culture and form
Post on 04-Jun-2018
222 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 1/17
Yale University, School of Architecture
Critical Architecture: Between Culture and FormAuthor(s): K. Michael HaysSource: Perspecta, Vol. 21 (1984), pp. 14-29Published by: The MIT Press on behalf of Perspecta.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1567078 .
Accessed: 13/12/2013 12:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Yale University, School of Architecture and The MIT Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Perspecta.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 2/17
K. Michael ays
CriticalArchitecture
Between ulture ndForm
That architecture,s activitynd
knowledge,s fundamentallycultural nterprise ayhardlyeemcontentious roposition. ndyetquestions oncerningheprecisenatureofthereciprocalnfluencesetweenculture nd architecturalorm ringopposing heories f rchitecturendits
interpretationnto forcefullay.'
In this ssay shall examine criticalarchitecture,neresistantothe elf-
confirming,onciliatoryperationsfadominant ulture ndyet rreducibleoa purely ormal tructureisengagedfrom hecontingenciesfplaceandtime. A reinterpretationfa fewprojects yMies van der Rohewillprovide xamples f critical rchitecturethatclaimsfortself placebetweenheefficientepresentationfpreexistingcultural alues nd thewholly etachedautonomyf an abstract ormalystem.The propositionf critical ealmbetween ulture ndforms not omuch n extension f received iewsof nterpretations it is a challengeto thoseviews hat laim to exhaustarchitectural eaningn considerationsofonlyoneside or theother. t willbehelpful, herefore,obeginwith briefreview f twoprevalentnterpretiveperspectiveshatmake ust uch claim.
MiesvanderRohe
Friedrichstrasseprojectcharcoaldrawing
1919
15
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 3/17
/"- ii
It,.
I i
S p
i ? ?
1i
I,
? i'i
. "
aS
i1
ii
iil
? to , , -
.i .
'4
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 4/17
Architecturesaninstrumentf ulture
The first osition mphasizes ultureas the cause and content fbuiltform; he taskof the nterpreter,hen,becomes hestudy fobjects ndenvironmentss signs, ymptoms,and instrumentsf cultural alues.On thisview architectures essentiallyan epiphenomenon, ependent nsocioeconomic, olitical, nd
technological rocesses or ts variousstates ndtransformations.oreover,as a functionalupport orhumaninstitutionsnd as a reificationfcollective olition, rchitecturennoblesthe culture hatproducest; architecturereconfirmshehegemonyf culture nd
helpstoassure tscontinuity.Accordingly,heoptimum elationshipto be established etween ulture ndforms oneofcorrespondence,he atter
efficientlyepresentinghevaluesofthe former.
The temporal onventionf
interpretations, on thisview,retrospective.rchitectures seen s
already ompleted; hecritic r historian
attempts o restoren architectural
objectto itsoriginalmeaning.Misunderstandingspresumedo arise
naturally ecause fthechangesnarchitecture,anguage, nd worldview
thathavetakenplaceinthetimeseparatinghe rchitecturalbjectfromthe nterpreter;hemeaningmustthereforee recoveredya disciplinedreconstructionf the cultural ituationin which heobjectoriginated. tartingfrom hedocuments, ecordedctions,and artifacts hich re thebasematerialofthe historical orld,understandingsseen as essentially self-transpositionr
imaginative rojection ackwardntime.Whenthishistoricalmethod s ofsufficientidelity,n <<objective nd
true,, xplanation ftheobject nquestionresults.t is supposed hattheonly lternativeo the trict
methodological ecoveryf theculturalsituation t thetimeoftheobject'sorigin s the denial of nyhistorical
objectivityndcapitulationo the deathat ll schemes f nterpretationre
hopelesslyubjective.2
Architecturesautonomousorm
The opposite osition eginswith heassumption hat heonly lternativeoastrict, actual ecoveryftheoriginatingsituation s therenunciationf single
?truth,>> ndadvocates proliferationf
interpretationsasedsolely n form.
Interpretations ade from his econd
position recharacterizedythe
comparativebsence fhistorical
concernsnfavor f ttention o theautonomous rchitecturalbject nd tsformalperations-howtspartshavebeenput together, ow t is a whollyintegratedndequilibratedystemhatcan be understood ithout xternalreferences,nd as important,ow t
maybe reused,how ts constituentartsandprocessesmaybe recombined.
The temporalonvention f
interpretationere s that f n idealmomentn a purely onceptualpace;architecturalperationsre magined obe spontaneous,nternalized-thats,outside ircumstantialeality-andassimilable s pure dea.Architecturalforms understood o be producedn a
particularime ndplace,ofcourse, uttheorigin ftheobject s not llowed oconstraintsmeaning.The intent s
preciselyodismiss nyoftheworldly,circumstantial,rsocially ontaminatedcontent fhistory,ecause uch ubjectmatterwouldnecessarilympinge ponthe ntellectual
ibertyfcriticismnd
theavailability f theformaltrategiesfor euse.Architecturalorm an beread nd interpreted,fcourse,yetmisreadingsndmisunderstandingsreunderstood o occurroutinely,ndwithbenefit.n anycase,there s a consciousavoidance fanyhistorical r materialfact ther han hose f dislodgedformalystem. heway nwhichbuilding s a cultural bject ntimeispossessed, ejected, r achieved snot addressed.3
K. Michael Hays
i6
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 5/17
Such an approach asnotbeen
entirely nhealthyor rchitectural
interpretation.t hasdoneawaywithtestimonialshetoricallyroclaimingwork's reatnessndhumanistic orthon thebasisof ts ccurate epresentationofthedominant ulture. t has
developed specialized ocabularyenabling ritics o talk eriously,
technically,ndpreciselybout thearchitecturalbject s distinct romotherkindsofobjects.Furthermore,so longaswe construe rchitectureas essentially ependentnor
representativef omethinglse,wecannot eewhat tdoes tself;o longasweexpect o understandrchitecturenterms f someanteriorrocess,wecannot ee an architecturehat s,paradoxically,oththeendof
representationnd thebeginning f
something uiteitsown.
Nevertheless,heabsolute utonomyofform nd itssuperiorityverhistorical nd material ontingenciess
proclaimed, otbyvirtue f tspowerin theworld,butbyvirtue f tsadmitted owerlessness.educedto
pureform, rchitectureas disarmeditself rom hestart,maintainingts
purity y acceding o social andpoliticalinefficacy.
Moreover,hisformalistosition isks
collapsing nto an interpretivecientismnotunlike heoneitseeks ocriticize.Ifattemptsorecover<historys it
reallyhappened,, isplay quiteovertemulation f thepositivistmethodologyof the natural ciences, heformalistattitude oo often allsunwittinglyntoits ownscientism s formalategories
becomemorerigidly efinedndentrenched.Whenprioritys ascribed oformal ategoriesndoperationshatclaim tobe free fhistoryndcircumstance,nterpretivenalysis isks
simply eaffirminghat tsformal
categories redict.The supposeduniversalityf nyonekindofformal
analysis bscures hefact hat riticalmethods reformedhroughexaminationf necessarilyimited etofexemplars,nd that hese aradigmsemanate rom specificulture-theyo
notcome tous untainted. t alsoobscures he fact hat hemethods f
study fthese bjects rethemselves
partofa larger omplex nsemble f
relationships,recontaminatedytheirownworldliness,nd are egitimized ysome other ultural uthority. perhapsunforeseenonsequencefthisidealization fobject nd methods thatarchitectures denied tsspecial tatusas a cultural bjectwith causation,presence,nd duration f ts own.
Theworldlinessofarchitecture
The twopositionsketchedbovearesymptomaticf pervasive ichotomyin architecturalheoryndcriticism.One sidedescribesrtifactssinstrumentsftheself-justifying,elf-perpetuating egemonyfculture; heother ide treats rchitecturalbjects ntheirmostdisinfected,ristinetate, scontainers f a privileged rinciple f
internal oherence.Analternativeinterpretiveositionwhich uts crossthisdichotomy ould bearnotonlymorerobust escriptionf the rtifacts,but also themore ntricatenalysisdemandedbyartifactsituated xplicitlyandcriticallyntheworld-in ulture,ntheories fculture,n theoriesfinterpretationtself.
A discussion f a fewprojects yMiesvan derRohe will draw ttention o thefact hat n architecturalbject,byvirtue f ts situation ntheworld, s anobjectwhose nterpretationasalreadycommencedut s neveromplete.istoricalcontingencyndcircumstantiality,swell as the rtifact'sersistingensuousparticularity,ust ll be considered sincorporatedn the rchitecturalbject;they aturatehevery ssence f thework. Each architecturalbjectplacesitselfna specificituationntheworld,so tospeak,and itsmanner fdoingthis constrains hat anbe donewith tin interpretation.heparticular orks
byMies to be examined rethosewould describe s critical. heymightalso be calledresistantndoppositional.This is an architecturehat annotbe reduced ither o a conciliatoryrepresentationfexternal orces rtoadogmatic,reproducibleormalystem.Ifa critical rchitectures to beworldlyand self-awareimultaneously,tsdefinitions in its differencerom therculturalmanifestationsnd from prioricategoriesr methods.
K. Michael Hays
'7
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 6/17
Kurt Schwitters
view of the Mertzbau
Hanover
1920- 1936
r .J-.."
~l~tfi) ;i
r??
"'^
?t
~.~:'c
I
L?
The criticalrchitecture
ofMies van der Rohe
Amongtheprincipal roblems heintellectual aced n the first alf fthe twentiethentury astheacuteanxiety hatderived rom hechaotic
metropolitanxperience.n theessay<<TheMetropolisnd MentalLife,>>thesociologist ndphilosopher eorgSimmeldescribed hiscondition s <the
intensificationf nervousstimulation,,resulting rom he<the rapidcrowdingofchanging mages,thesharpdiscontinuityn thegraspofa singleglance,and theunexpectednessfonrushing mpressions. hesearethepsychologicalonditionswhich hemetropolisreates.,,The typicalconsequence fthisnervenleben,according oSimmel, s a blaseattitude-ablunting fdiscrimination,an indifferenceovalue,a languidcollectivity.<In hisphenomenonhe
nerves ind n therefusal o react otheir timulation he astpossibilityfaccommodating o thecontents ndforms fmetropolitanife. The self-preservationf certain ersonalitiessbought t thepriceofdevaluating hewholeobjectiveworld, devaluationwhich n theendunavoidably ragsone'sownpersonalityown ntofeeling fthesameworthlessness.,>>
The problem or he ntellectual,hen,was how toopposethisdebilitatingdismay,butfirst owto reveal t-howto provide cognitivemechanismwithwhich o registerhe ntense hangescontinually xperiencedn themoderncity.Manyofthecentury'sarly rtisticexperiments,rom hewoodcuts f
EdvardMunchto thenovels fFranzKafka,maybe seenas attemptsoarticulate heabjectdespair f theindividual aughtbyimpersonaland incomprehensibleorces. hereklamearchitekturadvertisingarchitecture)fEric Mendelsohn ndthefactories f Hans Poelzigmademanifest,as iftopin down andcontemplate,hedynamism, hecontradictions,ndthedisjuncturesn theprocessesnd
reasoning f commercend industry. ntheotherhandDada's ferocious ihilism
was an explicit ttempt o demonstratethefutilityfconventionalmodesofreasoningn theface fthechaotic ity.AsJeanArp put it, <<Dada wished odestroyhehoaxes freason nd todiscover n unreasonedrder.>>5AndMondriannamedthecity tself s theultimate orm owardwhichde Stijltended. <<The enuinelyModern rtistsees themetropoliss Abstractivingconverted ntoform;t is nearer ohimthannature.>> It is against hismetropolitan redicamenthat heearly
work fMies vanderRohe houldbeseen.
Edvard Munch
-The Scream,,
1895
.-.....
Eric Mendelsohn
SchockenDepartment Store
Stuttgart
1926-29
E?e
K. Michael Hays
18
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 7/17
Georg Grosz
,Friedrichstrasse>lithograph
1918
JiSIfl ,
"~ L-~ f
;f\ `r,i.1`;k
9 ciA~
91 ~?'ir I
tz~r ..,i/
\~3~i)~iThe rathertartlingmageofthe1922
skyscraper roject,published n thesecond ssue ofG, compriseswoarchitecturalropositions. ne, a resultofexperimentslready egun nMies'sFriedrichstrasseroject, s a buildingsurfaceualifiedno longerby patternsfshadowon an opaquematerial utby
thereflectionsnd refractionsf ightbyglass.The other, radicaldeparturefrom ven the earlier kyscrapertudies,is a buildingform onceivednot nterms fseparate, rticulatedmassesrelated ooneanother y geometricallyderived ore,butas a complexunitaryvolumethatdoes notpermit tself obe read n terms fan internal ormal
logic.With these wo related
propositionsMies confrontedhe
problem fphysicallynd conceptuallyrelating he architecturalbjectto the
city.The glass curtainwall-alternatelytransparent,eflective,r refractive
depending n lightconditionsnd
viewingpositions-absorbs,mirrors,rdistorts he mmediatemagesofcitylife. The convex,faceted urfaces re
perceptuallyontorted ythe nvasionof circumstantialmages,while thereflectionachconcavity eceives nitssurface s thatof ts ownshadow,creating apswhich xacerbate he
disarray.
Mies van der Rohe
Friedrichstrasse
project, charcoal
drawing
1919
K. Michael Hays
19
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 8/17
Mies van derRohe
Skyscraperrojectplan
1922
4[,.?'f' "ltl
r1 .1
li
Miesvan derRohe
Skyscraperrojectmodel
1922
(I-I
4f,:1:1M
MiesvanderRoheSkyscraperrojectcharcoaldrawing
1922
These urfaceistortionsccompanyandaccentuateheformalnscrutabilityof hevolumetriconfiguration.nclassicallyerivedorm,heviewer angrasp nantecedentogic f he bject,decipheringherelationshipsetweenitspartsndconnectingveryart oacoherentormalheme;he lternative
posited yMies sanobjectntractabletodecoding yformalnalysis.t isimpossible,orxample,oreduce hewhole oa numberf onstituentartsrelatedy ome nternalrmaturertransformedhroughome ormaloperation;ndeed, o uch ompositionalrelationshipsxist.Neithers itpossibletoexplicatehe bject sa deflectionfromome ype;Mieshasrejectedhemeaningshat uch lassical esignmethodsend opromote.nstead ehas nvested eaningn the ense f
surfacendvolumehat hebuildingassumesna particularime ndplace,ina contextuallyualified oment.
Mies nsists hat n orders mmanentin the urfacetselfndthat he rderscontinuous ith nddependentpontheworldn which heviewerctuallymoves. his ense f urfacendvolume,everedromheknowledgeof n nternalrder r unifyingogic,isenoughowrenchhebuildingfromhe temporal,dealized ealm
of utonomousormnd nstallt n aspecificituationn the ealworldof xperiencedime, pen o thechance nduncertaintyf ifen themetropolis.' ieshere hares ith adaanantagonismgainst priorindreasonedrder; e
plunges,into he
chaos f henew ity nd eeks notherorder ithintthrough systematicuseof heunexpected,he leatory,heinexplicable."
This solicitation fexperiences
intrinsic o themeaning f thework; tserves o identifynd individuate hework tself s an eventhaving ensuousparticularitynd temporal uration,bothof which re nfrangibleo itscapacity or roducingndconveyingmeaning.Nevertheless,Mies'sskyscraperroject s notconciliatoryothe circumstancesf ts context. t is acriticalnterpretationf tsworldlysituation.
K. MichaelHays20
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 9/17
In the skyscraperproject of I922 Mies
approached radically ewconceptionofreciprocityetween hecorporealityof the architecturalbjectand the
imagesof culture hat urroundt;by 1928-in projects like the Adam
buildingon theLeipzigerstrassenBerlin,the bank nStuttgart,ndthe
competitionor he
Alexanderplatzn
Berlin-heseemsto have diverted isefforts.heseprojects bstainfrom
any dialoguewith thephysicalparticularitiesftheir ontexts;s
peremptorilyemonstratedn the
drawings, heglass-walled locks ouldbe reproducedn any itewith no
significant anipulation ftheir orm.
Thougheachbuildingunithas been
adaptedto theshapeandsize of ts ownlot for xample,theAlexanderplatzproject), he relentlessameness ftheunits nd their ndifferentiatedrdertend todenythepossibilityfattachingsignificanceo theplacement r
arrangementfthe forms. ut the
repudiation fa priori ormalogicastheprimaryocusofmeaning s
preciselywhat s at issue; t is this
repudiation hat inkstheprojects f
1928 to the researchof I922. Meaningismadea functionf mpersonalproductiveystems ather hanof formal
operationsr ofrepresentationalevices.
Z
I4,,u
SC~ i. 1&
Miesvan der Rohe
Stuttgartankproject
collage
1928
''....
;;;
"" i
Ii
1;
i ?
i':i
*:t'
~~,,,...,?r:?
-?9
MiesvanderRohe
Alexanderplatz roject
1928
6 0
-,S ... ..,..-:
.-. .
-
"'
46'Lif1A-- s r %~~~'?~~?~I*; T4p :-?JiA4
Mies anderRohe
Alexanderplatzrojectcollage1928
K. Michael Hays
21
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 10/17
Herewemusttake Mies at hisword.<<Werefuseorecognize roblems fform, utonlyproblems fbuilding.Form s nottheaim ofourwork,but
onlytheresult.Formby tself oesnotexist.Form s an aim is formalism;ndthatwereject. As hypothesizedyMies, modern uildingproductionrequires hat achbuildingunitbe
completen itself et dentical oallothers, isallowing ither ierarchical
relationshipsmongunits r
predeterminedoints f focus rtermination. ejecting hespecificationsof theAlexanderplatzompetition,orinstance-which avored curved,peripheral uilding hatwouldencloseand centralizehespaceof the
preexistingrafficircle-Mies's bjectsaredisposed n sucha waythatnoresolute enter an be found.Across hePlatzoracross he ntervalsf pacebetween he serialbuildingunits, achglass-walled lockconfrontsnd
recognizes othing ut ts double.Liketwoparallelmirrors,ach nfinitelyrepeats heother's mptiness. he spaceis duplicitous, utthe motivations
inescapable.Mies'sachievement as to
openup a clearing f mplacable ilencein the chaosof the nervousmetropolis;thisclearing s a radical ritique,not
onlyofthe establishedpatial rder fthecity nd the establishedogicofclassical
omposition,utalsoof the
inhabiting ervenleben.t is the extremedepthofsilence n this learing-silenceas an architecturalormll itsown-that s the architectural eaning fthisproject.
Bothconceptionsfthe rchitectural
object-as the efficientmbodimentfa dominantystem fvalues, ndastheuncircumstancedxistencefautonomous orm-are eriouslychallenged, f notdefeated, ythewayin which his ilent learing laims
place n theworld.First heres the
recognitionfthereciprocityetween
theculturallyualified,mpiricalconditions fbuildingproductionndthepractice f rchitecture. ies'sobdurate efusalomanipulate is
objects o conformoany priori ormal
logichas the effectfrepudiatinginternal ormal perationss a sourceof theobjects'meaning. econd,thoughMies succeeds ndirectinghearchitectural eaning otheoutside-towhatmightbe called cultural
space-there s the nsistencehatarchitectureoesnot<<honestly
representhetechnical, ocial,oreconomic onditionshatproducedt.Indeed,Mies's architectureonceals he
<<real?origins f ts formationydisplacing hemwith materialsubstitute-an rreduciblyrchitectural
object.It effectivelyancels hecomplexnetwork fcolliding orcesn whicharchitectureriginatesopresent swith thesilent act f tsexistence.
<<Sincethe facts ave thefloor,etanyonewhohasanythingo saycomeforwardandkeephis mouthshut,,,wrote
KarlKraus. oMies's silent rchitecture,following raus'sdictum, omesforwardooccupy tsculturalpaceactively;tdisplaceswhatwould havebeen n itsplace. Critical rchitecture
pushes side otherkinds f discoursercommunicationnorder oplacebeforetheworld culturallynformedroduct,partofwhose elf-definitionncludes heimplication fdiscontinuitynddifferencefrom ther ultural ctivities.
Distinguishingrchitectureromheforceshat nfluencerchitecture-theconditions stablished ythe marketandbytaste, hepersonal spirationsfitsauthor, ts technical rigins, venitspurpose s defined y ts owntradition-becameheobjective fMies. To achieve his,heplacedhisarchitecturena critical ositionbetween ulture s a massive odyofself-perpetuatingdeasand formsupposedly ree f circumstance.
Our observationsanbeverifiedagainst hemasterworkfMies'searlycareer, he1929 German avilion nBarcelona.Withrespectoouranalysisthusfar, hisprojectnitially ppearspolemical nd self-critical.he Pavilionhasbeenwidely egardeds themostimmaculate ranscriptionfthe modern
spatialconception: synthesisf
Wright'shorizontallanes ndthe abstract ompositionsfthe
Suprematist-Elementarists;ithhonorificodsto thewalls ofBerlage(<<letalone from loor ocornice?), hematerials fLoos,and thepodium ndcolumns fSchinkel; ll processedthrough hespatial onceptionsfde Stijl.This seems oclaimfor hePavilion rarefiedpatial rder hat
presentstself s an a priorimentalconstructather han palpableworldly bject.
However, his s precisely ot he orderof Mies: <<The idealistic rinciple forder . . with tsover-emphasisn theideal andformal, atisfies either urinterestn simplereality orour
practical ommonsense.>
The BarcelonaPavilionbeginswith
horizontallyxtended pacewhich sdescribed ytheuninterruptedoofslab, itsrelation o the columns ndwalls,and thecorrespondingonstancyofsection nd volume mpliedbythefloor lane. Space is, quite iterally,continuous etween he Pavilion nd the
plaza infront f the Palace AlfonsoXIII. The Pavilionmore pecificallyengages ts sitethrough hecarefulcontrast etween he ongtravertinewalls,theroof lab,and the unbroken
palacewall. All this olicits he viewertowalkthrough hebuilding,butthelimpid harmonyf theexteriorsconfoundedn theexperience f thespatial uccession f the nterior.
K. Michael Hays
22
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 11/17
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 12/17
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 13/17
ii
0000"
ir
mm,..
What should trike s forcibly,hen, sthat heartifacts nothingess than
winningf eality.12 hough t existsto a considerablextent yvirtue f tsownformal tructures,t cannotbe
apprehended nlyformally. ordoes t
simply epresent preexistingeality.The architecturaleality akes tsplacealongsideherealworld, xplicitlysharing emporal ndspatialconditionsofthatworld,butobstructingheirabsolute uthority ithan alternativeofmaterial, echnical, nd theoretical
precision.A participantn the worldandyetdisjunctivewith t, theBarcelonaPaviliontears cleftn thecontinuousurfacefreality.
'"
".
.X
if.. to
r* it t 66
-ij
..,.I
??f
, .,ii
a
MiesvanderRobeGermanPavilion
in Barcelona
1929
drawing f
interior
b c
GermanPavilion
inBarcelonainterior
d, e
GeorgeKolbe
<Dancer*
GermanPavilion
inBarcelona
1929
1)
K. Michael Hays
25
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 14/17
fil
._.--...
i.--..?
s
I 4j ?
=a=__
Max Ernst
<<Tous les vendredis, les
Titans parcourrant nos
buanderies? from
La Femme 1oo Tetes
Irar
toprv?
10 0
I to"
.00e.:
Mies van der Rohe
Illinois Instituteof
Technology (IIT)
1939
A brief nalogywill perhaps ffordhese
points ddedclarity.n 1929 Max Ernst
publishedhispictorialnovel,La Femme
Ioo ThtesThe HundredHeadlessWoman), a purelymetropolitaninspiration omprising series f
collagesmade fromcenesgathered rom
popularnineteenth-centuryllustratedbooksandmagazines ntowhichErnst
grafted bjectsoroccupants oreignothem.What resultsn suchcollagesas <<Tous esvendredis,esTitans
parcourrontosbuanderie> (EveryFriday, he Titanswill invadeour
laundry)s a laconicdisplay ftwo ncommensurablexperiencesinterlockedcross he surfacef thework.LikeErnst,Mieswas able to seehis constructionss theplace inwhichthemotivated,heplanned, nd therational rebrought ogether iththe
contingent, heunpredictable,nd the
inexplicable.his vision
persistedven
in Mies's laterworks.The campusofIIT, for xample, anbe construeds aredistributionf someof thedesignstrategiesftheAlexanderplatz rojectand the BarcelonaPavilion-a subtle
graftingf an alternativeealityntothe chaos ofChicago'sSouthSide.
K. Michael Hays
26
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 15/17
Authorshipsa resistantuthorityFrom heskyscraperroject f1922totheBarcelona avilion,Mies'sarchitecturalrogramwasa persistentrewritingfa few hemes.Beginningwith setofarbitraryropositions,Mies rationalized isinitial hoiceofthemes ydemonstratingherange ftheir pplicability.He reused hem n
changingircumstances;emodified
and refinedhem ver ime.Thissort f
repetition endershe ssueoforigins rfirstausesunproblematic,nearbitrarycantusirmuseing mitated ndrepeatedsomany imes s to loseitsprimacy.
Thoughthebeginning fhisauthorshipis arbitrary,epetition emonstratestheconsistencyfMies's authorialmotivation;t establishes he
constancyfhis ntent.A persistentlyrearticulatedntent ccumulates
knowledge-more pecificndmoreprecise-of hegeneral rchitectural
programndallowsthegrowth f that
knowledge ccording o itsownspecialbeginnings nd conventionsatherthan ccording o thosederived romsomeprior uthority.Mies doesnot
accept preexisting rame f
reference;e representseithernauthoritativeulturenor nauthoritativeormalystem.
Repetition husdemonstratesow
architectureanresist, atherhanreflect,n externalultural eality.nthiswayauthorshipchieves resistant
authority-anbility o initiate r
develop ulturalknowledgewhoseabsolute uthoritys radically ilbutwhose ontingentuthoritys a quitepersuasive,ftransitory,lternativeothedominant ulture.Authorshipanresist heauthorityfculture, tandagainst hegeneralityfhabit ndthe
particularityfnostalgicmemory,ndstillhavea very recise ntention.
Criticalrchitectureandarchitecturalriticism
One crucial ssue remains nclear:what s theprecise ealm ftheoreticalinterestn a critical rchitecture?owdoesonedefine rdemarcatehe patialortemporalnterval hat s thefocus fa critical xamination farchitecture?This discussion fMies suggests hattherealm f nterests in the distanceestablished etween rchitecturendthatwhich s otherhan rchitecture.
No singlebuilding-neitherhemost
distinguished or hemostpedestrian-canreflect preexistentultural ealitywithperfect idelity.o theextent hata work s architecture,tdiffers
qualitatively othfrom representationofrealitynd from reduplicationfother ultural ctivities.But thedifferencearriesdeologicalmotivation;itproducesknowledge othaboutculture nd aboutarchitecture.t shouldbe possibleto recognize oththemeans
bywhich rchitecture aintainstsdistance rom ll that s outsidearchitecturendthe conditions hat
permit he existence f thatdistance.
The kindoftheoreticaltudy uggestedheredoesnotassumetheprior xistenceofunchanging rinciples or
interpretingrchitecture.nsteadwhatis assumed s a specificituation romwhich amethe decision omake
architecture.his means hatach
architecturalbjectplacesrestraints
upon nterpretation,ot becausethesituation s hiddenwithin heobject sa puzzle,butrather ecause ontingentandworldly ircumstancesxist t thesame evelofsurface articularitys theobject tself. nterpretivenquiryies inan irreduciblyrchitecturalealmbetween hose onditions hat eemto
generate r enablethe architect'sintentionomakearchitecturendthoseformsn which he ntentions
transcribed.
The contingent uthorityftheindividual rchitectxists t asensitive odalpoint.The individualconsciousnesss a partof and is awareof thecollective istorical ndsocialsituation.Because ofthis wareness, heindividual s nota mereproduct f thesituation ut is anhistoricalnd social
actor n it. There s choice nd,therefore,heresponsibilityfa criticalarchitecture.
Butwhat, then, s theresponsibilityfarchitecturalriticism r of critical
historiography?s it to teach ndtodisseminatenformationboutthemonumentsfculture?s it todelivertechnicalnsights ndopinions boutthecapabilities f the architectr theform fthebuilding?Or is it,as hasbeensuggestedhere, oconcentraten
the ntrinsic onditions hroughwhicharchitectures madepossible? n orderto know ll we can aboutarchitecturewemust be able tounderstandachinstance farchitecture,ot as a passiveagentofculturen its dominant
ideological, nstitutional,nd historicalforms, or s a detached, isinfected
object.Ratherwe mustunderstandtas activelyndcontinuallyccupyinga cultural lace-as an architecturalintention ith scertainableoliticaland intellectual
onsequences.riticism
delimits field fvalueswithinwhicharchitectureandevelop ultural
knowledge.
Architecturalriticismnd critical
historiographyre activities ontinuouswitharchitecturalesign;bothcriticismanddesign re forms fknowledge.fcritical rchitecturalesign s resistantandoppositional, hen rchitecturalcriticism-as ctivityndknowledge-shouldbe openly ontentiousnd
oppositional,s well.We must eekalternativeso entrenched odesof
operation ndcanonical orms.We muststrive o invest ritical iscoursewith
somethingmore han ompensatory,appreciativeeflectionsrmethods fformalnalysis or bjectswhoseculturalmeaning s thought obeundecidable. t is preciselyheresponsibilityfcriticism hat hisculturalmeaningbe continuallydecided.
K. Michael Hays
27
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 16/17
ii
;~~X:lc
~1-
t~
- \~"li-da
-) -
'z:
ae
;:1
~?
?ii'
B`r
?a::
u-k
i
~I
r
i
?"';
": rx*.-~1~"
a~;~~; ?irt
~tt.
I have benefitedromthe
questions and criticisms
ofRISD studentswho
participated in
myseminar,
<<Interpretationsf
ModernArchitecture,,
where many ofthe deas
presented herewere
formulated;and from
the responses f
colleagueswho read
earlier versions f this
paper. I especiallywish
to thankStanford
Andersonand Rodolfo
Machado for theircontinuedsupport nd
encouragement.
K. M. H.
Mies van der Rohe
Minerals and Research
Building, IIT
1939
K. Michael Hays
28
This content downloaded from 144.122.1.203 on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:16:39 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/13/2019 Culture and Form
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/culture-and-form 17/17
Notes
I
By culture,as I shall use
thetermhere,
understanda conceptual
unity comprising,on the one hand,
those theoretical nd
practical systemswhich
authorize,promote, r
constrain theproduction
and use of deas and
objects nd bywhich a
society ra place
differentiates tself nd
maintains its hegemony;
and on the otherhand,
theartifacts nd
environmentswhich
endure as resourceful
physicalprecedents r
exemplarsofsystems f
productionand become
transmitters fculture.
Thus, it is in the
purview ofculturethat
theproduction of
architecture s overseen
fromabove bya
dominant system f
values saturating
downward, and
generatedor validated at
its base bynormative
standards of practice
and methodologies hich
may themselves ecome
culturalagents.
2
The historicism fthis
positionhas been
criticizedbynumerous
authors,mostnotably
StanfordAnderson,
Colin Rowe, and David
Watkin. Watkin uses a
Popperian argument
against historicism
withoutnoting
Anderson's earlierstudy
<Architecture and
Tradition,in
,TheHistory,Theory,
and Criticismof
Architecture*
Marcus Whiffen, d.
Cambridge,MIT Press
1965.
Watkin doesmention n
a differentontext
Anderson's reviewof
Pevsner's Sources ...
in,Arts Bulletin,
vol. 53 Sept. 1971
PP274-275.
I shall not rehearse these
criticismshere.For a
recent discussionof
interpretationshat
emphasize the
object'sorigins
see S. Anderson
,APresentness f
Interpretation nd of
Artifacts:Toward a
History ortheDuration
and Change of
Artifacts,in
wHistoryn, of,and
forArchitecture,,
JohnE. Hancock, ed.
Cincinnati
UniversityofCincinnati
1981.
3
The unfortunate
oversimplification,
packaging, and
consumption fColinRowe's <<collage city*
approach byvarious
epigones s indicativeof
theprevalenceofthis
attitude. ThoughRowe
could notbefitted asily
into thearchitecture-as-
autonomous-formmould,
suchstatements s the
followingare often
misleading to those
inclined toward
uncritical consumption
of mages ofthepast:
4It shouldbe obviousby
thispoint thatpresent
argumentshave little
to do with <history.,
<History,> sofar as we
are aware, relates to
concatenationofevents
and their tylistic
profile. n the
framework ofthis
discussion it can only
interestus very ittle;
and, ifwe are interested
in theusefulness f
particular morphologies,
we are correspondingly
unconcernedwiththe
provenanceofspecific
models.
Fred Koetter nd
Colin Rowe
<<The Crisis oftheObject:
The Predicament
of
Texture,<Perspecta 16 ig98o
P135 and n 5
4
,TheMetropolis nd
Mental Life,
(English translationof
,Die Grosstadt und das
Geistesleben,Dresden 903) in
,TheSociology f
GeorgSimmel,Kurt H. Wolff,
trans. and ed.
New York,Free Press
1950 P415
5
Jean Arp
o<OnMy Way:
Poetry nd Essays
1912-I9i6,,New York,Wittenborn
1948 P91
6
Piet Mondrian
oDe Stiflf
7
Rosalind Krauss makes
a distinction between
what she calls analytic
or narrative time-in
which the viewer can
grasp the a priori
transcendent tructure f
theobject-and real
time-in whichthe
viewer encounters orm
open tochangeand
circumstance. The
development feach in
modern culpture s
discussed in
<Passages in
ModernSculpture,
New York,VikingPress
1977
8
Mies's well-known
friendshipwith
the Dadaists
Kurt Schwitters ndHans Richter nd his
collaboration with the
editorsof<G,
support
thisreading ofthe 1922
skyscraper. he
implicationsofMies's
affiliationwith the
Dadaists haveyettobe
fully explored.
9
In PhilipJohnson
,Mies van der Rohe*New York,Museum of
ModernArt 1947
Io
Karl Kraus quoted by
WalterBenjamin
in <Reflections,
EdmundJephcott, rans.
New York,Harcourt
BraceJovanovich
1978 p243
II
Johnson p 94
Also see Mies's
disavowal of
de Stijl in Peter Blake
,A Conversation
withMies,
in <Four Great Makers
ofArchitecture*
G. M. Kallman, ed.
New York
DaCapo Press
1970 PP93ff
12
StanfordAnderson uses
thephrase <<winning of
reality, toemphasizethe
reciprocityetween anobject,its creation,and
its interpretation.The
phrase capturesthe
notion that the
understanding of
building unfolds nd
may change in time.
See Anderson,
<A Presentness f
Interpretation nd of
Artifacts..
13I owe my understanding
of ntention-as all that
whichfollows rom
special beginning-to
Edward Said
,Beginnings,Intention
andMethod,
Baltimore
JohnHopkins University
Press 1975
K. Michael Hays
29
top related