2000.05.14

paradigm 3/5



an answer to "Now what?"

an answer to"Now what?"
2000.02.03

Hugh Pearman states and asks:
Such being the case, we can conclude that Decon has run out of steam as a manifesto-led movement, and we must look to its successor. Ideas, anyone?

Steve Lauf replies:
Is Decon the only thing to have run out of steam? Has the now pervasive and generally accepted way of looking at and being critical of architecture also run out of steam? For example, does moving from seeing Decon as reactionary to now (maybe) seeing the New Austerity as the latest reaction really convey a sense of meaning beyond the oscillations of fashion and trend? Has each new "critical" building become nothing more than the latest "creation" of the now global fashion show? Likewise, has the element of shock become ingrained within the (elite) architectural profession, the same way shock has become "stock-in-trade" in a good deal of high fashion? [I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the architecture that receives attention and the industry surrounding it being akin to the fashion industry, but I do think there is something wrong about not recognizing the phenomenon as such.]

Here's how I now look critically at architecture (and urban design) both currently and historically:

What architecture is extreme?

What architecture is fertile?

What architecture is pregnant?

What architecture is assimilating?

What architecture is metabolic?

What architecture is osmotic?

What architecture is electromagnetic?

What architecture manifests the highest frequencies?

What I've found so far is that some architectures fall straight into some of the categories above while some architectures are categorical hybrids. Here are some examples:

The Pyramids, Stonehenge, St. Peter's (Vatican), Bilbao(?) -- extreme, extreme architectures.

The Pantheon, Hall of Mirrors, Versailles, entry sequence of Schinkel's Altes Museum, Kimbell Art Gallery -- examples of the best osmotic architecture there is.

Classical Greek and Roman Architecture -- pure architecture of fertility.

The Hindu Temple -- the ultimate transcendence from an architecture of fertility to an architecture of pregnancy, whereas the Gothic Cathedral is an architecture of pregnancy, albeit virginal.

All of 20th century Berlin -- the metabolic (create and destroy and create and destroy and ...)

To understand architecture of assimilation, look at the Renaissance, but also look to early 20th century Purism to understand assimilation in the extreme, ie, purge.

Today's architectures are by and large assimilating and/or metabolic (contextual and/or 'deconstructivist'?).

You're very lucky if you ever see pure examples of electromagnetic or frequency architectures today because they are almost entirely architectures of the far off future.

There are many more examples to offer, but that's all for now.

In general, I see all architectures as reenactionary (as opposed to reactionary).

Architecture reenacts human imagination, and human imagination reenacts the way the human body is and operates. The human body and the design thereof is THE enactment. The human imagination then reenacts corporal morphology and physiology, and architecture then reenacts our reenacting imaginations.

Stephen Lauf



««««

»»»»

4357
www.quondam.com/dt00/0233.htm

Quondam © 2012.03.08