the audience to the underlying forces and structural mechanisms within the work, encouraging a reconfiguration of spatial perception.
Ultimately, in our work, movement lies not in the physical transformation of the piece, but in the spatial dialogue between structure, tension, and the viewers' perception.
Q: "Geometry of Restraint—Circle inside Reuleaux" explores the relationship between dynamicity and restraint. What role does the concept of restraint play in this piece and how does it contribute to the overall tension?
A: Among geometric relationships, the state of single-point contact is particularly fascinating.It maintains a static balance while carrying an unsettling tension.
In our work, "GEOMETRY OF RESTRAINT," this notion of single-point contact extends into structure through the lens of 'restraint,' where spatial relationships such as inscribed and circumscribed configurations transcend mere composition and evoke dynamicity within perception. Conventionally, 'restraint' is perceived as a form of limitation, yet in this work, it operates as a condition that generates dynamic tension. It is not merely a force of suppression but one that introduces instability, evoking the anticipation of latent motion.Through this restrained energy, spatial tension is heightened, allowing the aesthetics of stillness and the expectation of motion to coexist. The equilibrium in this work is thus established through the interplay of restriction and release, wherein restraint functions not as a mere constraint but as an active force that gives rise to dynamicity.
Q: In "Suspended Gravity," you incorporate architectonic logic into the work. How do you balance the dualities of gravity and suspension in this piece, both visually and spatially?
A: The title "SUSPENDED GRAVITY" itself plays on a paradox, capturing the very essence of this work.
In this context, the notion of gravity embodies both Newtonian and Einsteinian physics. At an everyday scale, as seen when an apple falls from a tree, gravity acts as a force that pulls objects downward, whereas at a cosmic scale, it manifests as the curvature of spacetime. The work constructs this duality of gravity through the spatial and visual counterbalance of structure and tension, both grounded in architectural logic.
While its self-supporting form imparts the structural stability and architectonic order of an arch, the tension-induced curvature, coupled with the suspended hemisphere and the stepped gradient applied to the arch’s surface, generates a perceptual dilemma.
This interplay reveals the multifaceted aspects of gravity—not only falling and floating but also the warping of space and time—evoking a physical sensation of being drawn into the artwork.
"Is what I perceive actually falling, floating, or the very distortion of spacetime itself?"
In this way, this work does not simply depict gravity but reflects its dual nature through architectonic principles, seamlessly guiding the act of observation into spatial contemplation and interpretation.
Q: "Dimensionality in Perception" challenges the traditional notion of flatness in painting. How does the manipulation of perspective and depth create a dynamic dialogue between two-dimensional and three-dimensional spaces?
A: The essence of "DIMENSIONALITY IN PERCEPTION" lies in the coexistence of multiple dimensions. Whereas traditional painting depicts depth directly on a flat canvas, this work does not rely on pictorial representation.
Instead, through structural operations—such as the shape of the frame, the repetitive arrangement of elements, and physical transformation—it generates multiple vanishing points and establishes a spatial construction that, like Giorgio de Chirico’s paintings, resists being converged into a single viewpoint.
As a result, intersecting dimensions emerge simultaneously, constantly unsettling the viewer’s perception. In this context, the viewer simultaneously experiences overlapping spatial conditions, oscillating between perceiving it as a debossed surface and as a constructed space. Thus, the boundary between two-dimensionality and three-dimensionality ceases to hold significance in this work, as the viewer’s shifting perspective continuously reshapes spatial perception. It is not merely a visual illusion but rather a new mode of dimensionality.
Q: The idea of spatiality is central to your work, especially with your 'Architectonic Paintings.' How do you define spatiality in relation to the viewer’s experience with the artwork?
A: "What is Spatiality?"
This question cuts to the core of our creation.
"How is this piece made?"
"I want to touch this bulging surface."
"If I look behind it, will I understand something?"
When we hear such words filled with wonder and curiosity from viewers standing before our work, we sense the very moment when what we call 'spatiality' begins to take shape within them.
For Jeu., spatiality is not merely a volumetric attribute; it emerges from the viewer’s perception and expands through their thought. This perspective is deeply connected to our exploration of spatial concepts, as our work exists at the intersection of architecture and art. In the "Architectonic Paintings" series, space is not a passive backdrop but a central agent shaped by frame and tension.
It does not merely depict space; rather, it seeks to construct a mechanism that reexamines space itself.
This approach is grounded in the structural duality of the 'visible' and the 'invisible,' drawing on architectonic methodology. Within the interactive relationships of surface and frame, membrane and void, and matter and force, our work cannot truly be grasped or fully experienced through visual information alone.
The interplay between visible and invisible elements naturally encourages the viewer’s awareness of the hidden structures and forces at play, assembling spatial configurations within their own perception.Consequently, space extends beyond the physical, unfolding within the realm of thought and interpretation—this, for us, is 'spatiality'. In this framework, we place great importance on a 'conceptual distance' between our work and the viewer. While both engage with space, our approach fundamentally differs from certain forms of so-called 'immersive art,' which have gained popularity by offering direct and sensory experiences. We do not regard 'immersion' as simply overwhelming the viewer with visual spectacle or enclosing them in a physical environment. Rather than dissolving the boundary between the audience and space, what we define as immersion lies in perceiving space as an object of inquiry and deepening viewers' engagement with it through contemplation. Our work offers an experience that transcends mere sensory stimulation, inducing a 'play of observation, reflection, and interpretation.'
In essence, spatiality is the expansion of conceptual dimensions within the viewer's inquisitive mind, and the 'depth' in our work is therefore not defined by physical scale but by how far it extends in their perception and imagination.
Q: Your work often shifts between the realms of painting and sculpture. How do you navigate this boundary, and what do you aim to achieve through this transformation?
A: Certainly, while our work can be classified as painting in that it involves the application of paint onto a support, it simultaneously exhibits sculptural qualities, possessing physical volume and shifting in appearance depending on the viewer’s perspective.
However, instead of merely following a traditional categorisation or genre classification, we focus on the generative principles and dimensionality of the work.
Its form is neither rendered as in painting nor carved or cast as in sculpture, but emerges within space through the interplay of structure, tension, and void.In this sense, our work is informed by architectonic methodology, rather than painting or sculpture.
Architecture constructs a spatial framework through an assemblage of structural elements and the balancing of dynamic forces; likewise, our work defines space itself and shapes the viewer’s spatial perception.
Here, painting is no longer an act of depicting a subject but serves as a compositional element of spatial structure, while the canvas, once a passive support in conventional painting, has now transformed into a tension-induced curved surface that actively forms space.
Similarly, within our approach, the enduring stability of sculpture, achieved with direct material manipulation, is replaced by 'stillness in tension'—sustained through dynamic equilibrium, holding the imprint of latent motion.
In this way, we seek to reconfigure and integrate the elements of painting and sculpture into our work, transcending their boundary to envision a 'small architecture.'
Q: With your architectural background, how do you approach the concept of 'Constructivity' in your work, and how does it influence the relationship between form and structure in your pieces?
A: This question also strikes at the heart of Jeu.’s creative philosophy.
Constructivity is, for us, not merely the structural function that ensures the physical stability of a work, but a definitive principle that systematises the relationships between objects and space, structure and force, manifesting them as tangible, perceptible form.
Our work, like tensile structures in architecture, is constructed through the interplay of meticulously designed wooden frameworks, carefully calibrated tension, and the voids that emerge within the piece.
This, in essence, aligns with the architectural approach whereby structure organises spatial elements and imbues the void with meaning and experience. Our work likewise defines three-dimensional form through structure, not only establishing a visual presence but also drawing attention to the structural and dynamic forces operating beneath its surface.
Realising such constructivity, whether in architecture or in Jeu.’s work, requires detailed planning and precise drawings before actual construction commences.
In the context of art, "drawing" is commonly perceived as a sketch or linear rendering, but for us, it signifies the act of developing a blueprint that defines the structure and form of a work.
We find little interest in creation that overly relies on spontaneity or momentary inspiration.
A drawing is the visual manifestation of a logically controlled framework that eliminates arbitrariness and enhances reproducibility, within which the conceptual and constructive approach of the work is condensed.
In this sense, it can even hold almost the same value as the finished piece.
Nevertheless, no matter how perfect the drawing or how meticulously the structure is designed, it is the tension—essentially an uncontrollable dynamic force—that ultimately determines the resulting form, and hence, there will inevitably be slight deviations.
Structure gives rise to form; in architecture, 100% precision is required, yet our work is built upon 99% planning and 1% unpredictability.
Through this 1%, constructivity encompasses slight unpredictability, bringing a subtle surprise to the intended form—this serendipity, for us, constitutes the very essence of the realm of art.