Re: [Re:] enactment
Brian asks: I wonder what the limits of reenactment are... where does reenactionary architecture begin and end?
Steve replies: It seems logical that no reenactment occurs without an enactment ocurring first... reenactment's most inescapable limit is that it can never be as original as that which it reenacts.
Re: [Re:] enactment
Does this mean that typological architecture falls within the domain of reenactionary architecture, wherein there is a precedent / original (enactment) to be copied again and again--does originality pose any problem, such as finding the correct original from which to base the reenactment on? For example, the Parthenon has been said to be copied by bank typologies. Aesthetically, the Parthenon is not a unique building type as far as I known, it shares common traits with other Greek temple architecture, thus the problem of finding an original might be one of a mythical original or first ideal form.
How does reenactionary architecture deal with this issue?
Bank is a typology.
Temple is a typology.
Greek temples are a specific category of the temple typology.
The Parthenon is a specific Greek temple.
Some, but definitely not all, banks reenact Greek temples, and probably quite a small number of banks specifically reenact the Parthenon.
William Strickland, Second Bank of the United States, 1819-24, Philadelphia.
Perhaps typology is basically an exercise in the reenactment of architectural abstractions.
When it come to mythical origins and first ideal forms, it is worthwhile to ask if the mythical origins and the first ideal forms are themselves reenactments. For example, the manifestation of Shiva reenacts metabolism. Moreover, might not Plato's ideal forms [like his Socratic dialogues] also be reenactments (albeit highly abstracted)? Perhaps Plato's perfect circle 'ideally' reenacts the pupils of our eyes and Plato's perfect triangle 'ideally' reenacts the nose on our face.
Perhaps all abstractions are highly idealized reenactments of reality, rather than reality being a reenactment of highly idealized abstractions.
Perhaps I'm a minority or even unique in this thinking, but, of all the forms of architectural representation, architectural photography appeals to me the least. Foremost, for me, are architectural drawings (plans, sections, elevations, axonometrics, even construction documents), then models, then buildings themselves, then perspectives, then photography.
And of photography, it is the 'perfect shots' that I like the least. I prefer what the eyes really do see.
Iconography, or the problem of representation
irony 2 a : incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: "Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated" (Richard Kain).
And yes there is a certain irony in utilizing common easily associated images to help execute and promote an architecture that otherwise strives very hard to be original.
What I like most about memory (i.e., remembering, being reminded of) is that it is a seminal manifestation of reenactment.
seminal 2 : highly influential in an original way; constituting or providing a basis for further development: a seminal idea in the creation of a new theory.
09021801 Baths of Constantine architecture of 4th Century Rome plans
What are architects immediately critical of when entering a building?
I just finished writing a novel where 20% of the world's population employs an architect--after cell phones, i-pads, etc., architects have become the must-have life accessory--most consult their architects on a daily basis. Then, of course, the competition among architects is fierce, thus the book is like The Gong Show meets Fantasy Island.
13021801 Palais Savoye elevation test
13021802 Stoner Food Restaurant rear elevation
2014.02 18 13:54
What's the next architecture-related outrage going to be?
In the future, some world organization will survey every person on the planet with the question:
Outside of your own profession (if you have one), what profession is most effective at and/or most capable of improving your life?
After the results are published, architects the world over are outraged that their profession was never mentioned, not even once.
15021801 Bldg 9594t @ GAUA 1100x550
15021802 Bldg 9594u @ GAUA 1100x550
15021803 Bldg 9594v @ GAUA 1100x550
15021804 Bldg 9594w @ GAUA 1100x550
15021805 Bldg 9594x @ GAUA 1100x550
15021806 Bldg 9594y @ GAUA 1100x550
15021807 Bldg 959z @ GAUA 1100x550
15021808 Bldg 9594za @ GAUA 1100x550
15021809 Bldg 959zb @ GAUA 1100x550
15021810 Bldg 959zc @ GAUA 1100x550
Otherwise, just to note a calendrical coincidence, this image
appeared at Archinect 2013.02.18
and this image
appeared at Archinect 2014.02.18