contemporary architecture essay
WEEK 11 READINGS/.DS_Store
__MACOSX/WEEK 11 READINGS/._.DS_Store
WEEK 11 READINGS/Derrida_Point_de_folie.pdf
1986 1_
Jacques Derrida "Point de folie - Maintenant I'architecture" Essay accompanying the portfolio
Bernard Tschumi, La Case Vide: La Villette 1985 (london: Architectural Association,
1986), essay trans. Kate Linker
What Jacques Derrida calls his double writing (ecriture double) provokes, on the one hand, an inver!iion of the general cultural domination he everywhere identifies with Western metaphysics and enacts, on the other hand: a new text that, necessarily,
P~ni<:ipClte!iin the very principles it decon~tru_~~s, but participates as an invasion, releasing the dissonance of the inherited order. In his essay on Bernard Tschumi's La Case Vide- the "folio-folie" that presents the conceptual structure of Tschumi's Parc
(de la Villette- Derrida projects onto architecture the same formulation: I' architec t ture double disrupts the entire given architectural system and, j~st for a mome,nt, ~ takes over the field.
i
Architecture theory had already constructed for itself an account of meaning based on a generalized system an architectural langue - understood as necessary for the production and intelligibility of architectural events-parole, the messages, usages, and effects of the generalized code. But the relationship between langue and parole produces an aporia. The norms and regularities of the language, its structure, are a product of all the prior architectur.a ..1eve. nt.s..; yet e ..ach event is itself made possible by the prior structure. There can be no ~!tginary_~v~N that might have produced the structure - an event comprising, say, a point, a line, and a surface - for such an event is already structurally distributed and arranged. Neither is the structure ever present; there are no full, positive elements of meaning but only differentiation and referral to other elements. A point, for example, can function as a signifier only insofar as it differs from a line and a surface and, moreover, traces those forms, refers
~, 1\ to those forms, which it is not. Thus meaning is not a presence but rather is the effect , of a generalized economy of absences.
Derrida's term for this g~~a.b.s.e!1~J.s_ctL@r:qEf~ (differ ence-differing-deferring), which alludes to the undecidability of this altern'ation of structure and event and to the nonoriginary origin of meaning's infinite play. Meaning
;L is not inexhaustible in the sense t. ha.. t ther.e are infinite possible interpretations; rather \ meanings are maintained in tb.f..<;![re!:ttofJ.mrogaoi.ng. An analogous term is ~,
which he uses throughout the following essay. "Differance, then, is a structureaii-d a movement no longer conceivable on the basis of the opposition presence/absence. Differance is the systema!iC;Ql~LQf differences, of the traces of differences, of the spacing by means of which elements-ar; related to each other. This spacing is the simultaneously active and passive ... production of the intervals without which the 'full' terms would not signify, would not function.'"
I Deconstruction ordinarily does its work by locating the moment in a text where meaning is supposed to be antecedent to differance, exposing the
I i
untenable metaphysics of that supposition, and reversing the hierarchy. In the in stance of La Case Vide, however, the architecture's complex signifying practice is al ready divided against itself; the undecidability of its meanings (though meaning is the wrong word) is built into the architecture and its workings. Such a text cannot be deconstructed, since its repetitions, substitutions, and gaps have already been "marked" by its author and by the architecture. What Derrida shows, then, is the
text's exorbitance- not only its effacements, tracings and retracings, but its excesses, itsburstTngtnrough conceptual repressions.
Derrida graphs the function of architecture as four points, four traits-traces, four corners of a frame: what he elsewhere terms a parergon.' Together, "they translate one and the same postulation: architecture must have a meaning, it must present it and, through it, signify. The signifying or symbolical value of this meaning must direct the structure and syntax, the form and function of architecture. It must direct it from outside, according to a principle (arche), a fundamental or foun dation, a transcendence or finality (te/os) whose locations are not themselves archi tectural." A parergon of architecture is against, above, and beyond the work of( architecture, but it is not incidental; rather it cooperates in the inside operati~~ of ( architecture from the outside. The logic of the parergon is the logic of th~ment. It must be convoked because of a lack in the work - its internal indetermiri-acy-that it comes to frame. The lack that produces the frame is also produced by the frame, and in the moment, precisely, when the work is considered from the point of view of architecture. Thus, like differance, architecture is never present as an event (not pres ent, not even for a moment) but nevertheless can be recovered by a kind of Nachtrag lichkeit, a deferred action in which architecture is constructed and maintained for a moment in the work of architecture by what can be called a textual mechanism- a transcription and a translation. 3
One example of this textual mechanism is the graft, inserti!!& 4 _____ M
.__ • --_,_•• ' __ ••S=~
~J1~!_~i:>_~Q.yrses .intQ.on~., as. itsjteIat,i!lJ,!_~n~.~~plo!j~!~~P!!I/~re.eetitionslth(It Iset' Eisenman I 531-532ensue. "The invention, in this case, consists in crossing ttie--arcFiHecturalmotif with ~
what is most Singular and most parallel in other writings which are themselves drawn into the said madness, in its plural, meaning photographic, cinematographic, choreo graphic, and even mythographic writings .... An architectural writing interprets ... events which are marked by photography or cinematography:' Even the points, lines, and surfaces are here understood as grafts insofar as each system conflicts with and is superimposed on the others.
The graft is included in what Derrida calls "a typology of forms of iteration."4 In La Case Vide it operates along with other forms of iteration like the signature ("the maintenant that I speak of will be this, most irreducible, signature") whose "authenticity" paradoxically depends on its reiterability - and the performa tive ("the event that I make happen or let happen by marking it"), whose very produc tive success depends on its repetition of an already iterable code. s Architecture maintenant is a signing of the architectural contract ("it does not contravene the char ter, but rather draws it into another text"), an j!eration_9f.<mlt~r:.gb.le__(:Q.d~>
But Derrida attributes a more generalized disruption to Tschumi's text, for its thematic figure, the point, comes to both describe and arrest the general series to which it belongs and is, therefore, not a theme at all but the arche-theme behind all the thematic effects. This is the point at which the strains to sustain architecture's contract, its promise, its "charter or metaphysical frame" can
be felt in an uncanny opacity. It is a point of condensation that maintains the perpetual / disruptions and disjunctions, maintains the undecidability of its architecture not in 'polysemousness but in the affirmative power of its infinite generality and unorganiz
able energy. This is Tschumi's madness (or better, the madness of La Case Vide, for . such a system cannot have an intending author): "it maintains the dis-jointed per se."
of reiteration without exhaustion and, importantly, without keeping in reserve.
A final point. Derrida hints at the nontextual nature of institutions be involved in architecture or deconstruction: "Deconstructions would
did not first measure themselves against institutions in their solid their greatest resistance: political structures, levers of economic
the material and phantasmatic apparatuses which connect state, civil society, bureaucracy, cultural power and architectural education." But he does not re
solve how deconstruction can reckon with the forces of an extratextual institu tional
Notes "Point de folie - Maintenant l'architecture" was reprinted in AA Files 12 (Summer 1986).
1. Jacques Derrida, Positions, trans. Alan Bass (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981),
P·27· 2. See Jacques Derrida, The Truth in Painting, trans. Geoff Bennington and Ian McLeod (Chi
cago: University of Chicago Press, 1987). 3. According to the Freudian theory of deferred action, precocious sexual stimulation normally
has no psychopathological repercussions at the time of its occurrence, due to the child's
psychical incapacity to comprehend the act of seduction. With the physiological change of
puberty, however, the mnemic-psychical trace - inscribed in the unconscious as if in an un· known language - would be transformed (rewritten, reiterated) as trauma and displaced as
symptom in neurosis.
4. Jacques Derrida, Speech and Phenomena, and Other Essays on Husserl's Theory of Signs,
trans. David B. Allison (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1973), p. 192.
5. The promise is the standard case of a performative utterance, which constitutes the very act to which it refers. Derrida points out that for a promise to constitute itself, however, it must
be recognizably a repetition of an iterable model of promising. Ibid., pp. 191-192.
UlRRIDA I 1986 I 571 1 986 Jacques Derrida Point de folie- Maintenant r architecture
Maintenant: 1 this French word will not be translated. Why? For reasons, a whole se ries of reasons, which may appear along the way, or even at the end of the road. For here I am undertaking one road or, rather, one course among other possible and concurrent ones: a series of cursive notations through the Folies of Bernard Tschumi, from point to point, and hazardous, discontinuous, aleatory.
Why maintenant? I put away or place in reserve, I set aside the reason to maintain the seal or stamp of this idiom: it would recall the Pare de la Villette in France, and that a pretext gave rise to these Folies. Only a pretext, no doubt, along the way-a station, phase, or in a trajectory. Nevertheless, the pretext was offered in France. In French we say th~t~~hance is offered, but also, do not forget, to offer a resistance.
2 Maintenant, the word will not flutter like the banner of the moment, it will not intro duce burning questions: What about architecture today? What are we to think about the current state of architecture? What is new in this domain? For architecture no longer defines a domain. Maintenant: neither a modernist Signal nor even a salute to post-modernity. The posl-S and posters which proliferate (post-structuralism,
(post-modernism, still surrender to the historicist urge. Everything marks an ( era, even the decentering of the subject: It is as if one again wished
to put a linear succession in order, to periodize, to distinguish between before and after, to limit the risks of reverSibility or repetition, transformation or permutation: an ideology of progress.
3 Maintenant: if the word still designates what happens, has just happened, promises
aSV\l~!1 asthrO!lg!Lil!cllit~C!ure, this imminence of the (just happens, just happened, is just~bo~t to happen) n~' longer lets itself be inscribed in the ordered sequence of a history: it is not a fashion, a period or an era. The maintenant [just now] does not remain a stranger to history, of course, but the rela tion would be different. And if this happens to us, we must be prepared to receive these two words. On the one hand, it does not happen to a constituted us, to a human subjectivity whose essence would be arrested and would then find itself affected by the history of this thing called architecture. We appear to ourselves only through an experience of spacing which is already marked by architecture. What happens through architecture both constructs and instructs this us. The latter finds itself engaged by architecture before it becomes the subject of it: master and pos sessor. On the other hand, the imminence of what happens to us maintenant an nounces not only an architectural event but, more particularly, a writing of space, a mode of spacing which makes a place for the event. If Tschumi's work indeed describes an architecture of the events it is not only in that it constructs places in
which something should happen or to make the construction itself be, as we say, an event. This is not what is essential. The dimension of the event is subsumed in the very structure of the architectural apparatus: sequence, open series, narrative, the cinematic, dramaturgy, choreography.
4
]s~~rc~i!ecty~~,<?i~\'~~~s E()ss!EI~? If what happens to us thus does not come from outside, or rather if this outside engages us in the very thing we are, is there a maintenant of architecture, and in what sense [SeIlS]? Everything indeed DustementJ comes down to the question of meaning [sens]. We shall not reply by indicating a means of access, for example, through a form of architecture: preamble, PIO naos, threshold, methodical route, circle or circulation, labyrinth, flight of stairs, ascent, archaeological regression towards a foundation, etc. Even less through the form of a system, that is, through architectonics: the art of systems, as Kant says. We will not reply by giving access to some final meaning, whose assumption would be finally promised us. No, it is justly Dustement] a question of wh1lJJli!Pfl.W.s-to __~.>< not in the sense of what would finally allow us to arrive at meaning, but
i"'If.'fJ'C,"" to it, to meaning, to the meaning of meaning. And so-and this is the event-what happens to it through an event which, no longer precisely or
falling into the domain of meaning, would be intimately linked to some like madness rIa folie].
5 Not madness [Ia folie], the allegorical hypostaSis of Unreason, non-sense, but the madnesses [les We will have to account with this The folies, then, Bernard Tschumi's folies. Henceforth we will speak of them through metonymy and in a metonymically metonymic manner, since, as we will see, this carries itself away, it has no means within itself to stop itself, any more than the number of Folies in the Pare de la Villette. Folies: it is first of all the name, a proper name in a way, and a signature. Tschumi names in this manner the pOint-grid which distributes a non finite number of elements in a space which it in fact spaces but does not fill. Meton ymy, then, since folies, at designates only a part, a series of parts, precisely the
weave of an ensemble which also includes lines and surfaces, a "sound track" and an "image-track." We will return to the function assigned to this multi plicity of red points. Here, let us note only that it maintains a metonymic relation to the whole of the Parco Through this proper name, in fact, the folies are a common denominator, the "largest common denominator" of this "programmatic decoIl struction." But, in addition, the red point of each folie remains divisible in turn, a point without a point, offered up in its articulated structure to substitutions or combinatory permutations which relate it to other folies as much as to its own parts. Open point and closed point. This double metonymy becomes abyssal when it de termines or overdetermines what opens this proper name (the "Folies" of Bernard
to the vast. semantics of the concept of madness, tbe great name or com mon dellominator of all that happens to when it leaves itself: alienates and dissociates itself without ever been exposes itself to the outside and spaces itself out in vvhat is not itself: not the semantics but first of all, the asemantics of Folies.
6 The folies, then, tbese folies in every sense-for once we can say that they are not on the road to ruin, the ruin of defeat or nostalgia. do nor amount to the "absence of the work" -that fate of madness In the classical of wh ich lioucauJt speaks. Instead,
make up a work, put into How? How can we think that the work can possibly mointain itself in this madness? How can we think the mainlenant of the architectural work? Through a certain adventme of the we are corning to it, maintenant the work-maintenant is the very instant, t.he point of its implo sion. The folies put into a general they draw into it everything that, until maintenant, seems to have architecture meaning. More precisely, every-
that seems to have given architecture over to meanin2. Thev deconstruct first of all, bu I not only. the semantics of architecture.
7 Let us never that there is an architecture of architecture. Down even to its archaic fC)[lI1dation the most fundamental concept of architecture has been constructed. This naturalized architect me is hequeathed to us: we inhahit it, it inhahits us, we think it destined f()I habitation, and i.t is no an object lIS at alL But we must in it an a construction, a monument. It did not fall from the
not even if it informs a scheme of relations to the sky, the tbe human and the divine. This architecture of architecture has a history, it is
historical through and tbrough. Its heritag(' inaugurates the intimacy of our econ omy, the law of our hearth (oHws). our familial, religiOUS and "oikonomy," all the of birth and death, stadium, agora, square.
goes right through us [noliS transitl to the point that we forget its very we take it f()[ nature. It is common sense itsel f.
8 The concept of architecture is itself an inhabited constructum, a which compre hends us even before we could submit it to thought. Certain invariables remain, con stant. all the mutations of architecture. Impassable, imperturbabJe, an axiomatic traverses trw whole history of architecture. An axiomatic. that is to say, an
ensemble of fundamental and evaluations. This bierar has fixed itself in stone; henceforth, it informs the of social space. VVhat
are tbese invariables;> I will artificial charter of four traits, : let us say, rather, of four translate and the same \ (liTe must have [J meaning, it mLlst present it through it, Signify. The or
ical value of this must direct the structure and syntax, the form and function of arcbitecture. It must direct it from according a principle , a funda mental or fClUndatioIl, a transcendence or finality whose locations are not themselves architecturaL The anarclIitec:tural of this semanticism from which,
four points of invariallce derive:
of men other arts)
must be dwelling, the lavl! of oikos, the economy of pi~sence which distinct from the the architectural work seems to have
RRiDA 1986 I 573
been destined for the presence of men and gods. The arrangement, and investment of locations must be measured against this economy. still alludes to it when he bomelessness (Heim[Jtlosigkeit) as the symptom of onto-theology more of modern technology. Behind dw hons
crisis he encourages liS to reflect properly on the real distress poverty and destillltion of dwelling itself (die Not des . Mortals must first learn to cJ\;vell das WiJhnen erst lernen miissen), listen to what calls them to dwe! L This is
a deconstruction, but rather a call repeat the very fundamentals of the architecture that we inhabit that we should Jearn again how to inhabit, the of its meaning. of course, if the folies think through and dislocate this they should not in either to the jll bilat ion of modern technology, or to the maniacal mastery of its powers. That would be a new turn in the same metaphys ics. Hence the diffic]] lty of what, Centered and hierarchized. the architectural had to fall in lme the anamnesis of the origin and the of the foundation. Not the time of irs foundation on the ground of the earth, bl.lt also since its
f()umlation, the institution which commemorates the of the heroes or fCJUnding Despite appearances, this religious or political mem . ory, tllis historicism, has not deserted architecture. Modern architecture retains :/ nostalgia for lt IS Its to be a guardian. An hierarchizing nostal
architecture will matericllize the hierarchy in SlOne or vmod , it is a of the sacred (hieros) and the JJrincipJe (arche), an mhi -hieratics.
subscribes to all
service. This
which is true. that of the coherent a network
on
ory and criticism of architecture, from the most to the most triviaL Such evaluation inscribes the hierarchy in a as well as in the space of a formal distribution of values. But this architectonics of invariable points also
an of what is called Western culture, far its arcbitecture. Hence the contradiction, the double bind or antinomy which at once animates and dis nubs this history. On the one hand, this general architectonics effurfs or exceeds the
of it is valid for other arts and of expCl'i ence as welL On the other hand, forms its most ymy; it gives it its most solid objective suhstance. By I do not mean logical coherence, which all dimensions of human
in the same network: there is no of architecture without inter or even economiC, religious, political,
cree. Rut I also mean duration, hardness, the mOllumental mi neral or suhsistence, the of tradition. T-Ience the resiswnce: the resistance of mat.erials as much as of consciOllsnesses and uflconsciollses which instale this architecture as last fortress of metaphysics. Resistance and trans ference. Any consequent deconstructioIl would he if it did not take account of this resistance and this transference, it would do little if it did not go after architecture as much as architectonics. To go after it: not in order to attack,
, or dc-route it, to eriticize or it. Rather, in order to think it in
fact, to detach iLsdf to thought vvhich beyond the lheort~m-alld becomes a work in its turn.
9
M(jintenant we ",-ill take the measure the folies of ,vhat otbers would call the immea surable hybris of Bernard Tschumi and of what it offers to our thought. These /()lies destabilize meaning, the of the ensemble of this pow erful architectonics. They put question, dislocate, destabilize deconstruct the edifIce of this configuration. It will be said that are "madness" in this. For in a
which is without aggression, without the destructive drive that would still a reactive affect within the hierarchy, do battle with the very of
architectural meaning, as it has been bequeathed to us and as we still inhabit it. \Ve should not avoid the issue: if this over what in the West is called do these folies not raze Do they not lead back to the desert of
of architectural where this writing wmdd aesthetic aura, fundamentals, hierarchical
short, in a prose made of abstract, neutral, volumes?
and engage their affirmation be- this ultimatelv annihiiatillQ. secretlv nihilistic renetitiol1 of archi
maintain, renew and reinscribe architecture. They revive, an energy which was infinitelv anaes
buried in a common grave this: the charter or metaphYSical frame whose
has just been sketched \vas already, one could say, the end of of ends" the figure of death.
This charter had come to arrall'U ttw worK, It 1I1100ses on nurms or meanings which were extrinsic, if not accidental. made its attributes into an essence: fi>rrnal beauty, filulitv. utility, Ull<..L1Ul"Ul~1l1, inhahitable valli e, its
tbe services, so many nonarchitectural or meta-architect.ural architecture mailllenant-what J keep referrinQ to ill this
way, using a paleonym, so as to maintain a l11llffied these alien norms on the work, tht~ fillies return architecture, to what archi tecture, since the very eve of its origin, should have The m(Jin!cnallt that J speak of will be this, most It does not contravene the but rather draws it into another text, it even subscribes to, and directs others to subscribe to, wllat we will again later, a contract, another play the trait, of attractIon and contraction.
These struction,"
A that I do not make without caution and
Tschumi al ways talks about" deconstruction Irecon the folie and the generation of its cube
mal combinations transkmnational relations). What is in question in The Manhattan Tramcripts is the invention of "new relations, in which the traditional components of architecture are broken down and reconstructed other axes." Without nostalgia, the most act of memory. Nothing, here, that nihilistic gesture which would fulfill a certain theme of of values aimed at all unaesthetic, LlIlinllabitable, unusable,
architecture, an architecture left vacallt after the retreat of and men. And the folies-like la folie in·are anything bill anarchic
RRIDA I 1986 I 575
chaos. Yet, witbout proposing a "new order," locate the architectural vvork in another where, at least in its
these external its essential impetus, it will no
Tsclmll1i's "first" concem will no be to space as a function or in view of economic, or teelmo-utilitarian norms, These norms will be taken into
will find themselves sllbordinated rein scribed in one and in a space which they no longer command in tbe final instarlCe. "architecture towards its limits," a will be made for will be destined for a "llse," with its own scientitlc ane! finalitIes. We \'\,UI say more later about its powers "attraction." All of this answers to a program of transbrmations or
which these external norms no hold the final word. will not preSided over the sillce Tschumi has folded them
Yes, f()lded. What is the I<Jld i The aim of architecture ill what its OWl! is not to reconstitute a IJmpJe of architecture,
a pmist or integratist obsession. its own the immanence of its ec01l .
it to its inalienahle presence, a presence which, !lon-mimetic and refers to itself. This autonomy of
which would thus to reconcile a formalism and a scman tici.sm their extremes, 'Nould fulfill the metaDhvsics it DIetended to dc- construct. The invention, in this case, consists in with what is most and most selves drawn into tbe said madness, in its
and even Transcripls demonstrated (the same is true,
, a narrative mOIltage of great comnlpy which mvtholoQies contracted or efbced rable" monument. An architectural writing of active violent, interpretation) m(Jrked or Marked:
captured, in any case always mobilized in a passage from t() allOlher, from a
writing another, . Neither architecture nor anarchitec· ture: transarchitectme. It bas it out with ofiers its work to users, believers or dwellers, to aesthetes or consumers. Jnstead, it appeals the other to invent, in turn, the event, comign or advanced by an advance made at the other --and mmntenant architecture.
am aware of a murmur: but doesn't event you speak which reinvents architect.ure in a ,cries of onces" which are always
unique ip their isn't it what takes each time not in a church or a temple, or even in a political in them, but rather 05 them, them, tt)I example, each Mass when the of Christ, , when the body the King or of the nation presents or annOUllces itself) Why not, if at
takes place when, for the eucharistic evenl goes [tranlir] church, ici, mCiinrennnl Ihere, now I. or when a date, seal, the trace of the other are
on the body of stone, this time in the movement of its
Bernard Tschumi, Pare
10
Therefore, we can no longer speak of a properly architectural moment, the hieratic impassability of the monument, this hyle-morphic complex that is given once and for alL permitting no trace to appear on its body because it afforded no chance of
permutation or substitutions. In the folies of which we speak, on the contrary, the event undoubtedly undergoes this trial of the monumental moment; however, it inscribes it, as in a series of As its name indicates, an
traverses: voyage, trajectory, translation, transference. Not with the object of a final presentation, a face-to-face with the thing itself, nor in order to complete an odyssey of consciousness, the phenomenology of mind as an architectural step. The route the folies is undoubtedly prescribed, from point to to the extent that the pOint-grid counts on a program of experiences and new
(cinema, botanical garden, video workshop, library, skating rink, But the structure of the grid' and of each cube-for these points are
cubes-leaves opportunity for chance, formal invention. combinatory transforma -J tion, wandering. opp()rtullity is not given to the inhabitant or the believer, the
user or the architecturaltheorist, but to whoever engages, in turn, in architectural
de La Villette, Paris, mil 1982-1983
11& .. - 11&
I 577
. 2~ ~ri~:)without reservation, whichl~.£llie.sap.l~y"e,I!!iY~ r~.~ing,~he restlessness of a'W1lOle culture and the body's signature. This body would no longer be con tent to wulk, circulate, stroll around in a place or on paths, but would transform its
motions by giving rise to it would receive from this other spacing the invention of its gestures.
11 The folie does not stop: either in the hieratic monument, or in the circular path. Nei ther impassibility nor pace. Seriality inscribes itself in stone, iron or wood, but this seriality does not stop there. And it had begun earlier. The series of trials (experiments or artist's proofs) that are naively called essays, photographs, models. films or writings (for what is together for a while in this belon£s to the of the folies: folies at work. We can no give them the value
supplementary illustrations, preparatory or pedagogical notes-hors d'oeuvre, in or the equivalent of theatrical rehearsals. No-and thiS is what ap pears as the greatest danger to the architectural desire which still inhabits us. The immovable mass of stone, the vertical glass or metal plane that we had taken to be the very object of architecture (die Sache selbst, or "the real thing"), its indisplaceabJe effectivity, is maintcnant in the voluminous text of multiple writings: su perimpOSition of a Wunderblock (to a text by Freud-and Tschumi exposes ar chitecture to psychoanalysis, introdUCing the theme of the transference, for as well as the schiz), palimpsest grid, supersedimented textuality, bottomless stratig raphy that is mobile, light and abyssal, foliated, foliiform. Foliated foliage and folle [mad] not to seek reassurance in any solidity: not in ground or tree, horizontality or verticality, nature or culture, form or foundation or finality. The architect who once wrote with stones now places lithographs in a volume. and Tschumi speaks of them as folios. Something weaves through this foliation whose stratagem, as well as
reminds me of Littre's suspicion. Regarding the second of the word that of the houses bearing their name, the name of "the one who has had them built or of the place in which are located," Littre hazards the follOWing, in the name of etymology: "Usually one sees in this the word madness [folie]. But this becomes uncertain when one finds in the texts from the Middle foleia quae nat ante and domum and folia ]ohannis one suspects that this involves an alteration of the word feuillie or feuillee " The word folie has no common sense any more: it has lost even the reassuring unity of its Tschumi's folies no doubt play OIl this "alteration" and superimpose, against common sense, common meaning, this other meaning, the meaning of the other. of the other language, the madness of this asemantics.
12 When 1 discovered Bernard Tschumi's work, I had to dismiss one easy hY1Potllesis: recourse to the language of deconstruction, to what in it has become to its most insisten t words and to some of its would be an analogi cal transposition or even an architectural In any case, impossibility itself For, according to the logic of this hypotheSiS (which quickly became untenable), we could have inquired: What could a de constructive architecture be? That which deconstructive strategies begin or end by destabilizing it, is it not exactly the structural principle of architecture (system, architectonics, structure, foundation, construction, etc.)? the last question led me towards another turn ofinter
what The Manhattan Transcripts and the Folies of La Villette urge us towards is route of deconstruction in one of its most intense, affirmative and
necessary implementations. Not deconstruction itself, since there never was such a thing; rather, what carries its jolt semantic analysis, critique of discourses
"'~llJA I 1986
; and ideologies. concepts or texts. in the traditional sense of the term. Deconstruc tions would be feeble if they were if did not construct. and above all if they did not first measure themselves institutions ill their at the place of their greatest resistance: poJi tical structures. levers of economic the material and phantasmatic apparatuses which connect state, civil society, cultural power and architectural education-a remarkably sensitive dition, those which the arts, from the fine arts to martial arts, science and tech-
the old and new. All these are so many forces which harden or architectural particularly when it the
and involves transactions with the State. This is the case here.
13 One does not declare war, Another strategy weaves itself between hostilities and ne gotiations. 1:,ken in its strictest, if not most sense. the grid of folies introduces
crosses a channeL It is tbe
of
furthermore. such
does not move through an texture; it weaves this texture. it invents the structure of a text, of what one would call in a "fab ric." Fabric in English recalls fahrique, a French noun with an entirely different mean ing, which some decisionmakers proposed substituting for tbe title of
tillie" Architect-weaver. He
holds out a net, A weave A network-stratagerr
the threads of a chain,
of matrices or cells whose transformations will never let themselves be calmed, stabilized, identified in a continuum, Divisible themselves, these cells also point towards instant.s of rupture, disjunction, But simultane
or rather anachromies or aphoristical
gaps, t.he point of point de folie = no together wbat it has dispersion. It cathers into a multiplicitv red
Resemblance and chromoarallhic reminder
a necessary part in it. What then, is a point, this of folie? How does it stop folie)
For it suspends it in this movement, brings it to a halt. but as folie. Arrest of folie: point ddolie. no or more folie, llO more folie, no f()lie at alL At the same time it
settles the question, but which decree. which arrest-and whicll ness? What does the law ri(Tomnlish) Who accomDlishes the law? The law divides (md
arrests division; How can we the architectural chromosome, its color, this lahor of
divisiO!l and individuation which no lom'er pertains to the domain of
We are
through one more
14
after a detour. We must pass
non-coincidence. Bm who would ever have built in this
manner) Wbo would have counted on only the in dis- or de-) No work results " from a simple displacement or dislocation, invention is needed, A path
1986 579
Without tbe deconstructive affirma tion whose we have tested Oil lhe contrary so as to giye it new impetus- tllis maintains the dis-jointed per se; it joins up the dis~ maintaining (mointenont) the distance; it gathers the difference. This assembling will be ,ingular, What holds together does !lot t.ake the {<mn of a system; it does not always on architectonics and can disobey the logic of or the order of syntax, mointenant of arc ltiLecture would be this maneuver to illscribe the dis- and make it a work in itself. and , tbis work does not pour the difference into concrete; it does not erase the differential trait, nor does it reduce or embed tbis track, the dis-tract or abs-tract, in a ma~s (concrete), Architectonics (or the art of the system) represents Olle epoch, says Heidegger, in tbe history of the Mitsein, Tt is only a specific possibility of the assembling.
would be both the task and the wager, preoccupa· dissociation its due. but to imnlement it per se in the
dissociation with re
ceived norms, tbe economic powers of architectonic, the mastery of the moltres d'oeuvre, Tbis "dif1iculty" is Tschumi's experience, He does not hide it, "this is not without "At La Villette, it is a matter of f()rming, of acting out dissoclation, , , , This is !lot without difficulty. Putting dissociation into form necessi tates that tbe support structure (the Pare, the institution) be structured a reassem
system, The red of folies is tbe focus of this dissociated space," and the Combinative." Precis 11; Columbia University. New York,
15 A fi')rce joins up and holds together the per se. Its effect upon the dis is not externaL The dis-joint itself IIlointenont architecture that arrests the madness in its dislocation. It is not only 0 point: an open multiplicity of red resists its
metonymy. These points mil!ht fral'menr. but would not define frapment still
understand how it also knot the point of lolie schi:! and madness,
without
order to must analyze tile double bind whose
what can bind a double bind to
On the one hand, the concentrates, folds back towards itself the greatest force of attraction, contmcting lines towards the center, Wholly self-
within a which is also autonomous, it fascinates and what could be called its
same time. which would "reassemble"
magnet seems
attraction through its very punctuality, the of instantaneous IIlainlenant to wards whicb everything converges aIld where it seems to indi\-iduate but also from the fact that, in stopping madness, it constitut('s t he point of transaction with the architecture \vhic11 it in turn deconstructs or divides, A discontinuous series of
ofiolie the attractions of the Pare, useful or economic Of investments, services
their program, Bound energy and semantic Hellce, the distinction and tbe transaction between what Tschumi terms the
and deviation of the folies. Each point is a it of the text or of the grid, But the maintains hOlh the
rupture (lnd the relation to the other, which is itself structured as both attraction and
DERRIDA 1986 I 581
interruption, interference and difference: a relation without relation. What is con tracted here passes a "mad" contract between the socius and dissociation. And this without dialectic, without the Aufhebung whose process Hegel explains to us and which can always reappropriate such a maintenant: the point negates space and, in this spatial negation of itself, generates the line in which it maintains itself by cancelling itself (als sich aufhebend). the line would be the truth of the point, the surface the truth of the line, time the truth of space and, finally, the maintenant the truth of the
(Encyclopedie, §256-257). Here I permit myself to refer to my text, "Ousia et gramme" ("La paraphrase: ligne, " in Marges [Minuit, 1972], [University of Chicago Press]). Under the same name, the main tenant I sneak of would
mark the interruption of this dialectic. But on the other hand, if dissociation does not happen to the
point from outside, it is because the point is both divisible and indivisible. It appears atomic, and thus has the function and individualizing form of the point according only to a point of view, according to the perspective of the serial ensemble which it punctuates, and subtends without ever its simple support. As it is seen, and seen from it simultaneously scans and interrupts, maintains and divides, puts color and rhythm into the spacing of the grid. But this point of view does not see, it is blind to what happens in the folie. For if we consider it absolutely, abstracted from the ensemble and in itself (it is also destined to abstract, distract or subtract itself), the point is not a point any more; it no has the atomic indivisi
that is bestowed on tile geometrical point. Opened inside to a void that play to the it constructs/deconstruct;; itself like a cu be given over to formal combination. The articulated pieces separate, compose and recompose.
articulating that are more than pieces-pieces of a
game, theatre pieces, pieces of an "a-partment" piece, roomJ at once places and spaces of movement-the dis-joint forms that are destined for events: in order for them
to take
16 For it was necessary to speak of promise and pledge, of promise as affirmation, the promise that provides the privileged example of a p.E19r1P3.ti~.[iJ!Il&. More than an example: the very condition of such writing. Without accepting what would be retained as presuppositions hy theories of performative language and acts-re
here by an architectural pragmatics (for example, the value of presence, of tile maintenant as present)-and without being able to discuss it here, let us focus on this single trait: the provocation of the event I speak of ("I promise," for example), that I describe or trace; tile event that I make happen or let happen hy marking it. The mark or trait must be emphasized so as to remove this performativity from the heQeJmc)IlY of and of what is called human speech. The performative mark spaces is the event of spacing. The red points space, maintaining architecture in the dissociation of spacing. But this maintenant does not only maintain a past and a tradition; it does not ensure a syntheSiS. It maintains the interruption, in other words, the relation to the other per se. To the other in the magnetic field of attraction, of the "common
( denominator" or "hearth," to other points of rupture as well, but first of all to the ') Other: the one through whom the promised event will happen or will not. For he is ( called, only called to countersign the pledge [gage]. the engagement or the wager.
This Other never presents itself; he is not present, maintenant. He can he represented what is too quickly referred to as Power, the politico-economic decisionmakers,
users, representatives of domains of cultural domination, and here, in particular, of a philosophy of architecture. This Other will be anyone, not yet [point encore] a suhject, ego or conscience and not a man l'homme]; anyone who comes and answers to
the promise, who first answers for the the to-come of an event which would maintain spacing, the maintenant in dissociation, the relation to the other per se. Not the hand being held [main tenue] but the hand outstretched [main tendue] above the
7
Overlaid by the entire history of architecture and laid open to the hazards of a future that cannot he anticipated, this other architecture, this architecture of the other, is nothing that exists. It is not a present, the memory of a past present, the purchase or pre-comprehension of a future present. It presents neither a constative theory nor a
nor an ethics of architecture. Not even a narrative, although it opens this space to all narrative matrices to sound-tracks and image-tracks (as I write this, I think of La folie du jour by Blanchot, and of the demand for, and impOSSibility narra tion that is made evident there. Everything I have been ahle to write ahout it, most notahly in Pamgcs, is directly and sometimes literally concerned-I am aware of this after the fact, thanks to Tschumi-with the madness of architecture: step, threshold, staircase labyrinth, hotel, hospital, wall, enclosure, edges, room, the inhabitation of the uninhabitable. And since all of this, dealing with tbe madness of the trait, the spacing of "dis-traction," will be published in English, I also think of that idiomatic manner of referring to the fool, the absent-minded, the wanderer: the one who is spacy,
But if it presents neither theory, nor ethics, nor politics, nor \f t1' narration ("No, no narrative never again," La folie du jour) it gives a place to them all. ! ' It writes and signs in advance-maintenant a divided line on the edge of 1111:<1.I..'"1);:, before any presentation, beyond it-the very who engages architecture, its discourse, political scenography, economy and ethics. Pledge but also wager, sym bolic order and gamhle: these red cubes are thrown like the dice of architecture. The throw not only programs a strategy of events, as I suggested earlier; it anticipates the architecture to come. It runs the risk and gives us the chance.
Notes I. Maintenant, Fr., adv., now; from maintenir, v., maintaining, in position, supporting,
upholding; from se maintenir, v., remaining, lasting; from main tenant, the hand that holds. Folie, Fr., n., madness, delusion, mania; folly; country pleasure-house.
In general, the French spelling of the word folie has been kept in this translation, according to Bernard Tschumi's own usage, so as to retain the connotation of madness. [Transla tor's
2. Trame, Fr., n., woof, weft, web, thread; also plot. conspiracy; (phot. engr.) screen. lator's note. ]
__MACOSX/WEEK 11 READINGS/._Derrida_Point_de_folie.pdf
WEEK 11 READINGS/Eisenman_Futility.pdf
__MACOSX/WEEK 11 READINGS/._Eisenman_Futility.pdf
WEEK 11 READINGS/Lynn_Folded_Pliant_Supple.pdf
INTRODUCTION Architectural Curvilinearity: The Folded, the Pliant
and the Supple / Greg Lynn
In 1993, Greg Lynn guest-edited an issue of Architectural Design
dedicated to an emerging movement in architecture: folding.
Lynn, a Los Angeles-based architect/educator with a background
in philosophy and an attraction to computer-aided design, was
the ideal person to organize this publication and, in effect, define
the fold in architecture, a concept that generated intense interest
during the remainder of the decade.
In his contributory essay, ''l\rchitectural Curvilinearity: The
Folded, the Pliant and the Supple," Lynn ties together a variety
of sources-including the work of Gilles Deleuze, Rene Thom,
cooking theory, and geology-to present an alternative to
existing architectural theory and practice. He states that since
the mid-1960s architecture has been guided by the notion of
contradiction, whether through attempts to formally embody
heterogeneity or its opposite; in short, postmodernism and decon
structivism can be understood as two sides of the same coin. Yet,
for Lynn, "neither the reactionary call for unity nor the avant-garde
dismantling of it through the identification of internal contradic
tions seems adequate as a model for contemporary architecture
and urbanism." Rather, he offers a smooth architecture (in both a
visual and a mathematic sense) composed of combined yet dis
crete elements that are shaped by forces outside the architectural
discipline, much as diverse ingredients are folded into a smooth
mixture by a discerning chef. This new architecture, what Lynn
calls a pliant, flexible orchitecture, exploits connections between
elements within a design instead of emphasizing contradictions
or attempting to erase them all together. Of equal importance
is that this architecture is inextricably entwined with external
forces, both cultural and contextual. Architects deploy various
.. ,JJiJIIIiIIIIliii.
,j'"'ngies-including a reliance on topological geometry and
"'u"al software and technologies-in the creation of their designs,
II,,' Ihe resulting works tend to be curvilinear in form and inflected ....Ih the particulars of the project and its environment.
In addition to Lynn's essay, Folding in Architecture, as the
A/. hitectural Design issue was titled, included other texts by fig
,,·os such as Deleuze, Jeffrey Kipnis, and John Rajchman, and
'''presentative projects by architects like Peter Eisenman, Frank
( inhry, and Philip Johnson. This list of distinguished collaborators
("fl' weight to the publication, intimating that the phenomenon
"I the fold was already entrenched within architectural design.
If Indeed it was, Folding in Architecture cemented the shift in
(lfchitectural thought by identifying and highlighting this new
mchitecture of smoothness. The importance of Lynn's special
.,sue of Architectural Design was underscored by its reprinting in
2004 as "a historical document,"1 complete with new introductory
nssays analyzing and situating the original publication as a guid
Ing force within twenty-first-century architectural discourse. 2
Notes
Helen Castle, "Preface," in Folding in Architedure, ed. Greg Lynn (London: Wiley-Academy. 2004), 7.
2 See Greg Lynn, "Introdudion," in Folding in Architecture, 8-13; and Mario Carpo, "Ten Years of Folding," in Folding in Architecture. See also Branko Koleravic, ed., Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (New York: Spoon Press, 2003), 3-10.
30 31
GREG LYNN
ARCHITECTURAL
CURVILINEARITY:
THE FOLDED, THE PLIANT
AND THE SUPPLE
First appeared in Architectural Design 63, no. 3/4 (1993): 8-15·
Courtesy of Greg
For the last two decades, beginning with Robert Venturi's
Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture,' and Colin Rowe and Fred Koetter's Collage City,2 and continuing through Mark Wigley and Philip Johnson's Deconstructivist Architecture, archi tects have been primarily concerned with the production of
heterogeneous, fragmented and conflicting formal systems. These practices have attempted to embody the differences within and between diverse physical, cultural, and social con
texts in formal conflicts. When comparing Venturi's Complexity
and Contradiction or Learning from Las vegas with Wigley and Johnson's DeconstructionArchitecture it is necessary to overlook many significant and distinguishing differences in order to
identify at least one common theme. Both Venturi and Wigley argue for the deployment of dis
continuous, fragmented, heterogeneous, and diagonal formal strategies based on the incongruities,juxtapositions and opposi tions within specific sites and programmes. These disjunctions
,nult from a logic which tends to identify the potential con 1I.IIIit'lions between dissimilar elements. A diagonal dialogue Iwlween a building and its context has become an emblem
I", I he contradictions within contemporary culture. From the ', •. 1It' of an urban plan to a building detail, contexts have been IIl1l1ed for conflicting geometries, materials, styles, histories, ,.lId programmes which are then represented in architecture as 11111' mal contradictions. The most paradigmatic architecture of t t1l' last ten years, including Robert Venturi's Sainsbury Wing of
'hI' National Gallery, Peter Eisenman's Wexner Center, Bernard I \chumi's La Villette Park or the Gehry House, invests in the ,II ('hitectural representation of contradictions. Through con
II ad iction, architecture represents difference in violent formal • 1111 t1icts.
Contradiction has also provoked a reactionary response ,,, formal conflict. Such resistances attempt to recover unified
.1Il'hitecturallanguages that can stand against heterogeneity. I !Ility is constructed through one of two strategies: either by '\'('onstructing a continuous architectural language through historical analyses (Neo-Classicism or Neo-Modernism) or by ldt'ntifying local consistencies resulting from indigenous cli
mates, materials, traditions or technologies (Regionalism). rhe internal orders of Neo-Classicism, Neo-Modernism and
Ilt'gionalism conventionally repress the cultural and contextual discontinuities that are necessary for a logic of contradiction. III architecture, both the reaction to and the representation of heterogeneity have shared an origin in contextual analysis. Both Iheoretical models begin with a close analysis of contextual con
ditions from which they proceed to evolve either a homogeneous or heterogeneous urban fabric. Neither the reactionary call for IInity nor the avant-garde dismantling of it through the identifi t':ltion of internal contradictions seems adequate as a model for l'Ontemporary architecture and urbanism.
GREG LYNN 33 32
In response to architecture's discovery of complex, dis parate, differentiated and heterogeneous cultural and formal contexts, two options have been dominant; either conflict and contradiction or unity and reconstruction. Presently, an alter native smoothness is being formulated that may escape these dialectically opposed strategies. Common to the diverse sources of this post-contradictory work-topological geometry, mor phology, morphogenesis, Catastrophe Theory or the computer technology of both the defense and Hollywood film industry are characteristics of smooth transformation involving the intensive integration of differences within a continuous yet het erogeneous system. Smooth mixtures are made up of disparate elements which maintain their integrity while being blended within a continuous field of other free elements.
Smoothing does not eradicate differences but incorporates3
free intensities through fluid tactics of mixing and blending. Smooth mixtures are not homogeneous and therefore cannot be reduced. Deleuze describes smoothness as "the continuous variation" and the "continuous development ofform."4 Wigley's critique of pure form and static geometry is inscribed within geometric conflicts and discontinuities. For Wigley, smoothness is equated with hierarchical organisation: "the volumes have been purified-they have become smooth, classical-and the wires all converge in a single, hierarchical, vertical movement. "5 Rather than investing in arrested conflicts, Wigley's slipperi ness might be better exploited by the alternative smoothness of heterogeneous mixture. For the first time perhaps, complexity might be aligned with neither unity nor contradiction but with smooth, pliant mixture.
Both pliancy and smoothness provide an escape from the two camps which would either have architecture break under the stress of difference or stand firm. Pliancy allows architecture to become involved in complexity through flexibility. It may be
34 ' ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
pn""ihlc to neither repress the complex relations of differences "Ih fixed points of resolution nor arrest them in contradictions, btu "ustain them through flexible, unpredicted, local connec Ikllls. To arrest differences in conflicting forms often precludes ....ny of the more complex possible connections of the forms of .rc:hilecture to larger cultural fields. A more pliant architectural k'""ibility values alliances, rather than conflicts, between ele "'t"IlIS. Pliancy implies first an internal flexibility and second a dc-,ll'ndence on external forces for self-definition.
If there is a single effect produced in architecture by folding, .. will be the ability to integrate unrelated elements within a new tunlinuous mixture. Culinary theory has developed both a prac tklll and precise definition for at least three types of mixtures. l'lll' first involves the manipulation of homogeneous elements; bt"lIling, whisking and whipping change the volume but not .ht" nature of a liquid through agitation. The second method ur incorporation mixes two or more disparate elements; chop Pill){, dicing, grinding, grating, slicing, shredding and mincing rvisl'erate elements into fragments. The first method agitates • "ingle uniform ingredient, the second eviscerates disparate Ingredients. Folding, creaming and blending mix smoothly multiple ingredients "through repeated gentle overturnings wilhout stirring or beating" in such a way that their individual l'hnracteristics are maintained.6 For instance, an egg and choco tilt' are folded together so that each is a distinct layer within a c:nntinuous mixture.
Folding employs neither agitation nor evisceration but a .upple layering. Likewise, folding in geology involves the sedi IUl'ntation of mineral elements or deposits which become _lowly bent and compacted into plateaus of strata. These strata Afl' compressed, by external forces, into more or less continu IIUS layers within which heterogeneous deposits are still intact in varying degrees of intensity.
GREG LYNN 35
A folded mixture is neither homogenous, like whipped cream, nor fragmented, like chopped nuts, but smooth and
heterogeneous. In both cooking and geology, there is no pre liminary organisation which becomes folded but rather there are unrelated elements or pure intensities that are intricated
through ajoint manipulation. Disparate elements can be incor porated into smooth mixtures through various manipulations
including fulling: "Felt is a supple solid product that proceeds altogether dif
ferently, as an anti-fabric. It implies no separation of threads, no intertwining, only an entanglement of fibres obtained by full ing (for example, by rolling the block of fibres back and forth).
What becomes entangled are the microscales of the fibres. An aggregate of intrication of this kind is in no way homogeneous; nevertheless, it is smooth and contrasts point by point with the
space of fabric (it is in principle infinite, open and uninhibited in every direction; it has neither top, nor bottom, nor centre;
it does not assign fixed or mobile elements but distributes a continuous variation}."?
The two characteristics of smooth mixtures are that they
are composed of disparate unrelated elements and that these free intensities become intricated by an external force exerted upon them jointly. Intrications are intricate connections. They
are intricate, they affiliate local surfaces of elements with one another by negotiating interstitial rather than internal connec
tions. The heterogeneous elements within a mixture have no
proper relation with one another. Likewise, the external force that intricates these elements with one another is outside of the
individual elements control or prediction.
Viscous Mixtures
Unlike an architecture of contradictions, superpositions and accidental collisions, pliant systems are capable of engendering
36 ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
unpH'dicted connections with contextual, cultural, program
nutl ito, structural and economic contingencies by vicissitude. Vldssitude is often equated with vacillation, weakness 8 and Intll'l'isiveness but more importantly these characteristics are
trt'(IUcntly in the service of a tactical cunning. 9 Vicissitude is • (IUality of being mutable or changeable in response to both '.vourable and unfavourable situations that occur by chance. Vldssitudinous events result from events that are neither arbi
trAry nor predictable but seem to be accidental. These events .rt' made possible by a collision of internal motivations with
""Il'rnal forces. For instance, when an accident occurs the vl"1 i m s immediately identify the forces contribu ting to the acci dt'1l1 and begin to assign blame. It is inevitable however, that nu single element can be made responsible for any accident
." I hese events occur by vicissitude; a confluence of particular Inlluences at a particular time makes the outcome of an acci d('111 possible. If any element participating in such a confluence
(If local forces is altered the nature of the event will change. In A Thousand Plateaus, Spinoza's concept of "a thousand vicis
alludes" is linked with Gregory Bateson's "continuing plateau uf intensity" to describe events which incorporate unpredict
"hie events through intensity. These occurrences are difficult to ICIl'alise, difficult to identify. 10 Any logic of vicissitude is depen tll'nt on both an intrication of local intensities and the exegetic
prcssure exerted on those elements by external contingencies,
Nl'ither the intrications nor the forces which put them into rela lion are predictable from within any single system. Connections
hy vicissitude develop identity through the exploitation of local iltljacencies and their affiliation with external forces. In this fil'nse, vicissitudinous mixtures become cohesive through a log-ic of viscosity.
Viscous fluids develop internal stability in direct propor lion to the external pressures exerted upon them. These fluids
GREG LYNN 37
behave with two types of viscidity. They exhibit both internal cohesion and adhesion to external elements as their viscosity increases. Viscous fluids begin to behave less like liquids and more like sticky solids as the pressures upon them intensify. Similarly, viscous solids are capable of yielding continually under stress so as not to shear.
Viscous space would exhibit a related cohesive stabil ity in response to adjacent pressures and a stickiness or adhesion to adjacent elements. Viscous relations such as these are not reducible to any single or holistic organisation. Forms of viscosity and pliability cannot be examined outside of the vicissitudinous connections and forces with which their defor mation is intensively involved. The nature of pliant forms is that they are sticky and flexible. Things tend to adhere to them. As pliant forms are manipulated and deformed the things that stick to their surfaces become incorporated within their interiors.
Curving Away from Deconstructivism
Along with a group of younger architects, the projects that best represent pliancy, not coincidentally, are being produced by many of the same architects previously involved in the valorisa tion of contradictions. Deconstructivism theorised the world as a site of differences in order that architecture could represent these contradictions in form. This contradictory logic is begin ning to soften in order to exploit more fully the particularities of urban and cultural contexts. This is a reasonable transition, as the Deconstructivists originated their projects with the inter nal discontinuities they uncovered within buildings and sites. These same architects are beginning to employ urban strategies which exploit discontinuities, not by representing them in for mal collisions, but by affiliating them with one another though continuous flexible systems.
38 ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
Just as many of these architects have already been inscribed ...hl" a Deconstructivist style of diagonal forms, there will .",1), hc those who would enclose their present work within • Nto-Baroque or even Expressionist style of curved forms. "JW("vcr, many of the formal similitudes suggest a far richer *kJJCil' of curvilinearity"11 that can be characterised by the Involvement of outside forces in the development of form. If Inltrnally motivated and homogeneous systems were to extend In .tmight lines, curvilinear developments would result from the IIM'urporation of external influences. Curvilinearity can put into ..hllion the collected projects in this publication [Architectural ,"',ign 63], Deleuze's The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque and Rene Tholn's catastrophe diagrams. The smooth spaces described by these continuous yet differentiated systems result from cur ..linear sensibilities that are capable of complex deformations In rl'sponse to programmatic, structural, economic, aesthetic, political and contextual influences. This is not to imply that Intl'nsive curvature is more politically correct than an unin volved formal logic, but rather, that a cunning pliability is often Inure effective through smooth incorporation than contradic lion and conflict. Many cunning tactics are aggressive in nature. Whether insidious or ameliorative these kinds of cunning con IIt'ctions discover new possibilities for organisation. A logic of rurvilinearity argues for an active involvement with external ('wnts in the folding, bending and curving of form.
Already in several Deconstructivist projects are latent sug J(estions of smooth mixture and curvature. For instance, the (iehry House is typically portrayed as representing materials Hnd forms already present within, yet repressed by, the subur hlln neighbourhood: sheds, chain-link fences, exposed plywood, trailers, boats and recreational vehicles. The house is described liS an "essay on the convoluted relationship between the conflict within and between forms ... which were not imported to but
GREG LYNN 39
emerged from within the house."" The house is seen to provoke conflict within the neighbourhood due to its public representa tion of hidden aspects of its context. The Gehry House violates the neighbourhood from within. Despite the dominant appeal of the house to contradictions, a less contradictory and more pliant reading of the house is possible as a new organisation emerges between the existing house and Gehry's addition. A dynamic stability develops with the mixing of the original and the addition. Despite the contradictions between elements pos sible points of connection are exploited. Rather than valorise the conflicts the house engenders, as has been done in both academic and popular publications, a more pliant logic would identify, not the degree of violation, but the degree to which new connections were exploited. A new intermediate organisation occurs in the Gehry House by vicissitude from the affiliation of the existing house and its addition. Within the discontinuities of Deconstructivism there are inevitable unforeseen moments
of cohesion. Similarly, Peter Eisenman's Wexner Center is convention
ally portrayed as a collision of the conflicting geometries of the campus, city and armoury which once stood adjacent to the site. These contradictions are represented by the diagonal collisions between the two grids and the masonry towers. Despite the dis junctions and discontinuities between these three disparate systems, Eisenman's project has suggested recessive readings of continuous non-linear systems of connection. Robert Somop3 identifies such a system of Deleuzian rhizomatous connections between armoury and grid. The armoury and diagonal grids are shown by Somol to participate in a hybrid L-movement that organises the main gallery space. Somol's schizophrenic analy sis is made possible by, yet does not emanate from within, a Deconstructivist logic of contradiction and conflict. The force of this Deleuzian schizo-analytic model is its ability to maintain
40 . ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
multiple organisations simultaneously. In Eisenman's project Iht' tower and grid need not be seen as mutually exclusive or in (,()lItradiction. Rather, these disparate elements may be seen I" distinct elements co-present within a composite mixture. I%mcy does not result from and is not in line with the previous luc:hitecturallogic of contradiction, yet it is capable of exploit Ing many conflicting combinations for the possible connections Ihilt are overlooked. Where DeconstructivistArchitecture was seen II) t'xploit external forces in the familiar name of contradiction And conflict, recent pliant projects by many of these architects t'xhibit a more fluid logic of connectivity.
Immersed in Context
The contradictory architecture of the last two decades has t'volved primarily from highly differentiated, heterogeneous ('ClI1texts within which conflicting, contradictory and discon Iinuous buildings were sited. An alternative involvement with Iwterogeneous contexts could be affiliated, compliant and con Iinuous. Where complexity and contradiction arose previously (rom inherent contextual conflicts, present attempts are being made to fold smoothly specific locations, materials and pro Jtmmmes into architecture while maintaining their individual Idt'ntity.
This recent work may be described as being compliant; in II state of being plied by forces beyond control. The projects are
folded, pliant and supple in order to incorporate their nmtexts with minimal resistance. Again, this characterisation lihould not imply flaccidity but a cunning submissiveness that Is l'apable of bending rather than breaking. Compliant tactics, Mll'h as these, assume neither an absolute coherence nor cohe ,.ion between discrete elements but a system of provisional, Intl'nsive, local connections between free elements. Intensity d{'scribes the dynamic internalisation and incorporation of
GREG lYNN 41
external influences into a pliant system. Distinct from a whole organism-to which nothing can be added or subtracted intensive organisations continually invite external influence within their internal limits so that they might extend their influence through the affiliations they make. A two-fold deter ritorialisation, such as this, expands by internalising external forces. This expansion through incorporation is an urban alternative to either the infinite extension of International Modernism, the uniform fabric of Contextualism or the con flicts of Post-Modernism and Deconstructivism. Folded, pliant and supple architectural forms invite exigencies and contingen cies in both their deformation and their reception.
In both Learning from Las Vegas and Deconstructivist Architecture, urban contexts provided rich sites of difference. These differences are presently being exploited for their abil ity to engender multiple lines of local connections rather than lines of conflict. These affiliations are not predictable by any contextual orders but occur by vicissitude. Here, urban fabric has no value or meaning beyond the connections that are made within it. Distinct from earlier urban sensibilities that general ised broad formal codes, the collected projects develop local, fine grain, complex systems of intrication. There is no general urban strategy common to these projects, only a kind of tactical mutability. These folded, pliant and supple forms of urbanism are neither in deference to nor in defiance of their contexts but exploit them by turning them within their own twisted and
curvilinear logics.
The Supple and Curvilinear
1 supple\adj [ME souple, fr OF, fr L supplic-, supplex
submissive, suppliant, lit, bending under, fr sub +plic (akin to plicare to fold)-more at PLY] u: compliant often
42 . ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
to the point of obsequiousness b: readily adaptable or
responsive to new situations 2a: capable of being bent or
folded without creases, cracks or breaks: PLIANT b: able to
perform bending or twisting movements with ease and
grace: LIMBER c: easy and fluent without stiffness or
awkwardness. 14
At an urban scale, many of these projects seem to be some where between contextualism and expressionism. Their supple rorms are neither geometrically exact nor arbitrarily figural. I:or example, the curvilinear figures of Shoei Yoh's roof struc tures are anything but decorative but also resist being reduced to a pure geometric figure. Yoh's supple roof structures exhibit /I logic of curvilinearity as they are continuously differentiated Ill'cording to contingencies. The exigencies of structural span Il'ngths, beam depths, lighting, lateral loading, ceiling height lind view angles influence the form of the roof structure. Rather than averaging these requirements within a mean or mini mum dimension they are precisely maintained by an anexact ),l·t rigorous geometry. Exact geometries are eidetic; they can bl' reproduced identically at any time by anyone. In this regard, they must be capable of being reduced to fixed mathematical (Iuantities. Inexact geometries lack the precision and rigor nec t'ssary for measurement.
Anexact geometries, as described by Edmund Husserl,1 5
nrc those geometries which are irreducible yet rigorous. These geometries can be determined with precision yet cannot be reduced to average points or dimensions. Anexact geometries often appear to be merely figural in this regard. Unlike exact geometries, it is meaningless to repeat identically an anexact geometric figure outside of the specific context within which It is situated. In this regard, anexact figures cannot be easily translated.
GREG LYNN 43
Jeffrey Kipnis has argued convincingly that Peter Eisenman's Columbus Convention Center has become a canonical model for the negotiation of differentiated urban fringe sites through the use of near figures. '6 Kipnis identifies the disparate sys tems informing the Columbus Convention Center including: a single volume of inviolate programme of a uniform shape and height larger than two city blocks, an existing fine grain fabric of commercial buildings and a network of freeway inter changes that plug into the gridded streets of the central business district. Eisenman's project drapes the large rectilinear vol ume of the convention hall with a series of supple vermiforms. These elements become involved with the train tracks to the north-east, the highway to the south-east and the pedes trian scale of High Street to the west. The project incorporates the multiple scales, programmes, and pedestrian and auto motive circulation of a highly differentiated urban context. Kipnis' canonisation of a form which is involved with such spe cific contextual and programmatic contingencies seems to be frustrated from the beginning. The effects of a pliant urban mix ture such as this can only be evaluated by the connections that it makes. Outside of specific contexts, curvature ceases to be intensive. Where the Wexner Center, on the same street in the same city, represents a monumental collision, the Convention Center attempts to disappear by connection between intervals within its context; where the Wexner Center destabilises through contradictions the Convention Center does so by subterfuge.
In a similar fashion Frank Gehry's Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain covers a series of orthogonal gallery spaces with flexible tubes which respond to the scales of the adjacent roadways, bridges, the Bilbao River and the existing medieval city. Akin to the Vitra Museum, the curvilinear roof forms of the Bilbao Guggenheim integrate the large rectilinear masses of
44 . ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
!Cullery and support space with the scale of the pedestrian and IlUtomotive contexts.
The unforeseen connections possible between differenti illl'" sites and alien programmes require conciliatory, complicit, pliant, flexible and often cunning tactics. Presently, numerous IIrchitects are involving the heterogeneities, discontinuities and tli fferences inherent within any cultural and physical context by IIligning formal flexibility with economic, programmatic and Ii' ructural compliancy. A multitude ofpli based words-folded, pliant, supple, flexible, plaited, pleated, plicating, complicitous, t'Ompliant, complaisant, complicated, complex and multiplici tous to name a few-can be invoked to describe this emerging urban sensibility of intensive connections.
The Pliant and Bent
pJiable\adj [Me fr plieirto bend, fold-more at PLY] 1a: supple
enough to bend freely or repeatedly without breaking b: yield
ing readily to others: COMPLAISANT 2: adjustable to varying
conditions: ADAPTABLE, syn see PLASTIC, ant obstinate. 17
John Rajchman, in reference to Gilles Deleuze's book Le pli has already articulated an affinity between complexity, or plex words, and folding, or plic-words, in the Deleuzian paradigm of "perplexing plications" or "perplication.'"8 The plexed and the plied can be seen in a tight knot of complexity and pliancy. Plication involves the folding in of external forces. Complication involves an intricate assembly of these extrinsic particularities into a complex network. In biology, complication is the act of an embryo folding in upon itself as it becomes more complex. To become complicated is to be involved in mUltiple complex, intri (.'ate connections. Where Post-Modernism and Deconstructivism resolve external influences of programme, use, economy and
GREG LYNN 45
advertising through contradiction, compliancy involves these external forces by knotting, twisting, bending, and folding them within form.
Pliant systems are easily bent, inclined or influenced. An anatomical "plica" is a single strand within multiple "plicae." It is a multiplicity in that it is both one and many simultane ously. These elements are bent along with other elements into a composite, as in matted hair(s). Such a bending together of elements is an act of multiple plication or multiplication rather than mere addition. Plicature involves disparate elements with one another through various manipulations of bending, twist ing, pleating, braiding, and weaving through external force. In RAA Um's Croton Aqueduct project a single line following the subterranean water supply for New York City is pulled through multiple disparate programmes which are adjacent to it and which cross it. These programmatic elements are braided and bent within the continuous line of recovered public space which stretches nearly twenty miles into Manhattan. In order to incor porate these elements the line itself is deflected and reoriented, continually changing its character along its length. The seem ingly singular line becomes populated by finer programmatic elements. The implications of Le pli for architecture involve the proliferation of possible connections between free entities such as these.
A plexus is a multi-linear network of interweavings, inter twinings and intrications; for instance, of nerves or blood vessels. The complications of a plexus-what could best be called complexity-arise from its irreducibility to any single organisation. A plexus describes a multiplicity of local connec tions within a single continuous system that remains open to new motions and fluctuations. Thus, a plexial event cannot occur at any discrete point. A multiply plexed system-a com plex-cannot be reduced to mathematical exactitude, it must
46 ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
bet described with rigorous probability. Geometric systems have I distinct character once they have been plied; they exchange Axed co-ordinates for dynamic relations across surfaces.
Alternative types of transformation
I ,Iscounting the potential of earlier geometric diagrams of prob Ibility, such as Buffon's Needle Problem,'9 D'Arcy Thompson provides perhaps the first geometric description of variable ddormation as an instance of discontinuous morphological development. His cartesian deformations, and their use of flex Ible topological rubber sheet geometry, suggest an alternative to the static morphological transformations of autonomous architectural types. A comparison ofthe typological and trans rormational systems of Thompson and Rowe illustrates two rlldically different conceptions of continuity. Rowe's is fixed, ('xact, striated, identical and static, where Thompson's is dynamic, anexact, smooth, differentiated and stable.
Both Rudolf Wittkower-in his analysis of the Palladian villas of :1949 20-and Rowe-in his comparative analysis of Iltllladio and Le Corbusier of :194721-uncover a consistent organ isational type: the nine-square grid. In Wittkower's analysis of twelve Palladian villas the particularities of each villa accumu late (through what Edmund Husserl has termed variations) to generate a fixed, identical spatial type (through what could best be described as phenomenological reduction). The typology of this "Ideal Villa" is used to invent a consistent deep structure underlying Le Corbusier's Villa Stein at Garche and Palladio's Villa Malcontenta. Wittkower and Rowe discover the exact geo metric structure of this type in all villas in particular. This fixed type become a constant point of reference within a series of variations.
Like Rowe, Thompson is interested in developing a math ematics of species categories, yet his system depends on a
GREG LYNN 47
dynamic and fluid set of geometric relations. The deformations of a provisional type define a supple constellation of geomet ric correspondences. Thompson uses the initial type as a mere provision for a dynamic system of transformations that occur in connection with larger environmental forces. Thompson's method of discontinuous development intensively involves external forces in the deformation of morphological types. The flexible type is able to both indicate the general morphological structure of a species while indicating its discontinuous devel opment through the internalisation of heretofore external forces within the system. 22 For instance, the enlargement of a fish's eye is represented by the flexing of a grid. This fluctuation, when compared to a previous position of the transformational type, establishes a relation between water depth and light inten sity as those conditions are involved in the formal differences between fish. The flexing grid of relations cannot be arrested at any moment and therefore has the capacity to describe both a general type and the particular events which influence its devel opment. Again, these events are not predictable or reducible to any fixed point but rather begin to describe a probable zone of co-present forces; both internal and external. Thompson presents an alternative type of inclusive stability, distinct from the exclusive stasis of Rowe's nine-square grid. The sup ple geometry of Thompson is capable of both bending under external forces and folding those forces internally. These trans formations develop through discontinuous involution rather
than continuous evolution. The morphing effects used in the contemporary advertis
ing and film industry may already have something in common with recent developments in architecture. These mere images have concrete influences on space, form, politics, and cul ture; for example, the physical morphing of Michael Jackson's body, including the transformation of his form through various
48 . ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
surgeries and his surface through skin bleaching and lightening. These physical effects and their implications for the definition of gender and race were only later represented in his recent video Black & White. In this video multiple genders, ethnicities lind races are mixed into a continuous sequence through the digital morphing of video images. It is significant that Jackson is not black or white but black and white, not male or female hut male and female. His simultaneous differences are charac leristic of a desire for smoothness; to become heterogeneous yet continuous. Physical morphing, such as this, is monstrous hecause smoothness eradicates the interval between what Thompson refers to as discriminant characteristics without homogenizing the mixture. Such a continuous system is neither an assembly of discrete fragments nor a whole. 23 With Michael Jackson, the flexible geometric mechanism with which his video representation is constructed comes from the same desire which aggressively reconstructs his own physical form. Neither Ihe theory, the geometry or the body proceed from one another; rather, they participate in a desire for smooth transformation. Form, politics, and self-identity are intricately connected in this process of deformation.
A similar comparison might be made between the liq uid mercury man in the film Terminator 2 and the Peter Lewis House by Frank Gehry and Philip Johnson. The Hollywood special effects sequences allow the actor to both become and disappear into virtually any form. The horror of the film results not from ultra-violence, but from the ability of the antagonist 10 pass through and occupy the grids of floors, prison bars, and other actors. Computer technology is capable of constructing intermediate images between any two fixed points resulting in a smooth transformation. These smooth effects calculate with probability the interstitial figures between fixed figures. Furthermore, the morphing process is flexible enough that
GREG LYNN . 49
multiple between states are possible. Gehry's and Johnson's Peter Lewis House is formulated from multiple flexible forms. The geometry of these forms is supple and can accommodate smooth curvilinear deformation along their length. Not only are these forms capable of bending to programmatic, structural and environmental concerns, as is the roof ofShoei Yoh's roof struc tures, but they can deflect to the contours and context of the site, similar to Peter Eisenman's Columbus Convention Center and RAA Urn's Croton Aqueduct project. Furthermore, the Lewis House maintains a series of discrete figural fragments such as boats and familiar fish-within the diagrams of D'Arcy Thompson, which are important to both the morphing effects of Industrial Light and Magic and the morphogenetic diagrams of Rene Thorn, Gehry's supple geometry is capable of smooth, heterogeneous continuous deformation. Deformation is made possible by the flexibility of topological geometry in response to external events, as smooth space is intensive and continuous. Thompson's curvilinear logic suggests deforma tion in response to unpredictable events outside of the object. Forms of bending, twisting or folding are not superfluous but result from an intensive curvilinear logic which seeks to internalise cultural and contextual forces within form. In this manner events become intimately involved with particular rather than ideal forms. These flexible forms are not mere rep resentations of differential forces but are deformed by their environment.
Folding and Other Catastrophes for Architecture
3 fold vb [ME folden, fro OEfoaldanj akin to OHGfaldan to fold, Gk di plasios twofold] vt 1: to lay one part over another
part, 2: to reduce the length or bulk of by doubling over,
3: to clasp together: EN1WINE, 4: to clasp or embrace
50 ' ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
closely: EMBRACE, 5: to bend (as a rock) into folds, 6: to
incorporate (a food ingredient) into a mixture by repeated
gentle overturnings without stirring or beating, 7: to bring
to an end. 24
Philosophy has already identified the displacement presently occurring to the Post-Modem paradigm of complexity and con tradiction in architecture, evidenced by John Rajchman's Out oj the Fold and Perplications. Rajchman's text is not a mani fl'sto for the development of new architectural organisations, but responds to the emergence of differing kinds of complex ity being developed by a specific architect. His essays inscribe spatial innovations developed in architecture within larger intellectual and cultural fields. Rajchman both illuminates I'l'ter Eisenman's architectural practice through an explication of Le P!i and is forced to reconsider Deleuze's original argu ment concerning Baroque space by the alternative spatialities of Eisenman's Rebstock Park project. The dominant aspect of the project which invited Rajchman's attention to folding was the employment of one of Rene Thorn's catastrophe diagrams in the design process.
Despite potential protestations to the contrary, it is more than likely that Thorn's catastrophe nets entered into the archi tl'cture of Carsten Juel-Christiansen's Die Anhalter Faltung, Peter Eisenman's Rebstock Park, Jeffrey Kipnis' Unite de Habitation at Briey installation and Bahram Shirdel's Nara Convention Hall as a mere formal technique. Inevitably, architects and philosophers alike would find this in itself a catastrophe for all concerned. Yet, their use illustrates that at Icast four architects simultaneously found in Thorn's diagrams a formal device for an alternative description of spatial com plexity. The kind of complexity engendered by this alliance with Thorn is substantially different than the complexity provided by
GREG LYNN 51
either Venturi's decorated shed or the more recent conflicting forms of Deconstructivism. Topological geometry in general, and the catastrophe diagrams in particular, deploy disparate forces on a continuous surface within which more or less open systems of connection are possible.
"Topology considers superficial structures susceptible to continuous transformations which easily change their form, the most interesting geometric properties common to all modifi cation being studied. Assumed is an abstract material of ideal deformability which can be deformed, with the exception of disruption. "
These geometries bend and stabilise with viscosity under pressure. Where one would expect that an architect looking at catastrophes would be interested in conflicts, ironically, architects are finding new forms of dynamic stability in these diagrams. The mutual interest in Thorn's diagrams points to a desire to be involved with events which they cannot predict. The primary innovation made by those diagrams is the geometric modelling of a multiplicity of possible co-present events at any moment. Thorn's morphogenesis engages seemingly random events with mathematical probability.
Thorn's nets were developed to describe catastrophic events. What is common to these events is an inability to define exactly the moment at which a catastrophe occurs. This loss of exacti
tude is replaced by a geometry of multiple probable relations. With relative precision, the diagrams define potential catas trophes through cusps rather than fixed co-ordinates. Like any simple graph, Thorn's diagrams deploy X and Y forces across two axes of a gridded plane. A uniform plane would provide the potential for only a single point of intersection between any two X and Y co-ordinates. The supple topological surface of Thorn's diagrams is capable of enfolding in multiple dimensions. Within these folds, or cusps, zones of proximity are contained.
52 . ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
As t he topological surface folds over and into itself multiple pos "ible points of intersection are possible at any moment in the /. dimension. These co-present Z-dimensional zones are pos liible because the topological geometry captures space within lis surface. Through proximity and adjacency various vectors of force begin to imply these intensive event zones. In catastrophic ('vents there is not a single fixed point at which a catastrophe occurs but rather a zone of potential events that are described hy these cusps. The cusps are defined by multiple possible inter IIl·tions implying, with more or less probability, multiple fluid Ihresholds. Thorn's geometric plexus organises disparate forces ill order to describe possible types of connections.
If there is a single dominant effect of the French word pli, II is its resistance to being translated into any single term. It is precisely the formal manipulations of folding that are capable of incorporating manifold external forces and elements within form, yet Le pli undoubtedly risks being translated into archi Il'cture as mere folded figures. In architecture, folded forms risk quickly becoming a sign for catastrophe. The success of the IIrchitects who are folding should not be based on their ability 10 represent catastrophe theory in architectural form. Rather, Iht, topological geometries, in connection with the probable ('vents they model, present a flexible system for the organisa lion of disparate elements within continuous spaces. Yet, these
"mooth systems are highly differentiated by cusps or zones of (·o-presence. The catastrophe diagram used by Eisenman in the I{l'bstock Park project destabilises the way that the buildings meet the ground. It smoothes the landscape and the building hy turning both into one another along cusps. The diagrams used by Kipnis in the Briey project, and Shirdel in the Nara (:onvention Hall, develop an interstitial space contained simul laneously within two folded cusps. This geometrically blushed surface exists within two systems at the same moment and in
GREG LYNN 53
this manner presents a space of co-presence with multiple adja cent zones of proximity.
Before the introduction of either Deleuze or Thom to archi tecture, folding was developed as a formal tactic in response to problems presented by the exigencies of commercial develop ment. Henry Cobb has argued in both the Charlottesville Tapes and his Note on Folding for a necessity to both dematerialise and differentiate the massive homogeneous volumes dictated by commercial development in order to bring them into rela tion with finer grain heterogeneous urban conditions. His first principle for folding is a smoothing of elements across a shared surface. The facade of the John Hancock Tower is smoothed into a continuous surface so that the building might disappear into its context through reflection rather than mimicry. Any poten tial for replicating the existing context was precluded by both the size of the contiguous floor plates required by the developer and the economic necessity to construct the building's skin from glass panels. Folding became the method by which the surface of a large homogeneous volume could be differentiated while remaining continuous. This tactic acknowledges that the existing fabric and the developer tower are essentially of differ ent species by placing their differences in mixture, rather than contradiction, through the manipulation of a pliant skin.
Like the John Hancock Building, the Allied Bank Tower begins with the incorporation of glass panels and metal frame into a continuous folded surface. The differentiation of the folded surface, through the simultaneous bending of the glass and metal, brings those elements together in a continuous plane. The manipulations of the material surface proliferate folding and bending effects in the massing of the building. The alien building becomes a continuous surface of disappearance that both diffracts and reflects the context through complex manipulations of folding. In the recent films Predator and
54 ' ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
I'r('dator II, a similar alien is capable of disappearing into both urban and jungle environments, not through cubist camou Unge lS but by reflecting and diffracting its environment like an octopus or chameleon. The contours between an object and lIS context are obfuscated by forms which become translucent, rellective and diffracted. The alien gains mobility by cloaking its volume in a folded surface of disappearance. Unlike the "deco rnted shed" or "building board" which mimics its context with a singular sign, folding diffuses an entire surface through a Ilhimmering reflection of local adjacent and contiguous particu Inrities. For instance, there is a significant difference between a limall fish which represents itself as a fragment of a larger fish Ihrough the figure of a large eye on its tail, and a barracuda whieh becomes like the liquid in which it swims through a dif fused reflection of its context. The first strategy invites deceitful detection where the second uses stealth to avoid detection. Similarly, the massive volume of the Allied Bank Tower situates hsclfwithin a particular discontinuous locale by cloaking itself In a folded reflected surface. Here, cunning stealth is used as a way of involving contextual forces through the manipulation of II surface. The resemblance offolded architecture to the stealth bomber results not from a similarity between military and archi I('ctural technologies or intentions but rather from a tactical disappearance'6 of a volume through the manipulation of a sur fnce. This disappearance into the fold is neither insidious nor innocent but merely a very effective tactic.
Like Henry Cobb, Peter Eisenman introduces a fold as a method of disappearing into a specific context. Unlike Cobb, who began with a logic of construction, Eisenman aligns the fold with the urban contours of the Rebstock Park. The repetitive Iypologies of housing and office buildings are initially deployed un the site in a more or less functionalist fashion; then a topo logical net derived from Thom's Butterfly net is aligned to the
GREG LYNN 55
perimeter of the site and pushed through the typological bars. This procedure differentiates the uniform bars in response to the global morphology of the site. In this manner the manifestation of the fold is in the incorporation of differences-derived from the morphology of the site-into the homogeneous typologies of the housing and office blocks. Both Eisenman's local differen tiation of the building types by global folding, and Cobb's local lUlU11l~ across constructional elements which globally differen tiates each floor plate and the entire massing of the building are effective. Cobb and Eisenman "animate" homogenous organi sations that were seemingly given to the architect-office tower and siedlung-with the figure of a fold. The shared of folding identified by both Eisenman and Cobb, evident in their respective texts, is the ability to differentiate the inherited homogeneous organisations of both Modernism (Eisenman's siedlung) and commercial development (Cobb's tower). This differentiation of known types of space and organisation has something in common with Deleuze's delimitation of folding in architecture within the Baroque. Folding heterogeneity into known typologies renders those organisations more smooth and more intensive so that they are better able to incorporate disparate elements within a continuous system. Shirdel's use ofThom's diagrams is quite interesting as the catastrophe sec tions do not animate an existing organisation. Rather, they begin as merely one system among three others. The convention halls float within the envelope of the building as they are sup ported by a series of transverse structural walls whose figure is derived from Thom's nets. This mixture of systems, supported by the catastrophe sections, generates a massive residual pub lic space at the ground floor of the building. In Shirdel's project the manipulations of folding, in both the catastrophe sections and the building envelope, incorporate previously unrelated ele ments into a mixture. The space between the theatres, the skin
56 . ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
und the lateral structural walls is such a space of mixture and intrication.
With structure itself, Chuck Hoberman is capable of transforming the size of domes and roofs through a folding structural mechanism. Hoberman develops adjustable struc tll res whose differential movements occur through the dynamic transformation of flexible continuous systems. The movements of these mechanisms are determined both by use and struc ture. Hoberman's structural mechanisms develop a system of smooth transformation in two ways. The Iris dome and sphere projects transform their size while maintaining their shape. This flexibility of size within the static shape of the stadium is (:apable of supporting new kinds of events. The patented tiling patterns transform both the size and shape of surfaces, developing local secondary pockets of space and enveloping larger primary volumes.
So far in architecture, Deleuze's, Cobb's, Eisenman's and Hoberman's discourse inherits dominant typologies of organ isation into which new elements are folded. Within these activities of folding it is perhaps more important to identifY those new forms of local organisation and occupation which inhabit the familiar types of the Latin cross church, the siedlung, the office tower and the stadium, rather than the disturbances visited on those old forms of organisation. Folding can occur in both the organisations of old forms and the free intensi ties of unrelated elements as is the case with Shirdel's project. Likewise, other than folding, there are several manipulations of elements engendering smooth, heterogeneous and intensive organisation.
Despite the differences between these practices, they share a sensibility that resists cracking or breaking in response to external pressures. These tactics and strategies are all compli ant to, complicated by, and complicit with external forces in
GREG LYNN 57
manners which are: submissive, suppliant, adaptable, con tingent, responsive, fluent, and yielding through involvement
and incorporation. The attitude which runs throughout this collection of projects and essays is the shared attempt to place seemingly disparate forces into relation through strategies
which are externally plied. Perhaps, in this regard only, there are many opportunities for architecture to be effected by Gilles Deleuze's book Le plio The formal character tics of pliancy
anexact forms and topological geometries primarily-can be more viscous and fluid in response to exigencies. They maintain
formal integrity through deformations which do not internally cleave or shear but through which they connect, incorporate and affiliate productively. Cunning and viscous systems such
as these gain strength through flexible connections that occur by vicissitude. If the collected projects within this publication do have certain formal affinities, it is as a result of a folding out of formalism into a world of external influences. Rather than
speak of the forms of folding autonomously, it is important to maintain a logic rather than a style of curvilinearity. The formal
affinities of these projects result from their pliancy and ability to deform in response to particular contingencies. What is being
asked in different ways by the group of architects and theorists in this publication is: How can architecture be configured as a complex system into which external particularities are already
found to be plied?
58 ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
Notes
Robert Venturi, Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (New
York: Museum of Modern Art Papers on Architecture, 1966).
Two ideas were introduced in this text that seem extremely relevant
to contemporary architecture: typological deformation and the
continuity between objects and contexts. Both of these concepts
receded when compared with the dominant ideas of collision cities
a nd the dialectic of urban figure/ground relationships. Curiously, they
illustrate typological deformations in both Baroque and early modern
architecture: "However, Asplund's play with assumed contingencies
and assumed absolutes, brilliant though it may be, does seem to
involve mostly strategies of response; and, in considering problems
of the object, it may be useful to consider the admittedly ancient
technique of deliberately distorting what is also presented as the
ideal type. So the reading of Saint Agnese continuouslyfluctuates
between an interpretation of the building as object and the building as
texture . .. Note this type of strategy combines local concessions with a
declaration of independence from anything local and specific." 77.
See Sanford Kwinter and Jonathan Crary, "Foreword," Zone 6:
Incorporations (New York: Urzone Books, 1992), 12-15.
.1 (rilles Deleuze, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia
(Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press, 1987),478.
Mark Wigley and Philip Johnson, DeconstructivistArchitecture: The
Museum ojModernArt, New York (Boston: Little, Brown, 1988), 15.
" Marion Cunningham, The Fannie Farmer Cookbook, 13th edition (New
York: AlfredA. Knopf, 1990),41-47.
Deleuze, Plateaus, 475-6.
H An application of vicissitude to Kipnis' logic of undecidability and
weak form might engender a cunning logic of non-linear affiliations.
This seems apt given the reference to both undecidability and
weakness in the definition of vicissitudes.
II Ann Bergren's discussions of the metis in architecture is an example
of cunning manipulations of form. For an alternative reading of these
tactics in Greek art also see Jean-Pierre Vernant.
I II Deleuze, Plateaus, 256.
I 1 This concept has been developed by Leibniz and has many resonances
with Sanford Kwinter's discussions of biological space and epigenesis
GREG LYNN 59
as they relate to architecture and Catherine Ingraham's logic of the
swerve and the animal lines of beasts of burden.
12 Wigley, DeconstructivistArchitecture, 22.
13 See "0-0" by Robert Somol in the WexnerCenter for the VisualArts,
special issue ofArchitectural Design (London: Academy Editions,
1990). 14 Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, Mass.: G&C Merriam
Company, 1977), 1170 15 Edmund Husserl, "The Origin ofGeometry" in Edmund Husserl's Origin
ofGeometry: An Introduction, trans. Jacques Derrida (Lincoln, Neb.:
University of Nebraska Press, 1989).
16 See Fetish, ed. Sarah Whiting, Edward Mitchell, and Greg Lynn (New
York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1992), 158-173.
17 Webster's, 883. 18 Rajchman identifies an inability in contexualism to "Index the
complexifications of urban space." John Rajchman, "Perplications:
On the Space and Time of Rebstock Park," in Unfolding Frankfurt
(Berlin: Ernst &Sohn Verlag, 1991), 21.
19 A similar exchange, across disciplines through geometry, occurred
in France in the mid-18th century with the development of probable
geometries. Initially there was a desire to describe chance events
with mathematical precision. This led to the development of a
geometric model that subsequently opened new fields of study in other disciplines. The mathematical interests in probability of the
professional gambler Marquis de Chevalier influenced Comte de
Buffon to develop the geometric description of the Needle Problem.
This geometric model of probability was later elaborated in three
dimensions by the geologist Dellese and became the foundation for
nearly all of the present day anatomical descriptions that utilise serial
transactions: including CAT scan, X-Ray, and PET technologies. For
a more elaborate discussion of these exchanges and the impact of
related probable and anexact geometries on architectural space refer
to my [A. Krista Sykes] forthcoming article inNYMagazine no. 1 (New
York: Rizzoli International, 1993). 20 RudolfWittkower, Architectural Principles in the Age ofHumanism
(New York: WWNorton, 1971). 21 Colin Rowe, Mathematics ofthe Ideal Villa and Other Essays
(Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1976).
60 . ARCHITECTURAL CURVILINEARITY
l1. For an earlier instance of discontinuous development based on
environmental forces and co-evolution, in reference to dynamic
variation, see William Bateson, Materialsfor the Study ofVariation:
Treated with Especial Regard to Discontinuity in the Origin ofSpecies
(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1894).
l.l Erwin Panofsky has provided perhaps the finest example of this kind
of heterogeneous smoothness in his analyses of Egyptian statuary and
the Sphinx in particular: "three different systems of proportion were
employed-an anomaly easily explained by the fact that the organism
in question is not a homogeneous but a heterogeneous one." l4 Webster's, 445.
l;, In Stan Allen's introduction to the work of Douglas Garofalo forthcoming in Assemblage 19 (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press,
1992) a strategy of camouflage is articulated which invests surfaces
with alternatives to the forms and volumes they delimit. The
representation of other known figures is referred to as a logic of
plumage. For instance, a butterfly wing representing the head of a bird invites a deceitful detection. This differs from the disappearance of a surface by stealth which resists any recognition.
l(, This suggests a reading of Michael Hays' text on the early Mies van der
Rohe Friedrichstrasse Tower [unbuilt] as a tactic of disappearance by
proliferating cacophonous images of the city. Hays' work on Hannes
Meyer's United Nations Competition Entry is perhaps the most critical
in the reinterpretation of functional contingencies in the intensely
involved production of differentiated, heterogeneous yet continuous space through manipulations of a surface.
GREG LYNN 61
__MACOSX/WEEK 11 READINGS/._Lynn_Folded_Pliant_Supple.pdf
WEEK 11 READINGS/Schumacher_Parametricism.pdf
ZAHA RADm ARCHITECTS, BEUING
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT COM
PETITION PROPOSAL, 2010. STUDIES
OF FORMAL MUTATIONS. ALL IMAGES
COURTESY ZAHA RADIO ARCHITECTS.
Patri!? Schumacher
Editor's Note: This text is excerpted from a lecture Patri!? Schumacher gave in Los Angeles at SCI-Arc in September 2010.
Pararnetricisrn And the Autopoiesis Of Architecture
It's great to be at SCI-Arc. I had two great days to see what's going on here, and I think what I have to say speaks, to a certain extent, critically to what is going on here. The lecture is a variation on a lecture I have been giving this year. I've added an element that relates to my forthcoming book, The Autopoiesis ofArchitecture, which is an attempt to create a comprehensive and unified theory of architecture, and which features parametricism as the last chapter of volume two. The argument is that parametric ism continues the autopoiesis of architecture, which is the self-referential, closed system of communications that constitutes architecture as a discourse in contemporary society. The book is in two volumes. Volume one, a new framework for architecture, is coming out in December [released December 7,2010] and then a new agenda for architecture appears in volume two, probably four to six months later. It is difficult to summarize, but just to raise a bit of curiosity about this, I will make an argument for a comprehensive unified theory is of interest.
A comprehensive unified theory of and for architecture is important if you are trying to lead 400 architects across a multiplicity of projects, touching all aspects and components of contemporary architecture in terms of programmatic agendas and at all scales. With a unified theory one is better prepared to manage the different designs, designers, and approaches that run in different directions, fight each other, contradict each other, and stand in each other's way. I am also teaching at a number of schools, the Architectural Association Design Research Laboratory [AA DRL] being one of them, an expanding group that is now 150 to 160 students. Here again there is an issue in trying to converge efforts so that people don't trip over each other and get in each other's way. The need for a unified theory is first of all to eliminate contradic tions within one's own efforts - so one doesn't stand in one's own way all the time. If you go around from jury to jury, from project to project, you one thing here, another thing there, and further ideas come to mind; by the third occasion
63
you might be saying and doing things that don't gel, don't cohere. You might be developing ideas about architecture's societal function. You might be concerned with what is architecture, what is not architecture, to demarcate against art, engineering, etc. You might think of yourself as pan of something like an avant-garde and try to develop a theory of the avant-garde. Or think about design media, the role of media theory; about design processes and design process theory. You wonder about aesthetic values and whether the notion of beauty is still relevant. Or you try to develop a theory of beauty, an aesthetic theory. And you're concerned with phenomenology. Then there's perception - how do you perceive space, subjects in space? Then it goes on. The concept of style: Is it still relevant? Then you try to develop a theory of style. You try to read the history of architecture in a cer tain fashion ... and you do all this to position yourself with respect to contemporary architecture. These are the compo nents that different authors, different thinkers, might un dertake and spend half their careers on. Some of us might do two or three of these. At a certain stage it makes sense to ask whether these things can be brought into a coherent system of ideas where they forge a kind of trajectory that has to do with guiding practice. You can only lead a coherent practice with a deep and comprehensive theory.
No one has attempted a unified theory for architecture since Le Corbusier, and perhaps the book The International Sryie, and perhaps the work of Christian Norberg-Schultz. But for a long time it has been nearly taboo even to start thinking about such an idea. I find it very interesting that the concept of style, like the International Style, returned after it had been abandoned by most of the early modernists. Modernism - the International Style - dominated the trans formation of our built environment for 50 years and gener ated an unprecedented level of material freedom and plenty, aligned, of course, with the growth of industrial civilization. In the 1970s it became clear that the principles and values that had defined modern architecture for half a century were no longer the principles and values through which architecture could facilitate the further progress of world civilization. Modernism experienced a massive crisis, was abandoned. Everything had to be questioned, rethought, which led to free rein, freewheeling, browsing, and brainstorming. This also brought forth a new cast of characters, a sense of pluralism, and a sense that all systems (grand narratives) are bankrupt. That doesn't mean that aU attempts to cohere a unified theory are to be dismissed forever. After a period of questioning,
brainstorming, and freewheeling experimentation, new pro visional conclusions must be drawn, decisions must be made on how to move a project forward in a clear way. The neces sity of this cannot be denied.
So, to raise some curiosity about this idea, let me discuss the chapter structure of volume one. After the introduction there is a chapter on architecture theory, which is put for ward as an important, necessary component of architecture. It actually marks the inception and origin of architecture with Alberti 500 years ago in the early Renaissance. That's where I say architecture starts. Everything before that was not architecture, it was some form of traditional building. Most of the book is an attempt to observe architecture and its communication structures, key principles, distinctions, methods, practices. It's a comprehensive discourse analysis of the discipline, and from that develops a normative agenda of selecting, or filtering out, the pertinent tendencies, the permanent communication structures, and the variable communication structures that have been evolving. All this is elaborated in order to forge a statement and position on how to move forward. To make this more digestible I extract poignant theses from the theory, and I will just read a few.
Thesis one is that the phenomenon of architecture can be most adequately grasped if it is analyzed as an autonomous network or auto poetic system of communications. So I am not talking about architecture as simply a collection of build ings. I'm not talking about it as a profession or a practice. I'm not talking about it only as an academic discipline. Rather, I am concerned with how all of these activities are joined to gether to create a system of communications.
Thesis four states there is no architecture without theory. Thesis six contains the notion that resolute autonomy, or what I call self-referential closure, is a prerequisite of archi tecture's effectiveness in an increasingly complex and dy namic social environment. The notion of a self-enclosed autonomy of the discipline means that we as architects, and as a discourse as a whole, need to define the purposes that guide us, the conceptual structures and modes of arguments that are legitimate and meaningful to us, the tasks to focus on and how to pursue them. The kind of network of communi cations that we constitute determines this. In contemporary society there is no other authority we can appeal to which would instruct architecture with respect to the built envi ronment and its evolution. Neither politics, nor clients, nor science, nor morality. We have the burden as a collective to determine the way forward. That's what I mean by autonomy
64 Winter 2011 65
- the autonomy to adapt to an environment and to stay rel evant in it. And that is not
I also discovered that only by differentiating the avant garde as a specific subsystem can contemporary architecture actively participate in the evolution of I believe that institutions like SCI-Arc and the AA, which seem to be one step removed from the burdens of state-of-the-art solutions here and now, are a condition for archi tecture to rethink and upgrade itself continuously.
Thesis ten suggests that in a society without a control center, architecture must regulate itself and maintain its own mechanisms of evolution in order to remain adaptable in an ecology of evolving societal subsystems. These subsystems constitute society according to the notion of society underly ing this discourse. There can be no external determination imposed upon architecture, neither by political bodies nor by paying clients, except in the negative, trivial sense of disrup tion. Yes, they can stop your project. Maybe they can clamp down and deny permission, but they obviously cannot con structively intervene. The same occurs with other so-called subsystems of society, like the legal system, science, the arts, etc. They are all self-regulating discourses.
Thesis 16 suggests that avant-garde styles are designed research programs. IfI talk about style or use the concept of style I am not necessarily alluding to all its connotations. I am making an effort to redefine style as a valid category of contemporary discourse, because to just let it drop to the side would be an impoverishment of contemporary discourse. The notion of style is one of the few ideas that is meaningful beyond the confines of architectural discourse. For the world at large it's the primary category of understanding architec ture, and we need to engage with that. All avant-garde styles are design research programs. They begin as progressive design research programs, and parametricism is now in that phase. They mature to become productive dogmas, which happened with modernism. And there is productivity in the ability to routinize insights for rapid dissemination and ex ecution. And obviously all styles end up as degenerate dogmas. That is their trajectory.
Thesis 17: Aesthetic values encapsulate a condensed collective within useful dogmas. Their inherent inertia implies that values progress via revolution rather than evolution. Aesthetic values obviously shift with historical progress. You need to relearn your aesthetic sensibilities to
for moral sensibilities. I am arguing, for instance, that mini malist sensibilities have to be fought and suppressed because they don't allow you to adapt to contemporary life.
Thesis 19: Architecture depends on its medium enor mously. Parametricism is also a product of the development of the medium of architecture. Architectural communication is happening primarily within the medium of the drawing, becoming the digital model, becoming the parametric model, and the network of scripts. Architecture depends on its me dium in the same way the economy depends on money and politics depends on power. These specialized media sustain a new plane of communication that depends on the of the medium, which remains able to inflationary tendencies. If you overdo make-believe
reality, there is a but without this
comoel1lng medium you would never be able to convince or anybody to project complex, large-scale
find those that are productive and viable and that allow you to exist and be oroductive in contemporary life. The same goes
66 Log 21 Winter 2011
projects into a distant future, or to coalesce the enormous amount of resources and people needed to support and believe
67
ZAHA HADID ARCHITECTS, BEIJING
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT COMPE
TITION PROPOSAL, 2010.
ZAHA RADID ARCHITECTS, BEIJING
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT COMPE
TITION PROPOSAL, 2010. STUDIES
OF FORMAL MUTATIONS.
in a coordinated effort. Architecture, of course, with its increasing complexity of tasks and agendas, also needs to upgrade its medium, just as money did. Money is no longer just coinage; it became paper money, became electronic money. Administrative power is also benefiting from the microelectronic revolution in terms of administering, controlling, connecting, and directing. Each of these social subsystems has a specialized social medium. All these media evolve together with the tasks they take on.
One more thesis, Thesis 23: Radical innovation presupposes newness. Newness is first of all just otherness. The new is produced by blind mechanisms rather than creative thought. Strategic selection is required to secure communicative conti nuity and adaptive pertinence.
*** Now I want to talk a little about the theoretical sources that allow me to work out a comprehensive unified theory of ar chitecture with confidence and conviction. To do that, one of the key things you have to grasp is the societal function, or the raison d'&tre, of architecture in the world why it came into being, why it took certain forms and moved toward certain developments, and what the best bet is for staying relevant and continuing to play an important role. This requires some sense of the overall social process and its workings. For the first decade of my architectural life, beginning in the early
68 Log 21
1980s, I looked at Marxism and historical materialism as the kind of overarching theoretical edifice through which to think what is going on in architecture. When I went into ar chitecture at the University of Stuttgart, I was joining the late modern period. People were still convinced of modernism. There was still hi-tech - Norman Foster and Richard Rogers were still the prominent going tendency. I was into it, but one or two years into my studies, I discovered postmodernism in the writing of Robert Venturi and in charles jencks's The Language of Post-Modern Architecture. And so I changed, and, in fact, the university changed. And a few years later there was a radical shift to deconstructivism. It seemed that in the 1980s, every two or three years there was a revolution in style, in paradigm, in outlook, and in values. I think that period left a mark on some people's general philosophical outlook. Soon there was a pluralism of styles. It seems that since then the kind of monolithic, cumulative trajectory of modernism is a thing of a past era and that we're now living in a world of continuous flux and splintering, fragmenting trajectories and ever-changing values, but that it is a historical illusion.
In my search for a credible theory of architecture and theory of contemporary society I discovered Niklas Luh mann's social systems theory. Luhmann's fundamental prem ise is that all social phenomena or events depend on systems of communication. He steps back from Marxist materialism to a kind of abstraction, but one that I think is plausible. You always have to abstract to theorize. To focus on communica tions is interesting, because if you think about everybody's life process - where the bottlenecks are, where the crux of your problems is, your issues - you are always coping with social systems, your ability to communicate within them, to find a position within them. Even the physical world only gets to you through systems of communication. For example, if you're struck by illness your main problem will be whether you have health insurance, whether you have people you can communicate with, whether you are embedded in a system of communications with rights and the ability to speak. If you want to traverse physical space your issue will be whether you have money, an airline ticket. The bottleneck will be traffic, other people's attempts to travel, security controls at airports, etc. You are protected if you have the ability to buy a hotel room, an apartment, switch on the heater, pay the bills. Com munication structures everyone's interface with the physical world and our relations with each other. If you think about architecture as an inverted commerce, we construct projects only through communications, whether through drawings,
69Winter 2011
contracts, phone calls, emails: communications, upon com munications, upon communications - that's what runs this world. Everything goes through that needle's eye.
Luhmann's philosophy of history differs from both Marx's and Hegel's. I insist that an architectural theorist possess a philosophy of history, a theory of historical development. Luhmann looks at history in terms of modes of social or soci etal differentiation - the mark of epochs. Today societies are organized in terms of functional differentiation. This is what Luhmann calls functionally differentiated society, composed of the great function systems of society, themselves parallel systems that co-evolve as autonomous discourses, systems of communication like politics, law, economics, science, educa tion, health, mass media, and art. A politician has no way of influencing your voice in terms of scientific truth, just as issues of law have nothing to say with respect to scientific knowledge. The economy is separate from politics and has its own autonomous domain and communication system based on money and exchange in the market. The reverse is also true: science can deliver knowledge, but what is to be done with that knowledge is a matter of the economy, or the political discourse, and science cannot instruct politics. The same is true for art and science. The beautiful cannot be sci entifically determined, etc.
This is Luhmann's picture of society, which I very briefly sketch here. Luhmann has in fact written comprehensive analyses of all these social subsystems, but he did not write about architecture. He fit architecture anachronistically - into the art system, but really didn't talk much about it. I have been reading Luhmann for about 15 years, and it in creasingly occurred to me that architecture could be theorized in the same way. Architecture is one of those great function systems of contemporary society, our functionally differenti ated society.
Just a few more points about what that might mean. Luhmann discovers a series of important processes that deter mine these different systems within the era of modernity. The emerging market-orientation of the economy, the liberaliza tion of the economy, is the pertinent way for the economy to become an autopoietic system. The political system has been evolving and succeeding through democratization, and only through democratization does it become a truly autopoietic, self-referentially closed system. The legal system found its autonomy and forward drive through positivism rather than natural law or God-given legal discourse. Art discovered its self-programming in romanticism. All of these mechanisms
70 Log 21
mean that these systems become autonomous and adaptive to each other. They become versatile, innovative, progressive, and ever-:evolving. All these processes are established some where between 1800 and 1900. My thesis here is that the concept of space, or the spatialization of architecture, is the equivalent of the democratization of the political system, the
liberalization of the economy, etc. As Luhmann was analyzing these different function sys
tems he realized that despite their differences - they share parallel structures and face parallel, or comparative, prob lems: How could they demarcate themselves? How could they cohere around an elemental operation? How could they rep resent within themselves the differences between them and their environment? He discovers that each of these systems has a binary code, programs that elaborate how the code val ues will be used. Each has its specific medium, such as money for the economy, and they all have a unique societal function, which acts as a kind of evolutionary attract or for the differ entiation and autonomization of that respective system. This unique and distinct function unfolds in a series of tasks. Each of these systems projected itself forward through something Luhmann called self-descriptions. This means that within each discourse there are theoretical reflections via great treatises, written accounts of trying to think through and argue the function, the purpose, the raison d'~tre of each of the function systems. So within the political system there is political theory. The legal system developed together with jurisprudence. Science developed together with epistemology, the philosophy of science. And architecture has architectural theory, but only a deep and comprehensive kind of architec tural theory functions as self-description. In volume two I go through some of them: Alberti's Ten Books on Architecture; Durand's lectures on architecture for the era of neoclassicism; Le Corbusier's Towards a New Architecture for modernism; and The Autopoiesis of Architecture for our time, for parametricism.
We can identify in every function system a so-called lead distinction. The lead distinction for architecture is form versus function. You find it in Alberti. You find it in all major self-descriptions. This lead distinction is the re-entry of the system-environment distinction into the system. It represents the distinction of the system of architecture against its en vironment - that is, against the totality of society - within architecture. So with the category of form, architecture rep resents itself to itself as distinct from function, which is the category representing the external world reference of archi tecture. The lead distinction of the economy is the distinction
Winter 2011 71
of price versus value: price is the internal reference; value is the external reference. In science it is theory versus evidence, in the law, norm versus fact, etc. There are further parallels between these function systems. To identify the respective structure in architecture that coincides with the structures found in the other function systems has been a creative puzzle-solving exercise, but in the end a coherent picture emerges that allows me to take a position with respect to all of the partial theories I have been developing over the years.
Let me show a few pictures of MAXXI in Rome as a reminder that there's a certain credibility in realizing projects that follow the principles I'm talking about. The Rome proj ect is a field project. It has a very stringent formalism. At the same time it is very capable of adapting to contexts, in terms of continuing field conditions, aligning with an urban grid on one side and with a separate urban grid on another, incorpo rating existing architectures, and managing to create a coher ent space around a corner. I would argue that it does a lot of difficult things with ease and elegance. Some of the strong alignments with the context go right through the building. There's a sense of bringing together disparate elements under a single formalism, with flow lines irrigating the space. One of the ambitions is moments of deep visual penetration, the legibility and transparency of complex organization. In the central communication hub, ramps and staircases follow the formal language of walls and ribs, creating something coherent. That's a precondition for generating an overall complexity without creating visual chaos. Although MAXXI was designed 10 years ago, it is a kind of early parametricist project. The proliferation of lines, bundling, converging, and departing from one another, creates a field space.
***
So let me define parametricism. First of all, a conceptual definition: all elements of architecture have become para metrically malleable. That's both fundamental and profound. The advantage of this is the intensification of relations both internally, within a design project, a building, and exter nally, with its context and surroundings. This is a funda mental ontological shift with respect to the base components and primitives constituting an architecture. For the previ ous 2,000 years, if you like, architecture was working with platonic solids, with rigid, hermetic, geometric figures, and just composing them. Compared with classical architecture, modernism was allowed to stretch proportions, was able to give up symmetries, and instead had a kind of dynamic
72 Log 21
equilibrium and more freedom that moved these figures from edifice to space with all of the advantages of abstraction and versatility that entails. But in terms of the base primitives, it was geometric figures and nothing else. If you look at the kinds of primitives we are working with today, however, it is a totally different world splines, blobs, nurbs, particles, all organized by scripts. I think it started with deconstructivism, to a certain extent, and then Greg Lynn talking about blobs in 1994-95. When we were teaching at Columbia in '93, we were creating dynamic, cross-inflected textures and fields. This was also the beginning of certain computational mechanisms. Instead of drawing with ruler and compass, making rigid lines and rigid figures, we worked with dynamical systems. That's a new ontology, which cannot but leave a profound, radically transformative mark on what we do. If we succeed, and I have no doubt parametricism will succeed, we'll change the physiognomy of this planet and its built environment, just the way modernism did for 50 years in the 20th century. The recession over the last two years put a bit of a damper on but that should not be misunderstood as a failure or refuta tion of this kind of work. In fact, architecture continues to invest in digital technology, fabrication systems, etc., and any prohibitive cost is diminishing as a factor. An economic recession cannot stand in the way of universalizing these principles. Parametricism is the way we do urbanism and architecture now.
73
ZAHAHADID ARCHITECTS, MAXXI: MUSEUM OF XXI CENTURY ARTS, ROME, 1998-2009. PUBLIC PLAZA AT
ENTRY. PHOTO: IWAN BUN.
Winter 2011
ZAHA RADID ARCHITECTS, MAXXI:
MUSEUM OF XXI CENTURY ARTS,
ROME, 1998-2009. PHOTO: IWAN BAAN.
'" '" '" So the thesis is clear: parametricism is the great new style after modernism. I consider postmoderrusm and deconstructivism to be transitional styles, or transitional episodes. I think that architectural innovation and history proceed by the succession of styles. These are the great paradigms and research pro grams by which architecture redefines itself. Postmodernism and deconstructivism are temporary phenomena, a decade each. Parametricism is already 15 years down the line. Design research programs establish the conditions for the collec tive design research needed to agree on the fundamentals that add up to an overall research project. If you are fighting over fundamentals every time you start a new project, you cannot progress. Here I draw not on Luhmann so much as on the philosophy of science as projected by Thomas Kuhn, theorizing paradigm shifts, and in particular I draw on Imre Lakatos's theory of scientific research programs. Science is founded, or re-founded, with certain paradigmatic categories, principles, anticipations, and intuitions about how a science could progress, and on that basis, after a revolutionary period of paradigm exploration, a new paradigm or research pro gram has to emerge and win the competitive battle, and then reconstitute cumulative research. Like a research program, a shared style implies that you are formulating pertinent desires, framing and posing problems to work on, and stra tegically constraining the solution space. We are identifying
Winter 201174 Log 21
problems and trying to solve these problems by means of parametric systems, by exploring the power of malleability in the elements. The style imposes a formal a priori. There are very strong analogies in science. For example, Newton set up a certain set of principles by which every phenomenon was investigated, probed, and modeled. From problem to prob lem, the same principles are held steady, otherwise there is no testing, no research. Innovation requires this kind of steady, collective effort. It is the condition of any progress.
We can think of the history of architecture in terms of cycles of innovation and shifts between revolutionary periods, when the paradigm is no longer working, as happened in the late '60s, the '70s, and early '80s. You couldn't really go on after Pruitt-Igoe was imploded. The principles that architects were relying on were exhausted. That's also why SCI-Arc was founded because the old university way of doing things couldn't continue, it was bankrupt. The situation required a sense of freewheeling brainstorming. Architecture drew on philosophers, and fundamental questions were asked. It's interesting that today philosophy has receded, we've reached a different stage. We have drawn conclusions and learned our lessons; we have internalized new forms of thinking and argumentation, new values, new philosophies, and now we have to forge ahead, developing a new architecture. Every new generation has to relearn the raison d'~tre of what we do, but that doesn't mean that what we are doing is up for discur sive destruction or disposition every second year. At the early stages of a new convergence you have to become accustomed to living with a lot of failures, a lot of difficulties, a lot of implausibilities. That's why we need the avant-garde: where there is methodical tolerance, where there are dry runs, experiments, and manifesto projects, and where you can't expect to immediately compete with the mainstream state of the art. You have to stick to your principles and not allow pragmatic concerns to push you to fall back on old models, old solutions, which are easy and accepted. You've got to go it the difficult way. You've got to go it the consistent way. The dogmatic way. That's what Newton did also.
It's important to give a conceptual definition of para metricism in terms of parametric malleability, but there is also an operational definition of parametricism. When I first started to talk about parametricism I was talking about for mal heuristics, but now I find it necessary also to talk about functional heuristics, because a style is not just a matter of form and structured formalisms. Each style also introduces a particular attitude and way of comprehending and handling
7S
ZAHA RADIO ARCHITECTS, NYC 2012
OLYMPIC VILLAGE COMPETITION PRO
POSAL, NEW YORK, 2004. BIRD'S-EYE
VIEW AND PERSPECTIVE.
functions and program. Any.reri()u.r style must take a posi tion on these issues, and I think we have a different attitude and position with respect to function than the modernists. We need both functional heuristics and formal heuristics. This is not something I am dogmatically imposing, I'm just observ ing that I, my friends, my students, naturally adhere to these principles without faiL Their hand would fall off rather than draw straight lines. Is anybody here drawing a triangle, a square, or a circle? Ever again? No!
Postmodernism and deconstructivism celebrated collage, interpenetration, and layering in an unmediated way, but this notion of pure difference and collage, which is in fact the default condition of spontaneous urban development after the collapse of modernism, is invested only in just the pro liferation of pure difference, of piling up unrelated elements against unrelated elements, etc. But that is taboo within the discourse of parametric ism. Modernism, seriality, repetition are out of the question. Instead everybody is putting down their own shape, form, material- all uncoordinated. So, if the modernist recipes as well as their spontaneous antitheses are rejected, where are we going?
We are trying to create a second nature, a complex var iegated order, at Zaha Hadid Architects and at the different schools where we teach. I am trying to formulate the positive principles that determine the new physiognomy, that define a new way of working with parametrically malleable, soft forms. Soft forms are able to incorporate a degree of adap tive intelligence. They are no longer just forms, but may have gravity or structural constraints, material constraints, inbuilt logics that make them intelligent.
The second positive principle, or dogma, which all of you here always demand of yourselves and which your teachers
76 Log 21
will demand of you as students, is differentiation. If you are building differentiated systems, whether you work only with smooth gradients, or whether you work with thresholds or singularities, you will always work with laws, with rule based systems of differentiation. These can be applied mean ingfully, for instance, in the adaptation of facades to create an intelligent differentiation of elements. You can do this by taking data sets like sun exposure maps and make them drive an intelligent differentiation of brise-soleil elements, which are scripted off the data set. But you can also apply this kind of technique to urbanism. We're talking about urban fields, about the lawful differentiation of an urban fabric according to relevant data sets.
Once you have a series of these internally differentiated systems, you can think about establishing correlations be tween them, where one system drives the other. These are all co-present systems, which become representations of each other. They might be ontologically rather different, radically other. There will be multiple systems, each differentiated. Then you can establish correlations. Here, just a simple exam ple, are our towers for the New York Olympic Village, which interface with the ground and create a kind of resonance with it. The way the facade is correlated with the horizontal sec tion of a tower has to do with the programmatic shift from an office area to a residential area. And of course you can try to mechanize these correlations in terms of associative logics. What is important here for me is that we are moving from single-system projects, which are a kind of first stage - too abstract to really grip in reality to the inter-articulation of multiple subsystems, to multisystem correlations.
The principles of parametricism, in terms of its heuris tics, its operational definition, provide failsafe tools for criti-
Winter 2011 77
cism and self-criticism of project development and project enhancement. You can always identifY where the rigid forms still persist, where there is still too much simple repetition, where there are still unrelated elements. You can always ask for further softening, further differentiation, and further correlation of everything with everything else. There's always more to script and correlate to intensifY the internal consistency and cross-connections and resonance within a project and to a context. It's a never-ending trajectory of a project's progression. The intensification of relations in architecture reflects the intensification of communication among all of us, everyday and with everything. A building can no longer be a silo out in the greenfield; it needs to be connected in an urban texture, needs to be accessible, have internal differentiation, yet have a sense of continuity.
Functional heuristics. There are some taboos in terms of handling functions. We avoid thinking in terms of essences. We avoid stereotypes and strict typologies. We also avoid designating functions to strict and discrete zones. These are taboos for all of us. Instead, we think in terms of gradient fields of activity, about variable social scenarios calibrated by various event parameters. We think in terms of actor-artifact networks. That's the way we break down a program, a task. And that makes sense, because the formal heuristics and func tional heuristics coalesce, make sense together. To translate these functions into form you need the formal heuristics I discussed earlier.
Clearly, parametric systems or techniques could be used as technologies of design by modernists like Norman Foster; they could also be used by neoclassicists. The point is that the tools themselves have great potential, but we need to drive these potentials and draw decisive conclusions and give value and direction to the utilization of these tools. That is the difference between a set of techniques and a style, which depends on these techniques, albeit not exclusively, but drives them to a new destiny. Foster's British Museum dome could only have been done with parametric tools. Every joint is dif ferent, every panel is different. The use of parametrics made this possible, but the spirit of this application is the spirit of modernism of neutralizing the differences, making them inconspicuous. Here all elements are different but they want to appear the same. Against that I put forward a new kind of "artistic project," the project of driving the conspicuous amplification of differences. So a difference in curvature is transcoded into radically different conditions of ribbing, of gridding, of dense networking, perhaps engendering a phase
78
PATRIK SCHUMACHER IS A DIRECTOR
OF ZAHA HADm ARCHITECTS AND
PROFESSOR AT INNSBRUCK UNIVER
SITY. HE IS ALSO CO-DIRECTOR OF
THE DESI<TN RESEARCH LABORATORY
AT THE ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, LONDON.
Winter 2011
change at a certain threshold. This is much more prone to the development of versatile conditions and different atmo spheres, which bleed into each other instead of establishing disparate zones. I think our work forms a much more perti nent image and vehicle of contemporary life forces and pat terns of social communication than that big Foster dome.
This emphasis on differentiation, the amplification of de viations rather than neutralization and compensation, is also related to the difference between exploratory design research and problem solving. Problem solving is the engineering side, the side of parametric technique. In contrast, when we are talking about parametricism as style, we're talking about teasing out the as yet unknown potentials of these techniques, but with the general direction clearly set by the parametricist heuristic principles. This has been going on for quite a while now. I believe that we are on the cusp of moving from an avant-garde condition into claiming the mainstream. Most of our projects, even most of our built work, are hypotheses, manifestos, but I think some of our projects go beyond that and are becoming compelling success stories in the real world.
The projects now coming out of the office show the rich ness of our formal vocabulary and the richness of types of structures we are addressing. There's a kind of unity within difference, or difference within unity, moving across various scales: endless forms. But these endless forms are there to or ganize and articulate life. So formpo"Wers function. That's the new thesis. Spatial organization sustains social organization. Can we demonstrate, control, and predict this? To a certain extent, I would argue, we can.
If we look at the history of parametricism, in fact it's the history of the whole evolution of architecture. The funda mental thesis is that social order requires spatial order, that society doesn't exist without a structured environment, and that society can only evolve if it is able to enhance and intri cately structure its built environment as well. Architecture provides the necessary substrate of cultural evolution.
79
__MACOSX/WEEK 11 READINGS/._Schumacher_Parametricism.pdf
WEEK 12 READINGS/.DS_Store
__MACOSX/WEEK 12 READINGS/._.DS_Store
WEEK 12 READINGS/Deleuze_Bacon.pdf
,; ,I ..J, ~
, ,t(
,. ( .... Also by Gilles Deleuze ,t
Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (with Felix Guattari) ~.} ,
\,!.
A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (with Felix Guattari)
Kant's Critical Philosophy
Foucault
Cinema 1: The Movement-Image
Cinema 2: The Time-Image
" ";,,
, Kafka: Toward a lv1inor Literatll1'e (with Felix Guattari)
.'.;'. The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque
';.~r ,',
L. Essays Critical and Clinical
Proust and Signs: The Complete Text
,.:','
:, ~"
Francis Bacon The Logic of Sensation
Gilles Deleuze
Translated and with an Introduction by Daniel W. Smith
Afterword by Tom Conley
I University of Minnesota Press
Minneapolis
30 - Bacon's Periods and Aspects
extends itself in order to better close in on itself; and there is a sys tole in the second movement, when the body is contracted in order to escape from itself; and even when the body is dissipated, it still remains contracted by the forces that seize hold of it in order to re turn it to its surroundings. The coexistence of all these movements in the painting ... is rhythm.
CHAPTER 6
Painting and Sensation
Cezanne and sensation The levels ofsensation Figuration and vioknce - The movement oftranslation,
the stroll The phenomenological unity ofthe senses: sensation and rhythm
There are two ways of going beyond fIguration (that is, beyond the illustrative and the figurative): either toward abstract form or to ward the Figure. Cezanne gave a simple name to this way of the Figure: sensation. The Figure is the sensible form related to a sen sation; it acts immediately upon the nervous system, which is of the flesh, whereas abstract form is addressed to the head and acts through the intermediary of the brain, which is closer to the bone. Certainly Cezanne did not invent this way of sensation in painting, but he gave it an unprecedented status. Sensation is the opposite of the facile and the ready-made, the cliche, but also of the "sensational," the spontaneous, etc. Sensation has one face turned toward the subject (the nervous system, vital movement, "instinct," "temperament"-a whole vocabulary common to both Naturalism and Cezanne), and one face turned toward the object (the "fact," the place, the event). Or rather, it has no faces at all, it is both things indissolubly, it is Being-in-the-World, as the phenomenologists say: at one and the same time I become in the sensation and something happens through the sensation, one through the other, one in the other.! And at the
it is the same body that, being both subject and object, gives and receives the sensation. As a spectator, I experience the sensation only by entering the painting, by reaching the unity of the sensing
the sensed. This was Cezanne's lesson against the impression ists: sensation is not in the "free" or disembodied play of light
31
, 32 and Sensation
,i
color , on tne contrary, it is in the
of an Color is in the body, sensation is in and not in
the air. Sensation is what is painted. What is painted on the canvas is
the body, not insofar as it is represented as an object, hut insofar as
it is experienced as sustaining this sensation (what Lawrence, speak
ing of Cezanne, called "the appleyness of the apple")."
This is the very general thread that links Bacon to Cezanne: paint the sensation, or, as Bacon will say in words very close to Cezanne's, record the fact. J "It is a very, very close and difficult thing to know
some paint comes across directly onto the nervous system and
other paint tells you the story in a long diatribe through the brain.""
There would seem to be only obvious differences between these two
Cezanne's world as and still life (even before the
versus Bacon's inverted
the world as Na
are not these obvious differences in the service of "sensation" and
"temperament"? In other words, are they not inscribed in
Bacon to Cezanne, in what they have in common? When Bacon
speaks of sensation, he says two things, which are very similar to
Cezanne. Negatively, he says that the form related to the sensation
(the Figure) is the opposite of the form related to an object that it is
supposed to represent (figuration). As Valery put it, sensation is that which is transmitted directly, and avoids the detour and boredom of
6 And positively, Bacon constantly says that sensa
one "order" to another, from one "level" to
one "area" to another. This is why sensation is the
the agent of bodily deformations. In this re-
the same criticism can
ing and abstract they pass through the
act directly upon the nervous system, they do not attain the sensa
tion, they do not liberate the Figure-all because they remain at
one and the same level. 7 They can implement transformations of fonn,
but they cannot attain deformations of bodies. In what sense Bacon
, Painting and Sensation 33 ~
is even more so than if he were a disciple of Cezanne,
we will have occasion to consider later.
corresponds to a
the interviews, he
" "areas of sensa
think that each
sensation: sensa
tion would thus he a term in a sequence or a series. For the
series of Rembrandt's self-portraits involves us in different areas of
feeling. 9 And it is true that painting, and especially Bacon's painting,
proceeds through series: series of crucifixions, series of Popes, series
of self-portraits, series of the mouth, of the mouth that screams, the
mouth that smiles ... Moreover, there can be series of simultaneity,
as in the triptychs, which make at least three levels or orders coexist.
And the series can be closed, when it has a contrasting composition,
but it can be open, when it is continued or continuable beyond the
three.lO All this is true. But it would not be true were there not some
that is already at work in each painting,
sensation. It is each paintimr. each Fi!!llre. that is
itself a shifting sequence or series (and not
it is each sensation that exists at diverse levelS, III dltterent orders, or
in different domains. This means that there are not sensations
different orders, but different orders of one and the same sensation.
It is the nature of sensation to envelop a constitutive difference
level, a plurality of constituting domains. Every sensation, and every
Figure, is already an "accumulated" or "coagulated" sensation, as in
a limestone figure.!! Hence the irreducibly synthetic character of
sensation. What then, we must ask, is the source of this synthetic
character, through which each material sensation has several levels,
several orders or UVllldlll:>. what makes up
their sensin!!" or
"Vhat makes up
34 and Sensation and Sensation - 35
Bacon does, that something is nonetheless figured (for instance, a screaming Pope), this secondary figuration depends on the neutral ization of all primary figuration. Bacon himself formulates this prob lem, which concerns the inevitable preservation of a practical figu ration at the very moment when the Figure asserts its intention to break away from the figurative. We will see how he resolves the prob lem. In any case, Bacon has always tried to eliminate the "sensa tional," that is, the primary figuration of that which provokes a vio lent sensation. This is the meaning of the formula, "I wanted to paint the scream more than the horror."12 When he paints the screaming Pope, there is nothing that might cause horror, and the curtain in front of the Pope is not only a way of isolating him, of shielding him
view; it is rather the way in which the Pope himself sees noth ing, and screams before the invisible. Thus neutralized, the horror is multiplied because it is inferred from the scream, and not the re verse. And certainly it is not easy to renounce the horror, or the mary figuration. Sometimes he has to turn against his own instincts, renounce his own experience. Bacon harbors within himself all the violence ofIreland, and the violence of Nazism, the violence of war. He passes through the horror of the crucifixions, and especially the fragment of the crucifixion, or the head of meat, or the bloody suit case. But when he passes judgment on his own paintings, he rejects all those that are still too "sensational," because the figuration that subsists in them reconstitutes a scene of horror, even if only second arily, thereby reintroducing a story to be told: even the bullfights are too dramatic. As soon as there is horror, a story is reintroduced, and the scream is botched. In the end, the maximum violence will be
in the seated or crouching Figures, which are subjected to neither torture nor brutality, to which nothing visible happens, and yet which manifest the power of the paint all the more. This is be cause violence has two very different meanings: "When talking about the violence of paint, it's nothing to do with the violence of war." 13 The violence of sensation is opposed to the violence of the repre sented (the sensational, the cliche). The former is inseparable from its direct action on the nervous system, the levels through which it
passes, the domains it traverses: being itself a Figure, it must have nothing of the nature of a represented object. It is the same Anaud: cruelty is not what one believes it to be, and depends less and less on what is represented.
A second interpretation must also be rejected, which would confuse the levels of sensation, that is, the valencies of the sensation, with an ambivalence of feeling. At one point, Sylvester suggests, "Since you talk about recording different levels of feeling in one image ... you may be at one and the same time a love of the person and a hostility towards them ... both a caress and an assault?" To which Bacon responds, "That is too logicaL I don't think that's the way things work. I think it goes to a deeper thing: how do I feel I can make this image more immediately real to myself? That's aU."14 In fact, the psychoanalytic hypothesis of ambivalence not only has the disadvantage of localizing the ambivalence on the side of the spectator who look., at the painting; for even if we presuppose an ambivalence in the Figure itself, it would refer to feelings that the Figure would experience in relation to represented things, in rela tion to a narrated story. But there are no feelings in Bacon: there are nothing but affects, that is, "sensations" and "instincts," according to the formula of Naturalism. Sensation is what determines instinct at a particular moment, just as instinct is the passage from one sen sation to another, the search for the "best" sensation (not the most agreeable sensation, but the one that fills the flesh at a particular moment of its descent, contraction, or dilation).
There is a third, more hypothesis. This would be the motor hypothesis. The levels of sensation would be like arrests or snapshots of motion, which would recompose the movement syn thetically in all its continuity, speed, and violence, as in synthetic cubism, futurism, or Duchamp's Nude [102]. It is true that Bacon is fascinated by the decomposition of movement in Muybridge, which
has used as a subject matter. It is also true that he obtains very in tense and violent movements of his own [39], such as George Dyer's ISO-degree turn of the head toward Lucian Freud [42]. More gener ally, Bacon's Figures are often in the middle of a strange stroll
., 36 - Painting and Sensation ,'I [68], as in Man Carrying a Child [22] or the Van Gogh [23]. The ":~:
round area or the parallelepiped that isolates the Figure itself be
comes a motor, and Bacon has not abandoned the project that a mo
bile sculpture could achieve more easily: in this case, the contour or
pedestal would slide along the length of the armature so that the
Figure could make its "daily round."15 But it is precisely the nature
of this daily round that can inform us of the status of movement in
Bacon. Beckett and Bacon have never been so close, and this daily
round is the kind of stroll typical of Beckett's characters: they too
trundle about fitfully without ever leaving their circle or paral
lelepiped. It is the stroll of the paralytic child and its mother cling ing to the edge of the balustrade in a curious handicapped race [36].
It is the about-face in Figure Furning [30]. It is George Dyer's bi cycle ride [40], which closely resembles that of Moritz's hero: "his
vision was limited to the small piece of land he could see about
him.... To him, the end of all things seemed to lead, at the end of his
journey, to just such a point. "16 Therefore, even when the contour is
displaced, the movement consists less of this displacement than the
amoeba-like exploration that the Figure is engaged in inside the
contour. Movement does not explain sensation; on the contrary, it is
explained by the elasticity of the sensation, its vis elastica. According
to Beckett's or Kafka's law, there is immobility beyond movement:
beyond standing up, there is sitting down, and beyond sitting down,
lying down, beyond which one finally dissipates. The true acrobat is
one who is consigned to immobility inside the circle. The large feet
of the Figures often do not lend themselves to walking: they are al
most clubfeet (and the large armchairs often seem to resemble shoes
for clubfeet). In short, it is not movement that explains the levels of
sensation, it is the levels of sensation that explain what remains of
movement. And in fact, what interests Bacon is not exactly move
ment, although his painting makes movement very intense and vio
lent. But in the end, it is a movement "in-place," a spasm, which
reveals a completely different problem characteristic of Bacon: the
action of invisible forces on the body (hence the bodily deformations,
which are due to this more profound cause). In the 1973 triptych
,I"l
Painting and Sensation - 37
[73], the movement of translation occurs between two spasms, be
tween the two movements of a contraction in one place. tThen there would be yet another hypothesis, more "phenome 1,lilinological." The levels of sensation would really be domains of sen
sation that refer to the different sense organs; but precisely each
level, each domain, would have a way of referring to the others, in
dependently of the represented object they have in common. Between
a color, a taste, a touch, a smell, a noise, a weight, there would be an
existential communication that would constitute the "pathic" (non
representative) moment of the sensation. In Bacon's bullfights, for
example, we hear the noise of the beast's hooves [56, 57]; in the 1976
triptych, we touch the quivering of the bird plunging into the place
where the head should be [79], and each time meat is represented,
we touch it, smell it, eat it, weigh it, as in Soutine's work; and the
portrait ofIsabel Rawsthorne [41] causes a head to appear to which
ovals and traits have been added in order to widen the eyes, flair the III
nostrils, lengthen the mouth, and mobilize the skin in a common ex 'II ercise of all the organs at once. The painter would thus make visible a
I
kind of original unity of the senses, and would make a multisensible
Figure appear visually.
But this operation is possible only if the sensation of a particular
domain (here, the visual sensation) is in direct contact with a vital
power that exceeds every domain and traverses them all. This power
is Rhythm, which is more profound than vision, hearing, etc. Rhythm
appears as music when it invests the auditory level, and as painting
when it invests the visual level. This is a "logic of the senses," as
Cezanne said, which is neither rational nor cerebral. What is ultimate
is thus the relation between sensation and rhythm, which places in
each sensation the levels and domains through which it passes. This
rhythm runs through a painting just as it runs through a piece of
music. It is diastole-systole: the world that seizes me by closing in
around me, the self that opens to the world and opens the world it
self. 17 Cezanne, it is said, is the painter who put a vital rhythm into the
visual sensation. Must we say the same thing of Bacon, with his co
existent movements, when the flat field closes in around the Figure
38 - Painting and Sensation
and when the Figure contracts or, on the contrary, expands in order to rejoin the field, to the point where the figure merges with the field? Could it be that Bacon's closed and artificial world reveals the same vital movement as Cezanne's Nature? Bacon is not using empty words when he declares that he is cerebrally pessimistic but nerv ously optimistic, with an optimism that believes only in life. IS The same "temperament" as Cezanne? Bacon's formula would be: figura tively pessimistic, but figurally optimistic.
CHAPTER 7
Hysteria
The body without organs: Artaud UIOrringer's Gothic line "What the "difference oflevel" in sensation means - Vibration
Hysteria and presence Bacon's doubt H.ysteria, painting, and the eye
This ground, this rhythmic unity of the senses, can be discovered only by going beyond organism. The phenomenological hypothesis is perhaps insufficient because it merely invokes the lived body. But the lived body is still a paltry thing in comparison with a more pro found and almost unlivable Power [puissance}. We can seek the unity of rhythm only at the point where rhythm itself plunges into chaos, into the night, at the point where the differences of level are perpet ually and violently mixed.
Beyond the organism, but also at the limit of the lived body, there lies what Artaud discovered and named: the body without organs. "The body is the body I it stands alone I it has no need of organs I the body is never an organism I organisms are the enemies ofbodies."1 The body without organs is opposed less to organs than to that orga nization of organs we call an organism. It is an intense and intensive body. It is traversed by a wave that traces levels or thresholds in the body according to the variations of its amplitude. Thus the body does not have organs, but thresholds or levels. Sensation is not qual itative and qualified, but has only an intensive reality, which no longer determines within itself representative elements, but allotropic vari ations. Sensation is vibration. We know that the egg reveals just this state of the body "before" organic representation: axes and vectors, gradients, zones, kinematic movements, and dynamic tendencies, in relation to which forms are contingent or accessory. "No mouth.
39
before80 - The r these traits, figuration recovers and re-creates, but does not
the figuration from which it came. Hence Bacon's constant
formula: create resemblance, but through accidental and nonreseIIl
bling means.
So the act of oscillat
ing between a of paint
ing ... Everything is already on the canvas, and in the him
self, before the act of painting begins. lIenee the work of the
is shifted back and only comes later, afterward: manual labor, out of
which the Figure will emerge into view ...
CHAPTER 12
The Diagram
Tbe diagram in Bacon (t1'aits and color-patcbe.lj1 Its rmmual cbaracter Painting and tbe experience
ofcatastropbe Abstmct painting, code, and Action Painting, diagmm, and rlUmual space
vVbat Bacon dislikes about both tbese 1l'tlys
We do not listen closely enough to what painters have to say.
say that the is alrea~y in the canvas, he or she encoun
ters all the figurative and probabilistic givens that occupy and pre occupy the canvas. An cntirc battle takes place on the canvas between
the painter and these There is thus a preparatory work that
belongs to painting fully, and yet precedes the act of painting.
can be done in sketches, though it need not be,
in any case sketches do not replace it (like many contemporary
painters, Bacon does not make sketches). This preparatory work is
invisible and silent, yet intense, and the act of painting it
self appears as an afterward, an apres-coup ("hysteresis") in relation to this work.
What does this act of painting consist of? Bacon defines it in
this way: make random marks (lines-traits); scrub, sweep, or the
canvas in order to clear out locales or zones (color-patches); throw
the paint, from various and at various
or these acts, presupposes that there were already tlguranve gIVens
on the canvas (and in the painter's head), more or less virtual, more
or actual. It is precisely these givens that will be removed the act of painting, either by wiped, brushed, or ruhbed, or
covered over. For example, a mouth: it will be elongated, stretched
one side of the head to the other. For example, the head: part
HI
S2 - The - S3The
" of it will be cleared away with a brush, broom, sponge, or rag. This is what Bacon calls a "graph" or a DifJgram: it is as if a Sahara, a zone
of the Sahara, were suddenly inserted into the head; it is as if a piece
of rhinoceros skin, viewed a microscope, were stretched over
it; it is as if the two halves of the were split open by an ocean; it
is as if the unit of measure were changed, and micrometric, or even
'A'''HHL, units were substituted for the figurative unit.' A Sahara, a rhinoceros skin: such is the suddenly outstretched diagram. It is as if, in the midst of the figurative and probabilistic givens, a rntnct,,.n!1h,,
overcame the canvas.
It is like the emergence of another world. For marks, these are irrational, involuntary, accidental, random. They are
nonrepresentative, nonillustrative, nonnarrative. They are no longer
either significant or signifiers: they are a-signifying traits. They arc
traits of sensation, but of confused sensations (the confused sensa
tions, as Cezanne said, that we bring with us at birth). And above
they are manual traits. It is here that the painter works with a rag,
stick, bntsh, or sponge; it is here that he throws the paint with
hands. 4 It is as if the hand assumed an independence, and began to guided by other forces, making marks that no longer depend on
either our will or our sie-ht. These almost blind manual attest
to intrusion of another world into the visual world of
Ti-l a certain extent, they remove the painting from the optical orga nization that was already reigning over it and rendering it
in adv;"mce. The painter's hand intervenes in order to shake its own
dependence and break up the sovereign optical organization: one
can no longer see anything, as if in a catastrophe, a
is the act of painting, or the turning point of the painting.
There are two ways in which the painting can fail, once visuallv and
once manually. One can remain entangled in the figurative
and the optical organization of representation; but one can also
the diagram, botch it, so overload it that it is rendered inoperative
(which is another way of remaining in the figurative: one will have
mutilated or mauled the cliche ...).5 The diagram is thus the
set of asignifying and nonrepresentative lines and zones,
line-strokes and color-patches. And operation diagram, its
1U1lCUUll, says Bacon, is to be "suggestive." Or, more rigoronsly, to
similar to Wittgenstein's, it is to introduce "possibili
"6 Because they are destined to give us the it is all
the more important for the traits and color-patches to break with
figuration. This is why they are not sufficient in themselves, but
must be "utilized." They mark out possibilities of fact, but do not
constitute a fact (the pictorial fact). In order to be converted
into a fact, in order to evolve into a
into the visual whole; but it is precisely through the action of these
marks that the visual whole will cease to be an optical organization;
it will give the eye another power, as well as an object that will no
longer be The diagram is the operative set of traits and color-patches, of
lines and zones. Van Gogh's diagram, for example, is the set of straight
and hatch marks that raise and lower the ground, twist the
trees, make the sky palpitate, and which assume a particular inten sity from 1888 onward. \Ve can not only differentiate diagrams, we can also date the diagram of a painter, because there is always a mo
ment when the painter confronts it most directly. The diagram is in
deed a chaos, a catastrophe, but it is also a germ of or rhythm.
It is a violent chaos in rclation to the figurative but it is a
germ of rhythm in rclation to the new order of the painting. A'i Bacon
says, it "unlocks areas of sensation."7 The ends the prepara
tory work and begins the act of painting. There is no painter who
has not had this experience of the chaos-germ, where he or she no
longer sees anything and risks foundering: the collapse of visual
coordinates. This is not a psychological experience, but a properly
experience, although it can have an immense influence on
the psychic life of the painter. Painters confront the of
dangers both for their work and for themselves. It is a kind of expe
rience that is constantly renewed by the most diverse painters:
Cezanne's "abyss" or "catastrophe," and the chance that this abyss
will way to rhythm; Paul Klee's "chaos," the vanishing "gray
" and the chance that this gray point will "leaD over itself"
84 - The Diagram
and unlock dimensions of sensation ...~ Of all the arts, painting is undoubtedly the only one that necessarily, "hysterically," integrates its own catastrophe and consequently is constituted as a flight in advance. In the other arts, the catastrophe is only associated. But painters pass through the catastrophe themselves, embrace the chaos, and attempt to emerge from it. Where painters differ is in their man ner of embracing this nonfigurative chaos, and in their evaluation of the pictorial order to come, and the relation of this order with this chaos. In this respect, we might perhaps distinguish three great paths, each of which groups together very different painters, but each of which designates a "modem" function of painting, or expresses what painting claims to bring to "modem man" (why still paint today?).
Abstraction would be one of these paths, but it is a path that re duces the abyss or chaos (as well as the manual) to a minimum: it fers us an asceticism, a spiritual salvation. Through an intense spiri tual effort, it raises itself above the figurative givens, but it also turns chaos into a simple stream we must cross in order to discover the abstract and signifying Forms. Mondrian's square leaves the figura tive (landscape) and leaps over chaos. It retains a kind of oscillation from this leap. Such an abstraction is essentially seen. One is tempted to say of abstract painting what Peguy said of Kantian morality: it has pure hands, but it has no hands. This is because the abstract forms are part of a new and purely optical space that no longer even needs to be subordinate to manual or tactile elements. In fact, they are distinguished from simple geometrical forms by "tension": ten sion is what internalizes in the visual the manual movement that de scribes the form and the invisible forces that determine it. It is what makes the form a properly visual transformation. Abstract optical space has no need of the tactile connections that classical represen tation was still organizing. But it follows that what abstract painting elaborates is less a diagram than a symbolic code, on the basis of great formal oppositions. It replaced the diagram with a code. This code is "digital," not in the sense of the manual, but in the sense of a finger that counts. "Digits" are the units that group together visu ally the terms in opposition. Thus, according to Kandinsky, vertical-
The Diagram - 85
white-activity, horizontal-black-inertia, and so on. From this is rived a conception of binary choice that is opposed to random choice. Abstract painting took the elaboration of such a properly pictorial code very far (as in Auguste Herbin's "plastic alphabet," in which the distribution of forms and colors can be done according to the letters of a word). It is the code that is responsible for answering the ques tion of painting today: what can save man from "the abyss," from external tumult and manual chaos? Open up a spiritual state for the man of the future, a man without hands. Restore to man a pure and internal optical space, which will perhaps be made up exclusively of the horizontal and the vertical. "Modem man seeks rest because he is deafened by the externaL"lO The hand is reduced to a finger that presses on an internal optical keyboard.
A second path, often named abstract expressioni~m or art in formel, offers an entirely different response, at the opp~)site extreme of abstraction. This time the abyss or chaos is deployed to the max imum. Somewhat like a map that is as large as the country, the dia gram merges with the totality of the painting, the entire painting is diagrammatic. Optical geometry disappears in favor of a manual line, exclusively manuaL The eye has difficulty following it. incompa rable discovery of this kind of painting is that of a line (and a patch of color) that does not form a contour, that delimits nothing, neither inside nor outside, neither concave nor convex: Pollock's line, Morris Louis's stain. It is the northern stain, the "Gothic line": the line does not go from one point to another, but passes between points, contin ually changing direction, and attains a power greater than 1, becom ing adequate to the entire surface. From this point of view, we can see how abstract painting remained figurative, since its line still de limited an outline. If we seek the precursors of this new path, of this radical manner of escaping the figurative, we will find them every time a great painter of the past stopped painting things in order "to paint between things."11 Turner's late watercolors conquer not only
the forces of impressionism, but also the power of an explosive line without outline or contour, which makes the painting itself an unparalleled catastrophe (rather than illustrating the catastrophe
86 - The Diagram
romantically). Moreover, is this not one of the most prodigious con
stants of painting that is here being selected and isolated? In Kandin sky, there were nomadic lines without contour next to abstract geo metric lines; and in Mondrian, the unequal thickness of the two sides
the square opened up a virtual diagonal without contours. But with Pollock, this line-trait and this color-patch will be pushed to their functional limit: no longer the transfonnation of the form bnt
a decomposition of matter, which abandons us to its lineaments and granulations. The painting thus becomes a catastrophe-painting and a diagram-painting at one and the same time. This time, it is at the point dosest to catastrophe, in absolute proximity, that modern man
discovers rhythm: we can easily see how this response to the ques tion of a "modern" function of painting is different from that given
by abstraction. Here it is no longer an inner vision that gives us the infinite, but a manual power that is spread out "all over,''1l from one
edge of the painting to the other.
In the unity of the catastrophe and the diagram, man discovers rhythm as matter and materiaL The painter's instruments are no longer the paintbrush and the easel, which still conveyed the subor dination of the hand to the requirements of an optical organization.
The hand is liberated, and makes use of sticks, sponges, rags, ~yringes: Action Painting, the "frenetic dance" of the painter around the paint ing, or rather in the painting, which is no longer stretched on an easel but nailed, unstretched, to the ground. There has been a con version from the horizon to the ground: the optical horizon reverts
completely to the tactile ground. The diagram expresses the entire painting at once, that is, the optical catastrophe and the manual rhythm. The current evolution of abstract expressionism is complet
this process by realizing what was still little more than a meta
phor in Pollock: (1) the extension of the diagram to the spatial and temporal whole of the painting (displacement of the "beforehand" and the "afterward"); (2) the abandonment of any visual sovereignty, and even any visual control, over the painting in the process of be ing executed (the blindness of the painter); (3) the elaboration oflines that are "more" than lines, surfaces that are "more" than surfaces,
The Diagram - 87
or, conversely, volumes that are "less" than volumes (Carl Andre's planar sculptures, Robert Ryman's fibers, Martin BarnS's laminated
works, Christian Bonncf"oi's strata).ll It is all the more curious that the American critics, who took the
analysis of abstract expressionism very far, could have defined it as the creation of a purely optical space, exclusively optical, peculiar to "modern man." This seems to us to be a quarrel over words, an am
biguity of words. In effect, what they meant was that the pictorial space lost all the imaginary tactile referents that, in classical three dimensional representation, made it possible to see depths and con tours, forms and grounds. But these tactile referents of classical rep resentation expressed a relative subordination of the hand to the eye, of the manual to the visual. By liberating a space that is (wrongly)
claimed to be purely optical, the abstract expressionists in fact did nothing other than to make visible an exclusively manual space, de fined by the "planarity" of the canvas, the "impenetrability" of the painting, and the "gesturality" of the color-a space that is imposed
upon the eye as an absolutely foreign power in which the eye can find no rest.14 These are no longer the tactile referents of vision, precisely because it is the manual space of what is seen, a violence done to the eye. In the end, it was abstract painting that produced a
purely optical space and suppressed tactile referents in favor of an eye of the mind: it suppressed the task of controlling the hand that the eye still had in classical representation. But Action Painting does something completely different: it reverses the classical subordina
tion, it subordinates the eye to the hand, it imposes the hand on the
eye, and it replaces the horizon with a ground. One of the most profound tendencies of modern painting is the
tendency to abandon the easel. For the easel was a decisive element not only in the maintenance of a figurative appearance, and not only in the relationship between the painter and Nature (the search for a
motif), but also in the delimitation (frame and borders) and internal organization of the painting (depth, perspective ...). \Vhat matters today is less the fact-does the painter still have an easel?-than the tendency, and the diverse ways this tendency is realized. In an
88 - The Diagram
abstraction of Mondrian's type, the painting ceases to be an organ ism or an isolated organization in order to become a division of its own surface, which must create its own relations with the divisions of the "room" in which it will be hung. In this sense, Mondrian's
is not decorative but architectonic, and abandons the easel in order to become mural painting. Pollock and others explicitly re ject the easel in a completely different manner, namely, by making "all-over" paintings, by rediscovering the secret of the "Gothic line" (in Worringer's sense), by restoring an entire world of equal proba bilities, by tracing lines that cross the entire painting and that start and continue the frame, and by opposing to the organic notions of symmetry and center the power of a mechanical repetition ele vated to intuition. This is no longer an easel painting but a ground painting (true easels have no other horizon than the ground).l) in truth there are many ways of breaking with the easeL Bacon's triptych form is one of ways, very different from the two pre ceding ways. In Bacon, what is true of the triptychs is also true of each independent painting, which is always, in one way or another, composed like a triptych. In the triptych, as we have seen, the bor ders of each of the three panels cease to isolate, though they con tinue to separate and divide. This uniting-separating is Bacon's technical solution, which brings his entire set of techniques into play, and distinguishes them from the techniques of abstract and in formal painting. Are these three ways of once again becoming "Gothic"?
The important question is, Why did Bacon not become involved in either of the two preceding paths? The severity of his reactions, rather than claiming to pass judgment, simply indicates what was not right for him and explains why Bacon personally took neither of these paths. On the one hand, he is not attracted to paintings tend to substitute a visual and spiritual code for the involuntary dia gram (even if there is an exemplary attitude on the part of the artist).
code is inevitably cerebral and lacks sensation, the essential reality of the fall, that is, the direct action upon the nervous system. Kandinsky defined abstract painting by "tension," but according to
The Diagram - 89
Bacon, tension is what abstract painting lacks the most. By internal izing tension in the optical form, abstract painting neutralized it. Finally, because it is abstract, the code can easily become a simple symbolic coding of the figurative. 16 On the other hand, Bacon is not drawn to abstract expressionism, or to the power and mystery of the line without contour. This is because the diagram covers the entire painting, he says, and because its proliferation creates a veritable "mess." All the violent methods of Action Painting-stick, brush, broom, rag, and even pastry bag-are let loose in a catastrophe painting. This time sensation is indeed attained, but it remains in an irremediably confused state. Bacon will never stop speaking of the absolute necessity of preventing the diagram from proliferating, the necessity of confining it to certain areas of the painting and certain moments of the act of painting. He thinks that, in this domain of irrational trait and the line without contour, Michaux went further than Pollock, precisely because he remained a master of the diagram. I?
Save the contour-nothing is more important for Bacon than this. A line that delimits nothing still has a contour or outline Blake at least understood this.IS The diagram must not eat away at the entire painting; it must remain limited in space and time. It must remain operative and controlled. The violent methods must not be given free rein, and the necessary catastrophe must not submerge the whole. The diagram is a possibility of fact-it is not the Fact it self. Not all the figurative givens have to disappear; and above all, a new figuration, that of the Figure, should emerge from the diagram and make the sensation clear and precise. ii:> emerge from the catas trophe ... Even if, as an afterthought, one finishes a painting with a
of paint, it functions like a local "whiplash" that makes us emerge from the catastrophe rather than submerging us further. 19
Could we at least say that during the malerisch period the diagram covered the whole painting? Had not the entire surface of the paint ing been lined with traits of grass, or variations of a dark color-patch functioning as a curtain? But even then, the precision of the sensa tion, the clarity of the Figure, and the rigor of the contour continued to act beneath the color-patch or the traits-which did not efface
90 - The Diagram
the former, but im;tead gave them a power of vibration and nonlocal ization (the mouth that smiles or screams). And in his subsequent pe riod, Bacon returns to a localization of random traits and scrubbed zones. Bacon thus follows a third path, which is neither optical like abstract painting, nor manual like Action Painting.
CHAPTER 13
Analogy
Cezanne: the motifas diag;ram The analogical and the digital Painting and analogy - The ptzradoxical
status ofabstract ptlinting - The analogictll language 0fCizanne, ofBacon: plane, color, and mass
Moduttltio?l - Resembltl?lce recovered
There would thus be a tempered use of the diagram, a kind of mid dle way in which the diagram is not reduced to the state of a code, and yet does not cover the entire painting, avoiding both the code
its scrambling ... Must we then speak of wisdom or classicism? It is hard to believe, however, that Cezanne followed a middle way. Rather, he invented a specific way, distinct from the two preceding ones. Few painters have produced the experience of chaos and catas trophe as intensely, while fighting to limit and control it at any price. Chaos and catastrophe imply the collapse of all the figurative givens, and thus they already entail a fight, the fight against the cliche, the preparatory work (all the more necessary in that we are no longer "innocent"). It is out of chaos that the "stubborn geometry" or "geologic lines" emerge; and this geometry or geology must in turn pass through the catastrophe in order for colors to arise, for the earth to rise toward the sun. I It is thus a temporal diagram, with two moments. But diagram connects these two moments indissol ubly: the geometry is its "frame" and color is the sensation, the oring sensation." The diagram is exactly what Cezanne called the motif. In effect, the motif is made up of two things, the sensation and the frame. It is their intertwining. A sensation, or a point view, is not enough to make a motif: the sensation, even a coloring sensation, is ephemeral and confused, lacking duration and clarity
91
__MACOSX/WEEK 12 READINGS/._Deleuze_Bacon.pdf
WEEK 12 READINGS/Kipnis_Cunning_of_Cosmetics.pdf
__MACOSX/WEEK 12 READINGS/._Kipnis_Cunning_of_Cosmetics.pdf
WEEK 12 READINGS/Riley_Light_Construction.pdf
opposite: Fumihiko Maki. Congress Center, Salzburg, Austria. Competition proposal, 1992. Detail of Rainerstra& (principal) facade
Terence Riley Light Construction
Tn recent years a new architectural sensibility has emerged, one that not only reflects
the distance of our culture from the machine aesthetic of the early twentieth centu
ry but marks a fundamental shift in emphasis after three decades when debate about
architecture focused on issues ofform. Tn projects notable for artistic and technical
innovation, contemporary designers are investigating the nature and potential of
architectural surfaces. They are concerned not only with their visual and
qualities but with the meanings they may convey. Influenced by of our culture
including electronic media and the computer, architects and artists are rethinking
the interrelationships of architecture, visual perception, and structure.
Represented in this survey are some thirty projects, created in response to com
missions and competitions in ten countries. As the majority of the works have been
or are being built, they engage their environments on material as well as theoretical
levels. This essay situates the projects in a broad, synthetic context, addressing both
their cultural and aesthetic dimensions. Priority is given to the visual encounter with
a structure, a choice that is not meant to imply a hierarchy of importance but to rec
ognize that the appearance of architecture provides not only the initial but frequently
the most defining contribution toward its eventual comprehension.
The sensibility expressed in these projects refers, but does not return, to the
visual objectivity embraced by many early modernists, particularly as it is expressed
in their fascination with glass structures. Ludwig Hilberseimer's 1929 essay "Glas
represents that rationalist outlook and serves as a historical antipode to
contemporary attitudes. For him the use of glass in architecture furthers hygienic
and economic goals; he discusses its formal properties only insofar as they enable the
architect more clearly to express the structural system. Aesthetic concerns are
essentially negated: "Glass is all the fashion today. Thus it is used in ways that are fre
quently preposterous, having nothing to do with functional but only formal and dec
orative purposes, to call attention to itself; and the result, grotesquely, is that very
often glass is combined with the load-bearing structure in such a way that glass's
characteristic effects of lightness and transparency become completely 10st:'1
Hilberseimer's sachlich approach contains its own understated implications for
an aesthetic vision. Describing the Crystal Palace, London (1850-51), which "for
the first time showed the possibilities of iron and glass structures:' Hilberseimer
writes, "It obliterated the old opposition oflight and shadow, which had formed the
9
1: Michael Vall Valkenburgh.
'e lee Walls, Cambridge,
·husetts. Instal/atioll, 1988
proportions of past architecture. It made a space of evenly distributed brightness;
it created a room of shadowless light:'2 The extensive use, in contemporary archi
tecture, of semitransparent glazing materials (such as frosted or mottled glass),
translucent plastic sheathings, double layers of glass (which, even if clear, produce
enough reflections to function as screens), and an apparently infinite number of
perforated materials, results in spaces very different from Hilberseimer's
"room of shadowless light." Indeed, recent projects point to the possibility
that "transparency" can also express the shadows of architecture.
The literary critic Jean Starobinski begins his essay "Poppaea's Veil": "The
hidden fascinates:'3 His title refers to a passage in Montaigne's essay "That
difficulty increases desire" (II: 15), where the philosopher examines a com
plicated relationship between Poppaea, who was Nero's mistress, and her
admirers: "How did Poppaea hit on the idea of hiding the beauties of her face
behind a mask if not to make them more precious to her lovers?"4
Starobinski analyzes the veil: "Obstacle and interposed sign, Poppaea's veil
engenders a perfection that is immediately stolen away, and by its very flight
demands to be recaptured by our desire:'5 To describe the action of the view
er, Starobinski rejects the term vision, which implies an immediately penetrating
certitude, in favor of gaze: "If one looks at the etymology, one finds that to denote
directed vision French resorts to the word regard [gaze], whose root originally
referred not to the act of seeing but to expectation, concern, watchfulness, consid
eration, and safeguard:'6 Starobinski's metaphor is literary, but it easily translates
into architectural terms: the facade becomes an interposed veil, triggering a subjec
tive relationship by distancing the viewer of the building from the space or forms
within and isolating the viewer within from the outside world.
Created by streams of water running over light-gauge metal fencing in frigid
weather, Michael Van Valkenburgh's elegantly simple Radcliffe Ice Walls (Cambridge,
Massachusetts, 1988, fig. 1 and pp. 34-35) gives the metaphor substance: like
Poppaea's veil, the walls interpose between the viewer and the landscape an
ephemeral material (a frozen cloud) and an image (the fence) signifying protection or
': Fumihiko Maki. Congress
Salzburg, Austria. Competition
I, 1992. Exploded diagram
obstacle. Another germane example is the Ghost House by Philip Johnson (New
Canaan, Connecticut, 1985, pp. 36-37), also made of chain-link fencing, which recalls Frank Gehry's made from off-the-shelf materials and
Robert Trwin's diaphanous landscape projects. This minimalist rendition ofthe
archetypal house was designed as a nursery, a latter-day lath house, for growing
flowers. The chain-link surfaces not only render the house and its interior as a spec
tral form but prevent foraging deer or other inquisitive visitors from reaching the
flower beds: a most succinct representation of Poppaea's distanced perfection, a lit
eral expression of the watchful and concerned gaze.
A similarly mediated relationship between the viewer and a distanced space
within can be seen in larger, more complex projects such as the Saishunkan Seiyaku
Women's Dormitory by Kazuyo Sejima (Kumamoto, Japan, 1991, pp. 38-43) and
Fumihiko Maki's project for a new Congress Center in Salzburg (1992, pp. 8 and
44-47). The dormitory's heavily screened facades, finely perforated like a sieve,
figure 3: Jacques Herzog and Pierre de Meumn. Goetz Collection,
Munich. 1992
Figure 4: Ludwig Mies van der Rohe.
Farnsworth House,
Plano, lIlinois. 1946-51
provide maximum blockage with the fewest of hints of the interior spaces. Inside,
these spaces are relatively free and open, with light filtering through the facades
and descending from above. Still, various screened materials used throughout the
project impose physical limitations on vision. The Congress Center's facades are
more open, but the distance between the viewer and the space within is no less rig
orously maintained. As in a Russian doll, the spaces nest one inside another, farther
and farther removed from the viewer's grasp (fig. 2).
Tn these projects and others, the distance created between the viewer and the
space within suggests, on some level, a voyeuristic condition made explicit in a gym
nasium designed by Charles Thanhauser and Jack Esterson (New York City, 1993,
pp. 48-49). Tn place of typical locker rooms for showering and changing are four
freestanding cubicles within the training area, partially enclosed in frosted glass.
From various perspectives, the obscured images of athletes dressing and undressing
can be observed, accentuating the sensual aspects of physical culture. As in Alfred
Hitchcock's Rear Window, the anonymity and detachment of the images enhance
sensuality; in Montaigne's words, they "entrap our desires and ... attract us by keep
ing us at a distance:'7
That all of the preceding projects might be referred to as "transparent" suggests
a newfound interest in a term long associated with the architecture of the modern
movement. Yet the tension between viewer and object implied by the use of the archi
tectural facade as a veiling membrane indicates a departure from past attitudes and
a need to reexamine the word transparency as it relates to architecture. The presence
of a new attitude is confirmed by a brief glance at such
projects as the Goetz Collection by Jacques Herzog and
Pierre de Meuron (Munich, 1992, pp. 50-53), the Cartier
Foundation for Contemporary Art by Jean Nouvel (Paris,
1994, pp. 54-59), or the TTM Building by Toyo Ito
(Matsuyama, Japan, 1993, pp. 60-65). The Goetz Collec
tion, whose supporting structure is enclosed between the
frosted surfaces of a double-glass facade, appears ghost
like, a complete reversal of the of the so
called Miesian glass box (figs. 3 and Seen through a
freestanding, partially glazed palisade, the frame structure
of the Cartier Foundation is more explicit and the use of
clear plate glass more extensive than in the Goetz
Collection. Even so, the Cartier Foundation achieves
extreme visual complexity-"haze and evanescence" in the
words of the architect-due to the overlapping buildup of
views and multiple surface reflections. Transparency in the
TTM Building and the Cartier Foundation is not created
simply by applying a glass curtain wall to the exterior of
the building'S frame. Rather, the jdea of transparency is
present deep within the structures; one seems to be sus
pended within multiple layers of transparency, not only
10 11
, Rem Koolhaas-O.M.A. )que Nationale de France,
)mpetition pmposal, 1989.
etric
..
vertical wall surfaces but horizontal surfaces such as the translucent floor panels of
Nouvel's project and the reflective floor and ceiling materials of the ITM Building.
About the latter, the critic Yoshiharu Tsukamoto has noted: "The result is an
bleached of all sense we customarily associate with the materials, sublimated into an
experience of 'weightlessness; in Ito's own terminology:'8
Hilberseimer's ideal of shadowless light is difficult to see in the banal office tow
ers and residential blocks erected in the postwar building boom. The depredations of
the debased International Style of those years provided fertile ground for critics of
both the modern rationalists and their latter-day followers. The antipathy of the
architectural historian Colin Rowe for the kind of architecture proposed by
Hilberseimer was buttressed by a distaste for the technological, anticlassical ethos of
the glass curtain wall, which he felt was bereft of the intellectual complexities to be
found in the traditional facade. Tn his critique of the purported objectivity of the early
modern rationalists, Rowe found an ally in the painter Robert Slutzky, a former stu
dent of Josef Albers. Slutzky'S interest in Gestalt psychology had led him to question
the claims to objectivity of some modern painters. Together, they wrote in 1955-56
the essay "Transparency: Literal and Phenomenal," which was first published in 1963
and was widely read in the 1960s, influencing several generations of American archi
tects. In it they state: "[The observer] may enjoy the sensation oflooking through a
glass wall and thus be able to see the interior and the exterior of the building simul
taneously; but, in doing so, he will be conscious of few of those equivocal emotions
which derive from phenomenal transparency."9 They propose "phenomenal trans
parency" as an abstract, theoretical sense of transparency derived from skillful for
mal manipulation of the architectural facade, viewed frontally, as opposed to the
more straightforward "literal transparency" that they ascribe to the curtain-wall
architecture of the modern rationalists.
Rem Koolhaas's 1939 Bibliotheque Nationale de France project (fig. 5), a mas
sive, glass-enclosed cubic structure, offers a kind of transparency that appears to
entirely outside Rowe and Slutzky'S scheme: a building with the visual complexity
they sought, which nevertheless rejects the traditional facade that Rowe ultimately
defended. It is a building in which transparency is conceived, in the words of the
architectural historian Anthony Vidler, "as a solid, not as a void, with the interior vol
umes carved out of a crystalline block so as to float within it, in amoebic suspension.
These are then represented on the surface of the cube as shadowy presences, their
three-dimensionality displayed ambiguously and flattened, superimposed on one
another in a play of amorphous densities." Vidler also takes us a step further toward
understanding the new direction of contemporary architecture: "The subject is sus
pended in a difficult moment between knowledge and blockage:'10
The visual experience described by Vidler is certainly not the type that Rowe and
Slutzky disparage as literal. But does the viewer's ambiguous perception ofthe build
ing's interior volumes evoke those "equivocal emotions" that derive, those authors
argue, from phenomenal transparency? The word ambiguous plays an important role
both in their writings and in the more recent ones of Koolhaas; but it is not enough
to think that all things ambiguous are necessarily related. The distinction between
Figure 6, Pablo Picasso. Man with
a Clarinet. 1911. Oil on canvas,
41 3/8 x 27 3116 in. MuseD Thy,'Sen'
Bornemisza, Madrid
Figure 7, Georges Braque. The Portuguese. 1911-/2. Oil on canvas, 46 x 32 in. Offentfiche KUllstsammlung Basel. Kunstmuseum. Gift of Dr. h. c. Raoul La Roche, 1952
the experience of Koolhaas's design, as Vidler describes it. and the terms of analysis
proposed by Rowe and Slutzky can best be understood if we look to the passage in
which they use paintings Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque to provide a "previ
sion;' as they call it, ofliteral and phenomenal transparency.11 They see Picasso's Man
with a Clarinet of 1911 (fig. 6) as an example of literal transparency, "a positively
transparent figure standing in a relatively deep space"; only gradually does the
observer "redefine this sensation to allow for the real shallowness of the space."
Braque's The Portuguese of the same year (fig. 7) reverses this experience: the paint
ing's "highly developed interlacing of horizontal and vertical gridding ... establishes a
primarily shallow space"; only then does the viewer "become able to invest this space
with a depth:'
At this point it seems necessary to separate Rowe from Slutzky, whose concerns
led him into a deep investigation of the relationship between the fine arts and
psychology of perception. 12 While admiring Slutzky's analysis, Rowe is
concerned with how the cubist paintings might support his conviction that modern
architecture represents nothing more than a formal evolution out of, rather than a
break with, the architecture of the classical past. Disregarding the fundamental dif
ferences between traditional perspectival construction and synthetic cubism, and
setting aside for the moment the differences between Man with a Clarinet and The
Portuguese on which Rowe and Slutzky we can three aspects of the
paintings that made them useful to Rowe for architectural analysis: their frontality,
analogous to that ofthe traditional facade; their figure-ground relationships, which
privileged formal discernment; and their synthetic spatial depth, which suggested to
Rowe an affinity with the compositional elements of the classical orders. Thus, the
analytical tools developed by Slutzky to undermine rationalist objectivity in painting
12 13
: Marcel Duchamp. The Bride
Bare by Her Bachelors, Even
rge Glass). 1915-23. Oil, var
dfoil, lead wire, and dust on
;s panels (cracked), each mount
een two glass panels, with five
'ips, aluminum foil, and a wood
I frame, 109 112 x 69 1/4 in.
'phia Museum of Art, Bequest
rine S. Dreier, 1953
ironically serve Rowe to defend the objective viewpoint of the architectural con
noisseur. Tn an extended comparison of Gropius's Bauhaus workshop wing, dis
playing literal transparency, and Le Corbusier's Villa Garches, representing phe
nomenal transparency, Rowe and Slutzky even criticize Gropius for
"relying on the diagonal viewpoint;' rather than the fixed, orthogo
nal viewpoint of Le Corbusier's work and, for that matter, the can
vases of Picasso and Braque.13 Tn so doing, they continue, Gropius
"has exteriorized the opposed movements of his space, has allowed
them to flow away into infinity:'
Regardless of their ultimate positions, Rowe and Slutzky's ideas
about transparency rest on the premise that the viewer has visual
access to the object, either by penetrating to it directly or by con
structing a visual path through the shallow space of the Cubist grid.
Vidler's term blockage has no function in a discussion of penetrating
the spaces created by Picasso and Braque (or Rowe's architectural
exemplar, Le Corbusier), but the term strongly resonates with the
work of Marcel Duchamp, particularly his Large Glass of 1915-23
(fig. 8). For Duchamp the surface of the Large Glass is a kind of
threshold, distinct from the object itself, suggesting a subjective ten
sion between the viewer and the object like that created by
Poppaea's veil; it is to be "looked at rather than through;' in the
words of the architecture critic Kenneth Frampton.14 Another way
of describing the effect on the viewer is suggested by Octavio Paz;
whereas Picasso's work represents "movement before painting;' Paz
explains that "right from the start Duchamp set up a vertigo of delay in opposition
to the vertigo of acceleration. Tn one of the notes in the celebrated Green Box he
writes, 'use delay instead of "picture" or "painting"; "picture on glass" becomes
"delay in glass:""15
Frampton's comments on the Large Glass are made in an essay in which he com
pares Duchamp's great work to Pierre Chareau's 1932 Maison de Verre, a long
neglected masterpiece of prewar architecture, which ran completely against the grain
of modern rationalist thought (fig. 9). It was sheathed in layers of transparent and
translucent materials, which alternately obscured and revealed a sequence of views
"ambiguous characteristics;' Frampton notes, which "would surely have been anath
ema to the fresh air and hygiene cult of the mainstream Modern Movement."16
Though the glass architecture of the Maison de Verre might have been dismissed by
the rationalist Hilberseimer, it remains resistant to the visual delectation espoused by
Rowe. Frampton points out that it served as both a private residence and gynecolo
gist's office, a combination offunctions richly analogous to the division of the Large
Glass into the Bride's domain above and that of the eroticized Bachelor Apparatus
below. Frampton writes, "The works are unclassifiable in any conventional sense;
they are 'other' in the deepest sense of the word and this 'strangeness' is a conse
quence of their opposition to the mainstream of Western art after the Renaissance:'17
Frampton's writings, which underpin many of the thoughts expressed here by myself
Figure 9: Pierre Chareau. Maison
de Verre, Paris. 1932. Facade
Figure 10: Rem Koolhaas-O.M.A.
BibliotMque Nationale de France,
Paris. Competition proposal, 1989.
PeripMrique facade
and others, point to the relationship between delay in glass and a potential delay in
architecture that this essay attempts to establish.
These modes of delay resist the kind of classification that inevitably results from
visual objectivity's fixed point of reference. Herzog and de Meuron's 1989 project for
a Greek Orthodox Church in Basel and Ben van Berkel's ACOM Office Building ren
ovation (Amersfoort, the Netherlands, 1993, pp. 66-67) provide examples of "delay
in architecture:' The church is a volume of glass and translucent marble enclosing a
second volume of translucent alabaster, which is the sanctuary. On the alabaster are
ghostlike photo-etched images of ancient icons, which act as filters, interposing faith,
history, and memory, "delaying" the headlong rush of visual perception into the inte
rior. The new facades surrounding the ACOM Office Building similarly provide a
visual threshold, revealing the "memory" of the preexisting structure, built in the
1960s and now subsumed. Van Berkel employs translucent materials and perforated
screens to hinder visual penetration, creating the greatest possible distance between
the interior and exterior membranes.
Like Poppaea's veil, these facades have a positive presence and, in distancing the
viewer, a specific function: they are something inserted between. The facades of
Koolhaas's library not only transmit the shadowy presences of forms within but
acknowledge equally amorphous forms without, specifically clouds, whose generic
shapes are etched on the Paris and Peripherique facades (fig. 10). In this respect as
well as in acting as thresholds, Koolhaas's facades have a certain affinity with the
Large Glass, whose upper panel is dominated by the image of a cloud. The cloud is
an appropriate symbol of the new definition of transparency: translucent but dense,
substantial but without definite form, eternally positioned between the viewer and
the distant horizon. Koolhaas describes the library's facades: "transparent, some
times translucent, sometimes opaque; mysterious, revealing, or mute .... Almost nat
ural-like a cloudy sky at night, like an eclipse:'18
The "mysterious" facades mentioned by Koolhaas and the "haze and evanes
cence" that Nouvel sees in the Cartier Foundation originate in conditions Rowe and
Slutzky somewhat derisively refer to as the "haphazard superimpositions provided by
the accidental reflections of light playing upon a translucent or polished surface:'19
But the architects' words are not simply poetic, and the effect they describe is not
haphazard, as a brief excursion into quantum electrodynamics may suggest.
Transparent and translucent materials allow some photons (particles of light) to pass
through them while they partially reflect others. This activity in the surface of the
transparent membrane can account for the reflection of as much as 16 percent of
the light particles that strike it, creating visible reflections and, frequently, a palpa
ble luminescence. 2o The doubling of the glass found in many of the projects here
increases the potential for the glass surface to cast back photons: up to 10 percent of
those that pass through the outer layer are reflected by the inner one; still others ric
ochet between the two. The dynamics of light passing through transparent surfaces
is described as a "slowing" of light by the physicist Richard Feynman. 21 The similar
ity of his term to Duchamp's "delay in glass" provides a striking bridge between the
languages of the physicist and the artist.
14 15
Figure 12: Reconstruction of Brunelleschis perspective experiment,
1417. After Alessandro Parronchi,
Studi su la dolce prospettiva (Milan: A. Martello, 1964), fig. 91
1994. see fig. 26) proposed by David Chipperfield, and other projects all show a
dense volume surrounded by open, unprogrammed space, itself enclosed by a glazed
skin. Analogous to thermally efficient double-glazed walls, these designs isolate activ
ities from light, sound, or heat. Yet the extravagance of these efficiencies reminds us
that isolation is not simply a functional goal in these structures, but a visual and ulti
one.
The tension between viewer and object engendered by the use ofveil-like built-up
membranes parallels a tension between architectural surface and architectural form
that is evident in many of the works presented here. The art historian Hubert
Damisch has written at length about the invention of perspective drawing, one of the
principal design tools since the Renaissance, and its inherent bias toward form:
"Perspective is able to comprehend only what its system can accommodate: things
that occupy a place and have a shape that can be described by Iines."22 Damisch fur
ther notes that the limitations of perspective's ability to describe visual experience
were apparent even at its inception. He cites Brunelleschi's 1417 experiment in which
he tested the accuracy of his perspective drawing of the Baptistery of San Giovanni,
seen from the door ofthe Cathedral in Florence. The drawing on a panel was held by
the observer, who peered through a small hole in the back of it toward the Baptistery
while holding at arm's length a mirror that reflected the right half of the panel, thus
allowing him to compare the actual view of the structure with the reflection of
Brunelleschi's drawing of it (fig. 12). Damisch notes that the architect attempted to
compensate for the limitations he clearly saw in his drawing system: having rendered
the Baptistery and the surrounding square, Brunelleschi added a layer of silver leaf to
the upper area of the panel to mirror the sky and the clouds, those aspects of the
actual view that escaped his system of perspective. Brunelleschi's addition of silver
leaf not only "manifests perspective as a structure of exclusion, the coherence of
which is based upon a set of refusals; but, by reflecting the formlessness of the uuuu~,
must "make room ... for even those things which it excludes from its system:'23
Many ofthe projects presented here exhibit a similarly compensatory attitude, an
attempt to "make room" for that which neither perspective nor Cartesian space can
describe. Dan Graham, in Two- Way Mirror Cylinder inside Cube, a component of his
Rooftop Urban Park Project at the Dia Center for the Arts, New York (1991, see fig. 27
and pp. 86-87), recognizes the usefulness of geometry, plan organization, and sys
temization ofthe structure while refusing to assign them a transcendent, defining role.
The environment, endlessly reflected, literally superimposes formlessness on the struc
ture's architectural surfaces, easily overcoming the certitude ofthe structurally framed
view and the idealized abstraction ofthe circle and the square that create its plan, dis
solving their Platonic forms in contingent perceptions. Similarly, the transparent sur
faces, flickering video screens, and tilted volume ofthe Glass Video Gallery by Bernard
Tschumi (Groningen, the Netherlands, 1990, see fig. 14 and pp. 88-91) counteract
the ability of a structural grid and perspective vision to determine the overall image of
architecture. As Tschumi explains, "The appearance of permanence (buildings are
solid; they are made of steel, concrete, bricks, etc.) is increasingly challenged by the
immaterial representation of abstract systems (television and electronic images):'24
Ire 11: Ludwig Mies van dCT Rohe.
endhat House, Bmo, G"zechoslova
1930. Exterior view of retractable dows.
While Feynman's writings apply specifically to the passing of light through mate
rials, the D. E. Shaw and Company Offices by Steven Holl (New York City, 1991,
pp. 68-69) demonstrate a "slowing of light" as it reflects off opaque surfaces. Tn this
project, natural light enters through the building's windows, strikes screen walls
back-painted in various colors, and ricochets into the interiors, suffusing them with
reflected colored light recalling the soft, pervasive glow of James Turrell's sculptures.
The contrast between a classic modernist project and recent works illustrates
the difference between today's attitudes toward the architectural surface and earli
er conceptions of transparent and translucent skins. While capable of creating a
remarkably complex surface, Mies van der Rohe intended in his Tugendhat House
(Brno, Czechoslovakia, 1929) to achieve the greatest transparency (fig. 11). To real
aim, Mies employed the simplest kind of skin. The house was sheathed floor
to ceiling by the largest sheets of plate glass produced in Europe up to that
time. Ironically, given its expense, he hoped that the glazing would be
essentially nonmaterial; in fact, a mechanism allowed the glass walls to be
lowered into the basement, removing them altogether.
The projects presented here rarely display a skin that could be called
instead, they exploit the positive physical characteristics of
glass and other substances. As opposed to the fraction of an inch by which
the windows of the Tugendhat House separated its interior from the exteri
or, these newer projects frequently have very complex sections comprising
a variety of materials, with discrete spaces between. This gives the surfaces
a depth that is sometimes slight, as in the tightly bound sheathing of the
Signal Box auf dem Wolf by Herzog and de Meuron (Basel, 1994, pp. 72-73),
and sometimes more pronounced, as in Peter Zumthor's Kunsthaus Bregenz
(Bregenz, Austria, pp. 74-77), currently under construction, whose interior
and exterior are separated by layers of translucent shingles, a passable air
space, and an interior wall. Such built-up sections increase emphasis on the
architectural surface and reveal a desire for greater complexity, visual and otherwise,
in the structure's skin. The reasons for multiple layers of material frequently include
reducing the transmission of heat and cold, but the aim of insulating the structure is
not solely a technical one. As does Poppaea's veil, layers of transparency define the
viewer's relationship to the world, creating not only insulation but a notable isolation
removal from the continuum of space and experience implied by the nonmaterial sur
faces of the Tugendhat House.
Architecture-though it may be read as a text with definite relationships to liter
ature, philosophy, the fine arts, and so on-is a specific kind oftext with its own crit
ical tools. The section, a conceptual device with little application outside architec
ture, can be used to develop details, like the elements of a structure's surface, or
even the building as a whole. The section on page 78 of Harry Wolf's proposed ABN
AMRO Head Office Building (Amsterdam, 1992) is analogous to details of the struc
ture's curtain wall: each represents a volume of space suspended between glazed sur
faces. Section views of the Leisure Studio (Espoo, Finland, 1992, pp. 82-85) by
Kaako, Laine, Liimatainen, and Tirkkonen, the Neues Museum extension (Berlin,
16 17
Rosalind Krauss has recently described a phenomenological reading of minimal
ist sculpture, on the part of certain architecture critics, which effects a shift in mean
ing that closely parallels the shift from form to surface evident in the projects pre
sented here. She writes, "Far from having what we could call the fixed and enduring
centers of a kind of formulaic geometry, Minimalism produces the paradox of a cen
terless, because shifting, geometry .... Because of this demonstrable attack on the
idea that works achieve their meaning by becoming manifestations or expressions of
a hidden center, Minimalism was read as lodging meaning in the surface of the
object, hence its interest in reflective materials, in exploiting the play of natural
light:'25 This interpretation of minimalist sculpture's tendency to shift the meaning of
the object from its form to its surface has broad implications for architecture. Jean
Nouvel expresses a similar idea when he describes the architecture of his Cartier
Foundation as one whose rules consist in "rendering superfluous the reading of solid
volumes in a poetry of haze and evanescence:'26
The position that Krauss describes need not be limited to a building wit)1 pol
ished, reflective surfaces that record "actual, contingent particularities of its moment
of being experienced."27 For example, the "contingent particularities" of the Goetz
Collection do not lie solely in the subtle reflections of the birch trees surrounding it.
The project achieves a specific rather than universal character in its construction as
well: it "reflects" its site in the laminated birch veneer panels of the facade. And even
though the surfaces of the minimalist gymnasium by Tfiaki Abalos and Juan Herreros
(1991, pp. 98-101) are much less transparent or translucent, that project also resists
being perceived as an abstract formal exercise, insisting on its site-specificity, reflect
ing the character of the walled Spanish hill town of Simancas.
In telling contrast to the ultimate importance given to architectural form in both
historicist postmodernism and deconstructivism, many of these projects exhibit a
remarkable lack of concern for, if not antipathy toward, formal considerations. In
fact, most of the projects could be described by a phrase no more complicated
than "rectangular volume:' Commenting on one of his recent projects, Koolhaas
explains the logic of this formal restraint: ''It is not a building that defines a clear
architectural identity; but a building that creates and triggers potential:'28 The ten
sion between surface and form in contemporary architecture is not limited to rel
atively simple forms: the overall silhouettes of Renzo Piano's Kansai International
Airport (Osaka, Japan, 1994, pp. 110-17), Frank Gehry's Frederick R. Weisman Art
Museum (Minneapolis, 1993, pp. 106-9), and Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners'
Waterloo International Terminal (London, 1994, pp. 92-98), for example, are far
too complex to be characterized as minimalist. Kansai Airport's sheer scale pre
vents us from grasping its form, and the extent of the new Waterloo terminal can
only be seen from the air. Yet even when experiencing parts of Kansai Airport, we
realize that its silvery, undulating skin is more critical to its design than is its for
mal composition; equally, the form of the Waterloo International Terminal reflects
peculiarities of the lot lines of existing rail yards rather than any preconceived for
mal conceit. Tn both projects, the overall form is complex but indefinable, specific
but nonrepresentational.
•
None of the above projects, nor any of the less articulated ones previously con
sidered, displays interest in "timeless, unchanging geometries;' and all of them com
plement the diminished importance of overall form by an increased sensitivity to
the skin. And while the large projects may seem not just indifferent to but funda
mentally estranged from the geometric rigors of perspectival construction, what
impresses the viewer of a project such as Toyo lto's Shimosuwa Municipal Museum
(Shimosuwa, Japan, 1993, pp. 118-23) is not that its form is difficult to grasp, which
it is, but that it simultaneously appears so precise. In effect, it suggests a new con
ception of measure and order. Brunelleschi perceived an unbridgeable gap between
the measurable (the Baptistery) and the immeasurable (such as a cloud). Similarly,
Leonardo identified two kinds of visible bodies, "of which the first is without shape
or any distinct or definite extremities ... The second kind of visible bodies is that of
which the surface defines and distinguishes the shape:'29 Leonardo's distinction is
essentially false, however, determined by the inability of Renaissance mathematics to
describe complex surfaces. Fractal geometry has shown that there is no such funda
mental distinction between the Baptistery and the cloud, only a difference in the
manner of calculating their physical characteristics.
The computer has diminished the realm of the immeasurable in architectural
design. In describing the uniquely shaped panels that compose the skin of the
Shimosuwa Museum, lto noted that without computer technology their cost, rela
tive to that of standardized panels, would have been prohibitive. The use of extensive
computer modeling in the design of Kansai Airport (fig. 13) and Waterloo Terminal further demonstrates the extent to which technolo
gy has overcome the "problem" of structure, once a
primary focus of design, whose "solution" subse
quently defined, visually and otherwise, all other -kf:B;
--------- -.--.---'
aspects of a project. This relativization of structure
can be seen in various ways in the projects pre
sented here; for example, Nagisa Kidosaki, writing
T
Figure 13: Renzo Piano Building
Workshop, Japan_ Kansai Tnternational
Airport, Osaka. 1994. Diagram showing
top-bottom chord axial forces under
vertical loading
about the Shimosuwa Museum, explains: "Thin
membranes meant a thin structural system:'30
The use of sophisticated computer modeling is
only one sign of the impact of technology on the architectural surface. The incorpo
ration of electronic media into contemporary structures may result in the transfor
mation of a building'S skin, which literally becomes a screen for projection in Herzog
and de Meuron's 1993 Olivetti Bank project (see fig. 15). A more architectonic syn
thesis of the electronic media can be seen in those projects in which electronic tech
nology is not simply grafted to the structure but transformed into material and spa
tial qualities. The flattening of objects and activities projected onto translucent
glazing gives a facade or interior surface the aura of a flickering electronic screen. On
a small scale, this phenomenon is evident in the Thanhauser and Esterson gymnasi
um, where the athletes' silhouettes are projected onto the surfaces of dressing room
cubicles (each cubicle has splayed walls, as if to suggest projection). On a larger
scale, the farmhouses and elements of the natural landscape outside lto's ITM
18 19
Building collapse, in effect, as they are projected onto the surface glazing of the
triple-height atrium. Tn Tod Williams and Billie Tsien's portable translucent set for
the play The World Upside Down (Amsterdam and New York, 1990-91, pp. 104-5),
projections actually became part of the performance as actors' sil
houettes were cast onto screens and magnified by manipulation of
the lighting. Jacques Herzog writes of "these surfaces for projection,
these levels of overlapping, the almost-identity of architecture."31
Despite the ambiguous, equivocal, and at times even erotic
undertones of many of the projects discussed here, it would be
incorrect to assign them to a world of smoke and mirrors, where all
is illusion, indecipherable and unattainable. Rather, they realign
or rethink a nexus of ideas that has fueled much of architectural
development since the Renaissance: perspectival vision, Cartesian
space, and, by inference, the structural grid. Inherent in the works
presented here, particularly Joel Sanders's studied Kyle Residence
project (1991, pp. 124-25), is the possibility of a position that
includes the certitude of objective vision and the equivocal nature of
the gaze; these works recognize the efficacy and the utility of per
spectival construction without subordinating all else to its language
of measure and order. The fusion of the two might be best under
stood in the designers' attitude toward structure, for centuries the
most evident expression of the theoretical coincidence of perspec
tival vision and Cartesian thinking. Many of these projects share a
common approach to relationship between the structure and
the skin: the structural members, rather than framing and there
fore defining the point of view, are lapped over by single and dou
ble layers of translucent sheathing, as in the interior partitions of
the Cartier Foundation, the clerestory of the Goetz Collection, and
Annette Gigon and Mike Guyer's Kirchner Museum Davos (Davos,
Switzerland, 1992, pp. 126-29). The structure, while providing
support in a straightforward manner, has a diminished potential to
ure 14: Bernard Tschumi. ass Video GaTtery, Groningen,
e Netherlands. 1990. Exploded
'onometric diagram
determine the appearance of the building. Other projects here vir
tually erase the boundary between support and surface: the Glass Video Gallery
makes no material distinction between the glass ribs that give it stability and the
glass sheathing that encloses the space (fig. 14). The monocoque design of the
Phoenix Art Museum Sculpture Pavilion by Williams and Tsien (Phoenix, Arizona,
pp. 130-31) similarly merges structure and sheathing. The Pavilion's translucent
resin panels, ranging from one-half to one inch thick and connected only with stain
less steel clips, are self-supporting and stabilizing.
It could be argued that these self-effacing but critical details relativize the role of
the structure in a more self-confident way than deconstructivist ploys such as tilted
columns, destabilized surfaces, and structural redundancies, which, though meant to
undermine the role of structure, frequently achieve the opposite: the specter of the
displaced rises up endlessly to haunt the architecture. More fundamentally, such
detailing can be unambiguous about creating ambiguity.
Calvino expresses this idea well: "Lightness for me goes with
precision and determination, not vagueness and the haphaz
ard:'32In "Lightness;' one of Calvino's Six Memos for the
Next Millennium, he writes, "T look to science to nourish my
visions in which all heaviness disappears"; and further, "the
iron machines still exist, but they obey the orders of weight
less bits:'33 Calvino reminds us that just as the current con
ception of transparency is distant from that held by early
modern rationalists, these contemporary expressions of
Figure 15: Jacques Herzog and Pierre lightness are distinct from earlier conceptions of lightweight architecture: they imply de Meuron. Olivetti Bank Project. 1993
a seeming weightlessness rather than a calculation of relative weight. 34 Calvino's bal (prototype)
ance between iron machines and weightless bits is also seen in Starobinski's pre
scription for the "reflexive gaze;' which incorporates the wisdom associated with
vision, yet "trusts in the senses and in the world the senses revea!:'35
The subject ofStarobinski and Calvino is literature, but their observations have
numerous implications for understanding the aesthetics of the architecture pre
sented here, as well as its broader cultural context. 36 Calvino refers to Guido
Cavalcanti as a poet of "lightness;' which he defines as follows: "(1) it is to the high
est degree light; (2) it is in motion; (3) it is a vector of information:'37 Tto's Tower of
the Winds (Yokohama, 1986-95, pp. 132-33) practically begs to be analyzed in
these terms. Relatively nondescript in daylight, the structure was brought to life at
night by thousands of computer-controlled light sources whose constantly changing
patterns responded to sounds and wind. Tn the architect's words, "The intention
was to extract the flow of air (wind) and noise (sound) from the general flow of
things in the environment of the project and to transform them into light signals,
that is, visual information. Simply put, it was an attempt to convert the environ
ment into information:'38
Tt is not surprising that the pervasive presence in contemporary culture of film,
television, video, and computer screens, representing a unique sen
sibility of light, movement, and information, should find its way into
architecture. Koolhaas's composition for the Karlsruhe Zentrum fUr
Kunst and Medientechnologie is perhaps the most provocative con
figuration of the electronic screen and the architectural facade, but
the proposed display of financial quotations on the facade of Herzog
and de Meuron's Olivetti Bank project is no less explicit and equally
convincing, given its program (fig. 15). Among built projects, Tto's
Egg of the Winds (fig. 16), Tschumi's Glass Video Gallery, and
Mehrdad Yazdani's CineMania Theatre (1994, pp. 102-3) represent
Figure 16: Toyo Ito. Egg ofthe Winds, more restrained uses of electronic imagery but still demonstrate the ability of the Tokyo. 1991
architectural object to be transformed by the dull glow and flickering image of the
electronic media. The effect, as Tto has described it, is to render urban space as a
"phenomenal city of lights, sounds, and images ... superimposed on the tangible
urban space of buildings and civil engineering works:'39
20 21
igure 17: Jan Vermeer. Woman ith a Pearl Necklace. C. /662-65. 'it on canyas, 21 11lt6 x 17 % in.
x 45cm). Staatliche Museen
Berlin-Preullischer Kulturbesitz emiildegalerie
The architects' interest in electronic media is neither an expression of techno
logical fantasy nor simply a fascination with the aesthetic allure of low-voltage lumi
nescence. It is rooted in the ability of these electronic modes of communication to
portray the immediacy and the poignant transience of contemporary life. Their
works bring to mind Ludwig Wittgenstein's observation, "It seems as though there is
nothing intangible about the chair or the table, but there is about the fleeting human
experience."40 Dennis Adams's installation Bus Shelter TV (Munster, Germany, 1987,
pp. 134-35) narrows the gap between the tangible and the intangible. Adams trans
forms an ordinary bus shelter into the setting for an urban drama in which com
muters find themselves both observers and observed. Interposed between enlarged
backlit transparencies, they find their own image projected and reflected by a high ly manipulative visual environment.
The many images here that portray the architecture at night, lit from within, sug
gest that Ito is not alone in seeking an architecture that "is to the highest degree
light:' Tn Zaha Hadid's 1994 proposal for the Cardiff Bay Opera House, the nocturnal
view is not simply the inverse of the building's daylight appearance. Indeed, the draw
ings prepared for the competition indicate that the design was conceived as a night
time phenomenon. Floor Plan, an installation by Melissa Gould (Linz, Austria, 1991,
pp. 136-37), equally depends on darkness, literally and metaphorically, to convey
its message. The project consisted of a nearly full-scale outline of the plan of a Berlin
synagogue destroyed during the Nazi terror. The ghost building was evoked by lights
shallow trenches, which traced the configuration of the synagogue's walls and
columns. Photographs document the poignant dramatic character of the project: we
see eerily lit faces of visitors moving through the installation. More tragically, the
work can disappear at the flick of a switch. Gould's project demonstrates unequivo cally that "lightness" should not be confused with frivolity.
The current fascination with the architecture of lightness in many ways depends
on recent technological developments. It also manifests a persistent theme in
Western culture. Describing his proposed ABN-AMRO Head Office Building, Harry
Wolf refers to the "longstanding concern for light in the Netherlands; that is, the
association of luminosity, precision, and probity in all matters:' However, notwith
standing the philosophical associations of light with the Enlightenment, illumination,
and so on, the attempt to magnify the presence of natural light in northern European
projects is primarily a response to the immediate setting-also a longstanding con
cern. Wolf recalls "Vermeer's preoccupation with subtle modulations of light through
a window."41 Jan Vermeer's emphasis on ambient light is, among other things, an
attempt to magnify its diminished presence in northern latitudes (fig. n); a similar
motive led to the gilding of architectural features, from the cupolas of New Haven's
churches and the Goldene Dachel of Munich's imperial residence to the reflective
sheathing of Gehry's Weisman Art Museum. The Kirchner Museum's principal gal
leries are lit by a clerestory level, capturing light from all directions in a plenum and
diffusing it through the galleries' frosted glass ceilings. This sensitivity to low levels of
natural light also may be a response to the flattening of the shadowless landscape, particularly during the winter months.
Herzog usefully observes: ULe Corbusier ... wrote, 'Architecture is the scientific,
correct, and wonderful game of volumes assembled under light: What, however, if
architecture is not a game at all, especially not a scientific and correct one and if
the light is often clouded over, diffuse, not so radiant as it is in the ideal southern
landscape?,,42 Holl's Helsinki Museum of Contemporary Art (under construction,
pp. 138-43) traps this diffuse northern light within its section in order to introduce
both directly and by reflection, into the lower parts of the building-suggesting,
perhaps, an architectural antithesis of Le Corbusier's brise-solei/, a shield from Medi
terranean sunlight. Oriented to maximize exposure to the sun, which is low on the
horizon most of the year, the museum incorporates a reflecting pool as an extension
of nearby Toolo Bay. In Holl's words, "The horizontal light of northern latitudes is
enhanced by a waterscape that would serve as an urban mirror, thereby linking the
new museum to Helsinki's Toolo heart, which on a clear day, in [Alvar] Aalto's words,
'extends to Lapland:"43
In climates far removed from the idealized, sun-filled landscape of the Mediter
ranean, which Le Corbusier encountered in his youthful voyage en Orient, the long
ing for light may conflict with another more recent cultural concern. The past two
decades have seen an increasing consciousness of architecture's environmental impli
cations, particularly the energy consumption of buildings. Two approaches, both of
which avoid or minimize mechanical heating and cooling systems dependent on fuel
consumption, attempt to balance environmental concerns with the widespread use of
glass and other thermally inefficient materials.
The first approach is essentially passive, in the technical sense of employing non
mechanical systems to heat and cool structures and often electing to forgo optimal
climate control. Williams and Tsien's Phoenix Art Museum Sculpture Pavilion is to
have no mechanical air-conditioning system; instead, it will employ a low-technolo
gy cooling device based on commonsense thermodynamics. Approximately twenty
feet above the viewing area, scores of nozzles emit a fine mist of cool water, which
evaporates before reaching ground level. The heat exchange that occurs during the
evaporation process lowers the air temperature by ten to twenty degrees, and this
heavier air then descends to cool visitors in the open pavilion. The simple principles
behind this low-technology approach are equally useful in the colder climate of
Munich, where the Goetz Collection is enclosed by a double layer of glass that not
only contributes to the "slowing" of light but acts as a sort of a duct, like a chimney.
As heat accumulates in the lower floor (which is below grade and therefore has a
more stable temperature), it escapes into the space between the layers of glass and
rises to the upper floor, providing a secondary source of heat. The Leisure Studio and
Glass Video Gallery reject systems requiring high energy consumption to compensate
for low thermal efficiency; users must simply accept constraints imposed by the cli
mate: diminished comfort or restricted use when temperatures reach seasonal
extremes. This attitude should not be perceived as a kind of obliviousness to the real
ity of climatic conditions but as a value judgment: a conscious decision reflecting a
deep-rooted preference for the enhancement of available light, for one particular
kind of comfort instead of another.
22 23
igure 18: Sir Norman Foster and
'artners. Business Promotion Center.
'uisburg, Germany. 1993. Axonometric
utaway of layered glass cladding and "oor slab
The second approach uses higher technology to achieve energy efficien
cy. Just as the computer has rendered the problem of structure less funda
mental, limitations on the efficiency of mechanical heating and cooling are
being overcome by technological advancements. Norman Foster's Business
Promotion Center (Duisburg, Germany, 1993, pp. 144-47) is a building with
an insulated glass facade wrapped in another layer of glass (fig. 18). A con
tinuous air space between the two layers rises from the ground to the top of
the structure. Large buildings, in contrast to smaller ones such as the Goetz
Collection, absorb too much heat. To control heat intake, the air space in the
Duisburg project has translucent louvers that can admit light but deflect
heat, which can then be exhausted upward before entering the interior glaz
ing. Within this system, there is an attempt to address micro environmental
differences between interior spaces. Even though the louvers adjust them
selves automatically to the position of the sun, office workers can readjust
them. Occupants may also open windows in the inner glazing to ventilate
offices from the air moving through the twenty-centimeter gap between the inner and outer glazing.
Just as lightness offers a way to understand much of contemporary archi
tecture in terms other than formal ones, cultural concerns with light and the
environment are not limited to glass structures. The shimmering skin of
metal tiles that covers Kansai Airport not only evokes the architect's stated
goal of "lightness;' but acts as a huge umbrella, protecting the structure from
which become translucent when a preset thermal threshold is reached:'44 The former,
used in sunglasses, is not yet sold for architectural use, but the latter, according to the
authors, will become more widely available in the near future. A third type of smart
glazings, called electrochromic, consists of multilayer assemblies through which a low
voltage electric current can be passed, causing ions to move to the outer layer where
they may reflect heat-producing ultraviolet light but transmit visible wavelengths.
To speak of the technological attitudes of the projects discussed here as cultural
phenomena requires further scrutiny, particularly given the prominence of glass
structures over the course of this century. Glass architecture is not, however, unique
to our time; a centuries-long fascination with it is evident in Jewish, Arabic, and
European literature and mythology. As the architectural historian Rosemarie Haag
Bletter has demonstrated, the "glass dream" that inspired these cultures has ancient
roots, traceable to the biblical accounts of King Solomon's temple having reflective
floors made of gold. 45 The glass dream was sustained through the Mozarabic culture
of medieval Spain, principally in literary form, but it also found built expression in
small metaphorical structures such as garden pavilions. "Because an actual glass or
crystal palace was not technically feasible, the semblance of such a building was
attained through allusion: water and light were used to suggest a dissolution of solid
materials into a fleeting vision of disembodied, mobile architecture:'46 In the Gothic
period, the glass dream found greater expression in built form, in the soaring cathe
drals with their expansive walls of colored glass, as well as in literary sources, par
ticularly the legends of the Holy Grail. Tn Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzifa1, the
sought-for Grail is symbolized by a glowing crystal hidden in a cave. The association
between the image of a crystal or jewel and glass architecture is enduring. Zaha
Hadid, describing her design for the Cardiff Bay Opera House, refers to the overall
organization as an "inverted necklace" that strings together the various service ele
ments, which she calls the "jewels" of the program. 47 Similarly, Harry Wolf speaks of
his attempts to "create a heightened sense of transparency, just as light reflected and
refracted in a gem seems more compelling and brilliant:'48
This literary and architectural motive continued through the Renaissance, emerg
ing as a central theme of Francesco Colonna's widely read Hypnerotomachia Poliphili
of 1499. An expression of the romantic aspect of the Renaissance fascination with the
ruins of classical antiquity, it invokes images of structures with transparent alabaster
walls and floors of highly polished obsidian, so mirrorlike that viewers thought they
were walking through the reflected sky. While the Enlightenment was characterized
by a fascination with light and the scientific investigation of optics, its architectural
expressions were not as poetic. The Crystal Palace might seem equally rationalist,
though it is hard for us to imagine the impact of this first extensively glazed large struc
ture, envisioned as the stage for a global event, and the spectacle created by its con
struction and dismantling. Furthermore, the glass fountain at its crossing was an under
stated but direct reference to the fantastic Mozarabic structures described by Bletter .49
As Bletter has demonstrated, the association of crystalline architecture with the
transcendent (and its counterpart, the association of opaque materials with the pro
fane) is central to the glass dream in all of its manifestations. The expressionist
heat gain as well as rain. The building's undulating wave shape is, borrowing
Calvino's words, "to the highest degree light;' but it also interestingly embodies his
emphasis on movement. Its shape expresses the flow of passengers across the struc
ture from the "landside" to the "airside;' as they move from check-in to departure,
and it is also calculated to channel streams of air. The voluptuous interior ceiling
carries ribbonlike channels, their shape derived from computer models of the flow of
air, which guide heated and cooled air through the length ofthe building without the use of enclosed air ducts.
Such applications of innovative solutions to environmental problems bespeak a
confidence in technology that has become discredited in some quarters. But the dis
missal of a technological approach as evidence of an unjustified faith in the myth of
progress is refuted by the successes of Foster, Piano, Peter Rice, and many other
architects and engineers. Much of their research seeks to justify the ongoing use of
glazed structures, so it is not surprising that their attention often focuses on glazing
materials. While this research, like that devoted to conversion of solar energy, has
limited application today, new glazing materials are on the edge of wide use.
"Superwindows" with various coatings and gas-filled cavities have already proven to
have better insulation properties than today's thermally efficient opaque materials.
Perhaps more intriguing than this new class of high-performance but essentially
static systems are what Stephen Selkowitz and Stephen LaSourd call "smart" glazings,
which react to changing conditions. 'These include "photo chromic glass, which
reversibly changes optical density when exposed to light;' and "thermo chromic glazings,
24 25
movement in the twentieth century added to the spirituality, fantasy,
transformation, and utopianism with which glass architecture had
historically been identified. In the aftermath ofthe First World War,
expressionists such as architect Bruno Taut were seeking not only
new forms but a new society. Bletter notes, "The crystalline glass
house [fig. 19] ... concretizes for Taut the kind of unstructured soci
ety he envisions. Class is here no longer the carrier of spiritual or
personal transformation but of a political metamorphosis:'::;o
In an essay published ten years ago, K. Michael Hays proposes
the possibility of a "critical architecture" that is perceived as a cul
tural phenomenon, as a readable text, without forgetting that it is a
particular kind of text with specific references to its own history, "a
Figure 19: Bruno Taut. Glass
Pavilion. Cologne. 1914 (demolished)
igure 20: Paul Nelson. Model of
'uspcnded House. Project. 1938. The
'useum of Modern Art. New York. Gift if the Advisory Committee
critical architecture that claims for itself a place between the efficient
representation of preexisting cultural values and the wholly detached autonomy of an
abstract formal system:'51 If the architecture presented here can claim to occupy
such a position, one might ask, Where is that place? Of what exactly is this contem porary architecture critical?
First and foremost, it is a critique of the canonical history of modern architec
ture. The historian Reyner Banham writes: "The official history of the Modern
Movement, as laid out in the late Twenties and codified in the Thirties, is a view
through the marrow-hole of a dry bone ... The choice of a skeletal history of the
movement with all the Futurists, Romantics, Expressionists, Elementarists and pure
aesthetes omitted, though it is most fully expressed in [Siegfried] Ciedion's Bauen in
Frankreich, is not to be laid to Ciedion's charge, for it was the choice of the move
ment as a whole. Quite suddenly modern architects decided to cut off half their grandparents without a farthing:'::;2
The modern past is reconfigured by many of the projects discussed here in tha~ they offer a chance to reconsider the reputations of certain figures whose work was
largely ignored in the postwar period. Fritz Neumeyer Uses terms strikingly similar
to Starobinski's when describing Otto Wagner's 1904-6 Postal Savings Bank in
Vienna: "Like the then floating garment that clothes the female body in ancient Creek
sculpture, revealing as much beauty as it conceals, Wagner's treatment of the
structure and construction exploits a similar kind of delicate, sensuous play that was
probably only evident to a connoisseur of a certain age and experience. Exactly
this principle gives the interior of the [Postal Savings Bank] its quality of silk-like
transparency. The glass veil
is lifted up on iron stilts that
carefully cut into its skin and
gently disappear :'53
Paul Nelson's "technosur
realist"54 Suspended House
(fig. 20), a glazed volume with
free-floating forms suspended
within, provides a model for a
Figure 21: Manfred and Laurids Ortner. The Museum of Modern Art. Museumsquartier Vienna. Competition
proposal. 1990. Diagram ofcomponent
structures
Pigure 22: Prank Lloyd Wright. S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. Research Laboratory Tower, Racine, WIsconsin.
1943-50. Exterior
presences" could equally be applied to Chareau's masterwork or
Johnson Research Laboratory Tower (fig. 22) by Frank Lloyd Wright, the great
American architect whose contribution to modern architecture was frequently mar
ginalized by European historians.
Oscar Nitzchke's seminal project of 1935, La Maison de la Publicite (fig. 23), was
similarly neglected by modern historians, whose interests
were more focused on the machine metaphor than on
populist expressions of modern culture such as cinema
and advertising. 58 Yet the project offers an early example
of the current fascination with electronic media and the
nocturnal transformation of architecture. Recalling
Calvino's triad of light, movement, and information,
Nitzchke's project assumes a prophetic aura. Louis Kahn's
decision to use glass for its specific material qualities in
his projected Memorial to the Six Million Jewish Martyrs
(1966-72), instead of regarding it as a nonmaterial, is
unusual for its time, and dECOi's 1991 Another Class
House (fig. 24) is a recent project that transforms its inspi
ration, Philip Johnson's 1949 Class House, by emphasizing
glass'S materiality, which Johnson implicitly denied.
In postmodernism's caricature (ironically based large
lyon Ciedion) of modern history, the wholesale devaluation of buildings such as
Cordon Bunshaft's 1963 Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Yale
University (fig. 25) has further obscured the roots of a number of works presented
here. The Beinecke's section within a section-an outer layer of translucent alabaster
enclosing a glazed, climate-controlled rare books library - is revived in various ways
number of projects, from Sejima's Women's Dormitory to Maki's
Congress Center project and Manfred and Laurids Ortner's pro
posed Museum of Modern Art for Vienna's Museum Quarter
(1990, fig. 21 and pp. 148-51). Describing his unbuilt project of
1935, Nelson said, "Suspension in space ... heightens the sense
of isolation from the outside world:'::;::;
The Maison de Verre by Pierre Chareau, largely ignored by
modern historians until the publication of Kenneth Frampton's
monograph on Chareau in 1969, looms large in any discussion of
lightness. 56 Recognized in its time as having transcended the then
ossifying parameters of the International Style, it was referred to
as having a "cinematographic sense of space;' a description that
invokes much of the imagery employed here to describe contem
porary architectural synergy. 57 In its visual complexity, the coy
ness with which it reveals its interior space, and its willful subor
dination of structural clarity, the facade of the Maison de Verre
could serve as a precis for Starobinski's notion of the gaze as a
reflexive act. Vidler's description of facades that reveal "shadowy
26
27
in Peter Zumthor's Kunsthaus Bregenz, David Chipperfield's pro
posed extension of the Neues Museum in Berlin (fig. 26), and the
Herzog and de Meuron Greek Orthodox Church project.
Besides representing an attempt to recapture lost figures in mod
ern architectural history, the projects here also reflect the current
reevaluation ofthe canonical masters. As a result of the historical par
ody of "glass boxes" offered by postmodern critics, a new generation
is rediscovering an architecture of the not so recent past. Charles
Jencks's dismissal of the work of Mies van der Rohe exemplifies post
modernist criticism: "For the general aspect of an architecture creat
ed around one (or a few) simplified values, I wiU use the term univa
lence. No doubt in terms of expression the architecture of Mies van
der Rohe and his followers is the most univalent formal system we
have, because it makes use offew materials and a single, right-angled
geometry:'59 Detlef Mertins's writings are among recent, less hostile
appraisals: "Could it be that this seemingly familiar architecture is
still in many ways unknown, and that the monolithic Miesian edifice refracts the light
of interpretation, mUltiplying its potential implications for contemporary architec
tural practices?"60 Mertins could well be speaking of Koolhaas's Two Patio Villas
(Rotterdam, 1988, pp. 152-55), in which the use of clear, frosted, green-tinted, and
armored glass recalls not the nonmaterial of the Tugendhat House but the rich sur
faces and the mUltiplicity of perceptions evident in Mies's Barcelona Pavilion.
Although the expressionists were rejected by rationalist architects such as
Hilberseimer and effectively written out of the history of modern architecture by
Giedion and others, the influence of Taut and his followers, referred to as the Glass
Chain, is evident in the work of a number of canonical modern masters, including
Mies's glass skyscrapers of about 1920. Walter Gropius, in his manifesto for the
Bauhaus, was influenced by Taut's expressionist utopianism: "Together let us desire,
conceive, and create the new structure of the future, which will embrace architecture
and sculpture and painting in one unity and which will one day rise toward heaven
from the hands of a million workers like the crystal symbol of a new faith!'61
Frampton, Banham, and others have noted that standard modern histories frequent
•
Figure 23: Oscar Nitzchke.
Maison de la PubliciUi, Paris. 1934-36.
Perspective, Gouache and photo
montage, 28 x 20 1/2'. The Museum of Modern Art, New York.
Gift of Lily Auchincloss, Barbara
Jakobson, and Walter Randel
Figure 24: dECOi. Another
Class House. Competition proposal, 1991. Axonometric
ly underestimate the important rela
tionships between what have come to
be perceived as irreconcilably opposed tendencies.
The success of Rowe and Slutzky in
awakening a generation of American,
and to a lesser extent European, archi
tects from the "glass dream" over the
course of four decades depended on
establishing a more narrow dialectic
than the fundamental one between
transparency and opacity described by
1;#111'" 25: Gordon Bunshaft 'kidmore, Owings & Merrill. Beinecke /I,,,,,. Book and Manuscript Library, Yale f tliVf~rsity. New Haven. Connecticut.
IfJrd. Interior view
Figure 26: David Chipperfield.
Nelles Museum Extension, Berlin.
Competition proposal, 1994.
Computer-generated light study
ofinterior of the Temple Hall
Bletter. Given Rowe's nostalgia for the classical facade and his antipathy
toward technological imagery, that longstanding relationship was enor
mously inconvenient. Rowe and Slutzky inverted the dichotomy by
equating the literal transparency of glass structures with materiality and
the phenomenal transparency of Le Corbusier with the higher functions
of intellectual abstraction: "A basic distinction must perhaps be estab
lished. Transparency may be an inherent quality of substance-as in a
wire mesh or glass curtain wall, or it may be an inherent quality of orga
nization ... a phenomenal or seeming transparency:'62
If much of the architecture herein can be seen as a critical response
to Giedion and the "room of shadowless light" that he helped canonize,
it also represents a critique of the formalism espoused by Rowe in the
course of devaluing glass architecture. The facades seen here express
not only a post-Rovian sense of transparency but the rejection of the
frontally viewed classical facade and its "structure of exclusion;' its "set of refusals."
While there is a common interest in maintaining a level of ambiguity, in limiting the
overreaching certitude of architectural expression, this recent architecture goes
beyond evoking the "equivocal emotions" that Rowe and Slutzky found in the pres
ence of architectural form, investigating the possibility of rethinking, and investing
with meaning, the architectural skin. As membranes, screens, and filters, the sur
faces ofthis architecture establish a vertigo of delay, blockage, and slowness, upend
ing the "vertigo of acceleration" that has dominated architectural design since the
invention of perspectival drawing.
In a contemporary context, the critique of Rowe's Epicureanism represented by
the projects here need not be taken as endorsement of a new sachlich architecture
of shadowless light, an expression of the renewed puritanism of our time. Just the
opposite: this recent architecture, trusting in "the senses and in the world the sens
es reveal," can be described as beautiful a word infrequently heard in architectur
al debates. Indeed, academic rationalists enjoyed such success in establishing the
basis for architectural discussions that architects have been called "secret agents for
beauty:' As a group, the projects here have a compelling visual attraction, undimin
ished by close reflection, that implicitly criticizes Hilberseimer's rejection of the aes
thetic dimension. They likewise reject the strictures of postmodernism, which have
alternated between invoking, as inspirations for architecture, a suffocating suprema
cy of historical form and arid philosophical speculation. Of the latter Koolhaas
writes, "Our amalgamated wisdom can be caricatured: according to Derrida we can
not be Whole, according to Baudrillard we cannot be Real, according to Virilio we
cannot be There-inconvenient repertoire for a profession helplessly about being
Whole, Real, and There:'63
Tn Tony Kushner's play Angels in America, part two opens with Aleksii Ante
dilluvianovich Prelapsarianov, the World's Oldest Living Bolshevik, haranguing the
audience: "What System of Thought have these Reformers to present to this mad
swirling planetary disorganization, to the Inevident Welter of fact, event, phenome
non, calamity?"64 Prelapsarianov'-s taunts remind us that the already muddied waters
28 29
Figure 27: Dan Graham. Two-Way
Mirror Cylinder inside Cube. 199 f. The Rooftop Urban Park Project. Diu
Center for the Arts, New York City
of the postmodern debate, played out over the last thirty years, are further roiled by
the approaching millennium, with its own set of critical references. Even so, without
claiming an overreaching system ofthought, it is possible to see in the current archi
tectural synergy further evidence of a renewed adherence to the spirit of the centu
ry, a spirit that most often expressed itself as one of invention and idealism. Tn
response to the "inconvenient repertoire" of poststructuralism, Koolhaas imagines a
"potential to reconstruct the Whole, resurrect the Real, reinvent the collective,
reclaim maximum possibility."65
Beyond his own work, Koolhaas's words resonate in projects at vastly different
scales, though, as is often the case, they can be most distinctly seen in smaller pro
jects, where simpler programs allow for more direct expression. Despite its modest
scale, the Leisure Studio eloquently fits Hays's definition of a critical architecture, but
it is also an expression of an idealism too easily dismissed in a cynical age. Designed
by an architectural collaborative as a contre-projet in response to an official housing
exhibition, it is currently used as an informal meeting place
where artists and architects socialize and exchange ideas. Tn con
trast to standard professional practice, the structure was built
and paid for by the architects themselves. Tod Williams and Billie
Tsien's mobile, translucent stage set evokes the choreographer's
theme of societal transformation, and in doing so reminds us that
the realm of the aesthetic has social dimensions. Graham's Two
Way Mirror Cylinder inside Cube, a work which clearly occupies
a position "in between," consciously refers to the history of glass
architecture. (Bletter's commentary on expressionist design
could well be applied to it: "Those very aspects ... that appear on
first glance to be its most revolutionary ones-transparency,
instability, and flexibility-on closer examination turn out to be
its most richly traditional features:'66) But Graham's work, too, transcends a purely
aesthetic approach. By incorporating it into his Rooftop Urban Park Project, which he
characterizes as a "utopian presence" in the city, he elevates the work from the sta
tus of mere formal abstraction (fig. 27). His contemporary urban park - which, like
its traditional counterparts, seeks to reintegrate alienated city dwellers with their
environment while providing a contemplative place apart-restores the aesthetic
dimension of the glass dream and points toward the idealism that sustained it.
Notes
I would like to thank Kenneth Frampton, Michael
Hays, Rem Koolhaas, Guy Nordenson, Joan
Ockman, Jean Starobinski, Bernard Tschumi, and
Kirk Varnedoe for their suggestions and comments.
I also thank Christopher Lyon for his dedication and
insights during the editorial process, and Pierre
Adler, Bevin Howard, Lucy Maulsby, Vera
Neukirchen, and Heather Urban for research and
translation assistance.
1. Ludwig Hilberseimer, "Glasarchitektur;' Die
Form 4 (1929): 522. Translated by Vera
Neukirchen.
2. Ibid., 521.
3. Jean Starobinski, "Poppaea's Veil; in The
Living Eye (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1989), 1.
4. Michel de Montaigne, The Essays of Michel
de Montaigne, trans. and ed. M. A. Screech
(London: Allen Lane, Penguin Press, 1991), 697.
The passage continues: "Why do women now cover
up those beauties-right down below their heels
which every woman wants to display and every man
wants to see? Why do they clothe with so many
obstacles, layer upon layer, those parts which are
the principal seat of our desires-and of theirs?
And what use are those defence-works with which
our women have started to arm their thighs, if not
to entrap our desires and to attract us by keeping
us at a distance 1"
5. Starobinski, "Poppaea's Veil:' 1-2.
6. Ibid., 2.
7. See note 4.
8. Yoshiharu Tsukamoto, "Toyo Ito: An Opaque
'Transparency;" in JA Library 2, special issue of The
Japan Architect (Summer 1993): 154.
9. Colin Rowe and Robe[t Slutzky,
"Transparency: Literal and Phenomenal; in Rowe,
The Mathematics of the Tdeal Villa and Other
Essays (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1976), 171.
10. Anthony Vidler, The Architectural Uncanny:
Essays in the Modern Un homely (Cambridge: MIT
Press, 1992), 221.
11. Rowe and Slutzky, ''Transparency," 163-64.
12. In a recent communication with the author,
the architectural historian Joan Ockman summa
rized the elements of phenomenal transparency as
"free play in the object, the extension of 'aesthetic
time; and oscillating readings or meanings that are
ultimately unresolvable: Her description clearly
shows that a foundation of Gestalt psychology,
provided by her husband Robert Slutzky, support
ed the concept of phenomenal transparency.
13. Rowe and Slutzky, "Transparency:' 171.
14. Kenneth Frampton, "Pierre Chareau, an
Eclectic Architect:' in Marc Vellay and Frampton,
Pierre Chareau, Architect and Craftsman,
1883-1950 (New York: Rizzoli, 1985), 243.
15. Octavio Paz, Marcel Duchamp, or The
Castle of Purity, trans. D. Gardner (London: Cape
Goliard Press, 1970), 1-2. I am indebted to Peter
Eisenman for suggesting that I look at Paz's discus
sion of transparency.
16. Frampton, "Pierre Chareau, an Eclectic
Architect," 242.
17. Ibid.
18. Rem Koolhaas and Bruce Mau, S,M,L,XL
(New York: Monacelli Press, 1995 [prepublication
copy]), 654.
19. Rowe and Slutzky, "Transparency; 166.
20. Richard P. Feynman, QED: The Strange
Theory of Light and Matter (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1985), 69. I thank Guy Nordenson
for suggesting Feynman's writings.
21. Ibid., 109.
22. Hubert Damisch, TMorie du nuage (Paris:
Editions du Seuil, 1972), 170. Translated by Pierre
Adler. lowe to Rosalind Krauss my introduction to
Damisch's book, to which she refers in the essay
cited in note 25.
23. Ibid.
24. Bernard Tschumi, "Groningen, Glass Video
Gallery, 1990; in Event-Cities (Cambridge: MIT
Press, 1994), 559.
25. Krauss, "Minimalism: The Grid, The/Cloud/,
and the Detail," in Detlef Mertins, ed., The
Presence of Mies (Princeton: Princeton Archi
tectural Press, 1994), 133-34.
26. Jean Nouvel, "The Cartier Building; archi
teet's statement, n.d.
27. Krauss, "Minimalism;' 133.
28. Koolhaas and Mau, S,M,L,XL, 126"
29. Leonardo da Vinci, The Notebooks of
Leonardo da Vinci, an., trans., and intra.
E. MacCul'dy (New York: George Braziller, 1939),
986-87.
30. Nagisa Kidosaki, "Shimosuwa Municipal
Museum," in JA Library 2, special issue of The
Japan Architect (Summer 1993): 27.
31. Jacques Herzog, architect's statement, n.d.
32. Italo Calvino, "Lightness," in Six Memos for
30 31
the Next Millennium (New York: Vintage
International, 1993), 16.
33. Ibid., 8.
34. The linguistic relationship between lightness
and lightweight exists principally in English.
35. Starobinski, "Poppaea's Veil:' 6.
36. For further analysis of Calvino and lightness
in architecture, see Cynthia Davidson and John
Rajchman, eds., Any Magazine 5 (March/April
1994).
37. Calvino, "Lightness:' 13.
38. Toyo Ito, "A Garden of Microchips: The
Architectural Image ofthe Microelectronic Age:' in
JA Libnuy 2, special issue of The Japan Architect
(Summer 1993): 11-13.
39. Ibid., 11.
40. Quoted in Ray Monk, Ludwig Wittgenstein:
The Duty of Genius (New York: Penguin Books,
1990),355. The passage is from notes taken by
Rush Rhees of Wittgenstein's 1936 lecture ,vrhe
Language of Sense Data and Private Experience -\."
41. Harry Wolf, "ABN-AMRO Head Office
Building:' architect's statement, n.d.
42. Jacques Herzog, "The Hidden Geometry of
Nature:' Quaderns, no. 181-82 (1989): 104.
43. Steven Holl, "Museum of Contemporary Art,
Helsinki," architect's statement, n.d.
44. Stephen Selkowitz and Stephen LaSourd,
"Amazing Glass," ProgT'essive ArchitectuT'e 6 (June
1994), 109.
45. Rosemarie Haag Bletter, "The Interpretation
of the Glass Dream - Expressionist Architecture
and the History of the Crystal Metaphor:' Journal
of the Society of Architectural Historians 40, no.l
(March 1981): 20.
46. Bletter, "Glass Dream," 25.
47. Zaha Hadid, "Cardiff Bay Opera House
Architectural Competition;' architect's statement,
n.d.
48. Wolf, "ABN-AMRO Head Office Building:'
49. Prince Albert Saxe-Coburg, the royal
patron of the Crystal Palace, commissioned Edward
Lorenzo Percy to design a centerpiece based on
literary accounts of a fountain in the Alhambra.
See Hermione Hobhouse, Prince Albert: His Life
and Work (London: Hamish Hamilton Limited/
The Observer, 1983), 103 (caption).
50. Bletter, "Glass Dream," 37.
51. Michael Hays, "Critical Architecture:
Between Culture and Form:' Perspecta (The Yale
Architectural Journal) 21 (1984): 15.
52. Reyner Banham. "The Glass Paradise;' A,'Chi
tectural Review 125, no. 745 (February 1959): 88.
53. Fritz Neumeyer. "Iron and Stone: The
Architecture of the GroBstadt," in H. F. Mallgrave,
ed., Otto Wagner: Reflections on the Raiment of
Modernity (Santa Monica. Calif.: Getty Center for
the History of Art and the Humanities, 1993), 134f.
54. Kenneth Frampton, "Paul Nelson and the
School of Paris," in Joseph Abram and Terence
Riley, eds .• The Filter of Reason: Work of Paul
Nelson (New York: Rizzoli, 1990), 12.
55. Judith Applegate, interview with Paul
Nelson, Perspecta 13/14 (April 1971): 75-129.
56. Kenneth Frampton, "Maison de Verre;'
Perspecta (The Yale Architectural Journal) 12
(1968): 77-126. For further discussion of the rela
tionship between Nelson and Chareau, see Abram
and Riley, eds., The Filter of Reason: Work of Paul
Nelson (New York: Rizzoli, 1990).
57. Paul Nelson, "La Maison de la Rue Saint
Guillaume," I:ArchitectuT'e d'aujourd'hui 4me annee.
ser. 3, vo!' 9 (Nov.-Dec. 1933): 9.
58. For an interesting but somewhat incom
plete account of the relationship between
Nitzchke. Nelson. and Chareau. see Se'an Daly,
"Composite Modernism: The Architectural
Strategies of Paul Nelson and Oscar Nitzchke,"
Basilisk [journal online] 1, no. 1 (1995), available
at http://swerve.basilisk.com.
59. Charles Jencks, The l.anguage of Post
Modem ArchitectuT'e (New York: Rizzoli, 1977), 15.
60. Detlef Mertins, "New Mies;' in Mertins, ed.,
The Presence of Mies (New York: Princeton Archi
tectural Press, 1994),23.
61. Bletter, "Glass Dream," 38.
62. Rowe and Slutzky, "Transparency;' 161.
63. Koolhaas and Mau, S,M,L,XL, 969.
64. Tony Kushner, Angels in America: A Cay
fantasia on National Themes, Part T/: Perestroika,
(New York: Theater Communications Group, 1994),
13-14.
65. Koolhaas and Mau, S.M,L,XL, 510.
66. Bletter, "Glass Dream;' 43.
32
__MACOSX/WEEK 12 READINGS/._Riley_Light_Construction.pdf
WEEK 12 READINGS/Spina_Huljich_MoS.pdf
Matters of Sensation
Marcelo Spina and GeorGina HuljicH
ARTISTS SPACE
1110
Marcelo Spina and Georgina Huljich Matters of Sensation: Materiality in the Sublime
Introduction
MofS focus closely on an evolving materialism in architecture by a group of emerging contemporary architects; a “Sensuous Materialism”, an affluent materialism of sensations rather than an abstract materialism of pure matter. While materialism implies a philosophical outlook; a conception of the world derived from physical phenomena and those relation- ships which are directly dependant on it; materialism in its ontology can not be detached from the body. In fact, as Peter Zellner argues, material bodies can only be appreciated through sensations. The pursuit of sensations in these contemporary practices constitutes a novel form of artistic research that implies “an evolv- ing materialist/sensualist architecture that gestures towards a far more negotiable set of relationships between form, perception and action”1 while still away from the realm of subjectivity or phenomenology.
To be clear, materialism does not imply here the idea that material organization at a certain scale will simply trigger formal organization and structural evolution of an entire project at another; nor it suggests form find- ing or form optimization processes as a priori design criteria. Materialism in these architects has a further meaning beyond a philosophical one, it indicates a con- cern with materials as such. In fact the working pro- cess of this group is rather open. It combines research and intuition with an obsessive creative surge. This interest explains not only an experimental approach to architecture but the will in exploring many different aspects of architectural form. For these architects, it is not enough to formulate an idea once; they are inter- ested in playing through various instantiations of an idea to demonstrate and rehearse its potential. None- theless, these architects are not interested in merely
proposing, positioning or illustrating questions, but they rather choose to produce provisional responses to them emphasizing in their outcomes the material, physical and sensorial aspects of form and matter. Hence the multiplicity of the senses needed to scruti- nize their work instead of the primacy of the visual.
Grounding Sensation
Sensation is synthetic by definition. Its space is optic as it is tactile. Bodies are not merely perceived but they take on a sculptural or tactile quality such as mass, depth, contour and relief. Deleuze following Riegl, terms it “haptic space, a space in which there is no longer a hand-eye subordination in either direction. It implies a type of seeing distinct from the optical, a close-up viewing in which “the sense of sight behaves just like the sense of touch” 2.
In thinking about the exhibition, we wanted to con- struct an atmospheric ecosystem, a whole ecology of sensation building objects that could be seen at “close range” 3, in close proximity to each other. We knew the architects in the show have worked towards producing sensations in their work, either consciously or un- consciously they all have made projects, installations, prototypes or large models which dealt in one way or another with matters of sensation and in doing so took pleasure in the sensations of matter.
As an idea, the exhibition focuses on architects that have moved beyond a pure digital practice into a ma- terialist domain based on robust forms of sensation. Contrary to the naïve belief that supports the idea of digital design and fabrication as having eroded issues of materiality and craftsmanship in architecture, we are now witnessing a welcomed return to material.
This should not imply a loss of a conceptual or abstract dimension to the work, but it certainly suggests a needed amplification to an architectural palette. MofS suggests an obvious departure from abstract process driven approaches to computation and constitutes a fresh reinvigoration of the discipline as an inherently material practice.
As a show, MofS focuses on objects that are not so germane to traditional architectural production and which have only became promi- nent in recent years as a form of research oriented practice. These artifacts [bodyworks] are outside the realm of conventional architectural representation such as drawings, renderings or models; and they don't quiet constitute edifices since they are neither building components, nor prototypes or full installations. Dimensionally proportioned and formally evolved, they engage and connect with the body one to one, not only visually but haptically. These objects are the outcome of a decidedly not linear and complex design and production where specific materials and techniques entangled in unseen ways. Like sculpture, they produce spatial, formal and material affects at their own scale while ambiguously maintaining a latent potential for scalar shifts into building form. Though truly experimental in their essence and with no direct practical purpose, these pieces are pure potential; materially formed sensation building artifacts and true vehicles for architectural innovation.
Figuring the Real
“It is a very, very close and difficult thing to know why some work comes across directly into the nervous system and other work tells you the story in a long diatribe through the brain.”4 To come across directly into the nervous system, implies a particular kind of engagement with the body. In Francis Bacon’s paint-
ings the body is always the human figure. In the case of Bacon paintings, the results were never completely new figures, but rather moment of figuration within material bodies. In the context of architecture, a full sensation can only be generated within the specificity of the real and, outside the abstract or generic. In fact, engaging the real implies a dual reasoning: first, the careful orchestration and calibration of sensations which are purposely scaled and directed to the body; second, the need to tap into specific elements and
internal systems within the archi- tecture discipline from which to produce those sensations. Hence it is the architectural body with all its physical and spatial sub- stance and constitutive systems [and the body itself ] that plays the role of the figure: it functions as a framework, a material sup- port by which to substantiate and sustains sensations. In the context of MofS, the real has multiple
connotations. It implies a particular engagement with notions of structure, tectonics, assembly and building systems for some; as well as with massing, fenestra- tion, opening and ornament for others; or with issues pertaining to coloration, tonality, light and contrast for
others; or even with motion and interactivity for some others. In every case, these particular [ar- chitectural] domains function as a material support, a physical and conceptual framework that sustains precise sensations.
Unibodies: The indivisibility
between material bodies
and the body
“Sensation is the opposite of the facile and the ready-made, the cliché, but also of the
“sensational”, the spontaneous, etc. Sensation has one face turned towards the subject [the nervous system, vital movement, “instinct,” temperament…] and one face turned toward the object. Or rather, it has no faces at all, it is both things indissolubly… It is the same body that, being both subject and object, gives and receives the sensation” 5
Spina / HuljichSpina / Huljich
Above:
UniBodies, PATTERNS with Kreysler and Associates Artists Space, Architecture and Design Series, 2006
12 Exhibitor Name
13 Exhibitor Name
“In fact, many of the work on Matters of Sensation is characterized by a form of plasticity. The idea that plastics could
generate infinite formal variations is echoed in Roland Barthes essay “Plastic”.
Aside from the possibility of bodies sensing objects and the consequences for all kinds of sensorial specu- lations, one of the most significant and somewhat uncharted problems of sensation is the possibility that the very material-bodies acquire the capacity of being sensitive. That is to say that internal systems, subsys- tems, various tectonic elements or components are in a constant state of vibration, a rhythmic activity of sens- ing. In UniBodies 6 for instance, the armature of a ribbed shell is embedded within the skin, giving way to a sort dual reverberation process: of vein like system of different thick- nesses and depths appears in the underside of the skin while its top creases producing near cellular compartments by means of egg- like partition of surface morphol- ogy. This partial absorption of one system by another where there is no longer as a result neither a duality within the body nor a total fusion of a priori discrete systems, but rather a synthetic, composite quality to the overall body amounts to a different but quiet unique form of material sensation. Many of these qualities are also visible in the work of the show.
Dynamic Sublime: Three Instances
Kant distinctively identified two types of sublime: the mathemati- cal sublime and the dynamic sublime. The realm of sensations in design and artistic practices is definitely concerned the latter and not the former. Whether is about induced body movement, abrupt changes of scale and sequencing; or is about the rich anisotropic materiality, lively color, spiky contrast and subtle tonal variation; or about shimmering, internal light; or about articulat- ed and intricate assemblies of parts, gradient relief and texture; or about viscously molded manifolds, embed- ded within thick surfaces; all these attributes and the inner activity they entail are indicative of a sensitive behavior. Eventually, only an attuned and synthetic coordination of such aspects amounts to a robust sen- sation, a synthetic and dynamic sublime.
DS1 / A Sensitive Constructivism in
David Fincher Films
Contrary to a misconception and its confusion with sensational, Sensation building is a potent constructive mechanism. Filmmaker David Fincher made a signifi- cant contribution by introducing computer graphics in movies in a radical new way. Indeed, Fincher uses CG to inventively animate unattainable sequences that capture micro spaces otherwise impossible to detect, but that are however absolutely essential to the
construction of a sequence’s mood and spatial sensibility. The elabo- rate and difficult trajectories that the camera undergoes allow for an intimate relation with the spatial structure [the intricate and trash populated world of a garbage can in the “starbucks galaxy”], complex mechanisms [the complex cable circuitry of a bomb inside a van lo- cated in the basement of the world financial center], materiality and
color [the polished but somewhat greasy stainless steel burner in the kitchen of the “ikea” apartment], and therefore affect of certain spaces and objects around us. In continuity with a filmic script and a narrative, these intensive segments amount to an affective constructiv- ism, a spatio-temporal constructivism of sensation that
instigates a heightened awareness of the extents of our material en- vironment.
Different from the use of CG to create a total ‘other” reality such as in science fiction films, in Finch- er, spatial effects are absolutely embedded within the “real”. They are there but the idea is that you don’t see them. In fact, the ulti-
mate spatial effect is the one you don’t see. You don’t know what they are, when and how they happen. You just know they are there somewhere.
The spatial implications of such techniques are mani- fold. They not only suggest sudden and abrupt changes of scale but also of time, speed and trajectory; from a general and global view to the almost tactile intimacy of a close range. By engaging the real, accentuating and
Spina / Huljich Spina / Huljich
exacerbating its features, the real becomes dynamically sublime. It is then not simply a coincidence that David Fincher would look at Francis Bacon’s painting to create a sensually blurry and erotically strange scene between Ed Norton and Elena Bonham Carter in Fight Club.
DS2 / Anisotropic Materiality in
Richard Deacon Sculpture
Richard Deacon’s recent food inspired sculpture com- bines a formal interest for complex manifold forms, [much more tectonically inarticulate and materially inexact than his previous work] with a painterly interest in pro- ducing anisotropic finishes. Materially, these finishing mixtures are achieved by color dripping glaze pigments until there are several layers to form a semi- transparent surface. Embedded in the finish, is the idea of a thick surface pro- duced by the use of glaze. These sculptures seem haunted with a terrible unease. “What is really peculiar here is the surface of these ceramic forms. At a distance, the glaze sparkles and glints. Up close it drools and drips, its shiny wetness making the shapes look as though they suffer some terrible skin disease, and are also sweating: a clammy, drunk sweat, a fear sweat, giving the sculptures a disturbingly or- ganic, unhealthy quality. The stuff drips and dribbles the way silicon saliva drools from the jaws of Ridley Scott's Alien.” 7
Applied to the surface, the glaze is like the make-up of a viscous skin, a strange color, at once luscious, repulsive and somehow vulgar. Within it persist the anisotropic properties of the material, full of a rich and exotic variability. The dynamic sublime and strange sensation of its materiality is the outcome of the intentional fortuitous coagulations and slippery quality of the glaze and the vitality of the paint drifting and dripping down the complex aggre- gate forms. DS3 / Light, Shine and Sensuality in George
Hurrell Portrait Photography
The theatrical use of lighting has become somewhat
paramount to atmosphere. George Hurrell revolution- ized Hollywood still photography by introducing bold new idiom of conceiving portraits. An acknowledged artist Hurrell was not a conventional fashion photog- rapher but a film photographer. Even more than the movies themselves, his lush and superbly illuminated portraits depicted a polished grace and refinement that transcends age and time while propagating an alluring image and a certain magnetic charisma in his subjects.
Partly synthetic, these photographs were not entirely artificial. Hurrel photos intensified the defining qualities of their subjects, while creating a veil of mystery with light and shadow. Hurrel used to light his subjects with a really big spot light from a fair distance away producing a concentrated beam effect in their faces, exalting their silluetes and most promi- nent features while accentuating their sharp contrast with the background.
“Like Rembrandt using glazes to make the material come alive in the paintings”, George Hur- rell often used to put lanolin to lighten the bodies of his subjects; “to create a part shine, part sexy and part sweat effect in their appearance” 8 This “wet” feeling of transpiration intensified by the punctual light glare
suggests a sensation of fear, anxiety and agitation in Joan Crawford 9 body [see picture below]; while a more relaxed, se- rene but intensely sensual look in Johnny Weissmuller photograph for Tarzan.
A Friendship of Sensation
In thinking about the show and the body of work that would fulfill its ambitions as curators, we have to admit that we always thought about specific architects, all of them working in the context of the US, and all of them from a somewhat
similar generation. Absolutely intentional on our part, we aimed at evidencing a family, a sensibility, call it a friendship of sensation, reflecting on its work and pro- jecting its potential contribution.
As designers, our interest in the show was of course not only conceptual but of a visual nature as well. In
Above:
Joan Crawford, Photography by George Hurrell
Johnny Weissmuller as Tarzan, 1932
Gelatin silver photograph printed image 29.8 x 23.3 cm.
Above:
Richard Deacon, Scrambled Eggs
15 Exhibitor NameExhibitor Name
MATTERS of SEnSATIon 14
a somewhat playful way, we sought to put together stuff we like, in close proximity to each other. In doing so, we had to resist our own temptation [often times induced by some of our colleagues] to include our own work in the show. Thus it is both with pleasure and a bit of anxiety that we observe this exhibition come to- gether, and we don’t see our work in it. Or maybe we do.
Although they attract our curiosity and consideration, we are always a bit skeptical of any form of restrictive discursive definition in design and architecture given the characteristically short life span of it in light of criticism, history and the inevitability of time and in- dividual need for change. MofS does not attempt to de- fine “a” style neither it suggests a rigid position around more or less sensually striking objects. We have had too much of that and its time to relax. MofS ultimate goal is to collectively share our passion, maybe even exaltation for these objects, their propensity for and overabundance of articulation…and a true enthusiasm for the body. •
— —————
1. Material Sentience, Peter Zellner 2. Maldiney, Regard Parole Espace, 195 3. Cezanne said that the painter must look beyond a landscape to its
chaos; he spoke of the need to always paint at close range, to no longer see the wheat field, to be too close to it, to loose oneself in the land- scape, without landmarks, to the point where one no longer sees forms or even matters, but only forces, densities, intensities. Daniel W. Smith, Deleuze on Bacon: Three Conceptual Trajectories. The Logic of Sensation
4. David Sylvester, Interviews” with Francis Bacon. Quoted in Gilles deleuze: The Logic of Sensation
5. Gilles deleuze: The Logic of Sensation, “Painting and Sensation”, Chapter six, page 31
6. UniBodies, a collaboration with Kreysler and associates for Artists Space Architecture and Design Series in September 2006. Consisting of a family of objects, UniBodies was as much about the cohesive material sensation and intimacy within the physical bodies, as it is about the potential induced resonances between those bodies and the body.
7. Adrian Searle, What's red, white and wet all over? The Guardian, Tuesday January 10, 2006, ‘Range’ was exhibited at the Lisson Gallery, London.
8. Jeffrey Kipnis generously introduced me to the work of George Hurrell during the interview for the book Sessions. He brought up the work of George Hurrell as a significant contribution to the problem of special effects in photography. Sessions, SCI-Arc Press. “Kipnis discusses the work”.
9. Joan Crawford, who was just 26 when Hurrell first photographed her, became his most frequent subject. Hurrell’s most striking portraits of her downplay her outfits, focusing on her intense eyes and determined mouth. He preferred to have his subjects relax and move spontaneous- ly, allowing him to add the photo’s artifice. From his heavily retouched photos, you would never know that Crawford’s face was covered with freckles.
BIO
paTTernS is a design research architec-
tural practice based in los angeles and
operating globally. Founded in 1999 and
headed by co-principals Marcelo Spina
and Georgina Huljich, paTTernS work
has gained international recognition for its
innovative approach to design and archi-
tecture that fuses advanced computation
with an extensive understanding of form,
tectonics and materials. paTTernS’s vision
is to generate innovative spatial forms that
actively engage, enhance and influences
the body, constantly challenging its rela-
tionship to the built environment akin to
the complexity of contemporary life.
paTTernS has received numerous prizes
and awards including first prizes in the
competitions for the Vertical Garden at the
Schindler House in West Hollywood and
the new Sci-arc café, the third prize in the
prestigious Young architect of the year
award in 2003 and most recently, an hon-
orable mention for a concert Hall in Skopje,
Macedonia. current projects include Sunset
8746 Boutique, and the Sci-arc café both
to be completed in 2008 in los angeles, a
Hybrid office Building in chengdu and an
entertainment pavilion in ningbo, both in
china, and a vertical apartment building in
rosario, argentina.
paTTernS work has been shown and
exhibited worldwide, most notably at the
art institute of chicago, San Francisco Mu-
seum of Modern art, the Venice Biennale
in italy, The architectural league of new
York, and its first solo show “uniBodies” at
artists Space also in new York. paTTernS’
work is part of the permanent architecture
collection of the San Francisco Museum
of Modern art, the MaK center in Vienna
and the Sculpture collection at Gyeonggi
cultural Foundation in Korea. in addition to
their individual work, Spina and Huljich are
the curators of “Matters of Sensation” at
artists Space. The show is one of the most
important collective exhibitions in architec-
ture that artists Space has organized and is
accompanied by a catalogue published by
charta Books.
Marcelo Spina and Georgina Huljich have
lectured extensively in the uS, South
america and europe and his work has been
published internationally in books, exhibi-
tion catalogues, magazines and newspa-
pers such as next Generation architecture,
new architecture, architectural record,
praxis, a+u, casabella, icon, index
architecture, l’arca, los angeles Times,
and the recently released Sci_arc Book
“Sessions”. in 2004, architectural record
selected the work of the firm among 11
emerging practices worldwide to integrate
their prestigious “design Vanguard”.
paTTernS first monograph Sensitive Form:
Inside and Outside Material is forthcoming
by princeton architectural press.
Marcelo Spina holds a professional degree
from the national university of rosario and
a Master in architecture from columbia
university in new York where he was the
recipient of several honors including the
William Kinne Fellowship and the Honor
award for excellence in design. Marcelo
Spina is a design Faculty at The South-
ern california institute of architecture
since 2001. He teaches design studios
and technical seminars in the Graduate
and undergraduate programs. He has
been a Visiting professor at the Graduate
School of design of Harvard university, a
distinguished Visiting professor at Tulane
university, the Friedman Visiting professor
at the university of california Berkeley and
a Visiting professor at the Technical univer-
sity of innsbruck, austria. He has previously
held positions at the national university
of rosario and The di Tella university in
Buenos aires in argentina.
Georgina Huljich holds a professional
degree from the national university of
rosario and a Master in architecture from
ucla where she graduated with distinc-
tion and was the recipient of several design
awards. She has previously worked at the
Guggenheim Museum and the architectural
firm dean/Wolf architects in new York,
as a project designer at Morphosis in los
angeles, and as the co principal of fl-oz
she was awarded one of the Six Winning
entries for the 21st. century park competi-
tion organized by the Graham Foundation
in chicago and designed the exhibition
‘pass Through’ at the School of cinema and
Television at uSc. She has also partici-
pated at Beyond Media ’05 Script Show in
Florence, italy with her video installation
Fairy_Tails in collaboration with video artist
Gaby Hamburg. She is currently a design
Faculty at the department of architecture
at ucla, having previously taught at uc
Berkeley as a Maybeck Fellow and the
university of Southern california.
— —————
__MACOSX/WEEK 12 READINGS/._Spina_Huljich_MoS.pdf
WEEK 14 READINGS/Payne_Doppleganger.pdf
3130
Doppelgänger
Jason Payne
Facing page: Fig. 1: d as a subset of B and A. If B≈A then d B+A.
Unlikely affinities, scary resemblances (B ≈ A). Often we find two objects that would, at first glance, seem entirely unlike one another, strangers in a strange world. Occasionally we are surprised to find them not so different after all. Surprise becomes delight in the case of shy objects, those thought to have little relation to things of even their own category, let alone any other. As it happens, the Albanian bunker and asteroids are two such objects. Side by side comparison reveals a number of similarities (Fig. 1), each crossing the orbit of the other to produce a glimpse of something else, a third thing that seems a double to both. Initial delight turns to fear, however, in cases where resemblance refuses the natural inclination to make sense of them. Sometimes resemblances are not logical correlates that work to strengthen our comprehensive worldview but instead are something other than this, uncanny look-alikes but not much more. In German myth the startling appearance of one’s double is called a doppelgänger and when it appears it is not a good sign. Associated with the dark side of persona, the doppelgänger is something that might be the other side of oneself or it might be something outside: one can never be sure. This uncertainty leads to ambivalence, among the most troubling of emotional states for its vacillating indeterminacy.
In the text that follows two objects are compared, each understood as its own project. On the left is Mathilde (Fig. 2), an asteroid in our solar system that is also the subject of a recent project by Hirsuta for the design of a twin to an existing Albanian bunker. On the right is a bunker from Enver Hoxha’s Projeckti Bunkerizimit (Fig. 3), a defensive infrastructural project built in Albania between 1944 and 1985. These two objects/projects are remarkably similar even in their specifics, though these are beyond the scope of this piece. Instead the comparison here occurs across three general terms meant to capture the salient likenesses of each... ...Big, Black, Blank.
U
3332
Above: Fig. 2: Asteroid 253 Mathilde. Photo: NASA/JPL NEAR Shoemaker Spacecraft, June 27, 1997.
Above: Fig. 3: Albanian bunker near Durrës. Photo: Jason Payne, 2013.
3534
Mathilde is big. How big is big? About 50 kilometers in diameter but that is beside the point. Architects think of big as something different from large scale, the former a term meant to capture the qualitative nature of sizeable things rather than their measurement. Big is, in a sense, an intuitive ineffability, something we know when we see but otherwise not much more. Big is, in fact, scaleless, a resistance to human measurement. Mathilde’s shyness in this regard extends even to those astrophysicists armed with the tools and expertise to dimension her properly, dark and distant as she is, evasive of sure capture. In any case, even if we could see her clearly what would Mathilde’s exact measurement tell us? Given the unstable categorical status of such objects that include everything from small meteors to comets to compound rubble piles to things almost moonlike in size (collectively called planetesimals as catch- all term for hard to define objects smaller than planets,) comparing lengths and widths seems of little value. Better just to say Mathilde is
BIG. [cue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kd34UjP6Q3Y here]
Gigantic, gigantic, gigantic A big big love (Pixies, Gigantic)
The Albanian bunker is big, at least in number. How big is big? Approximately 750,000 individual objects by best estimates, one bunker for every four Albanian citizens at the time of the project’s abrupt conclusion upon Enver Hoxha’s death in 1985. Big here is not measured in terms of the size of any given bunker (though some were impressively large) but rather in terms of the scope of the project itself. In Albanian it is called Projekti Bunkerizimit—the Bunker Project—a term referring to a project in which tens of thousands of reinforced concrete bunkers were placed throughout the country to protect soldiers and citizens alike from attack by outside forces. A military-industrial project at a grand scale, Projekti Bunkerizimit imagined as its endgame a bunker for every Albanian, each located to allow shelter on very short notice. Coming in three basic sizes—small (QZ, for individuals,) medium (PZ, for small groups,) and large (special structures, for large groups of the most important military and political figures,) each type has its
big and leave it at that, an emotive utterance somehow more accurate than any attempt at exactitude associated with scalar definition. Or if not more accurate then at least more useful in characterizing an object so foreign to human sensory perception as to render our attempts at measure absurd. After all, what does it matter how many feet are in the diameter of an asteroid since there was never any relation between it and the unit of English shoe size in the first place? More to the point and as we will see below, the term big binds nicely with two other qualities, black and blank, to form a compound greater than the sum of its parts and well-suited to capturing the elusive nature of things like bunkers and asteroids as well as whatever projects might be found between the two.
own logic of construction corresponding to scale and deployment.
With the re-opening of Albania in 1985 after four decades of impenetrable solitude (its dark mystery rivaled only by North Korea) the world was baffled to discover a project of such magnitude, equal parts engineering efficiency and absurd rationale. An exercise in the kind of steroidal production that sometimes results from megalomanic delusion, Projekti Bunkerizimit can be compared to other compulsive projects of physical and social engineering found through history, different only perhaps in its obscurity and, ultimately, its utter uselessness. For as it turns out, Albania never had any enemies to begin with, inconsequential as it was in terms of resources and location.
3736
Mathilde is black. Specifically, its albedo measures as low as virtually any known object or material, reflecting only three percent of the Sun’s light. Twice as dark as charcoal, Mathilde’s elevational aspect is nearly that of space itself, making it extraordinarily difficult to see and photograph. Ambivalent, it would seem, to the traditional and dichotomous relationships of object to field, mass to volume, body to context. As it slowly rotates it presents a continually changing figure and its outer profile appears to slip away into the dark of space, making edges difficult to discern. A study in black, Mathilde presents real problems of representation for astrophysicists and architects alike since each is more accustomed to objects with more pronounced optics. The definition of an object indifferent to legibility suggests that standard, disciplinary means of representation be questioned and may very well require the development of new methods of visualization.
BLACK. [cue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAzKbtIVdl0 here]
I’ve never seen you when you’re smiling It really gets under my skin (Catherine Wheel, Black Metallic)
The Albanian bunker is black. Not in literal coloration for in this sense it is the gray of untreated concrete, the material of which every one is made. Rather, its blackness comes of its unknowability, one that parallels Albania’s larger identity under Hoxha’s rule.
On this, a very brief history: In 1944 Enver Hoxha (b. Gjirokastër, 1908) assumed control of Albania, acting as First Secretary of the Party of Labour of Albania and Commander-in- Chief of its military until his death in 1985. His early tenure, coinciding as it did with the global reorganization of forces after World War II, brought Albania into alignment with various other communist powers in the region under the umbrella of the Soviet Union. His later rule, especially after the death of Stalin and Krushchev’s ensuing revisions to original Marxist-Leninist principles, found Hoxha at odds with the larger community of communist countries in which interpretations of the communist project were seen, in his view,
In the context of imagining what the doppelgänger of an Albanian bunker might look like our office could not help but emulate the black beauty of Mathilde (Fig. 4). Like a black igloo, the project begins with an attempt to capture the reluctant Mathilde through a reduction of the formal complexity of the original object just shy of losing its compelling strangeness. This is done digitally, taking a model fit tightly to measurements taken from the NEAR mission and reducing the number of points, lines, and planes. Stopping short of the moment where fundamental distinguishing features of Mathilde are lost, we then rationalize the object for material fabrication. The entire form is black, through and through. Unlike form in any other color, black resists even the most ardent attempt at objectification by the subject... or at least shrugs it off. In this way, Mathilde’s estrangement from our intrusive impulse for colonization through measurement remains intact.
to be softening. Maintaining Albania’s hardline position against the shifting seas of communist doctrine, Hoxha found himself increasingly alone in a dangerous world. Tensions came to a head in 1961 when Hoxha proclaimed Albania’s independence, leading to his country’s exclusion from the Warsaw Pact. Then Albania went dark.
A similar darkness imbues the bunkers themselves, as objects, turning their literal gray to figurative black. This is the darkening of growing inscrutability borne of a functional pointlessness evident even at the project’s inception that grows stronger with time. An instrument without purpose is a building with no meaning, one turned away from correlation to us. If indifference had a color it would be black. Were Hoxha to have carried his project one step further, to the level of material finish, he surely would have colored their concrete black.
3938
Mathilde is blank. What is meant by this? An elusive term that describes an elusive quality to be sure.1 To some degree blankness comes of the combination of bigness and blackness. Objects that are difficult to measure and hard to see are, in these terms at least, blank. In this way blankness could be understood as emergent property (b x b = b2) but it exists in its own right as well, a quality unto itself rooted not as much in the visible/sensible properties of an object (how we see it) as in those more conceptual (how we think of it.)
To be blank is to be free of association or, in other cases, fraught with multiple, incommensurate associations. The face of Michael Myers is a good example. A white mask crudely formed to make vague the underlying human features of its wearer, the disguise (which is not a disguise at all in the end but rather a new identity unto itself ) blanks out whatever humanity Myers might possess through dulling: eyes become mere outlines, nose flattens
The Albanian bunker is blank. An act of speculative realism of the most absurd variety, Hoxha’s bunker project served no purpose other than to exorcise the demons of an agitated mind, loosing them upon the landscape as mute sentinels to nothing. When a form is so highly specialized to serve a single purpose and that purpose turns up missing and its creator winds up dead, what then do you have? Perhaps nothing, in the way that glacial erratics are, for most people, nothing. Or maybe just something else. After all, Hoxha’s project was something quite different in his own mind than in those of his subjects and this latter definition of the project grew in collective strength with each decade. Only in the narrowest of terms was it ever really Hoxha’s project exclusively, its dark vitality showing an alarming appetite for autonomy, a refusal of its own parentage. Bastard by choice, the architectural equivalent of Michael Myers. Loosed upon the geophysical landscape like rockfall, its seizure of the collective, cultural imagination was all but inevitable. Hoxha’s
BLANK. [cue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peXvYXdN0Mk here]
You’ve fooled them, haven’t you Michael? But not me. (Dr. Loomis to Michael Myers, Halloween)
somewhat askew, mouth hangs expressionless. All of this more or less white which in this case is the same as black for the apparent lack of detail. Low fidelity. This is why Michael Myers specifically, and blankness generally, frightens us so much: our inability to see what is there, even in the face of its immediacy.
To be clear, blankness is not the absence of affect, not at all. To the contrary, blankened forms often convey very strong valence—usually repulsive rather than attractive—striking the viewer with a powerful sense of aversion. With a shyness that is criminally vulgar blank forms turn away from us, indifferent.
death, then, had no consequence for the life of the project and in fact gave it powerful new energy. Political suppression reversed overnight toward intellectual expression and with this new definitions and directions for the project emerge.
Post-Hoxha projections for a new Projekti Bunkerizimit vacillate between erasure and adaptive re-use. Both impulses miss the point. Blankness renders each project not much more than meddlesome attempts at control through interpretation. Neither beautiful nor sublime and not picturesque either, the bunker’s blankness defines an aesthetic category all its own. For lack of any better term: the bunkeresque.
Following pages: Fig. 4: Hirsuta: Low Albedo (2012).1. Here I must thank Jeffrey Kipnis for putting this term in my head in the first place. While his thoughts on “blankness” and mine are not the same (see his “Towards A New Architecture,” in AD: Folding in Architecture, ed. Greg Lynn et al. (London: Wiley-Academy Editions, 1993), 57-65.) the very idea that “blankness” could be of architectural relevance likely would not have occured to me had it not been for his essay.
4140
4342
Uuq ununquadium
114
[289]
Uub ununbium 112
[277]
Uuu ununumium 111
[272]
Tl thallium 81
[204.38]
Hg mercury 80
[200.59]
Au gold 79
[196.97]
Pb lead 82
[207.2]
Bi bismuth 83
[208.98]
Pt platinum 78
[195.08]
Uun ununnilium 110
[271]
Po polonium 84
[209]
In indium 49
[114.82]
Cd cadmium 48
[112.41]
Ag silver 47
[107.87]
Sn tin 50
[118.71]
Sb antimony 51
[121.76]
Pd palladium 46
[106.42]
Te tellurium 52
[127.60]
Bbb mathilde 113
[283]
Ga gallium 31
[69.723]
Zn zinc 30
[65.39]
Cu copper 29
[63.546]
Ge germanium 32
[72.61]
As arsenic 33
[74.922]
Ni palladium 46
[58.693]
Se selenium 34
[78.96]
Al aluminum 13
[26.982]
Si silicon 14
[28.086]
P phosphorus 15
[30.974]
S sulfur 16
[32.065]
__MACOSX/WEEK 14 READINGS/._Payne_Doppleganger.pdf
WEEK 14 READINGS/Roberts_Log31.pdf
13
Beyond the QuerelleBryony Roberts
There is in fact no such thing as a return. – Michel Foucault
Why New Ancients? The disciplinary dilemma facing the current generation mirrors that of the 17th-century Academie francaise. Like their predecessors, these “ancients” also re- spond to baroque excess and scientific positivism by affirming classical rigor. But while the term Ancients has long evoked conservative rigidity, a closer look at François Blondel and his allies reveals a more complex approach to history and science. Rather than asserting the strict mimesis of classical precedent, the old Ancients, as well as their 21st-century counterparts, reflect a synthesis of classical scholarship and emerging sci- ence that subversively elides past and present. Our conventional understanding of the querelle between the Ancients and Moderns has perpetuated a false dichotomy between tradition and progress. When Bernini unveiled his proposal for the east facade of the Louvre in 1664, he shocked the Academie with his curvaceous distortions of classical forms. Favoring more austere classicism but divided over the means, the Academie splintered into the opposing camps of the Moderns and the Ancients. While Claude Perrault spearheaded the Moderns by advocating for rationalism and scientific in- novation, Blondel led the Ancients by demanding fidelity to classical precedents. Since the Moderns ultimately won this fight, spawning French Enlightenment rationalism and, one could argue, modernism itself, Perrault is known as a pioneer of innovation and Blondel as an intractable conservative. But recent research by Anthony Gerbino reveals a different picture.1 A trained mathematician, disciple of Galileo, and professor of mathematics before becoming director of the Academie royale d’architecture, Blondel also aspired to the synthesis of emerging science and classical knowledge. In his treatise Résolution des quatre principaux problèmes d’architecture from 1673, he integrated discoveries by both contemporary and classical geometers to solve problems of projecting and building curvatures.2 The difference between Blondel and
1. Anthony Gerbino, François Blondel: Architecture, Erudition, and the Scientific Revolution (Abingdon: Routledge, 2010), 26–43. 2. Anthony Gerbino. “François Blondel and the ‘Résolution des quatre principaux problèmes d’architecture’ (1673),” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 64, 4 (December 2005): 498–521.
14 Log 31
Perrault was not the opposition between tradition and progress, since both were trained scientists and believed in a synthesis of the two, but rather a subtler but no less impor- tant difference in epistemology. Perrault argued for empirical testing as the foundation of knowledge, pushing architecture toward the sciences, while Blondel represented an earlier model of erudition that integrated the humanities and the sciences, valuing scholarly expertise in classical and contem- porary mathematics, science, literature, and architecture. Today, the field of architecture is facing a similar epis- temological divide between empirical experimentation and broader cultural knowledge. The loosely termed New Ancients operate with facility across the empirical realms of material and digital experimentation, but they locate intellectual discovery in dialogue with scholarly histories of techniques and precedents. Their integration of emerg- ing technologies and buried histories reconstructs an archi- tectural subject capable of decision making based on layers of cultural and disciplinary knowledge. Reared on Michel Foucault’s Nietzsche, they see the past as so conditioned by its contexts as to be impossible to repeat, but not so incidental as to lead to cynical relativism. Instead, they approach history in search of useful truths, and stage conceptual exchanges between past and present methodologies. While this genera- tion’s freewheeling transformations of historical sources would have horrified the old Ancients, their ambitions re- main uncannily similar: rather than pegging architecture to either individualized form making or scientific innovation, they invest in architecture as a cultural and intellectual proj- ect with a history of techniques for transforming abstractions into constructions. This valuation of history inevitably invites comparisons to postmodernism and its similar epistemological turn from technological positivism to historical tradition. But besides a difference in tone, from irony to sincerity, this turn is distinct for taking place after the shift in architectural discourse from signification to technique. Although the wide-ranging diver- sity of postmodernism is impossible to encapsulate, the most prominent buildings, texts, and exhibitions of the period con- sistently positioned architecture as a language. Charles Jencks, the prophet of postmodernism, celebrated the influence of se- miotics and promoted multivalent double entendres of archi- tectural signs, exuberantly realized in the late work of James Stirling, Charles Moore, and Robert Venturi. The recent his- torical turn is closer to the work of the Oppositions crew, which
15 Log 31
shifted the linguistic framework toward formal analysis and minimalist mannerism. Many of those featured in this issue of Log passed through the tutelage of Peter Eisenman and share his interest in constructing the discipline as a cultural and intellectual project. The trajectory from Rudolf Wittkower to Colin Rowe to Eisenman offers current practitioners an array of analytical tools, but recent projects manifest more willful transformations of the formalist canon that project outward from the discipline, in resistance to the old divisions between autonomy and engagement. Furthermore, current practitio- ners have been shaped by the intervening decades, in which the rise of projective pragmatism and technological experi- mentation have redirected architectural conversation away from signifiers and toward instruments. The recent obsession with technique leads some to appropriate historical precedents purely to enhance virtuosity, but the forerunners featured here use technique conceptually to stage parallels between past and present disciplinary predicaments. A geometric agenda drives many of the practitioners in this issue, who cultivate the rigorous refinement of primitives in contrast to the biomorphic digital baroque. For at least a decade, architects have been playing with slightly deformed primitives to differ from the continuous variation of digitally generated fields. With OMA as the grandma, practices such as MOS, Johnston Marklee, and Michael Maltzan Architecture have nudged, tugged, and collided simple cubes, cones, and cylinders to create intentionally awkward but program- matically astute primitives. Many of the practitioners seen in these pages take primitives to the next level of classical rigor, through old-school formal analysis of classical and neoclassical architecture and the perfection of orthographic projection techniques. Their strict use of regulating lines to construct any variations in geometry offers a latent critique of the sloppily distorted NURBS curves that have devalued the original rigor of the digital project. This meticulous refine- ment and transformation of primitives is emerging, in part, in the core curricula of schools known for exuberant digital form making, such as SCI-Arc and UCLA. Although initially seeming contradictory, this phenomenon actually continues disciplinary formalism by fusing classical knowledge with emerging technologies. In contrast to this more formalist strain, the emerging phenomenon of experimental preservation manipulates his- torical structures as fully embedded in material, political, and urban conditions. The fields of architecture and preservation
16 Log 31
have long been separate if not antagonistic, but more recent practices begin to fuse the two as preservation is acknowl- edged as an act of design. In the wake of poststructuralism, alternative preservationists have claimed the process of impos- ing a contemporary ideological framework onto past objects. A plethora of new journals, exhibitions, and academic pro- grams, such as Future Anterior and the Harvard GSD’s Critical Conservation program, are fostering discourse and mate- rial experimentations on the manipulation of historic objects. Architects, preservationists, and theorists are transposing his- toric objects from one cultural context to another, generating ambiguity between historical fidelity and forceful transfor- mation. The convergence of design and preservation opens up a new territory of architectural experimentation, in which we are designing the past and the present simultaneously. The historians and theorists of this moment are striv- ing to articulate a new approach to history, both in their own methodology and the design work they observe. Hailing from a range of camps, including critical historiography and the history collaborative Aggregate, they emphasize renewed methodological rigor and historical expertise. Their frequent references to Palladio, Piranesi, and Perrault (as well as to medium specificity and Clement Greenberg) reflect their ef- forts to establish disciplinary awareness within the milieu of technophilia. But alongside this seriousness about process and precedents comes an understated cheekiness about their own authority. Poststructuralism left historians with the undeni- able awareness of their own cultural biases, a perspective that can easily lead to fatalistic relativism. But rather than giving in to fatalism, these scholars synthesize historical rigor with temporal self-awareness, and even sometimes humor. The fables and allegories in this issue attest to the pleasure histori- ans and theorists are taking in constructing histories, and the resonance they feel with designers who are relinquishing tra- ditional authorship to fictionalize past forms. This motley crew of practitioners and theorists, with their range of techniques and their aggressive manipulation of sources, clearly represents only distant cousins of the origi- nal Ancients. The improbable comparison is at times wildly inaccurate, yet it does point to an important shared goal. Both old and new Ancients refuse to align architecture with either individual self-expression or technological positivism. Both see the beauty, success, and intellectual depth of architecture as emerging from a dialogue between techniques of the past and real-world demands of the present. Besides this shared
17
epistemological platform, there is also a shared approach to temporality, which only a revision of the original Ancients versus Moderns debate can reveal. Moving beyond the familiar simplifications of the Ancients versus Moderns – tradition versus progress – we can see instead a history of provocatively equalizing past and present. We typically understand modernization as initiat- ing a culture war between history and technology, but it also produced a series of thinkers who collapsed time by elid- ing historical moments. Although Blondel and Perrault are known for their opposing defenses of tradition and progress, they did not embody this duality; Blondel was less invested in the triumph of tradition than in the integration of classi- cal scholarship and science, while Perrault, the vocal defender of scientific progress, was an erudite scholar and translator of Vitruvius. The great architects who followed them from the Enlightenment through the early Industrial Age – from Henri Labrouste to Viollet-le-Duc – were notable for creating reso- nance between new technology and classical form. The rise of modernism in the 20th century, although ostensibly trumpet- ing positivism, also ushered in even more bizarre and experi- mental thinking about the elision of historical time. It is no coincidence that Friedrich Nietzsche, Georges Bataille, and Walter Benjamin, widely different thinkers linked in a chain of influence, all appear with regular frequency in the writ- ings, projects, and teaching syllabi of the individuals featured in this issue. All three philosophers expressed doubt about both scientific positivism and historical authority, and instead argued for temporal collapse. With the idea of eternal return, Nietzsche calls for suprahistorical beings who can see that the “past and the present are one and the same.”3 Bataille picked up the theme to mock architecture for attempting to resist the delirious looping of time,4 while Benjamin celebrated the spaces and objects that collapse past and present in a flash.5 While previous historical turns of the 20th century have lauded the past over the present, the practitioners, theorists, and historians who inspired this issue have stepped into the realm of strange equivalence. Absorbing and transforming, they develop a new authorship based not on singular individ- uality, but rather the ability to alter both past and present by making them inextricable. Past geometric techniques quietly shape contemporary forms, while digital techniques rear- range historic structures from the inside out. The intimacy of old and new plays out in the subtle redirection of architectural form and the rearranging of the architectural mind.
3. Friedrich Nietzsche, “On the Utility and Liability of History for Life (1874)” in The Nietzsche Reader, ed. Keith Pearson et al. (Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2006), 130. 4. Georges Bataille, “The Obelisk,” in Visions of Excess: Selected Writings, 1927–1939, ed. and trans. Allan Stoekl (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1985), 213–22. 5. Walter Benjamin, “On the Concept of History,” in Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings, Vol. 4, trans. Edmund Jephcott, ed. Howard Eiland (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003), 389–400.
Bryony Roberts is co–guest editor of Log 31.
__MACOSX/WEEK 14 READINGS/._Roberts_Log31.pdf
WEEK 14 READINGS/Wiscombe_Discreteness.pdf
3 4 P R O J E C T 3 5I s s u e 3
own irreducible properties. For instance, water is not made of little waters; water is a whole object with irreducible properties, containing other whole objects (hydrogen and oxygen) with their own irreducible properties. The result is a conceptual surprise: whole things are made of other whole things and not of parts.
Object-oriented philosophy takes this idea one step further, by way of metaphysics. If everything is a whole object and not a part of something else, and everything exists equally but differently, then vertical stratification between parts and wholes becomes impos- sible.3 In this model, everything exists side by side, like a collection of treasures laid out on a table. The question then becomes: If we agree that things are made out of other things, how
can something simultaneously be a component of a thing and be a whole thing? The philosopher Tristan Garcia uses the analogy of a “sack” to address this conun- drum.4 A sack gathers things to- gether into a loosely coherent form without dissolving the things’ discreteness. For architecture, this presents unfamiliar ways of thinking about relations between containers and the things they contain. Instead of one of each, this theory suggests multiple out- sides and insides, and an infinite deferral of interiority, like drilling sideways through a set of Rus- sian dolls. Further, it substitutes the idea of “components” with
supercomponents, capturing the indeterminacy of being simultaneously “above” (super-) and “below” (component) in a relational structure, essentially flattening out any hierarchy. Rather than wholes with constituent parts, buildings become objects, wrapped in objects, wrapped in objects and so on.5 In that case, architecture
W IS
C O
M B
E
object in “From Object to Field” (1997), Robert Somol favoring shape over form in “12 Reasons to get back into shape” (2004) and recently by Mario Carpo favoring voxel over spline in “Breaking the Curve.”2 At stake here is not only architectural aesthetics and what resonates at a particular moment but also a fundamental dispute about how things and groups of things exist in the world.
W h a t i s a F l a t O n t o l o g y ?
One of the most important advances in the dis- course of parts to wholes in architecture in the last century came through emergence theory, or the idea that the whole qualitatively exceeds
the sum of the parts. In that case, architecture could be coherent without recourse to classical composition. Despite often having been diluted by anemic computational exercises or obscured by jargon and scientism in architecture, emer- gence offers an explanation of how new things become manifest, as whole objects with their
If objects are viewed as nothing but blank screens onto which linguistic fantasies are pro- jected, we miss the tension in objects between their identity as one thing and their swirling manifold of spots and stripes where the connois- seur finds points of entry.
Graham Harman
The thing’s hollow—it goes on forever—and —oh my God!—it’s full of stars!
Arthur C. Clarke
Consider the orca. A biologist might tell you that orcas are, like
any other creature, the product of DNA muta- tion coupled with natural selection, as if that explained everything about the evocative thing right there in front of our eyes. In that world- view, the orca is simultaneously reduced to an outcome of interactions of atomic units and of enormous ecological systems. In a theoretical and popular world obsessed with networks, flows and processes, it seems like the orca must also be a network or a flow or a process; to a hammer everything looks like a nail. But this denies the specificity and discreteness of the orca: the depth of its slick black rubbery skin, the alien figuration of its white patches, its toy-like scalelessness. Rather than undermining the orca by attempting to justify or generalize it, why not instead embrace its specificity as an object, with all of its mysterious, irreducible character and inclinations?
In the architecture of the early 1990s, a revolution in digital design methods, the birth of the internet and the strong impact of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s A Thousand Plateaus prompted an urge to diffuse things into constellations of forces and relations. As read and absorbed by architecture, concepts of folding, becoming and the body without organs
transformed all things solid and singular into lines of flight, matters and speeds. At the time, this framework was an attractive alternative to the waning critical project of the 1980s, with its circular games of meaning and irony. This was a clear move away from the text as the center of discourse towards formal and material con- cerns. Sanford Kwinter’s discussion of Conrad Waddington’s “epigenetic landscape,” in which a warped surface (representing DNA expres- sion) is pictured as the extensive result of a network of intensive puppetry wires controlling it from beneath, set the stage for thinking about architecture in terms of sets of contingencies, as something in formation.1 In parallel, Jeffrey Kipnis began to promote qualities as a way to engage architecture immediately, without semi- otic reading, as a question of form and mood.
These two threads, one towards the inten- sive world and formation, and one towards the extensive world and new subjectivity, continue to support a rich dialogue in architecture today, twenty years later. Recently, however, this discussion has become in part radicalized by voices calling for total coherence between nature, city, infrastructure and building, versus others calling to recoup disciplinary expertise and engagement of the specifics of the archi- tectural object. These positions seem to exist in parallel universes: a world of surfaces, which goes on forever in all directions like a sheet, and a world of discrete chunks, consisting of things that can be held up and closely exam- ined like diamonds. In the former, difference is drawn out from a neutral state or expressed as continuous variation, while in the latter, there is no neutral condition, and difference exists within the things themselves. Coherence is not achieved through literal continuity, but rather by way of discrete things acting upon one an- other. The profound difference in ethos between these two contemporary positions underlies a long thread of debate in architecture, articulat- ed for instance by Stan Allen favoring field over
C R
IT IQ
U E
S
Tom Wiscombe
D i s c r e t e n e s s , o r To w a r d s a F l a t O n t o l o g y o f A r c h i t e c t u r e
1. Sanford Kwinter, “Landscapes of Change: Boccioni’s ‘Stati
d’animo’ as a General Theory of Models,” Assemblage 19
(December 1992): 62.
2. See Stan Allen, “From Object to Field,” Architectural Design 67
(1997): 24-31; Robert Somol, “12 Reasons to Get Back into
Shape” in Content, eds. OMA and Rem Koolhaas, (Köln:
Taschen, 2004), 86-87; and Mario Carpo, “Breaking the Curve:
Big Data and Design,” Artforum (February 2014).
3. Levi Bryant, The Democracy of Objects (Ann Arbor: Open
Humanities Press, 2011), 19. He notes that “all objects, as Ian
Bogost has so nicely put it, equally exist while they do not
exist equally.”
4. Graham Harman, “Object Oriented France: The Philosophy of
Tristan Garcia,” Continent 5.1 (2012): 10. On Tristan Garcia:
“Instead, a thing is comparable to a sack that is immaterial and
without thickness: it is nothing other than the difference between
that which is this thing and that which the thing is, between
content and container.” See also Levi Bryant,“Parts and Wholes:
The Strange Mereology of Object-oriented Ontology” in The
Democracy of Objects. Deleuze and Guattari, in a similar way,
insisted that “the wolf is also the pack” in Giles Deleuze and
Félix Guattari, “1914: One or Several Wolves,” in A Thousand
Plateaus (Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 1987) 26-38.
5. Graham Harman writes that “we have a universe made up of
objects wrapped in objects wrapped in objects.” Harman,
Bart Hess, Mutants, 2013. Video still.
3 6 P R O J E C T 37I s s u e 3
character that they do not become immediately subsumed by other elements and fall back into a default hierarchy. For this reason, at my of- fice we often work with collections of chunky pseudo-primitives such as crystals or jacks, which have strong silhouettes but no privileged Z-axis orientation. Techniques of development include sacking, stuffing, shrink-wrapping, in-laying, over-molding, figural slicing and other operations that produce synthetic material effects and celebrate the resilience of whole objects and their interactions. Instead of a milkshake, in which parts dissolve into a homogeneous unity, this is more like a Korean seafood pancake, in which different animals and vegetables are pressed together but left whole in unexpected arrangements.
O b j e c t s W r a p p e d i n O b j e c t s
Within the framework of a flat ontology, the “sectional object,” from Jeffrey Kipnis’s 1993 essay “Towards a New Architecture,” becomes newly relevant.8 Particularly after a decade of work focused on the subject of surface and deal- ing with issues of superficiality, refinement and tessellation, we may now return to concerns of mass and interiority, and importantly, the mystery and surprise of hiding and revealing
W IS
C O
M B
E
becomes an act of staging and characterizing the spaces of these deferrals, as well as charac- terizing each unique object.
Now, when all architectural “elements”6— such as mass, interior, surface articulation and ground—are treated equally but differently, strange and productive architectural conse- quences arise. Interior objects, as noted above, gain formal independence from the outer mass, potentially pushing into and inflecting it or even transgressing the boundaries of the outer mass to exist on equal terms. Next, mass is no longer contingent upon literal ground. Resisting harmonious alignments with the constructed “essence” of physical context, ground and mass are separated, to be dealt with as equally impor- tant but independent architectural problems. One does not erase or assimilate the other, but the two may anticipate one another. Finally, surface articulation is given its own identifi- able objecthood, embedded into the architec- ture loosely rather than being subsumed. For instance, patches (as in a calico cat), which have distinct figuration and independence from the surface they are on, would be favored over panelization, which is necessarily beholden to underlying surface geometry. This same logic of objects could be applied to any number of other architectural features as well—apertures, construction joints and so on—which have been undermined by a now exhausted will towards smoothness over the last decade.
This is a basis for a flat ontology of architec- ture.7 Architectural elements are pulled apart and de-stratified so they can be reassembled to produce a refreshing chunkiness and tension. In order to achieve this effect, architectural elements must interact—empathize with one another—rather than remaining fully autono- mous. Things can nestle, squish, or envelop other things, as long as they do not fuse to- gether or damage one another. Elements in play must therefore have enough resilience and
C R
IT IQ
U E
S
Guerilla Metaphysics (Chicago: Open Court Publishing
Company, 2005), 85.
6. The word “element” is problematic here (but difficult to find
a substitute for) because it connotes that things can be
broken down into subdivisions or located in a hierarchy. See
Gottfried Semper’s The Four Elements of Architecture (1851),
which argues that plinth, hearth, roof, and wall constitute all
architectural discourse. This problem of language is also why
I choose ‘whole-to-whole’ relations and not ‘part-to-part
relations’ in this discussion of a flat ontology.
7. Manuel De Landa is considered the source of the term “flat
ontology” in philosophy: “While an ontology based on relations
between general types and particular instances is hierarchical,
each level representing a different ontological category (organism,
species, genera), an approach in terms of interacting parts and
emergent wholes leads to a flat ontology, one made exclusively
of unique, singular individuals, differing in spatio-temporal
scale but not ontological status.” Manuel De Landa, Intensive
Science and Virtual Philosophy (New York: Continuum, 2002), 41.
8. Jeffrey Kipnis, “Towards a New Architecture,” in Architectural
Design: Folding in Architecture (1993), 41-49.
3 8 P R O J E C T 3 9I s s u e 3
one pushing up and one pushing down into a shroud, creating the effect of three independent objects nesting into one another without fusing. Shaped infill glazing jumps between figure and shroud, creating enclosed but seemingly exte- rior interstitial spaces.
Finally, the supercomponent model is a variation of the figure in a sack, in which objects are instead pressed into an enclosure from the outside. As if vacuformed together and then re- leased, objects can be nestled into one another, implying a coherent new object without produc- ing a fused monolith. Gaps and other disconti- nuities resulting from this technique are criti- cal, since they reinforce the supercomponents’ autonomy; supercomponents can be tight-fit, loose-fit and even mis-fit for different effect. By pressing some objects more or less deeply into others, involutions are produced which appear on the interior as inside-out figures. We proposed this model in our Maribor project for the 2012 Venice Biennale, which features deep, inhabitable crevices between form-fit objects.
H o v e r i n g a n d G r o u n d O b j e c t s
In the same way that discreteness and affili- ation characterizes the relation of inner and outer objects, it also characterizes the relation between building mass and ground. Building mass does not fuse or otherwise disappear into ground, but rather maintains distinction from it. Strategies include hovering, nestling or deferring landing by way of a ground object,
W IS
C O
M B
E
Top. National Center for Contemporary Art. Moscow, Russia, 2013. Aerial Rendering and diagram. Above and left. Taichung City Cultural Center. Taichung, Taiwan, 2013. Aerial Rendering and diagram.
interior objects. The term “objects wrapped in objects,” borrowed from Graham Harman, is intentionally open-ended in order to include many different models of affiliation includ- ing, but not limited to, things that are actually inside of other buildings.9
Three examples of models that push this project forward include the figure in a sack, the implied outer shell and the supercomponent. The figure in a sack is an attempt to create plas- tic relations between container and contained, in which hints are given as to the contents of the “sack,” but the contents are never revealed in full. Inner objects push out like a fist through a rubber sheet, creating strange formal inflec- tions in the sack, and a strange simultaneity of inner and outer silhouettes. The work of Bart Hess, in which human figures are wrapped in engineered polymers, produces similar effects: sack and figure are independent, but each restrains and affects the other. An interior liner, tucked between and around figures as if blown full of air, can create poché space with which to conceal circulation systems and organize functions in a non-stratified way. The liner also allows for a baroque-like independence of ex- terior and interior form, where mirrored zones of loose-fitting can create vast and unexpected interstitial spaces. This is the strategy for our design for the National Center for Contempo- rary Art, Moscow (2013). In this project, objects are never fully visible but their shape is implied; sometimes objects are entirely removed, and their impressions are left on sack and liner as a kind of visual subterfuge.
Where the figure in a sack model has as its precedents Jean Nouvel and Philippe Starck’s unbuilt Tokyo Opera (a container with incon- gruous figures) and Coop Himmelb(l)au’s UFA Cinema Center (an aquarium of “scattered objects”),10 the implied outer shell model finds its precedents in Bernard Tschumi’s Le Fresnoy and Le Corbusier’s Heidi Weber Museum. Both of those projects deal with the spatial effects of a partial secondary enclosure, which shrouds but does not completely obscure inner objects. Our design for the Taichung City Cultural Center (2013) was based on two vertical figures,
C R
IT IQ
U E
S
9. Graham Harman, Guerilla Metaphysics (Chicago: Open Court
Publishing Company, 2005), 85.
10. Referring to Coop Himmelb(l)au’s UFA Cinema project, Kipnis
writes: “a diaphanous membrane that envelops independent
objects scattered in its interior amid circuitous paths of
circulation.” Jeffrey Kipnis, “Exile on Ringstrasse; Excitations
on Main Street,” in A Question of Qualities, ed. Alexander
Maymind (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2012), 45.
4 0 P R O J E C T 41I s s u e 3
W IS
C O
M B
E
all of which create intensive coherence rather than literal continuity. A good analogy is the Russian Ground-Effect Vehicle from the late 1980s, which flies over water at a height of one meter, producing a tense, magnetic relation between ground and mass. This approach of detaching buildings from the ground is dif- ferent than lifting up building masses by Le Corbusier, which was based on an idea of al- lowing landscape to flow underneath.11 Instead, the goal here is to emphasize and re-invent the break between world and building as well as exterior and interior, two of fundamental architectural problems.
An opposite approach to the ground would be the “landscape-building” from the 1990s, which assumes little distinction between the architecture and the rest of the world, often ap- pearing in lump or hill-like formations. At that time, concepts of “becoming” and “the other,” as in Deleuze’s musings on werewolves, often pushed architecture outside of its disciplinary boundaries into the indistinct realms of context and site.12 Architecture became a surrogate for the ground and, as David Ruy has noted, buildings were often reduced to an “outcome” of real or imagined contextual forces.13 This denigration of the building object by defining it as a trickle-down effect of context is happily rectified with a flat ontology.
A ground object is the total objectification of the land underneath a building. Ground is re-cast as mass rather than surface. In classical architecture, the pedestal or plinth is extruded from the land, and hence is still a type of sur- face. In contrast, a strong ground object would be characterized by undercuts to the landscape, would appear dug-up and loose and would empathize actively with the building mass. Like a bird in a nest, where the bird and nest relate but have different characters, the ground object requires some degree of architectural autono- my. This autonomy can be further emphasized by way of trenches, joints, level changes, bridges or other sleights of hand. One recent example of this strategy can be seen in the Perot Museum of Nature and Science by Morphosis, in which
C R
IT IQ
U E
S
the main building mass nestles into a ground object, which itself maintains a clear separation from the land.
Another kind of ground object is a hole. In this case, the ground object is not a mass but an articulated void. This strategy can be seen in both Claude-Nicolas Ledoux’s house of the agricultural guard for Chaux as well as Marcel Breuer’s Whitney Museum. A hole has the benefit of both obscuring the foot of the build- ing on approach, and forcing entry at mid-level. The act of entry becomes a leap from one world into another.
Ta t t o o s
As opposed to meshes and panelization sys- tems, which are everywhere, all the time on a building skin, a tattoo is an objectification of surface articulation. Tattoos are not orna- ment, in the sense that they do no hang off of architecture.14 They are also distinct from the supergraphics of Venturi, which float on the surface of architecture. Architectural tattoos are instead embedded in the building mass, without losing their elemental autonomy. They are clicked-in, over-molded onto or pressed into surfaces loosely, as if they might later be removed and examined as independent objects. Like tattoos on the body, architectural tattoos may sometimes track underlying form, but they often deviate from it to become free-form or figural. Instead of being subservient to edges or
11. Jeffrey Kipnis, “Thesis Prep,” lecture, Southern California
Institute of Architecture, Los Angeles, CA, January 20, 2011,
http://sma.sciarc.edu/video/jeff-kipnis-part-two-thesis-prep-
talk-part-two-of-two/.
12. Deleuze and Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus, 241-275.
13. In his Spring 2013 SCI-Arc Lecture, David Ruy discusses
the problem of context and nature vis-à-vis the object. David
Ruy, “Returning to (Strange) Objects,” lecture, Southern
California Institute of Architecture, Los Angeles, CA,
January 30, 2013, http://sma.sciarc.edu/video/david-ruy-
returning-to-strange-objects/.
14. Jeffrey Kipnis, “The Cunning of Cosmetics,” El Croquis 84 (1997).
Left. Collider Activity Center, Bulgaria, 2013. Aerial rendering. Below. Diamond City. Adelaide, Australia, 2013.Aerial rendering. Bottom Left. Pop Music Center. Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 2010. Aerial rendering. Bottom Right. Russian Ground- Effect Vehicle.
4 2 P R O J E C T 43I s s u e 3
material a human can fabricate or carry and rethought in these terms, scale comes into question. Architecture can cease to register the human form and instead move toward strange, alien effects we can only begin to imagine.
* * *
Whether or not a flat ontology is enough of a basis for a new architecture remains to be seen. While recent history suggests that literal importations of philosophy into architecture can be problematic, the framework for a flat ontology to some extent already exists inside architecture: it provides a contemporary update to the discourse of part-to-whole relations and problems of composition. A flat ontology con- fronts the possibility of radically de-stratifying architecture without resorting to smoothing on the one hand or disjunction on the other. Instead, it offers a refreshing model of coher- ence based on constellations of whole objects engaged in magnetic and empathetic relations.
Top. Chinese University of Hong Kong Arena. Shenzhen, China, 2012. Aerial rendering. Above Right. National Center for Contemporary Art. Moscow, Russia, 2013. Diagram. Above Left. Chinese University of Hong Kong Arena. Shenzhen, China, 2012. Diagram. Left. National Center for Contemporary Art. Moscow, Russia, 2013. Aerial rendering.
W IS
C O
M B
E
other formal inflections of the building mass, tattoos are patchy and discontinuous. Accord- ing to Owen Jones, who may have been the first to make an analogy between tattoos and architecture, a tattoo is “an impress or a stamp” that is “derived less from the ‘body’ it covers than from the graphic interests and pictorial imagination of its maker.”15
The contemporary tattoo is not a sign, but an autonomous formal system. According to Mark Taylor’s descriptions of “dermagraphics,” a tattoo “is always duplicitous.”16 Architectural tattoos inhabit the duplicitous realm between two- and three-dimensionality, sometimes with the effect of flattening; in other instances they create the illusion of depth where there is none. While tattoos may often become associ- ated with tasks such as organizing apertures or joints on a surface, their primary architec- tural role is to produce mysterious cross-grain formal effects, which can emphasize or obscure the discreteness of the objects into which they are inscribed. This can mean that they feather edges, emphasize silhouettes or transitions, or virtually connect disconnected masses. The tat- toos of our NCCA project, for example, some- times bridge between discrete masses to create the appearance of a larger unified object, but other times create the illusion that the masses are separate when in fact they are not.
Finally, it is important to note that tattoos derive not only from a new formal sensibility, but from the possibilities inherent in compos- ite construction. Suddenly it is possible, and imperative, to rethink what constitutes surface articulation when the age of tectonic articula- tion based on bricks, sticks and panels is past. In composite monocoque construction, for instance, the site of the joint may no longer be the site of articulation; one may have nothing to do with the other. Joints and seams may be suppressed or emphasized or altogether faked for effect, as in our project for the Taichung City Cultural Center. Also, the sheer number of functional seams may be significantly reduced, pointing to the possibility of buildings made from massive interlocking chunks. As construc- tion is de-coupled from the size of pieces of
C R
IT IQ
U E
S
15. Owen Jones, “The Grammar of Ornament” (1856), in
Surface Architecture, eds. Mohsen Mostafavi and David
Leatherbarrow (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2002), 101.
16. “Lines on the body are never univocal but always duplicitous
[…] drawing opens as much as it closes, to create seams that
are as fragile as the bodies they demarcate”. Mark Taylor, Hiding
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), 129.
__MACOSX/WEEK 14 READINGS/._Wiscombe_Discreteness.pdf
WEEK 14 READINGS/Zago_Gannon_Tabloid_Transparency.pdf
1
TABLOID TRANSPARENCY, OR, LOOKING THROUGH LEGIBILITY, ABSTRACTION,
AND THE DISCIPLINE OF ARCHITECTURE
Andrew Zago and Todd Gannon
Architecture can only be political, that is, contribute to the production of another world, by being relentlessly attentive to its own discipline. - R.E. Somol
Contemporary architecture is in the throes of an unprecedented expansion of practice types, areas
of expertise, and topics of interest. Though similar proliferations of specialized niches have
occurred in fields ranging from engineering to music, architecture’s unique responsibilities to
society as both a service profession and a cultural discipline have produced more, and more
problematic, internal divergences than in other fields. Today, one is more likely to speak of the
concerns of “sustainability architects,” “interior architects,” or “healthcare architects,” than to
speak of the concerns of the field as a whole. Indeed, articulating such overarching concerns has
become increasingly challenging, just as constructing productive conversations between
architecture’s internal specializations has become more difficult.
At issue in any discussion of nascent tendencies within architecture is the status of the
field’s conventions of communication, its habits of speech, its discourse. The difficulty of
communicating disciplinary concerns to popular audiences is well known. Less often considered
is the difficulty of communication within the field, which often suffers from a similar lack of
linguistic common ground. Failing to recognize important shades of meaning in familiar terms,
members of specialized sub-groups in architecture —both established and emerging ones—often
fail to recognize, and thus to understand and respect, the contrasting ambitions, roles, and
responsibilities of architecture’s varied specializations. In short, many architects today simply do
2
not speak the same language. What follows is an attempt to clarify some basic terminological
distinctions in architecture, to outline some of the field’s generally accepted and less often
acknowledged responsibilities to society, and to sketch the contours of a few promising
developments in architecture’s recent contributions to culture.
Discourse Communities
Fields of cultural production, like all social groups, develop unique vocabularies to articulate
shared ambitions, to identify novel forms that emerge as the field progresses, and, perhaps most
importantly, to signal an individual’s membership in that group. When associated with
geographical regions and socio-economic classes, these clusters of linguistic habits are
commonly known as dialects. Think of Swiss-German, Québécois French, or the distinctive
speech patterns of the American South. Social groups defined by shared professional
responsibilities or cultural interests also develop specific dialects, which in many cases are
known (often derisively) by their jargon, as in “legalese” or “art-speak.”
Though sometimes bewildering to outsiders (and occasionally to the initiated), the
curious inflections of meaning, structure, and syntax found in all dialects are both common and
necessary. This proliferation of linguistic complexity enables not only nuanced description of
topics important to the group but also the construction of the group’s self-identity. The
sophisticated dialects of numismatists, oenophiles, and skateboarders, for example, not only
capture the intricacies of the currency, wines, and aerial maneuvers those groups esteem but also
structure the very substance of the groups themselves. Submission to a dialect’s vocabulary of
expertise, authority, and authenticity constitutes one’s membership in a group, while an ability to
3
manipulate and direct that vocabulary establishes one’s expertise. In sociology and linguistics,
such groups often are referred to as “discourse communities.” 1
Like many large discourse communities, architecture has developed sophisticated dialects
(and many sub-dialects) to govern its internal communications and to represent itself to society.
Replete with jargon, neologisms, and obscure syntax, architecture’s dialects are as necessary to
the field’s development and they are befuddling to the uninitiated. Consider, for example,
architecture’s use of the word “transparency.” As Colin Rowe and Robert Slutzky famously
pointed out, the word has two main meanings in everyday English, one pertaining to material
pellucidity, the other having to do with intellectual clarity. 2 To structure a particular formal
debate within architecture, Rowe and Slutzky developed further inflections of the term. In
architecture (at least in one if its more common sub-dialects), literal and phenomenal
transparency now signify contrasting surface effects, the former having to do with the
transmission of light through building materials, the latter having to do with the registration of
multiple abstract patterns and illusory depth on building facades. Of course, Rowe and Slutzky
used these terms not just to make categorical distinctions. More importantly, they used them to
make value judgments. Literal transparency, they argued, was associated with the oblique
compositional tendencies they denigrated in the work of Walter Gropius and others, and
phenomenal transparency with frontal compositions, primarily those of Le Corbusier, which they
supported.
1 For an excellent treatment of the politics of discourse communities, see David Foster Wallace, “Authority and
American Usage,” in Consider the Lobster and Other Essays (New York: Little Brown and Co., 2006): 66-127. For more general treatments of the concept, see Gary D. Schmidt and William J. Vande Kopple, eds., Communities of Discourse: The Rhetoric of Disciplines (New York: Prentice Hall, 1992). 2 Colin Rowe and Robert Slutzky, “Transparency: Literal and Phenomenal” [1963], in Rowe, The Mathematics of
the Ideal Villa and Other Essays (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1976): 159-183.
4
Such proliferations of meaning are rampant in contemporary architecture and contribute
to the difficulty of speaking of the field as a whole. Nonetheless, certain general observations can
be made. One relates to architecture’s ability to productively engage other disciplines and the
wider world. Another has to do with the unlikely reemergence of legibility in a field long thought
to have traded representational concerns for abstraction. But before turning our attention to these
inflections, we must first establish an important distinction within the field, that between the
profession and the discipline of architecture.
Profession and Discipline
The profession of architecture concerns itself with the advancement of the field as a reliable,
affordable, and sustainable commodity, the discipline with its advancement as an art form. While
those architects active in the discipline may well provide reliability, affordability, and
sustainability, it is the discipline alone that takes responsibility for advancing the public
imagination. This is not to say that those engaged primarily with professional concerns do not on
occasion participate in architecture’s cultural project, simply that when they do, they have
supplanted a professional posture with a disciplinary one.
Compounding architecture’s disciplinary responsibilities with the sheer size, permanence,
and ubiquity of its professional output produces a unique form of politics unavailable to other art
forms which also advance the public imagination. Though a person might easily avoid painting,
literature, and other cultural artifacts (indeed, many do), no such option is available with regard
to built form. Architecture’s ubiquitous presence in the quotidian affairs of contemporary life
affords it a unique political capacity irreducible to other forms of engagement, such as policy,
5
advocacy, and social responsibility, which obtain in architecture as well as in related fields such
as the political and social sciences.
The diagram above illustrates the relationship of the discipline to the profession. Notice that the
discipline is much smaller than the profession, lies partially outside it, and has a porous
boundary. Its porosity owes to the fact that some practices work at times within and at others
outside the discipline and the overlap to the fact that some extra-professional work (writing,
drawing, etc.) affects architecture without being building per se. As the discipline is capable of
things that the profession is not, the relationship is hierarchical. The discipline provides the
evolving set of artistic concerns that, inevitably, even the most prosaic practice must draw from.
This dependency is rarely acknowledged by the wider profession.
As with the broader profession, the discipline has splintered into numerous sub-interests.
In the past, internal specializations within architecture such as engineering, landscape
architecture, and urban planning spawned new, autonomous fields of expertise. The current
6
proliferation of specializations may well continue to produce such distinct fields. 3 The discipline,
on the other hand, is first concerned with the interrogation and reinvention of architecture’s own
potentials and self-definition and only later with instrumentality in the wider world. Proliferating
specializations within the discipline remain embedded in the structure of the field.
Though both the discipline and the profession organize social relations through the
construction of buildings and both deploy drawings, models, diagrams, and other media to do so,
their contrasting responsibilities to society point their activities in markedly different directions.
The profession responds to society’s immediate needs, where the discipline projects alternative
possibilities for the future.
Most projects are presented to architects as problems to be solved at the level of the
profession, that is, in response to society’s immediate needs. Goals of course vary, but typically
include functional and economic ambitions as well as site, budgetary, and programmatic
constraints, among other concerns. To effectively address these challenges, architects apply the
collective knowledge of the field as well as that of neighboring professions such as engineering
and economics. Such relationships constructed between architecture and neighboring professions
are commonly understood to be interdisciplinary. Within the discipline, on the other hand,
interdisciplinarity is more complex. To project alternative possibilities to the public imagination,
architecture often pursues interests parallel to those of other art forms, and at times finds itself
allied with neighboring fields such as painting, literature, and philosophy, to project a shared
3 Given the complex technical, legal, and bureaucratic contexts within which architects now operate, many tasks that
traditionally have fallen under the purview of standard architectural services (e.g. programming, accessibility, cost
estimating, permitting, specifications, sustainability design, and construction administration as well as rendering,
model-making, digital animation, and other “pre-visualization” techniques) are now increasingly handled by outside
consultants who, like engineers and landscape architects, bring significant extra-architectural expertise to the table
and are rapidly developing specific disciplinary habits and conventions within their respective areas of expertise.
7
cultural agenda. Interdisciplinarity in this sense operates not in the cause of pragmatic efficiency,
but rather to open new avenues of interest for the field.
Despite these differences, it is important to insist that both the profession and the
discipline be understood as advancing architecture as a material practice, even if the former’s
materiality is usually manifest in the durable physicality of buildings and the latter’s often is
found in more ephemeral media, including the seemingly (but not actually) immaterial flux of
digital design software. 4 Where the profession and the discipline deploy similar media, the
former does so primarily in the cause of immediate societal needs (usually via constructed
buildings), whereas the latter deploys architectural media (buildings included) as ends in
themselves and to project alternative social relations. In other words, the profession
instrumentalizes architectural media in order to serve society, while the discipline maintains the
autonomy of those media in order to advance architecture’s cultural ambitions.
Clients, Users, and Constituencies
There was a time when architecture was thought to address a single, general audience. Architects
from Vitruvius to Le Corbusier imagined idealized subjects such as the Vitruvian Man and the
Modulor Man as personifications of the collective audiences they wished to address. One of the
more significant achievements of the past century of cultural production has been the critical
demolition of such idealized subjectivities and with them, the hegemony of the generalized
audiences they stood for. 5 Recently, more vital groups have emerged around specific interests
and proclivities within both the profession and the discipline. In the profession, increasingly
4 See N. Katherine Hayles and Todd Gannon, “Virtual Architecture, Actual Media,” in C. Greig Crysler, Stephen
Cairns, and Hilde Heynen, eds., The SAGE Handbook of Architectural Theory (London: SAGE, 2012): 484-526. 5 For a particularly articulate presentation of this attitude, see Eric Owen Moss, “Armageddon or Polynesian
Contextualism,” lecture at the Southern California Institute of Architecture, 5 December 1979.
http://sma.sciarc.edu/video/1883_moss_eric_owen_1-00-00-00/
8
complex demands have given rise to specialized service niches which address issues of
programming, sustainability, accessibility, and branding as well as specific program types such
as housing, prisons, hospitals, and schools. The clients who commission and finance such work,
as well as the immediate users for whom the project is designed, may be understood as the direct
recipient of a professional service.
The discipline, while it usually works at the behest of commercial clients and users, also
addresses a broader constituency which may or may not directly inhabit or use a building. The
primary concern of such constituencies is not a building’s accommodation of utilitarian functions
but rather the architecture’s contributions to ongoing cultural projects. Where a building’s users
and clients are usually proximate, architecture’s cultural constituencies are increasingly
dispersed. Effectively addressing them requires the discipline to be particularly attentive to the
full range of architectural media. Not only is architecture’s proliferation as and through media
crucial to its ability to impact globalized cultural constituencies, but also, the integral role of
such media in architecture’s ontology must be taken into account if one wishes to take seriously
questions of architecture’s place in cultural production.
Where a building is a concrete physical object (as are drawings, models, photographs,
texts, etc.), architecture as such, the dynamic complex of habits, techniques, biases, proclivities,
and, importantly, values deployed by architects, is abstract, virtual, and ineffable. 6 As literature
is irreducible to books, architecture is irreducible to buildings. And, as a mode of cultural
production as opposed to a class of buildings, architecture inhabits and activates an array of
6 “Just as all buildings hold within them the potential of becoming architecture, so the documents that precede,
surround, and follow buildings are constitutive players in imagining, planning, and implementing architectural
practices and thus also participate in creating architecture. Embodied buildings and embodied documents are
physical objects witnessing to architectural acts, but architecture can never be reduced to these objects. Rather,
architecture partakes fundamentally of the virtual in the Deleuzian sense, a nimbus of potentialities in dynamic
interaction with the actuality of buildings and documents.” Hayles and Gannon, “Virtual Architecture, Actual
Media,” 485.
9
media, even if buildings remain a privileged focus of our efforts. Thus, to characterize the paper
architecture of the 1970s or more recent forays by the discipline into the manipulation of digital
environments, the construction of pavilions, or the programming of robots as somehow less than
fully architectural, as some in the field do, is to fundamentally misunderstand architecture’s
ontology and woefully underestimate its potential as an agent of cultural production.
Such dismissive characterizations also fail to recognize the spectrum of constituencies
that has arisen within and through architecture’s recent disciplinary achievements. As in music,
the diversity of audiences addressed by contemporary architecture has increased dramatically. In
response, the discipline has evolved a host of specialized genres through which to address them.
Given the breadth of interests, limitations of space, and the fact that many of these nascent
tendencies are not yet fully formed, we will not attempt a comprehensive overview of such
practices here. Instead, we will devote our remaining space to a discussion of themes with which
the more promising of these new practices are all in some way grappling.
Legibility and Abstraction
The return to questions of legibility today can be seen in a wide sampling of contemporary work,
including the neo-post-modernism of FAT (the now defunct practice led by Sam Jacob, Sean
Griffiths, and Charles Holland), the frank clarity of typological forms in projects by Herzog and
de Meuron or Atelier Bow Wow, and the regional symbolism deployed in recent projects by
BIG, FOA, and others. At the same time, one sees a resurgent and diametrically opposed interest
in overt, perhaps neo-modernist, abstraction, as in the fluid expressionism of Zaha Hadid
10
Architects, the stark minimalism of John Pawson, or the seeming return to the themes of 1970s
“paper architecture” in the work of young practices in Los Angeles, Chicago, and elsewhere. 7
Left to right: FAT, Blue House, London, 2002; BIG, People’s Building, Shanghai, 2004; Zaha Hadid Architects, Galaxy Soho Complex, Beijing, 2012.
In 2011, the principals of FAT made their case for a resurgent “Radical Post-Modernism”
by calling into question Modernism’s associations with abstraction. Citing observations by the
novelist Gabriel Josipovici, they write,
[T]he essential characteristics of Modernism can be limited to neither abstraction nor
technological innovation and, indeed…the kind of abstraction promoted by the likes of
Abstract Expressionist high priest Clement Greenberg did not represent the essence of
Modernism at all, but acted merely as a sign of it.
Modernism’s key characteristic, they continue, was instead “the recognition of a loss of authority
after the Reformation,” which caused Modernist artists to adopt exactly the values pursued by
the Post-Modernists of the 1970s, that is, “those of multiple authorship, multivalence, collage,
quotation, and decentered authority.” 8
Modernists, they claim, preached abstraction but in fact
practiced Post-Modern legibility.
In this, the authors are half right. Though Greenberg certainly promoted Abstract
Expressionists in the 1950s, he was by no means convinced of abstraction’s necessity to
Modernism. In a seminal 1960 essay, he wrote, “Abstractness, or the non-figurative, has in itself
7 Cf. Log 31: New Ancients (Spring/Summer 2014), edited by Dora Epstein Jones and Bryony Roberts.
8 FAT, “Post-Modernism: An Incomplete Project,” in Architectural Design (Sept/Oct 2011): 18. The issue, Radical
Post-Modernism, was edited by Charles Jencks and FAT. Josipovici’s arguments are from What Ever Happened to Modernism? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011).
11
still not proved to be an altogether necessary moment in the self-criticism of pictorial art, even
though artists as eminent as Kandinsky and Mondrian have thought so.” 9 Indeed, it was self-
criticism, not abstraction, that Greenberg saw as Modernism’s essence. 10
Self-criticism had to do
primarily with self-definition, with establishing the “unique and irreducible” qualities of each art,
which in painting issued from the flatness of the picture plane. For Greenberg, the key feature of
Modern painting was not abstraction, but rather the legibility of a painting’s irreducible flatness.
Twenty years after Greenberg, Peter Eisenman addressed the question of Modernism in
architecture and attempted a similar self-definition of the field. Once again, the central concern
was legibility, not abstraction. Modernism, he argued, was distinguished by an “object’s
tendency to be self-referential.” 11
Indeed, for Eisenman, it was not just Modern architecture but
architecture as such for which legibility was a necessary precondition. To distinguish itself from
geometry, he argued, architecture required legible intentionality. To distinguish itself from
sculpture, it required a legible relationship to function or use. Finally, to distinguish itself from
building, architecture had to “overcome” its function through self-referential signification, as
when a classical column both carries a load and simultaneously represents the act of structural
support. Like Greenberg, Eisenman saw no need to include abstraction in his formulations. In his
view, architecture does not, indeed cannot, deal in abstract forms such as planes and volumes.
Rather, architecture’s elements—walls, roofs, floors, et cetera—are always already legible signs
associated with shelter, structure, or use.
9 Clement Greenberg, “Modernist Painting” [1960] in John O’Brian, ed., Clement Greenberg: The Collected Essays
and Criticism, Volume Four, Modernism with a Vengeance, 1957-1969 (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1993): 87. 10
“The essence of Modernism lies, as I see it, in the use of characteristic methods of a discipline to criticize the
discipline itself, not in order to subvert it but in order to entrench it more firmly in its area of competence.” Ibid., 85. 11
Peter Eisenman, “Aspects of Modernism: Maison Dom-ino and the Self-referential Sign” [1980], in Eisenman Inside Out: Selected Writings 1963-1988 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004): 112-13.
12
More than thirty years on, Eisenman’s self-referential conception of Modern architecture
remains more convincing than other views that understand Modern architecture as a visual style
based on Platonic forms and blank surfaces. 12
In Eisenman’s (and, it turns out, Josipovici’s)
view, Modernism is not a style particular to a specific medium, but rather a pervasive cultural
condition manifested across creative fields. As Eisenman put it, “Modernism is a state of
mind.” 13
On this, the principals of FAT seem to agree, and indeed they see Post-Modernism not as
a “disavowal of Modernism,” but rather as “the continuation of it under different conditions and
armed with new weapons.” 14
They are also correct in their assessment that Modernist abstraction
is not abstraction as such but rather a sign of abstraction. Their dismissal of abstract formal
vocabularies on such grounds, however, is specious. The question is not whether abstraction has
been achieved, but rather how to overcome architecture’s pre-existing associations with shelter,
structure, and use. FAT’s neo-Post-Modernism works to overcome these associations by pointing
beyond architecture toward other resonances with culture. Their outwardly referential project is
served well by a formal vocabulary freighted with easily legible content. Eisenman’s
Modernism, on the other hand, works to overcome architecture’s pre-existing associations by
directing attention inward toward architecture’s “unique and irreducible” qualities. At least
through the 1970s, this self-referential project was best served by a vocabulary of elements with
minimal symbolic associations. 15
12
Cf. Henry-Russell Hitchcock and Philip Johnson, The International Style [1932] (New York: W.W. Norton, 1995). 13
Eisenman, “Aspects of Modernism,” 112. 14
FAT, “Post-Modernism: An Incomplete Project,” 21. 15
Of course, by the 1980s, Eisenman would routinely deploy more legible elements as part of his formal vocabulary,
as in the “as-found” elements at the Wexner Center for the Arts and Cincinnati DAAP.
13
The suitability of non-figurative vocabularies to disciplinary self-reflection by 20 th
-
century artists and architects is well known. 16
Equally well known is that by the 1960s,
abstraction in both painting and architecture was on the verge of exhaustion. The reductive
vocabularies of Mondrian and Corbusier, adopted by each as means to direct attention away from
representational clichés toward core disciplinary questions in their respective fields, began, after
decades of imitation, to appear as legible and clichéd as the symbolic vocabularies they had been
developed to replace. 17
By the 1970s, many architects had turned away from the Platonic forms
of orthodox Modernism toward a vocabulary of legible historical types. For some, the use of
identifiable typological forms was a means to counter Modernism’s abstract self-reflections with
overtly symbolic and often nostalgic outward associations. 18
Others wagered that an engagement
with historical types offered the best chance to recover the exhausted disciplinary ambitions of
Modernism. As Anthony Vidler explained in 1977, “the issue of typology is raised in
architecture, not this time with a need to search outside the practice for legitimation in science
and technology, but with a sense that within architecture itself resides a unique and particular
mode of production and explanation.” 19
While Vidler claimed this new, “third typology” “refuses
any “nostalgia” in its evocations of history,” 20
subsequent production demonstrated just how
difficult it was to avoid nostalgia and sustain serious disciplinary reflection when using historical
16
In painting, recall Mondrian: “All art employing naturalistic appearance becomes weakened in its true function.
All representation, even using abstract forms, is fatal to pure art; that is why purely abstract art is expressed
exclusively through relationships.” (Piet Mondrain, “Purely Abstract Art” [1926] in Harry Holtzman and Martin S.
James, eds., The New Art—the New Life: The Collected Writings of Piet Mondrian (Boston: Da Capo Press, 1993): 200). And in architecture, Le Corbusier: “cubes, cones, spheres, cylinders, and pyramids are the great primary forms
that light reveals well…these are beautiful forms, the most beautiful forms. Everyone is in agreement about this: children, savages, and metaphysicians.” (Le Corbusier, Toward an Architecture [1923] (Los Angles: Getty Research Institute, 2007): 102, emphasis in the original.) 17
On the problem of cliché in architecture, see Todd Gannon, “Five Points for Thesis,” in Elena Manferdini, ed.,
Thesis Now (Los Angeles: SCI-Arc Press, forthcoming). 18
Cf. Charles Jencks, The Language of Post-modern Architecture (New York: Rizzoli, 1977). 19
Anthony Vidler, “The Third Typology” [1977] reprinted in K. Michael Hays, Architecture/Theory since 1968 (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998): 288. 20
Ibid., 293.
14
types. Indeed, even the formal abstraction of Eisenman and the New York Five was susceptible
to charges of nostalgia, in their case for the historically identifiable vocabulary of Le Corbusier’s
lait de chaux villas of the 1920s and ’30s.21
left: Terence Riley, Light Construction, 1995, catalog; right: Marcelo Spina and Georgina Huljich, Matters of Sensation, 2008.
The dispute between “abstract” neo-Modernist autonomy and “legible” Post-Modernist
engagement raged through the closing decades of the twentieth century. On one side, the
unavoidable fact of legibility was embraced and used to sanction a broadly engaged populism.
On the other, architects (particularly in the 1980s) allied themselves with philosophers such as
Jacques Derrida not to evade legibility but rather to destabilize it an attempt to maintain
architecture’s inwardly focused autonomy. By the 1990s, new architectural interests rooted
neither in populist legibility nor in autonomous abstraction began to come into focus. Terence
Riley’s 1995 exhibition, “Light Construction,” at the Museum of Modern Art in New York,
showcased an array of projects that focused instead on specific material effects, particularly
21
See Colin Rowe, “Introduction,” in Five Architects (New York: Wittenborn, 1972): 3-7.
15
those of glass. 22
In 2008, the exhibition “Matters of Sensation,” curated by Marcelo Spina and
Georgina Huljich at Artists Space in New York, built on this renewed interest in material effects
and directed attention toward architecture’s affective, as opposed to representational, potential. 23
The latter exhibition drew significant inspiration from the writings of Gilles Deleuze on Francis
Bacon. In Bacon, Deleuze saw a painter who rejected both representation (what Deleuze referred
to as “figuration”) and abstraction as viable options for contemporary painting. Instead, Bacon
deployed what Deleuze called “the Figure,” which he described as “the sensible form related to a
sensation; it acts immediately upon the nervous system, which is of the flesh, whereas abstract
form is addressed to the head and acts through the intermediary of the brain.” 24
Through the 2000s, appeals to affective figures and visceral sensation (as opposed to
indexical forms and conceptual intellection) were common in architecture, particularly among
younger practitioners engaged in speculative projects executed in unbuilt work and gallery
installations. At the same time, firms such as BIG and FOA began to make overt appeals to
legible symbolic content, claiming to do so in order to seduce clients and competition juries. In
an important 2005 text, Alejandro Zaera-Polo of FOA made a case for a “double agenda” that
wedded the firm’s long-standing interest in formal abstraction and indexical process with their
clients’ desire for legible symbolic identity. 25
Though Zaera-Polo attempted to distance his
approach from the earlier Post-Modernist positions, his argument distinctly resonated with
Charles Jencks’ idea of “double-coding,” 26
and drew pointed responses from Sylvia Lavin and
Jeffrey Kipnis. Lavin criticized Zaera-Polo’s appeal to metaphors, which, she argued, were
22
See Terence Riley, Light Construction (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1995). 23
See Marcelo Spina and Georgina Huljich, “Matter, Sensation, and the Sublime,” in Patterns: Embedded (Beijing: AADCU, 2010): 208-217. 24
Gilles Deleuze, Francis Bacon: The Logic of Sensation [1981] (Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 2003): 31. 25
Alejandro Zaera-Polo, “The Hokusai Wave,” Quaderns 245 (2005): 77-87. 26
Cf. Jencks, The Language of Post-modern Architecture, 6.
16
inevitably bound up with meaning and thus vulnerable to falsification. As an alternative, she
proposed the use of seductive but ultimately meaningless forms “that have no logic of
verifiability, truth, or even use,” offering fishnet stockings and Pereira and Luckman’s 1961
Theme Building at Los Angeles International Airport as examples. 27
Like Lavin, Kipnis also
suggested non-signifying forms as an alternative to Zaera-Polo’s mimetic paraphrase, arguing
that these should aim to elicit irreducibly architectural effects. Though he offered Deleuze’s
reading of Bacon as a model for how such effects might be pursued (with the caveat that
architecture could not achieve its ends by imitating painting), he noticed that Bacon’s paintings
left: Francis Bacon, Three Studies for a Portrait of Lucien Freud, 1964; right: Jeff Koons, Balloon Dog (Orange), 1994-2000
did not fully overcome the legacy of abstraction due to the traces of the process of painting
evident on the surface of his canvases. Better, in Kipnis’s view, were recent works by Damien
Hirst, Jeff Koons, and others that, by effacing all evidence of process, proved startlingly resistant
to the clichés of both representation and abstraction. Works such as Koons’ Balloon Dog, he
argued,
…do not mean anything, they do not say anything, but neither are they silent. …It is not
that they have nothing to say, it is that they do not say; they belong to a world, to an
27
Sylvia Lavin, “Conversations over Cocktails,” Quaderns 245 (2005): 90.
17
ontology that has no place for saying, even as a possibility. This effect, made possible
only by the figural, suggests an un-theorized power of the figure. 28
Writing in 2005, Kipnis found little work on the figure in architecture beyond the writings of
R.E. Somol. 29
In the ensuing decade, a number of architects have taken up the problem. And if
contemporary rehearsals of neo-Modernist abstraction and neo-Post-Modernist legibility appear
ill-equipped to open new avenues of disciplinary exploration, these novel figural speculations
signal just such a possibility.
Tabloid Transparency
To distinguish recent experiments with the figure in architecture from those pursued in painting
and sculpture, we propose the term “tabloid transparency.” 30
In this, we take a cue from tabloid
newspapers, in which the content is so vapid that it cannot possibly bear scrutiny as meaning.
The presence of content provides raw materials to perception, while the vapidity of that content
allows one’s attention to shift toward the material fact of the tabloid as an object—to the letter
forms, the patterning of dot-screen printing, the materiality of the paper, et cetera. Meaning in
such works is so inconsequential that it collapses and, in effect, becomes transparent. In the
object’s absolute lack of ambiguity, questions such as, “what is this?” or “what does it mean?”
are suspended. Thus, tabloid transparency does not proliferate ambiguities or otherwise
destabilize meaning, but rather disarms it by rendering it insignificant. Where Deleuze aimed to
bypass both abstraction and figuration via the Figure, tabloid transparency dissolves the obvious
in order to access what might be referred to as the Abstract.
28
Jeffry Kipnis, “What We Got Need Is—Failure to Communicate” Quaderns 245 (2005): 96-97. 29
See R.E. Somol, “12 Reasons to Get Back into Shape,” in Rem Koolhaas and OMA/AMO, eds., Content (Cologne: Taschen, 2004): 86-87. 30
Though he never used it in publication, we suspect credit for coining this term goes to Kipnis, with whom we
recall discussing the idea several years ago.
18
The Abstract, we submit, stands for an ineffable but nonetheless specific disciplinary
condition, akin to Greenberg’s “unique and irreducible” qualities, or Kipnis’s “ontology that has
no place for saying.” Though closely linked to questions of form, the Abstract exceeds mere
description of physical shapes. As an analogy, imagine an accomplished athlete, say, a
competitive diver or gymnast. While such athletes are likely to be “in shape,” their performance
is ultimately judged in terms of good or bad “form.” In this sense, form, as a function of the
Abstract, disciplines physical shapes.
Though a function of physical materials (e.g., paint and canvas, steel and glass) the
Abstract cannot be reduced to its physical manifestation—the material object only alludes to its
ineffable qualities. 31
Where the distilled palettes of early 20th-century painting and ideal
geometries of early 20 th
-century architecture were able, temporarily, to sustain the illusion of
being “content-free,” that is, of appearing to operate somewhere beyond language or
indexicality, they ultimately collapsed into legibility. Ironically, abstraction precluded access to
the Abstract. Equally ironically, tabloid transparency’s awkward embrace of the banal legibility
of cartoons, contortionists, funny faces, and other trivial figures points toward novel abstract
achievements. 32
Such projects do not attempt to evade meaning, but rather wager that overt
triviality might render the question of meaning moot.
In the art world, the conundrum that links abstraction to figure is hilariously diagrammed
in Mike Kelley’s 1980 triptych, Square, Tangents, and Cats. The effect can also be seen in much
of Kelley’s later work as well as in Koons’ Balloon Dog and other of his pieces. Koons and
Kelley are typically understood as pursuing widely different, even antagonistic, ambitions, and
31
A useful parallel might be drawn here between the writings of Graham Harman, who posits allusion as a means to
intuit the qualities of “withdrawn objects” otherwise inaccessible to perception. See Harman, The Quadruple Object (Winchester, UK: Zero Books, 2011). 32
For a discussion of these tactics, see Andrew Zago, “Awkward Position,” Perspecta 42 (2010): 209-222.
19
both are well known for including overt narratives of their respective subjectivities in their work
(cf. themes of autobiography and suppressed memory in Kelley and of seeming narcissism and
ironic self-promotion in Koons). In the present context, however, both are notable for their keen
understanding of their position within current and broader historical trends in the art world and
for their cunning ability to leverage that knowledge toward the development of novel abstract
effects. If the Post-Modern argument (in both architecture and art) holds that legibility is
unavoidable and therefore should be embraced, works such as Balloon Dog and Square,
Tangents, and Cats demonstrate that abstraction is equally ever-present and, in fact, more
powerfully unavoidable. These works demonstrate that no amount of literalness can remove the
fundamentally abstract nature of everything, and that the more obvious the content, the more
efficiently it can offer access to the Abstract.
Mike Kelley, Square, Tangents, and Cats, 1980
20
Since at least the late 1970s, a number of architects have deployed familiar forms to
open similar avenues of exploration in architecture. Early experiments can be seen in James
Stirling’s use of typological forms at the Berlin Wissenschaftszentrum (1979-87). While one can
easily identify the fortress, theater, and church forms in the building’s plan and massing, the
interior arrangement and facades both work to undermine the clarity of those type-forms. It is not
that their historical significance is effaced, but rather that it is rendered inconsequential to
Stirling’s other organizational and material ambitions. This is particularly apparent in plan,
where the interior organization often diverges sharply from the massing of the typologically
legible volumes. With questions of quotation or meaning thus largely suspended, novel
organizational and material possibilities, such as the axial connections constructed between the
type-forms or the undulating shapes of the building’s perimeter (rendered continuous with
banded and cartoonishly flat stone surfaces) come to the fore.
James Stirling and Michael Wilford, Wissenschaftszentrum, Berlin, 1979-87, plan and view of courtyard.
Certain of Frank Gehry’s projects from the same period operate similarly. At the Loyola
Law School in Los Angeles (1979-84), Gehry deployed a collection of typologically legible
forms—church, temple, basilica, et cetera—to accommodate a large expansion of the campus.
Filtered through the lens of Modernist abstraction, Gehry’s legible forms resonate with Vidler’s
21
idea of the “third typology.” And, like contemporaneous works by Aldo Rossi, Georgio Grassi,
and others, the strong associations between these forms and the programs they house (e.g., the
relation of ancient basilica and temple forms to law courts) remain intact. In this, the project
produces something akin to Jencks’s idea of “double-coding,” in which one’s attention oscillates
between the legibility of the shapes and the abstraction of their material and organizational
effects. Gehry’s Chiat/Day Building in Venice (1991), with its distinctive over-scaled binoculars
by Claes Oldenburg and Coosje van Bruggen, comes closer to achieving tabloid transparency.
Left to right: Frank Gehry, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, 1979-84; Chiat/Day Building, Venice, 1991; Disney Concert Hall, Los Angeles, 2003.
The triviality of the binoculars undermines (but does not completely eradicate) one’s ability to tie
them to metaphorical narratives related to the program or context, and hastens a shift in attention
to the object’s unexpected voluptuousness. In more recent projects such as the Lewis House
project near Cleveland, the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, or the Disney Concert Hall in Los
Angeles, Gehry’s formal sources, whether borrowed from painting, folded fabrics, billowing
ship’s sails, or allusions to the building’s immediate context, are relaxed to the point of non-
recognition. Though exhilarating, Gehry’s recent work has become an identifiable signature,
making it increasingly difficult to separate the abstract achievements of individual buildings
from their legible associations with the architect.
Something closer to the effect currently under discussion can be found in Gehry’s serial
use of various animal forms, such as fish and serpents, and more emphatically in his experiments
22
with the form of the Horse’s Head in the Lewis House, the DZ Bank in Berlin, and elsewhere. 33
Herzog and de Meuron have conducted a similar series of experiments with the archetypal house
form dating at least to their 1985 House for an Art Collector in Therwil, Switzerland. Here, as in
their 1997 Rudin House in Leymen, France, the architects adopt the banal massing of a gable-
roof house only to dissolve its prototypical associations through unconventional materials,
detailing, and a curious disengagement from the ground. A number of other architects also have
taken up the archetypal gable form in recent years, but in most cases, their projects fail to
achieve the tabloid transparency found at the Rudin House. In MVRDV’s Ypenburg Master Plan
in The Hague (1998-2005) and Sou Fujimoto’s House 7/2 in Hokkaido (2006), for example,
clear associations to traditional ideas of “house” remain firmly intact and the projects ultimately
fail to overcome the banality of their elements. These latter projects, and others like them, rely
too strongly on reductive tactics, similar to the Platonic abstractions of the 1920s and ’30s, which
have lost their efficacy and no longer offer a viable means of approaching the Abstract.
left: Frank Gehry, DZ Bank, Berlin, 1995-2001; right: Herzog and de Meuron, Rudin House, Leymen, 1997.
33
For an informative treatment of Gehry’s development of the Horse’s Head, see Sylvia Lavin, “Twelve Heads are
Better than One,” in Barry Bergdoll and Werner Oechslin, eds., Fragments: Architecture and the Unfinished, Essays Presented to Robin Middleton (London: Thames and Hudson, 2006): 343-52.
23
Left to right: Johnston Marklee, House House, Ordos, 2008; Hirsuta (Jason Payne), Raspberry Fields, 2008; Herzog and de Meuron, Vitrahaus, Weil am Rhine, 2009.
Herzog and de Meuron’s achievements notwithstanding, most recent “typological”
projects, as well as the commercial popularity and lack of significant disciplinary purchase of
neo-Minimalism (whether manifest in John Pawson’s luxury asceticism or Dwell magazine’s
fashionable populism), suggest that the discipline’s reductive project of the early 20 th
century, as
well as its typological one of the late 20 th
century, have been completed. Rather than rehearse
well-known successes, today’s more inventive practices have concerned themselves with other
possibilities, particularly those that arise from complex geometries that superficially “look like
something,” left unexplored by earlier innovators. Johnston Marklee’s House House project for
Ordos (2008), Jason Payne’s Raspberry Fields project in rural Utah (2008), and Herzog and de
Meuron’s Vitrahaus in Weil am Rhein (2009) are promising examples. Though each begins with
an archetypal gable form, each then aggressively manipulates that massing and deploys curious
surface treatments to loosen familiar associations.
Whether deployed at the level of the element or the massing, the “content” of each of
these projects is immediately apprehensible but, owing to its utter lack of ambiguity, quickly
fades from attention to allow more sophisticated organizational and material effects to take over.
In them, typological forms serve simply as a means of entry into a discussion of the Abstract. Of
course, typology is but one way to enter into such discussions. Other methods, such as cartoons
or contortions, offer other ways, which Zago Architecture has explored in recent projects.
24
Though these latter tactics are sometimes nurtured as inevitable end-games by neo-Post-
Modernists and are easily coopted by those interested in producing a kind of meta-critical irony,
the projects to which we refer here deploy tabloid transparency and an interest in the Abstract to
introduce a reinvigorated sense of authenticity into progressive architectural discourse. Tabloid
transparency points toward the possibility of a post-ironic “stealth authenticity,” which, by
pressing the banal, the ordinary, and the dull into the service of the Abstract, avoids both the
skepticism of neo-Post-Modernism as well as the well-known pitfalls of traditional
authenticity. 34
Left: Zago Architecture (with Jonah Rowen), Taichung Cultural Center, 2013; right: Zago Architecture, Arup Downtown Los Angeles, 2014.
Projecting Interdisciplinarity Outward
Armed with such a concept, architecture might finally begin to move beyond the longstanding
insecurity felt by many architects over the field’s relation neighboring areas of cultural
production. As we noted above, interdisciplinary collaboration has become a central feature of
contemporary practice. Though it greatly increases the effectiveness of building design and
construction, this very effectiveness has led to unfortunate consequences. Routine injections of
efficacy from outside architecture have led many architects to view their own field as
34
For a more developed discussion of stealth authenticity, see Andrew Zago, “Real What?” Log 5 (Spring/Summer 2005): 101-104.
25
fundamentally inadequate. In the hands of some within the discipline, architecture has become
little more than a thinly veiled paraphrase of philosophy, computer science, or studio art. In the
profession, one finds engineering, sustainability, and humanitarianism overshadowing
specifically architectural concerns. The effect is tantamount to draining the architecture from
architectural projects. 35
Feelings of disciplinary inadequacy have also inspired some architects to
retreat from engagement with the broader world to aim exclusively at disciplinary concerns.
Taken to extremes, this approach can result in isolation, acrimony, and, ultimately, irrelevance.
Today, though architecture enjoys a general admiration by society, it is difficult to find
instances where a specifically architectural issue is recognized as making a valuable contribution
to the world. This is not the case for law, engineering, medicine, or, for that matter, painting,
music, literature, or any number of other fields. Though this state of affairs might be attributed to
the fact that some of architecture’s most potent effects operate beneath the threshold of conscious
attention, 36
a more convincing reason is that architecture tends to engage the world on the
world’s terms, not its own. As they generally are not seen to offer an immediate public health,
safety, and/or welfare “service” to society, painting, music, literature, and other art forms are
valued primarily for their specific disciplinary contributions, that is, for their form as opposed to
their function. Architecture, on the other hand, though it offers society both functional “service”
and formal enrichment, generally is understood solely in terms of the former, even though its
greatest strengths issue from the latter. In short, most people (many architects included) miss
architecture’s point, and as a result, many architects have tacitly or explicitly accepted a position
35
In a recent lecture, Sarah Whiting outlined a compelling indictment of this situation. See “Engaging Autonomy,”
lecture at the Southern California Institute of Architecture, 6 Nov 2013. http://sma.sciarc.edu/video/sarah-whiting-
engaging-autonomy-2/. David Ruy persuasively articulated similar concerns in “Returning to (Strange) Objects,”
TARP Architecture Manual: Not Nature (Spring 2012): 38-42. 36
For discussions of such subliminal effects, see Todd Gannon, “Grand Gestures and Intelligent Plans,” in Jennifer
Volland and Bruce Grenville, eds., Grand Hotel (Vancouver: Vancouver Museum of Art, 2013): 170-75.
26
of apparent impotency and have constructed alternative constellations of values in compensation.
R.E. Somol forcefully countered such tactics in a recent essay. “If architecture has lost its ability
to operate in the world,” he opines, “it’s not because architecture has become too self-involved,
but because it has not been attentive enough to its own protocols, techniques, and forms of
knowledge.” His argument hinges on the unrecognized potential of architecture’s disciplinary
abstractions. Too many architects, he continues,
seem afflicted by the assumption that the abstractions of other fields are real (for
example, the bookkeeping tricks that allowed Enron to count potential future profits as if
they were actual—conceptual accounting?), while the abstractions of architecture are not.
Architecture, if it is to operate in the world, first needs to overcome this reality envy of
other fields, and take its own abstractions as literally as it accepts those of others. 37
The form of disciplinarity we have outlined here, one not insulated by neo-Post-Modernism’s
ironic detachment but rather galvanized by stealth authenticity, offers a potent means to answer
Somol’s call to action. Though we respect architecture’s very real and important professional
responsibilities, we insist that the field’s most valuable contributions to culture have been and
will continue to be made in terms of architecture’s disciplinary ambitions. Today, the discipline
of architecture can best “serve” society by continuing to explore counterintuitive, risky, and
abstract possibilities which for various reasons the profession is unable to explore. Only by
taking seriously architecture’s disciplinary responsibilities, and by relentlessly proliferating
formal and rhetorical dialects through which to articulate them, can we meet architecture’s
obligation to “provoke other fields (ecology, law, economics, politics and policy, and so on) to
challenge their own limitations that have been unconsciously and pervasively founded on
ours.” 38
Projecting architecture’s abstractions on other fields, as opposed to absorbing those of
other fields into our own, is a model for a new, more productive mode of interdisciplinarity, one
37
R.E. Somol, “Shape and the City,” Architectural Design 82, special issue, City Catalyst: Architecture in the Age of Extreme Urbanisation (Sept/Oct 2012):113. 38
Ibid.
27
founded not on pragmatic efficiency, aversion to risk, and the solution of known problems, but
rather on counterintuitive experimentation, calculated risk-taking, and the invention of new
problems from which new possibilities—of built form as well as political life—might emerge.