Architectural Theories
Instructions: This essay is divided into two parts – two journals. Each part has to be around 270-300 words. 2 readings for each part and one image/figure. Needs an introduction, body and conclusion.
(LO1)Knowledge of contemporary design theories and the ways in which they can inform specific approaches to, and practices of architectural design
(LO2)Ability to demonstrate and analyse through careful argument how
architectural production fits within wider philosophical, historical, social,
political and economic discourses
(LO3)Ability to research issues in architectural theory, to critically reflect upon
them, and to organise and present those reflections in the format of
scholarly writing
Solution.
Architectural Theories
Part One
Deconstructivism Theory Vs Thilosophy of Plumbing
Deconstructivism is one of the popular architectural theories postulated by French philosophers, Jacques Derrida in association with his friend Peter Eisenman [1]. In his book, A Certain Impossible Possibility of Saying the Event, Jacques Derrida argues against the western culture of deconstruction as he considers deconstructivism as an extension of the interest in radical formalism. Deconstructivism theory has also been influenced by the prescribed geometric and experimentation imbalances put forth by the Russian theory on Constructivism [1]. On the other hand, in her book, Philosophical Plumbing, by Mary Midgley argues her point be describing that philosophy is like plumbing. Are these two theories comparative?
To begin with, Jacques suggests that the deconstructivist philosophy to architectural design and the theory roots at the “metaphysics of presence.” Jacques further suggests that the architectural process is like a language that communicates meaning that receives treatment by methods of linguistic philosophy even though his friend, Eisenman settles on the notion of presence or absence, or void and robust. Although, both of them believe that the locus or place of presence is what is described as architecture. On the other hand, Mary suggests that philosophy is like plumbing as she suggests that plumbing and philosophy are activities that arise due to the cultures that we exist in, fairly a complex system which typically goes on unnoticed [2].
In synthesizing Jacques theory, it is noted that they go hand in hand with Mary Midgley description of philosophy as a collection of different ideas which are corrected by one another. Furthermore, to substantiate this fact, Jacques deconstructivist philosophy entails the existence of a particular archetypal construction that has been established, and it is subject to flexible changes. For example, Seattle Central Library, this was fully designed to foster deconstructivist theory [1].
Conclusively, the deconstructivist theory goes hand in hand with the philosophy of plumbing by Mary Midgley, and there are still more theories that root from deconstructivism views such as the Russian futurism and constructivism.
1 Derrida J. A certain impossible possibility of saying the event. Critical Inquiry. 2007;33(2):441-461.
2. Midgley M. Philosophical Plumbing. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement.1992;33:139-151.
Part Two
Structural Architecture
Manuel DeLanda suggests that “the study of matter does matter.” It is, therefore, important that architects and engineer must put into consideration the necessary peripherals that initiate basic behavior of matter [3]. In this theoretical perspective, Borromini, Semper, and Loos suggest that that is recasting the surface as a concept within architectural theory where diagrams, drawings, models, computer images and so on are a focus of architectural perspectives. On the other hand, Leach, Turnbull, and Williams suggest that the computer as a programming device develops the spirit of the collaboration between architects in making matter complex. Are the two theories in relating to Manuel’s view on the complexity of matter?
First, Borromini, Semper, and Loos suggest that surface ought to be comprehended neither as a just structural, nor as a simply improving part of a building. Alternatively, maybe, the creation of surfaces which are inside walls or façades et cetera arranges a program which takes into consideration a navigation of the space of architecture. In space, architectural engineering—has a twofold register [4]. From one viewpoint, it alludes to the particular structural works, to specific structures, and how they impact and influence the subject. Then again, it makes a more extensive, hypothetical point about the way that design is imagined as an impact of the likely outcomes inalienable in the materials utilized as a part of the creating of surfaces. In this argument about structural design, it propagates the philosophy of design as put forth by Manuel DeLanda.
On the other hand, Leach, Turnbull, and Williams suggest that computers are essential when it comes to designing concepts for engineers. Consequently, Manuel proposes that matter can be made complex through structuring architectural designs that aid in coming up with a complex structure or “matter.” As per the book, Digital Tectonics, the fundamental logic behind the installation made at the Tate Modern used algorithms in designing the new glass roof to the British Museum. Such programs generate structural forms which enhance the complexity of the matter [3].
Conclusively the two articles, all fall on the philosophical view of design by Manuel DeLanda. Only that Borromini, Semper, and Loos suggest on the surface theory in designing as Leah, Turnbull and Williams focus on the utilization of computer programs.
3 DeLanda M. Material complexity. London: Wiley-Academy Publishers; 2004. p. 14-21
4 Benjamin A. Surface effects: Borromini, semper, loos. The Journal of Architecture. 2006;11(1):1-36.
