Persepecta 33 Mining Autonomy

THE YALE ARCH/ TEC TURAL JOURNAL
PERSPECTA 33
Mining Autonomy
EDI TORS
MICHAEL OSMAN
ADAM RUEDIG
MATTHEW SEIDEL
LISA TILNEY
J.
THE MIT PRESS
CAMBRIDGE . MASSACHUSETTS
LONDON. ENGLAND
. ..,,
Acknowledgements
The eel.hors would like to thank Hana Baldauf '81. B.A., '88, M.Arch. Frtd Ko1t
ter, Cesar Pelll, Robe" A.M. Stem '65, M.Arch and F. Anthony Zunino ' 70,
M.Arch. for their gtntrous alhs to l'wr~ro 33. We a,. 81"11teful 10 the Or1h1m
Fbundation for Advanced Studlts In the Ant Am ror Ill continued 1uppon of
l'W.tptCl. Special thanks to lennlftrOro.1 and lock Reynold a of the Yale Unl11tl'
shy Art G11luy for thtir support of Ann H1mlllon's contribut ion to thla 111110.
S~ial thanks to L.turen Kogod. our faculty advisor. Without hor sound
counsel and ccuratt criticism, the Issue would not have re1chtd 111 fruition.
Thanks to Brendan Moran for his 11en1roua advice from the ts1110'11t1rt
to finish. ~ggy Deamer's insight at crucial points aIona tho way provided valu
able dirtetion and !'us.
Thanks tognphlc deslgnel'li Lesley Tucker and Mark Zurolowho brouaht
theirexp!!nise. creativity and strong per.onal engagements to this proJec:t.
We would like to thank tho members of the Ooerd of Dl~I0'1 of PwrJijlto.
Tit Ya/ AldtitK'tltrol /ournat
Pem Deamer
Sheila Levrant de Bretteville
Michael HaYerland
Gavin MacRae-Gibson
Cesar~lli
Alan Plattus
Alexander Purves
Harold Roth
Rohen A.M. Stem
Thanks to Carol Krinky who provided generous and valuable htlp
with copyediting.
We would like to thank Anthony Vidler for arranaln11 trnlatlon and
providing editorial assistance oo Hubcn Oamisch's essay.
We are also grateful to Jennifer Castellon and Jean Sieloff of the Yale
School of Architecture. Monica Robinson, Dlro<tor ol Graduate and Profts
sional Schools Annual Giving and Dcvelopmont at Yale. ond Sally 1"onialno.
Associatt Director of Grants and Contracu at Yale. Thanks to Nina Rappaport
for her indisp!!nsable oss1stance wi th publicity.
For help with images wt would like to thank Laurel Bll11 It Yale University
1.Jbrary. Teresa Johnson at UC LA Library and Kristin Murray at An Resource.
Very special thanks ro the many friends who have off1~ thtlr support,
advice and ~rtkipation throuahout tht duration of this proiect. Catherine
Amon. Daniel Arbalan. Annmarlt Brennan. Stobhao Burke. Jason Carlow,
Al~ Hathaway. Ed Mitchell. Todd Rtls~. Altxandl'I Sov1, Sttph1n1e Tuerk
ind Jorae Zapata.
Editors' Statement
I
~
Pr.4p<H:ta 33: Minin9 Autonomy is a collection of tssays thar examonts tht
evolving legacy of rchitt<:tural autonomy and its rtl1tionsh1p to archlltc

tures potential to act as a cntical ;igent. As 1ts name implies. Min1n9 Auton
omy both draws from the richness of tht inttlltctual proJK't of autonomy and
perhaps does some damage to its suppositions by forwarding the id ta that the
conttmporary position of critical pracrlct has shlhtd from the autonomous
ceoter to the ptriphery of the architectural disciphnt.
The argument for the aU1onomy or architteture - tht belltf that archltec
tu re is a self-contained projtct with Its own legible, meaningful forms- ls gener
ally seen as an outgrowth of a larger understanding of tht role of autonomy Jn

the arts. But while the autonomy of the art object was considered an assertion
against the perceived bankruptcy of mass-culture, rchitrctural autonomy coin
c1ded not only with distinctions between external assamilaition and resistance.
bur also with ots own tradition of utility and functionalism. Ironically. the discI
pline's very emphasis upon its utilitarian nature had led to a pcorcelved dissolu
lion of irs own professional boundaries by the la" 1960s and eatly 1970s
In the 1970s. the reemergence and redtfinitlon ot the notion of archo
tectural autonomy >t 1hc lnstotute for Arch11ectureand Urban S1ud1es nd in
lhe pages of OppaAitloru. became a way for arch11ecu 10 dehne lh<or practice
against ttthnoeracy while ma1nta1n1ng for arrhatttturc 3 'cr1t1c.a1 social rolt
Specohcally. archittets and archi1<c1ural hosronans viewed aurononoy as the

only remaining pos111on for ardutecturt 10 ga.n sufflcotnt d1s1anct ftom cul
ture to rrsisr the cap11ahs1 cycl of production and consul"lptoon and present
new alttmativf's to the star us 'lUO In contrs to this post tunctiona11st pot:1
tion.. othtr arch11ccts at the
11mt reacted strongly 1ga1n111
tht per(tlftd 1h1.s

1orot1tyof modemarchitecrure and located theauto~omyof archotecruro on Its
own formal his1ory.
Although there can be no doubr tha11he s11ua11on of rho current dccd is
radically different than that of the 1970s (economocally wll a> cuhurally),
many of the same condi11ons of dosciplonary uncerta1n1y remain, New me1hods
of architectural production (the reahll of digital design, omgine and fab11
cation). growing environmental concerns and changing 1dtas about domes11c

iry and urban space continually pose new qucs11ons to arch11cc1s. How has rhe
conccpual framework of architccrural autonomy contlnucJ to Influence rhe
production of architccrure1 Have examples of contemporary cntlcal work s urpassed the usefulness of the autonomy model/
far from abandoning the notion of autonomy, Mining At<to"omy main
rains a critocal position that shif1s 11s atttnllon from the <enter of tht dostl
plin 10 irs borders. Loca1ed a1 the onterfaco b-Orwern autonomou w11h~rawal
and cuhurnl derermma11on. cn11cal rchlltcture O<<upies a i)O'otoon on the
~riphery
whert II <ts as mediator - translallng knowledge from vnoed
pursuits Into the language and convcnoons of arthnecrure as well as pa .. ong

onrelltgcnce and specul>11on ftom tht d1sc1phno to tho wortd Archotecturt i.
therefore capable of ma or.ta on mg both Its croucal capac11ywhlle lo engaging
on its social and cuhural conttxt
~,
0
0
rh'~
,-1
rI '--
....
~
',C
-
,...
"'"
..
I
~
...
"" t-..
t: ....
...
'-
@@[f
'
!I I.
'
t
~
J.
s'
PERSPECTA 33
'
Mining Autonomy
7 Editors' Statement
10
Ledoux with Kant

HU8ER 1 DAt.llSCH
16 The Ledoux Effect: Emil Kaufmann and the Claims or Kan1tan Autonomy
ANTHONY VIDLER
30 Quasi-Autonomy in Architecture: The Search for an 'lnberween'

STANrORD A NDERSON
38
Manfredo Tafuri and Architecture Theory In the U.S., 1970-2000

OIAtlE Y GHIRARDO
48
Why Autonomyl
CHRISTOPHER W000
54
TWenty Proiects a1 the Boundanos of the

ArchlleCt\lral Discipline Examined 1n Rela11on 10 the H1norrcal
and Contemporary DebatH OV<'r Autonomy
K MICHAEL HAYS
l AUREN t<OGOD
THE EDITORS
72
Notes around the Doppler Effw and other Moods of Modernism

ROBERT SOMOL
SARA~
78
WHIToNC.
Nor es on the Thing

EllZllBE TH GROSZ
80
Gottfried Semper: Stereotomy. BlolOflY. and Geometry

BERNARD CACH(
88
Digital de !'Orme
BERNARD CACHE
PATRIC BCAVCf
90
ultrasucde
C.EORCc WAGNlR
104
The Cool.I. t he Bad and the Ugly:

The Urbanism of Cood and Bad Intention'
MICHA[
114
Cnn1tanti in Mot ion:

Le Corbusier's 'Rule of Movement' ar the Carpenter Centtr
HASH M
1215
!> ANTON
~ARK~
Belonging: Towards a Th.ory of lden11hrat1on with Place

NEAL l EACH
134
Contributors
..- ...-..
... . . ' ...
...---,tl4
.
. .. .
.'
.,
- - ----
..
. . ..
..
....-
HUBERT OAM I SCH
Tran slation by RI II Wl\.l. IAM S
.~
..
~:~
L __
Ledoux with ,
:ti
.' 't{
. ''
This essay was originally published as the preface

to Emil Kaufmann's De udoux et Le CorbUAier:
t
)
I
Ori9ine et developpen1ent de /'archi tecture autonom e, i 981 '
11!
' r
,I
Pubhsh1ng delays some11mts h;ave" J>.nefic1al effect in that th ey bring a stm

blance of 1ust1hca11on to the exercise of wn11ng a preface - by definition a
risky undenak1ng For 11 the pubhcauon. as well as the purch ase of a book.
always entail> an element of risk (which cannot be measured in financial
1s the work of the author or of a third
par1y - 1s suppo>f ;also true to say that a text calls foT a preface is
1mpl1otly to admit that
t1
1s not enough 1n itself. that it will only havt its
't .
effect wnh appropriate clanhcat1on: that the reader will have no chance of
recognizing us 1mponance unless alerted to it in adva nce. not knowing how
to read 1t w11hout appropriate eyegla>>es. This presents the dist inct possibll
lly of abuse, when the preface begins to take on the role of a n advertisement
'
or 1ns1ruc11on manual
It > d1frerent 1n the case of an historical text. and when dealing with a
'
repubhcauon or a new 1ranslauon. The french reade r ha s d iscovered the work
'
of tm1I Kaufmann in reverse. so to speak: beginning with what appeared his
,,
...,.
rrowning ach1~emen1. the great book L:4n:hitecture au .Aitcle du Lumliru
It 9551 IArc-h1tKtul'P 1n the A9# of Rt4Uon), and only then becoming familiar
w11h Trou arch11ecu revolu11011no1re..: Boullh. LAidoux. Lequeu h95 2H11irH
Rwolu11onary Archuecu. Bou/lie. udoux. Lrqueu. finally arriving at the book
pubhshed 1n Vienna in 1933. whose t t1le alone signals Kautmann's end.rt

inrellec1ual progroim. De IAdoux o LAI Corbwier: Ori9i11t er dlwlop,,.mntl dt
l'orch1tectul'f autanome. This is a book that has n either the fu\lness of the!WO
h
1"d~
ot
er~. nor their weigh1 o f scholarship, but that contains the seed of an
that Kaufmann was ta take up 11relessly throughout his li fe as ht deeptned
of .. ..
and developed all of 115 ram1hcatlons. 11 1s a book with the appearance .
broadside or pamphlet . and one can ~ee from both us title and date oft>'fi<>
lion that 11 was topical enough At the moment when Nazism was t riulllpttant
s1ron~ly
rubbl~
..
supported by a mass of academic

in Munich dnd Uerhn .
0
"
ii was proo f o f great tn1'11ectual courage for a Viennese attemllt to dt!ll$11
. '
s1rate the existence of a fundament;il continuity be tween so-called oeacla
.::
..,
__ _
l
.
i
I
.~
...
',
"
.
l
I
~
cal architecture and rduwc1ure already denounced by the totahtaroan ideol-
of Ledoux could be presented as the paradigm ot this break assumes that
ogy a; "1ntcrna11011HI All the more so 111 thJt Kaufmann pressed hi. insolence
1he old and the new arc brought together wothin it on such a way that the
10 the point of including under lhe banner or IWD French dtthlle<ts a <naon
ruptur<' "only more evodnt Yet 11
number of German arch11ccts - begonnong wnh Schinkel
on modernory 1s opposed a discourse 1ha1. far from being one of a "brcu."
to this that the
mo~t
rl!Cent
d1sco~rse
d"omed a' an 1n1cgral pan of 1i. heritage (Not 10 menuon the ;ang froid with
works on the contrary to reue the threads, to reonscrobe on the contanutty of a
whrch Kaufmann dcmon>tr,ned, "'the lace of tht> blackmail and even more
history a practice from which for too long it had the pretcntoon of
in the f<c of the pohtocI hy,tcna of the avant gardts, as he celebrated the
nself The paradox that engages us 1n reading Kau fmann hes 1n the fact that
a\p1rat1on 10 au1onomy of" poarttct- that was nonetheless poten11ally a\ pro
he hlmlf attempttd to g.-e 1h1s phenomenon an hostorocal explana11on. and
foundly \OCoalozed as tht or archotecture.
that
in
>single stroke ht restored
10
f~e 1 ng
the Modern Movement both a past and
Thi\ book wa~ then born ol ots tome. I> thos 10 say that 11 1s only of retro
a historical d1mens1on For 10 maon1a1n that the break from which m<><lern
'P''' uvt ontcre>t, .is a hl\torocal document' When everyone os proclaomong the
arch11cc1ure on principal proceeds goes bck to the end of the eighteenth
failure of the Modern Movement .ind dt>nouncang ots "obicctove conntttoons
century 1mphes that thrs archotttture doe' not begin woth Lt Corbusrcr. hut
woth a tcchnocrauc order that ended up by adop11ng 11as11s own. what reso
rather that behind 11 loes.in entire history. including- as wewoll see- ns claim
nanrt can rhos thin volume and the thcs1> 11 articulates expect 10 hnd wnh
to the tabula rasa
large documentary appara1us 1 Nevertheless. of. as
Kaufman n's thes". 1hat saw Lt' Corbu1cr a th<.' tru~ hen or U>doux and
forg<' Luo\ Oorges would have 11. a pref~ce os no rnore th.on a form or lattral
Schinkel was bound to -candahze the champion> of a ,howy nl'O cla<\lct\m. a
cro111 "m then 1\ nn reason to nece\sartly expttt 1hdt the reader should be
la Albert Speer, as well 4\ those on the other >ade who felt th~t. after all. the pro
w.trnl'd ag.11ns1 1h1 book that JI ontroducS To alert the rrader to 1he rets
let.onat al\O had a right to the column (Question thtn dO<'s the prnlt'Uroat
1.. ncc\ that this reading might ehcor ,,, on the other hand. one of the rights
have a right 10 the eniasr>' Can the prolttnan column ddpt llselt 10 1nlld
gcnN~lly granted t o one who wnre" prtface. And since. 1n this ca>e.1herr os
toon') lnd~cd. we often fo1ge1 that the crouque of func11onah\m did not ang 1
a prtfac why would tho\ one not ta kt .idv.ontage of thl' g~p 1n tome to 1nv11e
nte yes1erd.1y. Amon11 the Marxists, as well as on Frankfurt with Adorno, there
res1s1anc~
were a ftw good mind\ who denounced wh.1t they reaardtd. as Or!'< ht put
always tndocares conOoct and 11 doe, no good to ignore !1 1 It 1s then up 10 u; to
11. "the la.i word of bourgeois archnect ure. ThP last word but not the
en>urc.- 1hat th as translatoon 100 is born ol lu tome.our own. ca ugh I as wt> are n
hrst. one can imagine that those who appealed 10 the revolu11onary 1deJI
the meandering ways of a d"cour>c thdf hJ> not yet broken w11h modernary -
m1gh1 have 1udged "'unsuitable the propo>1t1on according to which the pra
for rrJ>On\ that the reading of tho:. book ,hould help u> to unravel for des pore
gram of the Sachhchl<eot would have found 11s formult1on 1n the pe11od ol
out being shored up by
1ha11he new 0<der
is
the r1.1Jtr 10 hnd on 11 a way of seeing
ot<, brcvny.
.i
little more clearly. >once
11 has Jo\t none of us Pd9r
One <ould say 1ha1 this 1s certainly the least 10 be expected of >uch"
the "Great Rtvoluuon - French and hourgeoos - ot 1789 Out Kaufmann\

demon,1r~11on was
no le;, shocking w11h respect 10th~ habnual a~sumpuuns
book doe\ not 11 Cntral thesis sugge" that a radital breJk 1nterrup1td th~
of art h1\tory. For this book. devoted as
couroe of archote<tural production an the era of the french Revolution. a break
of the sources of the Modern Movement. does not olK'y
which would form the d1>tant ongtn or the Modern Movem<nl' That the worl<
If one agrtt~ woth
h1i.
11
seems to be 10 th 1nve>11ga11on
th~
I.aw of
thesis that Ledoux - as Kaufmann had
th~
gfnrr
d~drcd
ln'm
.... ~
...
Emil IZaufmann
De Ledoux
aLe _or_ us1er
. Origine et developpement
de l'architecture autonome
. -
,;J
. . . . . ,#
...
'J 1t; .....
1928 on
was a figure who signified a "personalizes break-point." in history,
one has also to admn that he 1s also an end point for any historical tracing
back in time of the Modern Movement. The question. then. would not be so
any more than to protond to stretch it as o~ would muscle: a s1mpll'cylinder

will do the job.
If architecture is no more than the expression of a constructive logic.
its reason for being should be sought in the act of building. In
port rather than oppos~ one's predecessors - as in the case of Ledoux in rela
architecture. from the moment It obeyed an external determination, would b4'
tion to Jacques-~'ranl;()is Blondel. it is still a form of owing them something),
no longer autonomous but rather the object of empirical knowledge. techni
but rather to know - in Kaufmann's terms - where he went. and 10 attempt to
cal and experimental. whatever the contributions of calculation. Nevertheless
understand Ledoux not on the basis of his own antecedents but on that of the
architectonic thought. even if it aspires to autonomy. does not operate in the
path that he opened up. It must be noted that Kaufmann only described the
registerof speculative reason: its aim Is not knowledge in itself; it has a task to
beginning of this path: as If. once he had demonstrated the direction in which
accomplish. a work to realiic. a world to construct. A matter of principles. it IS
Ledoux's work pointed, and how it became explicit In the teaching of Durand
only so inasmuch as pure practical reason is. In Kant's terms. immediately leg
and Du but. a route was would be traced that could no longer be mistaken.
islative: It Is only autonomous 10 the extent that the will is conceived as Inde-
th~se
terms,
Such language Is. however, not that of Kaufmann but of Kant. in the
pendent of empirical conditions and. consequently. as pure will. determined
preface to the second edition of Cr1riqu11 of Pure Rea..1on. In this preface Kant
by the sole form of the law called moral law. It is certain that Ledoux did not
makes reference to that other intellectu al revoluuon traditionally associated
read Kant. but we know how much he owed ro Rousseau. and how the reading
wnh the name of Thal~s. and concerning the beginnings of geometry. its
of Contra! ,iocial /7111 Social Contracr/ informed his doctrine of autonomy. If
"orig1n: the demonstration of the isosceles triangle in as much as it derives
the relationship between Ledoux and Kant 1s based on anything, it ls from
from an a priori construction. the author of which was named Thal~s "or any
the point or view of this common denvation. "Rerum to the principle. consult
orher name."' This is the Kant to which Kaufmann's !ext refers from the
nature everywhere man is isolated": the formula of L.:t.rchitecture echoes 1he
very first page. Docs this mean that from the moment that architecture
problem posed by Rousseau: to discover a form-that of the contract - through
accedeb to a new and superior mode of historl ciry
and that Its development can be seen as parallel. from the point of view
which "each Is united to all. yet nevertheless obeying only himself and rem;un
Ing as free as before."
of logi c. to that of science/ That this Fantasy (If 11 is one) constitutes
For arch1tecturo then. the claim of autonomy has. in the first place. a
one of the impulses behind an architectural ideology that purports to be
moral con not at ion. One has only to read Loos (where ornament is associated
with a form of crime) or Le Corbusicr !"t ruth" is opposed to lies. as the purity
11
"ra11onalis1," evinced by its constant return in Kaufmann's work? Certainly

KaufmHnn affirms 1ha1 if Lcdoux's work has value as a symptom and demands
of "whitewash" ls
10
the raise appearances of dEcor) to be persuaded of this:
be interpreted as such. he did not for all that create modern architecture
the rigor and the purity aspired to by the Modem Movement were those of
by himself: it would h<tvC been born anyway "even if he had never existQd."'
the moral law. Indeed, the relationship of tho Ledoux creator of the Salines de
But such a proposition docs not 1n the least undercut the paradigmatic read
Chau ><. to Le Corbusier, the aposrle of the wall "lait de chaux" (whitewashl. 1 s
1ng that Kaufman proposed of Ledoux's work in 1933. for it was less important
salty enough - if l can say Ir - in the register of the signifier. especially if one
for him to write a "page of hi story" than to construct a model to show clearly,
recalls thut Le Corbusier was himself born in La Chaux-dt-Fonds. But if it 1s
beyond all deceptive surface effects, the profound continuity of development
in fact necesary to think Ledoux with Rousseau, if nor with Kant. it is to the
that leads from Ledoux to Le Corbusier: a continuiry which in effect only has
extent that this other rela tionship allows one~ understand how the rejection
meaning through assigning ii a revolution as origin. pinning itself to the name
of rules handed down by tradition could for him be joined with the affirmation
of Ledoux "or any other name."

Indeed Ledoux. 1n his marked preferencr for the most simple and regular
of another imperative: uncond1rional. legality. Baroque architecture was het

eronomous Inasmuch as It obeyed an external exterior determination - th11
geometric conngurauon s - the cube, the pyramid. the cylinder. the sphere -
of "su1lab1li1y" lcon1oYno11ctl that called for the elements which composed a
moves in this same direction: as 1f he had meant. in this moment of origin.
building to be combined, superimposed, and melded together in the unity of a
to reconnect w11h the premier acquis. as Husserl would say. from which geom
single ensemble, following the rules of an order entirely of the fai;:ade. which
etry was born. This premier acqu1s held that due to technical ability. the Greek
was itsl'lf an Image of social hierarchy. According to Kaufmann's explanation,
succeeded in detaching certain "pure" forms from their bodily anachments.
the new princ1plc of autonomy would, on the contrary. mani~st itself 1n the
The Greeks pushed forms 10 their point of perfection. according to specifica
egalitarian sy"em of "pavilions which assumes that the elements. for e:um
tions suitable for the insrruction of 1he geometric mind: surfaces ever more
pie the different "blocks" or "unitk" (of habitation or otherwiseJ retain their
polished. whether flat or turned "in revolution:" edges ever more smooth. lines
independence, their freedom. their autonomy. The rationale determining the
ever more straight or even, angles ever more sharp, points ever more precise.
pav11Jons' placement and distribution. would only thl'n appear in full clarity
and so on. The same process of autonomlz.a tion of form is translated. with
on the level of the plan. In this sense the rejection of the
respect to the elements of architecture. by the rejection of all anthropomor
twentieth century would
phism. organic metaphors. and, in general, of imitation. beginning with that of
nity, appea1ed from the beginning of the ninetttnth century as the corollary
the monuments of the past. In all things. one should return ro the principle: if a
of the affirmation of a universal and abstnict legality. This legality was to be
column. considered according to its function (sachlichJ. is nothing more than a
affirmed In rhe teachings of Durand. taking the form of a rrgular orthogonal
post put up t o support a load (Violletle-Duc would say nothing less). there is no
grid inscribed within a square. which both rrgulated the mechanics of the com
sense in trying to calculate its proportions according to those of the human body.
position and was informed every ensemble, as it would continue 10 do 1n the
10
'
.,.. ,1 ,..,. .,
much to search for wl111rP he came from (even if it is always permissible to sup-
affirms Its "autonomy
J.'
rccogni~e
fa~ade.
which the
as one of the tnits of architectural moder
woi I. of M 1, n d, 1 Rohr lh gnd \ arc h1t.cton1<" ..

Th
,n and reprcsentanon.
doubl.. lur c110 rr5~,..i lor the gnd both rrgu!Atory dnd g..nn-a
of styl~ ( nth plurall Tht archtteuure of the ntneteeruh entury, ma ~td s

11 was on thr surlce by thr stamp of histonc1sm and eclec11ctsm, w.as ab n
rrs dttpnt '>tructurc> to pantc1patt rn th<' cont nu11y of a dl'vd opment "~e
un1~t'rsal pr<"trn."ri.1ons of iuronomou~ archirec

turr In tb< f st plac th gnd is P"'" nted tn Durand as th mrchani'm for
effttts would no br revratl'd unul th masks under wh1th a r, htocture hd
i hang tn sc.1lr Kaufmann i" dtarly Hut wnh Ledoux arch11<<turr had
operattd un11l 1hat um< wre removJ horn this point of view the "regre,
allJin,d ,1 '" w d nrns1on, rhu ot the ma.scs lgra11d nombrel. The idea of
, 10 n 10 nto cbssic1sm \\IS rn f ict no more han a symptom of he drtnor.i
autonom~
uon of trt1d111on,1 tor
t1vt ttstaty
a po''"
"111
1nr1to1hr
IJ<t m inonslt., 11 not brought bacll 10 the idea of rquahty,
mptymg 1h.11 .111 mrn 11 ..,. tho 11gh1 to orchur<ror< ("Ta,t. tn "' combin
taons w11fa '''
1tCogn1Zt~
no tl1Jl1 f(ncf" bltv.!'("t"n lhi" poor or
the r1ch1
In
! (Js. t hel t' any

thing 1l1n11he trtl'f ca1\d15tta1rl, Th<" hatl1.., ot ('luto. thr ''arthou ... E"of rht~ mer
ch 1nt, h h ir11 ol h tantwr mus II c.11ry Ms 1mpnm ")'Th.- pro1ett for an
1dt rny "thus no longer 1m1trd to a pt'<>JX'Ct "'v1c-w meant to produce an
''"""ally p1ctu rsqu~ et!cct but rdthe1 nu ant to respond m detail to all th<
I ('I U fO 11 t.
1111 t'l t U Jt llU gh 1 I U fJC' Cnr1( t' r 0 tJ With tf1t nt'tds Of
m. 1s K !Jfm~nn h1m,ell noted
could say th~t u y,ould 1,1kt
In lt ngu"t'' lfrits ,.,.
century 10 ' hi lt from an crnate .ind "baroq,o
mann< r of Plung, to a l,...e and n 11u1 .11 mo.le cl Cl p rt'S>n The ho" w~,
then from a mod" ol <xp1<'"1on 1h.11took 11~ models from tt.1d111on. w modo
ol tpr~s1on 1ht "'"'" .11 .1nt1 h1s1011co1I, but which m l.1q 15 ord~reJ
around another notron of h151111 y th.in th .. 1 1m po,1'tl by a h1'to1 y of an und r
stood as htst~ry ol "s tylc ~ a no tr on th 11 , .irgu. bll' "
II
moy 1><',demands 10 be
takrn into account m and of 11sdt
func11ons ot It wn t tht manutcturmg a "In lmyro..-n I have placed r\Cf)

typ of build mg rrquirl.'d by the 0<.1al ordN Ont"'" MT t'f'"l"'
gl\cb111hto11<'0plr tmbl1t> Atownw1ll11srup10Ml
them
I r 111-c hn.t llmronrwill stt the magn ftccnc.. olth
of th al..house on 1ht am lr\1.'l
1 1ndet'd
IT
lWIJil
a:
.,...
at*1~21lt<~~-~ -!~ tliio''f1,~~
t....doux treat> th<' qut'tton o! hous
mg 1n ms that ant1C1ptr the solutions of the phabMtrry thr g;irdrn nt)
qut'Vllle) a> a t.ilt of ongzns he dread of b<'g111n ng' inr s1ng n ! prKl>t
or th r mudcr n cqu 'alrnt "apart mrnt block w11h communal l;itchtn W11h
1n rupturC' or thl' rM'Olu11onaf) "brC"ak "' If the revcluu on of 1789
t g ng as th IS far l\aufmann ms sts that onr can Ct" lo Ltdoux s conttrns

thto beginning of mrchlln1
concCl-.d wuh rare <"X<epuons !pn:n.irv amongst whtch ont mu.i c tr T0<
11>n ol h dwelling In lct 11 s.ttm> us though
l\aulmannfth c osr to llrrcht1han to I.co Corbu 1t'f m thl' sens<' that the 1dta
1n for 1,.1 g" sttmcd to rontdCt th 1.'ry 1dra of autonomy As
r ma
bt'c""''
the or1g1nary hgur of soc1.l1"1 historiography, It Is bam., 1 apptarrd s

rhr foundrng C'vt'ol- thr t'lnugur;il moment of a histor y rt self rl'Wluuooary
rt k;ncd
from thc drtC"rm1nin11 factors tl1at rtduced h 1S:ory btforethe RtWlu
11on 10 a sort of "preh1\lory as Mar x termed

0
From the n:on:enl ~~
IS
Ado:-no would later,.,. "hou tng such as th1S a s!ap m thr fact'olth nostal
S<"t'n as thr orii:1n of a new cpo<.h, as ~n 1bsolu1c beg1nnmg a r.cw>trt lrom
& a for an mdrp nden1 cx,.1rn<I' thdt anyway ri<tsts no more
zero, from pnnciplt thr r<!Volu11on htlomc the r.rn tax of a truly human and
8u1 rht dop110n of tho g11d h.1s >1111 othtr rcpcrrus"ons, which one
rational ht tor~ If It wcrcn't tor 1hr la< that
t,
C~rbus11r
h.ld hnlcsynop>
might c1t rp1st1molog11 J \\hrrens th" rla sic al docrnncassoc1J1td the idea
thy for fl'\'Olut1t>ns, Uolshe-.k or othc1.,. isc, ,ind 1h.11 h" w" mor" concerned
ol unl\l r>al "'"''"rturc wllh that of a' h "''""'""' (lo thl' l " ' ' that vtb
'lrtz r rogf' zed h l lh1 cl,1ul<o1I 01<krs "'' 11 "modrl of comb a11on),of a rep
wuh htadrng them off by means of Jo l111<e 1111<' on could unJ,~t ind h""'
th,. 1ul1 s of tht1r <omhma11on
rho~ omrthrng ot 1h1 lOnsclousn<'" 11'.IUY lo'"""' th l~ntinu11y Col his
"rtone of ogns
11nd conn1 cr11J11
filgns 1hat b1 >uglot w11h 1h
rl1t
fll 111( 1plt llf .1t1111r10111y
in
Jllalr~
tile ncc1n1
les' upon thf'
lemtn" ol 1111h111 c''"" 1lm11 upon 1"" r uli 1ha1 dttrrmme) thru d1"rlhu11on
tn "' n paC<
uh 10 whi< h ..111111 nts rr subJ<'Cl<d rv1n in the11 layout
1'011h I IJurand 1111 a111 10 ltrrak w11h 1!11 p11nc1plr of comb1na11on tht P1f'cu.
d"/11 lutu ""' upplws th p11 "' non11ncla1urc of the prcct of
th~ gamr
to whirh " h11rc1u11 ts rrdu t'd from this poi 1 on 11ut th" gamt' 11 l'll ti
no long r
I
'o mu "a qut'Mlon of yn1,1x as rt 1s of <-Omt'try. a gromrtl) that
flar, ti< '.II< mary nd abo.t II Ju Ur The Ou :-id ")'litem" rttro~pt'Ctn-..~
mantfsts the paradro; of an arr" tctur<' that i.;uued n t f to be all tht' morr
Pk1ng" l~rlan1J n n" 1 rtnounccd 1hcord1nuy rn<'ansof Llnguagt- As tf,
1nth1S .iscas .. tll,auton rnylud rob<opushtdtothepo ni h
h
" rrt arc lll't"ture
nn longor borro..td II dettrtntnataon from art1 ul<lttd lot guage Autonolll)
would be pu hod to tht' pc nt wht'rt II would impose upon the ymbol c
ts
arll ulat ons '" >trucrure ns from worb-a d h

h
n111onot tr th.an that cal
cu atrd cording to th< proc1 dures of discour e
It W2 Louis Ambro Oubut "ho shOwt"d th , th
c game 1s not affected

rn pnn rpl~ b\ "r charJ tr of the tkments at us disposal wh I h
r.cru1,
"Ital
ran
drch .
Ill
c /
rn n 1skch1
av1 lu propo td1ocorthe1>ml'stru rurewuhenh
t d
t'r a goth1c or
Cd e 1roof 1' l< Corbu It r would~ f II
0
Viol!et le Due that
turc - morr th n 1 quo sllon of tyl< hn the s1ngul J
.r - ts a question
"'"&
Kuufmann m1&hl hJvl' b<>en 1emp1<d tn rc.lr srovt'f 111 thl' myth ol the "tJbula
tory that 10, o1L1 ord1ng 10 WJll w 1kew Y lor o low"auton
omous" row<'fS, dept nd upon 1lu s 1me lyrtr~l 1tlus1o:i t I at prompt<d th
"''
lu11ona11es f 1789 to introduce 11 nrw calendar al'd the lnsurgrnt> of 1 ' uly
R~luuon 10 5hoot out l hc clocks'>

But L(-doux, I therr not" paradox
in
rcgard1ni; htrn a a rC\olu!I n
1
archirect <ind the paragon of thr "break whel', by his own a "" h< onlv u
1
" co1prd the nJrtonal axe befon welcoming 11'c ,1n1val of t'le E:n'P "'
1
undtr t.andablt' rcllrP Ht rr the old deb3te over th t' con>equc crs cf po
and oc ,JI r..volu11on for 1hr domain of t he arts rrappe~ ll T
l<y c
h" 1
not 1rprl'sS the td a that rht Ir nch language aw>d 5 mr of s I"'
the sharp tn trument named "su1llo1 1n., ... his con1tmporancs. rrad
WC'rr 10 re<og'llie th<' tntlla!r o1nge of tht rcvolut on ry f1/'Cnt
W fl' eqUd
ned on throthrr hilnd that a 1m11.Jr ruptUn' in thr ord r I 1h'"'
and th
llnu1ty of ttml' had rc11Ulnrd for o long wnhou t e lf ! on htera .. '
d rt
<I
f
th<'point t h Ill w;i n er nry 10 aw:i11 th!! c xplo 1on o f Rom antic "' H
0
,_
h
1 lor V 01
lo at ws1 havr ns own roun< nth of July (In the serse t a
t
Romant1C1\ln wa "the rrrnch Rl'Volu1on turned 1n10 I''" r rure"I ALed '
th [loullCtarch !('(tUrl' is concl'rnt'd for K 1ufmann to propoSt' that w
and Lequeu it had u s own "revoluuon" (the question remains as to the place
that Soufflot s hould be ~signed Jn this context), was simply yo make an
analogy be1wcen this revolution and the political revolution. Indeed, he later
recogniz(d tha1 he was incapable of explaining t he change that architecture
underwent around 1800, insofar as explanations and reasons or this kind
ca n on lye sought in soca llcd "general" if not universal hi story." For it is surely
not an exp lanation to point to the process of the emancipation of th~ masses
as related to the principal of autonomy. On the contrary, we know only too

well that , as far a s autonomy goes, the f'ronch Revolution worked to the
contrary, 1n the du-cctlon of an ever more a ccentuated centralization, whose
bcneHts Napoleon was to reap, to the gre~t satisfaction - must it be repeated/
- or Ledoux him self.
Why, then . speak of "revolutionary" architcc1ure/The question, if it occu
pies us today, 1n the final a nalys is, bears upon the Status that should be atrrib
u1cd to the very notion of h1Arory Itself, In a rchitecture as well as the other ans.
and more genera lly 10 the work of thought - a s with every practice through
which man a 11~mpt~ lo assure himself or the control of his destiny. The his
NOTES
1 Of<QOll f MVotd as lhe r<tf&e roErn I """'mann
~ Lodout d It CorwSJ.. Ot.g.,.. I Ot~l--n cw
I Arrll1tt< tvrttAutono~ \p., ,, Ed.trQni EQtJe't'e. 1Q111)
<ren(l1 ~~ion ot VCVI LJ"' b>> Lt''""'"*' l/ti(J'Uf19 und
EntN1tAluno """'Aulon<>mit,., A,c,.ft:JtVf (YIPnr"ca a"ld l~10..g
R C)I Pine<. !QJ!J
2 &ttol: Bttel>I .,. oue""" a<Ch lee'.,;.,.,._, .., .,.._. LO$
rorian is free, according to his own polnr of view, to deny any and all dcscrip-
Atlc
fl'' '~""-llOll. frtnt.h """' 1P"'' t970). o 143
In'"" ortcle "l"""" ltc<lfht r""""' ""1lk:cl 0.CIO>)-
uve and raxonomic relevance to the nouons of hereronomy and autonomy...
In the present moment, when the h1s1ory of archuecrure hesitares between a
' E""""""' K""~ Ctl11Wdf:i.lltsoni'vt la< JJ19$

84r,. end Paul Atcsooaut(Po1 ~ Mct>lQr:,. l~i1l
renewed form o f 1he history of s tyles and a form of 1ns11tut1onal analysis that
'tOI I p 10
ignores everything properly archnectural, the Idea of auronomy, in It s ph1lo

>oph1cal sense. takes on the value of a regulauve concept . To think of Ledoux
wirh Kant s to rccogn11e rhai 1n the man er of archnecture, knowledge is no1
solely derived from hl~tory; or bc11~r said , In Kant 's 1erms, a knowledge 1ha1
.tul11Pcrively prcsenl> 11self as h1>torlc~ I . according to the way It was acquired,
ca n partic ipat e, ob1~r11vely, In one 101 m or ano1her of rationality." From 1h1>
& E""' i<out1t.,,,, Tto MCll.11" rl,iO/t,r.o"""''tHPilt1> ~'
'"'" ll4I '1 >.A DC. IQ78J p 137

8 Edmt.f'ld Hu~'tr1. L'0'1t1M de'~''* "''o nd tran,
Jlcque Owod cPa11 Pul'. 1962J o ?IC
7 C1~utfft N1c.Qlt lt<io'-1t t At<h1ttu1t- cons~~ .socn: la 'ID

pUll cJI/' ''des fYIOfi,/fS ti CH 14 ltQ>Sltlon (P1r1~ ,~ ,.
rilP.d 1n Kaul'T'df'I'' oo cit, p 1&2
>ems rhe problem o f theory - of rheory, no1 of doctrine - in 11s relarionshlp
to history: docs nor 1hcory have to s pecify the object of rhis history, and what
'"'d
determlnntlons belong t o ii alone.
lhd
To th ink of U!doux unrh Kant leads one on rac1 to qucs11on what consri.
tutcs arch 1tectur~ as an objccr not only of h istory but also or thought - a
..or-
10 *Th r...,w 1uh1.g clo~~ ~~ 1~ beQ1rtt' C\tna.tiuctv

w11n l"t C'l~lfUGt1on ()( '~'" t'l't1ll10t'l nd11ttduat noti&ib
lOl \tfll~ tt\ideflt,al bu1\d1"1.)s: Btttn1. ~. (t1. p 1
1 t Tt eodOt
ob1ect o f d esire, where the will - a s Kant 5ays - finds its determination. But
arch11ecture places 1n this c ategory only emp1nul principles, in the same way
trnJf1!N
f2
of the s ymbo hc. Arch itec ture finds 1rs determ1na11on both in what con sr11utes
n as an ob1ttt o f desh .. - or of will a5 Kam would say - which 1n th is cont<'llt
only conctrn empirical prlnetplei, and 1n whatever cons11rut II as a con
nol push the principal o f au1onomy to the point !hat Kanl would have wished,
to the point of v1ew1ng dependence on narural law as yet anot her form of hetet
onomy. "Jn all things. return to the principle:" this phr.lse or Ledoux's re1urn1
tu support th<' Idea that there art1. 1n the held of architect ure, prindples that
are not the product of history, just as
in
the a rea of law there art norms that
derive from a law postulated as "natural: It takes no more rhan thls - we havt
repeated It often enough - to stir up a revolu11on . But will the fact th<lt revolu
tions nece.sa rily tail , a lso be made a quest ion of principlel
Ad()tr)(L
M i/'11/'M M1.>11/1 ~.'#t1ot1$
Sul ~I'#
Frt<"th ''&nS fPt111 Payot. 1)83) &b
Fr1tt1(()1'
r ut(t\ Ptf>U
I ~-'OlullOll tc.i.n<i,& ~ tP~, 11 1911)
11 W9+ft!f ~...tT"! n '" T~~ ~J'" \a oh1IO$.Op'.. nt: I ttrsl.....,i"
...- t;1 q
'"""~'''""""""'IP
Q7~~ 2e6
14 ltw111 r tt.lt~y lA lt#"t011./1lJft Pl"fN."tt'ntc- ,,,_,. ,. R ~

~n.u1
t 5 C1r..r t\autr,..,.. "' L '
or
structed ob1ect, an ob1ect 11 sell sub1Pcrtd, a everything in the constructive

order, to constraints that artes l 10 tht power o f the symbolic ord<'r. Ledoux did
II
,,, st j)iltt
that wha t ~onsrltuts arc hllt>Cture - insofar as it is a rhing to consrruct - 1s

sub1ectcd 10 conMramts tha r attet . even tn the construcuve order, ro the force
('(1f
.shutitlyrrw,re <.0tntorrabtt1 hOi..ISn'Q betr4(:ks. bu\ w1fh \\It ot
thought chat ls itself bound by co ndillons, one will not fear to call formal, if
nor a priori Archn ecture is constif\Jtcd on th is principle insofar"' it is an
p~
' ' l\oft-1 lVt aJ.1.$1l'iC";,,. tJti t.1.1ni1tn
ft ., ' '
t6 '.lt<j' $.I oW'oO n.... tJt#~ $rhoVI. ,l.l 8v'ltlO

J..' P(1 ~fl'tl ; (J;o-.8 h,.I.
11
rl
,,Jc 1~ , l.IJ\/"""' <Par'\
'",g' i: o
""'
--- t..~. . -
11-
'
. 1. .
~ :: ~.
-----
'
The Ledoux Effect:
Emil Kaufmann
11
11
I
I 1dr11tify ModernU.111 with the 111tenAijicat1on, a/1110.dt

thU. exacerbation, of thi,,., Ac>/f-cnt1ca/ tendency
that began with the philo.1iopher Kant. BecaU);e he
u11Ui tlie fir.6t to criticize tl1e 1nea11.<1 itL.elj of critici;,n1,
I conceive of Kant a;, thr fir.6t real ModerniAt.

CLE MENT GREE N BERG 1960'
. .... .6
. . ..
Th idea of arrh1tectural ,1utonomy," the notion that architecture, t0gether

w11h th' othrr art>. 1s bound to an intrrnal cxplo1 at ion and transformation
of 11' own >pec1hc language. ha5 periodically surfaced m the modern penod.
1<\lhl'ther '" J way ot class1ry111g th~ quahttcs of archittctural form" a>
oppo,...i 10 s1yle." 01 a> J way of dehn1ng the role of the archi1cc1 tn an 1ncrea
1ngl~ Sp<'<1ahzed professional world. thr a>oertton of autonomy hiiS been a
tl'ttmoul ol modernism. from the end of the nineteenth century. if not earlier.
Art h"1011ans. beginning w11h Wof01n and continuing wtth R1egl; architects
b~g1nnrng with Loos and co1111nu1ng w11h Le Corbus1er and Mies van dcr Rohe:
critt(> brginning w11h fry and Stokes, and con11nu1ng with Greenberg ~nd
Kr JUS>. all in different ways and with d1ffonng agenda s have established their
ground~ of debate on the rclattv( autonomy of modernist aestheti c practices.
Mme recently, in architecture, l\O'i'1, Venturi, and Eisenman have, among
many others. laid claim to the Jutonomy or the language.
Of all th" writers and atehttecrs who have contributed over a century or
more 10 the dcbdle over autonomy, the Viennese historian. Emil Kaufmann.
)land' our as a cons1s1en1 rl'fercncc point for all subsequent di scussions.' for
while, u1 retrospect, Wofnins development of a formal method for characttr
1t1ng Jrch1tec1ural perio1h, <1nd R1cgl\ propo)ttton of a historical and cultural
'P.-llhtity to !he IOll'rplay of v1s1on ,1nd spJcc could be seen as set11ng up 1he
81ounds lor a modernist idea of autonomy 1n a 1ch11ccture and the other arts. ii
WJs
F:mil Kaufman n who was !he hrs1to101n rhc ana lysis of historical architec
tu 11 10 Kant's philosoph1cal position, denv~d from Kant, and who was the hrs!
10 coin the plu<1se "au1onomen a1 thi tcktur" drawing on Kant's own concept or
auionomy ol rhe will. And 1t wa~ Kaufmann who served 10 introduce 1hc twin
ided~ of dUfonomy and modernism to ~u~cessive generauons of arch1t~S
dnd 1 rtllC. beginning with Philip Johnson 1n the 1940s. bur conunuing wilh
Cohn Rowe in the 1950s and Aldo RoS\1 1n the t95os and 6os More r~tnily
his work Wd~ at the renter of a h1stoncal rl'ascssment of autonomy and the
~van garde 1n the Unned Slate 10 dn cay by the historian Oeltef Mertens
presented at a symposi um 10 honor Ph1l1p Johnson.3
"
ANTHONY VIDLER
\'tt
En11I Kaulm no,, tht,1\ ol tl1l' dtttlc."pmvnt ot d modltnL~m f'mng
mfnt o l irdou\ , l1ff' and worL. V11n l t't10llt l>u Lr Corbu..Jt#t
thr ht..,.. com pr"
g 1n the .-.or,.,, ot l'l.1otlt N1tol.t' lc-dot1" 1r' ctlt' l//Q')Andlulm111at1ng 1r:. tht"
hf'""'''f' monograpt:ical rr,..1tmrntof 1h<"frrnth.;ttch1trtt b.- itn' arch1te<tural
tqln' ha~ h.ld 111an) dt.. .tc 101 ~~nee t~" pub
h1\tor1dn' Substquc-ntly l\.)ufm.,nn" d1iccnn1t"\ hA\P 1n,p1red gentr.at1ons
YI Of k of l.t (:c>r bu''''' 1n 1t t :.1rt
l1c.1r1on o. 111~ po t111tl.,lly r1tltd Vo11 I f\Jc>11x biA L(" C.orb~lft 1n 19))' ~In<.
o, ...c-ho':.r ... 10 WOI~ "' 1 tw ~rch1trcturr 0: thf' rrvolut1onary petaoct, .. hfher
thrn tht V1t.nnt .. ,. h1,1nr1 ln, "lr'A of .trtl11recturd! pro~r"' h ..... t-ot"t-n t.bl
or noc: thr\ Jgrtt w11h K1utm.1nn th.tr
gr1ttd
*' ~11npl1,t1c: by< 1111<' 1.....
l du.11fto l'tr~llC> .. nd P-1ryer Sct-.1p1ro. ust-d
p.11f1ol1>Gtc. .11,vm1.,tclm of 1t't' dtt ... dt:n<l' ol mod'' n1\m b)' c Ol"ls.~rv.at;\\ 111\
ti) ,1
1011.tr'l"i I kt ti.in~ ~ttlln.1yc .. ,,d t.lttint~cJ
''"'Vt'""'>' ot h1,1or1c.I \Ch[)lo.1,h~p
b) fl'''''' lltJt; frt1n\ M1c.)t1ti
,111t'"'''''11f J~cr1t14h11t11on ... hl.lme'd fot
11J1c.lt1ly1ng i>tt11c pit\ I
1nlrlt(t'" 11, j)jlVlfJ
111)
'"f>b\r\(.IVt" \tdr<h
I ~,U1\t1td tn ,1n l'Xf1tmc. d1g1tc..... nd undc.t
W,1k111', tV()fd\ by ,1
hO\l t)f ll'iiC,11( ht't\
follOWlng
t)\l'
lt,iJ
~0111nh1ng rt1ovolu11onJ1)'"' ""'ii~ to~
dt'trt tt"d 1n tht.. p:r rf'V<'lu11ont1) .ind morurchtc. .11 lc..-dou Ht\ work hdc;. po ...ed
o ,t,1101'> to lhl" h1'\for1ogr.-ph1c.al t1t"atmrnt of 1hr ...ort~n\... ot
mod~1n1 .. m
:.nd ht 1n,plic ~ion 10 tht t"n' 1rt ton\1ru, 11on of h1 ..1or tc ' ' ' h1s1or v from Niko
tau'
rt
1l '\1sC11rJ c.1..J.on !t 1nt,1ros-11N h n.1turc.. ot .lb\tr..rr1or. 1n
f)t\'Sn..r
l11on 10 h~..om..1r1<ol fotnmploy. d by th~ rnl1ght<nm1n1 Jnd th. mnl1
196<). K.1ut1TI111111 ., r11w
f,11Hly fotJ,!'c>tttn lntlt1t 1d hl' ., ~'Cthdr' the onl>
c1l ~. _., c. h,tc.c.. ru r ,. J 11J ~o' 1r1 y 1n .e w.. y 1h.11 d 1r t"' t l~ '"h .-1 ltuil'd rhe c. ul 1u r .1r 1dt
olo~y ..,f Na11uf'l ..1 'lnt1 lt~01 an t)u: tC)}O' H:s ~Qhr1quct "ct\olu1101ldl)' .irc.h1
11npc11 ldOI h1~tur1.1n
.1,,c>
1,1tld with 1ht '" c..1llt.J V1cnna Srt1ool
at thl' 1q1t-J~
11.c..1"' 1n h1 ... llook l l1r. R i 1il11twnuryJ\rcli1t ( r..t. puh11,htd ''' 195J J' ..1rrl1~d
who ,,. wc>r k t . ,
l>tln { om1>1 cht ''' 1vtly 1c. '''l'');td for ''' ' ' tic>1 .. 1ly a1\d
tn rh1 ""' ul Jll l11CI\ r .. Jou lloull1<. nd L.-queu trio ho h'd l.irgdy J1>
m .. thod .. ln~it.tl q11ll11t'\ 1n 1h1 IJ 1 dtt 1d1 lln> S1dlm.1y1 ,111d 0110 Prht
r o\'l"tt.-d .ind, <i.t to ""P..-ilk ,,... ,.nr,J. "Whllt" n1u< h m1,,1nt!tc \tood nt.'\'trthclf'''
of Wc\lf~,1ng lf<'I 11u.11111., tfll1,,nk111t,; cf 1h1 1r.1d1t11>nl1l I tdoux chronolog)' 1n
tvi11
(~t;tdt> Kit''
r101
tlnlt/ vo1\
Wt1nl>trg ,.,,d I 1111 Nu\.lln}. f\,1\thttn tr.ln-.fJttd
)UC. ctrde"d 1n g.11n1ng tt1rm t ht 1 tt"r.11''" c1f ~ 1tou' '\. hol~r)' IIt' P''''h\lml'U'
''"'
lJiOok Ar 1111.' r11r, ,,. rl1, A9"0/ Hta.wtt Wtl\.OO ''"' p1,;t1l1c;4tll1n. con~1dtrtd tht
1.. ,, ""'1)1 don C'1ghtt't'r.th t'Of u1., u opr.-n .tr hit rt turr f- zn41llv. K-iaf m... nn..,
rel ttt.11 wo1k .trt tly1t d 1rt II\ J11\lc1r 1u~rd11h1< JI .. nd 1htorc.f1(I conte>ll:t
1n Chr1~t<\pt1tr Wf1od \ r<.trnr ;and 1mp<'tl tnt 1r1t1oductory ...1ud) 10 h1~
v,,., ''"
'""'~,.,;II th1t quc,1ons w11hm d ph1lo-.>ph11~I
c;, h111J/ Jl1t1d1 r, K.1utmar1n t' rtltgdttd ro .t fool nolt'
ll" wcf k h' nol .1lw:1y> bt ..n d1n1grtt'hng gn1h
c,tnt contr1ht1t1nn'\ 10 tht h1~tory
11f
frt.nch t"1gh.1ttn1h,~ntJriy 41Jthl'f'tturc
tlu<lu.g.1ou1 thr 19.10~. ,,. c~hn111K 1r.1d1t on.11 clt1-.S>1t1\m"' ""''h rht 1n11odut
1100
of tht 1J1 .1 cl nco cltt5>._,, '""m. K.111fm.trn.10 tht \t"tond \Olumtof Hd.n\
Stdlm.i}r .tnd l;rto r.tlht'~
l1.i,'t,.,,
JCUfOt11I of V1t.nnt,,. ..,,rukl;.tran.aiv\r,
publ \hf'J the f1r~t mJJO'" d\'4.'~'m<.nt ''' thl" .11,J11ttt.turC" ot Claudt- N1lO'A""
frtne,.ork 1ha1 ha> !>Ot

'r.t..t"d ro 1ntorm c.r 111c.1l 1twro1 \ th.tT prov1Ut'1! by KJnt tn ht!t tn'l1..,.tt!:'1l t' on 1hci
,,_,.tuncmy ot
Vunf"J
(trtf1r.~ttd
5thool', 1r1t1l1t1J,
f1l h1"
;l
l.Jl"l' pOfCIOn o( t':I!\ 19Jb lt\o ltW 0( tht'
nc.1tc:s
ror th~
unhn1\h..,d Ptu.4,oyt'n ~prlc
Wlll'I B<'nJ.1m1n cou'<l l1b<:r.11ly from KaulmJnn\ brrl'I. but ucn<hnt
tr
~ lund.1mt'n''' Jll*"ml\t'
tlf
bnur~t"<'..,
frct"dont Tht'
:1nlo. f')td1il1,,ht'd b .. Kat..f m...nn b.-1"""'"' n l rdm..-. OJ Mn1 J~ ituben Ooiml"( h
h.1 ... nottd 1n 11\t' n ...a} tr i'm.l tlrd 1n 1h1"'' olumt"
di on
th3t. .h~thPr or nof 1t 1\
h ''t orrc..il I) , ,r1 tia!llc km.. an'> hJl!c-ngmg r ,\~II 1n1t'fr11t1un' uf 1l1c na.1u1 c.
eot 1<h11.-. 1u1al lngU1$ and ol thrpla ~ ot h~ J1s.1phn~ tn mO<!<"t n :.1y

Bn"Ond 1h1... );.\ul"'"'""' "-nrk unl1Ar 1h41 of m.tnv h1..,tor1.:tn~ ha' h..;J
l fdou'C - c>nt 10 whit h Mt.\tr "\< h.1p1ro. dt)p11r ht' rn~..,,urtd ~C'C11t\ t 1 tttqu<
Of 114> t()I m.1l .lpprcl.-, h
t.f' w 11 .. ,
J1rt'<I 1rtl1Jtl\Ct"OP t11tta lt\tur~I ptOH.tt<r. nd .,p.-c1.1lly 1n thr w.\) th.1
'''"''""fJ
tht" moJl"fnt~m o! fh(" 1q10.. <i1nd lqJ'~ "l!t

1n '~" hr't 1n~1.anc,. 1n
the Un11t-d ~l.ltl't'~ 1mmr1t1 '6:1\ ilf1M th.co 'n.1r lm1gr.1t.ng to tht" \,!(, 'n 1<l4l
@q
,Jl __
1
........
I
~-~ii,~J~~-~-g~-~c=-=-:
l"Oic Architcetktunheorie der f'ranzosischen Klass1k und der Kalssizismus)
was taken up by Phthp lohnson. whose Glass House of 1949 was.
according to rho arch11<"<I. d""ply mdebted to a rca d1ng of Von 1Ado11x blA IA
11 h ArthitecnJr m th
Corbt<AI<''" Later. Kaufmann's wr1t1ngs. and cspccra Y 1
hen translated. trong
Aqe of llPOMm. poschumou<IY published m 1955. wer. . w
intlucnct< on the th..ones of rchltoctura l autonomycharacteristic of th Nco
Ra11onah>t S<: hool m Italy after 1<)71. and ..spt'C1ally on the theory and de!ign
of Aldo Ro<~1. who rt'V1ewed h" boo"- en de1a1I " More rl'Ccntly. Kaufmann has
bttn re-111trrpreted as a tti ..or1~t or an architectura 1 au1on omy based on hn
gu1>t1c and d1.sciphnary codcs. A~ proposedby p etcr E'sc
' nman and others"
~ufmann
Redd today on the context of rhc detailed monogr.1ph1c research th.II

was to have mod1hed his one scemmglyover s1ropllhcd conclusions. de,ptc
the unanh1ng of other architects to the foie to councerbalaoce the image
of the "thre-e revolutionaries: and tht concextuahzauon of their work in tho
hgh1 of new historical in1crpn'ta11on> of "enhghtcnment" and r~volution,"
Kaufmann; analyses can be ;ccm to rcga111 much of th~ir original force, as
seeking to nsr above styJ1 st1< differences and biographical details. IO grasp
th phonomonon of an arch11tt1ural enlightenment" en all cts d1mens1ons.
intelltttual and formal At ih >cry lea;t. hes thrsc> btar re examcnatcon as
representing a cr1t1ral stag m 1h de,elopment of th d1sccphne of archllCC
tural hi story - as 1mponant 111 1he1r own way as thooe of R1cgl. Frankl. and
Gicclion - a1 the s.1mc time a> 1hcy challenge qucs1ions to ou r contemporary
conccp11on> of arch11ec1ural form and our preconcep11111Hi of 11s pohtccal and
social s111n1 hca ncr. In rell ospt>ct. as I shall argue. hi> an~lyt cal and h1s1oncal
approach, more subtle and reMhen11han er 1tccs have understood. acts as a fun
damental cr111quc of the very "chool" with which he has been assoc1att'd, the
established klassizismus as a period with a formal cxpresion. or rather strut.

. . ow n"
ture-, or 1ts
. Mere Kaufmann ws underlining what he saw as thedisti'nci
difference between French developments and those in other "Baroque coun.
tries. Between Classicism in the m1dscvcntee nth century and Neoclassicism
after 1750 there were. for K~ufmann. cenain continuit ies of "clarity and truth"
bur sharp differences 1n compos111on. which seemed to him to move from a
principle of mea ningful harmony inherent in the work itself toward a princl
pie of expression or communication provoking scnsat ions beyond the work.'1
In an "htsiorical" confirmation of Nietzches 1878 assertion that "Stone Is
more stone than before: Kaufmann articulated tis shift. as one that finally
relinquished the natural values of physical materials ("the demand that the
material be? granted its own physical properties and life") in order to privilege
ideas alone.1
For it /NeoclaMicV.m/ rhe material i.i dead. Fonn ha;. 110 othl'r funcrion than
to be the bearer of ide12A the mediator of mood.A. to arotue emotio~ which 011
dutinct from the .Aen.4uOt<A matvrial ond which the matenal iu.elfdo.,. not con
tam. The ;.ymbol of Neoc/OAA1ru.m iA the nonAen.t.Ua/ .Atone, the .Atone inl:ab
crvd by 9ei11cu."
Kaufmann here established two clear points of reference for his analysis
of the period 175<> to 1800: what he would call later "the universal animism of
the baroque: where inanimate material took on organic forms, and its antith
esis. postRevoluuonary form, where the material itself has its own laws: ror
architecture after the Revolution," he wrote, "the stone 1s again stone." !"Bau.
V1tnnil School, wh1le 11 resonates with contemporary .i111mp1> to sec modern

csm" no longer as a brief (and fJ1lcd) ava ntgarde cxpenmcnt in the 1<J>O>, but
kunst ~t dr Stein we1der Stein"l11
a long proce.s of poli11cal and aesthetic struggle. w11h in1dlectual rool> in
c1sm. on the other, as the conceptual beginning and end points of his research,
Enhghtcnmcn1and Kanuan philosophy
Kaufman n has 1dentihed the period 1750 to 1800 as a site of transition from
In setting up in this way Classicism. on the one hand, and Neoclassi
one to 1he other; but more importantly as a site of struggle where the IWO
FROM NE OCLASS ICISM TO AUTONOMY
rendenc1e and their compositional and philosophical corollaries are inter
Emil Kaufmann was born on Mairh 28, 1891 in Vienna: he studied first ar
nally and often inco nsistently manifested as architects press the clasical Ian
Innsbruck
~nd
then Vienna with the Renaissance specialist Hans Semper.
11uage of architecture to its limits 1n the search for a means to express Enlight
cla~s1
enment and Revoluuonary ideas. The paradigmatic figure in this srrugg\e,
Jrcheolog1st Emanuel Loewy (1847-1936). and the historian Ludwig von
for Kaufmann , was Claude Nicolas Ledoux whose architecture registered the
Pastor (165~ 1928). He was espPc1ally drdwn to the teachi ng of Max Dvorak,
shift from Classicism to Neoclassicism in an especially dramatic, and ulti
however, wnh whom he formed a close friendship. He was awarded his doctor
mately productive way. For Ledoux, argued Kaufmann, architecwrc was the
ate m Vienna 1n 1920 and went on to forge an entire held by his rediscovery"
very <.'Xpres~ion of the social ideals of the new bourgeoisie and the political
of 1hre1 gentrJt1ons of French archucctural theorists and designers from the
ideas of the Enlightenment as developed in Rousseau's ideal of individual free-
wuh the Bpant1nrsr architee1ural h1s1orcan Joseph Strzygowski. the

c~I
1750s to the 820>. d field that he 1hen expanded into the generalexam1na11on of
architecture 1n tht~geof reason" en Europe.As Schapiro noted m hts brief obnu
ry1n 1953. Kaufmann wasunablr to obtain a regular academic post(nodoubt a
result ol rarnpanr antisem11ism) and was obliged 10 work in a bank for much of
his early carc~r
His hn>1 ma1or an1cle. wri tten 1n 1920 and published m the Repeno
num fur K11rurwwe1u.chaft m t924. (intercs1111gly enough, side by side wtth

another ground breaking architectural study by Paul Zucker. " Der Begrilt der
zen 1n dcr arch11ek1ur") outlcned the hases for his s tudy of lte h
h
" e1g tcent ten
tury archnecturc, by dividing a J>crlod generically known s "Cl , lb .
ass1c, a e 1t
in a la~e moment. into two. Ai. cxplteated by Gorgcs Tcyssot, Kaufmann's
essay. The Architectural Theory of French Class1c1sm and N I .
eoc ass1c1sm:
dom and its Kantian counterpan. autonomy.""

Kaufmann's first direct reference to "autonomcn baukunst" was to occur
in
a short study of Ledoux's church architecture, centered on the project for
lhe Church of Chaux, (probably designed in 1785, and published in Udoux's
l'.4rcllitecture cot1.1iderll' ..iou.i le ropporr de /'orr, du moeur.A et de lo ll~i.tilO

an
I 10111
n t a04.I to Contrasting Lcdoux's scheme with Souffl<>t s des1D
.. for Salnte. .tt obvio usly was a response, Kaufmann 1'dentifies it with
to which
Genev1~ve,
the qualities ol the new "neoclasslclsm he saw emerging with Lcdoux's 8'en
anludas
eration. The Neoclassical, as opposed to the Baroque, church was org

.d
. i t separation
a so l 1 geometrical block, with reduced decoration and a dist nc
d
I on different
an d 1 en11ty of it s functional pans - separate altars. for examp e,
Ieves.
I for res11vals and marriages, as opposed to funerals. As ""u
v fmann \l(l'Ofll.
Left lo right
H 111 rt' rJt: c....nd1ll ;t
(.1,-,,uJ1_ N~' 01a5 Lr'tl"\J '
6.1rr~''(J('ll't('1
( 4,,)1! ',.ch( d
:>l"t't..,
It h'
B.!,r.,l;rt '1E' PC"u I,

CJ1.Jc.:-tJe!"'.-"lt1<tl1<
J'
I
~-
(. .-ft:,
l'x11s Ambr
Ovt,..:
"In place of the conception of architectural form as living, organic nature, there
enters the feeling for
s trict geometry."21
This theme~ taken up again in the same year on the book-length anocle
l,.OJTI A,(ft,/11/tJ11>
H:lu~
i!:((
aspirations of late eighteenth century architects to develop a truly socia l Ian

guage of forms." The symbolic system that Ledoux wished to deploy was, of
course. nself dependent on the separation of ind1v1dual buildings onto odcnti-
on "The City of the Archnect LI>doux," l"Dte Stadt des Archnekten Ledoux"!
hable masses. and their shaping as readable signs. Herc, for Kaufmann. the
contributed to the second volume of the Vienna art h1stor1cal school's flag
pavilion s ystem, the isolauon of pans. and the articula11on of the appropriate
shop journal, the Kun,i,rt111AJ>e1u.chaft/iche For.6cl1u119<>11.tt In this first sketch
character of each structure, led naturally to what, 1n reference to Ledou x's
of what was to become, three years later. his first book, Kaufmann gives the
design for the Maison d'Educat1on," he finally named the new concept of the
idea of autonomy a fundamental place, with the subtotie on the Realization
autonomoiu trearment of the matenaJs_-a
of Autonomou s Arch11ecture 1zur Erkenntn1s dcr autonomen Archotekturt.
In thos way. Kaufmann established the complex development of Ledoux's
In thos detailed study, Kaufmann, hos critics notwothstandong. develops the
design practice as leading to the autonomous soluuon evinced 1n the series
argument too autonomy historically and with deliberate recognition of the
of none square plan houses deployed tn the landscape of the Ideal City of Chaux,
complexity inherent in architectural practice. LA-doux , for him, os after all a
an varied. all 1solated," as Ledoux stated.20 Such 1solatiun, Kaufmann averred,
1ransi11onal and pivotal figure in the shift from what he calls saroque to
marked the end of Baroque compositional practice, that of "concatenauon"
what he has c haracterized as Neoclassicism," and 11 os precisely the mixed
l\lerbandland the beginning of the newbuiJdjng form ldoe neue Bau form I.a form
nature of the work that allows him to comprehend the shift as an orgdntc
charaetented by the Enhghtenment pressure for c1ar1ftcation (Abklarungl ...
and slow process of 1n1ernah:ta11on and cognition on the pan of the archotect
Kaufmann thus prepared the analyucal ground for the systcmatic comparison
as to the overall problem of arch1tectu1e and tts proper means of expression
of with th<! general method of the Enhghtenment - that developed by Kant:
on an epoch itself undergoing 1adical shifts on 11> ontellertual, social, and

polttteal forms Thus Kaufmann's argument moves slowly towards the erkenntn1s- or "d1\COvery or autonomy, through a number ol stages. represented
by dctaoll.'d analyses of Ledoux's designs on roughly c hronolog1cal order
culm1na11ng 1n a long sectoon devoted to The Autonomous Solution 1"D1e
a utonomr IA>sun1(I.
At the ttme whe11 Ka111 reje<IA all tl1e moral ph1lo.6opltil'.6 of rite pOAt and decreu
the outor1omyof the will OA the.6Upr<'le pri11cipleof ethoo,. an analo9ow. 1Tau.fonna11on ralcu place m arch1ttttur# In the .6k'1tche,a of l.Adoux thu.e new ob1ecllve.4 oppttlr for the fir.bl time on oll theor clanty. Hu. 1vork mork.6 rite blrr/1 of
autor1omoiu arcl11tecn1re."
l'1rst Kaurmann analyle.<. the dramat 1c change on plan~ for the Saltworks
The theory of autonomy was given its fullest development in Kaufmann's
of Chaux betwl.'l.'n the in111al pro1cct of 1771 and thl.' hnal pro1ect of 1774
second book, a shm treatise ent11led. polemically enough. Von Ledoux bi.6
from a un1r1ed, square. counyard plan, to a number of separate pavo hons

grouped around a semi-circle, a s a sign of the mOI.' from naroquc un11y
le Corbiulfr_ pubhshed tn 1933. and su mmaro2111g and developing the argu

ments put forward on oie Stad1 In the Preface, dated v1cnna, May 1933,-
IBarockcn Vcrbandl to the Pavohon syMcm of the nineteenth century IPav1l
Kaufmann outlined hi s methodological premise Thi s was to be. he wrote,
ltonsystem1.t The break up of th1 project into functionally defined and foo
something more than a mono11raph. and different to a mosaic of an anlstic
mally exprci.sed units was, for Kaufmann, an 1nd1ca11on of the proncople of
hfe" Rather 11 was to be seen as a pan of the his tory of arch11ccture whi ch,
1sola11on," the emergence of an archttccture of 1solat1on hsoherneden Arc ho
through thl' 1nttrp1etat1on of the work of Ledoux. appears 1n a new hght
ttkturl that paralleled the emergence of the modern 1nd1v1dua1 conscious
at thl' s.ime tome as demonMratong the importance of the great movement
ncss llnd1v1dualbcwusstsetnsl."
of idea around
The 1xamplc o f thl' Church of Chaux affords Kaufmann an example
1800
for the domain of an: Thi theorettcal aom was
expre~sed on the i.ubt11lc to the book, no longcrzur t.:rkennt nis dcr Au tonumcn
of the transltoon from Baroqul.' dynamic composlc1on to Neoclassical static
Arch11ektu1 but now the more dynamic ursprung und Entw1cklung dcr
compos111on the flattened. low dome and the horizontal Jones of the block reon
Autonomen Archotektur." The sub\totut1on of orogon and Development for
forcing a sense of calm medotatoon, a s opposed to the upward movement of
01scovery represented both a firmer convtctoon 1n his own "discovery and a
Baroque churches. f'unher. the artocu latoon of the different altars - one for
sensl' of 11> hostoncal 1mphcat ions for later developments.
fest ivab and mJrroages on the upper level, wnh a second for bun a ls and memo
F"rom the outset, K.iufmann made 11 clear that he was seeing the f'rcnch
rial servi ce~ brlow 1n the crypt, whh ot> own entranc~s and cxns towards the
architecture of the Enlightenment and Revolutton .i s equal or greate1 Jn 1mpor
cemeteries. enunciates for Kaufm;inn a "principle of 1solatton IPnnzip der
lance to the already welle st.iblo shcd trad111on of German Neodassocosm a~
lsoloerungl. one that corres pond s to the sense of distance ID1stant1erungl
represented by Schinkel. Ho s title. on fact, was a direct gfo,s on Paul Klopfer's
necessary for th11 commun1cauon ol su bhme effects."
Von Palladio bu Sclunlce/, an argumt>nt for the primacy of German archotec
K.auf mann then advances his argument with the analysis of the two sym
ture as 11 received the Renaissance tradition from lt~ly. Kaufmann, by con
bol oc monument s, the "Panar.hcon and the "Paci f~re," cuing Ledoux's state-
1ras1, 1s concerned to emphasize rhe role of the l'ocnch and Latin traditions
ments that the torm of a cube 1s the symbol of immutab1l11y and the form
on the contonua uon of Palladio's legacy to t he present. His work 1n Paros had
o f a cube os the symbol of Justice as a way of introducing the concept of arch1
convinced him that u was the Laton countries that counted in the develop
lecture parlante." or speaking architecture."'" Kaufmann had discovered this
ment of modernism Whole philosophy. under the aeg1~ of Kant_and poetry fol
term, not ot~elf of eighteenth century orogin , in a mid nineteenth cent ury artl
lowing Uolderltn, could be seen to have constructed the 1ntellec1ual dnd loter
cle saunz1ng Ledoux's anempts to communicate ideas through buildings and
ary foundations of Romantic modernism. II was 1n f'ranct' and Italy that the
itnmediately saw
work of the f'nhghtenment en"red fundamentally into the visuJI drh. and
11
as both pos111v!' and apt in its characterizat ion of tht
~ ~
-.... ------
i
I
!
I
I
I:
a:=--r:;
. . ..
' K ufmann argued. by the

espenally arch11ectul't'. Tlus was accompIish "" a
"h
us" as he called
final break w11h Baroque modes of compos111on ( eteronomo
them) and rhc 1nrroduct1on on 1heor place of modern forms of disposiuon
("auronomous or"free stand1ngl Once ra11fied by the Revolution.and despite

attempts to ve1l rhe radical nature of the shift by means of historical styles.
autonomy survived 10 l'Srabhsh rhe abstracuon of modernism as rhe apotheo
om the JitrAt ro th<> .&eco11d project reflecu no le.u thao one ,,

Tile paM09P fr
.
o,
rtonr
PvtllU
11
the
l1utory
of
architecture:
the
diAm<mberinq
1
rhe moAt 1mpo
In
t A/IOllOll (Zertrummeru119 dv. Boroclu?n Verbondu/
of Baroque cO"co
.
0
remorknblt> poralleli.l.m 1vrth the gen~/ h1Aroncevolut1on,concatenotion u~
o'povd1o11 nate compo.6it1011. tvhich, aftrr that moment. becomupreby t hPAYAt em ~
th" ; rlie F..e QAA0(1otio11 ofautonomoiu e11titie..1.(Pavillo11.1em_die
.
:rdommo111: ~ ~ 1..
fr" Verein1911t19 .&elb.bto11d19er exi..irenzen/ IVLLC, 16-171
sis of Enlightenment l't'ason. He wrotrc
If wt>
o,... well-mforrnvd about tloe l1u roric role of Italy"' rhe i11iriorory lo
.
'
by
11
In this rransformation o f compositional techniques. the instrumental force,
traAt
of modn1 r""'" in rlie domo1t1A of art 011d .&oc1ery. '"" remain, con
i9nom11r of th rolP of F'ro11ce a..i pioneer of a new arr and crearor of a new
orrhirecruni. ro1vor<U 1800. d11r1119 the Gothic period, rhe ded.&iVP innova
"'
11otu Nim<' from thP Fre11cl1 arch1tecl.6. Jn rhe following work. I om Jir.&t con
1:.n1ed ro ,.nder JUAt ke ro rliP a rrur who ivcu 111 ftrAt, no r with a vogue i11tu
1t1cm of durant 9001.1. bur wirl1a cfpor and [1111 AP/fco1t.1>cio1uneAA. ro troverA
rhP long routv from rl1e Boroq11e "' modern architPcrure: Claude.Nicola..i
U>doux. Ploc~ or rhe /ro1111er of two epochA. before and after the Rt>vo/.
ut1on. h1A work u rl1e firJ>I 10 on11ou11ce the nPlv orriAttC oiln.6: it iA the ronqible
witnP.._. ro rhe oppeoro11r# of o lll'IV world. Bur ir iA a/Ao my concern to Allow
how l11A 1dP<lb arid rho..P of hu epoch ore rro1umirted to UA. and how, in
a woy. thP umry of tlrP la..it hundrPd and fifry yearA iA ref/P<'fed "' arch
tl'CT11rol ocr1v1ry. lvLLC. 5-61
both for the produc11on of the buildings and their historical analysis, was the
rational plan. it is the plan which as Kaufmann noted "allows us to discover
the fundamental reasons for the determination of forms," no doubt a first
s tep that allowed for Kau fmann's historical connection of Ledoux with the
Le Corbusicr of the "plan
as generator: And this plan, as with the three
d imensiona l form of the pavilions. is constructed not by any reference to a

Baroque observer. but purely geometrically. Geometry operates as a calculated
control of form for use; not only does the "rat ionahty of the plan" (die Ratio
des Planes) exercise "absolute sovercjgnty." but it offers a neutral system of
order. en11rely abstracted f rom the personal experience of a perspectival
observer. Where an baroque architecture was conceived as a function of the
observer," now "the center of the new buildings is no longer the heart of the
whole ... It is no more than a geometrical point to which all the parts rela:~.
Thl' new buildings are assembled and not intimatelylinked IZusammen-gestt2.
Kauf mann wa; 1mml'd1ately concernc.'d to announce that 11 was the "revolu
nocht zusammcngewachsenl. IVLLC. 19) In accordance with the spirit of auion
tionary" ptnod a> a whole - 1770 to 1790 - with which he was concerned:
omy. the new pavilions are enurely self-sufficient: as opposed to the Classical
preci se dates, which for Ledoux were on any cse hard to come by, were less
and Baroque system, rnhented from Renaissance aesthetics. where 1odetach
important than a sen~c o f the >1gn1hcauon of the global shift
in
art and
philosophy. a s 1n the >ocoal and poh11cal n!alm. The years t hat saw the prepa
a part is to destroy the whole." the pavilion re1ects parts and becomes anassocoation of independent elements:"
ration of the grea1 revolu11on that was completely to t ransform the social
sys tem of the west" wer "the same years on wh ich the work of Kant matured."
tlr
wr11~s.
"Globally. rhere was a profou nd (we could say today. defini11ve)
If one wiAhe.4 to choracrerire theorchitectural.4y.&tem.6 by formulaellA reduced

po....1blP 011e could define Baroque t111Aociotion in the.be term.A: one port dom
a..i
Q/I the otl1er.4 011d nevertl1e/e..u all the part.& farm a whole: the detp
denial of the past ; a clear and self<onscious rupture, a decisive step toward
i11ate.i
a new autonomy." ror Kaufmann . the interconnection between these move
..ierue of rlrv
men1s and the work of Ledoux was not accidental, but established by Kant and
w1rl11n tl1e frame of tl1e totality. /Der Tei/ Lit frei im Rohme11 de.A Gorizen/
Ledoux"s com mon respect for and indebtedness to Rousseau:
BettWen the tlVO AyAtPmA lie.& a Rqvo/11tio11. 1v LLC. t9)
Ar rlie momonr wlion. wirlt rlre Derlarotton of tl1v Righu. of Man , the r i9llu of
Kau tmann was far from claiming that Ledoux ever threw off the Baroque sen
tht individual are affinrtPd. at the moment wlie11, in place of the old hererono
mouA mora/11y. Kant i11Atirut<'d rl1e auto11omoUA ethic. Ledoux laid tl1e foundo1io11A of on au1011omoUA arrl11recrurP. IV I.LC. 12)
sibility entirely - in different ways, all of Ledoux 's work exhibited its transi
The correspondence was direct 1f fo1 Kant the Crinque of Pure ReC1.11on had
esse du Barry) a nd the 1780s (the H6tel Thelussonl that "the opposed prin
. I
ds . .AAU)t$
c1p es were hv1ng or rl1e .Aome time in the artist" - but he fin 1n"""" '
"fa na11c1sm
f or geometry and rigorous
.
o f the arthi
planning a n ant1c1pa11on
accomphshe0 wha1 numerous centunl!s had !>ten unable to realize," for Ledoux
"the moment 1n wluch we hve has brok~n the chains that shackle architecrure."
Jvu.c.12: l.edoux. l 'Arrl11tttture, 30) f)'om a study of Ledoux, Kaufmann averred,
po11iho11 ..iy..item co11 be rro11.Alot11d thUA: the port iA independent
tional character - indeed Kaufmann s rresses in his analysis of buildings from

rhe 1770s (the H6tel Montmorency, the pavilion at Louveciennes for the
eom
reefs later. more abstract project s . (VLLC. :to)
would emerge the an swer 10 three cnucal questions: the reasons for the "aban
Here Ka ufma nn sees the influence of the desire of the Enlightellment
doning of the aes1ht-11csof Baroqueclass1c1sm," the"relations between the Revo
for "clanhca11on,- or Abklarun9. which when applied to architecrure called tor
luuon and architecture." and the profound s rgnification of neoclassicism and
t he u se of "massive blocks" superimposed in compositions that. rather than
the architecture of the end of the nineteenth ceniury- IVLLC, 12 J."
relying on the effect of a cen tral. princip al, motif. gained effect
.
I
. II fref in htS
simp e strength of masses themselves. And while Ledoux is stt
The general concepr of arch1tectural autonomy, was, for Kaufmann, repre
through~
cdurnsand
.sented by a wide range oflarge and smallscale formal mo-s

Th6< ft r51 . and most
<
use 0 Baroque mo11fs to give hi s buildings character- the upturn
fundamental, because the most radical shift from Baroque m od es o f compost
non was the separatton of buildings according 10 a q"as
I 1den11fica
1 fu ncuona
grono in the Salt works, for e xample - h is preference was for th e 3
rchittc~
i ns ror the
to speak by mean s of 1ts own s tereometric forms, as 1n the des g
t ion , rather than their unihed and h1erarch1cal massing 10 inc Iud ea II functions.
This step, taken by Ledoux at the beginning of his career ash

e 1et11soned the
f
courtyard prehminary s~heme lor the Salt works in fa
.
.
vor o a grouping of pavil
ions. was dl'C1s1ve:
its concentric rings and intersecting barrelshaped form):
th
W )<shOP (..-1
ouse o lhe Surveyors (a vast elliptical tube), or the Coopers
or
;,Jijng initia
f:xperi mqnu. wir/1 fomv. thenuelve.& count amon9 the ma.1>t a..1ton
nJ
,
~~IW
tivc,i of rlri..6 epoch. 11111 preference for t/ie .Aimple.At .6tereometriCC0 .
nrrrj. . . .
Ji11 dAmthtr-.
1..1 rndicatve of the qraviry of the ..ipirit of rlrP a9e Th1L4 one
.)
'
N'f.A
of I Nlo1. \ Af"'VI rr < ,&,:.ti laA Otl'
\'A far'
apl"'altolhc oc: 111 m ol 11 anm s Mtryiu who. in "1~' l.1udPd IA'tloux for having
\arr1pl1 ''' tl14' <011r1try Hot1M t:1J
/an1a< or th II UAr for 1 Mll11 o} I rtt rAl 1111 l/01ur of ti,. Woodc1111<"T.A "' rli<
g1vrn the pyramid (pll'V1ously ''"''""for lh~ ehrr) 10 thr mas>cs"

nut
f"rmof a pyrarr rd r/1 cyli1d1 ra/ <:ou11try l/01ur {al.Ao tlw llarrir of thr 1011
w:- 11 rhf" cont'lt
uon bc1wc<11 1-Nloux and Rou~scau mY I><- obv1
kva.-d of La l1//c11. Ml~ ..1ta11d1119 arid tlu cyl111dr1cal llo1t<e of .\I lJ. Wirt}
ous 1ha1bttw11n1..,doux 1nd Kanl 11ma111s uncrrtarn tor. di hrs glance the
andfmallySpl '"ca/ l/J11A 0/1111 Aqrrn1/twJ/Guar.t.l lv1
question of ulononi1" p<ll<d hy I\ ant lht has" for morI prancaplc and
Du1ld1ng U?
L<.
301
1akcn up 1hroughout the nant11, nth and 1wrn11e1h cenru1 rt>s
tt
argu11lt'nt I r I c tou\ as 1n <Ji.1g1nator of modt1n1srn.
l\aufm 1n r~mar k on 11~fa<11h,11 "ou1 own l'pcxh lank1d 10 rh.at of L~doux.

l'i open to 1 xprr1mnn1s of lh< \,11111 t..1nd wh1< 11 l'Vtn 1f th<y ar<" without l\,ut
from in 11ch1tt t tur.111111111 c1f view, a11 n<l l<ss \t'r) ~1gn1f1tf1nt of tht. 1ndc.fati
haJ 1nt1111.1trd 111lllS1..~11111w11111lH,s. th1 (>t<>lt'l t lnr tht C'hu1ch of Chau>c.. Comhln1ns tl1(; cJ11:1.tnd t11 .1 s1118lt, f 1tt !lit.1ntt Lng n1.1'' t1or1l<>n1al .1n<l ~t<lt 1c. with
1rnt1cn tlt tt11\1 t1cln.1I 111n11nrs ~uch ,,., tht .1l1.1rs, on d1tfl'tlnt lt\<ls 1
11 also< on,11 u ..
tt a
c iln1 mtd1tdt1on In
lion and
f\tW k1n1t cit

c1
u1ocl.1'''(tll suh!11n1 J hts wa' 1.ubt1mc of
511!111111 lll\IOtlbll11y; ,1 ~\Jbitmt
C)f
111J1v1dual '\elt ahCiOI p
I) tl)lpt1!rlt d I<> tl11 Mcd1tv.1I t;anctuary of unworld
C'>ntrmpldt1c111
Ian" or'' 1roqu1 spi ltu 1l 1 ltv111on
It
~as
t 11!1.I .tdvancf.'<l In tht c:rrtlC/Ut of r11r1 Rl'CU.Olt as a call ro
flroi(fl(t
re;t,on to gain sr1f knt1WIPdgi 11 prt stnltd tht kind ot p.11.tdox b<tw("tn ldW
t1qu<- ot pure. 11,; t\t>rl pr1-..up1><1,1~ wh.1f l\e c.1ll.., .1 .. tr1bun.I'" that wall rn~urc
IJ1111g1ng fcJgt 1l1c1 .111t1tt''''t1>1npc1~1 t1l1n.1l 1nnnv.1t1011~. ' .l~ Kaufmann
f..( ,,
rh<ory or
l1bror$ll pot1t1c!i, <lct s 1\0t <1~1ly 11 1 tt to arll11tcc1ure. <-1tht"r in
anJ -..c.11w1ll1h.tt 1, '" h.1u1lled pol111cal 1t t"i.on1ng t Vtr ~1nct In Kant fh<" cr1
gahlc rt cc. 1rt.h tot 11cw lttl m~ ln1u1r Cit'!'!. I 1f1J 1v1 t <, \.Z)
1h1
of }lOurgeo1s
1< lhl'warchword
,1J,o d bulilamt of da-..tanct.,
1t\tcl.11n1s of rt.1 .. 01,, ,1 trthun.11 cf1.tt optr.1t11-.. 'not by d1",pot1c dc1..rttlli" but 1n
.1ccn1d.1nte w11h '''own 11 ..111.11 .and un.1l111.1hlt' law' A p~r>QU by('do1no
1nlp~1.ll 1v' 1ht I 1uu,lc)lll to g1vt~ oncsrlfla~ re>i'rci;e'\ts

~h1 "'i\*<m Cqnpt If. i:;:,i, Jio.,r phltRsupify; \\iterrlSy .~trng'in accor
dan{~ "'' I 1w r~ .ir ,,, l urttfaon ftr t(Jldo'Oi l3r, colllie1scly, fncdom
m~i,r~f'' 11 :11t ~ hl~Ur~ 01 rfa, 1l'tl"' ~.I\ , airi~pM m1gljt sd!X:. d1St nr'!ll.dl!I
ff,~m ~Y 1'1'.Jir mff nr.li nri!ijptt\i '!Jf'c.tl,1rPau 1 ~th~p :f&r 11itgu~1na
1
ogi. b ~.en fr ilom~. rl/1 110-n!Jr rW. 6J.t'fa Ta-/
1
,__,,"'-'ll111 &1 r .tngt doutl1!f
i.-.;"
rt tlec t tns tht
1<l~.1 rt11r.mon to ntt>
Ktt nt 1.. ns t ron1Woltt)an1 o \'\'arburg Adorno
to Kt1ircaucr ,,d lit n 1m1n, th ll o!J11 Cflvtty tnd 1n11onal11y rcqu1r<-s a kerp
mg on<' d1s1anc<'" fd1 rnnzhalrrnl IV 1 <, 131 hnally, lh<' ~nurc fltet ot rhe
Church, II own 1 nl gh1< r.rd sp1r11u.11 ty IS i;arn!CI not by the 1nrroduc11on ol
p mtrng. u:ulp1un 1m~ ' "' symbol> bur by "the autonomou> -ans of
archnrcturr" ld1l'au1 r.omrn Mllt<'I du Ar<hlh kturllvtLC )41
~l"" ~ v
l!tni
repr1 stn!C'd far mart
1l11n ,a
K:lll;s-l't'fnn pie of
1utooomy
simple app('ill to rrn\on or ii century old claim an
rhr philosophy of knowleJg Ir wa h1.ror1c ally nd concrprually tht found

1ng pnnaplt of bourgois so<1< ry, a proclucr. ,. Adorno had
11
saa~m of lh<' you1hful bouri;co1.s1e which had no1 Y"' strrttl its
complaints th rra on cannot olw an~ thing. bu1 .... h1ch
of "the' nrhu
RC!Ytr end
ng
.,,u Itel conhdrnt
o! 11s b1 ry 10 ch1ove rhtngs b) vurue of lhr powers ol 11s own rr,on Thus
FROM KANT 10 LE CORBUSIER
undrrstood. <ht anrrrrogauon of .iutonomy was toancd 10 1he an1erroga11on
Autor1omy o/ rl1 u11// I.A 1/1r .iolr p1111 1plr >J 11/l 11101ul /uw.A a11d of dulUA rn
ol bourgeois hboI dtmou.ac) und<r sev c threat In rh~ 1n1er war period
J., e1>tn9 '' rl1 '''"''' '"'' 1n110111yvj c I 01cr,011 tl11 c1tl'"' J1a11rl. 11ot cnly dGe.A tlot
9tout11I a1 y ohlJgcJtl011 ''' t1l/ l.,,t L6 111.Arc Jc/ ''l'f'CtArd to tJ,4 11r111Cl/'I" of oblio]a
lnsp111d hy 1h1> re e"ch ol lht M rhurg ><hool, u11drr rhr l<adrnh1p of Her
r1011
1111/ ro r/1111101
1/1ty oj 1J1,
ol
Imm 1n 1tI K 111t 111t1q11, 1>/ 1~,,,, t1cc1I Ru.A(ltJ, i788

1
I l1l (llfllll ( 11011 1h;.tt K.1l1f 1111r1n )OU~l\t ))l tY.'l l'fl .11 ( h1t4<JUrt dnd rt11lu:.oph)
1
,
.,,u
K.1n1 w.1,
r111v1did
and t11,1or1call)
g1fJUlllit ti h\ 1 r<!1l1x's rc.ttl111 ol f(1JU\~(,1u ltc>U\~t.~.tu \'w'a~ tvoktd (xpl1c1tly
r1nd 11npl1< 1ly 111 r11.1ny IJ,1 \.tgc;; 111 I J\~11111.t ,,,,,. fl'{' ''l>v1ou~ 1nttrp11.c.1t1on
ol
early
twt ntt<th ct~n1ury. 1ntlud1nj;
t rn!rlt ta\s1rr:1 wl10,tyd1t d tt ~1 tr!Jurg.we1t rt1urn1ng 10 Kint a-. tht. 1n111a1or
,,,,11
dllll ult 111,1trly ht twttn It dc>UX
J11~nn Cot1 n n1.a11y ph1IO\OJ1l1rr!i. 1n zt1t"'
l'h<,111mt 11111111t1t l'111l>c>d1t<.I 1n tn1 ,,1,1t1 1llu,11.111ng
tht :,hcltc.1 of tht'
por1r th1 'ritllU~I 1... 111 IUI ttll dr~lr 1pt1on:. or tht
City c)f <.h .. ux tht rtfc-r(' ncr It> .. ,,. p.1t. ft at><jnl" and finally 1ht ov1>r.1ll atlht'r
tr.<< to a '"111 1ll (0(11 ig11 ... P>tl111.J1ft ti 10 r. tf1JlJX S 1t1.~c1ryond Jr~1gn Tht kty
m{>dt rr\ c111t
K<lt1(~
l 'bt11
1l
11t11f /
11l11ll>1opl1y Co\
11t 1stw<J1ituti1t.s
r\ 1/11 rr t111d /o,-,,,
(1910)
,l1'1 1l1t1115 1 n1odt 1n c<1111p1 1l1cn-..1\'e ph1lo~ophttC11( b1ogra
pl1y, wJs p11bl1 .. l11d111 ''''" 1r1d ht l 1n1c. tht 11l1r,11<t point lor
.J
Ol'W gcnt-ra
t ion. 111c lucJ 111~ Krac Juc.1. Ado1 no, n11cJ l't'ltJ 111ll n wh'' s.1w K.111t for ht>1 l<'r 01
for wur\t', .ts tilt- htg11111111i; J)()lt1t
111 .1n
l1lvt..,tlg.tt1on 11ttl'!t\,tty tor lhl~ dtvcl
opmt111 ol .t 11 uly .. , 1111c.1I" tltto1 y Ac.1111 ,,,,, 111 p.11 tll\ll.11 , IJ,tw K.,n11J11 .1u1on-
11n1y I)
u dtJuhll' tl1~tcl -..wo1 d
nlul h 111 1hr w 1v
Vtl'l l <ildf~ctt 1111r1g l~llU~s1,,u'ti.
tl\.,t tontt1npor.1ry
th11lkl'I s
s11t 1.11'01\t1 .1ct .ts 11npl1ctt1y 1ot<1l1tJ11.1n for
Adorr"!o qut.~5tl<>n1ng 1ht 11npl1t 1t1on\. ot a1,1u: 1ls ro "tt,1'''"
l'\d(
h,1J undlr
po1 ~1gr t 1 Kaut1nar11\ 1 J<11llng tl1ts 11 tt11n to a1.to110111y 1~ th.it In wlich
I Joux 1u~r1t11
tht Sl'pa1 i11on of 1ach func11on 1n p1vll1ons zn rhta scco1ltl
pro1 t for he Saltworks
II m~orez ,1u 11ranc1pr
!'lo< 111,c.:e
s1cJ, autonn111y I K till
t!I.
dark !,eCrt t 1 1f bourgt'Ol
~oc1i
y O/ oll ~po11 .11/, /lrur u ro .ony 11 u tlir
tur> Ot 1<IY 111< tr n ph lhc plann<'CI brothrl or "01kma"
Jo1111tlar1011 oj rlw rorrn cl1a1uctrr cf .ion. ry ''" co11/orm11y 1vul1 lau lliat
with rhe tn b1l ~of <;chi 11cl
ll'hlr/1 liaA IOA
th pl<' uu oft~
"l.uund~
1yp1 I of tlK t"fOCh
wllness to the "autonomy of

llcyond 1hl, ROUS>c rducaton commu

" I hv ng and h ' mor B ncrol prt 0< upar ion with the Cll1Lcnry of hlS n w
uo1v<r ,11 1t1Ztnry orWd1hu1gernchke1t lfl<doux
pror
IJ' A11L11 CIA IA OCfll
n//y ,,., /o>1111d11tfo11 of tlr. diprru/.,
IA rlw1 /t4'A b4'l111d ,, ,
mtdR
li1.1crhu~ II
ty
TJ1u1trc ,,, IA.,,, ,,allt) tl1at ,,,, /(JlllJOl /11,~/01t1 nf '''''''''
ma5<1urr dng1 1 lrgm< ofaGn kMonumcnr" c un1trdforl\aulmnn
byn
1hr k1 rnrl 1)t his 1lt1l<l'Jt1phy." di 11cul 1ttJ 41 very
r u'< sou 1l 1hough1 nnd th lh"11lullun dr 1gncd by Lcdou
for~ .. ideal"
a11J ttc. hr111l11vy 111 t 11ly btgl1n to txh1l,1c tht11 ..dark
t on~ul 1I1 noturr. pr
1 ur 'homm , tr off v1 LC, 41 IA 9 >I K.iufrnann further dra~ p.trdllcl

t>..1....,on Rou
tf1c 11111<'tt1 of
Rtg
111rtan11
sthchnc oflJI r1CVolut1nnancSU<h<1
bc uf h < namly brl evrd an a "11aur o.: 1o1l1 th 11 .. nuowro 1he
t01Ln1l)(rot uc141yw1tl\ rr.h11 rtt1rt
a<hdr ltc: 1 tcthii1twoufdl1tt1
II wa
I Ill
""'9'"' , l OWi Pl'aAOlla.\ ti I' ucnurd.
ol cour e II
humani t
in
Vry AITO"t) tlu'Ory tliat 111 Kant" IUOrl IA a tr1b1ma/

p rado-tc~I n 1urr of 1h" dach tom) 1ha1 ld llldny
th< rnt~rwdr pt'rllld lo >Rl~llO It thur o.,.,n oh1ect of <tud
from plulo ophy to arl I 1 iory. I 1 mom 111 wlu n bourg1 ors .. uronomy and
lls uri>o
d hnk tu rra <'n nd lib ral1Mn 1f nor ocial domocr icy w ~ hal
I ngrtt by tl1c- IJ\0\1m<111 rrt1m ,,,, 11 cdom ol 1 \\-to tot 11 lttrl Ill
Knulnl inn 11' V1rn,B \\ \ t:qti lfy ''XlOS1!d 10 111
<0<"((10~.
neo Kanta 1n rf'\ val
l,1.1t 1nt k1ng111l>\a11f 1 111f1111dl1\gl1t'11 <fn1otl11nbourl101!!.soc1 ty nd
'
Snl'f"lhtally on 19 33. hr wa~ making a ve1y different point to that ot -
EMIL
KA UFMANN
t,., 8l'f!in
r--
theonst~ Whrrt> tht' frar.kfur school sociologists wt're already look
ing at Uie
P
1msolf was
srruggling wuh the d1Hicuh1rs of rcconc1hng Rousseau and Kant .
.
aradoxe~ ilncl problcmllC> of Knttan 1deahsm, and Cassh'\'r h
n essays
Published
1932 Kaufmann apparently blithely ignored such qu "'

.
.. s . ,ons in
favor of a i:cner~hzed appeal to Rousseau Kant as s1gnifving an Enr1 h
g tn
m<'nt umfied enough o provide n mtell.,ctua! base, both for Ledoux a d
r:. 1Or
his inrttprctatJon Such apparent s1mphhcati.on, howevec, 15 explicabteont>,;o
11
grounds. firSll)". Kaufmann was concerned 10 sketch the intellectual fra,,..,.

.,.ork fnr an arch11ec1 who h1m!>elf was anything but a ystematit thinker. one
who readily appeillrd 10 a wide range of authorities in his attempt to justify
new torms Kaulmann's seeming confusion. 1n these tcnns. was historically
accurate 1n delineating 1hr d1scurs1ve breadth uf Ledoux's sources, and tis
impact on d<'s1gn. Certainly Cassirer's study of The Philo~ophy of rile f:n/ighi
enmPnl published 1n 1932 had. together w11h his essay on Rousseau of the
same year. the aim or consrructingsuch a unny of thought.ll
...,
Sf'Condly. and eqully important. Kaufmann's own mtelle.:tua\ agenda

1.,ached
beyond a purely hi>toncal Interpretation. Emb~ded in 1he title of
Von Ledoux btA le Corb11A1er. and in its appeal to Kantian thought. was an
1mphcu challenge 10 the emerging cuhural poli11cs of Austria and Cormany,

and a covert appeal 10 a "unued" front based on the rule of law and reason s
the basis for the res1a1ement of the 1dr.al of a liberal. soda\ democratic, stare.
Published in May 1933. two months after Huler's takeover of poweraher
the March 5 ell-c11ons, was seemingly deliberately c-akulated to assert the
social democratic values of Enhghtcnment. republicanism, and modernism,
values under se\ere anack not only from Nazi ideologues who had denounced
them. and 1he modernism 1ha1 represented !hem as degenerate and Bolshe
~1k. but
also from conservative ViennPse art h1Storlans !tke Strzygoi.sk1 and
Sedlmyr The lattrr. ... ho had JOml'd the Nat1onal Sociali!>t party in 193.1, Ihm
10 bome a loyal suprorter throughout the occupation and War, was to w.ii1
un11l 11.ufmnn~ 01gh1 to the U.S. before developing his own rhesis of th
"los of cen1er using Kaufmann's own marerial to set out a despainng thesis of
decline and fall where Kaufm .. nn had seen only progress and justice. In 1933,
T'~P~
',
f..
'
( t
1,,,,
howtver, d~ Dam1~ch h~~ poinu~d out. 11 w;is an act of 1 eal intellectual. if not
phy\1cal. <Ouragt 10 ~e1 out 1he con1inu111es between tht' French Revolution
and Modern1~m. 1n a moment when Speer and h\s cohorts were find mg monu
memI soldle in the g1gan1c\que revhal of German neoclassicism.
Ledoux. 1n 1h1s conte><I. wa~. more 1han a historical sub1ec1. a cover.
or meraphor for 1he exphcat1on of liberal bourgeois society. If not a kind of
u1op1Jn soc1alism 1n historical guise. n,c real s ub1ec1 ot the treatise would
1hen be the architecture of Loos, Walter Gropius. Richard Neutra. and Le Cor
busier
1he arthllt>cture of Modernism developed be1ween l<)OO and 929-
Kaufmann wrote'
Tht C'011tt11uiry of thl' d1ve/opme11r of pOAlrt>vo/urronary arcl1irercure ccin in

rile beyn1n 1119 of our 0W11 period. which OPfl"'
aro1111d 1900 w11h thP Dutch Ber/age a11d the V1e11neAe Adolf Loo,., a period
o woy bP rra(rd rhrou9h
10
01r. con u.ujully de.r.19nate by 1101111119 1u, moAt Aelf-<ort.AciOIJ.4 prota9onw tht
ll'OdProf tht' you119 Fre11ch Ac/100/ LP Corbiuu>r /den Fuhrer de.& 111n9vn Fronk
Tt>tCh
l.e Corbu.r.11'rf fVLI
c. 611
The hrs1 mention of Le Corbusier 1n Kaufmann's wri11ngs ts in a fooinott to

the art1cle
oie Sradt," which
points to the s1milan11es between 1.hret Sl'lll'

menlS bY Ledoux. and the ttx1 or Ver..i u'lf' arch1recrur1>. The con nectton wJs
d
-1
of a p!in
un ers1ood as obvious as Ledoux spoke or "the appreciable fe"'ing
.
'\ding or the
as s iemm1ng from 1hc sub1ec1. the ~11e, and the needs of the bu
' .
d
"bed Wll~ a
estrucuve effect or details on surfaces," and or the "forms descn
al
I habtt1C
single stroke or 1hr compass: the S(\uare and 1he circle as the a P
nal
T
bo t.e theSt a
wo years la1er. Vo11 ledo 11 x bu C.e Corbiuierwas to ela ra
d 1n
frnann a11ut
0 gl
es as sys1ema11cally and historically grounded. Ledoux. Kau
leuers used by au1hors 1n the 1ex1 of their bes1 work'5.""
-.
..
_4
I/ I
I
I
'J f, 1/
.. -,
way formalist ("he did not confine his attention only to formal detatls. as did
action. .auch .r.ttm 10 M rl1' fundamniral ttmdmci'A of rhu dewlopmertt."
the Secession a hundred years later" IVLLC. 4211: rather "on his research heenv1s
aged the totahtyof the reorgamtallon of the body of the building itself and of the
It is. nonttbeless. wtth Le Corbus1er that Kaufmann concludtt his little book.
and especially his group of town houses designed after the Revolut1on
for Hosten. Kaufmann to introduced hos hrst modernist comparison. not to Le
'
jwctapo1>111on. thl' ..1tnct d,/tmrtollon of concepu.. of rhi> domain;, of rhauq/11 and
work~.
/..
the last sKt1on of the book. was the progenitor of a modernism that was in no
systems ol large complexes of buildings" IVLLC. 421 Considering Ledouxs later
'
!'
t,
a Le Co.-bus1er represented not on ly by VPr.A unP archttecturr. but by the trans

lated version of Urbanisme, Stadtebau. and more recently still by th~ first
YOlume of his OPUvr'.A complrtl'A. 1910 10 1979. published tn 1930. Kaufmann
Corbusier. but to Walter Gropius: referring to Ledoux's late works. he notes;
was thu~ able to refer to the already commonplaces of the "fasc1na11on for the
straight hne: or the -return to the fundamental realities of the sphere, the
The pnnc1pal arri.411c quality of thPAP projecu.
- - hat
I " ' 9 Ron;,
Ledoux lookPd fer abovP all. The formal principl
W<>re bQAed correApondA to the IP1tmo11f of our prMent architecture. aA Walter
cube and the cylinder 1n great architecture but also ro extend his comparison
Gropiu.o hQA exprPMed II in the fir;,t volumP of the Bauhatu boolu: a variety
1>tartinq with th1> ;,ame fu11daml!ntal type obta1nod by the alternau juxrapo1>i
reminiscent of the pyramids of Ledoux and Boullee. Kaufmann, as opposed to

the trenchant cru1ques of the Marxist Karel Teige. lauds the "idealism of rhis
lion and ;,upenmpoAitioro of repetitive ;,pa11al cell.A. " IVLLC. 48)
utopia as directly rela11ng to, 1f not influenced by, that of Ledoux:
lt 1s clear that in tracing the development of autonomous architecture after
The ruemblonce beru1<1en tlie epoch of Ledoux and our own U. not limited (thU.
Ledoux. and through the nineteenth century, Kaufmann is aware of the dete
will be one of our concl1L111011.1.J ro fornral and thematic ai>pecu. 711iA rut>m
b/ance doeA not only rue 111 rite focr r/1a11n hi.6 epoch QA our own one ;,ee;, r/1e
'
';I.
rioration in aesthetic content. and of the deleterious effects of the incessant

repetition of the "pavllion system: Thus he analY?-es the teaching method
and influence of Jean Nicolas Louts Durand. who systemauzed Woux's own
system for the cole Polytech nique, repeating the fundamental elements of
architecture a> if they were so many geometrical points. lines. and planes on
graph paper. and sees this method's effects on architects likr Oubut. But it is
eqully obvious that Kaufmann 1s here only attempting to demonStrate that
despite the oven historicist "clothing" of 1he pavilions in question. varied
according to taste and styhst1c revival through the century, the survival of the
with Woux to the layout and pro1ec1ed monuments of the Cn~ Mondiale. with
its already contentious pyramidal scheme for a Mu ndaneum or world museum.
11ew ond 1mporrant problem of rhe mOAAeA l!l'l!erge 0.4 rhe powvrful motive of
;,olut101U. /ndependen1ly of the newdema11d.6 of rhe real. one di.6cemA now QA
ar rho! epoch a new idea/um. It opp#ar;, in L'Architecture of Ledoux 0.4 in rhe
wrirm9..1 of I.A CorbU.A" 1n rhe pro1ect for the Ideal City QA in rhe Cirl Modiale.
II L6 in thu 1dealwn..foundedun thenrw1dea1Aofethiuand law, in which i.6,iro the
end. roored. ir .aeenu to U.A. /,,fo,.., 1800 ftiell (1.4 roday. rhe renewalofarchitPCfllr#.
Kaufmann concludes:
pavilion. and us fundamentally geometncal!functional founda11on. allowed
Becau.u L11 CorbU.A1er ha.. no JU.A faith in rh,,... rhan Llldoux, becau.oe in the
the prmciples of modernism to survive if not to prosper.

HIS assessment of the effects of autonomy on urbanism is, for example,
one and 1n rhe or her the m11mol1P Jmk /Htwttn arr and life u QA ;,rrong, one
mtur Ctte. Aide by ..11d1P, the mil.Aler who;,e work crownA rhe mumph of the new
bleak enough, and parallel to that of Camillo S11te at the end of the nine<eenth
prinetpfeA and he whou acr1v1ty /ta.. open#</ rhe way for the;,e pnnciple1>.
century: castigating the pavilion structures around the Place de f"Etoile, the
Place Roya le in Mu nich. or the R1ngstrasse in Vienna. whose buildmgs
ore ;,er up. /Ike uolor11d blodu. In thetr uolarton, eac/1 on" could, without
hindering tU. arrroc11veneAA, b11 duploced ro another .Aire. II iA of little impor
ranee rhar the part.i have bePn r#a/iz41d 011d are of different appearance, 0.4 in
Munich. or are co11remporory and fit omongAt the111Aelve;, QA in Vienna. The
doublP D.4pPrr of the pQAt ccm tury w/11cl1, like /auu.o, look;, or once forward and
back111ard, appear.i even mora clearly i11 rhat portion of rhe RinlJl>rrOAAe wirh
the monumental b11ildint of the Par/lamPnl, the City Hall. the Un1verAity. and
the Theater. Conceived according to an ab,iolurely /1erero11omotu in.-ptrarion,
the buildinl}A are de1>tmed for Aho111. 111 rhi.A lntenrion, each of rltem corrie;, an
old ..1u11. p0Min9 for Greek. Gothic, or late Rertai.A.l>ance. But iro thi.A diver;,iry
there i.6 al.Ao a 1111w rra1t: the toral indifft>Tertce ro rhe effecr of rhe whole. &ach
b111ldm9 remain.A 1n a rota I i.6olat1on, none i.6 linked in an en..wmb/e. lvLLC, 611
STRUCTURAL ANALYS IS
Kaufmann's methods of analysis, as well as those of the Vienna School with
whirh he was to be loosely associated. have often been criticized for their incip
il!nt "formalism: and especially so from the left in the 1930s. Thus Meyer Scha
piro. respond1ns to the confused and contrdd1ctory "formalism of the Vien
nese School. 1n an 1nc1slve review ol the publicat1ons of the "New Viennese
School" of an history, tried to redress the historical problem in terms of a less
reducuve poli11cal
po~1t1on.
Assessing Emil Kaulmann's anicle "The City of
the Archllect Ledoux: and the later Van Ledoux bu U! Corbtuier, Schapiro.
while recognizing the merll of Kaufmann's rescue of Ledoux, pointed to the
hmita11ons of the formal approach In relating architecture to its social context.
Kaufmann had allempted to 1oin what he called Ledoux's principle of architec
tural autonomy - the denvatton of an architectural aesthetic from internal
requirements of construction and use rather than from any external, imposed
Yet, despite the moribund. half heteronomous, half autonomous aspect of
art1st1c conception - to a s1m1lar charaeteristic of emerging bourgeois soci-
the stylerevival buildings of the R1ngstrasse. the principle of autonomy sur-
ety. - "which thinks of nself as compo~ed of isolated, equally free individu-
vived to triumph 1n the younger gencrat1on of modernists following Berlage.

Kaufmann 1s not inclined 10 enter into a detailed analysis of twenticrh cen
als." Schapiro argued that Kaufmann. in fact. h3d succeeded only in 1oining an
tury modcrni~m as a conclusion to his Ledoux monograph: for him, the simple
ings. "The con-elation: Schapiro wrote, 1s w11h bourgeois ideology. not with
"evidence of Le Corbusier and his contemporaries is enough to make the point.
t he actual class structure and condu1ons of bourgeois society, and depends
Interestingly enough. 11 is Richard Neutra the Viennese exil<' in California.
more on quotations than on a study of social and economic history.- In the
whose Wie baut Ammka had been published in 19i7. who is selected as the
light of our analysts of Kaufmann's theses or 4Utonomy, we would have to con-
spokesman for modemlsms cont1nu1ty wnh the past. Roman, and Baroque:
clude that Kaufmann m1gh1 haw readily agreed with Schapiro's crittque: far
Neutr>,quoted by Kaufmann. writes:
from trying to develop a matenahst history assummg the fundamental rela
arch11ectural principle to a social prtnc1ple, one found indttd 1n Ledoux's writ
t1ons between base and supemructure. society and culture, Kaufmanns aims
II U. o long way from rhe plQAl1c forrnalV.m of rhe Gretk world to rhe twi..lted
facadu. of rhe Daroque, but thu. ro11te ,.. roor 11/09ical, it alwayA CTO.&MA AO to
.1ipeak the ;,ame region: t/101 ofa cirrra1nAp1rirual atrirude towarti,o architectural
creation. The 9enMTII prirrciplt the dw<>lopmant of wl1ich we hove wanted to demon..itrotr here in orc/1itt:ture i.4 defined by N<>utra in the;,e tgnn;,: Di.Mociarion,
were surely more modest and conhned to demonsirat1ng the relations between
thought about social fonn, and thought about architectural form .
But Kaufmanns method was nor only attacked from the left. Like many
social-democratic theses
It
was e4ually subject to criticism from the right.
nmies as rhe Berlin

Jndced. Kaufmann did nor have ro look O Iar Ior his c
11ed srudent of WblfOm,
of Hitlers putsch: Hans Sdlmayr. ahother d 1<11ngu1>
3nd an edirorol the Vienna school s llagsh1111ourna1 t h e Ku>v.twtA.4PnA<laftlt
rho ForArhun911. m which Kaulmann had publ rs hed h'rs breakthrough article.
h3d, during rh..se years taken shrp 1Sue wtt h Kau Iman n's democratte nd
1deahsr 1c reading ol rhc arch11ecture ol 1800. and pr..cisely from a conseJ'"\i
11ve. soon ro become lasc1st.comm11men1 It as an comparison with ~lmayr's
app1oach that Kaufmann seems lcs> and less the Vienna School historian.and
. .
ii 1119 mo~ than a bod1oke or a wry anl1nary p11tr11 of lunacy, While L

rlO 1
trip n-.ore
rlrable
ho""
Jooktd
upon
11
fond
hvre
)tp 1.1. rfrrm9 to lh , 0,,,.1.,,,
cI1a
'"" of ;,14
,t,OmPlim Vienne.AI' f'O:IP09ut f;m1I Kaufmann/ a,.; on "Pxper111,_,,1 Wlrlr /o"".
Tf1P 1h1119 "'l'Prtornly an..iore eno119h. b11t fir twre no'"" rhun that. ave diout~
hardly b<> JUAllftl'd m U1QA1t119 much ltme over fl
11 no1Aeiuiral idea, ho1wver. need by no 7n4'0n.. 1:., wlro/J!f ll/ifh.
our ,. , n1/1C'artc . .1.wch abnonr.ol1tirA rrwa/ wry Aprc:1fir <htlTan.,.u.tlQ
9
71uu rhr
,,,.r.,,..
1vhE11
w...,J l2A
rhr ,.hap# of a
bu1ld1119
0 critical [om,
tuluclr
..., 0 A'J'"p1om of a profound'""''" both in arch11etture ond in 1~1
whole Ir/ of rhr human Apiri1. Hrnt Ille ore 1><'9rnn1t19 ro deo/ Wtt/r the.,,,,,
more and more the student of Oorak

Jr was Hans Sedlmayr. ol all ihe Vienna School h1stonans. who tool< sen
ously the lessons of R1egl. in oppo>111on 10 has d1sse11at1on ad,~sor Julius
Schlosser. in con(eptuahi1ng a method of art htsrory that completely mte
grated architecture; developing R1egl's concepl ol Kunsrwollen, as reanrer
pr~tod by has contemporary Panobky, 1111owhat hr termed a "Strukturanalys<'"
or analysis of struct ural p1 mcrplr' ThcC were not. of course. the principles
of structu1e, a an arch11ec1ural h1sto11an mtgh1 understand them. Hrs well
known treatise on Borromrm' church. San Carlo allr Quattro fontane. found
11s structural principle not an the archue<tural strucruro, nor even in the
"struct ural" organization of its mtorsecung s~ces and volum<'s. but rather in
the decordllVe treatment of the wall As Chnsropher \l\'ood notes. "In other
words. structure may rt'Veal ttself an apparently marginal or meaningless fea
tures !Wood, sl Here Sedlmayr rrhes on Gestalt theory 10 introduce the
no11on of "shaped vision: that 1n ha> terms lormed an ob1cc11ve and ra11onal
way of looking beneath appearance;. of seeking out principles of form and
organ11a1 ion no1 apparent in nornial ch~racrrnzations ol funcuon. style, and
the hk'. Wood and Meyer Schap110 bcforo ham. have poinred out the en11rely
"specaous" narure of this ra11onala.m." cnt1<121ng Its in1u111onis1 and 1mphc
Corbusrer1. Sedlmayr casngates the M1son Savoye at Po1ssy, rhe pirome

of corb11s1an modernLSm for Sigfried G1ed1on and perhaps for !Uuftnann too,
as 11 rt'sled "upon its support~ upon the lawn: nothing more tha11 the rmage
11 ly racist undertones.
In Sedlmayrs terms. while Kufmann had (the method after all was SCI
unhappy v1s1ons, and shadow values" of Booll~e's and t.edouxs archittctur..
en11hcally correct) analyed the formal shafts he had entirely m1sd1agnosed

rhe ~ymptoms Where Kaufmann saw renewal an revolu11onary and modern
Archllccture. Sedlmayr saw decay and decline. where Kaufmann saw 1ncreas
of rlar 1mconAC10llA .\LC. 41
Sl'dlmayr sw this :1onatch1recrural form as rhe fatal symptom of an

abstra<t1on that had. w11h Le Corbusrer. reached I S most nonsensical and
anuarchaiectural end. Agreeing with Kaufmann that autonomy wo.s th key
(It implies 1har arch1te<ture under Ledoux had as it Wre become conscious
of 115 own true nature - it was t he same idea that ani mated Loos and u
of a spaceship that has JUSt landed." (LC,107) Le Corbusiers p'.ctures, wro:e

Sedlmayr 1n disgust." are full of Ooaung transparerU things." [Lc.1011
Srdlmayr is here opposed to the ~utonomous nature of this geometri
cal archnecture -
ts apparent
"'pulsaon for the <'arth, n architecture wishing
to Oy. rransparent. noating in the air, and hereby no longer holding tons tr<
tonic foundauons, and dangerously open to the deleterious ef~cts of what he
calls "paper archi1ec1ure." It is no comcidenct that Stdlmayr uses Kaufmann
as the scholarly source of every one of his critical description of the dreams,
Indeed, Kaufmann is
acknowl~dged
as the sourct of S<'dl mayrs whole study.
as. an hrs poSlface, he admits.

Thr '<'ry "91111111194 of 1hu work werl' tJUplfed by the ,..Mardi of 111/
Kaufmann on
which came to my notice m 1930. I .iaw or once rlr111
1ng health rn soc1e1y and arch11Ktu1e. Sedlmayr saw decadence and death
Ar<h110C1ure was but a sign ol the "hugt inner ca1asrrophe" se1 off by the
Rovolu11on. a "loss of center" and stab1l11 y imaged by what for Sedlmayr was
rowardJ. thr undrrAtondm9 of 011r 09e. but that at the .ianui rime h~ had not
tho mo\! characteristic motif ot 1800, the sphc1c. wuh all 11s 1mphcauons
wliolly recoqmzed thl' true 11i9111fironce of /au ow11 diACovtry,ond that rheph,.
of rhe destabthza11on - the litcrdl derac1na11on of iradntonal arclntecture.

Kaufm;ann's heroes were Sedlmayr 's dev1b as the Ian er observed of Goya:
110111r11a AO clParly perceived by lirm were 1101 correctly evofuared. (Lc)
"The more we .iudythe art of Goya. the anorc Lntcnse grows ourconv1c11on that.
like Kant an philosophy and Ledoux's arch11ttturc. hr as one ol the great pulver1z1ng forcrs 1ha1 bring a new age into being" JLC. 1171 Sedlmayr. sensing an
'"Yan his hght against the demon of modernism, cites Ernst Junger approv
rngly m rhararterrz1ng 1he mu.Aeal'n tneb. the "f;ice rumed towards the thang 5
ol doarh: ol rhe contemporary epoch
More specihcally. expldmmg ht~ ~ocalled "Method of Cn11cal forms: a
method herla1ms as "capable of sepra11ng the true from the false: ol "conccn
Lt'daux,
Kaufmann hod Auccreded rn makm9 o d1J1covery of the utll'la.al impor11l11Ct
Of course. this does not prevent Sedlmayr from claiming almost equal credit.
as he rtcounts that he expounded the "thoug)lts .. developed hert" m YtrlU.Ur
dvr Marte rn a lecrure given 1n 193 4 and agd1n in 1937 1n a dis<ourse that was
not published," hnally to set them down rn t94' and giving them "in wu'tf'
slty lectures rn t94' and 1944.....
11ns debate between Kaufmann and Sedlmayr has gl!nerally been sern.
in a" h1storrcal cirdes at least, as the sta"tng point for tht rtt'f31uation of
Revoluuonary ar~hitecrure, as ~II as the origin of many myths only r.ceotly
trat1ng on that unconsuous sphere of ins11nc11vc recepllvtty" and of"posses
dispelled by less formalis11c and more hi~torrcally d1spasionate rosearc.b. But.
ston m which "the soul of the age ~rands naked before us - a method that 15
for 1he moment, I would want to hold such cnucism. tn order to follow up
common to the pathologist and the PYtholog1st - Sedlmayr finds in the image
the rundamenral d1s11nc11on drawn by Hubert Oamisch between what stmioll>'
toma11c form that descftbes the folly of the modern age: th~ Sphere Hou~e of
gtst s and their hear~ over the last decades have spoken of as the meanil1i
o f arc hllecture, cons1derrng arch1te<ture as .. systl'm of communi catiOn. a11a
the Agricultural Guard~ 1hat Kaufmann had sren as a brave innovation. a harbinger or modernist abstract ion.
t he quts11on, poSt!CI by Oam1:.ch of "what arc:hitecture mtans i n a spteiflC

moment According to these d1s11ncr1ons. when Kaufmann ..-rote in 1'14 ol
of Cedoux's archnccture one such apparently bizarre bur fundamentally symp
Such a rod1col ne1v form. for 11Ulon<P. u mhervnr in the de ,,

' a o, u..un9 o ,6p/rere
iu th ba.iic form of ott entire hoU6e. Mo;,1 /HOn/p liove rreoted rh
,.
na11on tu
to tht
classrcrsm as demanding a "harmony that con fined s1gruficauon
f neoc1ass1cJSlll
1 n1rrn~1c quah11es of the subiect and their txpress1on. and 0
as ~etrng form as hav1ng noo1her funcuon 11\an robe the suppcl
rt forthoUP'
Lott to rogN
Ha
H<. 1l~lon
to tran,m11 ompre >oon. to provo~- -.nsa11on~;" hf' was p<rhap not <o mu1h
mtnh. lndo"fll 11 " clear tht t.aulmann tnr,.ndt us to U his "architteturI
"'t-ong ther t"" arch It<'< urf'S ~' aomph sh1ng th1~ goal w1th1n 1ht1r panicu
IY>ttm" a on thr umf' rtan~ '"and commrnsuratr with 1ntell..ctual devrl

opmtn1'. \the mntff'>t11on, l 11 othrr words, of thf' 1rch1tt 1'1 thought ~
lar <0< 1tllt' and cultur"' a , tlAp1rrn910 that goal 1n then thronl' and ideal~
Thu >. \lm1larly, whl'n he >peak of Ltdoux in 1h1 \dmt' breath as Kant ind
<..,.~f' Thts Is what ht mrn whtn hr 1p14ks of "pt!rnng ~hind the lacadrof
Roueau . hl' wa' ptt hap, not ~o mu<h 1la1m1ng that there 1s an inner essence
arch1tt<1u1~I dtvelnpmtnt" 10 "d'"""' the mrt~phyuc 11 bac'ruound of build
on Lt'dou~, i11<ht11'<tuu 1hat t> K.1n11an, nor 1ena1nly that Ledoux had read
1ng in a partot ula1 tra If 5A u t81 Th nottnn ol tht p:.r11cul1r rr w;os funda
Kant or Wt'>h<'d 10 b1 a Kan11an "<hilt'! I , but moo e "mply tha1 1hert. seemtd
mtnral to Kauf mann"1 v1tw of rht tpe< 1hc 11yof hl\tory. As 1M! noted tn a r(!Vleow
to be a homology be1wten, in theu d1fh1ent re.1lms. l.edoux's use of separate.
of Nib'~ ~tudy of tht work ol l"u" J1an Oe1p111. "rach tp<>< h requires sp1bc
categorle> ol trratmrnt Ntw ma1ertal 1hould not ht- 1nrtrprc-tMI wuh1n thP
independent. gromtn11 formo,, nd ''Y Kam~ desorf for principles of ondepcn

dent cntic;il 1udgement, and Hou.,,eau\ rel urn 10 1he pnnc1pleof natural man.
I o,ay "morr imply: bu1 in fat 1, '>uch rel;i11ono, introduce a complex11y 1n the
cate11ortf'S "denvrd, orogonally. from tht produtt1on of nother la11 rulr pnor1
penod: but rather .1((01d1ng 10 "\ome nrw approach .. dequ;ott' to thf'r novt'I
interpre1a11ve '>lruuure th.11 is belled by the crude 1uxtapos111on. and that goes
well beyond the <'qually ci udr "o,oc1al economic formal" pos1ula11ons of Marx
way ll econdudrd "The rdea ol all embrac ins c.11ego11e1
1s1 a1 t ho'>torian of the perood llen. Kaufmann 1& les\ a follower of 1he psycho
log1<al lot mJlo\m ol th< V11'nna School than an adherent of the principles of his
ph~hmen" of a dtlfrrent
worsr. of tour>r.
~the ~erolr apphc.1toon
is" chrm.ar~ S11ll
of catrgonr formrd on thl' accom
period.""
Kaufm .. nn t-ldboratrd 1>n th" 1n a rrvww .irtorlt' ol 194&
men1or Max Dvorak\, toncept of "the h1s1ory of arr a' th< ho>toryof ideas.""
lldmottl'tlly, Kaufmann ha been 1a~t a a reduc11ve ~ystemauzrr 1n hos
~ttempt to c on~trutt an 1n1<rpret.111ve <heme derived fr1>m Rlt'gl's kunscwol
len that <nlr<'sponded 10 archntcture on par11cular And yet his no111>n of
an arc h1te<tur.1I 'Y>llm
a devrlopt"d
in wn11ng after ho> t'm1gr.n1on lo
ch.. Unnrd ~toilf'' offered a far more prt'Cl'>f' 1001 of analysts A> he definrd 11.
,11tent1on focu., ...d not ~o much on problems of ~tyle. nor on de~cnpuons of
songll' fe.Jturt, nor even on the 1nvest1ga11on 1n10 general form. bu1 r.lther
upon the onterrelauon of hr >l'Veral parh of 1he compos111on. and e\pec1ally
lht nli1IH>n,h1p IX'twein the ~rvtr.11 component\ and lhf' wholt archllectural
compo111on lltlf ... Uut ht11 "''' h.l\t' moved beyond a gene11c will to form."
and evtn btyond S1dlmayr'> \lat11 "o,rruuur.11 analy>is: 10 a flrx1blr model
t ht
appro>om~tt->
p~ornons
no1 1>nly ~1m1l.tr typ1 on mu1t and h1tra1ure, ai well~
hut a"o.1n thl\ ' '"'" the a1(h1trt1 " own dt,1gn proc<'llures
Thr urrl11tt<111rr of tl1r lut r19l1trr111/1 and r1111nrt11th c,11turir4 /1cu much m
corm11011 11111/1 r/11..u11ul 011d IJ01oq111 art 811r tl1rJ.e common rro1u co1upr11
0 11/y
tlor Aur/1:11 r Tlw 10111m111c/ I/AP of rliuv.Kal frotrirt.t. rrrotr.4 a C'rrto111
.4ll/>rr/1rrol 11.t.1111 /1/11111<
ll1vnlut1011
011/y
by 1111
bP11w111 tlirAr pr1111d.4 prrt edm9 and follow1119 tlir

u11olyA1A bu1rrd 011 tloP conrrpt of on "orrh11rrrurol
Ay..it('m ran wr apprvcratr /tow f1111damriually
th~ mode of urcl11tectura/ com
pOAltltlll WCJ.4 tro11Afor111Pd fl ~All , 131
Tht comp.1 ri ~un dntl m.-1. h1ng of UI h J ~rructurc once 1den11fted wuh similar
'rrucrures on 1hou11h1 .ind >011~1 Ith w~ 1n111l'ly flexible and always h1f11ng'
In t/11 rrlutw111rh1p bvt tt't'n1 forrru 1111c/ .t.yAttm rarh pa< h t.4tobluhP.4 11.t. 011111
bcu1r 1dra..i of d1.t.poJ.1ttt11 u11d 11111rtla11011 of porl.t. (1tl1Pr o/dl'r fonn.4 arr
rmodold 1u111/ tli..y or<' rrrf t tlyadJl..irvd to ''" nf'w Ayt1111 of orron9tmtnt,
or '"w formA prt1ff..,,c/ by
lll'll'
101uitru< tto11ul mrthod.4 arr odoptPd t/ thty
or<ord wtth thl' 1111.,.4y4tl'fll or 11oturalform.t. or' r1111tvrpr~t~d 111 l..t1p1119 with
t/1r rhon9rd 11Ja/ of CJl'll.,af dt.4pt1AtlWll
a nrcr.uary co11.uqt1<11"
nw Mat1/1 for llM.. jornu. U. thrrrj<Jll',
'1 thr dt'.41ti'furo 11rw .4YAtm ronn.t. thn11Mlw.1o arr
.uco11tUiry Joaor.t.. thr Ay.t mu tlir primary ro11.A1d1rutton hsAH , 181

W~ might c hdra<tt'nt~ th ls mt1hod. s oppord 10 lh<' morr py<holog1cal and
trleologocal ,tructural andl ysis of
S<dlm~yr ,
a> nor 50 much tru<1ural ,..
".t.tnutun.1/1A1 parilll!"11ng 11m1lar cnn1l'mpo1 .try att~mP" to 1d~n11fy "I'm>
of rrl1tonsh1ps on hnguhllCi and ~ymhol by, say. Cass1r<r dnd Panofi;~y in

orher domain'
But .1ga1n Kaufmann' 61ruourah~m ha ij ho>tory thdt grounds 111n irm
por~hty. and <.'Vtn th1u11h ht> htlory fall\ 'horr of Schapiro dl's1red >ooal
and (.'~onom11 tnquu 1ei;.11 os ngor1>u>ly (.'nough ba,ed 1n 1ntell<-ctual devtlop
We /1w mo llm 111 w/11ch thr901hvrm9 and rrordm9 of Jortual tk.ta or" oftm
COn.41drrrd t/11 uniqur t11d of ol'I hutory No doubt""' h '" 1tv1ry u 1ndup#JU
obit. y,, on.U.ould not owrlook th' /at 11/101 tt do-' not r11qutrl' "'"'h or~inal
1ry to tro1v,fonn o <ord ftlr mto o book. oft" havm9 oddtd 1iu.t a/"" drtatu
to thr ft11d1'1t of many pndr<ru.or4111 a /"Id labor..J./Hrhup.A.. thruu9h t'mlu
nt On "11011/d rotf' h19lirr th b109raph" who wntur-' vut 11110 1111-pf"'d
trrrrtory. wloo durowr" o /orr prof/tr-' a nrw p1rturr of o IH'.40nobty and n
rro Sur/1 ti b109raph" u morv /1kly to'" m hu "11(1/uot1on.4 and ""'11ftft!U
thu11 thr ""''Pl romp1lr. t1ltho119h ti" lottrr u by no mvna.. 1nfollthlf' m hU
01111but10ll.l ~rt hutory "hould not rar lr..M about tlil' rp1phf'nomr1t0n tlion
thr phr11omrt1011 Thr b1119ropl"r w/10 .Mru99/-' to yrcup tM 11.,on1119 oJ or1u
lie produa1on 11111/ brromf'O -'O"rr' o/ ..r111111/u..i 011d pr"'lre..M for
thrdi.oopli,,..
""Y
whrn '" rrrA Nrrd/v.u to

th-' ,,,narlu. apply "111/ Mtt4'r to tho.Mo
rort hutor1a11..i 111ho. 91/trd w11/1 u "'"" v1..i1011. rrducu1"-ror rtmt.'Tpr. to 11.'holf'
rpo</1 0.4, r 9. d1tl th ..u 1111/or" w/10 ubo11t 1900 muu9urorrd tl1r .t.tudy of tlw
Baroqur, or 1l10A w/10 ..iom,111/1at latn b1ou9l1 Ma11n1rurn to /19ht /nt~pr~to
l'Wll
lV hutory a/o11p '" IOIUlrtlfllW 111.t.tory ..
In I h1~ qu.1~1 autob10111 ,1ph11 .11 JU\ll fu .11 ion, wr rnr no only chc P-'t hos
ol the lonely ~xpl1>r<r, 1ht dr>tolulf' 'lholar \f'archtng for ht> cahfo1n1a: but
al>o the consc1ou:.n1 of the h1ro1r roll of ~< holar5h1p 1uelf <h . bu1ld1ng on
tts formatovf achtevtmenh, h,1\ the cour dgl' to onwn1 11> 01<.n futort Mere or
le>> fX'nnolr\\ dher ht> flight lrom f:uropt, K.iufnnn had rktd our a hVlng
on gr.;nt\ from th1 ulbn11h1 Commutre and th" Amf'n<an Ph1loM>phical Socr
t'ly, hnd1n111n th~ Averyl obr~ry 11nd numrrou, otht-r <l>llt'Ct1nM mo~gentt~I
mtendl for h rxp~ndtng ~uJw~ ol <'nhghtt'nmrnl and ren1uswnc..archi1ec
turr lit dlf'd forlornly on hb rcon.i 1oumt>y to l.os Angeh>s 1n 19531n Oley
rnn. Wyoming. It W- wtth dldrh1 ll"ftsll' humility 1lut luutmann adm1tt~
1n h11 potthumouly pubhsh1d book "I do not ~hi!'"' th.11 I have'"~ th
mom1ntou ptoblrm ol how'"" a1chllt"Ctur~I trnlonll411on ol about 1Soo
1 amt' to Ps "''
VO N KAUF MANN BIS JOH NSON U NO ROSSI
/onrt tr/ "If g/u.U /u:tl.t41' ,1.tu/ tltl' MJ'OtCllWll of junniolu2I

""'"' mta '""' oh.\.">111tr .&11opo4 1otlllf rhan n mopr"' mt1.or -''"9 o/ poru.
0
n1" ( 11/Jlt', Cl/u.o/utP
ram.... d1ro~ t ly f 111111 w~".' ,,,,. r1i,>rtn ntli ' '"'"""II futltw OJ mod....., 01rduta: nor
C... ~rm/ Kaufma1111'.t. t r//1.,1t..i.ndy VQ11 lldoo r /Ju /A' c.om.u.i..r1 Tht <UM ond
ti' .41lirrr, f/lf' I""' mutht'ltWtical Altuf"'A, u, ,,, dv.r ID th(' h#uru. oJ
ti~ rr.i..t
/('('fuu/ u1~/1111nnon1.t. f 1u1r1 tit llutt"I"'. orui u orf' tlt"r th.A.n'f!dunt..i.
Ph1hp lohn\on. Arrh11w turol RPt'ri>w, 1950
.....
,,., , ..
dtnl nor 1ntally ironic. that

... p~ nol tnu~ly an acr1
In l'f'tnpttl. 11 was!'<''"'
htld to paralltl the

"utonomy wa
Kaufmann, ~l1tf ih l\rth11trlul"('<
) d vdual was lo pptal so
I th<' boul'lJl'OIS (modern in '
tmrgng autonomy n
h C1 Ph1hp lohnson Som...
f h h h bourgeois arr 11
"ronaty101ha1parad1gmo t " 8
f
in London on th way.
1h
""chaps
bric
stay
llm<' ~1wt<'n "~J8 an d 1940, w1 ,..
ked 10 prestnl his work
_, S
n 9~' lie wa> as
Kaufmann fl~ to tht Unllov 1a1es.'
.
h Cambndgt>
I A ch 1tr1ural ll1s1onans al I e
10 the newly ron<11tutt'd Sor1<ty o r i
R
II H tchcock
with
Henry
ussc
t
housrofPh1hpJohnson.whosrv111~10 GrrmanY
I ..
h1een1h century neo-c ass1c1sm.
had alrrled him lo ihc growing inlrft'>I in e1g
bl' h d
Th"" o( 1h1S talk. K1ufmann's hrsl Engh>h languag ar11cle. wa.s pu is e
'"ih next rt'"" 1he /oun1ol of,,,. Amncan Soriery ofArt H1AtonanA.
.
an his1ory and theory. 11
Basc-d on lohn~on~ own l.'ncoul'\tt"r wit h c.crm
wa> Kaufmann who provided the convcmcnt hnk bctwern the neoclass1c1sm
of Schinkel, adn1Hd by both National Sodalis1s and 1he then sympathc11c
d M 1rs as he h3d described
lohn~on. and 1h modcrn1>m o! Le Corb us1rr an

lhc tr1r1ory of modern arch11ec1ure beginning wnh the Enlightenment and
culminllng 10 tr coibu<icr Johnson had rrad Kaufm3nn's 1933 book Von
I doiu< b1A u Corh""'"' and wa~ ea\lly ble 10 reconcile Kaufmann's forma l
hnkag of L..doux and le Corbu>1tr w11h his own P"'d1lrc11on for Schinkel and
Mies - l'Orl Srh111kI btA Mtu ><'<'mrd a natural corollary to Kufmann's Von
Woux bl.41 Corbiu,.ras wn 1ho imphtd exttns1on, "Von Schinkel. ~oux.
Lt Corbusitr, und Mte. b" Johnson Bui of course. th enttr.. architectural
Cll"('tr of Johnson. raring 10 kttp up wllh the s1yhs11c ~1tge1s1. seemed 10 eel
rbult tht ~rs1hc11c autonomy of 1hr d1sc1phne
Wn11ng on his Glass Hous '" NeW Canaan. Connecttcut, in the A~hit~
rurol Hvwof 1950. fohnson sptt1hcally cntd Kaufmann's book 1n order to
hnk 1he gtomtt11c1l lorm> of Lt'doux 10 h,. own cubic design ArchiteC1ural
u1onomy. by which fohnson mean1 variously 1he free play of archi1ec1ural
langua~ as <tyle. the mdrprndenLe of arch11cc1ure lrom society, and the per
>on al fr~om 10 changt- s1yle 1 whm1, thence be Lame a wa1chword of his prac
Iler lndtf'd 1ht entire u11rle was a neat and en1irely unabashed collage of
K"ufn\ann, I.I' Corbus1er, and Mir~ van der Rohe, 1n eight sy stages. First,
John)oO 1llu;tra1cs I.A.' Corbus1er') 1933 plan for a village farm In order to
dcscnbe 1he approach ro his own hou>c: inc foo1pa1h paltern belween the 1wo
housts I copied from 1he spiderweb like form., of Le Corbus1er, who delicately
of the Glass House was 1hrrc following Kaufrnann's P .

nndplog of
almost 10 th~ leucr. l\eveahng his deeper afhnhics Whh G
ut"3tny
errnn
c1Sm and Sctunkel. but d1sgul~1ng them by a s1d1 np 10 fr
~ll&ill<eanc!hbt
ahsi cla\sicls1 modernism, lohnson in fatt produces t
'11, fdt
ranspai.n1 "Lo
box that proves Kaufman n's thesis even more powerful I h
"do-,,
YI ani..c
(loo wt'dded 10 1h horizontally open Dom Imo d1agrall'J COUid h
rb'''"
phshed. Perhaps this wa he fa1e of "late modernisms; to ""'"''~
.
to111.
aut11011ze al
writ1en history rather 1han making 11 !or themselves."
~dy
RATIONALISM TO NEORATIO NALISM
Thirty yea rs afler 1hc comple1ion of 1he Glass House, the arch 't
t ettAldo Ro
also working out of concept s he derived from Kaufmann's anal .
Ssl,
ys1s of tnligh1
enment architcc1urc, saw In the concept of "autonomy am

eans of sa\'j
archi1ec1ure from an increasingly disseminated fleld of aesiheu
. ng
c, social Utd
pQlit ical authorizn1 ions,~ nd 11 ndcrslood the word to refer to the .
'
nte.,,ahtruc.
.
.
1ure of arch11cc1urn l typologies and forms, as they formed Pa" f ._
O lnr S!((j.
men led structure of 1hc historical city.
For Rossi, however, as evinct'd by his reviews and critical wrltingt from
the late 1950s on. "auiunomy" also represented tho purest heritage of Enlight
enmen1, and thence the modern movement, for an age that had 1.51
Its Sfoasr
of roots"' the ec1rc11c1sm. and more 10 the point, in the adjustmenu ~uln.d
iu
by the pos1-fascis1pohucal struggles of the immediate postwar perfod.JnllUs
con1ex1 . Rossi's fasctnar ion w11h the geometric.al forms of la1e tnlighten:nnt
arch11ecture was more 1han a simple ttemp1 to recuperate t~.. SOUIU$olinand modernist monimahsm. but was grounded In his reading ol Kaulmuo's
wr111ngs. not only of Von Lvdoux bu Le CorblUier, but also of his pcstni
books. Three R,1JO/uuon11ry Arch11KU: Boulltt1, Lvdoux, ~""' hss3l a..i
the more general, po>thumouly published, Arthtrecture 111 the~of P BoroqtJe and POAtBaroque in n9/and. lraly. and lranct1. (195')l. It wu 1htle
books that Rossi reviewed for CaJiabe//o, taking note of tlte earlier 1930!
essays. and found 1n them ~programmatic source for his n~ ra11onalism,
Joining Ledoux, 3nd llou ll~e (whose E:.uat ~ur l'archltfe!Urt ht tnnslated lJld
introduced in llaha11l no1only10 Le Corbusier, but equally 10 hisownmodtm
is1 hero. Adolf Loos. The early criti cal writings of Rossi includeampleevldmct
of hts s1udy of n llghtc11mcn1 theory by way of Kaufmann, thencetoboinns
runs his commun1ca11on> w11hou11egard fo1 1he axis of his buildings or seem
mgly any kind of paucrn: Secondly. Mi>> 1>lan lor llT, 9l9 i~ adduced for
lated into research into spccifi,ally Ila II an examples (Milizla to Mtcnelllland
the formal layout of rlw 1wo pavi lion in New Ca naan. Thi s precedent is followed qutckly by Theo van Ootburg's paln1ing (the origin of Johnson's "asym
Thus for Rossi, the idea of an "autonomous architecture" was quitena1
modernis1 parallels (Loos).

rally joined to 1hat of a "rauonal urchhec1ure." Thus, when in 97lAldoRoss
me1nc ;tiding reclngle>J. August Cho1sy's plan and perspective of 1he Athe
nian Acropolis, one already commandeered by Le Corbusler 10 illustrate 1he
as curator of the ln1erna11onal s~ction of the Milan 1'rie11nalc sought to ult
dynam1< force of nun 1ec11hnear plans in Ver.a utte Archirett11re, St hiokel's
of language," he collec1ed them together under the bannerofRilianal Arthi
Cas100 1n C.heoecke. and as a prtlude to M1es's glass-house idea. Ledoux's
ecture." The premises of a "Neo R.ationalism"that becamteYidentintbtBiin-
spherical lfou;e of the Agricultural Guards, so much loved by Kaufmann and
nale represented th e beliefs of many ltahan and French deiigners, from~
ha ltd by Srdlmayr Dut now, m 1949-50 Johnson has cast aside any residual
Rossi to Bernard Huet 3nd Leon Krier. that archilccrure was ill sor:t 11tr.st
._ I nnrr ;ud4t
a dtsc1pllnc of us own, that 11s "language" was derived uvlll 0
-' ofIll JISIW
tures, and that 11s form and rule In the city was as much a ..,_uct . . h!
~hert 1h1t1s.11>t
cal urban structure, as 11 was of socialorpollt ical concerns."
.
.
th ... nratorollP"'
poI111c1zed c11mateof
1he 196os,soclety had been stenas D "
fl({UI'
ff~11on (or N;n1onal Soc1ahsi culture. nd prefers 10 follow the progresswe

path of modernism. froin !Adoux to ~ Corbus1er; thence to Kasimtr Malcv.
nrh and the Suprcma11s1 Pin1mg 1ha1 afforded the plan of the Glass House
wnh ii circle in a rtc11nglt.and hnally 10 Mies. who concludes the eigh1 points
of lohnson's new arch1tee1urt w11h the famswonh Ho
use. 1947 1950. Such a
n1 r. wr111ng of history. reversal in a sen;e of 1he progressive movement
describtd by th~ hi~1orians of Kaufmann's scncrauon. will be a lcttmotif of
po>1mod~rn1~m from lhe 1960s on
.The
parado~. nl cour;e, is that lohnson. often cn1ic1zed for "bet
M1e1 in the obviously
bo~ hkt and non.universal lOUnterhorizontalr:;~::
ufy those architects who. in Manftcdo Tafuri's words espoused ao a~tonoinr
and shelter. in rhe 1970s, perhaps 1n reauion to the eYident lossolt<lli p,Js
- fllt\ed bJd .....
1h ts imp11ed, architecture assert ed 111 own de1erm111i.....
Jysis an . ,...
lsrch1cecture of the City, 2 kind or s1ruc1ura\ism" 1n urbanana

' rfY!Vllal
alent of thtUIJ(li0$ iJ
ot1cs of architect ural analys is thu s emerged as the equ1
Ru.s 1an f'ormali~m. so-called "Car1osla n linguistics, and decOnf setJI as
b 'ldinll wert
hterary srudic~. "Autonomy" of the rext and of the ui
~y
CN
pa111lh I and comr h nwnuiry la<tls nt 1h1 ' i.fudl ol

th<' \"2
f\t'\
)0( 10
p<>h11c<1I n<1rn11,e-.
o r u1b<ln df'\<'lormrnr Jll;,nn1ng, and what N1kolau> l't''"nl'r h.td
alrrady 1df'n11 twd In 19ho 1h1 r~tllr n of hl\lo n cu>m
J ohn~on w<i' cndo....1-d wtth an O\tr arching themf' that supernc1ally at lea st
madr h 1\to11cdl dnd cnucal ,tn\t of his othtrw"f' lttttc "'ork: p<>)tmodern
1\ m was dthnttl\tly bdndon ed . 1oaerher "'"h the relat1\lt1ng theone' that
U ubf'~1 (la mu.th. 1n h h p11lac1 to lh<' hrll h981I Frtnch tr<in~li11ton of
Von IM1>11 bu Ir ( ,,,,.., ...,.,. ,.nttrlfd 1 rdou~ ilt't Mnt" with '" t'Chot'> Cf
lacAn~ own a lt'ar u11 prrf ar" t o th,. M~rqua. dt Sild< \ I a l'hi/(IJ.oph14 cloru 1,.
ttmtd 10 urport 11 , <ind. 1n a n1<c turn of rntelltoetual agenda. a new po<t

tht ory, pragma11c era 1mphc11ly OJ>c'nrd up
llf'nt~th th1' oht'n df <ontr adrc tory trarKtoryof the idea of "auronomy"
boudoir. " ll:ant au-c ~Dd<'." n ..tt~ 1h1 pl'<ulr.ir fa,11n.111on of lhl' 1970s w11h
tn arc h11~tu11. "'e
1 h~ 1J1 a of iun onnmh " ' d irt 1lv hn~td 10 !hf' t ont1nu11y of Kan11~n rhou3ht,
c1p1 of "t:nhtihtenml'nt." in tht twent itth ctntury From thl' gt'neral assump
a~ r n1 "hat It would I><' ro 1ourl Kant' an.11}''1\ of 1hf' origin\ of gl'Oml'try
11on of " progrt-s'and " rt ~on" common to thf' Third Republic and 11s liberal
'~"' ' Ri ., .,,., With th.it .1u1nnnmou' srnmet I y nf Ltdoux. tn
1nu1prtta11on' ol 1hr Revolution, to tht- c.,nteted domain of social democracy
otd<'t rn mo d1tt1 on rht ~pt l~I "<iurnnomy nf drch11tuure, from I 1dou1< to
aftl'r rht ~ "''Wm Id War, to the defcn\rve pro moder111s1 posturt' of thr rdeal
In I hr '
hFl'll" ' /
tor""" '"' 10 Lnll anJ lhtnet to thp .1utnnom11' tlJtmt'd b\
rhe new Neo
rn 11on l"m ol th1 la1t "17'"'
'"'"":.I
tho roJ'" 1/
f'l o11llil119
OllfilllOlffl/. lo)
11/ u '"q11 /otft1q ro11n111
tl111r 1-om1r1.<r:.1 tho ,.,.,,,, r 111ur1 nn/ o/ ul "'"" "'""
luA1 1111 rhP pl11/t1A~f>lt1cu/ _.r11..i1, rakrA on lhl' l'Clll"'
Tn rid AI nlou:. u~r/1l\ullu11> 'Ctyrrrr" tl1ot 111011h1
f<"< !111~ ' ' 11tJ'"IAI011din9 dor~ not pr()( .'ti ,.n/"lyJ'''"' 111.rory or 1n othl"r U't>rd.t.
u1rh 1\11111. that 0111.rtd r.Ara1d1119 u4i1t Ir
u'lth """'" "'lo rhr
""I" rlwly I'''"' 111~ 11..-. If 4A lrurory
'"".I' 111 w/11d111 /104,.,..,11 a cqult.d "'" part1ropat1 . obJK"
""'~11.111 '" -' ' " "" c>r anot/1.., o/ ron1H1al1ry
l o thrni.. ol I edot1 wilt. k:ant , ll'""ch c nndud 5, I 1011> "'""1
<Onlrtut~
au httN: 1u 11 a ' an objrr1, not onl) ol hnlor ). hur 111~0 ol rhnughr,and 1l1ought
t h.,I h con tr 1otld b) <"nJ111ons h~t ~'"a pnctl l or m~I. 1>1
in
i.nn1ht1 <1 niv.
lru 11n I tn th<l d1~nph nr ol Ort lute"< tur 1
CONCI USION
I 111.A ,... 1111 t 111
/11 Al 111111' rlw r r111 1</1'11 o/ 1111 lrrAI11r 11 o I /u 1111119091 / 11" 111 r. c""'
.,. a Cl't1do111111"}11.i 111.r.1n11my l11u /11 11 tlr/J11t ,J 11111rc ,,,,,,,run

1'1111 ll 1 1,1nm.1n, "Aulonomy llnd rlw Anr t.ardr," 1q96 ''
In ., u1nh1cn1 ~ hono11n11 tht , ,1111r ol Phthp Johnson, anti 1n11tll'd "Auton
omy itlld ldtnlollv th<' thl'tnt' "'" "''"" "ttrd, but now 1n a mor P d1.,rant, ht>
ton e al, '<'ns1, a' 0 n 1 rhJt ne.ttly 10111rJ tht tr.IJ~tory of lohnon' W<rk to a
n 1wly ,.,..,u.,rJ 1n1trf't 1n th'" tou> "mm.lt>rna.m> ot tht 1940,, 50>. t1nd 60>.
11
.1nJ th 1, on<t morr 10 a p 1 ~otct1ll.lt 1on wtth rht d1snpltr11 nl ar,h1tt'<lu1r

A rr l"'l'nttd .It thc ll)<l8 Ctlnlt'(tnt t'. !ht John~onian 5olll" Wi\S fundamrntlll)
r ..ltant on ,_ 111 onom) J 11 m.1 d 1 II> tr1 ..1 .;ippt-drJnce tn 1he Glass Hou't' proJ
1' and hu1lding ol 1948 9 Th> dr\lnod "retum to d1snphnal) root'." one that
h n.oturally tolloi. 1-J 'lmtlar 1all> 1n tht' humamur> and social ..c1ence~ tn 1hf.
"'~"'" ul thlnkr dr,uphnary ~pl'nfM'nt> 1nd cn11cal 1nnovat1ons of poststru<
turah'm ''<m\ to Oln>M-r 1 numl>C'r of conct'm> 1n a gl'ntr.111on uncon\1nctd bv
thr pluralum of po't m<>J11n1'm A 1etum
tO
th~ fundamentals of archllet.1Ull'.
uy t'fpr~'>tnttd by abs1n1u1on. m1n11naltsm, rhe

post modtrn1,m, i.'Ould count<'r ar<htrKtut'f's iii"'""' suspect
m th modm tr;oduion sntr ..

plw-ah'm <if
1\1 avant gardt and 1111'<1J!ul~r f1ont .ilhts 1n 1he 1930>. tO the despairing and
n1gti.r t rn1qu~ of I nh11hrrnmtnt Jrveloped by Adorno dnd Hork he1ml'r 1n
Ar n11 pr<Ji~t "'"'"' ttl r1 lwr1 rlti l11.A10 1y of adHI'< llJrl' l11.i11otl'A hnu"'''"
o rt11~.- d /orr11 c/ 1J,.. l1uro1y t>/ 4tylotA u11J 11 /<>m1 o/ 11Ytllutw11ol 0110/y.ALA
t inc h
can rr;ac,. all tht' 1tn>10n\ evoi..ed by the h1s1ory of the con
rl'l111ons to rht ~0< uty of the sf'l'Ctaclt" and us consumerrst ftl'rmath.

,.,., t'Vtdf'nttd by th~ 11o1pt"r> given at tht' ronfcrt>n( t', h1stonans, cn1tcs,
and ~rchtt<'<h ~srtt'd gPntrally that modtrn1~m 1n some form, whethrrclas
\rc "hreh modtrn1>m or thl' Ir\~ polt'm1Cal but morl' socially prest'nt modern
"'"of tht' 1mmed1~H poMwar period (corpora II' modernr.m. domrsttc modern
10,m, >uburban modrrn1'rnl. or rven "1ountr1 modrn11sm" of the k ind posed
by Kie' Irr. ws drttdl"dly pr r fe r~blP 10 poMmodNn1\m, and more rhan tht). to
the "deco11~tru1t 1 Vi\m th.it, 1n the John ..on 111nerary, h ad s uppl.lnted tt in the
1980s rhu> thr cunhrtncc propo~cd to b.lt1sly ~ number of qu<"~tron s at one<"
e-tli. to 1lw rf'.t5H'lllon of democrauc v.AIUt'> 1n th~ po~t War Frankfutr School
Jgaint rht pe1~ln11sm ot a withdrawn and po>th1'tortcal con~erv<i1 1sm, and
thtnc 10 thr r~n,.,.al of torm 1111d "itru<tu~ ' ' d rt'nrwal taclll for .i1rch1
ll'<rur .. 1n th 19701. ~nd hn.-1lly 10th<' q11.1>l1lo~1alg1c rtv1val of rhe 1d~a of
autonomy ttelf 1n rhf' 19<Jo1. all 11\11 lllt'St ro rht' po"'tr of Kant'~ dt'a that,
hoth formal and pol111cal, unpllt's ar on< f' lrt't-.iom and ordt'r. colle< llVt rrawn
.and rxprt"5sed 1nd1Y1d11<1hty
-
2& I VIOL R
NOTES
1
C - 1 Geenbefg Mooefnst Pa,n11ng. Tiit Colloct.O

Essors fftd C11lte1sm e-d John O'Br'6n In volume$.
\lolume" !Cl'ucogo Ch.cOQO Un1versoty Press 19931. p.8S.
Monumenttl. 979 ~I
'
2 ~ fo'lowtng 01 tcle 1.s en e"POl\SIOn ~ arQuments made
fot "'my Cl.'Ju~N1rl>ola LtdO<J1 Atchl(!Ctutt and

Socll rt/Ofm al Ill<> tnd of th(>Anc.en Rt9'"" (Cam
IYodg<!, M.O Ml 1 Presa. 1989) ond del'f\IOped onto lwo art
cies, "Resea1e:n1ng RetfOlutionary Arcti1tect uro. Journal
Of Archllurat Educa/10n,
1w9,,., (1991), '.!0&-?11and
from l.edou IO Le Corbus1er 10 Johnson. to Pro.

91Hve Arc1>1/ttt11rt. Moy ( 1991) Since tnen. lhe con
nections between Jot\nson and Ka~lmann have been
elabor111ed br Detlef Mortens 1n system and Freedom
Soglried G ecllon Emil Ka utmam and the Cons101u1ion
ol Archlle<trel Modormty." 1n R E Somol. ed Avian
omy and ldtolOgy Po$1f1on111g n Avl>I Gat~ m
~""' !NewYor~ Monl1Cel1t Pres$ 1997). pp ?12-23L
My tf"ltetest 1f"I Emtt KavfmaM 'A'~ 1nt1ated
by COion Rowt at CatnbtodQe 1n l1'e Fall of 1959, in
my nr~t woek o1 dtct11ttetJrll stud) at m, f'ir$t alkl ter
''ffl"O lut0f1al et h~ quasi moottl"llst apertment "'fen
Cau-v ono trorn t"- depthS oi ti<> Eomes "9c:tor

C.,.,d. allrulllly s""ngong rouno to tace me "- Mndeo
me a c<io; ol the te<en:ly pub<
"""'
A rch1ttclur~ tn I~
A~ o.'Rt-,son wth tht QUHI""' "Well
and"'"'' <lriYo
mellr oi concatonotoonr Supported by this""'"'''" f
was able to mae the relal.ons bet- Kaufmanns
rnc:>ck"ft'\lsm a"'CI h.s own tne
~t
m.a1te-r of my 'its1
d1SCll!'So0!\ Wtth Ph/fop Jonnson n 196' The longe< teom

con58QUeOCes of Ro-..s fir51 QUMl>on are mar~ ed .n
my lrle-looiQ 1nlesl 1n ledou and le Corbus4t Th s
par IJC\Jla' ei.say gre-N out ot tht"t 1nv1ta t.ons to ptesen;
a paper at the conference 1 he last Thinos Before the

Last: "'"""''ed by the PhD s tudents '"the Scnoot ot
pood
Archllecture" Columb11 Umvercity; to

toa
paper by Barbara Jolmsor at a conference oroamiecf <:If
T JCfar k at Berkeley llOd t he Sen Franc.sco ~O"" under
the t1lle 'What was ~nism and Why Won't I Go
Away: and to p1e6'lnl a paper al tlleconferance 1n Paris
orga nmld by ANY Maga11ne 1n 1999. A more develaped
""rsion ol !his papor was read at a ~tty conference on
arcmtectural h<etory and art history 1n !he SP'no ot 2CXX>.
and at a symposium on the 'Cuflu<e o! OtSonchantrnent"
hOosted by the Canter lor MOdern and Corltemporary Stud
ies uo.". 2001 f ha.e b@nefilted from the resp00se-. con
""'$Alion5 and debates at all !hose conferenc;es
3 The best con1&mpouwy summary ol KllufNIAm's controo.noon rs by Oetlef Mertens. System 4nd FreedOm
S9lrred ~. Em.I K9<1frmnn and !he Cono1rtuton

ol A1ch1lectural MOCll<ntr: 1n RE Somo!. td Mon
omy t>d /dfo/O(/y F'o&J/IOfl1nQ -.,AvantG11dr r11 ~..:a
(New York Monl~lr Pre$$. 19117). pp 212 231. F a
brief summary ot Kau1mtM's I ft - "'~ Scnai>o<o.

-Obituary ol Emil KaufmeM ~olArt ~NI
Winter (1116o1). 14' For the contenic>orary &56K$lll0nl of
Kauftn11nn, MM ~oes Teyuot Neoclassic al>CI 'AulonomouJ' Arch1leciure: lhe Fortn11~smol EmJ Kaufmam
1eQ1. 11153; 1n D"'"'" ~phy11os, ed . 'On lhe Meth
odolOgy oi Arcnrtect urat HslOl"y. Arct11tectur11 D10est
51 (1!181), pp.2.t-29, Gilbert Erouart. "S1tuat1on cf Em.I
Kaulma1>: '"Emil t<euftTWV\. T10ts arch1tec11 rNl)lu
l 1011tHtS: Bou/M, LJou, ~. ed Gilbert Erouarl
and Gtorge& TeyYOt tPM1$, 1978). l)p.$-11. See aloo,
Monoque Moiser. s1111att0n d'Em1f K : ~ Ledo<Jx Le
Coroos1 OrogtnH ~ /'1tch1tectute mo<J.rnt , l1>t r0d.1C
1i0n. J.l Avrtf, Arc ..tStr1Llns: Edition Foundation C.N
t..odou" 1967. 84--89: Daniel Rabteau, "Crotique d'Emrt
Neoclas..crsm and R.,.,.,..,nt ~=icisll\ "illcti

tool off directly from R1e~rs own alt~ to ra..se i,..
chare<:lonzat on of arotner neoiected period. tllei of111e
Spatromsche.
Ka.rtmann. Trois art/> IKtes r...,iut onores.. Bull!t1n
EmilKaulmaM.VcnledourbrSLeCortusltr Ursp<cng
lln4 Enlwtekl~ der A v - " Arcl>d~lur (Vienna and
Le1pzo0 Rolf Pa$$e<. 933)
For responses 10 Kaufmann on the 1930s. - Me~

Sctlal>iro. "The New Viennese School." Trw Art 8111/eln
xvn. t936 258-256: Ectuarco PeflSCO. Scr1tt' c11t c1 e
polemic. ed. Rossa and Ballo (Milan), p 210. Hans Sedl
moyr. Ver/us! der Mille- D<e brldtnde AuMI rJts 19 UIKI
20. Jahthunderls aid Symptom uMI St mbol tk< l 1al (Ollo
Mueller Verlag Salzburg. 19'8). TransJated b1Bt1an Bal
tershaw in Ari as C1,.,s Int LO>I Cnlrt (loncb'i Hollis
16 ffledrlCh Nietzsche. H11tT1an. All TooHumonA.$oo4 flOt.

Fte Sp1"1s. T1ans. R J Hofflnl)dale. lntroducticm by R'icn.
ard Scl>acht (Cambndije: Cambridge Uni,,.rslty Pr1996). p 101 (Menschltc~. Aflzumenschlic.es. 1e711i
17 Ka.Jmann. "01e Architeklurtha0t1e: pm, TrtR&lation
Georges Teyssot. 'Neoctass1c an~ 'Aulonomo..s A.rc/tt.
tectJre: p 24. s lightlyaltered.
s.
18 Em~ Kaufmann. Von Lerlcu b,. Le Corbus,.1. P.45.

also 01e sladt des Arch1te~tn Ledoux; p, 146: 'Stein .,1
6 Allan Braham. Trw Arc,.ltclut of It~ French Enlighltn

men/ (Berkeley l)n.-siy ol Cal1forr'la Pre>$. 9111).
p.7.
Oaod Wal~"'- TrwR,seof .Arcluttr:l1111t H.story tChiuo:>
u.........11 of O>ougo Press 19al) P 1ao
19 After 19'25. save for o slim book on the architecture at

the city ol Baden (Die Kunsl det Stadt &rkn Menna:
Osterreichisc:her Bundesve<lag. 1925)) K..,rmam con.
centrated his re-rch on II\! arc:Med of the lllte atgh.
tetr'Ch eentuf'(. especially l He cocitributacl the
anuvon Ledoux to th<!Thlome-Bedcer~
and an art1c~ on the German pa111ler. Fel<ltn>nd
Georg Wtlmtleller Ti. concept ol eu1ono:nws aretli.
7 C"'1st0pher S Wooded Tf'W~,,.,,,,.$:hoo/~a*1 Pol

/Jr:siMAtl H4!oncal/Ul/IO<Jlll t~ 1930s (New York
ZO~E
Bool'.s. 20XI! P~
8 Me/e' Scha;>,a. C4> c:.t.. ilt'od Y/a_1er ~... Ots PI S

S411"" Wer. ed Ro.!loedena""' Gesam-nene Schr1ften.
Vt>' S (191!2) 7rarsaled '-8'd E land. Ka...n t.lclaugll
lot> as TMArcaoesProier:I 1~
'iatard Uni
'9fS.ly Press. 1999)
ll'"""''"'
9 Kaufnvm T1Vtt-Jl.onar1 Arc/l<ftr:IS. Boultt.
Udoux nd Ltq.Jtu 111 Tt1"51~ of l~Amet.can

pr,,,,,.,oph1Cal Soot:1'Vo".ft>e li2 Pa.13 (Cktooer. 1962)
pp431-W
10 IU!ufmann kr:Jo,/tr:tllfe 111 tM Agou( Rascn &toqut
nd Posr&roquein ft>glnd. llly nd fr1nc. (Com
bridge MA Har. ard Ur\l..ers.ty Prtss 1951>)
11 See Franz Schulze, Phl'P JoMson Lil 1nd Wor~ (New
Knopl.1990Jpp.157~ 1~216
12 Aldo Rosoi. Sc11tr1 Selt1 sul'rcrttlluri l.'J c11t1.
20
Ern11 Ka.Jmaon.
N. Ledoux unc:erderkl<lsslztstisc:f>e
Kircltenbeu." K11chenk11nst. Ill (1931 ~ p.62.
21 Ibid.. p 6?.
22 Emil Kaulmenn, "01e sladt de Archteklen ltdouie Zur

~rkoontnis dor AJlonomen Archital<tur,' Kunslw/$$1
srhafthcha F0tschur>van, 11, Bertin (19J:lt. p.131--Hll.
23 Ibid . p .133
195&1972, ed Rosaftlo Bon-=alz (Moun <:Lu. 1975).

pp62-71 ("Em! Kaufmann e rarchltenura
detrlflumomsmo; C1ssabe~1 contmuI" 221 (1968))
Kaufmann's influence is S@<'fl also on Rossi's .11tro-
24 Ibid.. p 138.
duzione a Boo!~ (l!l67)T~ ontroducbon to Roossi s

trans1.alJOn ol Bot.ol ee'sAtt'hJtr:turt E~i 5"'/'111
77 KauttnaM does not provide a note to-this sour~ unlll

the pubf1Cation of his Three Revoiutlon11yArcllledis.
(SClotti scelt1. pp.346-J&SJ and the art!Cle 'lara..ten~ra

de rn1urruno5"'Q.' (1973)(Sct1111 Kell p;>.450-418)
13 R E. Somol. ed . Autonomy Ind kJNov1
14 Emil Kaufmar.n. ~ Atmtectl turtlleone Oef FranlO

Sliehen Ktass.i< utd der ~S'11$mUs; ~lorum fut
!Ci.Jnsh<,-ssensd'...1. tl.\ (1!!24J. "fl 197-237 Thi$ acc~t
ol 'neocl Utesm" W1Se;abora1ac1 in lhere-.-1111ictt
'Ktassiz<S""" ai.1~ unc1 a ls tpoChe. Knt1un.
&ttC11tt 11J1Ku>si(lnClJIClitl.U-IJ1er1lV'1'9331. PP.
~ 1 -21 4 which conslde-1d re .,,...., concepts ol 'llla.s
Sil~- from Rieg Sctwnarso... Paul Zucker. Fran!<~
BronQ.mary,. G'9dlon l5""lborol<Y I.ltd lom.n/ISCltef
Klas.st11sm1;s , 1922~ W~he"' ""1de<, encl Wcllfgo1ng Her
rmann l~setion Baul<...-.sl des 19 und 20 JllVtlun.

derts. 1932-:DJJ See George T!y$$0l ~ assic and
Autonomous A!chdecture: ~26.
15 Gecroe lerssot. 'Neocl&$$ic arct Autonomous
Arc:llltectue:ll!l-2!>-26 Tey5$0I hu el!ect W!'r analyzed

tne.debates O\'ef It.is sly11s1., and i>erlOdic a1t:n1>to00.
noting S'llfrieo G1ed!ons 19'/2 thesis C!1111Utd Spat.
baroc~ und iomant"Cner Klau rrsm"' "lete Berociue
tec:ture ~-. was

none cl these early
stud es. ..,._.perhaps bf implicatic:n aswhEn, n i929.
Kadmann characten ied Ledoux's arc:hi:ec
tuf'lt. wtl~ its geometneal pl1y of rrasses. as "111tf
Baroq~: (Emil Kaufmann. "Arcil~eldoosr:neEntwutft
ous der l ert der franzoslChen R.....tution: ZeiUclwiU tw
boldende Kunst. LXll 1~. p.45.J
.,.
Yor
wete'' S1P.1ri:
and Caner. 1961)
'
25 Ibid., p. l.f.!.
28 ledcklx. L'ArchrltCIUll. p.185. p.110.
&..II~. Ledot.Jx. Leq.-
28 li)ld .. p 1'6.
29 ledoJ>, L'Archtl eclvre. p. 234.
30 !Old., pp.I 52-3.
oie
31 Kaufmarn.
Sledl." p.153 Transtalion I~ ...
Tty&SOI. 'Neoclassic 8l1d AutonomousArch:~ ~
..
S2 KaulmaM, \'on ledocublsLtCoreusierp..3.All

lulure relertnc:es to thra wor11 rllf be ih !ht text itl t1>t
form {Vl,C ).
3S Kaufmann vras di...ct 1n his errhcl&m t:J hlsl*'5~ -:~

iool<ed only 1o ScNnket ll!ld Gennan.Nf!OGI~
....,sta
The 'Pruiiien Slyte 1s n0more tllan the~
..
t on of French Revolu!ioo&rY arcfl.t~tua"' Klllff~' f,' .: :.,
lobn Ledoux bis Le (OflxJ&/tr. p.SO.
,If " .
(~
34 Central 10 Kaufmann's 111'81ysis ol LOdoUl ..U

Ilse tt\31 le<lel l'116{/1$~/J~.T/is wtJdl.
. '
.
{
:-.~
M t NING AIJ10N0ltitt
ts 16 foho paoes of tet 1r.o 125 nora..ed Platas o1

leGoux's buil nd tdeel P"'iects. conshtuted tile moin
evidenc
wnat wos. 1n the 1~ known of Ledoux,
indeed. de1>1te subsequent d1~coYeries ol 0<1g1nel draw
ongs '"' s1>ec1f1c Pl'01ect s. nnd archival veriflcat1on of
the dates Of t'er111n comm1s.s1ons. l 'Arc;h1ttcture. w1\h
an ts emph1bohc acesses nd erchltecturat hubris shll
remains central to any 1nlororet~l1on ot Ledooll. The
two central p0st Knufrnann studies o' ledou remain.
Michel Gallet. Ctoudlt Nicolas Ltdwt. 1736 1806 (Paris:
Picard. 1!lfl5) and Anthony Vidler. Cl1udeNcolas Ledou;,
Arch1e<:ture and Social f/fform I Ille End of the Ancien
Rer;r.mc (C8mbrod(IQ, MA 1.01 Press. f989)
''
35 Kaufmann liere Quohno F Gundoll on Schleoel's

0
,
:is
designs and 11'\te<Pl'tte<I them as svmJ)loms of theJ

PMood (Von Ltdoux. p. t 1. 25. etc.). 1corlalnly do net
underrate what Sedlmoyr 1enns hntiscn. For men How
ever. the large number o1 ong1nel an<1 yet normal" 1nven tt0ns reveals tht thft compla perood with all Its OKC>lt
men! was sound enough to bring obOUt a true ro0enere
ttOn of ar<:h1tectu1e In \he Epilogue to"''~ S.dl
meyr points out thot my roooscovery of ledou beeome
the starting point of hos lnYGStigatlon Into the lormatlve
forcesol our ere. Though he does not fuMy ag1~ with
my onlerl)<etatoon. he nonetheless adopts mot of my
cone~\ and observation. esPG<;oally thosa of lhe new
dtcentrahzet!Of\ 1n compos1tlOl"I .. the ebolttOn of tht
old aesthetiC canons .. the increasong host1l1ly to decora
hon .. .lhe new "mob1loty of furniture ... the oltere<l 1ttatoonsh1p betwe<l<l st1uctue and environment . the odtat
of equably on architecture .. the triumph of efementery
geometry ... the parallel j)henomena"' the oQhoc 1111.
f)aftcularty the fashton ot the sJhouettt the end of
the &toque anlht000m0fl>h1smsand the new athtudl
towards matler . the coming uP fl new erchtottutel
lails . the new sense of cornmodtOUsnass tht
J)l'tsenta\IOO of new f0tms tong belorw new rnattrtals
f~ttng tllern -found the conhnuoty of the dt"91op
ment afte< 1800 the slruogte cl antagonislic: llrtden
cles 1n the runeteen\h centU<y tht -ranee of a
new structural O'dtr behind tht masfls of the va11ous
tytes .. end the tyoocahy nineteantheentury thouQh1
that perleci solutions of the past should be th4 atan
derds tor all the tvturt Archit:lvt~ m IN A~o/
RHSOI), Nole >GI. p.2e6. A few.,...,. terher he WIS
no '8s5 narYOtJS 10 rv1tw"O lhe bOOk by Mertel Ravel
and J -Ch. Moreu. Ctau~Nteolts Ltldou (Pa11a 10ol5).
whntt h "'"'mar1te& his se.~ chlirae of '90&,iem
1n a long note Art 8ullttm
19'8, ~t.
note 3. p.289 KaulmeM was no leM chlrllable to Htl8f'I
RO$or>eu who had wrttten on lequeu and Boull611 follow
it10 up the leada l)t'l>llodad by the \1111nnO>t 1cholar
0
luc:1nc1e" an 1mJ)Ortance wot"8u to a hosl0<1C11l len

den<;y; the nrst t>l)fOSSIOO OI the protound demand tor
an autonomy of Hl\Su&l pleesu,es 1n '"tho series of ph1I
osophocel petotlonS n laVO< ol the 1nd<)oendenco of the
sttengllu and 1ns11ncts of human neturt, 1 stries wtuch
"openod woth Kant's alflrmahori ol th4 ovtonomy of
morals {vuc 36)
Hannes Me-ier. "le realld<t<l So"61tc1 lot a1auotectos:

AlouIKIUt. n.9 (1;.t?). 1n Enghsn 1n
r.s>. Ml~ri~. n 3
119'2). Reo11n1o<1 "' Hennes Meyer. Scr1111111'11 11Ml?

Arrh lfllllfl O'"OlullOM. td Francesco Oet Co. Plldua.
Mo1s1ho (IOOD). pp 21 2tS
37 T - w A<lo<no. K1nt'1 "Crt\1<111e ol Pule Ree-:
ed Rolf Ttedemann Trans Rodney loVlngstona (Stanlord
Stanford University Press. 2001). pp6'4-&>
38 Ernst Cass1rn1. oas Problem Jean JacQ\ll't Rousseau;
Arc/1" fut Gescluc/\le dt< Phrlosoplue. ~LI ( 193?).
177- 213.79 S13 1he1n1et1w1ned "stories of Koulmann
and Cas.11e1 WOft 1Q11n to ontttMC\ with the f)Ublt
caton much tat~r ot the Enollsh od1tion of Casslrora
Philosophy o/ tne tnlOhtfllmont, and Koufmonn'1 oost
homouely Published A1c1>1ttcl1ire 111111eAge o/ fl11son
(1006)
.no .
43 M3 O.olak. TIHI Hrstory of A't as flHI H1s,0ty o/ ldffs.
30 Kaufmonn, "010 Stadt." f>. 41

40 Lodou. L'Archilocturt. pp.66. QI. 136 "Le aent1ment
appteti4 <l'un plen HI & 1'8bri de loute dom1netoon, II
6mane UJCI. ol doll acUlpter Afa naluto des l1ov
at des beso1n1; (e6) rou1 d'111l est 111ut1le, tt di plus.
nu11l>lt. ouand 11 deYIM los urfaces pat dlll additions
me11nes ou men10'l(lrtl (Qt) "ToutN Jes l0tm1 Que
l'on dktrt
trait de cornPAJ .eont avou..s par'gott la cercle le <arr&. VOtlA tea tettres alpl\ab4\t<1utS
Que 1
11 avtevrs emplolent dens Ml te>ture dos me1lltout1
cw
dun,..,,
l ranJ. John Hardy (London' Routl\Klt,jt and Keoon Poul.

1984). o...,;.k'5l(unsll}*S1:.h1Chlf1/s GlllHQeSChChlt
hed been published posthumou11y by h1astu<kints
{Munch: R. Piper and Co. 111'2)
.. Kaufmann. "C.N ledou; J04Jrn1/0f t,..A,,..,icn S1
etyo/ A1ch.teclu,,1 Histor.ans. July ( 11143). p t3 Future
references .n the te.i (JSH)
4S Kaulmam. "Nita G v.1:>11.n '0e5Pftt en Su~.
reviewed by E Kaufmann. Art Bvtlttm XXVIM (19'6). P283
46 Ibid.. p.263.
ouvraoe ( t36)
1 R!Chatd J Neut ta. W~ 1>1111 Amet1A11(19'.l1). pp.82, ell
42 Pltanooasums 101w1ve bHn the common d1-of
both Sedlmayr end Kaufmann Sedlmayr coricludes his
study ol the loss of cent.,. on sullen resentrn111t that
hl6 formulation ol Kaulmom's Ledo\" ned nal bHtl
rece<ved as auth0t1tatwe "Whoeve< upholds the doc
tune of "the loot center" can be e1<ta1n from the outAt
to perce<.e the consequence ol Ooono so petsonallv.
He will h<tve against him not only th<a people whO
reioct "'hal is new o.cause 1t 11 u""cc:ustOtnltd. l>vl
llr.o thOsa .,hO only prOl)llgate what 11 new becaiae 11
and therefore 1nlerost1ng
is contemporary;
"worshPJ>e' of the past and f uturist6 united ageinst
him. KoulmeM's footnotes 1n Architecture m lheAott
of RusM are no IGh bitter: "Hana Sedlmayr. Vef/u$I
tier Mille (Selzburg. 1948). p. 98 Havino mysell pointed
out the etre0tdinary 11g1111lcance ol tile r..-olut1onety
modem:
47 E111t1 Kallfmann. Atrhtttctur m Ille l\ge al itffson

8MtJe A/Id Posl./W<>QW m England. Italy, and l"nc
(Carnbtdge: Harvard Uno>etslty Pru$. 11156~ I~
L~ to"'""' that Kll\lfmann on his fir it vrs1t to Lot
AnQtles had the satistKtoi ol ft11a1ly -no \he work

ol Rw:tiard Neutra as t had - g t d in the conct.nion
o1 Von LJtxu IM Le Corbu51#1 as tht ulhrnate dtltne
lion for rnodernl1tn: the Ulaj)la ol a modet'nll SOC:al
demOCfa1icC.1Uorru. I could tY9rl 1meone the meeting
of the two\/lennese 1n Sliver laf<. Clft&1nt1 the coP)' o1
l'on trtdOUIC tn tne UClA lrbtary. bears Kallfrnann'a own
cotehll signature ., c:tonated by t he vi hor.
44 Phihp .klhnson. "House al Ntw Canean. Connecrfcut

A1c/lll.CIU1V Rl'l!iew, CVIII, e.45. (Sept. t!le()), 1~ l!lll.
411 By contrast as Mertens has noted. Kaufmann s autonomy." atreadr In 1he t~ was odo!>led wnolriatle oY
lht architect ludwlO Holbef..1rner. fellow,,.., w1\h Mies

van der Rohe on Ch4c1go. as he asMt1ed lhe\angulge
ol the rnodernost avant-garde. In his book Cont~">0''1
Arrhitectu,. ot t!IG<. H I - " ' * lO'ned together Rus
stan Construct.v1sm. Dutch Neoplast icisrn and Corll>sl91l
?urtsn1 undlt the heading autonomous archiecture. as
11 autonomy ,.presented a kond of hrQUISllC t . - n
50 ?eter 0 Estnman. "Aulonomy and t"" Avant.Garde: the
N11eau1ty ol an Architectural Avant-Gatde In Ameriee."
1n R.E Somol. td. Autonomy Ind ldfO/ogy. p.73.

51 RE. Somo! e<l. Autonomyndl~.p.73.
'
. - . ~.---------
uasi-Autonomy
in Architecture:
The Search
'
.on""'"'
fl
II
llttu11nll>
ari~c around >urh 1s,ue5 a thue ran arch1to<1urr
bl' otlh'r thn ,, mrrc >CIVJnt "' 1omme1r1allcap1rnh~\/1deolog1cal lorceV.
f~< h '" lt'I\ stt ~ 1l1l' Jrr h1tfC tu 1\ dl')('I ""~1 ).) nn1 autononlOUS product1or
lh< onlv "'~Y 10 '"lid >u~nw1>ion in thr niatcnI cond1110ns of oni~ 11ir1>
llo .. n .11 locrnI:) Jr1~n 1nt<1pn"' hkr "rchttrcture ddrS S0<1a\1ssurs
r.->pon.1bly (<or"' 11!1'
.,
In 1h1 l,1ll al 1991. I w.1' 1nv11cd ro 101n who1 wa\ domtnnlly a b1ulry
colloqu1Jm .1111.11 v.1rd\ Gradult' S hool of Oesign. Th1ven1 seemed robe an

i1trr1p1 ro ut Iu. Jnd ptrh:ip> 111 r>Olve, com rcu "R pos111ons w11hin th pod
>gogy ol th<' \lhool (11d not .ln emuient 1n1ernat1onal school of rthueaurr
n<'I to Oii< ~" Jn1 rerresnt .1se4f a, concernedw11h 1h< mos1 lundmntI
lt'\t'lsof 1hd1.c1plint' Should not 1he ~hool represent tu its l1udentsane1h1
cat dri.c 10 adJress the >0<'1al 1s,ues that confound rhc smJller and greatrr
~nv11onmtnl\ m which u finds 11\clfl
''"Y
thllt point. 11 was

to assen 1ha1 social commit ment in arrhiec
tur could no1 be found 1hrough .1 vu:gar Manusm 1hat rrtah arclu1rcturt"
a mer. epiphenomenon fully urcum!teribed by 11s 1nfra uructural bas Mor
Al
ould
II
in
.1ny <>ther form ot \OttI determ1nisn1 that dccoun1s for arch
tectur wholly by forces external 10 11. Still more implaus1 hlc was an archirrc
lural dEterm1n1>m 1n which the physical environment causes social bchaYOI
. a"""
How could On< VOid de1erm1n1sm w11hou1 finding onc>elf suppornng

of <irct.11Kturt ~s autor.omou - ..11hou1, 1hat 1s, err bracing archntturt~
. or challt>ng1ng 1he game m1g,,t""
" " l Th mornS
bedu11ful
a gam~. h
. b twetn soc iii
n d ed 1ncondu>1vcly, wtrh a general an xiety about choo>rng
o"""''
and d 1suplinary rcspons1b1h1y - rhe latter cxe01pl1hed by conceprs of auto

omy 1n arch1te ture
mort eongf'
The ..i11ors ol this 1ssu.- of Prr:....na
be02n
from
a
posiuon
....,,.... ..
ocUS d,,.
naal ' 0 me. ~king to examine archnec1ure's location bt't,..e<n autonom
'
eprestfll tn
ciplinf'and cultural produet" Th poles of dutonomy and pruuuet ar
their forn1ult1on and rnvne rhe dnx,.11es already n.~Qi
L:
f.
I\'
f'J1N1~
l\ 1QNC,'AY I 1
STANFORD ANDERSON
Indeed, the edttors anticipated the v1ab1hry of an mrerrnNhare position when
dtSctphne He r~ms a model for the value of 1nquirybetwoen the poles.
they referenced my an1cle "Cr111cal Convcnllonahsm in Archttecture that

opened the firs t issue of A.u.1mbla91 In t986 1 One word from that essay,
So much for the sen1n11: of the 1966 essay' In Its crittque of problemsolv
1ng, JI already engaged the early devtlopments 1n computation and design, at
quasi-autonomy." el1c11:. the pos111on to which I shall retum here.'

In a polemical world, the exploration of pos1uons away from the poles ts
least som StrlltnS of which 'ltll seek to instrumentalit e our discipline. In any
case, the es:.ay d""'ls on the "between rhme that has been a con>tant
in
my
oflen not welcome. Refu:.1ng to man the batrlements at either pole appears. I
thought - and the reason lor my pan1ctpdt1on tn P1!rApecta33. Since tins h istori
s uppose. wimpy. Out our ed11ors have riked entering such a discourse In the
cal piece Is unpublished. and serves both as witntss 10 a moment and grounds
for a conttnumg position, we includ the e1say here in abbrevrntcd form .
ponfoho section of tlH iournal. K. Michael Hays recalls a time of polariullon,

around 1970, where he 1>ercelved a w1dospread concern with the instrumental
1iation ot arch 1t cc1ure, a concern that In turn chcitcd a significant reaction in
PROBLEM-SOLVING ANO PROBLEM WORRY ING ( 1966)'
tho search for an autonomous architecture. Jn an aside. Hays noted that the
T~ not ion of problem solving. 11sriec1ally as architects have encoun
editors, and even he, wnuld not remember that time With that prod. let me
tered 11. is 1mbeddcd 1n a desire for 1ust1f1cat1on. In s tronger ins ta nces.
retu rn to an
unpubhsh~d
essay that I prc~cnted at the Archhectural Assoc1a
11on in London and og.1in nt the ACSA Cranbrook mee11ngs of 1966.

"Problem-Solving and Problem Worrying" 1s a period pe<: ro the extent
there may be a belief thal proble m -solving routines will lead to 1ust 1
liable results in weaker ins1ance!> thcro may he the belief that one's
that the problem solvina d1 s1.usston 11Jusiraros 1he temper of the t1me and
act1v1ty can be 1..ist1f1ed mt:rely through using powerful. 1f m1sappropri

ated. techniques
the lnstrumentohzotlon to which ltays refers. That overt content of the essay
It s 1mperat1ve that we do nol warp human well being 1ust for the
e~pecially when the technique rs a pow
sits recognizably 1n a more gcncril s~nse of the malaise of archttecture in
sake of explc1t 1ng a technique
the 1960s. The seeming triumph ol a1Ch11ec1ural Modernism 1n the pos1-war
erful one. As I shall argue 1n m0<e detail, the concepts of pioblern solv
years had by thn degrnerated to the roorless. decorattve sryhsm of archt
rng t!lat 1n:erest architects involve ~lher proble11~ o f dl.h .. v1ng deflnile
tects hke Ph1hp Johnson. Edward Durell Stone. and M1 noni Yamasaki. Those
goa SOI
archnttts and thcore11c1ans who proposed problem-solving methods my ur
to the~ cheractc11:.hcs of c1lhe definite oool orentot 1on or 1nduct1v
m;oy llUt ha~ ltoubl~d with t.rluusm or tho$ degenerauve Modern ...... but
ism. tnese not ion of ptoblem solvtr'IQ arc neither dc~cflptive or the trad1
their search lor a reliable. cvrn ..,1en11h c. mNhod certainly aa1ned anentton
ltOnAI hf>hil1IOI' of the be~t architect< nor opphcable to lhe currC"lt prot>
through their amb111on for an archtteC1ure that stemmed from a fundamental
lem stllatl()n ol arr.h1lr><:lure In contra~t to "sol ving the probllrn." I w ill
process based on empirical 1nformatton.
present another atltt11clP toward problems "prob!emworry1ng Let me
problem~ o! :.ynlhe,,z,ng from a body of estoblshed feels Due
My alterna11ve of "problem-worrying" sought an alternative path, one
attempt to c.!\aractf!1t1P t~ nct1on of "problem-worr ying wit h words
that was in 'ymparhy with the rtcl proc1ttcs of form and design exemplified in
o f a fl'lOC'e pos1ho1e connotation archit ecture is concerned will: struc tur
the only Amerir~n arch11ccturdl work of that moment that appeared to deserve
1og our environment to lacil1fote t ht: 11ch.evement of human purpo.ses
cn11cal ;iccJa1m - the work of Louis I. Kdhn. Kahn was as strong in rhetorical
Nhere the purposos arc 1ncompll!tely known at the outset and cannot bf>
persuasion a in archltectur~. bu t he ws not one to polari'te arguments or his
e xtraoolatPd from known purposes. Indeed. human purpose 1s altered
.Ji
y f
'
,,
t
I
I
'
t !l
,_
. ,
- ..
44
~-
; " ..
...1..," '....I~.
~.,-;;...
, , ,t ).......
. , . , '"'
.
. . .. .
. .
.........
r ~
. - ..
., ,rr,. ,..,- -.; -.
.. c"'
.........;
'
~-."T , . ,
u >1fw1''1;.;..,~~
, .....
. . ,._. .. - .... - '" :-, . - _.r..1 Ill':,. e".J'.~
_,_ ~ ,
..
BI p,""'' - - - - - - - - - - .
>~
. .
J ,~
,.
... -
'
. "l.'I
"'1 ~ f.fl.;
t
.-...... ,
>
.1
_,
Toa h v
""""t
'"Y'""lt
' ., ,
... ,... ,
~ ... ,..,..,
at1on and of the response of the best architects to these problem situa
a potential in architecture that she had not even suspected. That she
tions will be anything but easy. I shall attempt to do this through an exam
made her discovery by mean& of actual movement through the buildir'Q
alize
then deduce what appear to be some of its implications. What
is one of many indications that Le Corbus1er reshaped the original prob
1mmed1ately concerns me is that an important human activity should
lem 1n at least two ways. First. he made the building itself an act ive par
not be ar\1fic1ally and detnmentally simplified in order to fit an extant
hc1pant rn the problem s1tualtcn rather than a retiring. effortless frame
mechanical routine. The danger of such an oversimpliflcat1on stems
work. Secondly, the v1s1tor and Harvard are forced to recognize that
both from the enthusiasm for mechan1zat1on and from the impoverished
tlhteracy about art ts not a matter of v1s1on alone. In this building art is not
understanding of architecture fostered by modern architectural theory.
a spectator spcrt. all of one's senses and the wnole of one's perception
Architects see that any solut.on any ' orm. has 1mp11cat1ons beyond
are ergaged One feels tnat the Carpenter Center is a world, a context. a
tho~e that were ntended. 1nclud1ng 1mpllcat1ons for the reformulation of
..
1)1'obfem. and '"e have the happy opportunity to form ourselves 8{1ainst
the original problem or need. Consequently, architects are as interested
11 That is. Le Corbusor's building ma> be seen as a complete inve'sron of
1n the form as 1n the problem. they see a dynamic relation of form and
the 1d
pr<>blem as of the first importance. It is this reeiprocity o orm and pr .

lem the! is not sufflc1ently recognized by the problemsolving designer.
to any simple no
pie and
II also stands in sharp contrast

o prob em
v1ng. Harvard still has not defined the
This idea may beclanfled by paraphrasing M.C. Beardsley'sdescrip
original problem, nor solved it; but they have entered into the problem
situation more fruitfully than anyone with a hard definition.
t1on of creativity: ... as the artist moves from stage to stage. it is not
Of course it could be argued ttiat the buildings where we value such
that he is looking to see whether he Is saying what he already meant.
assertion from architectural form are unusual. As a matter of degree,
but that he is looking to see whether he wants to mean what he is
this may be so; here I only want to demonstrate that we cannot accept
saying." We can test the adequacy of architecture conceived as prob
problem-solving and effortless fit as universal concepts 1n architectural
lem-solv1ng and the universality of such conceptions as the frictionless

flt off orm and contell:t by ell:amining Le Corbus1er's Carpenter Center for
design. Elsewhere I suggest that a resistance to efficient design can be

important in something as prosaic as houS1ng fClf' married students.
the Visual Arts at Harvard University. The Carpenter Center has been
In contrast lo problemsolving design. I see the architect's approach
often crit icized for being anything but effortless in its relations with
as a seqence of act1vit1es encompessino at least the following stages:

gene<altzed understanding of the problem; various formal proposals:
people. with its ad101ning neo-GeOfglan buildings. and with the Cam
brtdge st reel pattern. However. 1t is important not to look for a well04led
solution here. but rather for the way 1n which a problem was develOl)Qd
and left open to cont inuing development.
Harvard University had discovered that. in rt& own words. "col
study of the impl:cahons of the proposals; successive reformulat ions of

the problem and prQP06als: and the final selection of a for'TI for itsappro.
prrateness to the reformulated protllem. In this case. one must judge not
only the tit, but also how the problem h45 changed. And one must judge
teaching program that called for active participation H'I the visual arts.
the fit not in terms of lrictionlessnes5, but in terms of whether the Irie
lion 1s suited to the new l)'oblem formul~toon. Does the whole - reformu
Thrs Pf'Ogram required a building; s ince the involvement was with the
lated problem and form - resist critlc1sifi?'"
visual arts. the site chosen was near the Fogg Museum.
Teaching at the Visual Arts Center has the opportunity to be the
But now it may be objected that I dm descnbing Q/Chitects as !he)

exist rather than a potential figure with new caoac1t1es. Furthermore.
leges graduate visual illiterates."' Harvard then decided lo conceive a
most important factor rn Harvard's program of education in the arts. As
in claiming that we have no clear stat~ents of architectural problems,
a complement to that didactic program, however. le Corbus1er and hts
no axiomatic system tor design, no spek1flcaltcn of elements. no spec1
building br1lltantly reformulated t he or1g1nal problem. Any teaching pro
fiable identrficahon ol a solution. and t\iat the problem shifts with the
gram reaches only a small part of a university community. and very few
form adopted. am I not forced lo tl'.e a'4ilward position thet everything
people outside that community. If un1vers1t1es are to be concerned with
is relative. aod to the adrrussion that'8rchitec1s can 1ust1fy nothing
general artistic illiteracy, they must instruct the entire community. The
(and thus anything)? However. I think-I~ understanding of architecture
building itself must reach out and engage every person in such a way
toward which my argument points not fnly confl1cts with the notion of
that even people who will never be formally enrolled at the Visual Arts
Center have t he opportunity to achieve new reaftzat1ons about the pot en
architecture as problem.solving, but alsf structures tr11d1t1onal architec

tural eclt 1t1es somewhat differently ltle strongest and most flexible,
t1al of architectural form as a shaper of hie. J had the memorable C)(PB

rlence of observing such a reahzallon. W1thoul Pf'10r in11truct1on. we
brought some MIT freshmen to visit the Carpenter Center. A young
woman completely untutored 1n architecture explored the Le Corbus1er
bu11d1ng. Alter she moved 1hrough the bu1ld1no for some ltme, she tlmtdly
expl81ned that when she came to lhe top of the ramp, she felt herself
to be all over the bu1ld1ng at once. One could at least begin to analyze
the ob1ect1ve qualities of the building that contributed lo her reaction.
ratsooal system avB1lable should give t~ creat ive person free reign sub
ject only to responsible, reasonel:llc. ;:ns1t1ve selfcrit1c1$rll. and the

public tests of performance and crlt1cl .
We return toe generally recognlz situation that I mentioned e111
lier Much ct recent architectur111s ~'.to senoos cr1tic1sm. and arch
tects have no way to 1ust1fy lhe1r actioGJ. Systems-0<1ented architects
adopt new techniques and seek to anal~: the problem into a rationally
unassailable assembly of b.ts that cant , be synthesized into an unas
....
'
-~
..
...
p
p
y
th
c.ur
' I
t t
r
r
I n
n I:> y f
ty but Iii
111
h,pott
'I
,,
lnthatp ~roftlurl) 1;1x~l.'~1~11go, lw1 cll'all~ tX<fi rdabolll

r> I\ \II f Ill
mo:ntah auon l\ut re 1s1 n 10 11ts11umrnt1h 1t1ot\, nd

1111
)
Ion 1 , I behl'V\' 1111 pc111nvnt In the p IK' I did n
othtr pole of H~)" on ern utonom~ <'llhC'I a n r I"'' 1 tht
~olvnia Po ti
or 1 11no1lwr
ro
111on I ollhl
aut n my was pre nt 1n th1 111ns

In 19C.4 Peot r f 1 cnm n thrn 11 )UUng
n sroup ol ) u11 "' hn 1 lplu rw.~ mod
Rol,..n \il'nturlJ to ~11< nd aw k nd 1111'11nr
conI
chflr~
1
4
1
' N"'
j\t
ll't!;or 81 Prl
ti)
eold r one'$. r
n d1 ,u
1
..,. .-tr""
1
tu1ur and h " th") m1i;h1 co ll'< 11v ly 1n1 n,11 Out ol 1
"' d of""
~ 1\1 th t
1ho" who ~m< tn b "" I d (
an org~n r 1rion n11ll!d Conlnl'n , nt Ar lut<I I
Anu ng
lion I Wl'H I 1nm an 11'1 1n , t n 1hrn Nt
mcnt (r A
I)
.. "
10
th l"fa"' rt
w' rl<). "rnn
\ i"llT
1 1v1dnl
I
l 1u1 l'rtn< t n). M1tha I (, 1 ,,., (1)(111Lr1onl Cl 11 11
\11tgon} lt1ch;1td "lc1 1 (In 1u1 1ltt'IH Now ' UI kl II< nn
~till
11
'"' ,
11 cll lnqu hn Hoh111 11 n nncl Hlo h,1nl W11n~t 111 I II tr'"

1 111
lllMIT1
d~"Y l.ow11 t.I nh;ut 1nil~1<111111Cllh,d ind m
I.A
""'"~ " " ' ' " ( r ol .\st (th<ro wa' no formally
rd1 1m
u n) 01nndfi! with lhr turhulrncr kno"n ""1968 That
.,,~\\fl l\(O~\l,Z1hl1Ill1ht lt,ltl1s tl\ .1n<11ttt1 flltIP<t 10111Jlt.'J hy
Tl
1u1h
II\ )'l'llr ol lh
1..1t1l~ tl1t ttt\t l.,Jlrncllt c1t <It l' lor tht ur t1 tr\ lr ''''f<>rmataon of
I 1 r1,n111r'
do suil group. 111s the emt.od1ment of a sI of d ~
n ult nt al f r m.11
er. unhke build mg' 1ha1 rmbod)a lormal 1dr~ 1n whof1

tht dt S111l foi m~ of lh
s. hrOd\'f HoU\\
WI It
oh t lok<'v lum
s nuh-d d<ldltl\l'I)
way tht p111 ptual rxperi nr of th< hou<eand thl'dtmand
In th.
01 uc contrtbut
Ila km ulmmaung tn the Nt w l Ill<, o xh1h1t1on at tht' Mustum or Modrrn
to thl' c~n 11 uctron of th whole that "con ''" nl wnh th f rmal Int nt bu
Art I th ht'g1nr; g or lll>7 four Unl\'1 Uy ba,ed tam W<r<' tn\"Olvrd t e
not "holly l'\''<"On(t11cd V1s111ns rh.. hou , onr becomes a" " of tht' foi mlll
ar hn
I"'' td< n11fi.J from Columh1J
Ro"~ Thom.1 Schumacher, lcrry
~l lli I 1d I rttl k..t>t ltt I t11111' ( ()fllt 11. G1 vt\ ollld E.1~tnn1.tn fl ltrn Prlll(.'101'1'
'~''""' lwh1nd the design. and "multancou>ly aware uf hr"" lmphr 11
of the f,11 m.1101 g.1n1z,tt1on
nod A11drl'On Millon, onJ l( .. lw11voodm111 from Ml 1 II
fvrn hough th de 'i!IJI group con ciouly >uppr<'i t'<l lhr natur of
Thr work of norc of tho "N~w Cot)" ham would 11lu trJtc
in,1rumt'nt ,
On 1h1 othrr hand al lca>t the c"'nl'll and P11nccton pro1eos could
I .it
tC"r1 t'ti .i.t) t ::-.p\or.1tl111' 1ow.trd an auto11omous ;i1ct11ttc.turt~ I 1rgt
bt lltar
ptlrl1ons nl ,l.1rll111 Wt t~ tl11n1n..1ttd int 1\'1lr nt .1b~trJ.t t. c1ltt1i h.1nd..,omt., >Ct'I
matcndls, 1l:iry do ,und a onr of thr kw "'mplars ol a solutton 10 the rm

U><
problt m I;,, S111I obJrrts and en' ronmrnts Ult st to thr po~'1b hi) ol t n
\ent1on!rr. Ullc1mmodat11,g. ,\111 cncourng1ng. I c1ttl rn' ol u~c 1hdt ''''' C<Ovtnc
mg 1n both mt<llrctu>I and u11h11n tom""
lo int rm and 01 hgurr ~ooun<I m.1n1pula11011" In contrast. the M 11 prof
W1th1t1 the cone< pt ol "1 autonomy thrt'" a wider.in of contr bu
ttt b& n wnh .1 SM'll' of dl'\rlopmenul slagts on 1hc undt..,loped tsland$
tl\e work Omt' apprn><h autonomy whtlt> othtn att d tply nsagrd 1n th<-
th i:a t Rtvr and on hll1 ''S<'5 also
matrn.I and social cond111on' or th< , llV'ranmrnt I s w ftsenm>n', rarh
111vol\t <t 1\ltll hoU)IJlK 1ll It tnl.,fOJ m tht {'OVllClOMtnt.t\ <,l1.i1 ll t('r of the CXIS1
work. not.1bl) the Toy Mu"'llm in Prrnc .. 1011. In th ,am hl1hl th.11 I sought
1n
!1.11< 1.1l
l\\S I tigl-
l1ou,111tc p1c111l.ts.. Only ,1f1tt vt.,r~ of rht dl \efopm<"nt ot \Uth
to ca't on the Schrodrr llous Th d< 'ill
nd 'ari\ Fhcnman work arr of
n w r ource> "'"s th mer. mntnl upgr 1d1ng of thr Harlem flbrtc contem
tundamc tal 1mponame to th< d1,c1p 11\t' of archutcturt" Thf'Y protctt nn<
pl <.'Cl \\ 1hm th mrmbcr5h1p of thr <ASL: group (not 'o l(lt nuhctl for tl:i<
ways of roncrl'mg matrnal torm. splice hght. and. at lrast o ffi) mmd imp
I: bnJ. a {lht '1'1'<31<d a domin int po>1t1on moving toward auton
M MA
0111\
\i11
ti'
lb own dt
t>nt 1h.11 s tw
c1plon~.
.11t.l11tt.~<.1urt
.1s 1n
1ntl'rpr1~t
th.it did. 1ndc~d, ha\t
but h.id .i1,o to >uh1ct II If to mattrtal oc oal dnd poli11
c ' cr111 m "In 19h9 1og~1hrr with M l't .iudtnt>. I orgamll'd an cxh1b111on
a1 Ml 1 >llaydcn C.Jlkry (tht prrdrccssor to the List Gallt-rvl tnlcd "form and
hlH" I
ho lltlt 1~ Hmgh to s 1y tha1 tlw the"' of the "xhlbt
11c)11 tr1s,1~tJ th1 ''~Ut
c1I tl\c. problt1n wo1 rytng es~a' rhe 'ttJ-,ang l'\'ent uf
LlP I'!\
A1th11<
ca11ons for
U'<'
and nt<an ng s1gn1fic intly thrsr "nw ""ys" are th pl<r, "'In
~uc h ;t m.tnntr J.~ tog1'' ,,, much or mo1estt.:11taon to tht.11
ual as to t~r >peetfic, they mt lly serv..d 11 "1n th tha the) approah
auronomy ande,tabhb new rofer<"nces wnhln thcd1c , hnc
Ont' rt ~son that WO<k> such as th e by h< dc"111l g1oup and [1,nman
rcmaln w11hin the dom.:un of qua" autonomy" 1ht11 int m It scal1 Aho, a
p;t1 lllull\1 u!.c 1' not dt1f1.nclt Ont: 1,acutrly a\\
1t' of onr S tlWn
thP oxh1b111on 111 rarly 1<Jbq wa< only tlH ' ' ontJ pubhc .-v< nt ot CA~E "It w.tS
relation to, th ,. en1rronments -
also th d<mt r al CA St "'mo" al 1hc mcmb"" saw tht MIT cxh1htl1on a
ot.cup:i11on tn \at&ous modn Pure gromttr c forms or
uppm ttng \th "in tr um ntuhz.11 oun" and (mr." hom the,..
1111\<
~1< 1al c .. u,cs
MA rxper1cocrl
.,urh ns .1dvc1(..il y pl.1r11\1ng Jn con1r:t\I onc-shou1J tl11nk
ol thr'P ~' '"' tlw \t 11 s 111 wh1< h
l'l'h
r I "~nman cmb1 " <d the dutonomy of
"cardbord .irdt1t('(turr" ind d1 ,1gned h1 st rlt > ol numb d hous<' prt>JCC'

I
t
con td<"r th
"prolh "'
lh >1ch11< 1 tutJI ,.,,1mplt w11l11n
lhl'
problt m worrying papor
altrr " of IA> lorbU>lf5 Carpent~r l.cntrr The "form and

le~ ud .1 loon 1.h'VOttd to de '>1111 uch1tccture and di
to.to from
r11\\ t11\
11141, l>y Mr
., 1lit
w.i
u.. exh1b1t1on
en mcludin& mat"
T1 UIJ'i ~t hr oder ~cl11 :.cJ11 who~t fdmou'J hou~1.: tn Utrrt hi
Schro>1kr ind Gerrtt l\lt'lvohl, 1s olt<n 1ak"n as the apotheosi
of ab It.IC! form tran l 01ed into archttcrturnl p.ice In th< lt-aflet that com
pJn1td tht exh1b1uon f d
I\ 11111 l
u sctl th< hous~ omc .. hat d,ffc cntly
c ""'"'"" 11pokr aj '"" u and rlu 1>lay of prmwr y jorm.111P1 l19/11 tlit
flm1 Ii Dlll\IA u11d u1duto 1111of1/1< d~ St11I "'""P 1111dPrtook the <'<plorat.011 of
form,,, a q"'lr df/1-rmt mnnr.-r Ratlo1 1 tlw11 Jop<'ak1119 oj ma.u a11d Platonic
forrnJ> 1/wy arrack"d 1/1" prob/1111 of d1'A191J am ed with u hat th1'1j con.ud,rrd
tho fulumt-urul r/~1111 ""' oJ urtv.11< co1uitr1Cllm ,.11a1gh1 /111u.. planr. pr/
ll)litVt tJ/cJf..\, hfuc k u11J 1.11/11tt /11 jur111tr,11 t.1111J all }11tt ft111ti Aft( Ju cJj 11111! t10i6A
1
t1un 01111
IJ/unar <01u.tr1(t101u .A1n1ult1ta J
tl1t' J1111d(lr11111tnJ e/cJt11MlLA "'"
formal y~i. 111 '"quln d tho pn>An>Ot1on "} rh 111ugr1ty oj rh" I mmr - 4'1"'11
u hr11 u d 111 la19<'rCOttArrucu; thL6 wo.1 on omplulNf by l1nvtn9 thrrlrnt'"'
pt1.u. l1y
<'''' u''''r111 r u 1111 '''''" tur19 111t1111 t 0'' r11rtro11A .~111 11 ofllnrto/l1j J. r11 'td
I 1lt1t11111 11/ pu1 t to
1.,1, t
1,.
lJJ, 11inUAly r J1,, tJ r 1t 1rl1r. \IA nj rJ1r
c1r9c1r11r
Ju r1ct1or1c1l
0111ul0<jy, cmplijio d by th~ R1 /1ord R1'rnl'rA<l1m1d chair {111 ''" rxh1b111on or

0111
11/d tl1 rrk oj jurru1tir" by lltnry '"" dr V. /d4'/

h11h1 schroor lluu ... paual
1.1t1htanan om1ns arr 1mb1dded

1n tll tllv1l<1111ne-nt I t}\1 tl-. St11l lorn1.1I &y~tem U11ec.t \.'Xp('r1<>r1~e of 1t1t'
HOd
Sdir0tlrr llnu rewal 1h.. 1n1t ll~cul forll\31 pnnctpl~ th ll conccrnl'.!d thr
f\
n c nwntaona
us ont n1a}
thr ,0 c.tlltJ Rtvolutoonary HChll<'Ch of 1h, lah ~ghtrntl "murr

anotl>t.'r thrr,hold
in th<" qu;
at an autonom that d..,.e
Ml 1 ,onlnbutlOl' 11\ both th>$e e'i b uon~ 10 havc bl'e
t,,. 1111c.)111.1 I ct1n\,1t1d~ of th\ t.J 1::.t11ll 1nc. ol ar<. l1111c. I01 t as wtJI
bod, 1n.itnd an
Dd with tlu abo th<" anti iutron of one
1rch11..:ctur.il form., 1nfl~tt-d to gr.:and10 r proportion...
I say only "le s a
(I S
s ts placr n o r conceptuah a1on f ar h t

be t c nvtronrnent
urcdty," fo1 wt> might .idopt A~oll I oo ' p<>-ttt n
th 11 arc htt ""'' rur~ly '"" r the r<" Im ol .ill

death So 1hri moy be
d
'ff
Slton ot the .iutonom' of arthllKturo \V< arrive

no
xc. rel''\ ln ptobl~m wo1 ry,ng W1th11l this approath, tlt:rt Wt1!. an ctfon to
r1c. OS"'''
grrt:r.111trd potcn
plat for
.i
rr1ha1" onl1 n confronnns
g1gnllc cenotarh for NM11on. but
plleil >1ze this" n nfi I< 1malpJrtofwl>~twew ntor "''-d1nou1 vt
ronment IX> S111I and I sr
n work< Ion als cannol comp 1sc our en<
ronmt1lt l'.vtn \tr) tlt\t. or h1tect"do f\OI conrt 1\~ trdosto n1:t1tonal fo ma
syi.tems t'Vet)' llm 1h1.y pick up a ~nc1I or mou\c Rather, 11 is al'o a hrgh call
!acts ,h 0w, rhat rhe> too are J1s
O\'Cflf'
of span. hghr and organiut1on
cng to comp1<h1 nd the lorrn31 sysrtm av31lablt within the d!'clpbnt of arch1
,.,, m the e~ampl< of th f l\t' Points, th~ no11ono' qua'' a~ronomy 1snot
trtiure ~nd then 10 bl\ng the~ to b.ar lru1rlully on our en\lronmental nttd'
hm11ed io fhghh ol high .irch11ec1urc and theory Indeed, I ha>'t' t\ploed the
and tht martnahty of bu \ding lndttd, 11 1s this broader ta<k that could yield
concept 10 rela11on 1? cit) torm (~av;ann.1h) and ""orker~ housing tlvupp at

[,sen and the Gurchotnunshilne ar l::1senhe1r.1) 11
th,, largrr arch1t<0ur~I and urban tnVlronmtrit5 in wt11ch""' would choo<e to h~
broadtn our focu In rt\is ,.ay less au,rete '"'enuon' aho
,.,, may bl' '''en then. 1h<1e ls a s1i;n1ficant rang<' within th<> concept of
<'m.,rgt AS S1gmhtant COntnbu\IOns to the d1sc1phn of anh1trtture In le
qua" autonomy Some instances Approach the austrre, thtry prov1de 1ho,espe-
(orbu\1crs renowned Five PomlS, modtrn matrr1al and proct"sof con<truc
c1al. rare explor.irrn w~thm the dosnphne of arch IKture exemphh<-d by de
uon are 1mbcdded Within the disciplinary prO!'OSl!lon Despne 1h" comphc
S111I Of course rh lormauon of the de "UJI group ;rnd
1ty '" ma1.11al and rim~ he fl\~ l'omrs alsoop~ncd Stgn1hcanr general pro!"l
s111ons about Sf'" hght, ~nd rn\1ronmen1al organ1u.11on The fne Po101'
can b<-conv1nongly e~plor...! wtlh1n a particular hi-roncal ettmg But II< ele
s much 01 more a con1r1bu1 ion to th,.d1sclphne of archn<-ctur., as ate the
ol
conceplS of dt Sr11I Uu1 111s.,\so rh1 case lhl lhe f 1v... Point; could nor hae
"hr6dcr hou><\ we l<'COgtllZ<" 1 r>h)"Cal tour de force to exemplify tho'e ele-
l>r<n conceived w11hout th< h\1lab1ltt) of ro1nlorced concrrte lhor really I>
no trtl1nolo'' .tl 1nvtn1 ion 1n tht ) I\,. f>oin15, tl1c> ilrl' ra\ht: r a '!..tgn1hrant Arch1
lt"(ttar.\\ dr~covc. 1y w1tl111) 11t"tt'f1tly dV,.11.ahl'-'" trl)tnology 1 Stated thus, l<" Cot
mcnral prtncipk and )<I ou1 minds can rr1h'rtJ1n the qun~ d1tf<rtnt love"
\\'hen
WI'
hlt'S 111 ~ ae. t\1t vt n1e.11t 111v 1tl"S t lit t: t1rnn1rn1
lb
''t of concerns
ml'lltal poJJ0s1t ons In mall~ of v1sU3l lorm do rdt'ftl ha\'e a high dl'gret
autonom~
Whtrhcr 1n Mo:idnan" p;1 nt ng
R1ttv~d~
furniture or th
I wh1< h w< art'3ddressed lh<' ta 11le qualillt' ol l.1ond11 10\ parnung' do net
dt',trO)' thr1r 1d,al1ty I thank
ti IS
for rhc a.amt- r~c1-,ons 1h,1t. when '"'tt 'l"e .a
51111 wo1i<_ we do 1hiek ot llollnd Cor<a 1q10 but Cn af,o grant the,e prin
Ir!\ iii gtnrr.1l1t\. th.._tt l5 not
10 hat nlomt nt nlone
'1"'
lvtn th~st lil>~1.11 Cc\t.l'5 bt-comf' n~tan<\"~ iNtt}11n a uo1ver~al
quasi ~11tooorny l'ventually they a
not1nn
of
led and, rf lcrrun"e. Cl\en gre,1ter
M IN1NG .& uTO!l.lOM f
l1
effecl by their prrformance. In speaking of a "universal notion." I claim th;11
Finally, I wa nr to recognize that the notion of quasi-autonomy is in no
every environmental work (and ocher forms of human invention) participates
way limited to architecture or maners of thl' physical environment. Conven
1n quasi-autonomous relat1onsh1ps. Nevertheless, this claim for generality
tions. whether touching on soci.ll or environmental issues (and.after all, thesl'
do.-s no1 g1ve a mean 1ngless wh1tew<1sh to all works. We can make critical dis
can newr be wholly separate), can be examined in terms of their quasiauton
11nc11ons. Unlike the de St11I example, Le Corbusier's Five Points participates
omous relations. An illustrative example 1s the social category of reenagor."
quite directly 1n the ma1enal world. In contrast to the de Stijl case. 1here can
The concept 1s so 1mbedded 1n our society that at first it seems the years from
be a relat ively semless rela11on be1ween the d isciplinary potential.s espoused
thirteen to nineteen must have some unity that is 1n turn characterized by some
in the 1'1ve Point s and a built work based on those principles. But for the same
ineVJtable traits. There are always and everywhere people of these teer. years.
reason. 1he 1'1ve Point s reveal a (valued) potential within certa in material con-
and they surl'ly bavetra1ts that are different from those who areeitheryounger
ditions: less general, more technically appropriate, than the De Stijl example;
or oldl'r What we make of this population, however, is at least as much or more
more technica lly and histoncally conslralned than~ Corbusier acknowledged.
a matter of th!' social construct we make for them, and t hey for themselvos.
Even a banal work can be analyzed in term of quasi-autonomy but will
This is my simple advocacy: the fruitfulness of recognizing the strengths
be revealed as just that: banal. My own efforts at using the argument of quasi-
and the clauns of. on on side, our theories and conventions, that should not
autonomy to reveal a powerful example - and allow this to serve as a gauge of
be hl'ld dogmatically, and. on the other, the realities, that a re in some ways
comparative works - Is perhaps best demonstrated in my studies of the town
obdurate but often remarkably and fascinatingly malleable. To seek to live
plan of Savannah .I! It is not s pecial that one can analyze Savannah from the
only a hfc of the mind at one pole, or of materiality at the other, or of coercive
perspective of quasi-autonomy. It is the distinctive features and the historical
power from either, 1s to impoverish one's self. one's discipline, and one's
performance of Savannah. revealed through an analysis of its quasi-autonomy,
smaller or greater community.
that make it special and indeed a comparative test for other city plans.
NOTES
1 The euay ~ed IS '" hol form one loctute f0< 1he conference
"C~ oons. Cenons. end Cffloc:1sm."
'""'' 1ed by the
t "Sert s Cone~ ol L"""O AJctutecloJf.i Ot"91' u (A.Igus!

1965} p 376
authOr for" 1 a'1Cf held et ' he Amencen Acaaemy of Arts

end Sc<!flCes '" Cembtdge Apol 982
10 F0< reams o: tome. the ne.1 '""' par~s _,not rtad
2 Actually I wrote se-n1-autonomy 1no"' pttl., qua., eu1on
11 Thi e>.h b t""1 WU uncle< the~ d Arthu< 0.td

Oecto< of the Deoartrnent ot Architechxe ano 0....,. d
Tilt~ ot Mode<1 Atl See ThtllitwClf1 A/Ch.ff/Cl'J/t
ndUrban~..,l(NewTM. MoMA. 1967)
Ol'l) 'I
vse tl\at l0<m throughout lh e.. Y even whore
"'lD'1don
I
nwotve' Cf\e"'1trt0 an .. rlllftf teat

3
On dl'e<enl crototal front. thI was also 1he ~arot Robel!

Ventur s Complenfy nd Cont1M11et1on m Jlrohl~tur (Ntt.v
Yc>r ~ MJeum of MQdefn Ari, 1966)
' As nolod. lh '' an unpUbhshed Uy Or st pteunted ii

11>e A1ch1tectvtal Assoc1ohot>, London, 1n March 1006 II
was - led ot> 5 June 1966 at t he annual teachers' conler
en..e of the Assoc1al 10t1 ol Collegoate SchOOls ot Arcrutec
lure. meeting et tho CranbrOOk Acodomy 1n Bloomtll!ld Hills
M1ct>ogen As produced hero, the text t cMnOQd '"minor
mailers of fohcily, the ~hm1natoon of such uHgo of tho'"""
as "the archlcl . he.." and aob<evoatlOn 1n acco1d with the
currenl Cld1l0t~
5 In tac1 I wes hopPY to pre-1udgo lhe P11nceton "'oiect ano
won tho rM0<1rces 10 tao an "'" confOt'ence 'tn119nt1ng

ll1t Futu<e Env11onmenl" (1060) lhel explored Ot her votwl
of tne 111ua1ion of arch1tochiro and ptaMng The reaullong

bool. w1s S Ander~. td P/1 nning for OtVfltS"Y tnd Cnorc1
Pou1ble Futures n MIT PrOlS. IG68). In ~man ..

o., Zu>.un!t di< rr.-nt1Cht1<~ UmM'f// (Frelburg 18 Ver141Q
Rombtocl>. 11171 ) Tilt fonel rtl)Of't of Iht AIA/Prnictton
was Rabllt L G..idHanO S..nord P Spong. A S1u<1yo(du
cot1011/otEMr_,,,,,0.11()n (Prnceton NJ Princeion
Un.vttsotr Press. UJ67)
"">'
I MC 8fardStet "OntheCreatoonofArL" Joutf14/of.VSIMI
rct""'llrt Cf//-c1sm xx111

1 A D lrouon0erg.
3(Spr1r>g
'0051 PM
'Col"'Oe Gr adult ts Vooal lil1hr<atu S.tvr
day~ l~b 1g 19156) Pl> 73ft
I A SOlnller aroumant for growlh llVOUQ4> 'ptol>lem WOHy1r>g'

CO<ikl be lnlldt for lhe way on whCh le Corbuser, a111ie
VAC. eon1 inued to transform lhe a rch11octutt e>tobltm that
Ill
ovt '"the Mao.on Domino "' 191 S Anderson.
Ar~tec1uoal Rasearen Pro0rammes 1n tl>e Wor~ of Le Cor
t>usi.r. {)ff,gn StUCls (Lonoon). v (July t984). pp 151 158
Rftf)r1nted (w11hout 1llustrat1ons) 1n K Michael Hy1. ed .
Archlfl/CtVf ri..,,,y mce 1066 (Cambtdge. Thi MIT P1a1s.
tOOS). DP ~
'*' ..,
12 An rnt1!1UllflQ out(lfowt~ of the e.r.tl<1>0n heS- lhe

utool1lhmanl. on N,,., '!bro Cly ot tile Inst.lute for Acr..
tec:ture end Urban Slud>es. tlvo;,oh the pnt tflOtl ol
Thi MuS8Ym of Modorn Att and Cornell Ur. -..s~y The lnih
tute will com~~ untve1s1ty, muse\l'T\ and QCMWNnertel
resources as l/ley mO)' oe brOUQht lo bear on whit IS now

one of the moS1 press"O questronsof
nat"
to became ot Out c1t1es Arthur Orv.let ws a motllllO
lorce 1n thS lounda11on Coln Rowe played 1 Ole'" lhl
atnl11t1on of Cornell Unovet'$1ly. bu! lhl Quoted pa1ogoeon
gives no 1ndocatoon of the C8111'81 role. onc6 again. al "-t.,.
Eisenman tlrst 1n thl toundahon uf AUS a'1Cf tiler Is
leader (wrth Rowe as a s1deloc:A in the first yea<s) A map
pro1oct of the IMttute was one on strMts spo-tsoreo by
the u S Oepattmenl of Hous"'Q and Urba~ ~
( 191!>-1972) II resulted on 1
pto,tet "' BtOOltl)n.,,.,
a bool< AndotSOfl, .0 On S/fHIS !Cen:bt The Ml'
Out,....., ..
,.,.,..ng
Jn Spen.sh as Calfl Pr-IN<#"'""""'
Press. 1V18)
1 1J1sttlo (Barcelona Gusta'IO Go
Stta<N (Bar Oedalo. 11182)
11181). -
IO ftaban es
15 In t.s 1916 ed:oroat tod)ppwlions 6 Eisenman d><

,,,......, autonom, al loast es he parce- 11 to have
bffn reprrset'ted, u a corit,nuang turo.n.s! eoterp:~se.
"Arcl><leltu<a RazlONlle" exlubl.on .i the Mlfan
,., t"'
T r _ of 1973 E_,,,,,,n anhapated..., ach.-.emenl

"'archtech.e. oe.a1eo1 1 of wn.1 the "mode<rust sens
brl.1y n.d ;ttQPefly beef\ a new. non t11,11nof'Ms.I cu'lur~
allot- I beleve lhoro can be mQOrtnt d1Shnctions

betWfft' vulgor z.,1oeist orguments and the invoc:afion
(offered by Ese<\OT\an) of an 6p.steme as conc8tved by
fovcaull Whal those d1s1 '11Chons would be. and how
tl>ty rai.1110 ;_,,,en's conhn..,ng work cannot be
allOmf)led 1 18 S Anderson. f orm and Use 10 Arcrnteclure, phot~Qy
leenet lor an exh1b.ton of the 511me ~me. organ1ted by
And.. >00at 1ne l'iay<Jen Gallery, "' " (Jan <!&-March 2.
t!lliG). po. 8-10
17 Adolf Loos. Arch1tektur; Troudsm (tnn..,..uck Bnr

0
Vor f<l;j), 1~t: rtf)lnl (Vienna: Gooro Prachner. '98:2).
Hert end elsewhere Loos ons1sts on d1flerentoat1ng !he

euttutal role& of va11oos nrt1facts. hicktd1ng buildings
fl\loldITTgs tipicatly do not fall in the realm of art. whole
""ononV"'OUS mound, of chataclerishc st..po, m1y
tnltr lhe reelm ot ar1 S.e Ande<son. "Arch1teclure 1n 1

Cult"' ' Field 1nTaia10 H Maktl and 'Ml1t1s Mill..,, ed~.
WMS 01 Ci.ssif)cf11ot1 .Arch lftctvc 1"'1 ModtfNly (N.,..
Yor~
Pr1ncttor Arch1t11Cturel Pres., t!l!l1l. pp lj-.JS,
11 Seeno11a
13 T"" MIT teem worked wolhoul 1111.. NI conlloc:t but lheI

was 1 cltSl.itt"'" .. rttwl its nwrrblfs ~t Goodman.
a1 rrry "'"1 1ion. was noted f!Q<#e ol lhl tme in
tr. poltlical nd soc..l .,,,toc:.sm ol thl atc/liltchifI pro
'""
'''*'
fess.on Millon and t - e moo inti-nee! 10 ..,.!Ml dltcoltt

uy onquoy Miit. 5Nr.ng in Goodm.,,.s concerns. from I/II
OIQoM'<IQ ol tlw P'oteel lhe<e was a bone! to ...1norow >'
laeto.,.y if MoMA rMJatad lhe polotcu.on ol Out f)loi-t
1tr"""
a poslbibty that was always at hand end perhaJ>o

only by me intense generl Pol<toes d tilt,,,,,. end llOlably
..-.cdoe-1
10 111atte<l concerruno Her..,,, """-"
Of1te<951 thal Mocl\ael Ou"4kos dreN uo the "'M port-ol t>
papers On lhe polrt 'Cl of lll'Clli'8CIU'I and plerlning of thet
momenL - : Robert Goodman. All IN P11M$ (Ne ...
York Soman & Schustat. IQ7t).
of
14 CASE meollr>gs M<e pr ova te to lhl ~ anCI guea(S

e<tP' tot pullhc event at tt-e
ol
af'd
1, _ this ..-llng a t Mil
u,._ .,,, Oreoon
19 I was moM 10 lls commetllary bye buel e r - 1

cl Clw11t~ Rich but I do not ....sh to mai.e l!im
reeponsillle for m1 l>P'OClf..tion. RIOks. 'T"" T , _ _
ot w.oat .. TO<if_, anci MoOOteton Syrnt>ol&. ln>aQl'y
and CAnvtnt.,,..; "'Roet.s. eo Efl{ltlS!I Drrr to 11ro
(1.oncbn Sf)llt-. Bocl.._ 1971) p Xl7
tO S4t On StrHls ano "l)rban f0tm and Society rn tht

GtN I City An Arovntnl from the Ow" AulonQrny of
~""'form:"' Lu9 ~zza. t<J . Wotld Ct nd
thf future of the ~/fopolfs (M11tn EIKte. 11188). pp
87 ~ 'S.vtnt\ltll nd the tuve of Prec:edlnt Crty Plat\
~ RHOutee,' RaPll Bennetl, ect. Sef!/emtnls lo /lie
A,,,.ricas CtOS$Cv/lv11t P,nptwes ( Nev.ark. Ot.. Un

..,,11y ot Oeloware P.ess. 1993), pp 11e>- " '
21 "Crrhcal Corl..enllonahsm The Hist')' ol A1ch1te<:ture."
MKJ()4rd I (Un,,.,o,ly ol M1n,,.sota).1, I (1!l8!1) pp. ~ 7
22 Sea the prevoous llOle but one.
---------------~
,
I
II
''
1":
'
Manfredo Tafuri
and Architectural Theory
jn
the U_.S ..,

DIANE Y. GHIRARDO
In the late 1960s, Italian architect and historian Manfredo Tafuri SUIVeytd
the s1tua11on of a1 d111ect\lre and rd11tectural practice with gnmresignitioA.
The concluding p1ragraphs of Arch11Prl11rr> and Utopia. DeAi9n andCap1ro/UI
/J"1H'/opmP111 ~f'rP'~ fairly wll rhe monumental despair which suffa5ed tills
and subseiluent texts by Tafuri
Mudvn1 arc-lure< rure hflA rnarkt>d out tt.4 own fate by mokm91u.tlf.. thebtom'
of 1deul.o of rarwnalizat1011 . .. ii u tLle/<>u to 4 truqqle for eACOJI" wltrn com
p/e1ely 11cloi.<d and confined wuhout an PXtt ... Nn "1alva11011" u onyl"9"
to b found w11l1tn
It
neuher wandtr1119 ru.llUJ>ly m /abyt1111iu of'"'~""
mul1111alt111theyPnd111 rnurenP.u. ~or tndo.1>2d in the Atubborn,ti/tr.cefqtom

rry content w11h 114 oivn P<'rfecuun 11 IA UM!leAA to propoAt pure/1artlnrK
rural alt~rnorrv~.'
for TJfurr. architecture s1ntc the Enloghtenmcnl had become th instrument par
excellcn~ ot capuahst
development. with the utop1as proposed by
115 greatet
avanigardes nothing but vt>htdes of wotlddo11nat1onandadmi

s
.
d. ~
I trauon rn the hands or rampant r~pttaltst exp.inston But in his " ' l
the history nf Wc,tern European <1rch11ecture. Tafuri conven1en1iy failed ro

mention thJt drch11er1ure had aho b~n an instrument of ftudalexploitan.
dnmmaioon, and adm1nistrat1on, .in instrument of postmedieval colontll
r xpan..
I
rrumfll of
~.on. exp ottatron, domrnaunn, and adm1n1str.11ton. in ins
~Iontlat 1on,cxplo11at:on. dom 1nat1on, and adm1n1strauon for Im!"'~~

'
and so o n Arl h ttcct ure s 1nstrum1n1al use by reg1m~ of po""r 1s hard Ir ntlf
Id his in~rr
t afuri avcn~d. however, 1s that 111 the contemporarywrn 1
1
nient~I
h
f
he
1oralt 11S
~ tzauon an bc<.ome tne>CJpabic. (\n!Sumably b~au~e O I
rea h 0 r h
h fottTIl3t"
c
t e proc;cssc< or capuahst fdtrOnaltlat 1on Buned 111 t IS
Wh
'
r
~
'
... . ,
~Che conv1c11on
that thmgs had once been d1fforcn1, buc chat wich the Enhght
enmen1 came a fall from grace wuh consequences as devascatina for arch11ec
1ure as those confronted by Adam and Eve when banrshtd from the Garden of
Eden. The veracuy. not to menuon the logic, of chis view Isac beSt dubious; bf
that as it m~y. Ta fun was widely underscood to be sounding the end of architeccure, 1uS1 os Arnold Schoenberg had announcd che end of tonality, Theodor
Adorno 1hc end of art, and Francis f'llkuyama lacer sounded the end of history.
None of !hes mil lenarian predictions turned oul 10 be true, as the Guggen
heom in Biibao, u2'sJoAl11Ja 'l)'ee, and Vil Cclmin's palnth1gs demonstrate.
Like other European and American elices, 1'dfuri cast his 5trn gaze over
consumeri1m. commercialism, the erosion of high cullure by a sea of senti
mentahcy and com1nod1fication, and a hose or ocher ills associated with late
capuahsm, ~nd, hnding chem at once depressingly perva~1ve and t numphant.
conceded defeat. Even worse, the possible fucur,s of arch11ec1ure were as res
olutcly dreary as us unrem1111ngly bleak present. With a future as bleak as
Talun an11c1pa1ed. why would one build at all7 And If all actions ore Inevitably
compromised by capnahsm. how 1s 11possible10 do anything when every act
can only repeat the in111al capltula11on? Concnry 10 what one might expect, in
the Unued Srnccs che rurrency of Tafurl's theories (In some very particular for
mula1lo11>) and chelr offshoocs survived chc Nixon. ford, Corter. Reagan, Bush,
and even Ch neon era8 to cncer che new nilllcnnlurn. In cho spacecime comprcs
s1on of the late cap11al1S1 order, nearly three decades 1s a long life span indeed
for a theory.111vcn that deconstruct ion in archlcecture went on and out m less
than a decad II doe help that parts of the theories in Tlfuri' various essays
nd books became the rncellectual baubles of un1vcrs11y laculcy. graduate stu
dent$, and 1oumal dnors, even If they barely penecr.ued the realm of pracuce.
While my aim here Is not to rap1tula1e or even cri11c1ze Tafun's theories, a few clarofocauons arc 1n order, not least because Tafuri's poSltion has
>O often been m1srepresento<1. Unfortunately, m moSI cases the translations
of his admlnedly complex and elushe prose are clunky nd often wrong. But
even the poor translllons are clear enough about his key points, so thac mis
represencaclon cannoc be dismissed as misunckrscandlng.' In his 1976 review
of the French edit ion of Tafurl's Theoriiu. and Hl.itory of Architectur'll, Yves
Alain Bois accused Tafuri of "losing" che architectu re! ob1ect, and of opposing archllecturc as criticism because It rendered hi s own work as critic inef
fectual.' Although Bois complained about the f'rcnch translation, his critique
could only be a willful misinterpretation, because Tafuri explicitly dlstln
guishd becween crl11c1sm within archnectural languaae. end one external
10 It, a mecalanguage wuh the aoI of exposing the undtrly1ng tdeologlcal
>yslem beyond the individual work 5 More later about themlsrcpresenta 11 ons;
first, how did lllfuri posnlon arch11octure7
Whac Tafuil viewed as che tragic fate of arclutccture In 1hecapitalls1 eco
nom1c YStem and w11hln th relations ot produc11oncertalnly drove him to the
limits of despair. for he v1~w~d capuoli sm as 11 rocahilng, all-encompassing
sysccm. Bu t ho began and pndcd his work from the perspective of the critic
and the hlscorlan, ~such undcrtaklns a poll11col crit ique of hlscory and prac
Tice in which he lnlCed th.c archltrccure as pure form could never rupture
cap1talism'1 Stranglehold. The esscntlnl 01hor half of this obsrrvaclon. rorely
quo1ed buc absolutely bound to the fh st, was 1ha1 for archhecture. rho: only
remaining choices were political ones Tafuri offered no blueprlnls for ac11on,
thac made 11 more d1fhcuh to tussle with him excopt o~ the levtl of tht ory.
As he remarked In Arch111rrur1 and Utopin, or cnurse, onQt the work or 1Jeo-
there remains the problem of deciding

logical crt11cism has bttn completed.
ful the polittcal
ht
be
immediately
use
to
wha instruments of know edge mtg
.
t by
1y no
d
rse
must
end
but
certain
struggle. It is precisely here' that my tscou
.
. the earl
choice "'The political foun~ttons of his posttion arc clear enough tn
h. ~
.
f
l s drawn from the architectural canon w tC
s
from
the
litany
o
examp
e
.
.
h c
1970
he lined up in Archirecrure ond Utopia. Tafuri described architects tn eac su
.
.
h' h then one by one, revealed
'
cessive phase as launching utopian proiccts w JC
ltzatton At
their inevitable imbrication in the system of capita tSt rattona
.
. T f
cifica lly remarked that
several points in Arch11ecrure and Urop10, a uri spc
toge ther capitalist development
the challenge facmgarchitecturc was to bring
and the reorganization and consoltdauon of the working class.' Thirty yea~s
later, the references to the proletariat and the working class have a quaint air
about them. the musty smell of something long stored 1n a dusty attic, but had
anyone paid attention to the poht1cal charge and the stance of the historian.
upon which hfun's writings were predicated. we might have been spared a lot
of the nonsense that has passed for theory in the subsequent three decades.
What is remarkable i~ that the arch11ectural theory machine in the
un11ed States ecstatically embraced Tafun's despair, deploying it as a trigger
for a new architecture, while ignoring rhe political dimension fundamental
to his critique. References to the social or political in most pronouncements
remained little more than piously uncontroversial genuflections with about
resisted-a fact reflected in his abrupt and total break from Eisenman in
_
1980
Nonetheless, Oppo1>itioru. published Tafuri's essays. the work of his colleagues
and stud<'nts, and Eisenman's lnstnute for Architecture and Urban Studies
(IAUS) invited Tafuri'sco\leagu<'s
to visit the Institute at various points.11Talun
himself only visited the United Stat<'S three or four times during the 1970s.
Jn 1974. Tafuri pr<'s<'nted a lecture at Princeton University, later pub
lished as "L'Architecture dans le Boudoir: The language of criticism and the
criticism of language." in Oppo.11itioru. 3" He outlined the objectives of the
article on the first page, a passage syst<'matlcal\y misunderstood as a manl
fosto for architects disenchanted with commodification to retreat to a neutral,
autonomous realm for design. He wrote:
Today, he 1vho U. willing to make architecture .4ptak iA forced to rely on mottri

al.I empty of any ond all meaning: he i.4forced to reduce ro de9ree zero a// archi
tectonic ideology. all dream.i. of .1oc1al fun ction and uropion rt.4idue.A. In hu
hand.II. the element.I of the modem architectural tradition come.1>uddenly to be
reduc'd to enigmaticfragment.A. to mute .1>igna/A ofa language whO.AecodehaA
been I0.41 ... (The/ puri.Am (of architecl.6 from rhe late fiftiu/ U. that of.11omeo11t
driven to a de.i.perate action that cannot be jU.Atijied txcept from within iu.elf.
Tire word.4 of their vocabulary ... lie periloU.A/y 011 that .1lopin9 plane which
.1>eparatu the world of reality from the magic circle of lan9ua9e ... (W}e wuh to
confront the lan9ua9e of criticum.t
as much basis in actual social or pohtocal conditions - much less actions
- as the decentered subjects featured during the 1980s and 1990s. How did
In this essay, and most of the subsequent ones, Tufuri's concern was the
this happenl Misreadings of Tafuri, and the cues for a new attit ude toward
role of criticism regarding four attitudes that he identified in contemporary
arch11ecture erroneously deduced from his critique, span the 1970s and 1980s
architecture:
1. one in which language was seen as a purely
and 1rrad1ated writers in many publicat ions: m this essay. I refer only to a
few of the most prominent. so-called theoretical texts written during three
decades of iterations.
At the outset, it is worth noting that Tafuri insisted both on the separa
rlon of history/thCQry and practi ce, end on the necessity for the critic to estab-
technical neutrality
~. architecture as a manifestation of the dissolution
of language
3. architecture understood as criticism and irony. as well
lish a distance from the object of his inquiry. The single architectural object
as a position which denied architectonic communication
was never the subject of the historian or critic's analysis. In fact, the examples
in favor of "information"
were interchangeable.because the task was to understand the broader intellec

tlllll a.nd social environment into which buildings fit. He disnussed the theory
and history produced by architects as Interested and Instrumental; architects
should suck to practice, he believed, and histori ans/critics to critical history.
Striking as 11 did at the very heart of most architectural writing in the United
States. this fundamental aspect of Tafurl's thought was simply igno~d by
architects who fancied themselves cri tics. historians, or theorists.
The Journal Oppo.1irioru, which first published Tafuri's essays in this
country and which led the charge to adopt bits of his thoories selectively, Is
as good a start'.ng point as any, bccouso it is the fountainhead of multiple
mlsreprosentauons ofTufuri's thought. As has been the ca
, h h'
f
se wit 1s pursuit
o numerous other theorists, Peter Eisenman's fascination with Tufuri was
entirely selfinten!sted. isenman has always sought . h
b
cr111cs w o would cele
rate his own work and reinforce his own ideas abo t h
u arc ttKture Amazingly
isenman continued to pursue Tafuri I
f h'
.
.
ong
a
fer
ts
deat
h.
In
an
arti
1
b
1ished in l ooo. 1!enman twisted Tufu .
c e pu .
history and cr111cism from practice to rf1as argu~ents, about rhe autonomy of
vor a view of arch ite

.
cture as autono
mous from everything else 0
esp11e 1senman's assid
f
him into his phalanx of theorists ""- f I
uous e forts to entice
u ur wa s one of the f
h
ew w o consistently
. 'bute the
4. an architecture which attempted to re d1stn
capita list division of labor.
St r
. I ded designs by James I .
Within the first th~e categories, Tafuri inc u
h
.
.
.
d Venturi and Rauc
ling. Aldo Rossi. V1ttor10 De feo, the New York Five, an
1
brand of empty forma
all of which he believed succumbed to ono or another
Stein
d Unwin C1arence
Ism. In the fourth, he included the work of Raymon

' . May and
humachcr. Ernst
.
Charles Harris Wh itaker, Henry Wright, F'rlti Sc
der Rohe.
L dwig Mies van
Hannes Meyer. 'a By comparison wit h Le Corbus Ier. u
h on of the
k d In the pant e
and Wah er Gropius, none of the latter group ran e
t rs on 'l'afuri
. . I commenta o
k h advanced as
great modern movement architect s. Not surprtstnS y,
whosewor e
the n and later conveniently ignored the only group
\though harlilY
.
al practice, a
offering an important contribution to archttectur
a blueprint for action.
he survey of twen
h'tects/
Int
ti
1
What did he find appealing about these arc
Ii hed in 1976. nfu
.
,., first pub s

....r
tieth cent ury architecture, Mod11r11Arch1tectu
May, and t-f,.
Schumacher.
led
spelled out t he ways in which Unwin, Whitaker,
the rrankfllrt S
1 nguege." In
bt t)le
offered alternatives to sterile exercises on 3
featurt to
h Id t he signa1
nstic
f
lungen planned by May. for example. Ta uri e
fees characte
b ildins prac t
political decision to reject the speculauve u
--- - - - - - - -
Pet"' Eisenman, tiouSe IV, 1971
H~ussman's
transformation uf Paris and the segregated citi es or the
tecture became instrument~! to late capitalism, this need not be its only result,
United States 1n favor of lowcost housing situated conveniently near the work
nor did this mean that the architect should retreat into contemplative games.
both or
place but integrated with nature.' 5 Pc>rhaps most important, these and the
Tafuri repeated this point numerous times. In a 1976 interview by Fran-
other projects Tafuri advanced, healed, he claimed. the breach between avant
coise Very, l'afurl spoke of "architecture without a capital A" as the most
garde aspirations for a new world and the "realistic possibilities of a demo-
interesting because 11 does not wallow in its crises and problems; instead of
cratic administration." 11 Tarun considered drawbacks to work by these archi-
talking, it acts.11 Acting, or movement. Tafuri insisted. mattered more than
tects, such as those of Unwin at Letchworth, but he 1ns1sted that whatever
results, and the movement that "tends toward something" constitutes the "rec-
its limitations. Unwin's scheme provided low density, high-quality archi tec-
titude or all political activity."10 It is therefore puzzling that an astute cr11ic
ture integrated into the natural setting.'7 What made projects such as Hamp
such as Michael Hays could describe Tafuri's position as expressing the "inef
stead Carden Suburb praiseworthy was the architects' struggle to accomplish
fectuality of any resistance Ito modernisml."f1 Even worse. f'l"edric Jameson
real projects for the middle and working classes rather than high-end, elitist
designs for the wealthy, empty formal games, or aimless dreams of a better
excoriated Tafuri for his pessimism and for setting up a scandalous political
impasse Ln his work.22
world in some vague ruture to be accomplished without effort, conflict. or fail
Given the choi ce between a responsible If not always entirely successful
urcs along the way. At Frankfurt, for example, the Siedlungen expressed the
architectural practice and the heady avant-11arde games of the New York Five
housing policies of soclal dPmocratic trade unions, even though ultimately
and their progeny, botween an architecture which Tafuri described as explod
they were "neutralized by the autonomous development of finance and monop
ing out towards reality and an architecture of language games, it is not hard to
oly capltal." 11 The lesson to be lonrned was not the impossibility of doing
figure out which has appealed more to theorists and designers since the 1970s.
anything, Tafuri nrgucd, bul rather that reforms needed to be extended with a
Never mind that Tafuri upbraided adherents of the latter approach for follow
coherent polltlca l strategy to the entire complex of institutions, and not only
Ing "false paths laid out by the enemy that lead into the desert." .. It is much
those Involving archltcctur~ and building. Put another way. even though arch I
easier to play games with cardboard, titanium. or com puter graphics than it
..
.~
:EJ
~
s::i
".
I
0
.......
''
'
------ -
\.
'
'
'
-~ I
,,
-
....__ -
-- -
- - -
- -
.,.J _
I I..
' 1
iI
I I
1I
' I
,,
/1.
,:
,, '
l
...
'
'i
'
''
'
'
--,
,
I
I
I
I
I
'
r
I
I
I
---
'
t. .,,,.,, 1. l0NOM1 , c
lb(d}
~ J3
-"
~\
-1
'1?=
.- I ''I
:::d
\'
is ro str11gglewith nearly 1ntractabl~ prob~ms of affordable housing or urban
','
'
,. '
,'
... L_ __
,,'
sprawl. energy cnses. or any one of a series of major problems which we con
~~
front today 1n the bu1h environment. Those games are also less likely to offend
the vaned interests wh1Ch comprise the purveyors of consumerism. commer
ciah:r.allon. and cap11ahs1 rat1onala1a11on (who also end up patronizing arc hi
tects none way or another) than might more direct confrontations.,.

When Peter Eisenman announced rhe arrival of Post-f'unctionahsm in
1976. he wrote ol an arch11ee1ural form d1ffrenr from what he referred to as
form as a relic of old. human 1st rheory. a new form which exists in an atempo
rat. decompos1t1onal mode, as omething >amplified from some preexistent
set of 11onSp<!c1ftc spatial en1111es Here. form Is understood as a series of Frag
menu- signs wnhout meaning."
Togethtr. these rwo formal ren<lenc..s ... cons11ru1e the essence of this
new. modem d1alec1oc They begin to define the inherent nature of the obje<:t
Ul
and of 1Cself and 115 capaCJty to be represented ..,. Th1s posn1on has aflir.i
tres with Tfu11s observations about th "fragmentatoon of the 0<der of dis

cours." th "silence of lorm.""trnptys11"\S...., Even at rhe tome, Tafun specifi
cally rt>ferrrd to E1smn.ans d~gns as emblematacof a tendency 10 "repossess
.. the unique chalacterof the ob1Kt by removing 1t from 11s economic and fun<:-
..
:1onal cootexu. placing n 1n parentheses with the flax of ob1ect~ generated
by the productoon S}">tem in 1976, Tafun descn~ the exas!H'rated formal1sm ot
Eis~nman
as producing ~ctis11c spas p1ec1sely becuse "only by
ruhngout all reasons and demands h:.vong nothing directly to do w11h architec
tur~ can E1"nman kttp his arch11Ktural bnguage inran."" Eisenman later
ecn~d
'
T'afuri"s "'TU1ng whtn he proposed an architecture fO< rhe lat twenll
uh century as an independent discourse. frtt of e><ternal valuos-dassica! or

any other. that 1s. the 1nters..c11cn of rhe meaning.free, the arbitrary. and the
._ D
t imeless in thean1fi<1al." an arch1tec1Url' which con.1s1ed only of selfr~feren
-----,
llal langu&*' ThJS echo was 1us1 that - a displaced and disembodied version
of'Thturi's pos111on.
Although 11 would be convemonc tu nrguc rhat figures sucli as ise11man
and later 1.Jbesk1nd fully behoved that tilt oct of building was so compromised
that autonomy was the only dl'lensible posi11on, and tht the only way of
adva11cing a critical pos111on was to stand dloof from the world of pracuce,
it just wasn"t so. E1senman's 1nd1fferencc to politlcal, economic. and func-
tk>nal con>u!erations 1s legendary ~nd lon11stnnding. and expresses nothing

more than an unw1lhngness to be troubled by such nasty inconvenincts. The
rcma1n1ng members oi the N"" York F\\~ did not adopt such drastically polem
ical positions as Eisenman did, and chcerfvlly built for any multinational
whu:h issued invitation~ Th ht any ol clients for whom the apostles of auton
omy later bush (or wanted to build) alone ough1 to put to rest any notion
that autonomous arctolte<ture represented anything othe< than a convenient
pubhc retac1ons deviet at a t:me when client< were scarce. such as during the
late 1970s_Even so. Ta/uri was 1ni11ally more tolerant of the r~treat into purity
and empry forrnahsm. for he d1sttmed It to be, at least in some cases. an
expression of ;anguish 1n tht fa<.e of the toulinng powtrof capitalism." Bur it
did not take long for thtS tolerancP toevapo.-ate with regard to Eisentrutn and
the so called American avantgardt. ending up only a few years later in an an1
rude of wry amusemEnt Ah hough he penned critiques of purism and of post
modtrnasr>. Tafuri ~bo rnunded his readers that the struggle over post mod
emi'm was but a war of words In confront~tlon with other words, a strugg~
'
of n,tn< ted langu.tge:. lor an 1mposs1ble rulr over that which"" 5

.
I inu~S"'' i::v1n if both Aldo Ro:.s1 and Eisenman CO!lduct d

' "
c Utarch .
aH hiflcturill punty, tht' gulf bt'tWl'C11 them was enormous, ~furi held.II. n
.,drr"J ~; 1 senmdn's "w1ll 10 abs traction" a:. only superficially simil nr101h~o1
tl>n
Ho,si" as a quick look at thl' product:. uf their respectiv, follow, 1'II U$11i11tlk
Tafuri wrotl' that Ro''' "d1smi:.ses tht.' importance of form in favor of a deco.
rous re:.crve, almost a:. 1! to signify that only thus can communica1ion ht"'
e:.t~bhshed bNwc<'n th!! 'httlr world' where architecture rises and th, 'bi
1
-- -- -
--~
----- --
--
- -~
world' whert.' 11 1s obliged to res1de."lt
~~-dj~
-::::
ra
"" ~$'to111t1
or course. Ta fun considered the mournful dingnosis of the stat' of art ho

eciure 1n an er<1 of late cap11ahst hegemony an indictment, ncithtrtauetor
l'clebra11on nor a blueprint for a new methodology, but this diJ not PPt"'
B
---
10 trouble Eisenman, Bernard Tschumi. or Hal foster unduly. They lnum

phantly announ.-ed the erosion (or end) of history, the appearance of thedtttnll'rl'd ~ub1ect, the end of representation, and the arrival of a thoroughlyiutono.
mous, independent architectur. architecture a~ an end in itself.'1

Although 1'afun cena1nly spoke ot ends, for Eisenman. 1,chum1, ind
foster and other theorists floating aloft in ecstatic 1ndeterminaty, ~rchll!f
--
, _...
----- -------!
-----
ture now 101ned an extremely select group of entities which were tht1rownand on\y-1ust1hca11on' but with which all of the~e theorists would hivtboem
loath to bt athhated: Cod and l'Vtl come readily to mind. So while architc1Ul'f
WJS
an <'nd 1n 11~elf, paradoxically els,where thtrt could bt' no ends, orttltol
ogy, and no history. Whatever else one can ~~y about Arrhitrct11N and U~poa,
11 did proposl' an interpretati on of history roughly from the Enh1htrnimn1
to th<! Modern Movem<'nl, a history unders tood as a sequence ot events. con
tradkt1ons, dialectics. 1dea~. and acnons in the eighteenth century ,,.h1ch fol-
...
-~ J
lowed one another and ll'd to Ideas and unde1 takings in the next twocen111rics
- 1n p3n1cular, the ab:.orptlon of architecture into the proccs.es ol capuah)t
ra11ona\1ia1oon with all of the consequences we hnv1 mcntiontd. Bttnus<'
l'.ifun used cr111osm to expose a view of that history .it vartnnt1' with 11~n
Jard ones. and because he a~scrtcd the pos~ibillty of inttrventlons only on thr
political level. he was not troubled by the prospl'Ct ot having srrv<'d up )Olltthing that could pa~~ for a meta-narrative. Subs\!QU'"' thtonsts, ho~vtr. io
the rhrall or dtcenllrcd. ah1btorical and nutonomous suh1cc1s. and ~rrhllK
ture for the sakt ol rchttPcture. those 10 seizt tht' results of 11\<1t anilisis
..
untcthend fro111 thl' h1>1oncally g1oundeJ
,
.1
J
:111h1~ Into
em<rg<'u To do othl'rwl!>e might tvcn mean havinll tn ~ m11111
,h
h
II . tltr wnolf
' '' imc of thing~. which would of course l~ud to Jlsm~ni "ti
.
. rrom wluth
postmodemht M heme of dl'Ccnhred ,ub1erts anJ tndrht min~cy.
0
r . ..
. --- -.. - .
-- -
--....
'
..
-r
Cl a
rnds. origin>, or rou11dJt1ons wen~ 11bsl'nt.
\_
-- . -- -
-- . ..:~-.:...:-~==:...:-::._ -J....,__J
'
11
-.
r.J
. ..
,,
."
F-1
.....
-- - -- J
...
1nterpretiv,,.1r~mewoik lrom"hteh
Ih
r~l rht<irrt"
A t ough hy tht 198ob the 1111en11011 of the i11~h1tet'lll
h
t~ahl 5I
Sfll'~1lll)'l, t r
1 m~nt h;1d ~h1htt.l 10 nt'w sourrcb (Oon11h1 onJ 1.ura t1 1
11
d
k
I rnt11l l'.u1.ir<""
8 iui1 wur lor 1unn<'< 11on:. w11h thu newr~t 1rc11Js In cont 11
311
tho I11 L
I1 T1hiti hln1$tlf '
ug .. at.I .ilrl'ady b11cn 'hdptJ by the 1on111cb wot '

u"r
UI
h I .-~..r~ull.
nni,oioub tt'Jder who wi" 1.1m11i~r woth 1h1 works ol M r
M"l
11d I
J tJt>/01< llr"
11
a. II dn, "nd nth er' by thr timt> ht wrote Ard111rrr11 1 ~"
n(h wrt
on >lhl'1 1, 1
d
$t 1>t thC l'n'
'' Y~ ol th" v~rly 1'}70~. hr h.11l 1111rodurl' 1011
1
' ~ who 'ub".~ljucnt ly dnm1n.1trd t hrn1 y 1n th<' U1111rd !'tl\tt
-~1t..ct11r.1I
Wtl
1 1 1hrd dv,nt ot po,t\11111 tun1ilm :inJ 1l""~notr ur11un,3f\ ff11'11"J110.
th 1ur"t
h
nd ,,~ 111drl
'cm 1.in.1l rh1 r1w d0< t11nc-. ~bout lan~uJ8' ~
11 m111r
lkl
I wh~I l~I>
II"'" \Ulh '"to uih, 11'o1l11y. ~nd \('fl.1lnty W(.'f\' r.-rut y
MN
. .....,.,.__ ............. .
1111\1 and df'con>1ru llVI t llic h1tt"('IU1 ul 1lwo11i;h almt'tl I> b.1111,h. That th y
(tod so hy propo51ng 1h1 tr own dogm." ul rnJ trr minC}. d<'CtnHrtdn< ''and
h~ M h of dl\cour1r b an 1mbllrr 1>mr111 no onr ''"'' tag, r to AJmtt Ont

ol thr thrill of '""dona rt. ,.Tit lni;s of pomodrt nlst h.u 1><>t~1ruc1urah>1, or
c!<"COn1truc11vi1t) a1chlltttu11I thro111 .. 1s 1h, hhth" 1nd11f..,..,nc., ,.ith "h1ch
glob. 11othng llbW'lt r> ~II - w~nts rn 1r..,..,1 w11h a dt>ten1tred ~ub1ect who
" ~ JlllOt And for whom rr~lotV I> Ml)' a J1,COU"I' tnd
an 1111y <>I hr<' f1~11n.: ui;nther'
I)
cra\h nothing but
J many ol t he arrhuectural 1heor1,1s
lull) &rMp 11,,. d1m"n1on of tM poi.1 true ru1ahs1 anJ J1.. on,11uo1vl'11hl"O
11es th(')' who It ht";art...Sly rmbrnced' Ut'mard Tsthum1 unw1111ngly '"''aled d
ceruon hazt1>rs al>ou1 5Qmr fundament.. ls old ons11uu1on 10 1<}88 when
mrbody 0\11kntly forgot to r..tl htm 1ha1 1n hr dt"cons11uc11v1'1 <"ra.
'>'
r.ms "''''" 0111 "dts1unct1on bttor:io a systt11U11c and 1hror..11lal tool for tht
m.al<.lng ot archhKrurr"
DtpI<" ll\t' mbracc of thr .,nJ ol th" class1cnl, th<" end of ntan
TM "7l .,_.., of &Ix-I"~.. not mf'rr/y J19 '"' rhr 1rr-rdu.1bl" n1ulttp!1rnv of
rongul'.. 11 >xh bl~ an ncomplrt1011. rhr 1nipoA.A1b1l1ty oJ Jit1u.lun9 of rotaln

"9 if ...arvrar,119. <>/ mp/1ti"(/"'"" rhin9 on thl' onlrr o/ f'dij1corion ore/,,
rrrr1""' rorurruN 01,.ayAtcm and an'hltl'Cfo1ucA
tng, tht t'nd ol history, thr d ssolutlon ol rrprtsrnt.11100. arJ
'IO
forth. rhe
19110 n-a 1hrorlsu rtsoncd to d d.M:uc pronouncrmrnts '" nsd ~nd 101ahz
lnfl il> 1hr mtta nanauv.~ thn thry suppostdly ...... r hes1egin11. and they nhen
1rumJ>Cd1h1 Md\'t'~.&f) whn II c~mt to i;rand1osll) o/ 5COp<' Ont good
1t~m
tollowon up on 1h1. tn 1"88 l.1 ark W1aley "wo~ tlw not inn ol "&round
"" ol thl~ -what,. m1;h1 ca I a "ll I rnul lomuh5m -1i; that <>I D1n1~l l 11x'
U\ UJ>JlOll nd lollowrd l>rrriJA. not l<n I h ti thr '" UCI Ul .. IOI lU Chlh'C I UI c)
.~
t~nd
not on thr lo1tnd hut on ~n 1th)~
. IV<""' Irv ("Olll. u/111y ,,,., ulyA "" "
1111 /1,, ""''""'
1ht
'""'"i.AllHI
f'<PdUCt'.A t/11 Of'/li'lllllll 1>j 1111/1cf 1jf1ll/11tf

~nd
la1tr 1n pc11<lng ol 0111111111111 .1~
,,
111d lrom hll Ull of drawui;;. Cl:am/t... \\ oil...
Jlrr l111rru1r. u. 11rllhiY 011 /h' lnA J~ 111tr th u1d1 It u 1101 a q11.,.n nor o phy4
/l.'r0ru11u. rion ;,.,.dJ, to a c"'"''' '' '' r111 .. ~1119 / th ..,,rrl n.nirol irlurw1,
.AhCJ>C!lJOr,fz-1,J by thi (Ir, }11f c t111,1( t,t1>tij 11/ tjlt>lllli/ All PIC (Jiit ., P11Jl11111( //1,
, ,,,,.. ~ IA
"v1ol.111con 111 M1uc1u ..., ;,nd ard111,...
wal Ju t It hw no ll1..r11111 011d II li>tA 1101 /11/J.,w Iulo' IVhat "'"''9'A 111 d1f
/ trllft<lt d
\l'f'lltn<?U. Athllr< ''"'.,.. '"' 111111 ~of rl1r r, /ot1C111.6hr/I bNt<'<'<'tl
uihot ""' u11d lfhor u 11/ ""A l11 r.,. ,.,,.. '" """ '\IMl'lll r~u/11y 1.1 a .&ymbol
M>/u("h 1111hr1r<X u o} <"IA''"'' ..'"'"' /1'tll''" o tr<11/ 1tf h11ro9lyrlu 111.4poce
c1111/ rrmr tlwt to.11 /1 t~ll1<'1l/o nt d'/tliA / U11ortq'"ul11y 41
d~1J~i ol
1urt as 1111 ponll>1 l11y tf h111Id11111. W1iih~ , ~hht .1ttd rh~ 1111k11 r mrnar) whll h
\'\lla1 d\ n;un1c' 111i;su.cl thrrt
<iiX"Onsrruc!lon m 1J, f'OS'lbl1 In Art h1t~IU!t
c1Zlntl rrllr< 1100 paS)td lot th\ory, anti wh.11 dol'> II all hav rodo wuh Tafur 1>
1h1ore11cal delirium in wluch poell
l t>1ta1nl1with1ht<'C'Onomktpans1on ul h 1q80' no11ons 1ha1 bu1ld1n11 was
'\.,rit a 91 " 'dot A 1101 cc>11.M11ur.

M>llr ,
CJ
11111hud a 111trq"" an onoty..u. or"
of I 9ft1muatum It u not .111n111 91e It lw.;
no110 .&a"J that It u. otmlt-M
ft"'""'"" 1
110
i'I y l"<'"Atly
p1t''Amb4'd aim. "'lu<:h u.
but 111>1 r1 '"'"' ,..,d Ir u.
1mpo~llblt- and that th~ only vpuon w.1~ poh11<al .1t11on bt'came progre ..>111.ty
1~,. aruactl\-. 10 arch11t-c1S Hf"'Ctally acadPmic nnP>. who eventually found
omm1ulon5 rn the t'COnOm1c cl11n41 of th 1q9oi; Du1 It wa> al~o pre< osely
"Of " P'Oftt"
thlS i;roup thdt han~ l'ltd to1 ln1tllt'CIUAI lllrtlh< a11on, o a bracing dose of ~u 11
Or as letlr~ ~.1p111 put 1t, d1'l"onsrru< uon olft'red wh.ir he callt'd "mollf,for
ably tnij!m<ltll t
'" hllt'Clural d"Slll"
0 n,.1 Addre,s1ng this query d rht sMg fur th" ~J>tacle of 1h1rty yvars or
urop~an
tht"Ory was 1111 the 11c~e1 Tht problem was, which
trying on ~nd d15<ard1ng b<>r,.,WHI th~nes w11h the rp1d11v of a commod1

~ ltlt d~Atrt.ry mamtaln, rrnru~ 011J t'rru.rnm /Jo ~.1tt/4' uoir/1 rb. "'}'
""'4 "''~
fltd consumtr at an o~tle!
~ale
Much ot Tafun\ body of theory ~nd"d up rn
of 11rrlrilf'C!u1ol mro111119 wi:lro"r pro/>(IAHtq u 111w onltr . Jto/ d1'Atu!lrl1r mron

rng TodrAttlb1J;zy '"""''il''J JOl'.A "'" rmplv procJ1rM1:i11 rou ... n:t utty nruo11J Atablt
he pill" of J1seard...t g~rmon". <rttrally "'h"' he cal!..d for archllt'cture to br
trltl.. tuul tJJa.u m n r1t1thrr mNtt ''' rt11I '''' 011119 rJOr r<>' h r.Jn9t- "'' anit19.
pos\lbli." an arch111c1ure "tmpl) ol any ijnJ .111 meaning." and the claim
Mny ot th~ dl... onstru111on teXh ol the lair 1980 and ~arlr r99os wt't.:
that Tafuri h.1d ,oundcd the d1ath of .uchott<ture - but th..,e hung on a'
.,
pohucally engagtJ. What "maint'd wrrl' Tatun~ rtft'rencf' to "no sahaunn
handy <'~cu"s tor rngag1n11 only 1n work on lhf langu;ig of archtte<lUr<'.
n,h1rn1'CI m 1om1s on irchotrnu 1al 1htO) Ab.1ndonf'd by practruoners ltke

L1b1 skind ~nil~ 1\1nm"n one,. rh<"y \Ian rd 1oobta1n comm.-~oons. and by th<"
empty tormali\m . An 01h1w11c ...,u, ..J h"1011an, Joan Ocl<m3n tumbl.-J
mi-rs ht'<aU'l' 11 oon l>rram~ thoroughly unl,h1on.1hle, dl'COnMrucuon and
over Tafuri, v11ws on uch1t~c1ur.tl l.1bor b\ rt.1ding him throui;h the ro~v
thP tfxls 111..1 cl'lrl:>r~Hd 11 '"" g.llhrr Ju,r Al111 all. nont ol rht-<<' 1heor1sr'
spe1 taclC\ ol l:1<1nman ." Rclr,1t1<d 1hr1111gh F'.os~oman's d"!tlrt~J lens, in
_.,;;.
Jll
'
j-
.
h purism ol the New York
Ockman' accoun1. Tatun ends by prt(erring t e
Tai , d1sm1ssed architecture as
Fi"" , 0 enpgtd wotk. Yet as early as 1976 un
.
he professed much more inter
miserable when it preens with maJUmum pomp;
d
m..ts offertd th cooperative
est In archu.cturt with a small a, an as exa v~
I'
work
'bu1ld1ns programs of commun1stgo""m""
lta ian c1' t its whtCh ""thertd
o
~ toatthtr wtth builders but harbortd no illusions about resolvtng the.
housing problem." Htr description of 'fafun's voew of "history as tragedy
is wonh counrrring with Massimo Cacc1an's observation 1n his eulogy that
Tafuri raught tht most difficuh lesson: the an of d<5enchontmcnt together
with ho~ and faith.*
Tifurl was not outlining an agenda for a new architectural production
d1sengagtd from politiul reality. On the contnry, 11 was to the critic and the
h11tori1n t~t he addressed his rtmark as an approach to the criticism and
hi.toc-y of architecture. Of the work of tht New York five, for exam pit, Tafuri
ttllinsly commtntl'd: "In th face of such products, the task of crit1tism is to
btgrn fromW1thm theworkonlytoesca~ from II as soon as possible so as not
to be caught 1n the vk>OUs c1TClof a language t~.at speaks only or itself."
The task Of t\w Crill< and that or the h11toroan art different OntS:
771.u ..,. abandon ht objttt iLUl/ o"d mow into th YAI"" which, in iuelf.
9iw ,,..omn9. ll"d crlrkwm thrrrby rxpllc1tly molltA /U rnquut from o ;,pe
clfic tOAk 10 th Atructurr rhor co"dirion.1 rhr total mronin9 of tht object ...
771 '"Ir ofcri1icim iA th vlolot1on of the ob11et In quudorL11
bombshells on his tory. theory and practice, there has be
en ilnle iu
dialogue generated by hls work. In the United States his .
sta1ae4
.
.
Vltws wer
vided 'into httle tasteless pieces for consumpt ion by the An
'lllb(i.
.
.
Bio S1it~ Li
has been added to his masters voice beyond a series of useful f
!tit
Instead, Wigley claims that Tafuri's impact registers elsn.~ OOtOlt\..,,
re: . rest>-&.
"
not dinctly influenced by Tafuri and which makes only occai.I
"""'
ona1reJerfrl<11
his writing might nctually be the most disruptive legacy of his won..n
'
Even though Tafuri called for a sep3ratlon of history a d .
n <ntlti1rn ~
practice, Wagley claim s that new forms of research" have
f
one Oot on tach
side of the gap, "testing its hmits without ever simply brld"'n It . ,
"' ll scrutrnltW,
its contours closely - " 51 What Wigley calls a "nonprescrtpti\'\! Arthlt
g
Theory" challenges "the discourse" in new ways. "Tafuri h
, fCl~rtl
'
< says, '<OA't p;o
away. His threat lives on in writing that he would no doubthaveh -
a._, W1it'!'
is probably correct on that count, but not for the reasons ht l1ta,ln. Tiii.i
would have loat hed the slick repetition of the .,.(ebratory tets, thealsucr
of rigorou1 scholars hip. a nd the construction of a theoty<nticism establi.s>
ment; he would have d ismissed most of it as empty languaseaamttonJ par
with much of architectural practice.
Having replaced an older regime, this system of theory/practx-e l1Mlfneedst11 be dismantled, or, to reframean observation fromModmillrclitf(ftm,
what possibilities 3re opan to a discipline such asarchltecturethai uaayetln.apablc of posing to Itself the problem of its own place in the polltleal arena/9
Out ii arch1tec1u1t dtmands ngagement wlrh polh1Cal, social, and economic
sysrems ind inst11u11ons. critlcim requires distanct, Tfur1 lnsl11ed, some

rh1na 111 shon supply today. The closeness of theonsts and architects who
mutually celebrate one anothtr, cue on anothe1, invite one nother to con
ferontn. writ< book$ and publish anodes bout one nother, and h1,.. one
anotli-r, IS aim lruoestuous. and cenunty luves no space for dtbate. let
alone the d1<1 anct lhat lllfuridecnied enrial for the pr""let or both history
nd of c11llcl\m Indeed, an 1981>, Tafuri argued th t th
trtlS no crrt1cl~m. only

1
i111ory, hJStory no1 of object~. bur ot men,'" which hechallengc 1sto understand how workol a1chite<:ture hi> onto Itsown rime. l he hltorl
,
n
c
rk
~
on
exam1n
1
urrentwo . hc hel~.musiertatl' anani ficlaldlsrnnle "lnsto h
have rod y 1
h'
"" w ot we
' n ., r itectural tllNiry is a more robust I
very sy<rcm Tafuri rhall
Y>tructur.d version of the
enged, a sy>tem that govu meaning to ond fc1l h' ,
arrhnf'Ctural ob1ecrs, dnd wh h d
.
' 1'1tes
IC en ~II> P U1t1oncrs wirh h
reWlrds ryp1cal ol a wen olled
t SU\tu s and
have >f'lfnl of lh.>ty prod carnpontnl Of C4pltlt>t 14l1Unhty. In >hon, we
UClron and "'Chltectural prod
prrtn1one1> that ,. co1qphc11 I h h
ucuon by theonsl/
., t t t commod1hcahon f
111ony Tfurt phculy ulut rted nd
n capuahst hegt
d
- a aprn\t .,hoch mos t f h
pra<111>on hvt' ropeatedly 1 d
o t H< rheorlsts
.
""1 Although
in..per.cJe111 or politics and
Prt>ented as autonomous
'""'
ttonornics. th1i. work wa d'
'
"'"' th>t WilS hf: prohlrm. thed
f
~
iroctly
insuumcntal
enia 1u 1nstrt1me I
ou1oll<omous as much as tho liil't or

nto ity by veiling the work as
rnsrrumental't Th
lCllurc rs utonomou and th I
I y,
~ 1s, to assen that rch'
rl f
ere ore nn1 instrumo I
l
ie ct that a1d11tec1uro 1s deeply b ,
nia ro pohtlcol ends covor&
much
rm rocotcd to pot
lpl'ublemaupcCtf\ccue.of
Illes and that Is iust a
in' 8o
nsrrumenalny A
s
9 , !hes. xpenmni. .
. s lalu11 astutely ob
in pnvare lan&uae
served
nmatn oo rl~ si.se cvrr mort
s
above all th.e des'
STttqutly 111111110
ore to
Mork W1gll')I ohs.rv,d that l!espueth
g'" an effon to tnterta1n.
epo-..er nd
h
>in1 ranw of Tar ur1's
tI
__j
...,
.
....
.>-....'
lJ
{~
....
NOTES
Menf'9d<> Tatvn. Arcl>lttel.,,. nd Ufop.1. 0.S1t1n and Cap,1.i.
15 lb.O.. p.181 .
111 t:lwolopmMr (Ca!>ot>tldge MA IAI l Pross W76. trano141tion
18 lbtd.
al P._iloVtOO< (Safi: Laterza. 1073), P.181.
<le a..-d T.tehumi. -TowdSaT1"'cfyolAt-.:twa1

Ols1ur>ctoon.' Arctwlectu<e MttlUrlltlmsm ~16 (Soperober
17 ,.,., Cl.JI!.
2 See. for ....,.,pi.. the ontroduc1"""' to Tat..,.t's H&ays PUbllshed rn ~1""'5 3 (~ 1911. CW.Os-t.ons 5 (Summe.
18 Ibid . P.183.
9'161. Qiposit.,,,. 11 (Wonle< 1971). ~'1IO<>S 17 ISurnmer 19
0
F'lncooseVety. E1<1e h1n-1.1in1rac1o Tai""'. AMI: ken.
1919) Pii1Wr E - ''li..WICM<l Cr~ic:: ANr 2!>-26. (2000),
ltclll'I, ~1 CMl.nurt~ 39 (Juno !9111). p - '
f6-10. 1nd tnCIHcl. """') ol 1"" er1oc... "'
llutl4ic:etoon
20 ftod.. Pm. Ir~ m.ne,
3 In tf\ls essay use thi! h 1stlif"Q El'IQ41SI\ trans.latl()nS of TatUfl'S
W<W'l l oec.aust th1.s 1:1 how moat Amertc:1ns were rntroduceo
21 K Michotel liayS, "Talun" G/losl.' A/\lr lS--2'!{2000), p. 38.
10 it: I onlv off ti' my own tran.5lat.ons whete ,, is less stgn1fi
22 Frednc Jameson. "Aret>"ecture and tne Critique ol ltleOfool<"
eaf\l tor the h1st0ry of the m11repttsent1l lC)Os..
.n J Oekman et al., Arch,lteturti/Cr1t1trsm/ldtv/o1Jy (Pritt,.
I YY9 Ala W\ Boos.
of T~i.s ont!Hisloryo( A>t:hlttclll'.
Ion Pl1oceton Alc:t,.tecturotPr..., 1986), J-sor.. "Tho
on l\:lpoa,111 11 !Wntor 11/17). e>.118-123. Boos IJe<et.ed
l'l>l~uol Theory. ldoolQg.cal f>oolton$,.., lho l'ost<T>Qdom
Toh"' tor not haWOQ "PIJd .-.111en1oon 10 orch<tect.....i
Dtblto; Nrw i;.,_,, Cr'1- 33(f1n 1981), P.5.3-i
larm (p.119) ond tor betr1Q .,,,.~-oil encr{ong]
23 lbod. p 312.
ICCOUrlt Ola 0..ld<'>Q. a task T1lut1 acctltd perlectly _ ,
:14 Fe< 1 fuller d50 1S&oOl'l ol tr.s PC>lnt. - mv artoci.. "The
"'I"'\' different ll/1)1 ol book. "*"'*'Arc/lrltclvr. l)f.rt
A~llltectureof Dec:e;l P1tS/>O(t12t (1961). p.110-115
wn.eh ws c:erta.n1y not celled tor an f'*>fr41s and Histor,.s.
'""t
re'"'"
2S PeterE ...rvnan. "PostFunc1.....,11cn\" ~Uons6(foll

11176), now m Oppos,tioosR..,,.,, p.12.
S Mattf~ TafV1'1, toor,~ f 6l0t111rkl/'11ch1tlt"'a (Bari: La!

tflO. l!ICll). p. 1 29-1~.
~ Teluro.
7 H.d . ...,_181. 182.
t Atc:lltec:turo dane le Boudotr. o.2115, 2119, Jm.
211 fbocl .. p:.17
8 Rd>tlrd lIQOlooll. nt.. _
wh MJnt-Tah .., "The<

"noc:t~iosm. Mr "41"'J.' De"'nllo<*R,,,_(Spnng
2t Taut1"' Del Ca. ModemAtd>1t:l4H. p..G,
ao Peter e1...,,,..,. "TheEndol tlleC-.,..1. Tho End ol

o P.te< """'"""- "Tho Wocl.oc:t Cntoc: A N ~26 (2(XX)~ p.10.
lhe e.g,,,,.."0- lhe End of'"" EN!: "'111>1121 (1964).
f l&enmen proftctecl h.1s own neod fOf surrogates ante TatUt"1,
p.16'-I 7?. now rn M. Hoya. ed. At<~iltclurt Tllfo,y Sklct
lu<e" nolhlrg
lllr'i8(Cembnc1Qe I.IA. Mii PnlN. 19'18). ~-639: the text

e11..i '' on p. 530.
'
~
,
3! "Entrot - 9.86
I_" In 111 E...-completaly IUMO'IO Tt1urrsown idus
ebolll "' e<kocat ltllP'M. .nctudtno being an anat1$1 ol

111&-ol lllstory rather then 1-i.r of suttOQlles or
31 lbod.. p.:oJ.
llUPl'Ola
nl-
n AIChnftfUlf, p.OIO
l!O Hal Focter. "(Alot)Modern Po'emtC$. Jlfrspocra 21 (1984l

o.t ~ 163: 8etnar<1 TSGl\<lm\ "The A<etlltte\urel p.,..do>c..
SllJdt0 lntomauorra1 ls..>tomber--Oc:t - 1975),,.,,,,, rn Hll)'s.
IO A"""1g the colltaguea wrted lo and pub/lhed by the

IAUS wMe GIOOtO Ciucci, Francttco Dal C.o. Franco Rella.
~Tays.sol. and Maslmo Cacciarl.
Id. Arcl>ll<etin Thoory S111ce llXIJ. p.21&-2:26 Toclll.wN wrilt$
ti ""9nl11do T1tuu. '1.'""""lactur dint re Boudr:>tr: Tile I.an
ol 1 lfl)yl1nlh
"''1
' "'
""'ocn d ;a m--10 - ano ol M
"&'ct.14Cture fthatl can -
"""3("'8t 1971), iw tn M. 11av&.e<i '"'61tJOM~
In""' ten r11t Hlatoric91
"9.'
rmtll: A1<111tGrde a/Id A11:h1tec1vro from P11.,,.., 101ht

19/'0I. t~. Penegrono rf A<:1arno and Aobt5
De<rtdl. Jocque& tAcan. GKIH o.lourt and Ftkl Guallen
to EOQlitl> reedr&. and IUSCrtbqut ol ttw ~games
ol tlte Ntw 'lb<J< Fl.. - arl1culotld 4Qfln n "Tho ASl\fl
of JeffarSOll." 1n 1t.it111 tn LI slra II llbllltlt.o: ~,.
lfC/lllfltjJ( "'f>lrMIMl f(l~ "'"' '10(Turln: EtnaUOI 1Glll)
and trlNlated Into EOQli611 In ri.. $,o/lett flrltheLl//nfh.
11 n wuwhen
~-:m
r7
CNew YOrll Pr11teton Ardwttctl>'lll " ' - l flllel, p.291-316.

Al1hcuQI> Ille number wu dote~ 1014, ~riOns w1&
two-
behind the l)Ublocahon dolt. In

111117. Ta1on maUW!ly tat1St0<med lht1 t1>ey for putlltcalioo
"'an l<lllld
hs usoys, Tht SfJ/*t nd tile Lll1t
f1mwt1y one lo
"'"""of
n nflUtflOldU--dur"1QtN 1970u11'd
._t of tho lllGOs-
tf lbod., p. :iw.
1a '~"' . o. 310.
14 M..,,,_ fefut1 and F'8noeeco Da l <A l#odfrn AICfritw:IJJrtl,
.,.,II. Robert Encl> Woll !New York Horry N. Abram&, Inc.,
"..,
Ta tun, -Tho AshN ol .Jttf.,1(11\," o 301
35 TaflJI and Oal Ca. -
mouth "''di COU4d bt ploced.
OtMgaol cnt"'*" onr:t tne crdocwn ol 1- -.'
1100 rne Aines of
41 Taf"" Atr:hileclU<.,,,, Ufop/. p '"- Jaflf!r&On,' p.302
men"""' IOI' Ind an bltry construe
tOJg1. or '1.">lllly IJUb/J$hed by Elect 1n Milan ro 1979 under

Ille title Atch,totlu,. Conl~- Blc:OUM tn. 111tmrs
ll11Qled OIA the d'8p!eis whoclt - h Wl'Ott l~ty. tt
11 - b l t IOSJtiQleOIA l11..-;1 ..,._...,.. , rtfonlY IO
<hoilltra Talur1 clufted 8$ hit...,.,
.Ille- O.r!clo. -O..T-1dellebol."11.,._ Jooll>'l f.

G<INm. I J. Gr.-.. D/lle<...ct itt TrftlflllitOn (ltNce: C:O..
no11~,;1,Pr-.11.p.186.elt4d byWtglly.
om.
Merl< WJQllr. ri. T......ie!;..nol Atol\itectura. 1i. Proctuetion ol 9ab1f.' In H.ye. Atchlltw ri-1 JH>C 11#1.
p.801-615: lho quot. 11 fr()rJI p.4'10.
40 Ibid.. p.674 .
'1 ~'rt lllpnia. T-rv 1'lt Sepwilrb ." MMm61tQI IA
~ 19111~ """'in~ /IJdtl#lclOJf
p.7\0--1.C.
<0 Ooritol L-""10..- -~ Atdlfllllf-1 MoOlt""'"'"

on T1>tmes /rOl'f'HvkfJtus
A,~., As.<0elat""' 191!3).
'"""""
44 Joa~ -v.rliee ond f>le,. York.
Clll 619-.6/ll
(Je"""'Y-fetwuery l!llllS~ p.51- lt.
5 "En1r11 ....: o.lll As-ceorr..i..,1otetwonc:.lo<tho

- k of the NewYOi"< F""" ~ c:-Tol..t's COMWnt
tr..,, Ard>lf(l<.rt and !Xopo . , OSAy
,.,lft., belore ht
"""""' cantect "'th or "'-ledQI about Ws gr....,.
""""""',.
tn - _., New Y
on.. P.6A: Cac.
...., ..... """'tt.e<AoQr Ouodf\ITI'
25 ~ 1996, ~od., Ca - Sit-!!), p.1111!.
I Oelmon's
.,.._"''\lance""
41 Tatw,, "l' A:hrtectuni dens te Boudot: p.:1.
tngorsoH. "?>,ore" no cntcivn. ority h$10l"f." p&-11
4G Tafuri, ta s/f'f" 1 ti Jl!l)it1nto (Turm.: E.ineudt. t980), JieS..G.

tran::rat'CW'I mint.
50 M&rllWcia..,. ~t-Ope..ai,.. H.story; ANt ~16 (l!IXQ.
p.A1~ ~ Qo<Uhon .s i,,,.,, p.!U
198G).p.8-lt
hOldlng lt\at Plrahe$1 beeamt a suttogate fOt' Tarur1. f i sen

.,.n 1100 wrote "The d11S01ut1on ol lorm anci ihe "ieQafi"8 1n 11..11. The consttucllon
ol a IAoooa of d!i$Ol'o00d f0<m bec4tnea tho rtcuperahon
ol thf neoou..,_ In Plraneas 'dSC<M!y' of Talun. arthotec-
p l'IG-1~
"
26 lbt<I.. 0 12.
& f1t u11, _.rc:htllurf!1ncJUIOtJia, o. x.
198!). p.1).15, now on Kai ~t<I. "-<Ori#~-- kw Nttvlr<wn At>~df-Jllfo!T'-1

19$S-IQ95~'1btt. Pr>ce1,,,,_tc1.nlPr-. IQll6).
n-,. ,,,,.. ,fl/II,
51 Ibid
"
ll>d.
5a
Tetu" and O;ri Co. -..nAICllollvtf, p. >.
hgu~~. and llu 1ld1ng~
to cen.nte the mystwto of atatl
~1"11/t'ly httlt a utonomy.
In the Wtst owe- the last fiw hu nclr.cl y.ars. 111
.,
ft~1 1ht autonomy ol .1n wasgnrantttd by loc;al PCliMillltll'l
pro1tc11ng an th.,- might
~mH$ It to t heir puachlal
ma,1ully. 1nu n1 10 c:omP 10 Iii. Animation of the

trl.11 unrt'.ih)llc, go3\ ol 111uch of annnt anmakl4
J 1,<1pft>Ol ll1t tngtnP<r O..rda\U$, dn amed offuh
would )!'Ult a!ld mollt' of 1r. own accord 1 T111a cordl-"1111

a ru.11\y su....,1w d dtt'p into Modrn European till\l9.
/ i ~;
..
. ..
.... .
t , I
. .
T-
.,.....
..
..;
'----
--- - - - - - - - - -- -- - ---'
- -..
with the meager technologies of anis11c realism at their disposal. resigned
only etwy. Arch1tec1ure does not need to <imulate vitality through a posture
themselves to a merely metaphorical votalism and automatism. the ideal of a
of monadicity. And there i< clearly no need for society to compensate arch1tcc
work of art dosed in upon itself. infinnelydense. 1rreduc1ble on much th9 .am9
tur"~ with the gift or autonomy. It as: amazing that arc:hltccts: would
way that a human soul is orreducohle, and signifying nothing. Some described
this ambiguous privilege, unless they were announcing their own withdrawal
this new ideal of closure and independence as monadic, invoking a term cen
from the world .
try to cl:um
tral to the metaphysical philosophy of Leibniz. The early twentieth ctntury
There are places of privacy, leisure, and luxury imbedded within the
arsthcticoan Benedetto Croce. pointing to the d1stmctoon between artworks
architectural field where quasi autonomous experiments can be carried out:
and symbolic representations. said that the artwork had no dopp10 fondo, no
villas. pavilions, gardens. caprices. Here. and in its virtual projects. architec
double or "false bottom" like a mag1c1an's suitcase.' Represcntauons, when
lure doe> won for itself some of the freedom and eloquence enjoyed by paint
Archlt~ture's suuatoon
explored. yield hidden meanings: arr works. by contrast, simply are what they
ing or poetry
are. Artworks do not issue any onv11at1ons. Many modernist theo11sts have
ahle tasks of clothing and sheltering prevent either fashion or architecture
resembles that of fashion . The inescap
held this view of the artwork. and yet at the same time felt it necessary 10 JUS
from attaining autonorny. But clothes and buildings are symbolic machines
t1fy the artwork ro modernity. Theodore W. Adorno, for Instance. in order to
and those who operate these machines naturally crave discursive freedom .
resrue the monodir work from complete irrelevancy, argued that the very ex1s
Fashion and architecture are thus always striving towards autonomy, but only
tence of a selfsuffic1ent. self.contained anifact is an impl1c11 critique or nega-
achieving ll ephemerally and spectacularly in the experiment al modes of their
11011 of rhe
respective industries: on the one hand. haute couture. and on the other, the
practical world
W11h ~uch arguments, the modernist artist has been licen>ed
tQ
make
architectural caprice and the utopian pro1ect.
things that are no longer used m ordinary ways. These pointless but strangely
Once beyond the caprice and the project. the Ideal of autonomy in archi
potent artifacts are cordoned off from the rest of the material world by van
tecture is not rnuch more than a mystification. It 1s true that Individual
ous framing and labelling devites. Some makers of these privileged things win
buildings can eventually, by the mysterious workings of rutept1on, achieve
great fame and material rewards, h\ot it is arguable that they do so only by
something like autonomy. It is not completely meaningless ro say th~t the Par
bPtraying their commitment to autonomy- by performing as glorified interior
thenon or the cathedral of Rei ms are monads. Bur 111s hard to set out to build
decorators. tor instance, or by penetrating the spheres of glamour and celeb
an autonomous building. In the modern world, where people tend to disagree
roty Mos t anmakers arc not at all famous. Negation 1s meant to be its own
wi ldly about the ultionate grounds of meaning and value, it is impossible to do
rcwa1d Artmakmg. according
the logic of autonomy, successfully finds
so. rhe vision or an autonomous architecture descends from the eatly Roman
ors Mgcr 111 direct proportion to 1rs disengagement from the business of the
tic idea that life itself may be thought of as a work of art and s haped according
tQ
world . Auronoony is 1ust anothc1 word for nothing left to lose.
to aesthetic principles. This idea encouraged the 1nnarcd and heroic image of
Arch11ecrurc, by contra st . is always answerable and never disengaged
an artost who would reach non artiSt!. how to live. Trying to r~shapc the world
from the business 0 r the world: and 11would have plenty to loi.c if it were to dis
engage itself. Unhkc pJ1nting, arch11euure h1stortcally Mver gave up its close
by making poems or paintings 1s one th mg; trying to do ir by making bu1ld1ngs
rnnnecr oon ro aurhorory. Arthitec ts ~till represent society's understanding of
tectural self rul~ would be misrule.
11self. ~1111 shelter and s hape the cemrdl symbolic act1v1t1es of social hit. and
still mrd1dte between man and n3tU1e 1n way> that painters 01 sculptors can
is toke opera ring heavy machinery under the influnce of a potent drug. Arc hi
Of couisc, MChatects do blunder into the Jivos of c1t1cs Jnd perpetrate
quas i cn m1nal
affront~ 10
hun1an dignity and freedom. ~gain a nd again Soc1
and no reason t;i be constra ned by II For Fiedler. tht world 1

tu re ol the mmd The truly amsttcally gifted nature; hemainlainll.
forth m 11sclfso to speak that process, now amved ata MWfrttdo&
rl'al11y 1 gc nerated tor man Art for Fiedler was rtal tnough wtlhalt
to look hl:.e rl'aht} s rhe Viennese a
h1~tJnan Alois R1egl folllwill
argued at the tnd of the nml't<l'nth century that the h1sl0ricalia

ar11st
form obe}ed an m1cmal logic
th~t unfo ded mdepetdtldl'ol
cal runcuonor material condition~. R1egl demonstrattd rhiswsdl
m his 1893 history of rhc development of ornamental moots tN

world More provocatl\t! was his latl'r attempt to see throuP tilt
m1me11c or symbolic coment of early medieval and rvenruatly
and Baroque sculpcures and pd anting~. and instead ptrrii\'ftMr If
tural formal pnnc1ple~ -one might say their ornamental priJIClpllSthrough conent R1egl prt';>ared these works for insert on inte
mde;iendent h1~toryof form 1
_.
R1egl was less mleresteJ than some of hts coniernporarll'
monnd1c work of art In h15 'lfl'lllflls.it-'
an mahng itself that wa> autonomous &elf sufticient. 511 ....,
no11on of the c
OSl' open to 1he world h pnr.tiplc. the

_...ftlllt
1 1hical c i - its beanngon pohtlrs~nd society, on fund:nnenta 1
aJ1C1
m 1\.\ manipul<tuon~ of line and color n the picture plane
,
le. for a soph
Riegl s schcm11 provided th~ frdmcwor
h
hornolojY
tory ot a1t nut 11 <eem' that hts vis on o f 1 r
nf'
d oes not support a cnt1ral aesthrtrcs. a J o<t 1 of rt
I t~ fiction
underwritear-'s e,xcep11onal1smand 1ust V 1
Consequently, rhm 1 h.1ve been n nu1nbcroI a tr empts t
i>t
"111toru1 to throret<ally more comp lex rnoJrl
It has been tmpung. for example. to compal'I' Rlegl's reduction of p1ctonal
rven h1rder ro su.ia1n. the idea that art or architecture's autonomy m1gh1 be
mPan1ng 10 a mattrr of simple formal choices to the structuralist hnguisrics
cuarantttd nor by rhe arb11ranne$s of 11s s1gn1fiers. but by thrirvery nonarbi
of rud1nand de Saus.ure 'R1cgl was an exact contemporary of Saussure. The
1ranness If hon1ontal elements mean what they do tor deep and 1neluctabll'
n<Jrscavery and 1heore11cally 1nlormf'd rereading of R1egl in art history sincr
reasons, the argument goes. then perhaps architecture has a kind o! grammar
the 1970s followed closely upon tht' post ward1scoveryof Saussure. Since then
which can be manipulated to generate meanings. R1egl himself tnrroduced
rhert' has bt'en a tendency to prOJKI the 1ns1ghts of languagebased structural
the analogy tn plan nine a h1stoncal gritmmar of the visual arts. But this
1sr rhought back onto lare nineteenth century German ustheucs and art htS
analogy undernres the power of gramnur and unfairly borrows the presn~
tory. rrancesl'O Dal Co. for mstance, cred 11 s F'ledler and Rieg! wuh recognmng
of grammar to 1us11fy ultimately non grammaucal operations. Grammar is
thar ano<Hc products, no less rhan ltnguls11c statements. must be understood as
innate and cannot be manipulated The system of pronominal desigJ'lauon of
repl'l'scn1a11ons. 1har S. a s neg;itoons of any srmple reflect ion betwttn subiect
the first and sttond persons,
and ob1ect. as 'anoncoal' constructions cut off from any foundMion of meaning,
lion of a sense of s elf - littrally. not hgura11v~y. tnd1spensable. Since gram-
and as autonomous events yielding up rruths only about themselves.
in
particular. 1s indispensable to the con.in.oe
mar 1s inseparable from human sub1ert formation. 11 1s not easily manipu
Bur th~ attempt to JUStlfy rhe aes1het1c1S1 proiect by linking or to modern
lated to poetic or representattonal ends. Wl'len arch1tectsgenera1e meaning by
isl 1ns1ghts onto the groundlessness of lingu1st1c tepresentarion, an attempt
deliberately confllsing our expectauons about inside and outside or wall and
launched by r1edler himself. is 1mpo~~ible to s us1ain. Painted pictures and
support. they are opNaung wtth a ltHC!om that language-users do not enjoy.
buildings can bear meaning, but it is seldom their principal function to do so.
The architects here are provmonally hberatlng arch11ectural elements from
And evrn when they do represent something, pa1n1in11s and buildings do so
their customary funct ions and meanings in order to introduce them into a sys
in ways that ha\e httlo 10 do w11h linguistic representation. Any later exten
temancity
s1ons of Roegl's amb111ous tormalism that imagine they are underwritten by
thus does what language does Is to mix rwo levels of langu~. and to Imagine
lingu1 s11c theory mus t be evaluated with care. Certa inly there are s pecial cases
that the elements o f gramma11cal deep structure can be loosened a nd pushed
II\
which they will carry new muning. To argue that architecture
meannK Rut such qua st rodes are never really a l!"eed upon within a commu
use of language, whereas an .orch1tect who l:u1lds a poem cannot be cttt.ain
nuy. nor dons members agree which elements of pictorial or architecrural
that all the future users of the building will rOgt\Ue 11 as a poem. What archi-
form a"' coded and which are n ot . Arch itects may argue that the code 1s estab-
tecu are askone for when they asl< for autonomit and what SOCJeties will want
lished by the lustory of architecture. But the history of architecture has to be
to think about twice beforegrant1ng.1s poetic h'nu.
learned from travel and books, and every ind1v1dual learns 11 d1ffrently. Every
In assesSJng da1ms that architecture m111ht inaU to chSC1J$ive auton
studtnt of rhe history of archnecture has his o r her own constantly shift1n&
omy. one hu to ~alert to hidden and rutnctl\~ 1deahsms. Th an h1Stomn

Rlegl undemood the supposedly fTtt gnention of meaning a s a ma.n ipula
idea of the code. Real language cannot afford this pluralism. Languaee tune
tions only because grammar is embedded 1n the brain at birth and becaus e
tion o f a fintte supply of markers w11tun a sewrrly regulated system. R1egl's
thl' local l111gu1stlc code Is lea1 ned in early childhood and only incrementally
sense of the hmu s of human freedom wu charactrnsuc of his epoch. By the
expanded later. Beholders of painting or architecture who are not at all fam1l
late nineteenth 'ntury. theaC'h1evemenu of 1nduct1w scientific research and
oar with the allegl'd <Ode can derive pleasure and meaning, not to mention
empmcal hisrorlcal sdiolll!Sh1p weighed ht>avtly on the un<aginatlon. Laws of
usevalue, from the picture or buildmg, whereas language is nearly useless to
nature had been discovered and conhnncd by repeated experim<!nt.s. Th mind
someone unfamiliar with rhe code.

Language, finally. derives all Its flexibility and its economy from rwo
and the spirn, 100. it wu feared. would soon be submitted todelin1tlwexplana-
principles: lht Mbitr~rincss and the double artic ulation of its material signl
as the invenroon of entll'l'ly new laws - new soc1t1es. new fonns of tl\e spint
flers. The form uf the s111n1fler is arbitrary in that it ls unconstrained by any
- the disi11usloned rhlnker of 1900 could only conce ive of frttdom as. at best.
non. If a Romantic philosopher around 1800 could s till cionceive
of
freedom
xternal constdtratlons: any signifier will do as long as everyone agrees to rec
a capacity to operate wirhln a framework ol p~x1stmg laws. History itself
ognrze it. Thesign1fie1 osdoubly articulated in the sense that words. which can
stemed a monumentll burden that threatened to stttle all crrativity and all
be multiplied infinitely, are built from combtnations of a tiny number of pho

ncuc mod111,.s. Pictorial or architectural s1anifiers are neither doubly artic
ulated nor arb11r~ry Ornamental motif~ seem to be the closest to ai b1trary
formal sogmhers. and lt 1s in this domain that wrners on art have been most
tempted to turn 10 the model uf langu age. But here, too, the analogy is wea.k.
A truly arbitrary 1gn1ner gets attached 10 lu concpt not because any future
of the s1gn1her makes it especially appropriate t o that con~pt. bu t enurely
becaun of custnm In an and architect ure. there is always some rea.on why
onu1gn1her 1s formally prefera bl to another forrepresenunga gtven content.
Honiontal element an a buikhng cannot ~imply be used to s1g rufy a nytlung
at all. u would be d1thcult to have t~m 11gn1f)' "verucalny: fur msuin
Structuralist system1t c11y may appear at tint to hold out the hope ot
an an1culate. poss1b1ly c n11cal represemauonahty - a d1scurstve autonomy
- for bu1ld1ngs and picture~ dhke. Yet without true 11rb1tranness. co~nt1onahty,
and doubl~an1cula11on. pictorial and archltectural representation can only am in
tha1 w~aker. mote gn~r;il ~Ort of autonomy desert~ by late Romantic aesthe'lt
ttsm: the hne. purev1 s1on of the turmal 1maginallon as a 1>4rpetuum molnle.
A stronger version ot the analogy between archltec lllre and language i>
~flection. Oscar Wilde and Wher Patr atpttd that the human
will would
never apin njoy rhat naive, rouJh sens of freedom that it had en10~ in
pre-historlnst times." In Prob/nu of Srylt, Rlegl ch ided tho contmpora.ry
Ms and Crafts rnoverNnt for e ncoura11n1 modem V1lStS to choos" their
motifs Crec-ly from the natural 'Orld. c.on1nm1ng these m.arun11less options
with !he s ell-seneratlng. .u1ntiall1 more amsuc: itnd litwful unfolding of
orMmtnt1I form m the clau1cal Mtdnerra nean. JU.,t cone~~ of frttdom
as a sutTtnder to the laws of hiltory
It aeems tbat Saussure's 1tructu111lwn ckr1ves frowi a sim1W- 1mprn
slOn of the hm1ts o n the s ymbollllng faculty lbql and Slluuure. as noted.
were C'OntemporenH But ap1n th anAIOJY be!Wffn a n
and l&Jll'l&g 1s
fli>tt<I and cannot be ustd to vtnd1Ut th 1duhst aHth111 entlllled by

Ri~l's schema UlnllJap's l1ws att ~l. llnd they.,... thebuu for tanguages
efficacy. The limiting condnlons of la.npage d id not d~p h1stoncall1 and

cannot us1ly be dismantltd Saussurt wu descnbm& an a h1Stcal system:
la~uacu may haw thir h1stones. but lnauli'" d~ not. "" by t"Ontnst.
hu f- laws, and ir cenamly h.as a lullory. WhAt Rltgl pnsttits as P*nnl

nent srammar of art1S11c form Is in fact not mlKh more than a taxonomy
f formal morof western art. Laws o

of form derivecl from adescripuve history
ficuonal ancl dangerously
td 1 n art h1s1ory are
-""logy of 1htsort Ritt! I d'"'"
ti fret, but rather
l's system is thus not at a
easy to txaggtnl Art in Rtg
11 converge with spirit
eetf',I future where art WI
always hul'lh"g toW1rdS a proJ
. R gl's notion that an ,s dis1ra11ons
ofhumanny. "
ancl embody the high est asp
d nde""ndently of any
is own abstnict en s i renrg.d from matter and pursues'
h rt is an autonomous act iv
pncnul or symboli'ting tasks irnpo~ on it - t
,...
'.'a
ny- isan ide1hst and potentially an illiberal nouodn. l f utonomy and the
'd within the 1 ea 0 a
T1le rtStrlctlVC idealism hI 1ng

f
Th~
freedoms takes various orms.
ryd
consequent rhrut to prac1 !cal. eve ay
'
Wmc:UI
her and art historian Johann loaclu m
eigll1ttnlh-ntury Gem.an wr
bod - th
politlcal lretdom htually em ''"" '" e
-n
for rumple saw socl a""
m- .
.
td m for Wmckelmann is
ideal G,....k nude. AS Alex Potts has explamtd. fre o
.
i ativecrealion ohn ideal
1
not jusnhtconditson rhat makes possib the smag n
f fl ured by that beauty. through
beuty 1t 1s also th sub1ec11vestatr o .,.1ng 8
its Pl>31'<nt embodiment of a stale of unconstrained nardss111c plemtude.

.
h '- If-absorbed free-standing,
wluch hr ldennfies mOS1 1mmtd111ely wit ""'St
.
nabd male fisure."u ror the neo-classiciS1 WtnckelmilJ\n, freedom was not an
opening outward but an arrival at a fixed aesthetic resting poinr. f'or others.
freedom wu a m)lsucal aspira11on, perhaps the aspiration to escape from the
humihat 1118 condiuons of nrthly and temporal hft' the n!eal of Weltflucht, or
flight from the world. An echo of that yurn1na 1s heard In the arch1tectvral
theonst's dream of a 1anguage of architecture. which in a sense a~isrs ou1side
of and thus autonomously of any style; an architecture no longer doomed to
tional views by malltpulating the "languag

e O1 ilrChlt
know about the political opportunism of the
tclu,_c
~IS of
l't"I ,,._
mally eloquent bu1ld1ngs oft he century- Lud .
~Of,._ ..... ,
wig t.ties
-......._
Johnson. for instance - it seems that form~l L. Yand~r l!o --.i lo,
' """""1 "
more than the intellectual fre~om to chang !St"~"""'

'd
~nt
e si swti .
e.t
Even more pernicious is the use of the doctr
n It ~s ro lltte
1ne of autot.
lllt
a vulgarNietzschean concepuon of the stron
h
"1tlJ it 1 '
8~< ~s
~ ...
superiority to constra1111. Only the strong ardut
arb;.__
~1.htheo
- .... ~
the pressures of the world and deliver an aiuhenc
. 'Y~ c1c cru 1que 11
~that architec1ual theorists loyally rush to the defe
"~ltili.
nse of this
' ""l
architect by invoking autonomy. il'1!"ing. for insu
stlf.,
91
h'
nc._
tlut
a
ill!
lure allows the arc sleet to rMlst the mass~-.
~ .......
~ntTiljlal!
00
1unon of the postwar bu1ld1ng establ~hrnent ""Ho
architects to be compared to the aut~rs of tho cme
w STtif)i 0
~sia.. ~
.
--t-
.
ill"""1~to
matlC nouvttl
all this carping is perhaps unfair, given that political
~~a.,
OflPG<tlS.1
the iobdescnptlon of the acchnect, who must treat c
.
111 ,.,_,.,
011Um.ty "'di
and state poW The mtfilectual comm1nuty setms t0
.
~
.
r.ahze tlli L
can one explain the cons1.S1ently charitable critical~
i:,..,.t\,
trr.en1 of ttlo~- .
architects, sharply contrasted to the constant ideol""'c-al . .
~...,.
.... Vigslil\ce~...i
ism that canonical modern poets and philosophers f~ct.
~
Some consffVative thinkers havestt:n <Msthetic aut
"
"'Y" Cllt d
keys to 1he la11tr cata~phe of Modtmi5m. with no mo~~
t.,
of that catastrophe than t~ utopian ptoJects of high rllOd

~..
trnLSt an:llitn
Hans Sedlmayr. for instanct. a rnctlonary Austnan
h'ISI
'11.
a."
on~ ald OVlt.
r~ster 1tsown h1stonul ume"
cltrided the "cosmopolitan and suppos.dly "pun archstect"t'<of\.t""-
One further proof of th<e 1nappropnateneu of the hngulsllt mocfel of

meaning 10 architecture is an lmtoncal formahsm's 1nab1lit)l IO deal with
architecture. Early twen11ethc~ntury art historians like Htsnrich Wolfflin
submmtd both painting and buildings to formalist analysis; the 1.-velling us
of photOlfllph or shde comparison5 made this osier But 1n the long run for111<1hsm could not keep architecture In play Moll 1mpona111 form.list an his
toryand cnt1c1Smof the twentieth century, from Uonello Venturi and Clement
Grrenbtrg to Michael f'tsed and Rosalind Krauss, simply loaves architecture
at1de This om1u1on 1s surely an acknowledaemtnt that architecture i about
empathy, appeute mO\cment. absolute d1men11ons. and the pasna of real
t1meand the occupation of rtal space. It ca nnot eu1lyreduce all these to ml't
phor u paint mg and s1.ul1>1ure manage to do If they want The vcc1ora of need
ier Sedlmayr, here drawing on theruearchoi Em1l Kaafmun. ln<tdtlit,..

lesmess and desplritualsiatlon of modeml$l ~hht<'lu.~ back to th.,
11111
of the F'rench !Qvoiutionary archttocts UdoW<. BouII~. and leque11. "''""
mous architecture as envisioned by LtdotU and rtalited by Allojf Loo&_.
and desire and the calculu)of absolute d1men~1on d1turb the premise of sys
1tma11c autonomy upon which formahst anal)'$11 depends.
concrete, chooe hundred meters high "
Architecture is so pattntly involved wnh the problem of somatic expen

ence that formalist treatment of arch11eeture, 1n order 10 make sense a1 all.
must subsersbc 10 a duahst, oven. idealist conception ol the mind-body rela
11onsh1p - that is.a concep11on of mind'ssupenomyto body The Renaissance
arttst and rt historian G1org10 Vasan, for instance. was able 1n bnna pamttng. S<ulpturt, and architecture under tho 1deohst common denominator of
d1seg110, or the menial 1de; underlying work of ~rt. In his Lrvv.6 ofthe MoAI
Cminmr Pornrtr~. Sculptor..t. and Archireru 11550), a biographical history of

Renaissance an that w.s at the same time a theory of dssegno, Vasan gave
pain11ng. KUlpture, il1ld arch11ec1ure equal 5titus and anenuon. Va sari had no
because for him all three ans wPruclf ev1 d ently
ruson to 1sol111t 1rch11ccture
se.m1:au1onomous: capble of generaung meaning through disegno. but only

wnhm the confines of their practical functioning in the world. Not un1il the
modern doctrine of the autonomy of paint mg and sculprure emerged in the
ntnttttnth century did arch11ec1ural history b,,g1n to be cut oH from the re$1
of an history. In thetwen11e1h century, architectural history and crluciu~ h
followed m own paths, in many ways ind
d
f
as
h'
epen ent o the development ofa"
istoryand 3n crit icism Any formahst art hist
.
ory is a contnvance but
ously formahst arch1teetural hlltory would be
.
a niioran outnght fantasy
Much twen11eih-cen1 ury orchitect
.
\Ire asstrted Its own
freedom. even clatmrng that arch'
reprcsenta1tonal
llcture could articulate crn1cal or op~1-
Le Corbus1er was a.rchitectutt that had "bome consc.11>1is of its - tni

nature But architecture achlevtd tlus. acconhns ta Stdltnayr, ))' ~
Ing Its representattonal respons1b1hues and 1nStud pu,...alng absol11tc,.

metrical ideal. Quoting a contempor.iry rtvlewer of Kaufman's bot\!. Se&
mayr dtclared chat autonomy was sl&~ry: anticipating.by awa'.fl'it.,
famous mantra from Gecrge Orwell's novel 1984- "F'rctd.n ss S'lrttr)' -~
the three slogans ln~cnbed on the fa(ade of the M1n1stryol l'ruth,abuW,..
111c1dentall)l. that m1aht have been bush by Ledoux, pyrmidal lntom.1nw!lllt
Sedl~yr wu a follower of Rlegl and a r .dtcal for1111hsunJ:r1kun

an h1stOI)' not only preserved Rleal's rno~I of an ntoacrroash .,.,.....
11re offorms: but also devtloped a concept of the df'Osiiyillld imdu<ibJllJtl
the lnd1v1dual artwork more explicit than anythJngfound lnRicgl. Thisssp.!l
do1cal. for Stdlmayr was at thuameume tdentify1nstheideaoh~
iVI as the source of all Modcrrusm's trOUbles. Hedtplored moderallY's--''
11
"able and Ideal 1rnageof man and modm art's abandonmtntofthtpnll<I....
d sobpsojjllh-.
represent ing that image. He deplored the self fl ex1vsl)' aft
ptr1im In 'll!l~IC
modern work of art. I find that this apparent contrad1cnon

.- is often the co~rvauvu i.mrotml . on modm an to the present 11
kindso' I,,._..,.
ty'i chaouc dynamism who most Rercely dritrd th~
cf111t
1,cy
nd
th
,rreducibi
both the independence of tho artt1l4kln1 process 3
__.....,$Iii
~1\s of'""-"'
anwork. The reason for t.lusscems 10 be that thesetw0 1
thrraft&'a;
imply humanism an iruegral ima1e ol mar~ confidtnce"'
if ~hd-5
rid"
llPs ol the will. hep<' fer bettermtnt. Auro11omous art. llOWf'l!I'

. -(DCIS1lt:Jtitl'"
-u1red by llS
lustorical roots In that image of man. was never~"
giet!u"1
contribute to that ima11e as Sedlmayr would have pointed out re ~~ti'
-~1dt1lofauton .. .....!
So the anti-modernist Sedlmayrsupported""'
-.M (jllf _..,.-'- yant .~ - I
what the avant-garde had done with 11, whit u- a
...;Ill
...aY'n-
..
rdt wis ii\ ~'7
.,,_
the critique of autonomy. lndHd.1he avantP
..,,..511'(11,,...
eel 1nrothe 1.,.-
.,,.'1""
a critique of autonomy. This paradox perstst
the.,..etiCl
draw on new
bl
the so-called neo-avantgarde was a e to
and mount an apparently final, devastating challenge to the idu of aesthetic

autonomy. The neoavantgarde espoused an outright anti-humanism, involv
ing a critique of authorsh ip that followed from the hyperstructuralist and psy.
choanalytic critique of integrated subjecthood, and a critique of the aesthetic
that followed from the philos ophical deconstruction of the work and the frame.
W are in a strange situation now. in the wake of that challenge. The critique
of artistic autonomy carried out in the t96os and 1970s has to be said to have
tailed. repeating the failure of the "historical," early twentieth-century avant
garde. The s harp critiques of the ideology of artistic "freedom" levelled by the
neo-avantgarde have been instantly and eagerly absorbed by its own institu
t ional targets, the mus eums, commercial galleries, and art history textbooks.
Those institutions wero des igned to protect the freedom of the visual ans and
are not easily rattled when painters and sculptors exercise that freedom. no
matter how unpredictably. Artistic autonomy in our society is as safe as it ever
was. The critique of a rchitectural autonomy, by contrast, carried out concur
rently in these same years, was quite successful. Those who carry on defend
ing architectural autonomy s eem to be animated by the same spirit of futility
NOTES
as those who carry on critiquing artistic autonomy.

1
The two fields, art and architecture, are thus intellectual mirror images
Mertn-e. Th<CourtAtlsl: OntMAl>cn/rfol

th#,.,,,,,,..,, A<tost (Camtl<odgo. Cambudgt UP. 1900) so.
of one another. Adornian neo or postavant-garde art criticism. exemplified
p~
by the influential writings of Benjamin Buchloh, is intellectually paralyzed
Sarai> P. Mo<ris. OMH/0< - ~ ()r,gn o{ Grffo\ At/ (Pnt>c

eton ""noeton u........iy Pr8ss. 19112). esp. chep.8
because it feels itself bound to identify and endorse art that purports to dis
from tho ideal of autonomy - that we wouldn't know how to recogniz.e an at all
3 Horst~ ~Li;to/At>llQU!'f-t/>#Culto/ll>e
Mo<h<nt. IM ll'cin.!Mmmor-lhf W#Vt<Ofl Of Nolin, Art,
- TecMology (Princeton Mart.usW-. 1995)
if it were not autonomous. It is a thrillingly hopeless task to try to undo that
mantle the ideal of autonomy. even as it must recognize that art is inseparable
knot. The dilemma of the postavantgarde is sometimes sentimentalized as
t<orvaaF'-. --Nat"'lll"mus""" kunst~

~toel' on- Scl>n{tM ..w l<umJ !ColoQn9- o.Mant
an aporetic stance, a proud refusal to compromise loading to a severe narrow.

ing of the concept ion of the artistically permissible. Architecture, meanwhile,
t977J. p. t25.
is clearly not an autonomous activity and the critic who persists in making
AIOosR>eQ!.ProOltmso( s~ Four>Otl~"". H<Storyol

0rno"1MI (1813). tr....._ E...iyn K10n (Pnnceton; Prnc:91on
Uru>et$11y"'9$$. llel).Lolt- Att /ncM;lry(l!IO). trano.
the case for architectural autonomy is equally, symme'lriully, obstinate. The

sheer s tubbornness and vanity of such arguments must be the source of their
Roll V.\nke.s(Rcme. Bt.t"""-. 1!e>~ Th#GrO<,f>Porttait

o/Holltn<1(1'1Jl). 1'*'5. Ewel)
Autonomy in architecture can never be more than one of the vectors of
gagcment of the post avantgarde, which is essentially the fastidiousness of
lnstotute. 1999~
MarQa<et t.wsen. ~S R~: Arl H<Stoty- TMoly (C4mbndgo. " " ' MIT Pr9ss_ 1993). p.5f>.1i6.
its force, on e of the multiple frames of mind that make up the building pro
cess. That seems s elf-evident. Architecture cannot afford the aporetic disen
eer-tto Cn>ee. Esi.t-c (1~~ eted on EdQetW rd. Art

-Anon:/ly(l.ondon. F-ano Fa-. 1963). p.!14, n.57.
a ff11nco=> 0.1 Co. lt1JU10$ o(.ArcMtettn ind Thought:

G.ltNnAICMtltltCCJllln IMHAA>(NewYbtlc R1uol..
1 990~ p.108.
the mandarin, ultimately a gentlemanly ideal of withdrawal from the world.

Architecture, in fact, has an appetite for the mel~e. All the theoretical talk of
autonomy is surely a blind! Sincerity and authenticity, the criteria of ideal per-
Rolord Barthes. E-ts Of $"""'00' (New l'otl< HIU Ol>d

~1913).1>.39
10 AIOos Roogl. HSIOthf G..,,..,.llA tJot -
K"""te
sonhood that emerged in modern times alongside the doctrine of the pure and
(Gtaz rd coioo.,.. Bo1>1u. t966~. poslhumcl(J$ pul>Cocat.on
independent work of art, are only confusingly, unhelpfully imposed on a practi
based on lecture 001 ... 11>a conclj)I of a t.1stcw""'1 orammaf" was Rieol's own.
cal architrct.11 Architecture. the discipline and the practice. will build the right
buildings not by presenting the world with the truth about buildings. but by con
vmcing the world that the world itself knows whlch buildings are the right ones.
Successful architecture calls for a ctrtain political cunning and even duplicity.
The autonomous artwork. ultimately a religious ideal, is a beautiful modem
contrivance. Architem rre is perhap$ be$t thought of as a pre-modem art.
11 Jonah Soogal, o..itu1>d l <Ct$S:
no. NmolttlllhCMt<WY C.,i.
li;to/ A1t [Pr.nceton Pnncelon U-Slli' P...s. 2000)_ p.231

t2 R..gl, Pt1)/Jlemoo/Sty1t. 1>201
13 A'tex Pot.ts. llblw>d U.. ltlNI. W<netttmtnn - /hf Or,gins

o/ AI History (New H.-.en. Yolo Un1Ye<s1ty Ptess. 1961'). p.a.
1f !'tierEIRMllll. 191orrlt'l IO Alllo Row Ind Reol<t 'JINI0'1.

nAttronomyttdldoology: Poslt<Clt>"'flM~lG.or<1>Amt<
""' R. E Somol ed. (New York: Monace!ll Press. tllll7). p 13
I am grateful to Romy Golan for her thoughu. on thu topic.
t5 R . Somol. s1at.,,..,.1 ot Editor ' W.thdte,..1: Aul"""'l'

lll<lldfolog)>. p.25-26.
tO H!l\S Sedlmayr, Alf 111 c ...... Tn.lost Cftll"' (11148)(0"
caoo. R<1gnt< y. 1068). esp. p.~1 .116 tt Em11 Kau1menn.

~ i-.. b<s t Cort>us~
utld Ent-I.Juno t1et
u._
Autonomtn ArcM..I"' CVoenn11. 11133).

17 Sedlmtyr, An., C1...s. p.100, Ult
18 L..,,,..Tri1bng.S.nctriryitwJAulhoOOc.r7 <Uttnbtldge Har
vwd u. 1972)
\.

K . MICHAEL HAYS
LAUREN KOGOO
THE EDITORS
l
i
i
'
'
1l
i
at the Boundaries of the

Architectural Discipline
Examined in Relation
to the Historical and
Contemporary Debates
over Autonomy
...u
"'a:
"'
<I.
<I.
The fundamental criteria for the Aelection of the

twenty projecU featured were that each would challenge, in AOme way, the conventional foundationA
of the architecutural diAcipline and engage a diAcipline outAide iU boundarieA. Further, the choiceA were
limited to contemporary, realized (or AOOn to be realized) buildin9,1, de,1,i9ned by architectA. A6 U, clear
from the Aelection, however, each of theAe Atipulatioru wa.A violated at lea.At once. Thu framework wa.A
valuable for refining and te,1,ting our idea.A and for
e.lltabluhing a coherent, vuible body of built work
functioning in a critical context ouuide the autonomoUA center of the diAcipline.
IN
,.,
,.
"'
_,
_,
The text that accompanieA the Aelectioru i.IJ taken

from di!,c'UAAioru between the editor,1,, K. Michael
HayA, and Lauren Kogod which focUAed on the implicatioru of the projecu to the ducourAe on autonomy, in both hiAtorical and contemporary context.A.
The nine e"ayA Li.Med at the left .llerved a.A a textual
framework for the di.IJcU.A..&ion.
"
-.
- -L
::::J
-.J
."'
0
..c
"~
;;
'C
:.
~
~..
c
>
L
>
:z
IC
x
~
::;
?;
~~
"'<0
::;
"'~::;
~
1!!,..
z
i;:
~ -
.
t
~
(
::cl
------ - --...
Ln j
._c.--
-:...>
-- ----
..,-
E:ii--A-~-
--~
!:
w:1k d fRANCOIS
....
"'
+ lfWIS
...
"~
Cl
...
e:
"'Cl
..
?'
~
>
...
"..:r.>
i
--- ---
- - - - __ ... ..
.._..
,,
____
- . . . . . . _ . . _
y ..~
...................
---
...
::
.
W
:::
..
A
kO
Jf.SuP
ES FRAh I
t)t
..'"
"MH
"'
.....
>
II:
..
: ~LJr B
i
"'~
'C
"'
,.
>
:r
~
~
. Ll .f ~,
ti
--- --
... ...
"' "'
t2 SUBURPJ.N
sPCC
J.T
'
I
'
. - -'
'
f
14 KLIP 81N0A HOU$ HOUSTON HXAS
A 114
HOU TOI'<
rn"
tDH 000
tttt
..i
<
::t
...
0"
2:
<
..
::!:
..i
..'
;:
0
0
z
:e
0
""
... "'
I\ JI
LEWIS. INTERLOOP MICHAEL EIE\.l, c.'ld FUSCO & ~EGLI c-1be;J t~~.r J:'":c<e ~
&
&
'
>1
f~
\.
'
I~
-:
...
.,,"'
<101.,g ;t-,e g"e", bu!
;!;
.,
I ,',cuq brc11ks
ni)t
'"t~10
dl?f'l\fy
are h10ge-
z>
,....
0
:i
,."'"'
ly <lnd ~ Nicn1SO' ;
,._~
...
"'>
0
..
"..
>
'Z
,,,'
i~,,
f/
69
69
..,
...
<
-'
:::
"'
~
0
u
..,
'::;
%
~
,:
:l
"'
=
Q
~
~
Q.
....
-- ----MT, !JOOl.~l
orOfK' ""' a~ ,_.., ~ chollengn tradlhonal

~.,.., labr.cat""' melhodS l.Jke ~her conlempo.
,..., aq111 pt"OffCIS. IS !Qrmal larOJ8C1t dtn-..d from
N .eur-. W\tt>.$ cas. traced from
~ ~ ol tl>O ..,._ ~ c...c Cc:orrciutet ,,.._,
.,,.., o.n.-Jt~t"' the~ ~truet er rJ. !toe - " O a!lod for the direct lflr\Ofer !com
dqtal moclelldesql IO bu~ - hanstorm"'O the roles
~ , _ _, _ ccrw;tn.dton (contractor)
al...,. -
'
al the P<o,ec1. ~ '*'"-'c:e of tho r.at- tt>ernenmedt fun!le<onspecJ01_. . _,,_11>e1

Ille IOI._ i i bound Ind f"""<d by -"itectural
ments wen u windows end an orthogonol ....ad Ind
-eframe. Tt-.srelahonship-\heta!lacy ol think

"'II al tile natur.i as llllleudled by,,..,.. Ind -1.,,.
arch<tfdure s
-intiton (!lo,. poiitcal
ano acient.rc -wonmen1a1 o.saw.oons ~ into
funct.,,... S11leg11ttclf-.!htl<C t -?}
-.-J--coo.vuctlol\.
'*'*"or->
The.-._s
. -oVll#t-- bet ~... geornecry to dor<elc!>
tt>t orQ"llll ~ . . _ i. bl.It'""" MCOUntered in
rt~r..:t.on i......~1-oeome1roes.ln
0nekdtltoctut9: Sb U..S.. AT- a Cowt. ~\Ill.

U. """"'1andl, 1 A pllJmjnQ ptoooul lor Int Oulch housong nllllr-e as "Ill "-Ei.. this PRll
eel 1$ en ettamQC 10~ ~' N( l 5 end tdac>log"'8l omlJlocallCM. In the ,.,.,.,..., the stardud SIAlur
ban stiff! oollerns end typocet Outcll l>ousirci erarqt
ments aro d<sc:ardod "'1 - al Ille orga..-zlll- loQlc;
ol lt'!fWS c-1 s Ti. er "2IJle rrel\es e.plrcll tha -
~ collllbo<al..,,.. w.th 0.. Arup lruelurel ~
C.C Batmonll. f()A - - tllat ~ is -..ble lo

Clntf\CI f0t<nally radcal ~
of"' t11e
.,,,_ t>r ooonno ard>ttl!dure to tha ...nuanc..ot
.,.., outStOt of
1redo\tor..i ~
e....,.._
Iii' lloc:M, osv & Sie. ,.~ Hol>itat Funlf, Peria. 191111.
So-Roi. E-S...U.-,M1. A pr..,.,
ol Roct.. prac:ica erld theory".,..-~""'
dtOotal n'lM\.... end ... PO!enloel
1o!Of91 ,_,..,...~bet_, atc:hittttlu<e Ind ~
llhlslC.ll corc.,1 Habitat Furt~ is a mobtle "'4"11 ur>I
1"*! t!lect moduleled ..,_ ol 1 '""~ l'-
''"'
"'lf>t _al..,"'
.._.,,.,,,.~
.. oanarateo trom.,.,.~
.....,...*'" Se...-ri.t,. a prOPQMI tor
IO
ftr91 bandl al contWM>uS oee""'yto _....

..i.. w ~y H4 buold.1o6 ...... mucn ot ,._term
...
;,
" -
1',..._
U-...Al\tto.iohlor.....,_.,.,.... _
- -n '"'-c..tto. Gatel-1\af\o. , _ Tiit&
...,._ t ... addition ..... . .......-.~.........,_

10 the ..ll"l) l)ltee - tho odtlo1""' II able to~""'
-~ "'"" _",,._ &l"IOQflthtWMt

-fromtha~ IOwnand,...,. ~ b)'casltnG
PIA>lit-.... aut~~
bet- ..... ,,,...... dClmllllC~J of,.,,..., anCI the....,,
""'8el was unoer1-. .......... .,,,.,. town of Gtbellna
4 ~
llor't,...,"' ~ Tiit Ctel">'ol"*
"'""'
-ol-m
It ~T--~.....,_a,_-,_ lluold
Incl l>oul..g""' loP al boO be .......... . ,__, filOtlO"
11toon V.t ll.-npl$ lo-Ille

Amaro:.n MU1*I ta11<te. lna lf\CfM&tCI ...., o1
lhe prepoMI'"" ba ~ .. cHect Ct(~"
--t.e
...........,"'-
~daevt 101 an .-ban!*\"""' llOJlor(I ~

~ pr-....iion -0Qil&tl'f-oor1ved
tar..--._..,~ ur1ler>oem The""*'*'
.__...U.C!-.IDQlcof _..on~-
'
----""""'
~cl
tllt ame.....,,...
116""1c!ilr> buoldong OI ...... Sect~ Iha pl.....
..._....,.._
----......,.,,. """'CtMt... _ad.,.ar.aoon.........,n.n ngr-ound.
, . . .oiact ......... ~ -IJl.-t ~""
'
...._ o.a.q. '""""' ..
"'""'*"
--,--er.-.
..,,.,,,...,u. us. 111et--t""~
al~MIUfben--lO---
. _ . . _ EGo-l'Wtlclo """'0..-. " - - , _
,;
_....i, . .
oil~ end potdlod rool as IN "'V""'f port.., ol Iha
.,., ""Pit -
a urano o.iog... """' tha

ot 1ha <1M1tCl19G
' - dtw bten r.i.um .-i ~od ol allfofe Bum
_,_,<billtral teconttructoon ati:.r
............. forc.l"ully~ ... 1!111 n.otory -
AJIA; H&.,___ _ _. _ , _ T h a -
CO.11 f<aihol + KorKhitdfM: _

11'1 Kalholer + Konic:floklgan aodol<OR to .,,..., tta
citmnel llOuM "' Ger"*'\' tunctoCN aaa -.stc"""
" - the~""'al localdlmatcc:at'doliono IUCll
1-.
13
ate..-
short,....,
~oot--.nu~ua~yr.in.
.,..,, \ .... ,......-.., -..~, Qlnlr*lod """'1>118Cl<.

0aqws Mart.'l'4mcllo.0.-F"or4ey ~Twn ,.,.,_
M.l,atll 8law-. B'""""' Jomes s_....... l'llt9f ICoe
Nor. Nyl11 frantom.
I~ fl-F-&Vl<IGr l(ovlt-11100.-~
_ ..,.lalltr>o_ .. .......,,,.._..
auCllC and,.,...... - - -
- - - n.
oro-L"od dostr1liuhon o f _, mecno... ~. -
end_,., u!My
IO- , , . . . . OllW
11 .io.t St.ndoro, Vllale loll R -Uon, -'!bn. ltll. Sand.WI dnclf'J <11*1'"' lradd'"'I -lion ol puCl<C
.,., on..11.,U.-1c - . Thcs - 1 ..-
""'
""""""''"' t.ldWI and llal (- . . 1

bya
tr...iuc:.ni PfllWl)l""I-~----
arc!''"''-'
d.Stncl>Onl.
17 1&1_ l ...._Aldlltetlen ~-Aloi-~ ~ID01.ln
__h_...,_
ICls Sl.ictl . . PbtonsC<ystal ~ - natut9 .,, . .......... glallto
......, _
u.tiorQtt -
a.-
allows,.,._,_.,.,,._. to l>eCom<O
more rnboQUOuS. ""' - - anCI _..,lec:tur t

'"'"' Otliri.ng
F.irther, wot'""
lhe booo---. the c..-a.lallor> P'Ogl'-llC - -
.._.......,.of -
,__.,. _ """"' .......,_,.,..,_al

ha--'""" color.,.,
--..-.i-
""""'_..."'_,_.__
II llti-hr1-.t.ao ..
-IC'I - - ....,
"-ter Leu cort..,11<1

C>UbllC """ ~ ""'" 09~ llUDhC ....ePllN-1~-PlM~""'""""
noc Oftl\oeleanl.,., -.Clflas"" "'...,_
-.alnel>4a.
llM.....,.
l)Ul4abo-----"
.,._._.,ey._..ttttg' -11tcto'yu_,_.,., .
Lall ti ltddtasfir(I Ina~ ol -1111-1 ~
- ...,~ ,,, ndutlliel """
R&Mtl_,_A_ 0.,. ..._,.. ~Doo
" -... a.,..,

-
-ell
RW.t81\U.1" tilJ'GICtl'l& ....,._ lor an

IMts Illa ..lenat d 11\t ~
rn,m llUr9 f - l i ty lOlfQIO&--ol
~ Cfey-<-c.nttr
1- - Pf"O
~ ........9' lot_.._... """"G.,., Cllllllno

-.lhtlllrtiltfl9Kralt11a.--~~
..., ...~tltau.drt--- ~al

~ur 5'tul...Sfta _
_.,~
,...,., .,, HcutCon. t n a - 11 ~ toconcernaol
" ' - - ~.. ....-,1i..t "'*''"Illa roll of
wcMecture '" tna

.....,._
llialL a pUllloc 1r1 ceNJ-.1 S.,.... f vO ' f(,eglo

draw our altt<!lion to tM " 'UNY-Irle nat11e al w:t>
$119Cfl TM pglrtcal and '"llO"ICal -tac>l'<n a1a CIMr.
tall ., -loon. Ille onS1ellel''1 ~s.,, otl&tota
..... funct.o> as S"""11............,t.i
acn. the can be bolh """"' C\DIOnllnCI Ind

"*'produced. Thol or"IKI-. noc """"" 1"
dll......, ...inct ~ ol atdotldurt> r d . oa..gn. bu1 -1/Wftat lhe ..,.._,......, _
thll -
al
of"""'* ty
,..olthe[-~
"""""'
ondlY1dlsol componenu ''.,,attar- nou.mo -.ioon

lllat l~ts ~ant_ ......,,51._,,, ,..uel"'Q. lll'lltl<
O'Q. fabratoon and sh~ I~ e.c-thl
PlttS
by~ COfnl*\4'{w>d "'fact . .
branded. llU lhe Hke Kiios In.I ettedl the ~s
to lho bin<IO<) thoy con t>e cusr""' or.-..d, fabro:.teO
&nd fh,pped tot.. client in I
pef~. lntorioDI>
has ello .ntroauced tho ION ol fltx1blt lea5"'11 ard ....
mttd ""'-'O ~ ~ plaong pubic IK*I
ol ttwo< ~lat>\ can be 1..-mally~lod A&
tM. Kan
14 lntwloa!f Atdoloct.... Oeoign: ~ - - ton. 1 ~ hous"IQ ""'ts that een ._"'*'as
ab<MI prwate- llle--publlCand

pmate. es 1rncionen1 ., ..o.rt.an '11#1! as they.,. on
aoc>allst -oeltn. art - - ' Y tlo-9d
Qllcally Ooa9*110 """""'... ~~est,.. prt>

gr-. tn tneo< comblnaloon. lhl aoacol'oeity ol lht \ti.style
ot wood and '-r The
'-"vs - " br"'OI tooettw erchilec1.-. eno

---~ H1scant ..
clus boas ompbal lnYI H [
. . dllq>td u _ _ _ .. ...,,_,_.. - - -
torm ~ ....,, conteon J,wig IOICt . . ...,. as~
tort""'.....,.., ard the .tor-
in"'"""
nou..
,_Olfice..__,"'_......,.....,r.,.
~c
E-..i Ft- & O.-t-11, ...._.,,,...., , .

f ~ & lot..,s holM "' .i.o11u addresses the,~
lionshtp boll_. 1rclt11ectin 111>c1 ts notura! enwon
ment At llr$1 glar>ce. lhe donM gr- cl trees
the body cl thts
$>!-lo dclm tl'e 1...m
~ ol ror-!Ml llCIUllf'G
-dteofnlll-- ~
ldantol't
"lapoed
"'llOIM. nctl
with.~ ,., ..... ~
arc!..-.. ~ - n... ,.,,,_.., ,.,...._.,,

INIUf'ICloor\11.-l'-'1<--.,.
., D-
+ . _ . . ,, 8tw ""tod. _
E_ . . . 0.llr
--ol-...
----OlllN
. . ._...,_.....,...i-....
Scolldto'l-of ~to~""--~
1i-- - ~~- ".._.._..., llt ltol
lw-al-"'9t c--t~-. . . . .
._.... _,..,,,~-~
1
.)
Notes around the

.. ,
Doppler Effect
and other Moods
__oLModernism
. ,~
No matter how often I tell my;,e/f that chance happening;, of thu kind occur far
more often than we .Mu.pect, ;,ince we all move, one after the other, along the ;,ame
roadA mapped out of for u.t. by our originA and our hopu., my rational mind i.6
nonethele.M unable to lay th<! gho;,t.t. of r<!petition that haunt me with eV<?r greater
frequ<?ncy. Scarcely am I in company but it ..6eemt. a..6 if l had already heard the
.Mme opinion.;, expreAt.ed by the .t.ame people .t.omewhere or other, in the ;,ame way,
with the .t.ame wordA, turn..6 of phra.t.e and ge.uure;, . .. Perhap;,. there i;, in thu a.t.
yet unexplained phenomenon of apparent duplica.tion .1Jome kind of anticipation
of the end, a venture into the void, a .t.ort of duengagement, which, like a gramophone
repeatedly playing the ;,ame ;,equence of note;,, ha..6 [e.,v, to do with damage to the
machine it;,el'f than wth
b
. .
1
an irrepara le defect m it;, programme.
W.G. SEBALD, THE RINGS OF SATURN
I would like to .t.ho th
. ..
w at t e4 e un1t1e;, form a number of autonomo~. but no
t independent
d without a
domain.t. governed by 1 b .
. '
ru e;,, ut m perpetual tran.;,formation, anonymoUA an
.1;ub1ect but b
' ,
im umg a great many individual work.t,.
MICHEL FOUCAULT, THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE
a~
:.
r
ROBERT SOMOL
S-'RAH WHITING
-----------="!
....
~.
1 )'-
... .. .,,.
;'f,..
.; ~
'
..
.
;,,~
..
.
,.
.t'
.
: .,. .
....
FROM CRITIC AL TO PROJECTIVE
m Hays's 1984 ess ay: " l'n--'P'fO 33 is bwlt around
if ntVer completely realize, the critical project of
In 194 the editors of Per.opecrc. Carol Bums and
the belief that architecrure s~nds 1n the critical
betwttMss." whether within history/theory, as
R*n Taylor. ~t out an ambitious agnda for
position beewttn being a cultural product and a
with Hays. or 111 terms of design, a s with the work
1ss~ 21. 'Arclutecr~ 1s not an isolated or autono-
dtscrete autonomous dlsdphn~ Yet. whil Hays
of ~ter wenman.
mous n>od1um. I\ rs .ctively engaged by the soc ial.
was su~ing that only cnt1c~ architecture oper
1ntlltual and visual culrure which 1s outside
ated
dw disc1plmt and wtucb encompas~s
LD
his
privileg~
It 1s from Rowe's and l'afun's conceptual
"btt>tten" posmon. the edi
genetic mareriil that architecture's criu cal proj

eel has betn formulattd. for both authors, th ere
1s
tors of 33 imply tbt a ll architecture now <automati
~on a premi~ that an:h11ecture LS 1nev1tably
cally occupies a de bt'to critical status. What for
1sar~uls1tt assumption of
nwolvtd with questions more difflcuh than tho.st
Hays was then an excepuonal practice. ha.s now
guity, regardless of whether 11 is subsumed or
1t It
contradict ion or ambi-
' style: While this orientation bears a
been rendered an ""eryday fact of hfe. If nothing
sublatecf (dialectical materialism) or bal anced 01b
curious connection to the "realbt" or grey tradi
eln. however, this Inflation of critical pr<actice by
eral formalism). Even bofnre examining the vari
loon of an euherYale generation. it also serves an
the editors of 33 l\as perhaps un consciously iden
ous reconfigurations of Rowe and Tafuri, however,
llJll of the na'ICent mixture ot a critical. neo-Marx
tified a fact of the last twtnty yean;: namtly. that
it is importon1 to recognlie that the opposition
1SJ11withac;,,kbrat1onofthevernacularoreveryday
disc1plinarity has betn absorbed and uhauSted
between them Is never as clear as would be imag
wnh wluch Yale would soon bH:omt synonymous.'
by the project of criticality. As Hayss first articu-
lned: Rowe's ostensibly formal project has deep

com11ons to a particular hberal poli11cs, and
of form
,.
..
Publis hed tn rut same issue. K. M1chul Hays"s
lation of critical arclutecture was a necessary ccr
ca.oruc esaay cn11cal Architecture: ~twffn Cul
rective to the realist posit ion of P.Y,tptcm 21, it
Tafun's apparentlyengagtd practice of dialectical
t11re and Fon:n" offered a wseful cortte11~ to the
m;ay bt ~arr tor. at lean. useful) to p:ovide
critique t ntai ls a precise series of formal a prioris
ednom1I posuion of the issue by indirectly impl)"'
an alttmariw to the now dom111ant paradigm of
as well as a pessimistic prognosis with regard to
mg that the editors were insufficiently dialectlQJ
criticality, an alternative that will be character
architectural production. Seen m this way, thtre Is
~1r understanding of eng:i_gement and auton
iud here as projective.
no more political writer than Rowe, and none more

formalist than Tafuri.
0111y. Hays"s sophistication ha$ always been 10 rec
As mdenced by Hays 's inslahtful polemic.
oinou that au10R0My is a precondlt10n for engae~
critical architecture. under the rtgime of textu
The criticality of Hays and Eisenman main
m.nt. Uslna Mies as a paradigm. Hays argued
ality, requittd the condition of being "bet~n
tains the opposition a I or di alectical framework in
for the poa.slbilny of a "c ritical arcl\ltect:urw" tJwt
various dis>Curc1w
weuld ope~ between the extnmH of conclUa
fonn" an altemat1wly be fisured as "lutsch and
the work of their mentors and predecessors, while

s ... ultaneoudy trying to short-circuit or blur their
tOl)' COO>mod.ity and negative commentary.
avant-garde" (CleMnt G~nbcl"8). "httnl and
terms. In theirvarlouuttempts to hybridize Rowe
phenomenal" (Colin Rowe). "ob1ecthood and art"
and 'l'ilfun In order to fashion a critical posilion!
""""ii ions . Thus cultu
rt and
T~lve issues and 5n'efltttn ycan later. the

ed1ton of Issue 33 ~return~ to the theme of
ln1trd1.1eiphnarity. Tius time. however. IN topic ia
(Michael f'riedl. or "capitalist dewlopmtnt and
both Haya ind Eittnman rely on dialectics - as 1
design" (Man~ f3fun). W1tl\ln architecture,
immediarelyevidenctd In the titles of the journals
t11phcltly undenmnen by the temas ettablished
Rowe's an<ll Tafuri's discourses most fully enable.
each was responsible for founding: Oppo.1.lrio>U
Hight ""'d l'ttlu\lli 1toht

t
""Y 1tir ~rch1tectur ..1obiecr '""'Nia lyr

'l'<'Cthc tempor.11 and SpdlI Cortex
tht way it ervc >5 a Ir.ice of 11s p Od
terns. Hays describes rhe barcclona p
"an event with t<'mporal dur~11on wtio,,,

exi~tence 1Honrinu~lly being prod
meaning 1s continually being dP
<ed ,
1d~d
deC1\1on is both rn fart and erymologic... y f
real gesrure par excellence.
In
t.
t:rsenman~
discuss on fJI tht o m
1s the dc.,rgn proce's melf 1h 11s ~ ngr
in
architecture. "Arct11tecture is both s
and act The srgn rs a record of an intcrve

an event and an "' whirh goes bey nd l~e pr
ence of clements wh1th are mertly ne e
rnntinual tranform311on In both ca t

cal form~ of self rcfPrentrahty nrP demo
via senJI reproductions be they f1 tnmq
drawn dxonomC'trrcs of the 11on ex JttOI D
pcr~pcu1ve, or thl' l11"orrcai photogr~
u'es to extr.1ct the exptncncr d tho dtfun
anal Barcelona Pavrlron lust J5 thu ar I; tect
.rnd A._.vmhlaqe l>esptt the11 amphnt crttaques
FROM JN DEX TO DIAGRAM
of Mu h d lrMI' .1eathr11cs.'both l:rsenman and
mtn! 1h1y 1r11o)Hl1on I" rlurma11v11~ and pra11
In the s1gmhcant produc lion ol both II 1y~ and

Erstnman, ~s pariillI rrahgnm1ni. of Row~ and
Taftm, th cnt1CJI p101ll "mev11.1bly m<'dt.Jttd
m fact, tt rs pt rpetuall~ ob~1 SM d by. md 1nl'xt11ca
bly hnked to. rrproductaon Tins ob\CSMon mani
fe 15 ruelf borh m 11.1y,\ .iccouut of Mic~ van dcr
Rohe Barcelona 1'.1v1hon .ind Pthr i l\cr11Mn..
mdli I Oil< 1oulrf av rhar Thr1r dehnnton of
rereading of Le ( orhu
II y ultlmardy tnar htrrah
d<>t'
h11h
un a11a1n
th
\I' as muh a Fntd

t
omorphrc remap
pm11 of hf< """ art ror borh, d15dphnarrry as

urnfi r 100.t a autonomy (Pnabhng cntrque, rep
nt 111~11 11nJ 11iruh iillHm)
hut not
as mstru
N ti
llfl
lr~n1u
tno
11~' 111 t ult m tlu 1uodtH W>11 of nc:w quahtath A
an 1111 ""'"" 10 rla 'rllar 11 p101crr

ti >n
hen link< d
11ul1 ~ f th1d11ltrll alndhot reprr en1a
till 11 xr d vil111
olthe1r 111tl\1
, tnw ptu ru
111 tllnn 111 grnlo11y
l111~11lrnll1t ds~mmrllt th
11111l0111
111 ''"'
at tlic
.1hov11 I 1Hrun.11 urultf
qu1lll~t1v
rnr1..;1 m 111 1m1 ~~thrlt tra 1l 1numuldl1t>nmay
lo tho
nh ~I
..~s' apr1op11 Htrrn
.tthlllt.OnltJn
As an ~hrrnr1t1vt.t to f 1
on the high l.urop<.HI ft am, whr
Uorn 1110, whn1 both
di 1rhn111tv1 <l11r t1dHgJrnltr1h alion1alhr

111111 towird thr po
t111n
n<entdt1on, .ind its simulaneous c

that cond111on
p1 Jor111 rut
11
If
"l111w1 ,,
rh
efhdenr rrprrben1.1111,,1 ol ptr<Xl\l1ng <uhur rl
value and th~ wholly ri< ta<lwd aurm1my <ii an

I 1h1S of l'l)n In
ab.rract formI y lent .. r hr

thC' world y<t "
r "'' '" rt s llrnecl hy rh1
,1s,
chr tr:lct nt a tr
tion. Koolhaas's invocation of the cartoontheorem" from Life magazine - as well as the section
cut from lhe Downtown Athletic Club - alternauvely enlists a vision of architecture as contributing 10 the production and projection of new
forms of collec11v1ty. These New York frames exist
as instruments of metropolitan plasticity and are

not pnmarily architecture for paying attention to:
they are not for reading. but for seducing, becoming. instigating new events and behaviors. The
skyscraper-machine allows the proiection infinitely upward of virtual worlds within this world,
notion of interdisciplinarity, which seeks to legitimi7.e archilecture through an external measuring

stick. thereby reducing architecture to the entirely
amorphous role of absorber of heterogeneous life.
A projective architecture does not shy away from
reinstating architectural definition, but that def
init1on stems from design and its effects rather
than a language of means and materials. The Doppler shifts the understanding of d1sciplinanty
as autonomy to disciplinarity as performance or
practice. In the former, knowledge and form are
based on shared norms, principles, and traditions.
and in this way extends Michel Foucault's reAec
In the latter, a more foucaultian notion of disci-
t1ons on heterotopias and prisons. Gilles Oeleuze
plinarity is advanced in which the discipline is
argues that Foucault understands Jeremy Ben-
not a fixed datum or entity, but rather an active
tham's Panopticon not simply as a machine for
organism or discursive practice, unplanned and

ungovernable, like Foucault's "unities form)ing)
surveil lance, but more broadly and productively

as a diagram which imposes a panicular form of
conduct on a particular multiplicity." Koolhaas's
a number of autonomous, but not independent

domains, governed by rules, but in perpetual
investigation of the frame structure is diagram-
transformation."' Rather than looking backorcrit
matic in the same way.
icizing the status quo, the Doppltr projects for-
F'rom these 1wo inventions of the frame struc-
ward alternative (not necessarily oppositional)
ture in mid-7os architectural discourse, one can
arrangements or scenarios.
discern two orientations toward disciplinarity.

that is. d1sciplinarity as autonomy and process,
A proiective architecture does not m ke a

claim for expertise outside the field of arch1t
as in the case of Eisenman's reading of the Dom
ture nor .d~ it limit Its field of expertise o n
ino. and d1sciplinarity as force and effect, as in
absolutedefin~itecture. Design iswh ~
Koolhaas's staging of the Downtown Athletic Club.
keeps architecture trom slippin~ cloud of

heterogeneity. It delineates the fluctuatin~
Moreover. these two examples begin to differen

ttate the critical project in architecture. with its
connection to the indexical, from the projechve,
which procet>ds through the d)Sgram. T~e diagram
is a tool of the ftual to the sarm.-d~ the
index isthe
e real. 1
dtrS of~I e's disclp:ira~i~and txpert1SP.
)7
r
So:/;en arct\i~~ '}p1cJthat art Sffm .

ingl outside o~re's his1orically-<lefintd
sc
- questions of economics or civic pohucs,
fo; e~ample - they don'I engag~ those topics as
ex~ on economics or civic po)\t\.J bLtJa~e}. )

s Je~erts on desjgp ;nd how design may affect
'l'.he)' ens:ii! bes~
c-.-,,.,.,.=-;;;-,.-;-;:,,..., Tr~,...HH"l'._>t1~-------;JC""-
:~~~~~~~~~~~~~:-:~~-~~~-:::::~~~~:;~~~la~t~io~n~s~h;i~to~th;;~e~~~:[~_::'.:=:::::::=:::::=:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Ratherth re ymgupont eoppos1 1011

of Critical d1alemcs. the projective employs some
thing si milar to the Doppler Effecr - the perceived
change in the frequency of a wave that occurs
when the source and receiver of the wave have a
relmve velocity. The Doppler Effecl explains the
change in pitch between the sound of a train as
II
approaches and then moves away from the lis
tener. If critical dialectics established arc:hitcc

ture's autonomy as a means of definiog architec
other disciplines. ratl'er than as cntics. Design
qualities of sensibility, such as effect. ambiance.

and atmosphere.
An example of 3 projective architecture that
..~ges the strategy of the Doppler effect in lieu
env
Of that of the dialectic is ww's lnrraCenter, a
40000 ft.'commuoitycenter located in Lexington.
acknowledges the adaptive synthesis of archltec-
Ke ntucky. The lntraCenter's client provided ww

~i
~ 'th.0 program list of diizyingoperational hetero
ture's many co ntingencies. Rather than isolating a
g~
singular autonomy, the Doppler focuses upon the
Caf .
~ library. computer center, job training faclli
ture's field or discipline, a Doppler archit&cturoe
effects and exchanges of architecture's inherent

mullipliritles: material. program, writing, atmo
sphere, fotm, t'l:hnolog1es, economics, etc. It is
--
encompasses object qualities \form, proportion,

~ateriali"'.
,..
.,. composit ion. etcJ but it also includes
aneity: daycare.athletic facih1 ies, social services.
hops,
tls.
0
etc. Rather than fisuring these multi
irnponant to underscore that this multiplying of
so as to pO"lde ucb with its own

Pi e proarams
.,.
o~ml identification. or rather than establishing
''
nautral field so 8S to allow the programs to dehne
COnlln.gencies differs greatly from the more dilute
the pro1ect. the hitraCtnter elides the expected
'
Pt1ect <feAWhtHt(.1"'' d~lf1'

o~ (N(Hl4'JN A 1arr1"tf"(t!J'f) 'ffttn PlPf"t11rr'J
[IK<ln<ll'lloU)aMT (l....,.r)
O'erlap between form and prog1 am fhen lack
of alignment lead to a perpetual Doppler shift

between the t wo Th" strategy of no" concontnc
11y generates other Doppler i:rfetts. mcluding the
a building~ matcn.11 paleHe or Mte A~ the nov
.11nphhcu by h111f1y 1 >..1min111g ,, me u1um Mc I u
eh~t WG Sebald explain>. each one of u' expen
hJn dot'' 11<11 <h'<U" 1wrto1111.111<

In
ences moment> of rcpet1\1on.coinudcncc or du pit
Wllll')
cation. whc1 e cchoe~ ol othc1 exper 1en1 c>. convcr
h" oh1111.11 y on 1h1
11
rnr
ll I\ Ill \.1 y
th,11 with Hoht1t M11d111111 VOU Stl l"''I r
m.,nu\ u .lncl
ru 1tot m.'1ll. l'

1
ht'''' n,,, t'prt st'<!
m4ny rever herat1on' among ovcrlJpping contll
'auons. mood~ and encount~r> .11f ec1 currtnt one'
uenc1es n we11 as matenol and structural cond1
Such momPntary echoes aH hke rncks out ol
t1ons The lntraCenkr ts p1 01ecttvl' rather than
ahgnment, hea1 ing ,ind .eeing out of pha\r th 11
H''"'' on know11111 'om1 1h1ni; 1' b~ k thrll'
crnlcal 1n that 11 very dehb<rately :.ts into mot ion
generatt momrnljry dcJ' vus, n 01;erlap ol ""11
1101 f111ng ''"'' 1x 1<11) wh.11 11" 111 \.1'
rhe posS1b1hty ol multiple engagements rathN
and v111u.1l world,.
wh.11 M1td1uon tltln tlwn, "
FROM HOl TO COOL
firmness and dehghtl
Som1ot11 Ahould r111ab/r.1l1 cm dtJt/JH>J><>loqy 11}
comn from the <irHk parallax ... tr "changP "the

apparent chanae In t he position ol an ob1 re, ult
in1 !Tom the chanse In t he
ponton from which
It IS Viewed"" Cla1m1n1 thll Stm consnou sly

rnpond ed to tlw poa11b1ht1H cl panllax Rois
atnu an ex1m,i. SelTI 1 de1cr1ptlon of h,. cul p

t ure entitled Sillht Point "llt -m11t first Ito tall
rlsM to leh
mike .n X. and lllrlilhten It di 1H1t
to I trua ated pyremid. Tbat would 0<cur thr<

tlmesnyou walked around' In other wmds, pr
allax" the theetn al effect of 1 penpa1e11c vu w
of
with
hor and cool
15 in
Owr.1\1, ont m1gh1 c haract~1 ue th1 >hrh ii om c111
t<1rn~ . of movang from a hot to
;1
rnM that 1115 p11occup1<J """ "p.11111ng 11s1ll

frorn nor ma11vr, b.1ckg1ound "'anonymous rnnd1
111d
,,,.11.1 g1011r
w11h o1111rnla1111g d lh-1
tl h nit ion", rn1w1y1ng wry p1 r< ISl' inturm t11on
a.U\tt;
f;Udt d~ 1t"ltvt~1on .UH~
low 1lc-hnll10n .and,
tlw111t111m.u10n1h,y1orw1y1s. comprunu~t d ,
icgarJ, t lu lo11nalt t tnt1tit1 proJu t ls hot tn 115.
II II no11u I an unfold1n
read n1 of an artwork but natmo,.pheri lfllPrg
II
pr1or 111 u11011 ol dthn111on, dohn1 111011 11nJ d1

tanc-1lon (n1 m ttlu n' SJh' ih nty) On~
ltt rn.JllVt\
rn1n11nalum, would bP. a c.oul ni t tmm ll I

dehn 111cin ancl ' ' qmu~ thP t untexl
iW
nd \'II Wt I to
act on It fore.,.ounda the behel that bo1h th~

sub)tct and t be object arry llftd PXC11ang mlor
compl<t it I 11 ~ ing b(ll h >di utt1<1r11t y nd "H
ma11on and eMr'IY In shon a user might he

moH attuned 10 n& n a 1"<1' of a hu11dmg
pa1111 tpa11c.n ~nd ~ o.l~rcd to Smit h 'n' 111omo
than olht He or sh. rniahi nd r tand how lhe

bu1loltnc rnpond IO a lon11AI h tstory ot au h1
IPCl urr or .&eploy. 1 P lh< ltth nonrgy
"'- or h{
or she nupt 11.... parh ufa a so ti.Hon w11h
kl h\ nmstruc tin
pl iu 1h1h1y h) th111 I C11l1r~. lit<~ '
muha h~ him'"' "high
tht Y 1tqu11 1111 pJrllup 111011 of tlu usro In tht\
of many aen11b1htles Add tlonally II ts not read
1t
,not vta 1on
that can bt aud tOI"( or vtsual the OopplN u&
"I ttrategy - that
hrltt "' tlwu d1.11
ot Cllt'dl\c 1phn~ <1111ral arc h111-ctu11 1> hc>1111 thc
c-n<~ l c11 Mph r I Ifret " old lK
uni!- 101 m ol t octl}, lht hot r " IS throu I di
1
'
io11 mJ ronnu1t!.S t l 1t ovr. ly d1fhluh l ~I th
wnrktd complu~tod co Ii
I
t.:dh tll1<" h\lwtr.n lhP o
5 II' J > d I
u a r
Ul\t
C"d
a y 'Thio
.Jnd th" hat m,.1, l t"
IUI
C'\
om~ "ho
ltnd makr \
uss of rnohng down <>r 111 M ""h.tll Md uh3n~
"t pmduc11on,
llli
)Urp
1111 I< "" two k nds
1cal to prO)fl tiv mod1s ot d1suphn.1111y u a pl o
that 11 ,. not purely OP' al Pred ated on waws

IHtl that t he Opttc:al and cmceptual are only 1wo
'''JI 1111!.J 1, 1lmn
M1 uc I .1 1 h.11 111<1 11ul ot 1lr1a1I
lllCdlit,
l(
111
ol '"'"'' 1111 hy .1rs111s I nt a1<'
/e.111ll.tudr11lard
11un1
hut
~11> that
llVl' 111111. one whu h 1 omhllll'' th<' chn
on one ch.annt l or an om mudt Uy contr st, coui
1\"a)
111g plju,1h1ltl\ tlldt n1111ht h1 o.l~pted
or form (contemrorary architectures commodlly,
with paralla1t, which, a Yvl Alain Bo" nor.-.
1111 M 11< hum' ffr<t
imJ pl.1u"hlt Ami ,, , t>. 11 ti) chl5 11 n11 I su f'
than a single an1cula11on of program. ti'( hnology
The Doppler Effect shar. s ome attnbu
(or11r11 "'nttll. hut drhvrnI
an
111 \11 N1f\I\ M'llftl, en wlttlt....
tht-.
p- nN l'"' wnh1n th~acwr.lllln~

.a< t\>f and th, hlrM19r, 111rh that~~ tf Ille
c;i!l'I 111I1011 <'I lhf
<hill~ It laillle. ,,... le
1111 v1hJ wI ' " .-y th1e llCflll that. When 'Wltl:h
lnJ I'< Nrl\ 11 loak Ilk~ lthlnll of the llf11ol11<' 1>111nm11 and ronRtTltetl 1Mt11rh). The
"l''""'I ,,.
tt 1n both Wrlte111 of C., f"r are
"'"""""., in 1h" ....rd. Tt\91991 remakto btgm~
,. th 11, Nu\\ w<>1lt1na out 1n pri-. extrc"lng or

rrl11~"'"I' whn' tM WMt rolllq off his b<i~
", 1uhlt In '"" 6111Jln1I. Mnchum la ill no niU:

r~~h lh 1v1U11. elljoy1na c119r and checlillllt
0.11'" " wnm,.11u1hey IHvt tht1 n111nhoUM, CDOI
lhf' hrHI<' He makes II look n~y. So '1>e Ntna
11" hit"' 1u1 .. h hot, d1fftcuh. lid md<>o.rs thr pro.

l'nl"''
nl u, pnodun1oll. lt'1 clnrly labarf'd, nar1a
11w, 111
"1'rftlt111tat101111l, or 11'"'9S r<lauon
hi>olthtt prt~rm1t1011tothtrMICdlt~
<'I o Pf>Y' hll llllttHt fnltn I ....I " " "
tw & ftc.
11011011,.,ll Mttch11111 ph1y.1 C.lllffrelt q
a. . .
11w 1111h 1tmk. and hellwatchilll~llltol
Ca.Iv''' 'P 'Mthed "--
1111 lledr...... wldl

ithh,al prowrlla and COIMllllta with a ft1N1 tf
"""*h la m11oll fw "'9 MethM..ctlftl Ot Niro
' " " ' rh111~t1 c.dJfl. "I cltll'tbvwwlwthlr to
laol. al him "rte fWlll Nm." In eenaut IO thla nar-
'*'
"""" llodt, "MltclluM ................... . .

arul "-r look lllw werll; 11'1 . . .
at4M
lllhnlieuon ol 1l'1l'Utlw ~l. till
p1t1Vhh11 111ain 1111 manr11v<'r, ~11J promt-~11~~

rln tt y With \ UbJt1 t"1 With Mlkhum . ~
1111.,1111 nuqh~1 hod 1 J111.1~ lh ~ un-n
Y111 1h1 unhonwly h.i'
lil'l't\ "'lll~nd with
P tu11n.1111c, 111 oh~ NP' 1~1n1
'UIP muv11111w.,ihiiitcrtllillll
pr tn - Ol\f which k~
nd llfTll Wt ~ to 1 projtlw
1ou1 1h11 pnij.rriw ProtrN

t lltll
'o:apllul1tian IO l1l&l'tlll"
n1111._.......
4 M fdi.tt fld hefttde,oo:ti !.O ~ft(Ule:~ s t-"Kf u t ion af~cnai.ik'Nf'
........, !hot J lMMQ>gOll -.Ci !::t'"""' Ol<AlitCtO-Oe' - U \ t , t t l

n1>.Aor<.l4a'1Qn bt'......,.
... 1Ulf' l9lt.r l.,.n ap.iw.. w.<...,111o11i1>er'
tt111R~--to. ""9'-""'Mrl.._,'l o.-.1~01_,.,., .. maumt<W1

IW't~""1Ur
vt jemonltr~ t-(;. ,.,..c-.t: t ~U"'~\.
nr K. Mlc.holl ><..,s. -e.. ... -
'1htflh&1reflec.t .,, ..\t'nai
Cl11.n aro ~crm. ~. fl (Cam~

l 21 AISo - l'tt.,.E""""""' ''""'*'' o!Modorrwn -""'1no
... s.cri.~ 15,16f....... ....;sor.ng \9')gj
..
ELIZABETH GROSZ
This paper was first presented as part of the conference entitled
The Pragmatut Imagination: Thinking about Thing.t. m the

Making held at the Temple Hoyne Buell Center for the Study of
American Architecture at Columbia University, in Spring 2000 .
Th m t of ti r>le lee t 1r> a ense tn

I mt of !tie le hrn al anrJ thn techool cal
P~rhaps I ho quest on aheiid of us no ....
$this wh<1I are the cond1!1ons of d git wt1on
rhe
and binenza11on? Car we prod,,ce techn
1101 are
ge ol olrcc kind ? I tee! nolr>gy nher nt )

s1mp1 f (at on and uduct1or> of th(' r~al? Wh;;it
nt rct lunct ors to dis eel d ~de, aom

rn contemporary b1n:mwt1on 11nd d 11 I za
mply the cut rent rs ons t t'11s ter
dency to !'1e c ca cut tre .,namtJ g
Lo~.
lite
oppo ton or binar1 ,;npulse& of tie ntel eel
wf'i cl
p
bourd b 1 h 111Jpc!1JS to (eventud or
. '1
BERNARD CACHE
Gottfried Semper:
Stereotomy, Biology,
Our poont of deparNrc "what 1s known
in
math
Ceramique, zoo: Tectoni~ur. 135: St,..,l'Olll!' u}
ema11c$ as a doublr point. This partKular point
But at issue 1s not merely1h nurnbefof ~-
1s constuutt'<l by the two statue' - one of George
15 11
11 ~
that the majontyof whattsactua Y
i:.
th thD ..
Cuv1c1 'and the other of Alexander von Humboldr.
1s dedicated to tectonics in s1one "'
tho Ce1 man d1sc1ple of Etienne Geoffrey Saint
stereotomypropor lnthepago I Dorr Snl de-

th><
Hilaire>- Gottfried Semper p1acedat the top ofthe
to stereotomy, Semper goes 5o far as t~asst"

MI<
Ntur~1s1orisch.s Museum (18n-1681), The fdct
the whole history of a1<1\1tt<turt """' ,
that Semprrdod not plceone.but twob1olog1s1sat

the sumn ..1 ol his represfnrauon of science ~hould
an
a qutstion mark wnhan Sem~rs D.r Sil/.
Hrs m>tstenrc on placing .. s1a1ue d a disciple of

Geoffroy Sam1 H1la1r. berral"' l doub1
in
Semper
thdl m 1urn re\cdb abhndspo11n D" S11/

The tour technical rh of Otr St1f~ 1ble
of contcnls, th< lour pillar>. arc trN1i>d tar f1om
eqully Semper, emp,as1son teules 1>01 course
very well known. but wha1 ~ rarely discussJ
is lhe weakness of lhr chapter> on >tercotomy '
The numbtrs of pages deJ1cated 10 each of the
lechn1cdl arts in
D~r ~11/ re Tu11le. 550 Pges,
ti
'
ihe 'lrtory of the >'auh (usullY coos~ . ~''

~I tbt rt<I"" j
pumary territory of ster>tomyl
.~ ;
ol'S anv motf
....
frame. but then hardly menu
~
f Sterf<!IClftV ..
n This dbsence of the corr 0
IJlt<I
more surprising cons denng 1h~ o'J!
and s1ud1ed in F'rnce. whtr< arch""""'
!d 1~h'
om)' Ho" cou
stronglv rooted in slettot
. a)O<I' !!,... 1tt...
.
1
..... f .
Wll informedsehotaras Se1np<'rwr1tt
uch~ptoi ...
li~ur<'JS
....t
otomy wnhout mcnuonong
, 51..-
rgues' ...
en de L'01 me~ or Girard [)e<a

l!Utkh"' ,,oli
""''<"
acknov.ledgong th ta II 0f F'rfn<h fr"'Olln
uons' Was hedr..w1ng conclusions
.
huf(ll. # ' "''
contro-.rsial Sa1ntt Grnevi~-ec
"
..
d1t1onI !rcnch geometnc methodology was sup
of mathematic> forming the conccp1ual back
mulauon was achieved. the arrh1tectunl read mg
planttd by a phy.1cI a pproach based on stil!ICS
ground of Geoffroy Saint Hlairc's work'
of geometry was bound to remain neo clas>1cal
nd the trengih of matenals1 Did Semper feel
One could ob1ect that these question> wtre
1n a manner similar to Wmckelmann's reading of
ths tradit ions were unable 10 cope with the tech
of litt le relevant to Sem!>('r's archuectural p101
Greek <1rt h11ecture a s pure. ideal, white form Gott
nologitdl challenges of the t 1me'
cct. and that he could have very well ignored
The>e rca\ons cannot fully expla 111 why
pro1ect1ve geometry and its connections to Sauu
:~~;~~
~
""~~le .J
~~--l~nform"
Somper mode no menu on at .tll of what appears
H11aire's biology But we should remember t
oh< the- most 'Scmpenn' piece of architecture in
Semper actually studied mathematics with Carl
Pri~. the wonderful s tone interlacing ol the rood

screen w11h1n 5 a1nt l:.llenne du Mont, only a hun
Friedrich Gau\>. the man who nrst acceptd pos1
Such a hypothes" rehes upon two a:.sump-
11vely the con>equences of the negauonof ud1d's
uons. The nr.t IS that pro1ect1'lie geometry was an
dr~ meters behind S<11 nteGencv1eve ' No other
fifth postulate, and 1n so doing 1n1uated the held
1mponant leatureof Geoffroy Sa int H1 laire's batk-
piecr of arc hne<tu re so clearly embodies the arch
of non Euchdean geometry." Semper's 1ntereS1 m
ground - $0 prominent a feature
tectural motif of the Semperi.1n knot and the the
mathemaucs was strong ef\ough for him to write
1g11ored by someone hke Semper with $trong inter
oret1cal concept of stercotomy, the transpo .. 11on
at the age of f\hy a technical essay on d1ffeie1111al
ests m arch11ec1ure, biology, and geometry. The
from text1le to stone. Could
be that what really
calculu!. applted to the shape of pro1ecttlrs." It
>econd
putiled Stmper was not only tht Phi libert de

l'01 me w ' t h presumed architect of th" rood
\<ren.' as wt11 "~of so many other Sempenan
1s my hypothesis that Semper had the capacity

to fully understand pro1ect1ve geometry. but lie
non-neoclassical read mg of geometry that would
repn:sotd 1t m D~r St1I be~ause 1t implied a refor
color by applymg 1110 <hape. Such an acu>mph$h
mulauon ol geometry that had yet to be achieved
ment would have enabled Semper to ad~uately
by mathema11c1ans themselves." Until this rcfor
wnte h1> m1ss1ng text on tereotomy
11
Pirce, of rchnccture, but that an archllect could

btthe 1n1t1at
,
oro1 pro1ect1ve geom<.'try.'the bianch
1>
11
could not be
that pro1ec11ve geometry could imply a
have el\3bled S~mp~r to pursut h1> work begun on
BIOLOGY
.
~-t becwrtn Cuvier
Wltat w;is the cort of 1ht de....
'
and Sa1nt-H1la1re thal excattd contemporaries
such as Goethe and Beliacl The lwo b1olog1sts
Wfrt in11ially good friends who worked togtthtr
on vtrtebrtt class1hcation in order to corrobo
ratt Sain1H1lairt's thtory of a single organizational plan that would inform ihe whole of ihever
tebratt lamlly. Since 1796, Gtolfroy SamlHilaire
had worked with the conctpt tha1 ihete existed a
single organizational plan for all animals." Saint
Htlaire's research began w11h mammals and then
extendtd 1ht concept 10 to1rapods. An 1808 essay
by SaintHtlalre on fish generalittd the single
plan to all vertebrates." Until that polnt Cuvier
"'II enthusoarncally supponcd Sain1Hilaire. But

on 1811, Cuvitr announced h1sown thes1~. classify
1na animals onto several btanchu or "embranchmen1s Vertebrata, Anoculata, Mollusca, Cni
dutans. nd Ech1nodorms rot Cuvier, these
embranchements were lundamenially dllfertnt
from u ch other and could not be connected by
any e'olutlonary translormatton Cuvier's "hx1s1
voew of boolOC)' pos11td that every $Ingle pln of an
organism" so Wtll ht1td to llS surroundings that
1hert 1s only one w~y on which earl\ part can be
conntt1td 10 the whole orian1sm ror those who
would 1hlnk that this is lar aw;iy from archntt
lure, rtmtmbcr, 1111 Cuvier who wrote the famous
sentence 1aken ~s a principle of func11onahst
arch l1oc1ure."givt me anyslnglp1cce of an animal
and l will draw you ohc whole body." According to
1h1s view, each cmbranchmcni has Its ow Organl
11
za11on and here can be no wayol conncc11ng par1s
in .1ny m.1nner o1her han tha1 dc;crihcd in each
of 1he categories.
Un11I 1810, Cuvier and Sa1111Hila1re lived
~nd worked peacefully'" he same nstitu11011 le

Mush d'lt1s101re Na1urcllc, '" Pans. During 1~1s
1
mf, lulcs C4esar Sav1gny who ad b
r
"
.en '" '8YPt
Wllh Sarn1-H1la1rc on the Napolcono E d
... Xpt 1taon,
Studied lht compara11ve anatom I
Yo an 1nS1ct's
mouth Another of SaintH1lire's ""e~ P
...... ttre
Andre La1re1lle. apphed the p
nnc1p1 of unity
ol compo111on lo all of tht An I os
h
1ru ata Until
t a1 point, the work of Cuvier and S
a1mH1la1te
remained compa11blt -....:ause neuhrr S
a1n1.
Hilaire nor his followtrs br k
ben.e.n
.
0 ' ary front,."
Cuvier s sacrosnc1tmbranch
on 1810, Saint H1la1re suooes1 a rnent>. Bui
U<'IWeen
Vencb1 ata a d I ... '"' unny of p'... n
began at lh
n nsecis. Cuvier'Ht1t1qus
" P<ltnl and onl 1
Sa1n1 lhla1,. la .
y ncrtased whon
' ning on work& b L
Mcyrand
y aurenctt and
. ex1ended his unuy ol
Mollusca as wc11 s
cornposh1un to
a1ntH1la1re had Ii
uni ed three
oftheembra..nchmenwan accomphshmt>nl Cuvwr

was unable to accepl.
But as one examines Saint H1lairc's unifi
cauon of Vertebrata and Insect>, the rel1111on
between the two embranchments seems rar from
obvious, since each has a thoroughly different
~lationship
to the ground. All Venchratn have
their digestive organs facing the ground, located

underneath the ~rtcbral column. which in turn
houses the nervous system. In cootrost. Insects
have digestive systems in an inverted position
facing the sky. with the spinal cord located under
neath the body. To address these difforoncos in orl
eniation. Saint-Hilair(> makes use or a 1orsion opcr
ation, a tool from prolective geometry, to explain
how insects have their belly upwnrd and their back
downward. Semper uses a similar vectorlal orga.
nitation in Der Stll, compbring the compositaon
of boological Vl'ttors in various species with the
vector of 11Tav11y in arch11ecturo.
ln terms of validating hos reuarch, however,
SamtHila1~ comm111ed an ~rror when he went so
far as 1opos11 that each animal lives either Inside

or outside 11s spine - effec11vely assimllot ln& all
carapaces from Insects 10 Venebr.. ta. Eventually.
he would even compare the legs of shcllfishc~
to the ribs of Venebrata . It was no difficult task
for Cuvier to take advantage of this hypothesis
on order to inv;ihdate the whole of SantHllairo's
categorization. As a result, Cuvier appeared the
winner of a crucial Serles of lughlypublic1ied
debates that took placebetw~n tho two biologists
in 1830, t the very time that Semper wa~ study.

ing in Paris." Cuvier retainod the victory mantle
until very recently. when !ho scientific publication
Nature published an aniclc by E.M. de Robertls
nd Y. Sossai which used contemporary biolo9i

cal studies to assert he validity of SatntHilairc's
original lheory." Modern biology has found genes
that code the orientation of organs backward and
forward. as well as downward and upward,It As
8
result, ht most plausible hypothesis now Is

hat indeed Ins
d
ecti. an Venebrat had a common
ancutor from winch they b1furcatd
~
some S40
million year~ ago.
GEOMETRY
To return ott..111
.
nteen1h century and the geomet
rte concepts in
b
.
use
Y S~1ntHila1re, 11 should b.
Understood th 31
acrucoal concept for Sain1Hila1re
was 1nvers1on Wht h
.n P<OJect.ive
.
'
c $also
,. a key translormai1on
800111
1
etry.
Through invc~ion. the
c osed quadra 1181
'
as
used
n pro1cct1ve geumttry'
can be taken as a
. S
conceptu~I equivalent of an ant
111 aintHilaire's
work, Insofar as an lnscc1 ;, a
'I 'I:,
r,.,V
"'
Lt!
bl
Jngles have J center of homology. thn they have

also an ~x" of homoloHY This 1hco1em would
brcome a torntrstone of pro1ect1ve geometry
AbSlldct clements such a5 1he center' and
the
a~"
of homology' were c... tatnly the kind of
m3roollnt> Sa1ntlltl31re
looking fo1 1n thl'
Wd>
con11nua11on ot the work of h" teach Rene

nos~ed (or JO\'t'ned) vertebrate Thi> conceptual
\u\I I tauy" lust Huay founded crystallogr.;phy
a common ground between
- another sc1rnt1hc domain not at all foreign "'
Geolh"y Saint H1la1re and Gaspard Monge." the
the h1>tor\ o! an especially "'hen one con>1der>
equahty estabhshes
red1scovererof pro1ec11ve geometry
11\a1 t htlF)'tal '-"3> to become the paradigm of the
Monge. who taught at the Ecol de Mrrwres

3nd wa closely connetted. an t794 to the Ecole
Normale. whert the young Geoffrey Saint Hilaire
had arrrved. believed 1n
....:;
"
de~.r1p11ve
geometry\
~b>tt.lltt
.1 Cl)">IJI
"Kun,twollen
lu~t
a:.. having dropped
Rene tu.i Huy tound that tne brokn
pine' >howed plans n11er.ec11ng at a con>tant

dnlllC'. Sd1nt H1ldne wa, looking for the equ1va
pl3n~.
ab1hty to bernme a unl\ersal language Monge
\1n1
was also one of th 01 gani2er "'tho Clenllht pot
wh1(h v.ir1ous dnimals could be ~id to belong to
!Ion ot
Napokon~
C:gypt
e~prdmon.
,11,d would
the tnvart3nt lement. on the basis of
the ,,,mo tormc pnm111vo." 1n the langugc ol
latr1 berom~ the Chau <ll the lnlllUI d'l::gyptt> It
lu't Hu ,1y, or to the same "urmouv." using the Ian
1s hkdy thdt Mong<' and Sa1111 1111,111\' h.icl pl,nty
UJI!' of Cu11frteJ Semper It ts on th b;i>1s of

~bit
ol opponuritty t<> di>CUH 1ht1r >h.ired 1111,r.1>
th un14uc plane tha1 01w woulcl be
wutun a year of 1h~1r overlap ,11 tlw t:rnle No1"
er .i11 .iny V<'Ct<>S by v,iryu1g the p1 oportions of
to gen
"utllcr Wl11le Scm1>er h1n1> at 11011ons of vary
m,1le. Sa10tH1la1re WdS 10 foi mubh' h1> 1>rrnclple
.in
uf "unity of plan."
Interestingly. Monge dev.lo1>cd pro10<11vt
1ng proporrlon\ 1n h1:. ch.1ptu on :.tcrootomy. he
geome1ry by \\aching st<rtotumy. lh 1n11rcst 1n

arch1tec1ure went
I.Ir as t(\ lcdd to a prnpo>.il
ll'm,1111' lar from con:.1det 1ng wch 11011ons >the

ptupurt111n> which ,1pptd1 to bl' con.i.1nt m pro1ec
uw trM1'forma11011
for an elhpso1dJI vauh - th~ 101nh of which were

Toei IO bonorn
...
hn('> of curvatu1c that adm11 two hmtt pu1111\,

I
....
gf11nie1ry "a~ 111
Thi htc >I prowc11w
two among many other hyb ul ((1ncepi- ,h.Jrl'd
<>p.;.I by n>thl'lnJ11c111> dnd U>od bv tcchn1t1an,
between l>1ology .-ind l!tomell)" Th"r" ., .1ho
wtnll.' simply 1g11orcd by mn>1 f>coplc rn Nh1
grNt ovt'rlap to Sa1ntll1\J11 .-., u'e of thl' tl'rm>

/,I<
PROJECTIVE GEO M ETRY
called umb1hc> 17 lnvN\tOn Jnd umb1lll lll' only
homology and "pldnl' of compo"11nn. both nf

which are s1gn1hcant .ndW\11 deh11e1I ttr m' w1th11\
proll't llW gtoml'l<Y ~Aini lhl~m d1dn"1 USl' !ht'
wo1d "homologut" .1> "VJl!u.' \)nonym to ,rna
loguc. nor did h U>l' "pl.li\ a V.IHUl' oynony111
ro orsan1za1ton .,. lie inuwlcd tht "''"'' to
1.11ry thetr full ma1hem.111CJI m1Jnint1' """ J'
tho> ucd by 1tw m~1twm.111n.1n Gir.1rd Ile'"
gu<'' HI 1618. ro formu lJIC tlw 1he111<m "11lWl111
h1IJ, t'10WCllH
<If J' onh
.I
~comNry
bo dr\el
"tommonly thought
\l"t Of dt JN1ng
tool~.
when 11 h,h
h1,1u11c illy 1m.11lved mud wider prdrll<.ll 11od1s
"'
'.,
..
.
I gside srone<:ut
h<ln 11mply represtnrauon. A on
t
rspe<tivc wa5 only one
ring and gnomonics, pe
1
held of development for projective geomerry. n
l protect ive gt0metry
mathematics for examp e.
.
had a much deeper significance than as 1u1t '."e
1 I d to the structuring
codification of a pracuce.
I t
ot geometry inrocategories - 1sometry, similitude,
. . ...
d
ropolo""
pro1ecr10
~
.,. Th problem is thar
. tht
h1st01"!' ol projeoctive geomerry is rarher shpp.ery.
Ir d.wloped independenrly in the three pracucal
filds menrion~ earher - stereoromy. perspcc
uve and gnamonics - unril Desargues invented
general theorems 10 be used commonly by all of
the fields. Unfortunately Desargues's rheorems
were widely ignored wi lh the cxceprion of a tew
emmen1 readers."
Although many reasons can be invoked to

plain the rcjl!'Clion of Desargues's work, 1t is a\
least worthwhile to mention three of rhem and
rheir 1mphcarions in various fields. In mrhemat
1cs, Denrgues's 1hcory of proiccrive geometry
appeared at the same rime as Descartes' theory of
analytic geometry, which was to give way to differential geomc1ry. At thP 11me, 1he parh was already
O!>n for a progressive ecl ipse of geomerry as a
whol. to the advanuge of algebra. By the end of
the n1ne1ecnrh <ntury, uclufs /~m1nu.. which
for rwo thousand years had been rhe mo~I of alt
ra11onal discoune, ceased lo be a teaching refer
ence. In strreotomy. Ocsargues had the same tY?e
of trouble that Phihbert de i'Orme had already
P<rttnced. and that Monge would face m his
" --le-de Polyiechnique, and ~en

comet ry at rhe"'"'
:ually. the consequences of pro1ective geometry
drawn not .,, F'rance. but In Ger man
~reW be
Staudt Plucker, and F'eli x Klei n.

countrie5, by von
me Semper wa studying math emat

S1ill, at t he ti
. 1 e geomet ry was considered t o be pn

ics pro1ect v
' . r ch What was Semper's underatand ing
mart
1y ren .
o geo111eI r ?And what could he have learned from
Frederick Gauss? lt'i a difficult question beca use
d'Anet. but in the vocabulary of

JIJ l'rltlcfi
a trunk, with knot.a, brand!., .~
"4ir.
.a.... tbfa11er
~
1 ~.,.tef
convex polygons, Stm per could have t . ""-
cation. fn1tead of rtstrlctlno hi
they are only a very particular
q~dlti.
wholevarletyofconcaveandcrosMdfi
~~
over, Semper would haverealllfd !hat:::::

polygon& cou Id have b11ernting nro
/ftthit " -
Hu . likt the alignment of the Inter~
~:
Gacss was known for Jceeping secret most of his

work until he was sure of all its conclusions. In
opposed 1ldes evidenced in Patcal'i ..... of~

"'""'Clll!lf'
the hexagon.11 Geometry taket on a
fact, he rarely made public t he methods he used to
ance when one doesn't focus IO!ely OJI Ilse r.
discover his theorems. His demonstration were

so deprived of all traces of method that they dis-
chapten of Euclid's e1~u and inJttad ~ .
played only their final structure. Gauss would

explain: w hen a beautiful building is achieved.
metrician of the flnt century e1tablllhtd lhtfitil

projective properties upon the baae of Tha!tti
one musr not see what has been the scaflolding.ll
theorem.17 Moreover, it ls pouJ.ble r:o dedua a11

the fundamental theorems of projective~
Such a sentence is so close to Semper's conception

of arc.httecture that ii quite probably was inspired
new~
it to combine with ~nelaus'1 tht0rtm. Thil
1111: .
Pappus, Ceva, Desarguu, Pascal. and Briancho.. .
by Gauss.
Ian Stewart presents Causs very well by stat
on the basis of this single theorm of Mentlau. :
mg that he was at rhe same time t he first of
Semper'sl Piiing up topology on top ofc!IAicil ;;
rbe modern mathematicians and the last of the

classical ones. "Hi s methods were modem, while
geometry, are we not mlslng IM intmnedi11{:
his choice oi problems was classic." Most proba

bly, Semper inherited from Gauss t his classical
approach ro geomeiry that read Euclid's /emenu.
as a text oriented towards a Platonic theory of poly
hedrons (as it 1s espoused in the Timid. Semper's
Prole9omimo begins w1th images of t he sphere and

lhe polyhedron as they appear in crystals. This
polygonal concepuon :shows up again in Semper's
text on stereotcmy. where blocks of st one are
conceived as polyhedrons. Chapter 16 6, "Gestalt
'Iles Unterbaues als Canzes betrachtet," reproduces this " kristallinisch~urhythmisch" concept ion: auf den Kre1S, das Polygon,das Rechteck. 32
Geometrically speaking, Gottfried Sem per is an
un~s~al case, his conception of textiles clearly

am'.c1pa1es topology and knot theory, and It
revives the main geometrical concept of Anax1mandre the
'
apeiron. But his conception of
srereotomy 15 enfrel
1 Y based upon t he transposi
hon of wood 'ect . .
on1cs into stone, and as su ch
.
11
remains ancho ed
of
.
r in a neo-classical reading
Euclid. Semper mis d h .
se t e intermediary level
between the I
w .
po ygons of Euclid and che knots of
1lham Thomson 34 H
1" would have d' ad Seinptr read Desargues
15
cl
covered a language of geometry
ose to Philibert de l'O
.
guage
nne s archit ect ura l Ian
- not only in its k n
and no
.
ot s and stone interlaci ng,
t only in the
. .
pro1ttt ve cone of t he Trompe
Are we not toda.y in a 1ituation llmilar ro -: .

I
step? Are we not putting 1hing1 100 simply wtn .

we oppose the cube to the blob? 11 there no oth
solut ion than the modernist arid and tl'.t tonltl!-
porary free forml Can't wt find opplc rtpll6 .
tiesI To be sure, mol'jlhing softwan enabl.- "'IO .
link anything with any othtr thlni- But lsn'tltO. :
pat h that matters/ By simply rejcctingpoly1onsto '. ,
promote NIJ Res. don't we missa seomettyforwt
projects, a projective geometry'/
MlNNC AU TONO MY I 91
NOTES
~... ...- ~geo; &ron - (176!H832) CuV1er's theones were based uPOn the r)Oloon thlst func.
t<l<' oeter"'snes btOlogteat form As SIJCh. lorm was deemed immutable w1lt\rn the restraints ol
u....l~.I' '"''" ttHs ~umptoon. Cu""'' Ol!.ieloped a system of class1f\catoon that ass'ljned au
23 In mathematJcs. an umbilic rs a IJOUl\ on a cur""' surface wtier& ell norm<.l sections have tile
same curvature. In biology, &o umbil1c S the CorYl8Ction between the embryo and the mot he<
fllrough the umbllrcat cord.
5(Je(,.,.,i .,.ma1 to or>e of tour ost111ct cateoones and denied the exts1ence of evolulron
w""""' A~..a"""' Y<Yl Humbold. Friedrich - (1~1869) A Germal"l naturallsl Von Humbold
..asa ~"'tile f.,id of B1ogeograplly. His exhauslYl! account of the strlJCture of the then
L...,... ""'.erse. Ko<tnOS. was ..1"'1ly translated and mftuential.
J Gec"or Sa.nr Ha~a1te. Etieme - (177?- 1844) French naturalist who devetoped the pnnciple
eamposillon.' This theory proposed that the analormcal structure ol all
01
1 "'
_,...,.c.._, be trace<! t>ack to a single form from which all other organic form is de11ved.
..,rt
t 4 The mathtunahcat defirotion of homology is. If betweon hO figures. compOSect ol p01nls na

sfraig111 lines, one can ~tabl<sh such a <:Ol'respondenco thlll cOUples of assoc1"1ed points
are localed on convergil"(l l'IH, those figures hawe a center ol JlOmology v<he< the Imes
converge. If the corresponOence such that CouP/eS of associated lines ir1tersect 1n points
localed on t h e -h
..to another.
"'II*""
Sleeol<YT'I oefi...d as the cutting of SOiids. m particular slOfll!

$ df lo.me Ptl1l1bert -(1512-1570! Court architect for Henry II, de L'Orme was considered one
ct t-e fathers of French Neo-Ctass1cal architecture. He 1s known for. among other things. lhe
~n1ot11V10Ve11t1\IC ~onecutt.,,,-., eM
25 Rene Just Hauy taugtit p'lystCS at the Ea>te Normal at the same t ime Monge tOUQht geomQlry.
211 Gnomonocs pertains to the mea&urmg ol tim<! bit means olthe projection cl the sun - mosi
commonly using a Stnliat
27 lhe first of whom was 81a1Se Pascal. Indeed. i>ascal $hCMJld be g i - the n~ht to share the
pattUmtt of ~tive geometry
vaulting tt1ci'ln1ques. wh~h madQ 1..1:.e of uniQve
~'"''''""'"''$.
this line os I/le axis of the homology which transforms one flgure
211 .llrgos Battrusaitts. "tes perspect...., depraves." Part t.
O...rg...s. Girard - (1591-1661) French mathematician who de""loped lhe foundetoons of

""'""'"' geornelry. His work. "'hlCh depended hea..ly on a Ur\!Qlle mathematical symbolism
nd clemed from bOtat>rcal notul1on. was not widely accepted by other rnethematlClellS unhl
211 Alter Monge'scocllfocat10n of descrlj)live Q1101119try m 1196. in 1810 B" anchon anno<ce<l h<s
astors/llng pr111C1ple of duellty According to Brianchon's ptV>C1ple. an theorems of geometry
""word
a $1\adcJw" theO<om. whoc:h earl i>& doductd by s""'*1 echatlgong

po1n1
"'"h stra>QM line' .and the word "1t1t8'secl" wolh "being aligned. In 1822 f'Oncelet pubhshed
'lrart~ cles propn4tb prored._ des noi.m..: so 1t 1s no .wrpriSe that Saln;e.HHa~ lhouQht of
bdogy in terms of pro)OCl1ve geometry. one of the hot topics amorq the """'nl!foc community
~~ steOl"d half at 1t'e mneteenth century.
Pl>.Jl!l" "olie has already hinted at the "Sempeflanness ol Pt>ihl)er! de rO<me"s BTCIUtechJt"e
"'"" brJl<arn bOoli. ~I/lures de la Pensee Uit><trur:/JvP In a way. this text ts a rec!l)rocal essaf
atthettrna
"' ,,.. "rm-di! rOrmeness' of Der Sfl/.
.on S1audt. Karl George Clvlstian-(1189-1!1S7). Plulw, JulKJS- (1801- 1868). Klien, Fehx -
Att..bu1ed ~o i>hllillerl de !'Orme by Anthony Blunt
30
?r.,,.ct1,. Geometry is the brarch of mathematics that deals with the retahon$h1pg between
geonetnc fogureo and the 1magu, or m8j)pl!l(IS, ol tllem that result from projection. Common
ecarnples al pr0jechons are the shadows cast by opaque objects, motion pictures, and mllj)S
"'the EB<1h s 5'1rface.
!1 81ogf31)hy of Carl f'1edrch Gauss by ian Staw11~ 1n le A.lIMmo.licoMS (8e<l"1. 1996).
10 Gott1roea Semper. 'Uber die ble1&<nen Schleudergeschosse def Allen und zweckmlrUoO<>
Gntanung <!or Wllrfllorper im Allgeme1n', (Frankfurt 1859).

ll Ho: to be achoewd by methemat1c1aos until 187:1.
U COIOr '"" ""1ace (which es Arostolle remarked are two closely related wor<ls. chrora and
'''"''NII beat ...t ...... to. pre Euclo<lean polychrome geometry where sunaces could not been
t'1Gughi ol rthout color.
(1849-1925) - German mathemlhc1tJ.ns whe contributed signil"icantly lo tilt <1evelopm<0nt and

solicli f1C&\lonol prOjtetl\-e gecrnetry amorQ othe< branches of mal"8mat1cs and physic
32 'from the Circle. the polYOQll. the rectangle'
33 A-.mar.ire - (610 OC~ BC> Gnil>k p>lilosophe! who do..eloped a systematic pn;loooQhicol
.iow of the~ bftSedon lheconceptol tl\e apenon. w"1ch wo<the unified. and undif
ferenliable state .,"'1llch all thol"(lt owsled before they were separated into discern1ble entit 31 Will-. Thcmsorl. Loni l<el..., (\824-t!l07)prQPO>' scient1sls to betie'"'
that ttwy could undo<stend the chemical elements by sludyil"(I di1ferenl cypes of ~rots and
thus t/liS led to a completely new f.eld of stuoy in math. A knot IS defined a closed
t3 ThK chrOr"IO&ogy of tto,c ~nt and rcleton of GeoHtoy Saint-Helaire and Cuvl-1" com~
,.o.monslon6! .,..,.., tl\ol ~ nol ltrtersect itself
from te G.rtllder. He<~. rhior1<s ., histOlfe en b/O{Ofl!O (Vrin. 1968).
Pr.,.ecti.e geometry-er.; t'l)lltly connecttO ro bloloQv since lhe very begwirnno of its
115
1~ "lleocrll>IKI\ do drkJJ< s1roes d" Atnenque. sous l8S nomo d'ateles arachnc>od-0 el d"at.ies marginatus."
1t.or1.tal..,,. At tile'""' Oesarguts,.as wnhng. boology we ncnl-11lly botany, hence Ille
-"1 net..,.. of tile wms projeci1ve geometry borlOW from nalural sclfnce. At the !ime
15 l e G.ptlPr. Herve. rhtor1<s el b1storre en blOiogie (Vr<n, 19e8).

11 Ururert ilOd Meoyfand" concept was that the layOut of the org""5 of a Cep1>a10j>Od was
"""'*'""to th&t of a Vertebra la. tnan~s to a fokllog (lp&fation alr..,dy auggested by the
.,)!Tlologi al the " ord "'(Aphalo-pode."
11 '" 1""' -e<y tome Sempe< was mak">o v1&1t s at tile Jardins de.s Pllllt/es "'"''"studying archltec
hxt in Pan$.
11 'A"""""" j)jan for clOrso-ventral patterll!OQ 1n B1l1tena. Natur~.

11
tllOO,
round -!rem geomeuy towards biology.
35
E- rrtte SU1p<sll"(ll1- those propertoa are kept wtariant wnen the pol~s ~.appen to be
crossed. or degene<afod. ~ralion ls onothor key concept ot pro1ect11'8 goomatry that
alsO Nippens to De central to Geoffroy Saint-Hilalfl"s wort<.
'SJ MenelauS ll$O iflltialed
"*'"'I<: tri9<>n<Jmelry. which would provide one ofttie Euclidean
_..ot nonEuchdoan geometry.
lGurade<. Hcve, Geo/fray Sa.nlHlwe, Berlm, !!l98.
:ID Soeclfically. an .,_s1on of pQWe< "k" . relative to a Pol O, ls U>e traMtormat'" which
""""areo io Point M the Point Mt sucn as OM' OMt '" k. One mmed1attly that
1
E..,.y ScnQle IJOlnl rJf the plar.e has an in11er.e. e.;ept from the pole 0 wr.>6
tr\wtf'5.f- t5o 'ef6Ct9d at rnfin1t~
2 ~t.ll 1$ the
mverse of M. 1hen rec1prooafly, M is tl>e 1n-se of Ml
3
of ds rediscove<Y by Morqe. f'l>ncelet and Bt1onchon. blo!ogy begon IOCt:sing on the animal
re.go But this time. the direction of the bDrlOWlng seems to ha"' gone maltlly the ether we:y
Tti.e c.r-c"' #rth tef'lter O and radius Vk remains nwarant
Ariy lwo P<>ltlls and lhe1r nvorse constitute a quadrangle mlC(ibed"" a cw-cte.
~ Tll,. t1r~
cut lhe 1rwar1ent e1tcle at roght angle

0 1
'- Q!Jodr.la1er~ of the quad< angle has""" exte<nal
\tie center ol tile
inwartent ttt'de
1
r,_. ""'"r """rrial vertex gees on the cros1111g of the two other oppouO odd
wt,.,, Mcorne. .,1o the 1nvtr""'t circle while N ~0"'6 remar11ng outside.
....,le""
2t ...__
;-GullO'<I, Comte Do Peluoe - (17416-1811!) French matl\em811Claft who dewfCl>e<f tt>e ~
doter""'"" 4<1d analyt1co! oeometry. Soll> o1 wlllch OON form tiranclles ol proiectiwe geometry.
22 JoelSotiaf
""tch, EJ>ure <f'rchrtocr1Xe (8.,khaUler. 111116~
BERNARD CACHE AND PATRICK BEAUCE

rran,lmonhrrn$pani>hbv IORCt Z... l'Al"
The dt> /'Orme PaJJifwn 1;, tlie product of a deAign and fabrication Atudio
raught by Be ma rd Coche and Pat rick Beauce al the L'Licola Superior

d'A1q111tecnoa oj thr Unrverl>itar Irt.ti!rnacional de Catalunya in Barcelona,
Spa111 J'!w uudio wM
011
ex1rcue in ut1lizmg the b<u.ic opl'ratio11.1; of a
mm1mcafly controlled machme for full-.1><0/p production of an architectural

oh1e1 I
CJA
WPll a.i. an attempt ro pUAh rlu.> lim1u. of rl1P new .t.uitP of M1ftware
a11d mm l111wry rhat l1a11i> bl'come increOAmgly available to architecu.
, ~
..
:;r
""'
1.;
:.
GEORGE WAGNER
..
THE PRE,MSE
BETWEEN THE WAIST ANOlHE FLOOR
t 3
BVILDlllGS. TEXTILES, BODIES
.. .
t!" _. r>ost !."'"hst

c
I
I d,((j Y(''~ll\11 r,I It S
b1 tt,.., car
~sci>~.,, c ttw bu cl1no~ <>ice v<-<l ,~~I' an:i .. ,s~n
tl~lolp SJrfart. ""'hllas '1~1{!() tr e p;;I~ C tlier re.;il1t1"''> ae un~\!l:''l llltl bJn"'J A1ft>1n, b<,I nd
d1rJ 01 otfe1 a ~.ol1st1c mcriel fo1 II< hit"~.
one<> ""~I the ~'l(lin\ ot ~rct ! ct or~ tfirout.h t I le,
I -:ii :.1:a1 a' vut a1> de:"ll:'d
'fl('
coniple
ec l"a l"..,orildtion L t d d If
x "" 0 d1scu1,.,,,e 111 the re>! t
i,
u
i o prr.ne t~1t was nt>ces~afllv
,
il l!Jr1 01 the pJrt:, Wh 11, 5
.
11 n nee1iac.y of lnP >natiul 1 .,, bnf
c
c P1>1J)f' s "'1 Ii 'I "'1P1c>tJ lh;, perc~., .. irtl
111
c <J11 1"e: h dd.,c fact ()( t
"'
Advl1 I ()l)S ic...;ogn11cd of th~d If
s, ~ uctur,,. u1 Tticl'Mc1<0/Cla<t<1ing(tif!8)
erP.nccs betweE<n
d
1WO dS "'11119 thr .irC"IPI al procp;~
.dlP"IS df{' WdfltJ anrJ J.vablt>
8 I '
.
'
I.I >Ou ~11nr1ol butl<J a hO(JSe 1 / 1
Ov o ca P"I~. IJoth tll~ carp<!t 01' //le
I .oor :in<lthe tape$/rion tnr> wall
'
rcqwrPd slruc /ura/ /1arr1elon 'a h
ti >1s ''"m< s tnearctt1tf'cf.s 'e
di
o. t r>mtnltir>cr.rrectplare To1nvu11
. 'h"
.
Wll
ll
.JS
'oos' reading of S1:-moe1 01d "Of dtl..n-pt to imt;Jc n

.mo buoldng structure ot s 1)()1.
a eh ca erat1or.1>t<wet'n ""II
ao-.menl for artocu at or
co.,~s:no
'h
1)1 an.._ oc:JI cvct esra!1on <>'pa:!.

del~11 For h11~ the d1>ta I u ice lst-11. the cove1ng, wh ch h<> call')C :h" ') J,.st .irc-'1"f.c..i1al
.
i is not a p1J1111 of cor1neclior 0' mOE:cll0n bu: a CJllt1~< .,.., e"""' rnc
He .-.a.. teci to t'lCO'lle 'hes 11
il
il'l
i,
(6
ma-;, than a JOll'\f
,,
The ultimate stratecw for m.tnipvl itin th

f
de~cr ibed by Loo~
'
IJ is Sur ace and the spac to which it
~1ves life. is
~:.I the art ist, the arc h1/12cf, first senses the .:{feel that ht' 'fitonds lo real1~c HI! senses /l>t> rffct
.at ne wishes toexl!rl 11pon thf >pre tat or 1'11!SP effeels arP producc-o by bo!l1 mdlL11.il ~nd 1~~ form
0 f /he SPilCC
Loos offers a way of cnnre1,,r.g arctik'Clu't.' unburde"E' J from rP~po $1l.J1!1t1c~ of P.lh{'.al l:P"'~
~on. f1orn lh" be!
el wat the rhcl<>'11.JI ,1r11c.i.alKJO of tl'e mate al Iacts ol tiu lc.l "11 GOmehow lie
lt'le tero tor11>f hone\ty or tuh. The cdebrated carer of Srhonkel\ AltPs MusPurn poi
ec I!> onto the sui face a desc1 pt1oro of tw hu lhng'!> 1nltrnal Pdrls and l\,tdp<1$e~ them against
(he t1g<1re ot the monolith<. w 11ole l.oos sug()i;>~ts l ~ ne1tht>r thi;> re~pnn".t' lit~ nor ne duty nt
thl MCh111;:ct to bn nu to the w1 f.i<.c trw C'ltlnffn ts that 1es1de p11v.itely w1t11111 th., deep sodce
within
of wr.h1tccture.
Schinkel's lur id re11~on1nll un<J tht- cl111 1t y W'lh wt11ch he hyb11d1z<'d owlrMo moiphOIOl)CS
rn:<.:1 1rnpeded but only 11e11Jhlenrtl fl~ skill~ in St<;llQUtaphy .snd crt-.1t .,,., rf!P<.t I h(~1; we tl his
othN <1vocat1ons His 1c>lllfl roo1n at C:harto1tl:'nhof (1826 J:lJ us<-C1 strf't~'" d ancl h11n(j fahr.c to
rfiviw J pllfel1 local SIJ8( r,.,sp..r\l"d 1rcrn tt1rarch11ectur~I moto,e:-.ot tt.e bu ld1np 1h<\t ..n<:aPO
, llsalM<Sl"he 1c ,,,.,.,.,, onv, k < 11 rt;11lm uoyoi:tJ tl1e .olla. tu lt'le ~UIJQ" hor, ol a l~o111a'1 CO"Pi!:J'
1
!Ent It ~the ,.,o!a:Pd Horio"' mono lhC and o'l<J..i gen: d~cvration. 1in1k1:1 lllt'l arJ ylt<. .trod h~,:o11
c 111{) 1t.coryof ')ernp1:r

DOMESTIC SPACE ANO INTROSPEC1 ION OETACH0 ANO SUSPlNOEO
Ttip CJ<-ldlhf'd iev~fll:!> of ~tt>1nkC'I'< t"r1\ rv<''l' ~llO'W't mo .t <l""'i th wit- lhr1 to;~t1h~ Cdn u :o
pllly
l ite ~pcond 11,1:f cif tho tw/11 tth c~~t.,,v p1ntlU<.1ng u fl'""'Y 11;1 ll w1lotv in ,1 SfldlP. wtth
111
cintini iuu~ surfui:e>. crn1111>nllv ~po l Ill ,1ncJ 111w,irdl; focuscd .i ~PM l1J1 11w1 tal 1!'f1l'C t 11)1'1 .ind
111
bodily w~pensc.n '" t h1: 1'J70~. Vo1111P pulil 1~hPd o numbN i.~nled wnm' ''" uJit uf ots 111ontl1l y
((!Y le ... ot <J'anior0us dvnwr,t1c1!y Th~ I l;'JJU~ (If\" l1kr 1io.. tlo11 ~. Jlld c 11~111 .tll I h pu~>ll1ht~ ,,1 "'
,,f
r.ndosed bod it ~v~pens o" !rum 1m.. a11d 01 .. cc Tiit' <.lluuicN of'"'''"' rC<'nl5 1~
riv!h111p
l1e
th~ ll"lil'lt<S 01 sensibiht "'~ rlfrv1a1" ') tlo10~!JI opUlar cullue. 1.r, 1, qn u I!>, OI II' l)tt:er pag1;~ .,.
V0<11.e Tt.oy pres~t lhu r oc t ,panls 11 1so1.1hon hon tit<: v.ortd
l"'"' di.:c::>rator B t, Ba r1.-.1n r>rod ,(ed CO'T'JMahl; (Jo::acl 1 J 1r.te'ICS ..,, h~ cl,ers n llb\
~ep.~iat '" frc.m 1h< ""''cl w.1., tl""'l', .;01nn od t~ ti e~c- ~pJr~i.rt., u 1 The
,..,, Thp t' l?IT e"I o!
10-n
THE SCIENCE OF ULTRASUEDE
HYmM' Mair &ltd

UllrMK~
....
..
.~'
~I
1
11 ._. '9'."'s a-d 10~ :tee oea oi the self as a1 1nd1v1dudted 1rcrerne1f of tre :>dom !<>Ok M N:n
fo rn~ ldent.:, ,,as re'"-e1 and cullrvated 1\ernar11 ;rrough psyciolog1c al ntP1 PH:tat1on, ~e,.,~,
;ioiit<c~. ;,l:era .e rf;'linions. crugs and se f hep regimes This rew ~<)ff ;ir,pf:ared riutwartil~ a,
a vis tiie ar11'acl .n :~e ::-~o c a1c,cJpe. a1ailable to rep,esent affil a\ons anrJ '>'fnipath1b Sa11c.
, al trPedJ'l bee""'" a po;r.t 0 1 everat1e hat allow?tl an 1ndl' dual to P")Je<.t 1del't1ly as a <1~m0 n.
~t at1~n \.1'
""
pc 1 ::ai a gn!""w ....

wc-sa 1 d a-d sit. fiour ngo,r bcces 1nteractoon aP{l re~ponsP to the nl1y"ca
PMfue
~nd soc at "'r>r d

posture ;.me
~ anct'ler dercons:rat1on of r"d1vdual alignment ' Jus! as furniture d1rra1e<
S' 'u~ues propt1et1. 1nd1V1duals can
deterrnine theu oosti..rt- as a reaction to tlP
a readv fiijved. ergot'O"" call 1 fixed e~pectat1on of bt.1 d1Q and furn lure fhese a'e 1ne b~Hles
of adolesce~l Cent 1, a"<l ndeper.de~ce oetwee~ pare~t and ch d and !tie battles move li<-el)
'mrn the IJl;bl;r :o tl e pu~a:e ream Po~ture is portable. figu1ed as much
by the real forms tt>af
ar>t1CPJ1e o.;r '"e1ac on as :;1 the aostract ones - the at11ludes and aur<Js we wish to pro1Kt
[vt>r as nd . dLal ide~t ty was be1~g cc1lr valed n varrous strains of non.conform srn. arch1
1et ~.ua spaces ~.ere o'tcn be<:o'1'l1n9 ~10"? :;iel'erahzed ar.d neutral Read1made "snells: Eero
Saaronf;'n ca ed ti'>eM
Usuar1, tN~poc/emof mter 01 design rs /lmrted. It begms wdh1n the exrstmq frameworh of an of(tce.
ctN!tlment, or read, ffiil<Je nous> The st:e//s of //Iese IMng and workmg units havf> lo anstter the
n~erJs of ~u~a,eos of tiousanos of peopff! The; na;e become completely anonymous shells. And
lhitnf Goa Ins :s so 1 1t 1s wt:en lhi'y s/1a1 from s/flCi mpcrsonaftl/ - anrJ try lo anl1c1pate some p~r
sorra1 .d,~rnnas b, mas~voovcmg some krndo{fancy door mouldng or man/elp1ece Iha/ lhese
;1nc; ana wol"fl!J sr.e.-is :or a mass ma1~el far/ both pract1c1Jlly and f.'sthe/1cally. Likewise. furniture
tas mo1eo nto<1 mass producl1cn era. and so to a greater or lesser degree. have orhet items of
:ne Nenor Tilt rt>suJ: rs tna: the rrwor equipment or furn1sh1ngs o/ /he ,n/ertor have an impersonal
01ara< le'. .Os .. .iti tre archi/ec/i.;ra1 shells, 1/ rs essential. m fact. that a mass produced item must
'1a1c tl><s n!pe<sOfliJ/ character.'

T1'e 1mpersonalrty tnal Saanncn espouses
wds often rendered by monolithrc and monochro
matrc S1Jrfaces Of course. the concrete of
Ire
sne\ was one Te~tiles were others Texh\es are a
provocat"e ageo\ of 1ntlust11al progress 1n <I co~
s... n e1 culturt! Their presence nearly always ind

cotes the tactile 1ntervenhon of the human uody
Un Ke most corr'lm<.-rc1al products, they are not

discrete but necessarily contmuous. aMnymous
1n their ub1Qu1ty
A~ an element !I at could :>rovde spati.i.1 conr1nu1ty and render \he inconsequential even al'ld
< ootmuou~ carpet ng wds 'ova ed only by paint Carpet could extend through the building. and like
tr.e "udzu nP ,.., :he Swtne<r rorest neutral,ze and subsume everylh ng in 1ts path Carpet. con
crete. gypsum bodrc a'l<l Pdint vvere all that were ~ceded to rel'lder physical the desired anonymity
ULT RASUEDE ANO DENI M
Si'1Ce the tecl-ino'OO]iCa: advances o' the mid nineteenth century, modern material& have been
seen as s gn1fic.ant representalrons of c1.o1tural prO{jress and have frequently been engaged to
ser,p nat.ona 1st er ds The hsto,,an Je!lrey Schnapp. 1n his e~say "The Fabric of Modern Tir11es"
has chronre ed lhe way .n wh C'> lhe Futurists in Italy ce:ebrated rayon 1n songs and poems. 1nfus
irg lhe fatlrrc wth powes that allowed rt to become a site for elaborating a comple~ physics and
" 1et;iphysrcs of so.ere gnty"' Mar1nelt1 wrote poems entitled 'The Poem o f the Milk Dress"' ~nd
"Th~ Poem of :he V <cose
Towe Th e Fasc1st s built a new town m Ft1ul1 around a rayon mill and
"
named 1tTor1v1scose Spea~.ng 1ienerally. Schnapp stales tha1
' ........
modern m111t:r1ls efl:erge .is 11 J/Onom ous rorces

'
wrI 111n an ovf.'tarchtnq modcrflts/ prosopoporra
Be:yond evtn their symbol~ rmpert /h 11 ...,,_
Y .,.,._omc proragonists and heroes endowed with po11crs of

il(/MCy dnd mord illOJe caf)dblt>Of shar1ng 1nth
e P<Jr/1cul1J1 ano un11111rsal a/tributes of humc1n sub
JI!<. ts dnd/or se,,rng as /JIOSthet ice; tensions of humanity .,
~~'lapp s Ob~r.atto"" aro: Pdnrcularly relevant when applied to North America 1n the decade~
o owing the Se1:ono Wor d War an e A
k d
h
T
'
mar c by Movat1ons '" manulactunno a<ld rapid socal
c ar19e elle;, ~am" the tannrble rnte f

...,
' ace amono industrial progre~s. po11t1c1111d 1dC'a5 ubl'vt
" ;'
!'11 I >1\
.
t
I lhl p11!,l1
,l( l
,t\t.11
t..''l-''fhf
.incl c:
'>lll.J\
111 "h111 h \I ' I.
i s 111n I
.!d\11 ti""'ll , \I'd 'nt.'1
,
' ' lll.lss Illa
t.111 t"t>r
th.ii,:, "ll1l' "' 1.w1 s 'l'h I An
lh1
in~i h
11 ' 1\ 11
lie>e
11 I
<lt1111~ssrvpfy ., arLf!ptJ iaor.teer
:.is,,
a
11i,nJoPs\nocvn!'
\V s 1
\\p11n1d~ I,.. "-1. dl'Pllll
.
, , .1 ll!)hl~ "'"tit> le\ I"'
I''P\111111,. nthP''1G\-;
1r, ,, ,.
t
WI I l'oput
~t'\lc' ll't>d111m
d verll-' '
d~
ilncl the t I11011 tndushy

.l!'lt>
'
cv. OPC\c>d fo fhf: pr<Y.ie1l51on of
t.111
~ oniealormofwrapping
11
d1'""" ti"
'"'''..,
"s~.ly o'
\\17
3. (X>n, 01 and ll- d
th
rowhack thaI cat,1fyzed sottal
I
1e New C
.<> ll'P1'sPn\ "''' 11 ch.,
s t>\I le v:h1ch, app1opr ated f
MServat11es," art1i.;u:ates
'
"'~JI:' m thf> 1960.s. ano later. tle c :im'
rom t~ wO!ld of labor. came first
T
l ll 1>qurtnu
hlJ11-,.fs t>/ blv1 J!'dns m !Ill' sxt <:
'
mere a1zdt1on of fashion
If I\ ls contrds/C'd 11ilh Ilic sJmt>; $claimed /h,1/ one's 1nd1vmuality was m
/ht' to11cli1nq ai/'f'tl'

ess of denim. and Iha/ them II
ade morf! apparent whcn
, nces m hllman bOdcs.
a eabfe clay of blue ;eans brought out
~ By recogn1z1ng denim's m onoch romallc emptiness as .. I'

cn=s how its sameness can be used I
rna .eable clay.. Fraser 1uc1d'y des
H
0 qua.ify and mal<e v1s1ble th d f
er perception is not unlike Saanren's dictum 'Iha
e ' ferences between bodies
sonal cha1acter" The sungeslio'l 1S f
h I
I a mass produced item must have an imper
o a r i: oricat energ1 bet

the dynamics of ind1v1dua ly One Ira
..
ween sar11encss/1mpersona1;ty and
mes he other and rerv.! rs

bl
f
den\ I y. Freedom and personal exp.
.
e v1s1 e d1 ferences of form ard
ess1on are relat -.e.
F1aser goes fu1ther and drolly places oenim n
wicker. chrom1un1 bare wood bric nd
I ... i a c:ategory of a1ch1teclural matenats like
"a
~uc e
that made up f
of the era Wh tie there d"fin1tely is somp taste ba h
ne verierated oa1etteof surfaces
"Perhaps lhos unth nll
s ng going on t>ere. she parenthetically adds
Th:o c me ! . ' '
vene1at10f'I of suraces and stibstances is related to the vse of drugs,,
Y a i\S de elegantly poses tile conundru'l1 of personal expression tn a l'lass cult
inn
01uggeo or sober. free 01 conl0t'm1st. lhe workl of surfaces and re1l1ca\ on always fac1l1tates
~~:
1dent1fk11tion of aliynmcnls 111 industna society. P1oducts are

p1 oducts 1s~ucd without ideology Take" up Oy groups. tl>ey
acquire a cep1esentat1ona veneer
Fr d!>el 's dscvss1on de11tif.es lwo
el !1<s'
wea11ng blue
1eans. and n do1nQ so. po~1ts howonernatenal can beenip101ed
lo sci ve differing valves

Tltf' firs/ group consists broadly, of /he mrddlea9ed, thr m1ddl~
class. and lllosf' who iJte st1tl m revoU a9amst /he old sartooal
rules but continue to be concerned with /he 111ay they dress

T/le second. <Jnd mo1e Pxqu1s11ely /ash1onable group is st19hlly
yovng< r, though wt// out of 1/s teens (the very young ha1e no impact on fashion any more). and tis
memt1ers long ago fumed /heir bacJ.s on /he 1uea of 1ast11onabte clothes The first group contmues
to
vaguPIY towilrd self.expression: !he St'cond. and more evolved, group is in relrMI from the
(Jamboyance ii cou1ted some 1ears ago. The (t1st seet.s out denim
fhP 1flus1ot1 1J1at denim
brngs freedom. I/le second. more S!'lf consc1ovs. adopts denim prt!c1sely for the its
ana
mo~<'
un~r
~mform1/y
asa puu;e.
Coexrstf\9 between \nese groups are mo11val1ons for oath freedom aod un1'orm1ty. encl the
sense \hat these needs ca" be
e~pressed '"rough labroe Freedom. at a 5artor1al levc,I al least. S'J9
gests a release flom tho con,ert1onsof format dress.1rorr> 1ts physical constrdints and
ences
cias~ refer
emanr1pat1on for the bod; Uniform :y of dress offers an era5ui e of an eler11eintdf discourse
of parts Paris are replaced with a rnonotony 01 fotm. one that rP.11>rs to social pretension and posi
str~tU\e.
lion w1tn1n a standardized

and ther does no more.
Speaking 1n Vogue. the designer Halston saw monotony cc.mono.
....
avn : /i/<,t; (ll' \H?it, fJv: f 'f.r:,. rPOple v.10 dfi!SS n.C'E.: Uti!J rtJC!O:: d
if(e'
bcca ..:SC tri!re 1:1,IJ be Jess t:r:d
,'r-t...~ oppor r.i/>1', r01 .n J. l 'dtiJ!,/r And /h.1$ S bee JLJ~l' thi?t~ .~11/ be '~r-,er na~vra fc!.:rjcs f/'".cJ; or..::: ':<:n
,ncose t1oni
_.,
H\l!StOn \\.d ... tf ,... t..'hanit!On of u1;rasvE>dC. 3 s. "':"'(!t
LSed lt to rn\llo.i: a -t.r:
d*'c':~
1ri
'i~f2
nlCtOf
nt..mLer 10.!
c. t~\;'K
t ...a. r.CQJ :t:d \arr:e bt?CJuse
-.~l"'Kh s
d 18 OOC
_;r t5
ti~
a~ pricp~ f }m
$18~ to; $360 Haist ' ::l'O~t' statl?C ~'.nu: O'' "a" :o c ean ~o ''"~or ".is rreq.ii-rtlJ Qu".ltt-<r
as ~<tvt"\\J 1es;; ') fnl.rt".
tht"' porv 3'" press ht: ...JS v~t~r ca i-;:C .J!r.1ar- $ fu..,t m'l"'l "nJ 1st
1
Ir)
Ul;ra"<l., "ii bia ~ r:irr. pa:0r>lf:d ,., 97 l,, z .1a;)dr;>se cc"1p<r1-O!d/1nrl1~tr:es It ,5

1
11' s r)()n.,.ce~ 'bf.'' ~ 1:-leme ; srono u.o
11
<il .. ahlE> \ ,d \'\'rt~ "'riqinJ "...:~t.:d for' 1,;.phvl<;tery aN"J 1.a I cc.e<""hl "~r-e ?10~ u t<as ...ei1e 1..as :re
11
1
fdO'IC of fll~ ~Hi ... "C a s:x: 0131\ oe'"o'Y1 t \\dS -r' Clt:; ac; 1(' C.. ... ~ r.t?eJOU U,tras1...edt: S ~th
oo per(;en; pc yPster ar> '1cfl Jestt'et1c$ ot s"'eae .\ i:,, Dt:nrf.ts f'Jaanmal product couido/.(f!
u111a~~rae ,.-:, sof!. ,upptf. Jna s~n~uovs to tf!t=- ;ooc"' "e' s also "f:S.s!ant tf) 3'il,..s drid drscolor
atvr Jf 'i t-lf'r m KIJtnt' ~-.asnaD 1c. ana r>e.e1 ne':ds ron1no.
t>. corno'er.:ra'. a'1ure was s~pputec tJV th~ O:'Ol!'Se 0' le<"'IO O<lY :o orodvce a mater a bot'1
tJri
1r-..:-11~1.,. p1achca aPd 1:1vnef11alt-I; strsual As a C"e::t g ous fabr c. ul:"'asu~ .. as .Jf'.IJSoa t~~
1t,c_r)''~~~ '.>Oi. red. s,;f"\<.t"'\he1abr c 1t~i;1' was tr ogo
Unhloe cen m, uarasurn., /'lao '0 a1fl>at1c'l "' '" :-e cCt.nleci.;~tu'e. bi.1 .: ...as :il>Ct easrl1
aJor.l'rl a~ a ,,n1f0r1n o:; Ha:.!o~ s a~,.>ent wslc:'l't'fS H;i:~;on s i.; ;r.iSt.!>1'; cesi:;n!> became t11e
gar" e ts trat con~1.,ned social c a~s a1'0 eco~0.,.,-c l)')S! or 001 rt~a.l'ed casval aria ci,sceet
:./1cOc> nvn,u;,r 704. ti1e <;h1r;.dre;.:>. 1> pvd, lfl)O og.ca 1a .;h": c~g ,.,.,ough 10 be a dress). but
t~ 'n.,..r.t1c;n s oa~ed upon tne sett and neuira. c:Q!l: r~ , c,' ii'~ a0< c Tre reati,e th1c<ness
vi 11 t' fatJ 1c oem.inded s1cnolc:; o~ CJ\ to m ,..,_ ~e "t'a., si;ar>s. arc ::-recl;;ded \he u$>P. of
t-ther h~ ny~ or r.terfar1ng
vlt1<1~u~de 1s ;i1,,ays <T'aO<> fl so\,o co ors ar.a so ;i .aa..,re~s a mor.:x:l'rU'ral.c appeaa'lce
lh~ J),,o, ,.as !1pca11\ concealed 111 Halstcr>:: des9r'- Seos.1a 1t, ,,as cooerred 110t n n'a' ng
11.e b!ldv ,,5101t bu: l""''"J'' \ht: Qu~ i .-s ut :~.e rat:r:: .\i1.c" oeca'l1c a <incl of sens.ia la1er.
rJr1.toe<! he:t~.e(l th: .,.. t-'a,er and !he .. vrld e'l.._.a a.. <? Jo.-e !o botl" s oe~ St.Mede is. aftef ai\. a
._,l'C.0P(J
~f'H\
Ull!a~ut'de >'as ,1s;:d b)' Halston "3S a feti>h orodLc: ano thP 1Lxt.1ry of tre material was coJr
le pnsed bl' tre s0 n-p1c !:; of the garmeN'!> \a1101 ~9 'was rionoch,omat1c. 1ecess.ve ar.d unde
sta!ea and its cla>;1c c.olo w2< be1g& While Ire elegance o! his cesgns was often <e1nforcecl I),
the auahty anu <>ensualrt, of !helab cs re u::.ed. Ha'storsc otheswert>o'.ten neutral and app'CP"
ate Over the years <'e de~1gred nurierous oific.1a1 ur1forms .n ulfrasueele 'or Braniff A1rlrnes 0<
the Girl Scvuts. lor tile 19i6 Olympics ano or A,1s Ca, Rental.
HalsIon lived in a '-.ot.se 1n New York on East 63rc Seet 01 ginally aesigned by Pau Rudo1Ph
and con5tructeo tor \he real esta\E< attorney Ale~arder H rsch m 1966 Tre ta'l central I ;:ng
>Paces 01 the "ouse wre furr1shed
in
monocrromatic .>.hddes a' aark gray labr.c wh ch uor~ed
cai PE-t!< and bJ11\ 11 seat1'1Q barqueottes 1n a continuous <11"'.d low ardscape The subdUl!d and rnr'
mal continuity o the room v.as broken by the rare !las~ o' color Halstons brignl 1Pd soo\s. a .a>t>
o ore.hid~. !he wh le caf:ar of his barefoot ~a!E:I
Another prachtrorer whose work was des<:i be<l as rrt\inial!>t in !ht> 1910s was the ,nte o
desrgr>cr Joe D"Urso l ke Hal s t or he experimented with te:xliles. ou,,os 1r>teno s were ll0:3oe
inr
the" eslra1nt ne
u;,eo bo'h
' 1urniture and c:olor fTl nrrna !y He: confrQurea the soace lh'C"g"
,IJe 1nstal!atroo <'.I! low p af
' orm~ covered in dcrk gray 1ncf:Jsh 1al carpe1 'The e!fect. 1uxtaP';eJ
against h1gh-glo;s white,,; all s, was to produce a cont 1nuou; and at>Str act andscape whieh dd ""1
j l I
tll t.11(' '11 l!!Vl'dl t I"'"'Kl !l it

rnrt1po\lv1C>r1l1>rlferrp
'"''I'<
, lw I Nt'll'(i\(>n \!Pc<, <n .mony1
Jt1~
d l11,11t1111nl<-1'1Ct <
t mr. :1u1s p1on1ptd 111111 t

es1d,.nt1;il tJ\11\1!.r>q\ 11 11'
X D Ur\cis res1d&nt1al
"raw ~pac,,' f 1 f
0 Qt\t1nn c
11 I
Most ir,/<>1101 I
1insh111.\11insof
' ot
r
" ,, i:d~C'd
, '
Y.. 10tf'1aclion
. t o.,<1
1
'''
ip1d
/
1
1s
c
Ii<
nt
.
on
.1
k111d
ol
foAC'
ind
.
cbI .
~ JJ<1sonJl!ly I 11'\./ lh
1<lual1ty If/ w/;1ch
l<iil/lf/, sa;. W/)('r(' tf /OU /dY
.11 wl1JI
IS l('d//1 // I.A
//e dl'Sqner
lo
I
f' a .~11'('( I
.. dvvul 15
a ( ('!'llJflt. I nol a fin(> I ..
' 0 pllpcr )'011 'r( IPS""llS t I
1Promple/ton unlikl' d
'
"' "" Nhatt iiti_not Iorio , Slfllfll
,,.. "t, in a ~eose
~
c.on Iv.ant my ,., ,;,
ontscomplet1on Bui
5
1
oo~ spootan
' () rqi111lut all /ht ~
0 101
The, art'/hen respons 11 '
eo1Js. Rathw I 111 tocu:ate (,
e emenls ma space I
' '",or giving /hPm ltfc
,rm, ctrnr l1<tckgrounds '01
o
,, mycI1en/s.
oc~ ~1 ~rid
''~ff1n
conve~ons
~/kl[(
I~
-~<'eAs
Urso p.Jrpo!>!'ly u1dulupcJ the h

r1::loCtJtP lhe oueshon ()i the bod . a ii ty of carpel to Pra~1: speet'c-1t fr
motivated lo st1mul>t th
y 5 app1op1 ia\e position and e
Y om the space, and to
u e
e will of th. I
.
ng.ir;ement ThE.
Both D'Urso and H 1 t
ec ienb, loso ic1t rntcrdcl1on
a1>stractronsa1e
a s on Wl'le a
1gure .theor freedom
l
sort of au1a their work manufactured
~~~u~s ~"the
m,11err,1ls enyay1ng bodies. They employed
to~
a~s~r~r~uct
c
ttdge of the lifestyle rt>volutoon
An~choose
of excess, but instead the mule

ion to prompl cnuaoomenl.
ari::;~
CAR P ET IS A VERB
Following
the Second World Wai' th e cos t efficoenc
act
ens \ cs of man-made fibers cont
I t
y. suppl) st11bd1ty and performance '
ri >u ed lo a stead r d
c.iar
Th f1
e 11 st V'able replacement or wool was nylon. ntr
' oduc
Y e uc1ion
n broadloom car pe t onces
1
ed in carpet manufacture
1 n 1947
Whereas wool was p11marily imPOrtecJ nylon
~ou\d be prodvced domestrca!ly. tnereb~ ensur

ing a stable supp'y Ava1 ability. alcmg woth 'ow
cosl res11it~e
'~ dnd b" 11 oant colors. con I rrbuted
lo the rapid acceptar.ce of ny on in the narket
place Bv the ate 1950s. it had sec;1;red the pos
too as ti-(' second most popular carpet m<1ler1a n the ndus'.ry. excc-edcd o~11 bi wool ther
~ynttieloc fibes f u ther accelerated lne erOSl()ll
.., ...... . . _
of woo 's rr~rkel sh.lre. Acryl>e introduced '"
19'>' sirr.u!aleCl wool's letue and appearanrt'

mth goeater econorr y and durability O'efie, or
ool)'propylenc-. offerPd durable. colorlast and eas
1ly-cl1:aned fibers thal could be used both indoors
d!ld out olyeste1 s advantaQ(lS ncluded a Ju1<urt
ou~. soft leture and sla111 resistance Nylon S

now the dominant synlht>toc carpet fiber with a
ma ket share of bO- 70 percent of p1te fil>lltS u~ed
1n I he us Syntheti\.s as
whole make
w 97 per-
cent ot all carpets produced 11'1 lhe Un>ted States

The pro11ferel ion of carpeting 1011ow1nu tte wor wils s1g111focantly enabled by the rapid mech
<1nrzat1un of the industry <Jnd lhe development of 1nc1eas1nqly 1;!fk1enl production technique~
C.a1pet rr1lls turned Loa piocesi. developed on 191.6 lhat st<!mrried ft um the productii,nol candlew rk
bed cov1:rs In th1<; process (tuHtngl a need'e
cl.rn1nate~
pits~e~ lot pl"\l f,t)l>rs Clufls) throvgh a backing fabnc
Ill~
Its 1Y1a1n advantage that 1t

thi> compl,cated techn1q11es rcqu,red for
production of
woverl cao J)f?hrtg No: only1s1t s1mp1c1 ard
but a''-.:> the
personrl!I 1equ1emuch less
fa~tcr.
o~rat111g
tra1nin11 With thei< owcr orodt.c.toon costs. tv'ed Cdl)!'l111Q rapidly caml' lo don'>ll'laU: the 1noustry
1
1ntheuS 1tsona11<etsha1eg1e,.drom9r,crcenln
n19:.61ol2Percentu 19bl s
i9i1 t..rf:ccl ca(Jlets amo1.1rted toove 90 pt'l'Cf:l'll of lhE: 11,1111
of a 1type:.o' carpets
Subsequent developments werP not nearly as re,o uuoMry and dd nol go muc11 lart..,i.r than
t9&11o~2o('fCent
y~rdaye
e~pard,ng
'"r~I
accc erat1ngor
p1odJ<lion cap<JCIY lhr
varoat.ons.,n lhe\.il\1og p1ocessw1oened
1111; rrach1ne$ ot adocd more ro.vsof needles Fol ow111<J !hest. soP"stceate<l pa:ternnQ and c)e;ng
~s1oiltlies.1r!t.lud1n<1 tre produc

se'<~ral
~11o~c o~
lrn9th of the p \e Another chan9es ttie speed ol the yarn b1:1rxi fed uito th<' rr>nch Pe Wnen Hie yarn
1 a 1ower ~peed. II f' p1lnb w II be ~tv.ir\er h~cauM' somP of 1t1" yarn S pulled or rl)IJced
is nlroduced at
allachrnents"cre 1ntrodueed that boa<Jcned !11'1 sccpnof dellJO
methods
lion of landsc.clpi?d carpets or mJIU-levcl pill' carpets. which ll'e achieved thrO<>:lh
On<> onrlhoO , <;e<; geor s of d1fferenl s1les Iha\ drtc1m1110 tl'>e
the nl'edle and tnecefore the
1
....., '
OOMESilCATING RAW SPACC UNlf'l'ING OISPARllY
lMAGE~OTES
<
41
u
a
~
'
NOTES
Eero Saar1nen. fft'O S..r,,,.., On His Work
Un1vers1t y Press. 111(;8) P.!i6 "The
(New fill- . Yale
and tables ma lYDieal mtenor ltunden:arnage o f CheH'S
world "
me. es en uoty. coolusing.
21 lb.ci, P-94
22 Ibid.
UNMI'"'
t3
Gollfr~ Sem1>9r, "The Four E'-.....,.,ts of ArcMectura: fhe

me-nts ofArcfl1~1ure ana Ol.l>tt 111
Ibid., p.91
Fovr Ei.
M V091Jt, June l!8l, p.ZJ8
Harry Francis 1.Autgre-e (Cambrlllge. Cam llllflOS. trens.

Press, 11
brodge Unn'trs.ty
P. lOI See also "The Texhle Art p2 l&-263
25 H41ston's ernbrota of tht madm leas
3 Adolt loos.
M
rna-e., a tlritluted to
~>'!In derRohe's. !'I the ea<ly l~lOs, and Ille '"deoiwad
ipllOn ol him aaa m1nun&1st. fo-ces Ille~"'"'
r11e Prmcip!e of C.......,-. S
l'OO!t\C
-~ .... "' ~n mtothe
ambrrdge MIT Press. 1982). o.ES
..,...., - i of nllUOllCe Ille v<Suet Ms hao on Md> Ill :his eta Thtl'i<St 8nd 5'mlnal. anthologyon mnmat att
Ibid.
-of
was l>Ublshod by GtfQO<y Bal!C0.-11119!8. A

lht
A~ ll'ldel to Arcllitachrel
fllds no elerencn
""'iodicaJ
S EM!y S.ldwin. 81/ty Bllldwin Rr~ (New Yark Ha

Brace 197' ). p 13&
n:OUtt
to """""ahsm., llrctwlecture ., tht Sl'd.es" ' -es and
Oemonslrotn that ltle doscours.i on 1111 , S<bie<'..., genot
Ibid, p.225
eled "'t"819QQs"' tht face of bou1oquu1ctriec:t,..ani:t

f.gura ... John Pawson.
8 1Uy S.ldwin. &rly 811/dwJn Dttotates (New Y0t1o; Chartwell
8oolcs. 1972). p.200
2e
8 C l - t &eenberg. "Alter Abstract EJ<P<ess1orusm. Al'I

"' "-'Y lli00-1911(). ed C. lillrrIson and P. Wood (0.ford;
8tac~well Press), p 7e8.
v.ww uttno..-,com
21 This abthty 4nCI Q<ut w>Nlngness to f4 t.s onto u..

emerviro corpcnte ~that dist~ Halstan's successand ll'IC>lllleled his prolesslCNI downlaL H<s cxmpeny enlered inlo numerous [ice<ising ooteemMta fer a var
ety of P'oducts et ddleant prloe pants. He SOkl h., cxm
oeny to the ~t Norton Soman t"'-"' :913. Norton
Smon welcomed and IJlln<:,.ted Ille P<8'19' ol ~on
Enterprises. but., o sanes of leveraged bu)o.Jts. te!oetMrs.
and nwoers - fuly ;irnoent ol ti..,_..,.. 90's -Norton
9 Ibid p. 7fl8
10 Donald Judd wrote eboul this spehal1ty 1n h<S nsay Sp.

crfte Obtts of I~ "Thll mo1n ttung wrong with POlnt1ng
is that 1t tS e teetanoutar plene placed llat -inst the wan.
AJmost all painttnos are SPohat'"
wey or anothef' Any.
thing on a surl11C1t hes space btlllnd 1t. Two colors on the
SimM was_...a b) ES<Nt1<. whcl!"' 1118' * -""'
Slon ot Beotriu Foods. In 11'18 &'>d. Hlllstai loA hd c:omplW'f
same surface almost always ht on different <leplhs. An even
and the riOfll lo uoe tus"4tnt. AftOI' ~ mool t/le mool
c::olot. o$1)8CUy in Oii pu>l ccwet~ all or much of a l*nt
successh.f llg'"5 in /Q bolslriess..,. _ , . _ to-1<
"1Q as "'-1always both flat encl ontl111te!y apatllll. The
'flderl:oSll""'namt.
space S shaflown all of thll ..,ork 1n wlll<:h the rectanout.,,.
plane 1& st,...nd. Rotllko's Sl>&Ce os shallow and tht IOlt
29 For a discus>lon ol ti.. ldee ol :J>e piltform In arclfftecton
rectangles are parallal 10 the plane. but the SPaca is almost
-l~ essa, by Jorn 1-"ZOI\ 'Ploll-aftd P!ateaus: lde~
trad1hona lly ~h.Jsoonlshc:. In Re1nlla1d-. Ponting, JUSl btcl<
o1 A Oanasll ArcWecl lI. 198:'. " IO. p.:1:i-:40.
f!Qm the plftr>e of the canvas. thefe is a tlol plaoe and this
29 1'9ter C.rlsen, "A M ln1m-4ist' Pa<lldQtn; lnftf/0($, Oc:tOber
Sfff1\S 1n tum inotfln1!ely ciMp. l'OAock's Po ont <S ol)\ll(lg$fy
tD7!i p. IZl.
an tht can.a.s. and the spact meonly that made by any
30
Formcnonc:arpet~-Robert
W K.B. TMC6rlln6:Js
marks on a surface, so IP\tt 1t 15 not very dtllCl'lp\1.,."""
Uy: Pre..,,f StMus .tlld FulurPro~ {Plllladl>lphra. ~
1Uust0n1SI. Nol4'nd'4 oone1tntric bands are not as specollcalty
Cali' of 11rvistl8D8 PIMS. 1910li Gfotgt- C.f'#B
pe1nt on surfact" Pollocls peint, but ti. banks llatten
-Ottw /'..-tw f iocmM'l""'5 (Tnldt Boal< Ser-..co. 1912';
the llleral Sl)ll(:t ITIOl'1t. As II.It end unollUs<>nlshc as Nolond"s
end W1U14171 A. Rqi>olds. /flt'O..Con Ml lltt UnilIS!.its
paintings"' the band do ad'lanc:e and recede E811 a
Cttpef lndl/Slry 19'7-t'J53(Van Nostr...S. t9fi8l.
a.ngle circle w.Uwefl) the surface to 1~ w1U have a Mlle
""
$1>4C8 behind 1t
11 8amtlt Newman, tntarvl<!w '*Ith Oorothy Gtes Seckt.r,
Alt"'
r,_,.,
1900-1900. p. 76!i
31 SetGeageWIQrw, '\oob>g!!ad<TowwdsthefrMU.0-
11ty. Bertir\" fJerfrn F- ~ty. ~A."CN:ac:t1nl
Astoc;ia1ron. J911Q~ p.1._23.
SI MoeNol f<.<1d. "Ali ond Objee!hOOd" ., /lldw:JalM .

Ballad. ed (Nfi< Yoril E. P. Outton. 19158l p.121 The
Idea o! sitoat10111S iclormed Dy Micboel frre<fl "NI ...:I
Objoetl>aod.. end :s here u...S to dlsu.W 1111 li<ltlOnu' pos
!IOI\ "' tl'l8 tandsall& ft nl.gN ai50 bo loe)'
wod
!1'18t au.npts to e>PIA aomeol tMI ""wntttn
hll> betwe811 mlnOmll 11 and arc/litect..,. ir: the ,wl ll>e
IO.,....,
"''-
,,,,,......_be"10
Er"""'1
''"used ...lwtO pletlonmll Snon ~ Uni
......- Y
_ ..ey and lht ~olArd!tl~llthll
.
~an1-
ol er11"" ColunDe. u do~~,..,1.,_ I.on; 1J1>rWJt Wiii QllleQo. ' Et.el See I ~..., U.
.,...lhe~o<1t!'18c:at-
WrcNI&._,
~";'.u.to-lnll lledloboV..nerPanton. SN-~
fM CqllJed'#otlrS ('t'ltr ONlgll ~l'Ollt)
..,_...,c; Olllfcll.' NI tt,,_, 191-l!lllll pMl.
If Ooneld Judd, ...,_..
.- .....
............. ,,:.
MICHAEL STANTO N
The Good, the Bad

and the Ugly:
d IntentiQJil.-. architecture e,neril d1recrly

.
. (!llt'yYday life
Moreowr. .Amee
mto
'" 1>xampl<>. rhror,gh it.A extra-arti.Mic funcrwna
. fity
. ) it creareJ.
~or
.h
.
.
from
wh1c
a Perman pm bond thar provide.A a Jinn crmcal ba..u
ro P<U..& jud9m>nr upon many good imentioru.'
GIORG IO GRASSI '
:.1.
SIENA
message. Hovering above it are vinues and sins.
T~oc111~s face each
other acro~s an Italian room.

ldltS !Jdinr.s
d
~tl-.tr d
or er. and abundance. The
" isheveled a d h
tr~rg I L
n c aot ic One ba;ks in the
1&
111 of the r
11,\wa
oom 5 north wall The other
" in shadow 1
!"ti painted
n 1338-40 Ambrog10 Loren.
the fre~coe 0 f Th
</ff14 1
"AllP9ory of the
One can presume that Siena had the potent 1dl of
' OOd ond Ba d Covemment m the City

>.d Co1111
'Y rn lhe Sala d
l\~~hco tn S
\'t Noe in the Palazzo
at the Scrovegni Chapel in Padova, thirty years
Ont rad
'
Pr1111ari1y rbiena Oespue I h e 111 Ic, the image 1s

t:"J(
d1\1ancu an The count rystd c falls away into
" 1romthefor
Prtd,(tble rr
eground of the cary. nus 15
<ut.,e,
om ancient t imes. the crry stood for
,.d,
"n tnore ntr

an intrrcate mctonym for something
b;k
. relation twrsts
~n lt\elt icat' The metanym1c
' clY'Presenta\ the llUZCn and coltecuvc ref\ex
and arc r
In loren~ ,
epresemed by the urban.
Sitn t'W\f, , th s work t h e city,
.
more or less
1
11 rs
narrative G
~ 1 SU.ill~ 0
' JVen that II IS painted.
to,,,.
paque. We
!\~or P~net
cannot sc~ around its
'ran,Parent, II rate its bc d rooms lt is soc1ally
owever fo
' r we do S~e its political
borh cities, that she was divided by the painter

for didactic purposes certainly to oppose republic to despotism. but also to oppose to all that
civrc virtue a nearly equal dose of c1vJC vrce. The
bad city tantalizes. As Giouo had demonstrated
before the Siena frescoes: presenung the contrast
between vices and virtues is a provocation Who
really studies rhe pious images of riShteous acuon
The holes of the next layer down are still evident.

All 1S equally sensible and detailed. The Tuscan
hill upon which 1he painted city rests rises to tM
striped cathedral. The landscapestretchesnch and
calm to the horrzon, Peasants bring in the riches
of the land. and the nobility go into the country to
hunt. but only where the fields have already been
harvested. In the bad city, the same buildings are
crumbling and stones fall into the street.An androgynous Trmor (fear) repla~s the f1tminine Securitas
over the cuy gate. The land 1s ravaged and smoking.

The city 1s cnml!-rtdden and
in
fear of the oppres
on rhe right wall in Padova when the left offers
sion that hes across from th" repubhcan harmony
such sublime and perverse actsl The postcards 1n
an the other wall. To the right on the paintrng sots
the museum s tore only show the deadly srns In
Tyranny himself. a snagg~toot:hed dl!'Vil attended
Siena. urban form represents value as much as
by fearsome and mutant lackeys. Al their feet ts a
those who are depicted as being in it or the myriad
bound and weeping Justice.

In the fourteenth century, when good and
spirits rhat preside over it. In the
sood c ity, c111
zens mingle. teachers instrucr attenuvc student~.

and a hanged malcontent dangles drscreerly from
bad could
in
fact be spoken of wnhout quahfica
11on. when a c1tywas funhermore sttn as havmg a
the scaffold held by Sccuntas. The buildings are
direct equivalence to these terms. and these terms
painted gay colors. Workers construct a new edr-
as having absolute value. then comparison could
fice from a platform cantilevered from its facade.
1950 war was an excu e for mu h m

demolmon In Beirut the pr perry of a q rt
mill n owner wa
ommM1decred a d r p
w11h d!'Y.llL1ng h res

runbyth nM1on
1 n th ng in t
in
td
'la 1dt c a c rpor
p 1 n ti'. t en
Ur
I nh rah
'iMaJ
mor re cnlly flunhtre1 ad1lf re
THE GOOo
In
'
r
"l
~
1~
.f . ,_ ;
I
<
.I'
..
.J
' f
.l
!i
.:}>JI.I.
.
.,
I
p,.,,,.iox 1.onlnu11cl, 1hr <l.1r11y nt u1 h,11\ '1"

Huqt~'ffi t'mhnc.ht'.-1 tJH c. n1t 11 .1Un tHH\
0 ,. , ...,.
rntt r1n' 111 th< v.11 H'd .tnd of t1n oppt),t1tl . t1 tt1mp1'
11, c !.ifllc 1 1h1 tt1H!c:nl 1\'\ o [ ltpttalt'm ;t,
phwr11
llw
thl'm...,tlvt' ph y,,<.~lly h \ u1h,tm,1u lot nh
~ IA\t"r tf
n.11 tHm
'"lo: .1g.11n... r
t.Jf)'
nn, l>ox1.1tlt!'\ .Hltt tht 'l)j'hr.HHll\ nt t.k1~l H' ' to
thc.y
unnpht 11 wuh 1ho'1
Sot Ml inxrng.
fl
11'.1t t
111 11 " ch.11.u_ i11. ' ' rcl.llttl tn ;tn tK;.t\ 1f,\r1an
c-.;I dl:1h,prn1nt fo1 11' 1n11 gy
wh>h on \tlll\t'
""' tnUnll lfl.'1 h\r\ ''
'''"'"' Al1tr .111, u1v1fofl"'' hn.1lly 1mpltnwnt
1,.
otod,11 '''''' tC 1,u tlw '''' "" ' ;1pp10\1d .1r t. h11n
:h
t.u1 1tw u mmw1 ''pt oht. flw VN y pmnt ot
l1h 1-.1 g1,ud
inttnt1on\
,1
h.Htt' h.u k
110
"' lhlll.UH.I. "' '
'"n'l'. tt 1..._. not Mii p11'\ms t h.u tht 1ntc.n,, '('''t
u'-'''"
tll\ I)\\'
.tpptu.tfrnn nr
llw Mtldt'll\ " ;\
publH Jlhtnom11\0I\ - p1c:t\ltH mi; t"WW tr\lr, l\Cl'lt'
"'''II .v..
tu1 " ntw 4u.1rtt1 ~. ,11\4.1 \V " ' \
,hnpplng_ ~ntl tnlt-rf.un
"''>' ... hu.ll'' 1,,ult"d
"' 1x1 <'Pl Hllhtlly lu~h q0Jlo1y hutltlong h11.1n,,J
lht\ h,1,1t ttlnt1.1<lu.1Jo1,, 1h.11
11wn1 nnptlrlllm
tlwy Wc.'H'
tuhuu 1 th.H l' t1ot ov1l'' 1n tht 'OCl~I dinrnu.t111
.u th" ""l1"V1Jlcn<1 I l11y WOI k tlo'tly Wtlh lh<
lh
l.11 gc.ly t1011t
tlw p11v.tt'' 'l't 101 Att,1 t\ftt'-n )t.tr'
'' lith 'tl'n 1tl)J)\'H' tu \'0< C)Ut ol\)t' llt.ih'l'I tlt'\ll\, 11),IY
o l h8hUn~ .ut<l, iuort th ... tHI\ t1vd, . htht1\ y1.1t...
M1r>1..n1 tu Hw v1tttl1ty of tHy th.u 1' cwuht'r
ot un1tttuf.1wU c t>ll"-tl\lc l1tll\, '"~ '1~n' 111 .. i;ot'd
tJt'.t\ll1lut. Ill H'IH lt'W

1
fm 'hrd.1tn
1~
lr<1uty.
U1 tht w.ty th.ti
'l fw1 v '' 1L'UfH<>f..1ty b'''Wu.6Ml u,,.
.. 1'11,
...~ 11111. hM m:i'll4'< .1h,11\li1W\l~Y1n<~fMRi\1~
-~~~itl1!t\lf~;~~~M~
-""'"'-111111u1~1i
t'llltUll'.
II' lll;JlklI
lfJhfHJtH.lmK. UH.I
1t111dun~ tlw ~oud
ltHl' llllOU'
ht H\ \OIU tpl
I\
llw ' fk< 1.1wl.11
< mi1111
1
bnd,t:opt lwyond
1o.1v.. gl"d rnon hy md1'c 11n11nt1fl 'Pt'C. ul.t
on,,ntl ttwh1..K1nn1n~ of host 1li1JC.' 1111y7c; th,111
fiy Wd1 lhl rnf t rt\lfUU u1 c

1
' '"' Tr.tf hl
llt1"><Uf')lhiy
,., ul "'
..,n,1rl' 1tw \lrc.:c:h
.1d
h<>t
~t.1tc <>I c.h'lrt,nt
Win!'\
cl.ut~(,. pro
wartuUl' .1rs.ou\ijl'JOtnh
11
" no1 "' 1f l..ch..i nrn h. 1-. not 111ttJ.trt<l urh.tt\ p10
gr,1 ~) or a11t!rUprNl tud1hnt tht n1.tnMCtl i;iow1h
'Jt " '
r .tfntut ''"l l' HJ<)t> A' 1n th.it 01hc.1 c ltVl'I
lufl,. llrtru>n tl olt,1nd, t.Jl1nl

IHJn. 'l'ht d1 ...t-(JUf\t'
' ' ~hund:tnt
''th\ ( 1ty
rn Llb.
,, (.0rHJf\UOl1', .:tilt.I
'Jl'flhth1>11\ f)U>pO'tith tJPfJl.. tl '('8Ul.u ly1n1I Itide. . to
I ht m ..1 11tl11\Hcl1ft,1 , 1u.t lh11w,1tl 1h,.,,. twt'

l 1111'' ,.., ,, hv1uu,ly \ h1onulo~h.1l 1 tlty Y1'.t1' .1tt,1,
Hot 1t1J.un ,, Uu1't l y d111w
U1vd1111nh1111 \\IHH'l\h''
.llun~ tht 11ty', 1tl~,.,, Ill H\\pl.H\h 11\ 1h1 \ tl'lh'I
\'1lU\Uh.'l\l.1l
tit K\1r
V.m /uul
In l\t.11ut , Jt,1u1t th\ ''"hn,1v1 .trnt.\\11\l ol HJ'Mll ,
J 11noliuun , .md 1ww 1 fln...,11u t1011 thtt>u~houf
tlw
t )lt.11uhJ nty, ll't 011,11 "'I hU\ othJl ,,.cn1 ... 1w1 hl
h.tvc lwgun, 1lw,11y h." 111:11\<lnl ~l'"''''llJ.tlh

, 1nu 1q75 thank:o, h' 1tw 1nt1ux ol
oflwr
101w'
1du~Wt''
hon\
ot hu,tihty .md .tl\o tu th, n.11ui,\l
dNll08.1 ilphlt ,htlh h1 ll\l~h t'I\
hy th1
\U h,1n111l
tum ot .t tl\Ulll1y ,,, ""''" 1h.lf the t.'nllH' IMIH'I'
c Ml llL' "'t' tl
" tht lt.'{tlOI\, .,
nn tht'
11\t'UOllilh\.U\
,1fto,~.of ll"I
l.tfUl.11 1h1 W,H th' ti O)rttl uw.11\' tif I"''

dut tion,111tl 111h.111oy.1t1w' 1h.1t k1p11wuph 11mtt J
1
10
vill.'1'''' .utcl xm.1fh1 , lllt'' tn.mv 1 >1 whu h ""
l\t)W tt)l\..,.Ullll'd II\ lh-11ut',
'P'wl
IOOI\' C.tlll,fl Ut ltlll\ Ot"( utud
A~ llWl\IUll\td,
th.er\ tlt~tl Ut ttun, hul
Pl.mn1n~ tVt1y
thl\ w.1, ufttn o 1i thl JWl tflht1y o1 ht' \'tll\tf. wh1h"
Jn Ocirut 11wu I\,, powcrf ul h1,rory o[ 'm h
the ''"''''"8 lly :.olttucf hunt llw uutunw1.,hl1
"11J;iir1vt' dnd ,1 l1go.u y ot H';11ly ,llptnor Modtrn
h ..urlc' ih .. c ,11upt11t IH'tWt.'4'n t'\'11y n11ht.11} .mil
l>t 1tLHt-d by otht'f"i; th!! fdt<. ol
W~urt
1
1
"" <.
h11f., tor( fr,,m tlw cr 4 ul tru1t\prrnf NH_t: 194 i tn
''175 [ 'P 1.olly <luo lttl! th1 Sh1h.1J11,t r~riorl, 1'1o

l\,il,n hro1tgh1 to ht.u a 1>utcl1 tl<Kr\'t oi gen1ut.,
1
ti) 11,,u,m,>1t>01d1r tlw ()hy"icc .r1 p1u1:tf <""" ol cul
11
H<-
lt 1' h.uJ IOth'\.'''t\
lunt titHh. 11k 1tu1 to1 nl11 d1wk'
ll'>r""1n,.1k1'd m toll.1p\.:d tro1n tht .,hoot1n8 ctnd
11
tlltl.unt.
tlu tttll'H u''"m' ut .1111 lw 1u 1 w.11 pl.tl\'1H\~ ntl'A'
lr<ttn mdu ... 111.1~ IO OIOIC' Ju11\t''"" 01
N<iw '1u11 Ht thr ,o u1h w.11l llw hutldlnK'
htiru1
1nt1muul"I' 11\ U111u1
n1 tn pl.u t~ wfwu Jltt.,gi.uu " ' h.ln~mt:t 1 .hht.1U)
THE8AO
hrimhing
.!
hut wh<'H' tlw nu1 tuh1,.I, P"'o1.tl , 1mplu .ltinn' of

c.nun1ry .ut .tlH'n. 10 rtu\ itnntl Ulh"nth'1h '' rnlwt.t
'' 1111nM1 y \.Ot 1.1l 1not t
'.t\1J , ,.,,., 11 ng fho"'l'
1two1,wm11w11 IWte1mc\
111li."' \U<>wrh 111lllc1w.1y m th, Y''""S
v1ry s11n1hthth t \'H
rioh1u 'th.ir lllu~ on 1<-t.tll .an1v1ty 111U t nmmtr
~ .,,,
l'h~<'lh
~lfAh!,1?1\C w.1<, ton"it.tnt
Artivlf
v rm ludnt
par. n\tht.-t1\'(fltt'Y. M"t ot wh.11 h.ht ht1ft U1t1 11

hclo11
lht
w.u .... tht
t I till .1nd.1ll ( \\111
'lh' 1lt HM\!l11111lll
th\.I'''
'\t'. rllJXtO\Ulll t'ttllltH\llt pnttJ\lt.11
AnJ HI tht ~ ,1H1r ot 1 h" LU1(t', Ir .u.hu~"-d \1'l '-'H,,I.

UI h;u) .,, ~ ""'Ill ,, t tw 1'11~'' 1.ttl1t ,,, 'tUl\J u Hll\, 'ht
' r~
,.
.
11 l ' S 1/4 ~1T0~
compared to the nearly empty streets of the metic.
ab&eni downtown. As the Russian Ossip Zadkine
in fact be a varied picture of infinite unexpected
c;olled his 19~6 sculpture executed for Rotterdam.
episodes ... a gTea1 order in the details. confusion.
ulously renovated center of Beirut. In this homog.
Beirut is a "oty wilhout a heart." Only the most
uproar and tumult in the whole . .. Order must
enous wonderland far from the vital ThitdWorld
extreme Stalinist urban programs - where state
reign, but in a kind of confusion ... and from a
scruffiness of the rest of the metropolis, peopleare
com
multitude or regular parts the whole must give a
eerily absent during the day and move like tourists
parable voids at the center of cities. But in Beirut
certain idea of irtegularif)' and chaos, which is so
at night. Class can partially explain the problem
extravagant specula1ion - developer and govern
fitting to great cities."" This statement emanates.
since the place is clearly meant for hautebourgeo1s
mem one and the same - are responsible. an
as Tafuri points out, from the Enlightenment
use and they prefer to drive. The New Urbanist
arrangement without precedent in the rest of the
and particularly from l.augier. It stands against
rhetoric of pedestrianism and s treetscape falls
capital11t world. As happens with extremes. polar
the anempts at control and order that character
on deaf ears, as it seems to in most places. And
political/economic strategies come full circle to
ized the following 150 years of urban initiatives.J
rents are prohibitive. The city of th~~l!\J<ls suit
produl~ similar formal results.
Viewing the city as a pleasure device. under
vital in places like Rotterdam or. ~atter.
ownership allowed total erasure -
produc~
Too much has already been written abo1Jt
standing Its basic 'tumult" and infinite, precise
Milan or Barcelona and not so in Beirut despitt
th1S >maordinary void. As Saul Bellow said of
details (as opposed to the inverse strategy of post
the global illusion that Mediterranean culture lin
Henry Jaml's, we may have "chewed more than we
tnhghtenment urbanism) did not in urban think
bit off." It pan kular interest Is how privare infer
gers in a twilight of social mixing: of piazias and
ing unlit Post-Modernity a nd the emergence of
rheir kin. The different politics of the places has
"the analogous city; "the culture of congestion."

a nd their kin.
direct effect on the physical fabric. But there also
The disarray is very different than the nearby
tion as well. The Lijnbaan is common in its mer
dues or Amsterdam on one hand or Oam;iscus on
cantilism and not refined in its architecture. It
uts and what p~sses for govemment Interact to
produce the urban. It would be comforting to find

Rotterdam to be an t'Xample of
"g()Od"
relations
- e1alitarian. fair, socially responsible - between

capital a nd the collective as repre$~nted by the
socialdemocraric regiml!', and likewise to hnd
Beirut u iu opposite, a study m setfinterest,
.,xplo1!ation. tyranny, week governmen1 in com
pllcity with woahh. But sucti <:>Uy readings do not
hold beyond a superficial ~l'W ot the places or
a Uptorficial understandln1 of the Sotielll' that
these lwo cities represent . In B01rut. ~omehow,
deplle the apparent eniama of such a do~e com
pllcity of development and thl' state, de&plte 1 profound SocielOarwln1sm detnminins most den
1lons. dnpl!e the shadow ot Syria that falls ov~r
all ovents. things do gel done. lnfranructure
15
repaired or replaced and plans for renewing the

city spew out w11h an almost Dutch regularity.
n-ue. much of this re111tahi:ation has come from
the ~ame source. In a par.adigm of power rela11ons
in oc1.olist and high-capitalist cultures. all the
a nonymous public officials and private develop-
the other: both ilncient and picturesque. one suf

fering ITOm an effe~scent superfluity of open
mindedness, the other from a overbearing ballast
of control. Rot1'erdam is a riot of conllicting idcolog1es embedded
in
d isparate c11y fabnc; From the
global/corporate grandeur of the W~na corridor.

to the comic hipnus of Adriaan Ceu1e's refortna
loon of the Schouwburg-plem, to the consumerism
or the Ou~pl"n 1ntegra11ng Marcel Breuer and
Bakema, to the new hyper-scale of the massive
Slructuresat the Kop Van Zu1d. Beirut is a turmoil
of diver~ urban milterial produced by pure specu
latlon. ii powerful form of ideology itself. The devel
opment of the Vttdun corndor
in
West Oeiru1
of the Dunu and Concorde comploes in pa.nicu:
I~. rtval,
at lea.st in their exuberance, the shop.
ping ione5 of Rotterdam. But more vital even are

the traffic circuluion cores and attendartt ad hoc
en who collaborato to produc~ Rotterdam are con
workmgclass retail commotion of Cola Square or
gcaled Into one astounclinely rich and powerful
Dora n Bol') Kammoud or the social mix ing of
ligurt In Beirut. but the ff&et h not so different.
Hamra, none of which ..,., panicularly planned
~suredly Ro1tordam is in a lot better shape
and Wh" e shopping is only an aspect at but. The
fh1n Bt-irut. And tl11s 1s not juu because the Dutch
downtown hoits temporary events like a monster.
have had a hallc"1tury to !'<'pair the dama~ A!I
truck nlly next to tht most active o f functioning
int~n11ons did produce results.
mosques. ruching a peilk during Rilmadan of rev-
many of them ~n~hc1al. But tht gstur.s of Mr.
ving motors and tlectronu:ally enhanced callsto

pr.iyer bmhng for audio-spa~.
the Dutch "good
H~riri ha~ hkcwlte rctormed the clry, not lust by

cv1sctra11ns
it
but ~lso in the provision ot new
roeds. monumtntat new lacllines,and myriad less

evident pubhc smictures In both c A
nonethelni., the bn11c dhord!'f ot the pl
ace overpowers
ai1y o1111nlu1\on. As Mlliiia wrote two centuries
ti0: "Ht who doe5 not know how to V""'
I
- 1 our pea
SUtt Wiil never sve U3 pleuur~. IThe cltyl hould
-s
The
two
c111es are Produ""" L
,,.., uy a S1m11ar
frlctlo.n between capit;il and luthoriry even if
1nten11ons ar. qutte d 1ff
er.ni. The apparent self
Interest of Hariri and his kind and t h
l
e a pparent
nte~sHnthe-commongood 0 f h
Rl'rs h
t e Dutch plan.
~ Prod~d sunllar Pilch of urban pan.
deomon1um. On the other h<1nd th
.
e tvemu1g Pdts
tz1iln wtreots DI central R0 " d
n am have to bt
may be a very simple, almost aesthetic. explana
reflects the teeming commercial centers of cities

that have not been reconstructed wholesale. Bei
rut's downtown is. due to single ownership and a
supremely bourgeois notion of urban quality,evolv
Ing to be uniformly precious. overrestored - Iii<
ii
rhinestone encrusted. beige poodle chpped too
perfectly: no vulgar s1gnage. no street vendors. The

fUneur Is not welcome, let alone the underclass.
THE UGLY
Beirut's subt ext of monopoly and scate contr0I

dilutes the city's apparent freemarket anarchy.
providing a crucial counterpoint to the inevitable
urban entropy that is the endgame of speculation.
Nevertheless. the frenetic expansion of the metror
ohs in the form of nt'w residential and mercanult
fabric essentially without civic s pace or adequate
infrastructure certainly maximizes revenue but
obviously wlll arrive at intolerable conditions. fhe
relief promised, the open space and facilit ies projected for the new city center, may be as illusor)'as
hve been othe r proposed amenities. but they also
tend to emerge in random and spontaneous locttlons. The undeveloped landfill of the huge Joseplt
Khoury development in Obaiye. a few miles north
of the city-center, ls Filled on weekends with at1i"'
ity. The streets are edged with parked cars. Th eor
niche is humming. Peoplestroll windowshoppin$
YM there are no buildings. This 1cnm1lllonsqu~

foot landfill st retche>1 more than~ mile atolli tht
offict
coast. Begun by Ricardo Bofill with the local

..ie1ed llY
.
o f Pierre
K.houry, this project was com""
,,..,d of
t h even more bland Oar al H1ndas1h as a.,.
61Tffts and lots with 1 Bofill marinll at lts cenrer
Strtets, eYl!n trees and lights, frame detp holt'S
dWJ1t1ng tons11urt1on. Th yachts dnd Merc<dos
lht ersatz nosu\g1~ of contt"xtuahs.t approachrr.
or 1ht .n11opdtod uppor m1ddle-clas popula11on
1hat actompan1cd Post Modern rtv1vals of hi>tOrt
hll th1~ nt'I/\' r-1ty are yet 'o arrive. lhe
c1s1 p.ast1cht and invented rrfereoce. New Urban
thdt
Y.1111
'mt>tY 1~WalcJ lot' ar sites for lootb.ill prac
~f rhetonc guides
hl~ Of
th development of prtwar ~irut responded to
bn:)'dt> nd1ng Thr 1nfrastrueture 1s ht"aV
1ly uwd by thr nrarby popula11on of ovtrcrowded
re-::,.1dlr1' pac-krd into e>t1Sttnce mmunum to'A.er
blotk' l're>umJbly. once the nrw bu1ld1ngs are
rt<On)truct1on \n fact. 1f
many 0-f tht ;amt plJnnmg tnthus1aims as that

of pO:>\'fll'~r Rotttrdam, then posr war Sf"\rut I)
not so muchdfferrnt 1n its desires 4l!nd con1rad1C
""'ti uc d and occupoed. tho.c people will bed1s
uons a~ 1~ post on1flc.auon B~rhnand manyotbt:r
rnura&d from v1Mt1ng

rJ ~011\\' <!XU,:I\\ bo1h
<n 1t>'S ""otld ""''e

C'\Ut5' jf\' \\tUm\ of
Unhkt nuch u1ban1iac.0'1111 tht M1ddl CCAt, /tht
ctu:u 1c.'\''!"""c e.rtat.. ah 1nd1cat1vt ot ~h,funs
8m'UI c.11rrol DLitYICt/
gloh.~l urb.,n l'nthu)ta!<,m~ to1nr1d<>nt wuh thtu
o'101d tht nuh to me>d~n1111and11"prtAA..: aud L6
u 11.al\.,HUt 11on Ho1wrdam.. gr1mm<"~t momtn1s
lf'HJ"'l'd o..; p1rhapA chi moAt rnrportom tmdfr
'""'''lo om 1110 hc.-JvyhandrJ utop1o1n1Sfl\ or J l...llC
ruloJJq m urban rvqrnnot1on 1n tht HJOtld tt>day.
Mod(111J\m 1hat wa guiding lh drrlopmrnt pro

,.,.,, Jhtr wor Id War II It llould l>u
tlw c11y'< f.ne" lbt1r (1hr
pcdcsin..in ..ut"-ctsl
:th.&>
b d tht
hou>1n~ <quuo and
c.-amc from Jht~~ mren
11ons. but oftctl evolved dc,p11e rhrm in uorx-
pctt'CI and twbnd<"onhgu1 o\\Of\S tar more ~ucct~s

fvl than ihe 'trrn plnnrs tould hav imAg1nod.
ue1ru< wa~ "m1\arly 3lfoctrd al 1h sa1M umt.

but without ihr
rcJhz~t1on
domocracy. and now I.a
mono91d '"
An"us (jav1nu
sohd " 1ry1ng 1n th decade fttr \hr nd of
rhe Co\J War''tort1roa(t1vttly m:.1.111 ~ mneteC1nth
Cf'f\tUJ'f a,ban1~m rhat prob~bly neverf'x,st.-d and
as cerra1n\y 4nachron1srir JJ\ tht" ......entyhr~t. Allu

... ions 10 uaduiou pepper their wnungs as they
l"rasf almO~\ alt struClUflPS mo<C chan on~ hun
drtd years o\d_ In his deoi;<npuons of che new
pOttilr m oCal
codrs for bu1tdll\S tn thf center. Angus (iav1r.'s ref
antmp to rtbu1ld
ertnts arr JlaussmaMot Regency England. 'Town
10
'" ihe pastel shadow of Po>1-Modrn1sm and of
;,..
ntu ..v for
AbO...t. mtddl be>k>""
1 ...
f'f\_,)\..
O""'C'r-1 ,.
~ 1 ,l Ct ...i pt.~ dsll

t,;,f, ;-,. !:i'J~'"'
f.'1.Jt:C'
j1n'll.r'W'\
.,,1,1
St-"' r..._ 1....q.. P ~

"~' ~ f'.)'l- $~1"f,...,
1fl
NL"'-> "' ~~,.,.v.
._,,.,,._!,<((, lt'
t 1;,l
..,,
f< 1
11~
C"'
A-1-:.,. 1
'Kl r '"'.i
p,,, ''O''f"'
,.,. , ...,. . . ..),\1!i;.f1,
b,
..- ...
>-.-
.,
~
,.
..
<
!'"
., .
..
'
....
..,.
.. li' .. , .. -'Sun 1m okt'C'! I H'n mo11 inHmgrumt<.
whldl 11 1~ t.mb~thkd ntft'f' 3 c.h.uuc 10 re~11H1
Cot hi< ~,1.11J, nr hill 11mh1 10 1h<'11 h-ulll"
\i'' Hl I'll ~ l e>httr.t'!<iol; JH mn11l~ 1mt .1
1hat h1.ro1)" .. mn<., '" u1h.tn lt<slt&Y In P>V
u~,J in nhttnCt'
cho:h,1,pysh0<l-- "' .umc111 chl:tt rit~ 11.iumJuc
.is 1~ hrpc 11mg 111 LA:bAnnn w11h Ar~l> or-trr0t h

liUt he,, an ,1Jop11ng an11qu tl.-J urb.ln 1.,rn\1'
m~mory.
in
1,
""'' "h >.,th
rt rm .... "'"'
r 1h. J1" ~rm1-r1 ol 1~,. d .. ntQ"n ot

11
I fl 1h r t~n mJlfl
1 l'
o ,,,
,Ill\!!!
"< "> ol
fl ~ 1\an~ Ph IUh \QU("
JJm.
ind .. ,a mer r An&lo ~ .. ).on c.t u .. h
1h.st
.,, ,f\r,tr'\t Jr.d culture to1'll1nu1h
r M'r'" , ..11, "''ti
~d'\'lf.
atlo"lllS rh1
1crt di ton ot p..1~onal11y
111
mo1< d>!tl1 mot!, II> urban coun1Np~1 1 >Ub
dt11'!oci.'1ut;il tlux pt rm1111ns t'Ckhnot oonotcul

t
rtut hh
f<cg1onh~m 0>11<1 n ti IOtMh>rn .tre dtll~11tt
<ut~ ol ht~""'" 1Jtnlo111< nl w11 I v.h1< h td~r1 II)
1,1
I .lf):'U1
!\f
fun
~ P.t\t01 .11
rlir.~11.., Of 1ht f,1,f u:nlUI\
:'11i. in
"' m\l .. fl\
c1fl1 I 1rt,~>1r.tl
''loo a V tun 1 lw l>u h .1p111" to h.;vt l11tl
th1' R-. tmh,t h~ht rt11 rt'>to1,urnn
l<1nctJfl f<'r thtlf "'''"'''of lhtm,dvt.~ It 1~ 1ht1t

I n1'Url.optn10 ""w Htior' unm1.:r.1nt cont11bu
ti th.ht ohint.d .11, "h1 H111 with .111.tc;h

11 ult11on htf\
tttat)ft.:\'Tl'l'ln1,r.01 h .. 1dt'flf,1
" n r~m\" "',. .. 'h.-tn ttw RotT1.tntll 1. ' ' M 1on c.if
h ''-'h , ... , I ~. '"a' cuntri 1 01111,"'

I
Jn
~nl\ lo.
'''um.J I" bt lor
f"-.11~ ...,,,_ ,\,di"'-~'' rt-.-. ..... ,Jltr
... , rr ldu~uon n1
1nr11v~h
ldt"rlf11\
Tht
"n' ..tK h
'r'< ul "'''
''-.di :!lot1\uJ
h)'
fld'\Uri\(l. tu,lftJ)
:tw ... ruhll.u n~ oi ttt url .ln '.tbrJC .n
11oh\
wJ gl .. to.1
cuhurr wtth" probll'mll< 1t'\rn1 Pl' 1 llw'
n. nut ~r i~rut
"'
d llllJjll'I) 101
a &l.hal 1onun11t1z,.rton ot ntnl'lt.. -t\lh <C'nlUIJ
111y 111 oh.1hly anl) h1s1omall\ "h7"'1 "' h

1111,11! nl J .uf l,ll()h or th onu,ing> ot d<' M-
p.l~'~lllf
hrochuri' Ir os
(l
II'>!
WI II
rn ,..,rs'" Jl(Jp\ll ..u Hrt1,;,,. Po~1
, 11,,ufc.~ ~nJ
bnukv.uJ1.u\ ,ul
ll"tanc~. The rt ~~~J'N..'flff!rWfi-~ "'~~ t;~~,, 1 . -
a~ h~..ty thtt
'
I IOftt
1lIam
,, '"'' nf
llP. ..,.
1u1c l lu:. ~ '"~ 1Il\' tilli 1c.~ I 1nUl:t. ol 1Jl'f\l
~ i(f
"Pi""" a' l'"'I" in f.t(~" Ch~n novn\ or or. rouo

.lf( h lll"<fUft'
planner' ..1 mo1ll-rr. Or1lm or
' "1nJm1lh nI woo.!< 11 'hot-,.,""' thy mo,rl)1.. 1
1 par~Hel Mh mp110 p1oJucea ,,..n.,..nt h1,1oov
ms :..n tr ~"lll P odm uon ot Ti111o.fl.l1 ~ ,~~nl::.111
ur dh al Ul'lt
"" .1tt.1\Jdt.' 1tth1tn1 :'P"'l'~' l \l'n" t ll\ Orun
Ill
tor
bt
1ht
t~ 111\IC u l <.Lilll 1l's.. ;...,~ ~r:""'""

'"d on~ ~:It l'T':\-1.:1'('1'~.
~ :;.;;,,,."""""'
1ri~~~=.1:~~~~
nt<' . . .
flo-dfUH.J <'li.("0
undu.atmn Gr1man
pl~n"'' ' ' on ht uth<t hand wtul~ no1 .111.t< h1ni;
......
rnz 11
maJ~,fl
J.
th .. I h _.mo~'
---luI'""'
t H\rl ;.t
\'\l lu"'
""' ',L
"
N~ wUrh.inl,m, .1nnlh<'t c Cl"c.-dna1a ll.ll '
th Mo,hrm""m
~t:I\
up' '
tl\1 I
"r"'r''
d>t saint utopian intentions, if for anti-
-"'1'~ 3 rnovt polit ically from left

~ ~basic and flawed notion that good
NOTES
G10<g.0Gtass, 'Avent-GardeancsConi--. ,.,___
--..,. ._..,.,11om21(S.-i~o.31111
.
loriable cama<aori ol the U QW>ts and ;;; '1glQnJ gi mo.-e
lho -
slento<an dlxorc! al a Metar""1 ~ El
2 G
"'"'"Yon one Cund Syna 11'1 lhe other .
,rlt
d
~~iaunl language makes goo commu~ 1~ ~lthycountries of the European
:.difst policits ~ mtrtly elitist. In Beirut,

;Hlll of pu~ business, that is racked with
,,.,,,_lilt)' CUIS!itut discrimination.
1Wr is" third wall in the Sala dei Nove. On
~IA~
3 AsJ,.roleelsewtiere. "llwa.sas1ftlltUMed
It
lump. l>t ~~wt for a 1
Sl41es !IO'NMlln(-Manhatl.., to Oor-.eJd
..as1erthe1mp1ement l
twm~senclll>tnwumaa.P1Wdtf>LU...motung
""'of develoc>ment sire~ aod
in\eresl Me lhM a thouoam IUJ - dwl
. Ol""'C new meanlllQ to conlkf...t.
- .,.
17PUrtd. Tllo WI/ CC>lll- ,. l/'e l>.>idlnQ
process, bot!> in the demollton ot the t..ter--.s c1owntown
..
I ha\ Is its rbu1~ . Rewrrtteri aft"' l>Jbluf of 'On R
encl In Ille idaol<>gocal ISS.Wll
Al!CHIS 9\$eptemt>e<ml)
ICCI
1al1smand lhtO-w"'
t~~ttd the good commune - a parallel
;.i...m-slyholds a severed head in her lap.
Rel,g'"' structureund O<Ol>OttY 3tl! ~y ~~~ .... __,.,

.....- ~--- .... -.ar~ts. boilmore
m'C>0<1anlly lr1 the endur"'IJ PQwe<ol rollgjotiuthefitsl l)ddical fact. met1imO
ancJ class. In thiS l\Oloon W>tti Oruzo. Sumi.,., SIMe l.!uslm. Gree.,., Anneni~
Ma!on1te. Gfft~ ard Roman C..tnohc: (to,...,,... 1...i the meior llQl<>nS Iba! ,.,., modern
Polit.es "'this pl~ - e tt>e<e is no _,,....., ol <h\Ki:ll end state), '""ere.,.,,, SUCh
proporties 1nc1\Jdl110. "'the downtown. a ~ano Protestant dlutch. lor~ '<lonld(
fragmenls m the -.cod of do<>.olillon
lks~efficiatts ~tween the good and bad
Paul G!oenel'ld1i1' and Ptol~~ G11Q/o-nAtt/llttelwo"' llott.rdMn (fl<ltt.,.,....:
ciiltt its sides and recalls that other modem
010. 19915), p.tl.
. , .1011it ilrvil and his minions on the adjacent
.-.ai. A patrian:hal figure embodies republir:llila- f>ith. Hope, and Charity float over his
i.aaumsurrou.nded by lounging virtues, one
.-m.idut~s. ""'n in
its corrupt present,
e The tW>tooroecx>- byOue!encl U.. ~-byo..dok ~under 111eGemwio.
eaimgt al ideal virtue. Reciprocal influence
1 Both ' of the peooie/J><c!eta"ar (IJOIX)loro. PQllU!a.n! and "lilted
8-I Nii
ICl'OSS
the Atlantic, c:an;ed by
. .a.!tcon0my. ThAmerican city is a player

Ila lllY setting op a reson~nce between
'-'*" -
This influence on modem urban
~is not a new story. The title of this
mi' aa-!tclges
both the "spaghetti West-
-of American urbanism and its role a.s
;.w-.._
ti"~ lll01ivallons that

....._ a( good,
underwrite the
and bad. intentions become
"'~"""-. .1s reahzed.

. Their develop ...,. form
._,.hlply11tpenc1m1 on th.e model of the Amer"catwy' ~obviously .lll the look of the places,
~and traffic arteries either bujlt or
::::- ~IM> In the vtry notion, endemic 10
~
~that a plan (either gn9hlc
-..,... ~)can 8">tme tM urba11 a!ld. by

.._. ia
tWturt nstlf. 111 the United States that
flt~
--..., the arid, bUt the concept that
"-t!iii
fll>nc Of SOti.tty will ri.w
like com
'~ luc\sqpe, controlling and lib-
~.
-saturatM, if not prod.uccd. Urban
"&di illd the
'"'~"av we l'J\llke, or remake,
'-.."'"1111 .. '~oes. pow~ sits, con

~<llio.~at the same time. all that
' -bq ~
_.,._J
9 il'hel>..ctorat Gene<al torlOWT1 f'lorwwloalongwdh a-. HIQ!lo< c...r.r..i1orr...,anc1C.....

tryOes.gnwere pr...ilc.Herthe<lown""cououY-'"tht'"ngb""""ICan-. --~
caUy '"the Medi!~ A!tho< A1al>C - - e WOtd. bl~h. the! rr1r1 be in!efprel4d
e lown. tht tttm. omlllYono tCll JUS1 $Calo bu\ """'5rd bllloo!\S. os WM\~ alien
10 E<1u4JIV Joi.,gn &Sall the fi,... modlm arm.toc:l<ire INlt was ,..:I zed dur111Q the~ l>etor
\M CM1 .,,.,_T,,., . . _.... o1estorre\lo'...ISoSOCl '*-"Y"' .. llatl ....
11 1owe 1h11 conceit to R- Salbll ..in #I -sat.on, desc<ited Ubl...._.. t\:lturus not
Clv~: S.,. tlI he ,.,..,.1 ne _ . . ol lhl
of the doj)ondency ol c:ultutt "'8
collect.,. eno tht raaniiefllbOn ol!h<l t*lionln beth S)OJl>llC space end soc*~
..,.,,JC.
la""1tnlanamc1 Beirut, the dissimilarities
~trogetlehy that Is tbe city. It
~ ~ U:."""" Rotterdam and Beirut to be
~~ saiz..s1mu11;ineo11Sly. This incon

""~~.the <l<titirc fact of tM modem, as
~with itscontrary."''
by--
Fuod SM>&b was presde<11 !:cm 1!118 to 1!lll<. with -I~ ol rn nfluenco ...-..;- "1td
1910 H1Stenur marl<edlhe hogl\ po.nt ol
ind~-!orso<tll rtlormend~
"
12 Francesco Ml111.., "'""'"" 6' Ot<Mtlf<JIH.m. ( 8 - t81Jl. YO!. JI, ~ QuOl4d In

Manlredo Tofl6l MCMectu ""11 Ullc.nt>'ldOO' Mil Jim). p.2G-ZI.
13
Fromthel>.meti<lf' gr'diron.101h e _ ol.........,.,.,, to the Sied~ol-Nsm.to

cokln>a\ impose.,,,. b'e ,,,. Fr...ch ,..1ra:turt-.i of S.l 10,... Ct!QIM ol -C"y PlotnnO:
.,_ poot.nlightenm~~"' .,,.,._1;.ot c.,. boc.orre>Ood lowMtF_...il
1
dlaraclttiMd as . _...,,.;
from _ _ .. BetVt: ,~ U.M.-.ttr Plan'' \he A~ of,,,. c .mra1
14 l>.ngUS ~ I
Bew!. Ro.-. erd Sarlo6 - (Mon!Cl>. london. NtwYorJi; p-~ 18),
O.stnci. PIOJOC ""1 . ~ , _ u .,._..,._ .,.,,.... 10 thoc""""""' o1 Solidl'I.'
p.217. GeVlll 11 de$CI'~
~-~wat I/Id uw Le1>11nesc Ow 'Na n1ei1 11t>llJitenoously.
15 """"'.~tN\lhe"""'
()It 5et00olAQtlf. 1111i; 11>\hatf'IJmhl~:Q(c;artiGtl>t

16 Tfl*Go0tJ, ti..9ad"'4lhftJr/lr, ondbad'""M
E1tWa1lad>. ther.im'-QUO."odd
Auttor"'O tuc1na1oonthal~astwood.,,d 1AOY>n CJ.,.t. ~IS \Md<oc1""1 ltiottlle ' uvJy
man out. lorrN e ltwd to Ct .,_oown that de..,..,,..,..,......,._.,.,..~.,......,,
w.lltcll wilt shoI "' tN! lesl
,.~h occntnry .. AU
17 'In oo< dlY ~IMll IS "'.egt-enl
-~-~to encJ tlull~l""ll IM'"" mate--...c.-..ntt ma~l f:Jl'C$$ Wll?\ "-...,~_,
lS
totsU'l"'"'__ __
""""'"..rllt\'dThtl'oopleP_.:
..al r.rce ~ Mal'- S90f>d1 at t
l!Ndo' (Norton: Hew'Jt1!.19'181- PS18-
_l'le.._
out....,,..,,..,.., DtOG'-,,,._,.fI'
,.
HASHJM S.ASKJS
..
"'
....;
.~~:.;.
- .. . --:
'
~
.,
I -
...,.: c,' .
..
i.'
I.
-~
:,, : ( ,
. ..:_
'.-
.....
'
-~~.,-:'=" :-~
1 _,-.: ;,. ~
f:
"
:";~:~\:?.. ~~ ;:,.~ :.
'_', ', .-: ,
;.::-~.~
-':".,:
~:..
.. . : _,
_:_:
. . !._ .
. '
_><;
.-"~ /:'.,. ,.. ~ ..

:.<"' ~.~ ... ~"- .;"' ,;. .
, . (t~
4 ,
~
-.. ~.=-..-::~;-.:;:
..
: ; :.. ;. t-: t
r.. ~tf... r r . ..
..-1;~.~r~~
;t
":
~\" .,,. . . . . . 4 ) .
.. -
..
.,. If''
.
.
-~
.. :-~
.., ... ..
... ,
..
....
;.:.; .;.o;;",;.1, 'IL~~- ~~ ;,. . ~,, ., .""- ."'
~ ... . ; "Jr.L
.-.,.~ ;./. . - .
"<~
-.
> .:~:-1+:;;" :'}:f_:~. _j}_:'.i._~_:_"T~~--~ ~~:~:.. t~_:f_;-;_ : ~-~.~~/ :/ n :-.-.t ~-::: ~-;~-~-: . '~-~ ~ ': .
.'
..
' - -
r-
~ ...
. .' . : i--<
... ,.- - " -
':~~y~ ..~ .> .... .-:
'
~~;i . ..:. ; ~-:. ~:i_J-~,~:(~ :.: >-~~ ~~/ ~-::., : ~:.: _:;~'.-~;~;.~:~~.:f
'.:~;~~\ ,~i~~1.~ 1.i:~.. ~ .~!.J. ir~ ;~~a!."::- :_~~~~'t:~) ~ ~ ~-r ;.~~,,.._._'. . -: ':,.: ~ ~' ,~! ~
::o;~::: ;9;,:~ ~~~i; -:>~I
~
~
...i;
.....
'....: ,,.-.1... ~"' - -~..~-:~:-:.~.:
,',:;.-- .";..!...-
.":~?~~~:J~:~>. :.:.':. . :,.:;.- / ;--. .:;:: . .-.. . .

,
Le CorblL6ier~ "Rule of Movement" at the Carpenter Ci!nter 1

GlEOION' S APOLOGIA
Writing in 1964 about the newt}' cooapiKecl C-

penter Centtt fW' the Visual Arts
lit Hiar-4 U.-
wrsity, Sigfried Citdion critkiud dw desill' 'the "hollow
SJ>a<'eS
around the wori:sMp
,...as.
The critids111 was wrapped iJI tflro ~ #

Le Corbusier must haw somehow felt dw __.
pl~f'SS of~ prosranuse" ~he was wPIC

on its de.sign. ~n though. aactdiJlc bl ~
"the most 5trilung innoYation ol dw lloriWiC i& ilS
progninune," 111PNning 1he idea of edllatilig . -
mlsts in the visual
U1s,
"Cof1Nr,si ...... r:lll"
tainly haw ~n able to ~te ~ and sadly neeckd - lecture hI iDUI tbt ~
building."' H<. also 1,._.,u dw ~ .,, . .
roite for the buildifti. Clffion Ud ~his ""'

in convincinc Le CorbuU..- te aa::ep1
~
sioo to clesicn dw ~ C -. ""'4 - '
also experienad the botiWias fUsdwld
I,__.
hrr wh1lf' lunmng 11 llrv.ard bur hf' snme~ to

h we b..-n shi:hr ly dtsappamrcd by the end ~uh
Orher rlti s havt
ddn.-~
thcwh
these sp<'{IS
of th(' building t vcn fess apofog, 11cally Tl.o )'Cars

..11cr c, won hutonan lfrnl)
<xpn ~sed
;,1
Ru~~eJ.
ll11chcock
strongt r drsagrc mer~ w11h thl' s te
bt!ec1on and thf' .awlrn;nd rt'!auon hrp
betw~n
rh, bu11dmg .md rts 1mmt1:!1arc surroundings. lie

complan<'<l that Le CorbU'>IN. tht urbanist had
shown too mu(h cldsllnty. and his c[rrnt too Int
f.'
wh..n 11 came to choosing .rn adrquate site to
do
wh1ch1hebu1ld1ngrnu d rclatt 1
wr
These comments abc>ut th<' Cnrp<. nter C.en

lrr's ~ring and programming art ~1gn11cant
hteause rhry acrurJtely detect 1hr om1ss1un of
"' <1ual111cs th.n h.1ve tradmonallv been c..,ns1d

~1ed essentJJl to any burldmg c nce1ved around
the promen"de arch1trc turale Le Corbu~1cr had
ntend d
Ina
t'ie Carprnrer Cerit~r be a lesson
l'f
'A t' I\
1'
tcr Center's programming. dfguing that ,uch an

institull'. unlike an institute uf rh~m1Mry or phys
1" rannot establish a routine plan. For this
r<a, 0 n, as a detailed pln was drawn up. Le Corhus
icr was only a'kcd to crcaw as flexible a space as
r--- - - ----,1
I
I
I
t I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
']
' I
I
,I
I1,... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ JI
Toptobouom
P'" ' ' ' d f,1 1x11l t>rt 111lt;t1
\1111., 5.1 , ~, ! )f!
f.lv'h'""-1' tJ)' l 11,<,t Nrwman
Oppo1ltt
( tu1rnt1l till; ( lll fH: 'll1'1 (rn!m d' J II ~ h 1 l~ h1ytm1J
However. a s a res ult of thi s investment '"

ttiP public dbpl~y of the promenade, the inside
does seem to be hollowed out , and 3> Gicdoun ,ays.
1urn<!d into a warehouse like space. When the parmions have been pu5hed out, w~ are left with
possible. even at the ri'k that the interior might
nothing onside the p lans. Hitc hcock returned to
look like a warehouse."' Indeed the interioo of the
the drawings that Le Corbus1er had chosn for
building docs look a bit like a warehouse. even
the OeuvrP Comp/i>rP to argue that Le Corbusoer's
when 11 is made out of the ,amc components a<
intentions were not the same what was hnally
oth1r free plan buildings by Le Corbusocr the
built . But on the Oi>uvr1t Complte. the most obvi-
column gnd. the r<?ctangular shapes. ;111d the free
ous aspect of the plans selected by Le Corbusocr
forms. However. when lOmparcd with oth<!r free
is how empty they real ly are. ~unhcrmorc. Le Cor
plan, such a~ the four canonical manifestations
busier chose not to mclud<! the full basement plan.
that L<! Corbusicr had described in his famous
He selected a sequence of Hve stark plans - the
sketch in />rfci..li011.d, this building deploys them
only major in accuracy in them being not so much
on a very different mann<?r. The fre<!Standing par-
the unfultill<!d relationship with the context. or
be<!n set up against
th<! emptiness of the interiors. but rhe inclusion of
the tree plan's grid of columns and within a rect
a ramp that was never built and rhat connect' the
angular boundary are here expelled from between
third floor gallery space to the fourth.
titions, which had
~lways
the columns and pushed out to the edge, to
When looking from the inside out. the build
replace the rectangular bound>ry. from the out
ong docs seem 10 ignore its surroundings. There
side, however. the neighboring buildings. the
arc many decisions in the interior layout 1nd1cat
f'ogg Art Museum and the Harvard Facu lty Cl ub.
ong that Giedion's cnt1C1sms of the ina11ent1vc
are sohcoted as the container of the Carpenter.
ness to th~ site and the emptone>S of the plans
Suggestions. that were rejected by Le Corbusler,
arc rclat.:d. Howeveo-. the building is not so much
of the building being too bog for the site,
inattentive to the context as 11 1s blind towards ot.
confirm the importance of the tension achieved
For one, the shear wall that hold> up the ramp ol
between the building's forms and the abutting
the Carpenter Center blocks the view through the
buildings. Importantly. from the first tome he
large and open lobby window. And a t the moment
dCw the plan on the actual site, Le Corbusier
when the viewer is on axis with the window and
load llAkod that the existing trees be accurately
the lobby, this wall cuts off the visual connectoon
located on it. The columns, again>t which the main
to the outside. The mullion-less window, through
entrance is locat<>d. ar~ aligned with a tree on the
its correspondence with this dircCI view, seems a
Fiiculty Club lot, uggc>ting continuity between
once to demonstrate and deny everything that has
the Ile-Id ot column and tht trees. Purthcr
been snld ;ibout the free fa~adc and the window in
more, the column grid extends beyond the paved
rcln tionshlp with the free plan On the one hand.
a1eo1 ol the entrance and into the same terrac<?,
the view is there available, and the inside and the
as of the Carpenter extends al l the way to the

r:oculty Club fatadc
outside ex tend into each other. But when one is

on a xi s, look mg ou t~ odc frontally. the wall coawls
Not only has the outside contai ner been
by and cut off th<! view. The lobby does not get
removed. the floors have as well. The dommo slabs
closed off or conhncd, and Pven from thi~ window,
that usually frame and confine the free forms
th e view tends to open up to the s ides of the shtar
In the interior between floors and ceilings am
wall when one a11proaches the window. The main
also rr111ovcd. The
rree
formb arc exposed 10 the

outside and they acquire on urban sca le. Here
~talr facing Quincy Street provides anoiher exam
again the building er.ates a surrogate to what has
afford excellent views of the campus and of Caro
been removed. Tho slabs arc graphically inscribed
bridge, situated as 1t 1s on a diagonal with the

Lamont yard. 11ow<'ver. the fa~adc of the s1~1rtase
intu the concrete of the curved forms. On the

Prescott Street fo~ade lhc slab~ are also revealed
u the horizontal memberi of tne lirise-solcils 11et
pie ot willful blindness. This is a volume that could
ia rilled on with glass blocks t hat only allow the hght

to come in but not rhe pr1111leged view. One mo"'
chp~ed to allow for the passage of t he ramp. By
confirmation can be found in the waytlle tree> and
sett ing up he column/tree field, by pushin11 the
shrubs arc repeatedly drawn in plan tn order to
free shapes against the abutting buildings. and
block the window walls from direct viewing to th<
w;th the full Cale exposure of the free forms,
outside ~en berween the two sides of the building.
Le Corbusier carries out the intention uf dem-
These blindl'rs act locally to prevent the vifW
onstrating his archhe<:tural principles. but in
from penetr.atlng deep into the workshop and
th1b case turned inside out in order to display
studio spa ces. But Le Corbusior deploys this blind
them didactically on the rxtcrior. Contrary to the
nus at
asseHments of Gicdion :ind Hitchcock, the build

ing seems very urban in its outlook.
diagonal bri..e-sole1l1 disallow a direct 111ew to the
a 1nore aeneral level in tht
w;iy that di
exterior. pan icularly in the workshops and stu
.,,
"
Left
(.,'
~
... ~
r.~
'J ,
J(l
8dlow. lefl lo right
, . ..,,
(
~
sngs lnqum('' into 1h1s subien have informed

mudtrn arc!uttctur at l('ast >tnCe lhP P101urtsque,
particularly
in
tht de~1gn thrones of Humphry
Rep1on, Augus1e Cho1sy, Augus1 Sch marLOW, Adolf

Loo,, nd Lt C:orbu,1cr and 1hrough an extmdcd
inter.inion bt'twcen .uchncu~. modrrn arfo1s,
.ind Ge-i~h p>ycholog1s1' 1n the 1920, d!ld 1910s
Each of tit~> thl'ortc> has dvanted pec1hr com
pos111onal strJtg1e>, surhds undulation, 'rnalny,

nd JUtapo"trnn l:ngagmg ihr moving ~ub1c-ri
1n the d1fin111on of the form of a bu11Jrng gtner

ally 1mpl1~s th~t the Mth11en, or thl' buildmg, 1,
.iw:11r of the presenep ol the occupant ~nd
ri<ip
tOCdlly th,tt the VICW~r become-. awa11' Of thr Way
Kevin lynch in urban renewal America, daily com

muuni; on the highway 1mpltes social mob1hty.
MorP recently different kinds of formal ag11a11on
)UCh as
formlessnes>. folding. and computational
ma1enah>m have been JU)llfied a~ enhanced cxpc

rlt'nce~ of the tnforma11on age
W1th1n each theory. rhe ktnc!lc r('la11onsh1p
between 1h,. viewer and the building could b!>
lotattd on a >pectrum be1ween two
pole~ On 1he
one end, the bu1ld1ng 1s understood as a ~cquencc

of ~tat< image) thAt ..re- connected by a moving
viewer (<'.g., Loo) ond I c Corbus1crJ and on the
other. rne butld1ngs'
~urfaLc) are warped and
that h1~'her v1oewing hab1h .ire formed by th~ sur-
Slrt'tlh<'d m 01der ro simulate or rC'J>rcsent mor 1on
rounding sp~cc
lord ,t.mt V1C'wer fog from Borromoni to Uen Vdn
W11t11n
each theory, when the suhiett moves,
hi' cqu1re, c~n;un ~oul trnhute~ f"or "

pie, ambul~uon m the l11uure5que assen~
v1duI f1cedo1n For modern hfl' to 'P
.,< " prellaf\d
to''~ lullt>1, tlw Futurists and Lt Corhu"tr had
to ob\c1 ve tht rny from~ fo\I tar or I
Pane Wuh
OcrkcU.
-'1
r 1 ''I
; 11 Li'1 '-r.ti.t I
~tf1 I' h11

.... ,
tpr r ,...,
'l! ~ .i(llt.)~t
~1h1r,v
~!((
'x
;t
(t
trol\I
a pictorial ;ensf 01
of 1hr
.
t intcrpreta11ons
a static pos1tion. But mos
l ser1oth
0
promenade in the free PIan have been c
to ini.muate monon
in
former, less rcpre!.enrational. pole. al corolM

h
pcrrcntl
nof 11\f
The promenade 1 ~ 1 e ex
1
basic
deftnit10
0105
of the free plan The
's ~ertiI
the bu1ld1ng
,
.
uttural
free plan 1s the idea that
d from its sir
pdrtt11ons Me disengage
d to iohabua
I d 10 respan ol rhe rt<
mrnt~ and freely emp oyc
1
d ~rT icuf.1t1o0
11
tton . The 1nhabitilt!Ot\ an
ovement. ~'
plan 1s guided by c1rcu\atton. by m en one nocr
If but betwc
only tn!>rd<' the plan itsc
r.d
theplan
f between
~
and other~. and importanr y,
~ p ha> hL"
1
their rel~fl
the exterior now 1l131
tacade
tsol 1ht
nr 1~
freed from 1hn.oni.ifain
of movtmr
.
r1:1a11on
-0111
The .1ccep1ed intcrp
b s er'~ow1'>
1
b V Cot u
rl a~
the freylan is guided Y inspired in pa Jil<'~
.I
. 0111(nadc
on en
mg about the pr
necuve pr 1 rb
O(C 1nlfOS,
folk.' 1111
a no11on, by the 111
his bOO~
y1./o~
1
of Jean lacqucs ROU sse~u. " n the s~cond dtnl"
Swdrm;,. wn11en 1n 194i durin., x flrl>. siu
the 13pau
w~r and add1 C>~rtl 10
0115
M 'N . . . .
' I \ dt
'
l~~ t,(.
I 11 \.f -' 1...t( 1l (,llllP
t1b ( tI l\-1 .-tl1M''IQ\
fl\'{
I" . >-,\ . il,t '~.I hut lht tlfl;'l IOf
;nrl :hen puh\ished .igain w11h renew<>d commit
and its impact on L<.>Corbusier's architcc1ure. Even
views. When one moves, thrse views, which are prr
1n 1957. Le Corbus1er describe~
though they may differ on the cultural interpre-
dominantly turned to the outside. are connel'ted
rtrrilto 11> tOntfnt
'lrp1om<n~de in th!' following manner:

~. urrmtr(turt
mu.At be walked through and tru
'""'d It 1A by 110 111ea111> rliat rmirely 9rapl1ic illu

"''' wro111 ,ic/100/.i of thought like u.i ta believe
together in the mind of the viewer. In his own writ-
unraveling the hu1l<ling to the moving subject in
ings. Le Co rbus1cr dors refer 10 t his unravclin11.
bits or as still frames that untold one after the
but not solely 10 that.
other. whether in smooth 1ransit1ons or in sur
An even more basic assumption underhes
prising breaks. crea1e<l by the f rl'e-standing intc
these interpretations of mcwemcnt
nor partrtions and the intermingling of interior
wr. It b 1hat visual perreption, as ,1 mental process.
space' with outside vwws. Recent ly. Beatriz Colo
<'nt ails the interpret<1t ion nf lwodimensiona1st1m
mina has provided the following int~rpretat1on.
uli as tht>y register <>n the retina. A~er undergo
mwo111 ep11011. rhe claA.Aicol rra haired
Mod1'rn l!'jl!lJ move. Vi.61011 in l.i> Corbu.iicri. an-hi
"P for lir total drAt n1crrou of archirPcture.
s1onal imnge from the r~tm~ to the brain, we can
tvcrure U, a/way.i tied to movem('nt: "You follow <HI
finally infer the third dimension back out of th1
"' Olj01,ud uro1111d 110111P ab.uract point thar
pre
r1ridA roh1 u mew. a chmwricul man witlt thP PY<'

1
'1 Jly w1d 1,;10111>m111fta11P011J>ly circular. Such

1
"mui, m1piy dor1> 11ot rx11>1, and in co11.ieqt1e11ce
1rlru.
10
'
tat ions of th<' rule, they do concur that it entails
liwrad o
in
Le Corbus
ing a pe1teptual proress 1hat t~kcs the 1wodirnen
two ryeA .iet in tl1e fronr

1
of "' lirnd, and hr 1>1a11ci.A AtX f<'t>I abov" th<'
irinemry." a pronlt'nade arch1tl'<r11ralP. Tlze ponlt
visual ruts. As the viewer changes position on rrla
of vit>w of modern arc/1itect11rl! LI >1ewr fixed, a.i 111
tion to the object bdng viewed, the brain <'onnects
Tl1~M /110/09ica/ far:tA
baroque orrl11t1ct11rt>, or a.A i11 the model of vi..lio11
th<' ~equl'ncc of twodimens1onal image as a roll
Utt-+.'1w119lr fo d
I
umn t 1e wlwlr barcl1 of pla11J> t/1at
1,.,,,tl"wh I
'" r.-volv1n9 arow1d a jlrrit1ouJ> p1vor.
ofthP can"'ru ob..icura, but alwuyJJ 111motion,aA111
ing h im does and interprets them. Perceptual th<'
ftlm or i11 tl11?c1ry. CrnwdA.AhopprlrA i110 department

More. rnilroocl truvell'r.i. und tlw i11,10b1tcwt.1> of Li
orists have employed the media of phntogrphy
'"man
<11>
9'Nr.d <md lookA uhrad_
Ti,..._ '~'"PJ!'d
' wrtI1 h 1.1 ow11
two i>yv.i and lookrn9
M1ur9hr ol1e d
Q .our mun walk.1 abour a11d clrang<'.4
Pr1.61t1u11A
a I I
PP'"" 111111>1?/j to hi1> purA111t.11, movi119
r111imrll;r ,,
01 <lAIH'AA/011 uf achrtectural r<?a/1
11,,.., H"re
xrvrreiu VA tlw mtmJ>v fv,,Jin9 tliut h<lil
<flni. fron; Owt ,,
>
fr11r ri
A <~PH tire of 11Wl!Pntvnt.6. Thu, lit. AO
l>y 1h
tor 01r1urc .,
'urecrmbej1td91>ddeadorltvin9
d"9"'" lo 111
/
1 UI"'
tlrv ru/p uf m<>v<'lllPtll hU.11
0,,,
dtMe9ard J01
brr//1amly exploited.'
Th 11 dc1rri 1
P ion h~, been cen1 ra I to th<' 1nt<>r
1mn ol 1h.
~,~~rr
c prom<'nadl arrh1t..:itturdlc among
011.,
' lrttH...1nll< llfH
4 r ,,,1
'> Morr rrcrnt rn1~rp1'ctl'rs of
llJ\lt't\ w k t
ur hive Ir w<l to loLU~ on under~ Plell\~Jy Wh

Ith
~t !hrs "rule ot movcmcnt"
<i} tt.to d
"t(_nl,,Tl)
'" ui,~<l hy llruno lk1chlin, ll<'~t1n.1. nd y
''" 'n 1
vriAl~m 1301., who h~v~ rd ied
~v f th10
'Pc1~,. tun,.
rtl'~. hom th ... l'utunsqu~. to
"nd,n
'1
it'
11
Yb;J.1
tht1ln1l'\ I
'cqlJt.~l..tliH\
th" lnt('r pretation of v1w
"''d to I h" ~dven1 ut (11\em~
and cinema as metaphors to explicate the dillcr
Corb11.11i1,ri. lioUJ.t>.11 have Ill common iJ11th movi<'

v1Pwer1J t/iut they cannot Jix (orrr.61) thP i11109P.
en1 levels of >ec111g. As our mechanical ~nd rl('f
Uk<' th<? movi<' vwwerrliut OP11iumi11 d1'.6aibPA they
would SC<'lll. are our models for vhion.11
inhabit a .!lpocP tlrut IA 11Pitlwra11 m..iide nor an out

.
, that iJ nor modi'
Aidl',pul>/1c nor prrvat<. It I}, a .ipan
is signihcant tor tustoric~I rrasons. ln hi) c.inon-
This digr1ss1on into perl'rptual psyhology

ir.il Sp(lrP, Tmw, mul Arrl11ttct111P, Giedrnn him
out of wall.A burofimage.i.'

L' CorlJusier's hou>cs ar1 less
Th< space> o t c
rlbou1 enclosur<' than thl! cntangl~m<>nt ol insid<'
. I intl'rior than
.rntl outsidl', il'SS about a 1r.1J tt1ona
ttet how 11Mny
1hout following ~n i11n<'1 .ry (no ma
ir how lrntar) th<' endo

1im<:~ rc<lr ,1wn. no mdtl
I . th< roi1;1gc of tl"l'lilll! im~g<'s
~un r<sul11ng
h too much
"I
d
the
rl'~dcr moves 1htnu11 .
d~.)l'O'" c as
. 10
"' too ro.1ny ,111nulr.
m"1cri.11.100 many rmag .
'
l111ll'S diffrrl'nt LOnThl~ inrerpn'ttltH>n lorn
un~si> ;i~ pho
.
houl thl' view. .i~ tleetlltl!
teptton' ~
,
. tur<' hut in .ill .:d~c~.
wgr.1ph. Jnd as mov1og pre
_
f
an ord1es11 at1<>n o
th<:> building i~ ronnived "~
'"'
tronic c4u 1pment hecomcs more romphcah'd so.11
selt h.1d proposed that rh.1ng<'S in moilcs ot pcrcrp

tion .ire cffectcJ bych.mgcs '"technology and th'
mtr utluct ion o( new niedi.1. Tcchno\og1cal rh,1ni;cs
thl'relon .1ftcct both the pr0Jur11on .ind the ircip
non of architttur<'- 111 idc1mlies Futurism .ind
Cubism :is two altl'lll()h .11 rcprr~l)ntulg t~w ~PJ(C
along'"' wl'll known <lu

11in<' Ius1on.I "'ollow1na
c
f I . I 11<lns1111r hl'twccn 1trhnrllo11Y
l'tJrHIOl\S (l t lf.' I l' ct
d 'rll urhlH'(.l! turmd to r.,,1.111 P~Y
thl~ tWP011t.1 ~ 11
rho\ogy
1100~
111
uo d<'r
to shJ"'' or u111hrm thr11 l""l

r
-or 10111posiuon
and fll'1wp11on ot fo1m.
auu
,
k d extensively
R..ciproclly. Gestalt thtonsts 1oo e
study
hgure and
at ~bstract visual ft in order to
ff
d the whole/pan
ground. their rclauonat e ects an
m "Gestah theories have
interacuons between th
d mens1onat illus
primarily concentrated on two- 1
rrauons and borrowed visual theory in relauon to
pa1n11ng wOuld seem that the d1scuss1ons of
I'
mouon in architecture are indebted to this p1ctonal aspect of percepuonas well. Le Corbusierdoes
appear to rely on a s1m1lar interpretation ol per
cepuon in motion Colin Rowe and Robert Slutzky
havHxhauuvelyanalyzed this aspect of his work.
but it is not thP only way his work relates to the
idea ol movement."
Le Corbus1cr'searlywritings on painting and
architecture with Amed ~e 07.enfanl a11empted to
ground the purist theoric of painting and ol arc hi
lecture in sc1en11hc evidence from such percep
tual p>ycholog1sts as Hermann von Helmholtz and
Charles Henry " Their iournal. L't.pm Nouveau,
pubhhcd cvc1al papers by Charles Henry. director of the Laboratory ol Phy>1olog1cal Sensation
at the Sorbonne Henry sought 10 1den11ly sc1en
uhc 1us11hca11on for ~c~theuc preferences He
de"loped the aes1he11c protractor: an instrument 1ha1 produced rhythmic angle> based on
umple number proportions that "er' supposed to
yitld mo~ >>11sfactory. thereforf al!!>theur. sensa11on 1n the ob~rver" Both llenry and h1> art1s1
ruder> hke Le Corbu>ier were aware of 1he cul
tural factor> inwlved 10 thedehn111on of aesthetic
preference>, but they placed rheir cnqu1si11on> at
level thac they believed preceded the establish
menc of cultural S1gmhca11on, di whac they under
tood to bt a ur11vcr~al ba>e. l.c Corbus1er and
Oztnf.tnt olt"n taucloned their readers that rhc
main QU~>t was not for an absolute (even if
the rhetoric ofccn ~lipped 10 that dirernon)."
Thesc "ronsiants" emerge out of chaos in order lo
tst<ibllsh "clah1fica1ions founded on the appcarancu of naiurt . This underlies the dilflcuh pur
su11 of constants (noc ab>olures) and the appa1en1
(not 1he actual).
This pursu11 would guide Le Corbus1er in
many UJ>f> of his work. whether through the
dfvelopment of the 1racN-s regulato1res th od
ul
h
em .
or. in I e polychromlf or in dffend
h
'
ing purist
s af)t'S. In eachohheseaspcctsof design, whether
II was the compo
I
siuonal organrza11on of the
a~adt, the rnusuremfncs f
o spaces '"'ad
of color, or th d
,
o ations
e etnn1na11on or free fo '
Corbuscrr ident1hed rul d
ntl5, Le
es erived fro
h
~hev,d remained
m w at he
constant for al!
the rule or
users. Neither
movement nor the
ated with it were
constants associevcr explicit! 1
have to be d ,
' spe led out. They
crived From pauln
from buildJngs l'k
and
1 the Carpunt8 relerences
c
he i temed to emnlo tL .
er enter, where
,, , 111s rule
Amongh h
,
iso1 erpursulcsof
$1bt, connection to the
constants, a pos.
rule or movem
em can be
f color This may be a rather

found in his theory o
.
t ng the idea of movement.
oblique way of 1nterpre 1
mic Architectural<' docs embody.
but the PcIye h10
ll manner, his views ol perception
1n a less unp I1e
talion of constants across sub
and the interpre
1ec1s. tnteresungly. II is also a place where Le Cor.
d ay from the composi tional and
busier move aw
.
I n butes of color and focused on II~
pamter Ya ri
. act m everyday encounters with
psycholog1caI imp
a moving sub1ec:t. According to Arthur Ruegg. Le
Corbus1er derived his approach from physiologi-
cal as well as psychologrcal eff<'cts of colors whrch

could fully unfold in the white space. Vice versa,
he also took its legitimization from the laws of
percepnon and associauon that are presumed to
be constant, from the unchangeable "mc!canisme
de remotion."" His color concept in th is respect
dilfers from that of the Dutch de S1l1I movement
or from German postexprrssionism. 19
Helmholtz. Henry. and other psychologists
whom Le Corbus1er read argued chat color
exh1b11ed certain psychological and physiological
effects th3t were constant among different view
er>. Blue for example, made forms recede whereas
brown stabilized them Smee Pcssac. Le Corbus
1er had bttn expenmenung wuh this employment
or colors However. Ruegg reminds us that Le Cor
busier sk1~ped thesc1entl hcally determined color
schemes, uch as the classified color circle of Ost
wald. and conncc1ed directly to the daily expe.
nenres of people with colors deployed polychro
ma11cally around them It was not the 1ntnnslc
qua lit 1es of materials 1ha1 he was after. Instead
he wanted to understdnd 1hc1reffcc1> and the con
Stonts that they d1splaytd 1n the chaos oF daily
life. Moreover. while he distussed color as a fJctor
that affected the tompoMtion of archlc ccturc to
a stauc viewer !It recedes fro m onu position at
one point :n time), 11 15 the free rlan that removed
che boundaries between rooms and allowed for
the different color~ to interact independently of
the forms that they covered. The free plan makes
such ideas as the "Rose Room. b I
f
o so Cle. It there
ore encourages using colors polychromat lcally
against each oth~r. The Polych

rom1e Arch/tee
ruro Ie. Le Corbus1
ers Systematic approach 10 the
:eployme01 of colors, was established in the 1930s
ora paintcompa 1
ny. twas then loosened
h
1950s s h
up in I e
o t at dec1s1ons could be b d
observing the effect of colors on ase more on
ng to Ruegg thl h
viewers. Accord
5 appened att
h
newcollect1on f I .
er t ecreationofa
o co ors en 19
lime as th C3
59. around the same
designed.
w ' '1>entcr was b<'ing
e can also go back
to find a rule of
to Ccstalt psychology
movement th
one Le Corb .
at cs similar to the
uscer may have b
ulate. A second
ecn trying to artic
,
generation of c
gists released th i
estalt psycholofi
e v ewer from th
xed laboratory ch .
e confines of the
th
acr and from th I
at they would
.
e mited results
get in matun h
8 t e viewer look at
pictures simulating motion Uh'

mately .~.,
posed that perception of molio d'd '-'<J Pt11n 1 not
connecting different static mag
Occur by
es and com
them, but rather by identifying h
Piri"t
W at Wis A...
and what changed with movemem S
. ome thtt"'or such an alternative to the Pct
""'
ona1 111o4e1
movement could be traced back 1
of
o early~Ui
theorists, but the development of aco
. .
mprt~nsc"'
theory of v1s1on based on chis model took plaq
after the Second World War. lames Gibson
.u
Arnerrcan perceptual psychologist who had Si>fllr

some time researching how pilots orttnt thein.
selves in the scarce environment or the sk
Ytime
to realize that neither the restricted environm,
111
of the lab nor the pictorial approach to percfptlo~

suffice to explain how we see in everyday life.
He shifted the emphasis away from the rttinal
image as the effective s1imulus for vision, aw~

from the image, towards the totality of tht environment, what he called an "optic array.""~
ing to Gibson, when we move within thinrny,"'
make sense of the world by way of reta11ni ow
movement to what he called "mvariant p1nem1
en the environment," certain constant propenm.
as opposed 10 variant patterns, or thost1h111as we move. Invariants are properties or p3n~

that remain constant when the obserwr, thetmironment, or both change their position. RKflll
elaborations on Gibson's idea disctm two rypes
oF invariants: transformational invariantUlfpil
terns of change that can reveal what Is happe!UllS ,
to an object. for example, when an objecc mom '
away from the viewer at a regular spted. Its appM
cnt area (the size of the angle apprehcndtd It
the eye) diminishes in a predictable manner. Tiit
decrease of the area is proportional to che squut
of the distance. Whenever this relationshiplsp1tl
ent It must mean chat the distance betwetn thr
.
repl1r
viewer and the ob1ect is changing '" 1
manner. Gibson and his followers placed a strol$
11
emphasis on the role that texturts of surl.it
play in the orienta11on and guidance of
!lltVI:
in a space. Structural invariants. the second~

h t remain~,.
are a higher order of pattems t a
It.
fore~P
stant despite changes in s1mula11on.

dii
the horizon ratio, the relationship belll'ffn
d1s11nctfr9I"
height of the object and its apparent
vftt'd
the horizon remains constant, a
nowingtht
t 10 11
to locate the object's real post
. fltf;.
as t~
them moves.
tl'OO'
.
,,._,tilt I 11
Cibson's ideas qu1cldy cauis"
oflP
.
.
H ublished 50rnt
of artists and architects. e P
fr~ud'rl!'
. .
. nals and was
..J
research m visual ans 1our
r1idtll"
11
seri8Son
featured in the George Bra11 er
l ll"ot"
fre<jllf~I y
.
by Gyorgy Kepes. He was also
lect~rtd i'
(who
by the likes of Rudolf Arnheirn
Good,,....
rl Nelso~
..Ill
and about the Carpenter Cente ,.bSon. P"
.
I tor of vi
~
a philosopher and 111ter oeu
. n"' llO"
atte~llO
insist tha1 we should payclo~e . Of'(let io

ists construct their own worlds in
ut11f
"'
. ..
,,....r:.I
.. ...
J
1..-
fI
stand better how the perceptual world works.22

In brief, this "direct" approach t
o percep
tion, what is also referred to as th
.
.
e eco1ogical
approach, shifts the emphasis awayfrom pictures
.
and towards invariants constants It 1
e evates the
role of such attributes as ratios, textures, and
spaces between objects because of their ability to
guide the moving subject. Importantly, as Gibson
observed, the reliance on these invariant attributes increases in a rarefied, empty environment.
CONS TANTS IN AC T ION

In an empty building, pictorial compositional st rat
lar patterns in the floor Sh.

.
my surfaces are juxtaposed against rough ones. Th
d I .
e on u ato1res not
on1y emphasize the curvatu
b
.
.
re, ut given their
irregular spacing, they also confuse its apparent
curvatu~e, p~rticular\y as one moves along the

wall. It 1s as 1f by playing out these attr1'butes of
the architecture against each other he 1s
_ remind
.
ing the occupants of the visual arts center not to
fully trust their eyes. Giedion insisted in his dis
cussion of the Visual Ans programme that the psy
chology of vision was much more important than
the opt ics, particularly in the electronic age that
he was heralding.
egies would be impossible to employ. The Carpen

ter Center's spaces rely on
a series of invariants
THE PURIFICATION
in order to delineate the spaces. Accounts of the
OF A RCHITECTURE BY THE VOID
building design agree on the importance Le Cor-
Much is yet to be said about emptiness in archi
busier gave in this project to materials, textures,
tecture, a phenomenon once described by Le Cor
colors, and surface treatments. It was necessary
busier as the purification of architecture by the
for him to capture a rough and continuous texture
void."23 It would be impossible to elaborare 011 all
for the ceiling and to maintain a regularity to the
aspects of the rule of movement in Le Corbusier's
floor patterns in the studio spaces, as if for the eye
architecture by studying only one building. Even
to measure against them. Whenever he employs a
if, as Stan Allen astutely observes, the Carpenter
smooth surface, with the exception of the columns,
Center is a place where Le Corbusier's concepts
a gradated texture is used in order to introduce cer-
are condensed, we would still need to follow the
tain references in this surrogate environment.

A strong emphasis is also placed on bringing
way in which the rule was employed more diachronically." Still, this alternative proposes that
the horizon line into every space. be it in the form
if the free plan had been initiated by releasing the
of a retaining wall that runs behind the pilot is on
interior space from the constraints of structure,
the street level entrance or in the form of a shelf
this freedom could only be fully gained if those
that is placed almost at eye level to tie the curva
aspects of architecture, formerly understood as
tu re of the room and its brisesoleils together. The
secondary and isolated qualities of form, are ele-
curvature of the studio walls is exaggerated by the

ondulatoires so that even in the absence of direct
light, they appear curved.
In all, however, it is not so much the specific
material qualities of things but their relational
qualities that seem to affect our perception in
motion. Textures are not understood as intrinsic
qualities but are to be experienced in relation to
vated into constants that operate according to the

rules of movement.
The effect produced by the emptiness of the
Carpenter Center and the challenges presented to
its inhabitation recall some of the techniques of
eighteenth and nineteenth century Picturesque
composition, particularly in the work of Humphry
Repton. Repton's designs forced the viewer to
change position in the landscape in order to be able
each other.
In keeping with the criticisms presented
to determine the actual measurement of objects.
against it, the Carpenter Center seems to sepa
I" model of
rate almost graphically, the p1ctona
deliberate distortions of ground, reflections. and

. zes of comparative objects all contribtampered s I
. . g the viewer a false measurement of
ute to g1v1n
, Pie
the object being contemplated. In Reptons
.
. - the difference between the appar
turesque 1t 1s
d the real that prompts the viewer to move.
ent an
r
.
earches for true measurement. 1mpo .
The viewers
.
.
. t'll moving from one static
tantly. the viewer is s I .
ed ic
. .
ther relying on one compos P
pos1uon to ano
'
. .
f
cer another but trusting none in itsel .
ture a f
laces
f
d the stroller triangu
L'ke
the surveyor 0 1an
1
fi the object of his contemp1a
before bemg ab1e to x

.
the
d true dimension and against
tion in place an
.
21
.
of the landscape designer.
deceptions
. . the games of meaLe Corbusier maintains
m fixed points and com
but departs fro
suremen1
h we can detect a more funda
positions. perhaps ere
the promenade from another, vdirect" one. This is

perhaps the aspect of the building that Le Corbus
ier was most dissatisfied with, and it shows most
clearly in the way that h e republished the plans
of the building by including the interior ramp
going from t he third to the fourth level. This ra~p
would have acted as a continuation of the exterior
ry between the
ramp and established a conunu1
two models.
However, the constants do not always oper. 1 h . the emptiness
ate as cues, as guiding 1g ts m
.
of the studios. Le Corbusier also uses these attn
butes of his building to deliberately confuse move
r effects We are
ment or to feign certain coun t e
.
th
dularized paneling
constantly presented w1 mo
.
rete against 1rregu
systems imprinted int h e cone
Jf an object is viewed from one position, the
mental cinematic inOuencc on his architecture but

one that does not rely onstills" orthe "freeze.frame
approach maintained by the abovemenuoned cin
ematic interpretations of his work. In the "Amer
ican Prologue" to Prku1onA, Le Corbus1er chal
lenges any Hollywood director to capture what he
\. .
different perceptions of depth and size than tht

actual ones. Architecture is not simply an objea
in an ordinary Amal! re.otaurant, two or three cu.4
gate visual field and its foil. The building provides
tomerA are havin9 coffee and talking. The table iA

Mill cowred with 9IOAAeA. with borrle,;, wnh platu.
they were the main attribute of the space and as if

they contamed a code to the archit ects on site as
a sense of diminution in depth. a surrogate hon.

but it also interrupts their function as invariants.
ncss, it simultaneously plays the role of a SllJTo-
zon. and patterns and textures to measure ag;iinst,
with tht botTle of oil, thP ..aluhaker, pepper mill.
imponant as the shapes and their dimensions.2&
napkin.i. napkin rin9, etc. Look at the i11evitable
This recalls the way the lonely figures move in
Even the delimitation of the space. the hrld of
order that relate,; thue ob1ecu to each othPT; they
empty spaces of Antonioni's "Red Desert" and the

way the crisp outlines of their colored coats rub
vision, changes in motion. Spaces are enclosed
against the rust of industry and the rough tex-
cnts of enclosure change with movement. Yet in
tures of weathered walls.

Ultimately, the rule of movement does not
such a rarified environment, it is not the arch1
only govern circulation, figurative forms. and
viewer's attention with its own forms and a~r

ent transformations but pushes back and allows
rho! .i.eparat<? between them are the mea,aure of life.
o tn\ial!Ct
rcsentation of spatial emptiness, render the textures of the surfaces very expressionistically as if
hand of one or the other of the dinerA; the dutanceA
movement, to heighten the sense of mor

.
.
1011. By
manipulating the constants, orthe illV;ln
ntS,tfit
architect is also able to feign different speeds and
that fills the 11isual field. In its decepuve rnpu.
have all been U.Aed. they l1ave been 9rcuped in the
sitional logic docs not merely aim
the films of Michaelangelo Antonioni and his rep
describes as a cinematic moment:
in architecture to take place. for when you enter

.
u experience it all at once. There
a studio space yo
'cws Eventually. however, you
f
is no sequence o v1 .
. . different way. The drawings that
start seeing tn a
s to Boston drawn by Guillermo
traveled f rom P an
Julhan de la Fuentes. an apprentice fascinated by
He goes on to criticize the Hollywood ctne

matic approach by saying. "There isn't a false point.
a hiatus. a deceit .. . no false harmonics. fakes.
dodges.""' It is through these mechanisms of film
making that we can think of the work of Le Corbus
ier as cinematic, not because of the guided view
ing along the ramp that connects between different
static views nor for the ribbon windows which
frame the panning view as 11 11 were a hlm, but
because of,1':;ol"...!'liJ>~ion of cons~:!'J.i emp.
uerthe sp~MM!!l!U~l.
Commenungon cenain associations between
film and Le Corbusier's architecture. Arnaud Fran
~01s ~roposes that Le Corbus1er relied precisely
on this quality of emptmess to introduce a differ.

ent cmemat1c vision mto architecture. Beyond the
cinematic understanding of an architecture that
cannot be perceived fully from one point of view (a
nonperspectival architecture) franr .
th h
'
,01s proposes
at t more the elements are situated on I
that
d.
Panes
are istant from one another th
tension be
e more the
tween them increases Th
tion or concordant and discorda~t o e orchestra.
source of th'15
.
biccts is the
spacing. Cinemato
graphic perspec.
tive 1s a medium 1
or expressing ten
beings and Object
h
sions between
.
s rat er than a unifi
toal a priori "tl r
.
ed and spa.
. ran~o1s reminds us th
.
gelo Antonioni had
at M1chotelan.
very slullfull
quality of emptines . h
y exploited this
Jtis , .
sm is films.
1f tl1e represent .
ment takes place on th
a'.1onal model of tnove
f
eexter1or and
another Form
o engaging movement .
15 reserved I
of th c
e arpenter Center H
or the inside
with a
. ere, we ar
n architecture that d
e confronted
the CC>nventional unde
~.s not even allo-w for
rstand1ng f
o the cinematic
ramps. It operates in the free pl an beyond the

guided path of the ramp and the confined frame
of the nbbon window. It extends to the articula
in a suggested, incomplete manner and the gradi
tecture that is eventful. It does not captivate lhe
the activities in the space, that are nt'lertbt-
t1on of the building's surfaces and planes. These
less guided by the architecture, to become tht

events. Through this approach, it is possible to
two approaches to vision in motion, even in the
think of an architecture that anticipates ewnts
Carpenter Center, need not be mutually exclusive.
rather than creates them.
Sttmingly opposed ideas about how we conceive

of architecture, whether as an image or as an array,
as full or as empty, could be reconciled or at \east
held in tension with each Other, even in the same
spaces.29Th1s possibility is heightened in the Car
penterCentergiven theostensiblera mp. the peculiar
relationship with the context, and the emptiness.
It is the pursuit of the latter, less obvious
approach that has d
'
nven this inquiry. Whether
in the Carpent
C
er enter or elsewhere in Le C
busier's a d h
Orn ot er architectures th.
of describing and d , .
is approach
betw
h
estgnmg the relationship
een t e building and h .
diff
.
t e viewer emphasizes
erent attributes of archite
v1ously bee d'
cture than have pre
n 1scussed whe 11
.
motion. Wh' I
.
n came to vision in
I e re1nvokin
rials, formal
. . g concerns about mate
compos1t1on a d
approach mak .
' n construction, this
.
es tt possible t 0 d
Without hav
a dress movement
.
tng to agitate th f
without beingfi
e orms or the path
SUral. and with
.
'
.
out being narrative.
In this approach
attention h'ft
to the background h . s i s from the object
t e field (Aft:
may very Well be
.
.
er all, the field
th
emptied of ob
e lllaterials of
Jects.) For example
constructio
'
PGsed in a relation I
n a.re selected and com.
heh
a manner b
ave in moti
, ased on how th
f
on, not as
ey
propenies of the b'
o observatio b
o 1ects
n ut a b
s ackgrou.,,d. Th~colnllo. - -
- -
'. :
HO TES
~ 1 ll.I tl a lect~re lrom constructor>g V1st0n." a course that I teach at the
-r'?': ~H.a:e Sctl()OI o1 Ot><ogn I am indebted to \he insights o! !he students 1n lh1s
~i-~ l a sta5~IOl\S w1'.h Eduard Sekler, Francesco Passanh. Guillermo Julhan
"i'....-t Pts'on Scc11 Coll<>n a'ld Geocge ea.rd I am also very grateful to Lauren
..:~ ~ ca..u a"(! '>s Qhtful comments on this paper and for her crnema\1c v1s1on.
I ):-~;~t<!oO"I. ~;Carpenter Center for Visual Arts der HarvardUnivers1lat 1n Cam
~-.,. '" &'Jffl ~Ollntn VOi 18. 118. <Zurich, August 1964). p.331-334
I S. '111' , ~.,..~ Hottheock. 'Le Corbu~1er nna the United States." Zodiac 16, 1965.
4
5
' .... ; S. t< ana Wll lm Curtis, L~ Corbus1er al Work, The Genesis of the Carpenter
' ., ~5va1A11s !Cambridge H&r.ard Un1vers1ty Press, 1978). p.57
'. :G4<lIY "NewVcnlurcs m Un1vers1ly Building (Le Corbus1er. Sert)." Zodiac 16
>- > O'I
""~...., ~-ssell Htcticock, Le Corws1er and the United States.
~ i\C ;ss ons occur 10 the question~ ot dist ribul ion of uses arour>d \he notion of
0
'" .>;, t." <.J dh4> " Ok of Bll Hillier on how space rs used T' defln1t1on of movement
1
ot ''-"to oesogn tiere naqo do with the manrpulaloon of form that responds to the
''Q."11 Pf<cepua tramcworl. when one 1s 1n motion

1
"ht>i.is
i;,
1'
" '
s "'fh Students Fr,,m fhe Schools ofArchitecture (New York: The OrlOft
14 1'(11 0 41-45
' Ei.-11~
'
11
~.?.t1>.1!b4,'\&.~
P~t>hc.11 a~ Puvacy, Modern Arch1tecture as Mass Media (Cambndge:
;.,
~"
~.c "*' . . . .~tt t-.i
sAbook Vision n 1979 in wt11ch he presents a compotational approach

ccord.ng to this apProach. 1n1trally. a primary sketch is formed
'"'':v i ...__
.ro-cross1rio of an image Zero crossings are sudden changes"'
1
"' "'"a.
are "'Osl!y related \o shape rather than to color or medium changes.
~ "'~"&ten tO<lsists ma1n1y of very faint 1mpressrons that remain very subject
!...,,.,"'.,.'.
sca1ec1a2dmetis1ona1sketch1s then 1ntens1fied from this Information.
_,,.,II 11 Sl1ll 1ag
1
t'<~~~J<.<1a1
ueand also subiect based. the 2-0 sketch beg11'ls to suagest
's;age loth '"' which becomes better sculpted in a following stage. the 30
1851
~"('st)! Os" staQe. the visual process breaks the image down rnto simple
~lllt ~<(s ,0;e ano then recogn11es the ob1ect by rdent1Jy1ng the composition of theSe
~st
'Prelation ot lhe
f
"~"O 'S'Ofl
perceptual process !orms the culmination o years
1
~- ttie rei,
,asan nd1rec1 process which Is achieved more by inference from an
.......
~ ''llftge Some
!or '11>a1 tOl\tr~ th ,
limes Phys1olog1c11I evidence 1s inferred: the number of
ee~smovern&nt from \he brain are more numerous than t hose that
~~"'""
..,.1, lo the boo81
~lat'l>1$are ,.,~ " A\ Other tunes. simple experrments and complex mathematical
'tllroaJ
......, In all the 1Oe 1
f
I""
it
~ it
a s that when we move, we see by way of trans orm .,...

ts a Shll 11T1ag
.,., """lodoe lOda
e presented to us "'sequence but transformed Into
"frocl.,e.,"'O.
Y!hrs lllOdel prevails over any other form of interpretation of
I~~
~C'eotlOf\
.,., ""'
I H41>ea a 1
..,,..,.a...,
'"""
..._
- . "ii
t...
"c0rri
DIAatlOl\ll a
'"'lo detc,tbe lll>r~h. unlike a P5YChologocal or physiOlogrcat app<oach,
the visual Pfotess d1rec:t1y but to model it. simulate it for olhe!
'..,
purposes, but inadvertently, it helps explain how ll'e YtSuat-menfat process actunny
works. The pictorial (or freeze frame) 1nterprelatl0fl of movement"' the free plan
confirms Marr's modef See David Marr. Vis10t>, A Compc,tlional lnveslipalJOn wo tht
Human RetxeSMfat1on Ind ProceS$mgofV.sual lnfounaticn (New York: W.H. Freeman
and Company, 1982).
12 SIQlrK!d GredlOO, Spece, Tmw andArchrte<:/Ufe, Tiit Gr(IWfJr of a New Tradl/IOt> (Cam
b<1dge: Harvard Univesr1ty Press, 1976), p.~
13 For a discussion of the retatiorl$h1p between psychology and art and architecture. Mark Jarzombek, Tht Psrcho/ogllltlflO( Modt1nity (CambridQe: Catnbo'1doe Unrvtrarly
Press. 2000).
14 Cohn Rowe and Robul Slutzky, 'Transparercr lrterat and Phenomenal," rn TM Math
ematrcs of the Ideal V1tla (CambridQe: The Ml1' Press. 1976). p,159-183.
15 Ozenfant arid JeaMerct, La Pelnture Moderne (Paris:G. Cres. CoUectron de L'spril

nouveau." 1925). p.165.
18 Charles Henry, Latuml~ro. La Couleur, La forme." Suite 4 fl), L'Espr1t Nowe1u, #9,
p.1068-1079.
17 See Arthur Ruegg. "le Corbvsier's Polych<omie Architeclurale," rn Polych1omleArclrll
tu1ale, (Basel: Blrkhauser. 1999).
18 Ibid.
1
19 It 1s important to note fhat Oevtd Marr. while try rc1tomodel"'""""enl1'111ially used 1 .
......... \hal \hey reqcired as oompleu process of\nterprt

Gbson's invariants buI cone.........
tion as that of his images and were nol afwayseasy to detect
-oat:h lo v-sual Pelceplion (Hitlsdatt. NJ Lawrerce

21 James J. Gibson. An Ecolot}icaI ,,,,,,..
Erfbaum Associates. Publishers. 1986).
ho was one of the maK> interlocutors of Gibson. See
22 Recrprocally. NetSOll
w (lndJanapolrs Had<etl Publishi"!I Company, 1978)
for rns\ence. Ways of WOtldma "9
Goodma;
~t
23 See Arthur Ruegg. op. ed.
isl Mo.emenl. The Carpenter Center fat

24 Stan Allefl. "le Corbu51er and Modem t
Tecfl()jque 1>nd Repr1Mnt1IJM (Amstor
C bridge lolA Practice: Archrlee ure.
Arb. em

21XXll 121
dam: G+S Arts 1ntemet1onat.
P.
. nd New York: Ho<>QMOfl
" Art of Landscape Gardenmg \Boston a
25 Humphry Repton. T~
Mltfl111 Company. l907l
id e MIT Press. 1999). p..9.
26 LAI Cortiuslar. Prkls1ons. (Cambr g .
cle te Corbos1er." C1n4mll~
c1nematograpNe de roeuvre
tl0r1 from original Freri:h tel
27 See Arnaud Francoos. La
~ p.SO my trans1a
ot
9 (Sp11ng 19911). P.
'
tor nhoO me in the direction
'::,:~:v:ioft between the lheo<ie of colOf
28 I am grateful to Guillermo Jvllian de

Antonion but also for h.elplng rne ma
nc1 the theories of motion.
~~~-
mocieis could be~ to
I Saxandall h8S lreadY itfustr.

5ee t.1iehael SaJ<a,->dali. S/lldOWS
29 M1chte
lghtenme"t pa1ot111ps.
effeclll'$1Y d~cnbe E:.....,.Yale urwersltJ Pten. i9!18).
Enllphl~flment (Neo;r
.
,_
CuiturI d
' entl! Y. thenforc
rn11orna11c
held of
emerges a; a complex
il<it r>not d(h oprrntions th at engages with '
~la ic,,llcture.
ncd by - lultur~I ar11tact; such
n h s Prhaps 1
itnn a
>y following th
d,l{ ' narr.,11on
e notion of the
our~
- of id.
8h<bi pur lorwdrd b
'nt11y as a kind of
ith 1
ycultural th
Stand wee
an or
cori~r Homi
ng lo
o dsp the im
r111 "'bring.
pr>rtance of under
d'l{o
.
ur,e. Th
1n5crihed . .
e ndlron
Within a cultural
1Uhu1 J
Plob
1or l.lhabh
n
<>ra11011.'T
a, ts cna~tcd as a
0
'"r'nd ivc '"rm .pcrcctw th c nation in this
1 t n, con1rsl\d natu
; "to highlt g h t the discur
0 1
l11n1h
re of 1'd
"''I
rough
. cnt it ics: "To
d
Ydr
It> n~rr
Stu y
,,
aw tt
<111vc: add
.
"I,
n11on
t
nss
do!!s
not
1
" \\!II. II oth""mnis to alter
o "' la n guagt and rheto
~ui110 , ~ Prob lrmai; . . the tone eptual object
1~~1 0 ihf
_. .
d n~P<l
totaliz~110t 0 closur
.
c of tcxtuallty
1
,.
~t
tv~
ol
n
1 1 "'"1a1
vaJu<' II(" .
at1ona l culture
'"n I h rough Wh'
, in di ~paying
I
the wide
i1h we con truct the
"'"at
L_
This brings us close to Pierre Bourdieu"s

field of meanings and symbols associated with
national life."'
Of course, it would be wrong
concept of habirus. as a non-conscious system of

dispositions that derive fTom the subject's eco-
reduce the
nomic, cultural. and symbolic capital. Habttus. for
narion to mere narration.as though form were totally
Bourd1eu is a dynamic field of behavior. of pos1
to
unimportant. Rather we have torecogniserhe nation
a~
being defined within a dialec1ical tension. It is
a tension, tor 13habha. between the object and irs
tionlaking. when 1nd1viduals inherit the parame

ters of a given sttuation and modify them into a
new situauon. As Derek Robbins explains: "The
accompanying narrative:
~ignifying the people as

an a priori historical prescnc~. a pedagogical object;
habitus of every individual inscribes the inherited
and the people constructed in the performance of
situation to position which provides the legacy of
narrative. its enunciatory present marked in rhe
a new situation."'Th1s approach supposes an int~r
r<>petition and pulsation of the nauonal sign.' Jf.
action berween social behavior and a given ob1ec
parameters of modificauon. of adjustment fTom
then. the nation is a kind of narration. it is never an
tined condition. It JS here that we may locate che
abstract narration, bur a context ualized narration
posiuon of architecture in Bourd1eus discourse.
inscribed around certain objects. And it 1s within

this held of objects that have become the focus of
narrative atti>ntion that we must locate architecture.
as a language of form5 not only embedded within
various cultural discourses. but also given me3rung
by those discourses.
Architecture. in Bourdieus terms. can be

understood as a rype of "ob1ec11vate<l cultural cap11al." l!S value hes dormant and in permanent
potenual. It has to be reactivated by social prac
tices that will. as it wer<'. revive 11. In this respe<t.
r1
uon.6 that r,ru-ut it. AittuJt1
arl'h1tcr1 urc htlong> 10 tht' samrtatcgory a' 01lw1
rnak1>
cultur~I ohJN t'
''
.I
If. tpmpnraliz1 1t,
and
fu11ct1011 m a polyva/Pnl unify oj '011Jl11
t11al pro9ra11u or t'011tmc1ual pro1wnHIPA In thU.

A/1l1m19h on1PcrA - A11ch QA /wok.& <>r p1cllnP11 - can
VtPll'. in ri/Qtion ro plucP. .1>pare LI /1kP I/Jr word
be 11a1ei t1> lw tlw 1vpo,1irori<'" nj ohJPcri11ated cul
wlwn 11
r1m1/ rnp11a/. rliry /ww
l'roximrty of a11 oc111a/ri:ario11. rron1oj(m1wd i11ta a
110 11a/11p
1111/r.M rlwy arP
modifwd by 1l1P rra11r,forr11atio1111 catJAPd by .&ucrr.o

11i1J1> context11 .. . llpaa 1.11 a prarticed plan'- Tluu.
rhe Mrvvt 9eo1111>tncallydefi11ed by 11rba>1 p/u11ni11g
1.11 tran11fomwd mto a /Jpare by walkerA'
In other words, what Bourd1cu highlight s 1s the
The problem of space 1s. for de Cerreau.
need for pr.1x1> 10 unlot k the meaning of a11 object.
ult1ma1cly a problem of representation. With
Ths comes clo>c to 1h1 Wittgensteiman model
Maurice Merleau-Ponty he draws the d ist1nction
whereon hngut,t1c meaning is defined by use. Ju>t
between geometrical spate and anthropological
as words can he understood by the manner in
space. famou,Jy observ i ng the imposs1b1hty of
which they an used. so buildings c;rn be grasped
grasping the concept of space as a map, with his
p1 etnl><'d almost solely on qllest1ons of form. 11

1s a; though nMrilt!Ves of u>e stand largely out
~1dc a1ch1tcctural t.oncerns. As a 1csult. ther(' ts
no a(.(epted framework for examining how people

mak< sen>e of place and identi fy with 1t. Without
th1>. the relation of ar,.hitecture to cu ltural identity 'an hardly be addressed. In order for archi
tN 1ure to hC" understood 1n
1erm~
of cult ura l
identity, some kind of 1dentihcat1on with arch 1

tenure must have taken place. But how does this
Fredric Jamesons concern for cognitive mapping

in h b quest for various tactics t hat overcome
this problem. Hence he formulates
"rhetoric
of space" that amounts to an individualzzed pro

cc~s
of spatial demarcation. based on a linguistic
model of narrat iv1ty. "Th e opacity of the body," de

Certeau notes, "in movement. gesticulating. walk
rng. taking its pleasure. is what 1ndefin11ely organizes a here in rcla11on t o an abroad. a 'famt l1arity" in relation to a 'foreignness'. A spat ial story is
on its minimal degree a spoken language. that is.

a hngu1stic system that distributes places insotar
1dent1hca11on occur'
rht> a11tcle attempts to address this quest 100 by ~ketch mg out
description of New York as seen from t he top of

the World Trade Center. De Certcau is close to
Mchotectural d1>course that has trad 1t1onally bee n
..
111 "
l>r111 be.Mowed Ii<> prr11N11ally dormant waiting ro
This opens up a cr ucial problem within a n
.-.
cou9/1t
All rlw.oP obiecr;, 011 Phid1 c11/t11ral 1ul11e /w.& evPr
narratives of use on which they arc instribed.
"
i.A
term drpvndvnt upon many d1ff<?re111 conwntJon.o,
hytht manncru\ which they are perceived - by thP
..
w/,.,,, rt
Aituured a.A an art of a prl?.Al?llt (or of a timP). and
~ _,
I.A.
n19 to modify rliru 111cor,,orated rnlr11ral capitol.
f".t.tabl1~1r uru1 pa/w' m Q new markl'r .Mtllat1on.
..
r,pok<?n, t/1at
OCFll'Ot1d Mmrrgirn//y ill t/1p preMilt by thOM> .&Pl'k
ht' n11w~1d. 1vartmgfor tlreirold 11nllu1 ro he uJ.Pd to
~ ..fJ-:..
Ill
sc.;hen1atic. f ramcwork for
tentt1w t lwory ot 1dent ifirat 1on wit h plarc

hy ho mgmg toge1her three discrete theo1 etical
models Starting w11h a theory ot how we terri
tortalt7.c and make sen>e of place through a pro-
Ct>sS of narrativizdllon. it goes on to investigate

how a sen>c of belonging to that place 1s achieved
through ptrforma1 ivot s. be tore h na lly uggest.
1ng how cvtntual identification with .1 panicular
as it 1s art icu lated by an 'enunLiatory focahzat1on .

by an act of practicing it." 9 The city turns into a
theatre of actions, narratives of space, pedestrian
speech-acts: "It is a process of appropriation of
the topological system on the part of the pede,.
man C1us1 as the speake< appropriates and takes
on the language); it is a spatial acting out of a

place (just as the speech-act is an acoust ic auing
out of language)."' It is about tours and not maps.
II any map is achieved, it is not some abstract
map, but an ondiv1duahzed "cogn1t1ve map" to use
plate 1s forged through a wries ot m1rronng>.
]meson's ll'rm. In oth...rwords it i s born o f a strate

g1c engag<'ment woth the c11y. and does not reside
N ARRAT IVI S A TI ONS
In Th< /'m((ICP
"f f,"wryday
Lif1. Mochel dt (,.,..
tt,1u ha' dcwlopcd a tlwory al ttn 11011Jlizaton

1hwugh 'l>at1,1l
CC'.\\t'~
tallrc~.
Through
h.1bJ1u~l
pro
ol movlrnem , hy covl'r1ng dnd 1clovtr1ng
thl' o.,ame p.trh-. and 1ouh-,, we LO mt.~ 10 lam1l1anLt'

our,clve' with ,1 t<mto1 y. and tlwr<by hnd nwan
111g in lht tc:r ritory.

Dr Cc1 lt'<lll draws thl'
on t he City t>ell as a col ll'ction al building>
ro walk." note, de Ccrteau "s to la ck apace.

I
It is the mdehnitr po occss of being absent dnd
sP~1Th ol
in
prop~r.''" A\ !Jn Buch anon o bserw~

th suggest> th< r~ltancc otdc Cerreau on Lac ,,'
l"or H i, h,
dn.
t ' tr~umat oc morrar>tdge - and the
d
"'cm1ngly paradoxical attempt to overcome that

<l1st1nction hetwt~t.n
"pla< e" (11cu) and ">pan (t-spa<eJ. Somtwhat con

fusingly. hr rnwrts their u5ua l rl'it t0nsh1p 'o
that spcc bt'tome' ' tontexlultzt1on of- pla(.e.
alienation through Cpe!1tion ad

.
~ cmon~trated Jn
F1eud"s <'Xdmple of t he <.h1ld playing the tor1da
game - rhat establii.hei. Lacan's primordial place
on de Certeau work. Sp;,cc mu;! h e th eonied by
mean' ot the mirror stage, and >pa!1al prdctite'
are none other than iepNnivc- geMure~ ctimcd

at overcoming the alienation al all conc.,ptual.
SpacP occur;. a.& rl1r ffPct prnd11cPd by rhP oppra
ab~t rttrt s.pact.AsdeCertt>aucomment .!:..1 n the .1n1
..
~,
..,...
~ pme. ~ as in th 'joyful activity' of th

cMld wt.o. -"liinc before a mirror. SttS itself as
"" (il tS sbt or tw. - n as a who~) but another
the present. it conceals and d1ss1mulates the con

ventions of which it is a repetition.""
This has obvious ramiflcarions for a theory
.
h wtuch thr child 1drnuf1rs
l1Nll. an imatr W1t
~ h"s 'spatial
it-'11. wh~ countS IS the process U'I t I
c;ap1arion' that in~bes the passage toward the
olM as. the law of Ming and the law of place To
pracl>C"t~isdlus tottpHt thr1oyfuland s1ltnt
rxpen~of dnldhood. It u .. in a p~. to MOthrr

row;uil the o~r."" What dr Crneau
" ' tO -
to place can tht'refore be understood as an aspe~

of territoriahzation. and out of that belongtng
of iden11hca11on with arch1ttcture. Butler's mci
a sense of 1den111y might be forg@d. The attrac

tion of forurr's apphcauon of performativity
sive comments on g<'nder 1dent11y being dehned
10
place 1s that II resisu more static notions of dwell
not in biological terms. but in performallve terms
ing emanating from Heideggerian discourse that
as an identity that is acted out can be profitably
seem so tit at ease with a society of movement
transposed to the realm of identification with
and travel Whal fomer proposes is not so~ dis-
place. This makes poss1b1le. of a discourse of
course of fixed 'roots'. but rather a more trans;.
performauvity and 'belonging' as Vikki Bell has
tory and Au1d discourse of temtorializationin the
shown. rhe repe1111on." she notes. "sometimes
Oeleuz1an sense. whrch provides a complex and
thrcKl1lh ...tking practices. and repm
n1uahst1c repetition. of these normah'l.ed codes
ever renegotiable model of spatial belongings.
those pncuces as a .ay of ~ming ahenauon.
makes material the belongings they purpon 10
fon1er's model is essenual\y a rhrzomic one of
IU1IC\llatrs. then. 15 a model for how we mal<t sense

of ~
11
&y b.sing his model of spaual appropnauon
simply descnbe." 1 It suggests a way 111 which
nomadic 1ern1orializat1ons and deterritoriahza
on hngu11ittcS. ~ Cenuu emphasizes the narra
commun111es might colonize vanous terntones
tions. for territoriah:tallon belongs to the same

logic as de1erruorialiut1on. The very provisional
t~ aspec1 to spaual stonts. Spatial tactics offer
through the literal performances-the ac11ons.
"Ways of malung connecuons, and finding mun
ritualistic behavior and so on - that are acted
ity of terntoriahzations colludes with the ephem-
"'I tn otMTw!S4! abstract places. But dr Crneau
out within ag111en architectural stage.and through
erahty of any sense of belonging. Just as terri10-
u~ hn~
those performances ach1rve a certain attachment
riahza11on'.'I are always shifting, identJf\c.ations
to place.
remain flttung and transitory. while leaving
about the actual 1dent1hcat1on with
those q>aCH. ~ing mott conceml'd as a theorist

wnh othemru th.an w11h ass1m1lat1on." If. then,
Cen1ral to this la11er no11on 1s the idea that
behind traces of their passage. As Bell comments:
w wioh 10 exttnd de Cennus thtory for making
just as communities are 1mag111ed communities.
"The rhizome has been an rmponant analogy Ii.re,
1erue of p\acr into one which establishes a modt
so the spaces of communities-the terntones that
con~1ng as
of td<>nuhcauon. we mu.i also consider howthtn
they have claimed as their own - are also 1mag
can come 10 temporary rest in new places whrle
in...S imagining a community." as
maintaining ongoing connec1ions elsewhere.
.paual tactlCs I.rip to forge a nnse of 1den11ry.
Ann~Mane
11 does an image of movement that
fon1er observes. 1s both that which 1s created
Butler's discourse extends Pierre Bourdieu's
1!ELON GIN G
as a common history, experience or culture of a
debate about hab1tus. Sh<' adds the possibility of
Here we should turn to tht work of Jud11h Butler,
group - a group's belongings - and about how
pohtJCal agency.and of subvem11g received norms.
who has elabonited a v1s1on of id.. nt11)1 that 1s
the 1maginl'd communil)I 1s a11ached 10 plllcH -
Through 11s repetitive c11a11onal nature. that
bu.cl on tlw notton of pertormat1Vlty." Butler
the locauon of culture..... fortier has eumm...S
lormat1v1ry has the powertoquestion and subven
1s a lh"'nst of lesbian pol11ics. and her concerns
how through rituahz.ed repe1111on of symbolic
that wluch 11 cues. for mimicry. as Homi Bhabha
an to fonnul1te a nouon of tdent11y that is not
acts, often conducted wuhin an ovenly rehgious
has tllustrated, is 111ves1ed with the potential to
censtr1111.cl by trad111onal heteros"wal models
context, these imagined communities can "make
desU.b1hu and undermine. as in the case of polit
and to offer a Dd1cal
cnu~ue
~rformauvny.
~"
of usenttalmng
matt'rlal the belongings theypurpon todescnbe""
1eal sa11re.
l'IWMIH of thtnlung.. Accorchng to Butlu. our act ions
Crucially Lheu acts are performed w1thm s1>1f\c
some uncrittcal and ulumately nihilistic accei>-
and lwNvlor const1rute our 1dMlity. and not our
archuecrural spaces.
1:1~ of
tn this sense. 1s not
the gwen, but rather a mode of operauon
btoloSJCal bodies. Gender. she arguu, is not an
What then happens throu&h these i.rylized
charged with a cenam political efficacy. Moreover,
ontoloscal condmon. but 1t is perforrnauvely
spaual practic"s 1s that i;pacei are demarcattd
whereas Bourdieu stresses the production of the
pnlduc...S. It
by cena1n croups by a lund of spatial aPJll'Opna
subject through culture. for Butler, social stnK
aenn1s. the tKll collecuw agyttmen1 to pe:rfonn.
11on. Through the repe11uon ot thOS4! ntuals. tl\ese
tum have themselves been performed. Hence ~r
prod~
spaces
JS
a construction that conceals 1li
and SVStam discrete and polu genders
a.-.
~membered,
wnh pan1c1pan1s rem
formatlVltyoffers an obVlous mode of ch;alle1111n1
by the crl'dibiliry
scribing thems..lve 1n10 lh space, evokina corpo-
those structures. ln an age colonized by fictional
of th~ producnons."" By extension - without
r<'al memories of previous truoC\ments. The rituals
worlds" (as Marc AugE has described our prestnt
wuJ\tnc bl collap$e sexuahry. cla$S. race and eth
are naturaliz.ed throu&h these corpor..al memory
en>. Butler locates perforrnativiry at the hean of
n1aty into th same catraory - all forms of 1den
acts. and the
my ean ~ 1111erpret...S as dependent upon perfor
become spaces of belon11na:
as culturalflnions is
obilCU~
ft\All~ COASIJ"\lctt...
We may rean1C\ll11e our identities and rem

Yent ounehH throu&h our performatlvlt\'5. Here
II 1s unpc>rant to note I.hat 1dt'nllty Is the effect
of periormanc... and not vice versa. Performativ

lty Kh.-s its aims
not through a singular perfor
mance - for perfonnativity can never be reduced
spa~s tn
which they
B,/ongint}A refer to both
~ioP!.A'
enactl'd
Yet 1 ,... are to understand belong\ng as
and opp-
arunanrt. Thor i.6. pracncu of group idmtity

ore about monufiacrvnn9 04/turu/ o.nd h~tonC"o/
j),/0119irtl}A whidt
morlt our trnu.iJU ofcommonol
/ty rhar d'lin.at11h1 pol1tia ond-'Ocial dynomiu

of'Jft1ln9 iPl.
The concept of 'belonging' as a product of
ltentwn of certain pracucu . for perfonnat1vity
performatlvity enables us to go beyond the llmlla
srounded 1n a form of c1tationality - of mvo
tions of simple narrative. It privileges the Idea not
and rej>lacarion. A5 Judith Butler explains:
of reading the envU"Onment, as though Its meaning
'Performativlty Is thus not' singular 'act', for it Is

alw.-ys a reiteration of a norm or set of nom1~ and
were simply there and wa.ltlng to be deciphered,
10 tM Qtmt that It acquires an ac1llke status In
by collective or Individual behaviour. Belonging
is
product of performatllliry. we must st\\\ constrUct

an argument to explain exactly how \his comes Into
operation. The argument above merely wulllltS
that a sense of belonging will emerge as a~
quence of propssive iemtoriahution. wltholll
fully accou nting for this procHs of \den11Rcati011
to perionnance - but through the aCC\Jmulative
ca110n
our cultural identity today."
but rather of giving meaning to the environment
..:.
.tity.
a~ticlty.
and aU ltlM!s Qf COl\tent are
~ ~ 9uilclings. according ro ~rk latMSOn. do not hav.e any \nhettnt meaning.

_ ve5I
l'My&n! usentlally intn. ~d re merely m
wilt\ tM&ttlng.
Walttc' Benjamin.i---.addsa crucial gloss
'~~SSH of rnnojection and projection:
.ii.till~ .,,. oppnlf'riai.d
in o rwofo4d "'onMr.
by._ud by ~on_ orrutlltr. by roudi and
...,.,. Slocll ctppropriori01t conn or bt mtd,.-Atood.U.
of rltt arr.111iw cft<'fHtrori<t of o
~ 0 fa.wtow.
roumr
buildtll9' On tit roctilt ;,1dt rhe,..
wno COM1ttwrporT ro conmnplorion on rltt> opr1co/

...,,,... TIM'filt oppropnotiO#t iA oo1npJiAhtd nor .60
111..c1t
by
amiuio"
o.i
by ltobir. AA l?C)OrdA orrhi
habit dttrnttitotu to o /orve unnr ~
rflO'f.
OfHicol rtt'lpfion.
di~
nw lottr. roo. ocrurA muclt I~
rapr 01m11ion rlton by noridnq IM objf
i1t rn<idtftrol [o.Altion.
"-"OIHd l>'irll
TltiA "'od of oppropriorion.
~t:'f
ro orcltrrKTurY. in CW
rcu" cirnilllAtoll<'U otqtHIYA cononrcol volut. 71tl'
rcW:A ""uclt ~Ht. lt11n1on oppcironu ofPf"ttl"

llOfl
or tltt
"'"'"'9 pcnU of hutory connor
IN
40lwd by OflfK111
tMGIU. rhor iA. by contentp/o

tielt. o/-. T1lty g,.. ltlOAIPrN CJfOdUa//y by habit,
tmdtr rht 9111donr. of rocrilt oppropnorion.
In Benjamin's tenns. buildings are appropri

ued. ~Y are intro~ed - absorbed within the
psyctr. not 1us1 throush vision, but also through
touch. ~ may extend this to 1ndudethe full
n!gts
ter of s.nsH. Moreover, for ~njamin. these appropnadons are relnforttd by hab11. Ht're mt'mory
p~ys a crucial role~~*~

~ llnJ>uls<IS lu
. of the setf onto the. external

wh 1e the projection
l
world
leads IO a second type 0 r reflection - the
..
f the self in the other. In either case.
recogruuon
to a fusing
f 'rroring results leading
a type o mt
ize a
between self and other. Here we can rec0 gn
second onler of mlrrorings. for m1rronngs occur

not only in the engagement her-en the self and
the environrnfnt. but a I so between that engage.
ment and memories of previous
en gagements. An
originary ellperience ts repea1ed m all similar
.
.
n-s
And
that
process
of
repetttton
rein
.
I
exper1.
forces of the original moment of idcn11fica11on. n
. sense hab'' t - as a rituahs1ic rephcat1on off
this
certain experiences - consolidates the process o
..
,.. .bi--
---r
impulses; they constl

run our baclqrround horizon of uperience. In tlus
~~ ldent11lution is as an ontologtul condition
consolidated through mt'mory. We could the~
clO\Sters - tha1 po1nh1 to the Proust:ian way in
which t~one1nchouse1sa type of intTOJectionof

prt'Yious expenences.
Identification with
ii
particular p~ce may
~be perceived u a mirroring betwttn the

subject and the environmcru time. Here we
might undcrsurnd the subject, in Metz's terms.
can be both serttn and projtor, fw in moments
of kkntillcation we see OW'S4!lves in objects with
which - haw become familiar. Al the same time,
- ~ il'ltrojected them int o ourschrcs. 'That reg
isttring of Im.pulses ~ads to one t:ype of t?flection
- tM l'fCO&nltion of die othtt in the self. Mean-
tural ones. T hrough a complex process of makins

sense o f Place developing a feeling of belonJing.
andevent ually identifyingwith that place, ;in tdtti
tity may be forged againSt an architectural bac'fl.
. d'tviduals idenufy with an environment,
drop. Asm
. 1.d ent 't ty comes to be constituted through
so their
thilt environ me nt This relates not only to individual identity, but also to group identities.
Architecture therefore offers a potential
for inscribing the self into lhe envi.
mec hamsm
ronment. It may facilitate a form of identification,
and help engender a sense of belonging. From
fo~ through a reflection-as though in a mirror
.
. t
t h 1spom
of view architecture plays a potentially
- appears at llrst sight to contrast markedly with

the more dynamic notton of tdentity based on per
social role The significant factor, however _ beyond the nature of our architectural
formativity. And yet. if we perceive the former
environment _ is our engagement with that envi-
as being grounded in intentionality. we should

recognize the acttve dimension to the g;ize itself.
sciousness by which we relate to our surround-
.
rta nt
1mpo
ronment. identification is a product of the con-
for perfonnallvity is not merely a quesuon of
mgs. and not a property of the s urroundings
physical performance. It extends also to modes of
themselves. Nor does matter - in Butler's tenns
perception. s uch as the gne. Butler has already
_ exist outside of discourse. As Mariam Fraser
addressed how the gaze should be seen as the stte
observes, following Butler: Matter does not 'exiR'
of performativity 1n the conteXt of race:
m and of itself, outside or beyond discourse, but
1do dunk rhor there I.Ao p11rfomtonvity to thegau
rho.I iA nor Ai"'ply the rron..1pcuirron of o rextuo/
modtl onto a vi.auo/ one; rhor when
wt,.,. Rodney
King, wit"' wv Att rhor video we a,.. al.Ao rrodm9

ond ""'or. al.Ao con..1rlnmn9. and thot the rrodrn9
iA 0 C'fTToin ronjuring ond o cmom C01UtTUct1on.
How do ~ducnbe thotl It Attm.6 tom thot thot

iA 0
~ry ofper{onrtorMry, rhor it I.A rodicol

port
what I would underAtond QA tht pufrmnativiry of

whor it iA 'to rllc. ..t.0merhin9' or to be 'road' by If.
is rather repeatedly produced through perfonnal\Yity. which "brings into being
Of'
enacts that
which it names..... This approach brings us close

to Bhabha's and 8 ourd ieu's observations on the
ways in which culture operates. It allows us to
understand architecture as a syStem of objects
situated within a cultural d iscouru, deriving ils
meaning from that discourse.
All this helps us to reassess the relationship
between architecture and cultural identity. The mftsage is clear: we should focus not only on architec
So I Aup~ thot I'm intnv.red m the modolitiu
tural forms themselves - for - 'WOUid ht ~

to dismiss these forms as irrelevant - but also on
of ,,.,-{onnariviry rhor rakt ir our of ii.. purely
the narrative and perfonnativ.e discourses dwP

them their meaning. With time the specific fora.
fott ref1ec1 upon the model of the oneiric house
of'fHoed up by Caston Bachelanl in TM Poeria of

~ 11 ts precisely the odor of drying raisins paral~lling l.efelwre's equally f'VOa.tiw d~rip
tion of IM 90Und of si"lllng echoing through the
of lost IoveS and former identifications. AJ1'.tonc

these '' d ent r-ficattons we could include architec-
identification.
The seemingly stalk model of tdentillcation
,~--~~~~tion. rhor rhr kirid ofvuuol reodmg proctict

=~-mifiar qou into tht viewing of thr video I.A of
CONCLUSION
. n~ud
once remarkrd. is like a rr-rtrd
Identity.
c
This can be ~ended to the gue as the poten

tial site of an identificatton wi1h place, since any
act
of viewing may be charged with a conscious
moment of politici:r.ed reading. Visual attachments

might therefore be rud as containing an active.
perfonnuive moment. What applies to the gau
may equally apply to the other senses. What we
find, then. is that ldentillcauon based on a process of mirroring is but a variation on the active
identification with place embodied in ritualistic
patterns of behavior. Through the repetitive per
fonnativities of these various modes of percq>tioo. a mirroring can be enacted and a sense of
identification with place can be developed and

reinfwced through habit.
tu res of architecrural forms tend to lose their prominence, and slip into becoming pan of an unnotkd
and marginal background landscape. If tdentity is
a perfonnativt construct - if it b acted out Wee
some kind of film script - then an:hitectUl'B afl
be understood as a kind of film set. But iris 85
a ti.Im set that it deriYeS meaning from tM actMties that have taken place ther-e. Memories' asaodated activities haunt archmctme lib a gtwiet.
. '
NOTES
r..,. ~,pi>ta!.on t'lat cr 11cal regionalism may contribute 1n some way to cultural identity
is made. at ea>t. 1n one of the chapter htl~. "Cr1t1ca1 Regionalism: Modern Architect ure
22 Ibid., p.42.
a"I! CJi:ural Identity used by Kenneth FramptO'l 1n his seminal study. Modern Architec
Z! Ibid., p.9
:.c A Clo/ieaSt(J(/y (London: Thames arid Hudson, 199'2). But 1t appears that Frampton
24 Marc~. A War ofDreams. trans. Liz Heron (London: Plu1o, 191l9~
1 ,,..St !\osexpiorcd lhs connection 1ust once, briefly. "Among the P<econdihons for the
~rg<-nce of a cnt1cal regional expression 1s not only sufficient prosperity but also a
str:ir<; de' re for rea1s1ng an 1denl 1ty. Oneof the mainsprings of reg1onahst culture is an
o<'icfrtr st se<ihrr>enl - an asp!ralon for some kind of cultural, economic and politocal
2S For Bu lier's engagement with psychoanalysis, see especially Butler. The Psychic Ufe '1(
Power: r,._~ of Sub1ection (Stanford: Stanford Uruversity Press. 1997).
'ldllpt<'(ienc Frampton. Prospects tor a Crrt1cal R~1or111hsm." Perspecta 20. 1963.
26 Christia.n Metz. Psychoanalysis and the Cinema, traf\S. Cella Britton, Annwyl Williams. &o
Brewster and Allred Guzzelt1 (London: Macmilla._ 1982), p..a
>l<1'!' B'lallha. "lntroducuon" 1n Bhabha ed Nation and Narration (London. Routledge,
'n Ibid., p.51.
;p: o'
28 Ibid., p.52.
2i Ibid.. p.54.
> >k 'lcOOiM. BOcJrdieu amJ Culture (London: Sage, 2CXXJ), p.30
'"'
30 Waite< Ben1am1" OneWay Street (London: Verse>. 1979), P-3'2~

31 Robert Vlscher. Empathy, Form and Space, p.104.
p'.lS
fl '.ne de Cen~au The P1acl1ceof Everyday Life. trans. Stephen Rendell (Berkeley: Unive<
.11 'Ca !O'"a P<ess. 1~)

ll>d p117
8 Jdr-<:>O<I aoa 1i<es the t-iomogen1Z1ng p:acelessness of late capotahsm through the conlus
~ sw1,.11afOU' of the vast atrium of the Bonaventure Hotel 1n Los Angeles. He goes on
I? s:uciv the process ol what he terms cognitive mapping as a means of inscribing oneself
"I"' er.,.ronment and overcomng this placelessness. In his vrew, capitalist society
e1e<y1t\ir,o into signs. images and commod11tes. so that the world threatens to
~~ de!lth1ts> But aesthetics also promises a way out of this cond1l1on. While 1t
<Olllb<Jles lo the aeslhehc1zat1on of the world. 1\ promises to counter that tendency by
lff'lirga ~hansmof Identification. Jameson's a<guments suggest that we need today
4
ial)I!, aesthetie P<actice that reinserts the ind1v1dual within societ y. Aesthetics may
se<"'asa
1
32 If we are lo look tor a model of the way In wllich content might be Ullderstood as a kind
of 'prO)GChon' we could consider the WO<k of IN! PoliShCanadian public. artiS~ Krzysztof
Wod1clko. who literally projects pohtically loaded images onto buildings as a commentary
on the politics ol use of that buildmg. In 1965. Wodiczko protected the image of swasllMI
onto the pediment ol South Air.ca House 1nTrafNgal' SQuara. London. This act was
intended as a pohtical P<Otesl against the trade negotiations then underway ti.tween the
apartheid government of South Africa and the British government under prime mfnlste<.
Margaret Thatche<. The proj9Clion ol lhe swastika onto the building highl1ol\ls the condf.
hon of bu1kl1ngs which have been blemished with the stain of evil His pmjection ol
content laden images on monuments and buildings echoes the procen by which human
beinQS ptoject the>r own readings onto them. On the work of Krzyutot WodicVlo. see
'Publt<: Pro,ectoons' and 'A eon-salion with Krzysrtof Wodiczllo', October, 38, p.:H;Z.
33 1 h&ve come to lhink that no work of art or ctilturecan set out to be poll!ical oncend
''"' ot cognitive mapping. We therefore might recognize the primary social
tor all, no matte< how ostentatiously 1t labels itself as such. for there can neve< be 8flY
guarantee th&\ it will be used the way It dem&ndi. A oteat polrtlC&l atl (El<echl) can
be taken as a pure and apolitical art; art that seems to went le be ~eJy aesthel~
and (lecorative can be rewritten as political with energetic interpretation. The pohtleat
c.lt Illa! arcti,lecture may play
DeC"'ltau oP Cll p 13'.l.

tO 1bv.! P.97.ij
11 !lid
'
,..,..r1tino or awopr111tlon. then. the potilieal use, must be altegoriuli )'OU have to know
that th1& 15 what it is suwaseci to be or mean - In \self 1t "wwt." Ja~on in Nell Leach
ed.. Rethinkmg Architecture. p.258-69.
tm. "Proper- here appears to be referring not to propnety" but to a sense
't app,OJl'aton
12
la.R.~ . .
-ldllOn
34 Waite< Ben1airnn. 111um111atiollS. ed. HanoahArendt. trans. Harry~ (New'lbrlr.

Schoci<en Books. tlle9). p.233
Michel de Cerleau (London. Sage. 2CXXJ). p.106-120.

13 0.Cl!<tea
h
u, oP cit, p.1w.110. 'Caplation might equally be translated appropria on.

14
See 10< ea
"'-
. h,, book on otherness: Mochel de Certeau. Helt!rolog1es: Discourse on

Otlit1 transm.,.
B
the
rian Massum1. (Manchester Manchestl!f University Press, 1986).

15 Ju1n~ Butt
Peiform I ., GendP1 Trouble (London: Roulledge, t990). p. 140. as quoted in V1kk1 Bell ed..
1' ~ a mty Md Betongmg (London: Sage, 1999). p 3.
Pe,:'K""s,e' tt>e l>OSS1b1lity of understanding Jewishness 1n this light 1n Vikki Bell ed..
~tlt>n ~at1v1/y Md Belongmg. See also Sne1a Gunew. Performing Australian Ethnicity:
emoden~o" W
w,,,trs noc
"' .Ommundsen and H. Rawley eds.. From11 D1stanc~: A <IiiI ra/'an
I
11
ulturat Displt<'fment (Geelong Deakin Umversity Press. 1996). P l59-17l
,.4 t~ Butier, Bodies
"~"
I.hat Matter (London: Routledge. 1993) p.12.

"~llerj Pe
'
11 .,
rformati1ly llfld Belonging
11
...,.
al
D~
""'~~~fortie< 'R
" 11
""
( i 1rrVtkk
e-memtienng Pieces and the Performance of BeJoriging s
11
" tanct Belonging (London Sage, 1999). p.42.
eo .~!ormai
ti lbQ P
The not on of oneinc space ,5 also central lo de Certeau'a concept ol space. As he

' . From this point of view. after ha\tloO compared pedestrian~ to II~
00serves.
brlf'G them baclc down "'the <kfeehon ot onell'ic llgu<ellOI\ or al
tic formatlOrlS. we can~"~ Ide what tn spat18l practio.. 15 inseparab4& trorn Ille cJ<ean\lld
ie~t discover on th&t ""'~ 5

place." de Certeau. P. tQ3.
Poelks ol s~. trans. Maria Joi (Boston: eeacon !?res&. ~),
31 Gaston Bactielard TiitThi! Pr'uct1on of Space, trans. Donald NichOfoon-Sm<ll> (Oxford:
p.13; Henn Lefebvre.
"" kwell Publlshet'S. Ltd., l9'11). p.225.
.,.ac
Race Aid~ IA 8ltl ed..
llltermwed by Vikki BellJ, QI\ Speech.
:rJ Judith suttvr (
(Lond<>n: 5801!. 1998). p.1e11.
Per(ormllll'llY and"" Ofl(J'
ibod.. p.lt L
38 MarMllTI Fraser. "Cla-..,
'
~ood in ,,.,.q.IMi.ms.as
.
pie, shOUld be rnc* praJ)9fty
.. .
se Thus reoi0nail9(1], for "'111
a discourse of reglon&liSm
35
n.,
no
--o.-
"~
I
I
I
;
Contributors
DIANE Y. GHIRARDO
d ted in architecture at the
in 1934 He was e uca
was born in Minneso13
..
.
h ld PhD in history of art
.
t nd cahforn1a, and o s a
universities of M1nneso a a
.
d Architecture and
fTom Columbia lln1versity. He is Professor or History an
I nu1e of
.
th Massachusetts ns 1
Head of the Department of Architecture at e
.
d
Technology. He was a resident Fellow of the Institute for Architecture an
STANFORD ANDERSON
Urban Studies in New York.. 1970-72. He was director of MI T's PhD program
.
A nd Urban Form from
in Hjstory. Theory and Criucism of Architecture, r1 a
.
.
H
"s a registered architect.
Its founding in 1914 to 1991 and in 1995-96 c 1
. . concern arc h"ttect ural theorv
Anderson's research and wnting
, . early modem
d
architecture in northern Europe. Amencan architecture an urbanism,
a nd
~istemology and historiography. He has published in numerous journals; his
Peter Behreiu: A New Architecrure for rhe Twentieth Century was published
by The MIT Press in 2000.

BERNARD CACHE
..
''
t .
began as a senior consultant in image telecommunications and digital televi

sion where he conducted strategic studies for companies like Philips, Canal
Plus. France Telecom and Fl"anceTelevis1on. He has wrincn articles on communi
cation. economics and policy in newspapers like liberation and M~diopouvoir;,
and taught social sciences at ESSEC and information economics at IFP.
His writing on architecture includes arth MoveA (MIT 1995) and
Tl!Yre meuble (HYX, 1997). He has lectured in Rotterdam (1994), Oslo (1995),
Amsterdam. Pans, Geelong. Melbourne, Adelaide. New-York, Yale, Los Angeles,
Columbus (1997).
an architect, he developed the Objectile software with MISSLER. In

199f>. he founded the company Objectile. together with Patrick 8eauce and
Jean Louis lammot. Since September 1998, Bernard Cache has been Associate
Professor at the Faculty of Architecture Landscape d 0 .
.
an es1gn {AL&O) at
Universiiy of Toronto
As
15 Professor of the History and Theory of Architecture in Los Angeles, Calif.

. Site received her M .A. and PhD from Stanford University was a
orn1a.
Fulbright Fellow in Rome in 1976 a nd 2001, and a f ellow of the American
Academy in Rome in 1987- 88. In 1994, she was president of the Association of
Collegiate Schools of Architecture. and was editor of Journal of Architecti;rll)
ducation. She has published articles in numerous journals and magazines,

including Journal of the Society of Architectural HLltorian..i, Art Bulletin.
Journal of Contemporary HiAtory. lotw., Cite, Harvard DeAign Magorine.
Per;,pecta and Ccuabel/a. She has published four books: Building New
Communitie.a: Nirw Deal America and FcucU.t ltaly (1989); Out of Site:
.4
Social CriticU.m of Architecture (1991); Mark Mack (1994); Architectur~ After

Modemi.;,m (1996), which received the Phi Kappa Phi award for excellence in
1997. Jn 1999, she was selected ACSA Distinguished Professor for outstand
ing Creative Achievement. She is currently working on a book about women
and spaces in Renaissance Italy.
ELIZABETH GROSZ
teaches feminist theory in the Department of Women's Studies at
Rutge~
University. She is the au thor most recently of Architecture from the OuUidr:
.May;, on Virtual and Real Space (MIT Press, 2001) and has published
widely in the areas of contem porary French philosophy, feminist theory and
architectural theory.
ANN HAMILTON
was born in Lima, Ohio, in 1956. She received a
BfA
in textile design
from the University of Ka nsas in 1979 and an MFA In Sculpture from the
Yale University School of Art in 1985. Known for her large-scale ephemeral
installations. A.nn's work has been widely exhibited in America and abroad,
including The Museum of Modern Art in New York; The Art Institute of
HUBERT DAMISCH
Chicago; the Musee Art Cont emporain Lyon, in France; the Mus~e
~: t:~ f:~ulty of the Ecole des Hautes Eludes en Sciences Sociales in Paris
Contemporain De Montreal in Canada; and the Akira Ikeda Gallery in nura.
f
.
.
istonan and philosopher, he is the auth
and Fmlrre JatmP Cadmium as well as Th
. .
or o Theor1e du Nuage
The NorciAAiJ.ric City.
e On9m of Per;,pecti11e and Skyline:
Japan. Among her many awards and honors, she received a MacArthur
Fellowship in 1993 and was chosen t o represent the United States at the 4Stll
Venice
B1ennale
in 1999. In 2001, she joined the Department 0 f Art facultY
d'All
at The Ohio State University.
K. MICHAEL HAYS
. h
SchOolof
ts t e Eliot Noyes Professor of Architectural Theory at the Graduate

D .
di Progrll111
esign, 1-tarvard University, and Director of the Advanced Stll es
ht
In 2000 h
titecture at t
e was appointed the first Adjunct Curator of AIC 1
ditt
Whitney Museum for American Art. He founded and, until last year :el,,ed
AJ..aemb/a9e, a critical
Journa
culture that
l of a rchitecture and design
develop arch
_J
1tectural theory as a scholarly discourse.
d' a'""
ed Stu it5
Hays received the Mas ter of Architecture ill Advanc
. {TOii'
the Doc
f
.
d Critlc1sni
f
tor o Philosophy degrees in History, Theory an
)tflof o
the M
h
. d the sac
assac usetts Institute of Tech nology. He receive
Architecture from Georgia Institute of Technology.
... .
HJI> has
wntten extensively on twentieth-century architecture, focus-
'. d
gacal issues in the history of the avant -garde and on current
<int ~n eo1o
. .
.
.
rchitecture and c nt1cal theory. His books include Modem
J,~1e' in a
.
.
-arid the Po..1tl1uman1At Sub1ect (199i) and the recent Arcliitecture
111'0}
A.U f0N O ~,y
' 116
MICHAEL STANTON
was educated at Antioch
coIIege and
Harvard University and received his

Masters in Architecture at Princeton University. He has worked in the offices of
A'fh1trrrur,
Agrest and Gandelsonas in New York and Hartman/Cox in Washington, DC and
Throry.imn> 1968. both published by the MIT Press. He is currently working
independently since i985. His design work has won an ACSA Design Award,
rv of architectural discourse from i968 to 1983.

coa h1sto .
the Young Architect's Award from the Architectural League of New York,
LAUREN KOGOD
awards plus several competitions. He was a fellow in Architecture at the
Lauren Kogod teaches architectural history and theory at the School of
American Academy in Rome in 1990-91 and the first Aga Kahn Traveling
the Biennial Steedman Prize and been selected for Progressive Architecture
i.rchnecture at Yale University. She is a PhD candidate at Harvard University
Fellow in 1980. He has published many articles in journals including Archi.A
and pramces architect ure with David Smiley in New York.
and Modulu.& and has contributed chapters in the University of Minnesota

Press books Tl1e DU.cipline of Architecture on knowledge and Whitt> Popt'TJ.I
NEIL LEACH
Black Mark..i on the African-American city. He has taught at The Institute for
teaches at the Architectural Association in London and the University of
Architecture and Urban Studies, RISO, Catholic University, The University of
Bath. where he is Professor of Architectural Theory. He has also taught
Miami and, for much of the last decade, at Tulane University in New Orleans.
at the University of Nottingham and Columbia University, New York. He is
He was a Guestprofessor at the Royal Danish Academy in Copenhagen. He is
the author of ThPAnae..irhetic..i of Arcl1itecture (MIT, 1999) and Millennium
currently Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Architecture
Cu/nm !Ellipsis. 1999): editor of Rethinkin9 Architecture (Routledge, 1997)
and Design at the American University of Beirut.
Archuecrure and Revolution (Routledge, 1999), The Hiero9lyphic..i of Space

(Routledge, 2001) and -Future..i (Wiley, forthcoming); and co-translator (with
ANTHONY VIDLER
IOStph Rykwen and Robert Tavernor) of L.B. Alberti, On the Art of Building
is Acting Dean of the Irwin S. Chanin School of Architecture at The Cooper
in Tl'!IBookA(MIT, 1988).
Union in New York City. He was the Chair of the Department of Art History
at UCLA and has taught at Princeton University where he chaired the Ph.D.
he served as Dean of the College of Architecture, Art and Planning at Cornell
Tyre, schools in North Lebanon and designs for public spaces in Beirut and
University. Mr. Vidler is the author of C/audeNico/a..i Ledoux: Architecture

and social Reform at the end of the Ancient Rqgime, The Writing of the Wall.4,
Tnpch Sarkis 1s Associate Professor of Architecture at the Harvard Graduate

School of Design. In the past, Sarkis was a lecturer in MIT's Department of
Archnecrure and a research associate in MIT's Department of Urban Studies
and Planning. He has also taught at RISO, Yale University and the American
Unrwrsuy of Betrut. Sarkis is the author of several articles on design theory.

on llmenca
h"
.
.
narc 1tecture and urban design, and on Berrut. He 1s executtve

tdnor of
. .
.
.
d
0.SE, a publication series of case studies m arch itecture an
urbanism d d"
1d
an e llor of Le Corbu..iier'.I. Venice Ho..ipital and the Mat Bui mg
Rl\11va1 (Mun h
.
8
Lt
ic Prestel, 2002) in that series. He is author of Circa 195
bane,. in the Plan.4 and PhotograpftA of Con..1tantino..1 DoxiadlA.

(Beirut:
Dar
anNahar, 2002
.
.
.
. .
Pr
l co.editor w11h Peter G. Rowe of Projectm9 Beirut (Munich.
estel, ,998) d
.
.
.
.
'an occasional contributor to An-Nahar newspaper in Beirut.
e recei~ed h
>-IArch
is BArch and BFA from the Rhode Island School of Design, his
from the G
.
,
so. and his Pho in architecture from Harvard University.
ROBERT SOMOL
leaches d
esign and th
d Ub n
eory m the Department of Architecture an
r a
at UCLA Hi
.
d
Studio in lo
s office, Pxs, just completed off.use, a residence an
5 Angeles.
Dts1gn
;~
Program and directed the European Cultural Studies program. From 1996-1998
HASHIM SARKIS
11 a pracucmg architect m Lebanon. His work includes a housing complex in
Architectural Theory in the Late nli9htenment. He is also the author of The

Architecture of the Uncanny and Warped Space.
GEORGE WAGNER
.
the School of Architecture at the University of British
.
1s a Professor m
Columbia in Vancouver. His writing has been included in the booksArc"hrtecture
"' . . m (Berlin free University), and Stan Douglas. He has edited
an d ,-emmr...i
.b.
d
S 'towitz Thom Mayne, and Barkow Let mger, an
monographs on StanIey a1
.
.
. H
d Oe.4ign Magazine Harvard Architecture Review.
published essays m an1ar
'
journal of the Society ofArchitecture Hi.Atorioru, Center and Bauwe/t.
SARAH WHITING
.
f . r in the Department of Architecture at the Harvard Grad
is an assistant pro esso
. .
Cambrid e. MA.
Des;'"' and is also a design pnnc1pal of WW m
g
uate Sch ooI Of
..,..
CHRISTOPH ER WOOD
d'
teaches Renaissance a
h ditorofTheViennaschootReader.
(ZONE Books. 2000). Professor
.
I Method m the 1930..1
PolitiC.6 and Art H1..1tor1ca
.
He has received Harvard's Jacob
.
rt at Yale an 1st e c
.
t Yale since 1992.
Wood has been teac h u1g a
h'
Deutscher Akademischer
.
d Sheldon fellows ap, a
Wendell Scholarship an
. f culty fellowship from Yale.
. and a Morse Junior a
.
Austauschdienst Fellowship,
h l at the lnstitut fur Europ:i1sche
b n a guest sc o ar
rd
Professor Wood has ee
l
d a Junior Fellow of the Harva
. hte in Augsburg (1994 an
Kunstgesc h 1c
Society of fellows.

Persepecta 33 Mining Autonomy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Persepecta 33 Mining Autonomy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE YALE ARCH/ TEC TURAL JOURNAL

THE MIT PRESS

Tit Ya/ AldtitK'tltrol /ournat

ind Jorae Zapata.

Pr.4p<H:ta 33: Minin9 Autonomy is a collection of tssays thar examonts tht

evolving legacy of rchitt<:tural autonomy and its rtl1tionsh1p to archlltc

ally seen as an outgrowth of a larger understanding of tht role of autonomy Jn

against ttthnoeracy while ma1nta1n1ng for arrhatttturc 3 'cr1t1c.a1 social rolt

Specohcally. archittets and archi1<c1ural hosronans viewed aurononoy as the

11mt reacted strongly 1ga1n111

tht per(tlftd 1h1.s

cation). growing environmental concerns and changing 1dtas about domes11c

whert II <ts as mediator - translallng knowledge from vnoed

pursuits Into the language and convcnoons of arthnecrure as well as pa .. ong

on its social and cuhural conttxt

Ledoux with Kant

30 Quasi-Autonomy in Architecture: The Search for an 'lnberween'

Manfredo Tafuri and Architecture Theory In the U.S., 1970-2000

TWenty Proiects a1 the Boundanos of the

Notes around the Doppler Effw and other Moods of Modernism

Nor es on the Thing

Gottfried Semper: Stereotomy. BlolOflY. and Geometry

The Cool.I. t he Bad and the Ugly:

Cnn1tanti in Mot ion:

Belonging: Towards a Th.ory of lden11hrat1on with Place

This essay was originally published as the preface

Ori9ine et developpen1ent de /'archi tecture autonom e, i 981 '

Pubhsh1ng delays some11mts h;ave" J>.nefic1al effect in that th ey bring a stm

par1y - 1s suppo>f<I to ofter pubhsher and reader a sort of guarantee, or

terms alone). a preface - whether

1s not enough 1n itself. that it will only havt its

repubhcauon or a new 1ranslauon. The french reade r ha s d iscovered the work

of tm1I Kaufmann in reverse. so to speak: beginning with what appeared his

rrowning ach1~emen1. the great book L:4n:hitecture au .Aitcle du Lumliru

pubhshed 1n Vienna in 1933. whose t t1le alone signals Kautmann's end.rt

that Kaufmann was ta take up 11relessly throughout his li fe as ht deeptned

and developed all of 115 ram1hcatlons. 11 1s a book with the appearance .

supported by a mass of academic

s1rate the existence of a fundament;il continuity be tween so-called oeacla

cal architecture and rduwc1ure already denounced by the totahtaroan ideol-

of Ledoux could be presented as the paradigm ot this break assumes that

ruptur<' "only more evodnt Yet 11

number of German arch11ccts - begonnong wnh Schinkel

on modernory 1s opposed a discourse 1ha1. far from being one of a "brcu."

to this that the

works on the contrary to reue the threads, to reonscrobe on the contanutty of a

a\p1rat1on 10 au1onomy of" poarttct- that was nonetheless poten11ally a\ pro

he hlmlf attempttd to g.-e 1h1s phenomenon an hostorocal explana11on. and

foundly \OCoalozed as tht or archotecture.

>single stroke ht restored

the Modern Movement both a past and

arch11cc1ure on principal proceeds goes bck to the end of the eighteenth

failure of the Modern Movement .ind dt>nouncang ots "obicctove conntttoons

to the tabula rasa

large documentary appara1us 1 Nevertheless. of. as

Schinkel was bound to -candahze the champion> of a ,howy nl'O cla<\lct\m. a

always tndocares conOoct and 11 doe, no good to ignore !1 1 It 1s then up 10 u; to

out being shored up by

1ha11he new 0<der

the r1.1Jtr 10 hnd on 11 a way of seeing

little more clearly. >once

11 has Jo\t none of us Pd9r

the "Great Rtvoluuon - French and hourgeoos - ot 1789 Out Kaufmann\

no le;, shocking w11h respect 10th~ habnual a~sumpuuns