8/8/2019 the pleasure of architecture

1/7

Thf Ph u u u of ArcbiHetUH

Funcnonaboc dottmal and thf puritan t t i t u d n .. the mod-fI 'tIlnO'tnnerll bawfohm r om f ImIkr ~ t u d r . Yet the anQmlideo . . pkasl,ll'f mU seems ...crilepow to QDntfmpol"U}"uclutt t tural thcmy. formany I f ' D < ' " ~ t i o n s any uclutCCl . .hoatlnf'd foroo ~ n r m p l f d to f plu.sUl'f in ateh.tC'l;run:. .as o:>lUi

8/8/2019 the pleasure of architecture

2/7

concern. And in the same way, architectural conservativeshave relegated to the Left everything ",motely intellectualor poli ti""l, induding the discou rse 01 pleasure. On bothsides, the idea that architecture can poibly exist withouteither moral or functional iustification, or even ",sponsibility, has been considered distasteful.

Similar oppositions are reflected throughOUtth e .ecent history 01architecture. The avantgarde has endlcssly debated opposi tions tha t mostly complemen tary:order and disorder, structure and chaos, ornament and pur ity,rat innality and sensuali ty. And thef'e simple dialectics havepervaded archnectu.al theory tn such an extent t hat architeens ! criticism has "'flected Similar attitudes: the pur ists'ordering ol lorm versus art nouveau's organic sensuousness;Behrens's ethic of form versus Olbrich'. impulse to thelorm less_ Oft en these oppositions have been loadedwith mora! overtonco. Adolf Loos's attack on the criminalityof ornament masked his lear of chaos and sensual disorder.And De StijJ's insistence on elementary form waSnot only areturn to some anochronistic purity but also a deliberateregression to a secure order.

So strong were these moral overtones that

8/8/2019 the pleasure of architecture

3/7

nadic>ry presence$ nl Tzara, Richter, Ball, Duchamp, andBretnn-Le O>rbusier and his Ctari,.. chose thequiet and acceptable route cdpurism. Even in the early 19708,the wnrk nf th e archi tectural school cireles, with their v,,inU!l brands cd irony or . t llindulgence, ran oounter to themoral reminiscence. cd '68 radicalism, althnugh bDth .hateda disli ke for esublished values.

Beyondsuch opposites lie th e mythical shadllws 01 A""llo' . ethi cal and spiritual mindscapu versusDiony. ius's erotic and sensual impulses. Architectural det-initions, in th eit surgical prt t ision, reinlotce and amplify theimpossible alternatives: on th e one hand, an:hitecture as athing 01 the mind, a dematerialized or C

8/8/2019 the pleasure of architecture

4/7

U J b a n ' ~ a t i o n won genel;u ed the ir own programs. Department stor..,s, railway stations, and arcades WCe nineteenthcen.ury programs born of comme",e and industry. Usuallyoompln , they did not readily re.ult in preei"" forms, andmediating factors hke ideal buddinR" types were often required, risking a complete disjunction between Nform" and"coment ."

Themodem movement 'sea rly att. cks on the..,mpty formulas of academicism coodemned thes

8/8/2019 the pleasure of architecture

5/7

icbm, by focusing on the intrinsic quehue e 01 autonomousohiect>, lornted an alliance with semiotic theory to makearchitecture an easy obi...:t of poetics,

Bm wasn 't aIchiteclure different Irom painting or literature! Could usc or pmgurn bepan 01form ratherthan a . ubject or content 1 Didn' t Russi an fonnalism dillerfrom Grttnbergian modernism in that, rather than han lShillJtcon . idel ations of content, it simply no hmger oppose

8/8/2019 the pleasure of architecture

6/7

dilfer. Beyond their diverjting esthetic means, bmh conceive01 architec ture as an obiect of contemplation, easily accn-sible to critical anention, as o p !O the interaction 01space and events, which i . usually unremarked upon . Thuswalls and gesture. , columns and figures are ,arely seen aspan 0/ a single sip;n;/ying sys tem. Theories of reading. whenapplied to architecture, are largely fruitless in that they reoduce it 10 an a rt 01 communication or to a visual an Ilhe ""called single-coding 01modernism, or th e double-coding ofpostmodemism), dismissing the "intertexllIality" thatmakes arohitecture a highly complex human activity. Themuluplid ty 0/ heterugenwus discourses, the constanl inter action between movement, sensual eXp'-'rience, and conceptual acmbati cs refute Ihe parallel with the visual' rlo.

If we are 10 observe, today, an epislemolojtical break with what is generally called moderni sm, then itmust .lso questi on its ownlonnal cont ingency . By no meansdoes thi s imply a return 10 notions of func tion versus form,to cause-and-efle

8/8/2019 the pleasure of architecture

7/7

Po . . . . . . .

I t. .,u ky'l dispLaYI of e 1 " " l r o m " , , ~ n e aerub.1 .ict, OSWSchlcnuucl ' , gc$'ural darien, and Korulanun MelnI k.,..' ,

o " of Anractoonl . which lurned ,n lO rcn an:hltce-.ural COIUtnKIlOll_ll cxploded !be r n l n c l l ~ onhodoxyof an1111ectural modernism. n.,.,,,,, we"". of C," " ,mon,es, andp"'Il'omo ,uAAeo, pouiblc d. . . . nce vll.. vi . both m u d e m l ~ 1orlhodoxy and hi oricist revival.