Regarding the readings on power & answering why we build, there were a few reactions in the reflection notes that we can discuss in class:
Cringing
I can’t disagree with a lot of the points made in this reading but they make me cringe. ~Valerie
…as the article continues it took the topic into a sad place. Architecture, which is constantly portrayed as something beautiful and magical, just took a twisted turn into egotistical. …Architecture can be beautiful. It can be complex and hold various meanings, but I don’t like deceitful. ~Steph
I don’t like the part of the reading that talked about architecture being driven by the rich and powerful… ~Mike
This abuse of architecture taints the reason why many of us build. ~Kyle
I cannot help but feel cynical at the idea that architecture is being bastardized from its intended use as social commentary/action. ~Bryan
The Use of Ego
“massive ego of the designer”
…Does living vicariously through the architect’s creation legitimize the client’s power? Or is the architect’s creation only a manifestation of the client’s influence?
…Is our desire to build purely our own legitimization of power? Are public service and humanitarian design only forms of self-deceit used to cloud our egos? ~Owen
I think that we become architects because at some level we desire control over what people experience. ~Brad
Software billionaires use this language when they make generous donations to a museum to carve their name into its walls, nothing short of what sociopathic dictator would do. ~Gao
Power With
But how about thinking about the “power with,” which consists of searching for common ground among different interests. Although today it seems like there are many rising starchitects, I believe that architecture, as a collaborative profession, has alot more to do with “power with.” “Power with ” is based on mutual support in conjunction with multiple individual talents. Ultimately, it is this type of take on power that actually transforms the world of architecture. ~Amy
I would have liked to take the conversation a step further. Juxtaposition of dictatorship and socialist commissioned architecture…. Another method to go about it would be to juxtapose government commissioned and privately commissioned architecture. ~syb5420
Selina: There is a chapter in the book on the Scottish parliament building by architect Enric Miralles. It is an interesting comparison, and unsurprisingly, it’s not a lot different from the stories of dictatorship. You should check it out!
Semiotics
…If you’re trying to scare me with your authority, you don’t show up in a clown car, you show up in the huge Cadillac. ~Steph
we need to separate the form from it’s intention and I think that’s a crucial idea. He’s not saying we forget the intention, however malicious it may be, but that we don’t hold it against the structure. ~Laura
I don’t think this is the case in the US. It’s not glaringly obvious which political or powerful figure is behind the development of specific buildings. Other than banks and city halls attempting to radiate ideas of democracy, I would argue that most buildings are not overtly politically driven. ~Amanda
The Architect’s Role
This leads me to question if we should have any say in the ethics of reasoning behind architecture requested by leaders. Then again, the client is always right, right? ~Tyler
Sudjic, D. 2005. Why we build. in The Edifice Complex. New York: Penguin, pp. 1-17.
Sudjic’s main thesis is that architecture is an attempt to construct a particular view of the world that reflects our own individual psyche.His exploration of the supposed narcissism of dictators and democratic leaders alike reflect Sudjic’s own fear of overblown egos that produce buildings that he has to confront as an admirer of design.But as much as architecture is a window into someone’s mind, how we interpret its expressions reflect the state of our own minds.Sudjic tries to reason how Saddam Hussein tried to build his own vision of reality when he gazed longingly at the bright lipstick colors of his model mosque, or perhaps he was trying to overcompensate for the secular nature of his regime.But in making these assessments, Sudjic asks a fundamental question of whether architecture, and the buildings that it produces, is inherently political. Is architecture an end or a means to an end?
He writes, “The language of architecture is used to project power.” (8) Software billionaires use this language when they make generous donations to a museum to carve their name into its walls, nothing short of what sociopathic dictator would do.These “megalomaniac” personalities are obsessive, using architecture for the specific purposes of satisfying their own needs while at the same time, producing expressions that are potentially vague and visually banal.“There may be no fixed political meaning to a given architectural language,” Sudjic writes, “but that does not mean that architecture lacks the potential to assume a political aspect.” (10) Sudjic continues, “But when the line between political calculation and psychopathology breaks down, architecture becomes not just a matter of practical politics, but a fantasy, or a sickness that consumes its victims. There is a psychological parallel between making a mark on the landscape with a building and the exercise of political power. Both depend on the imposition of will…Architecture feeds the egos of the susceptible. ” (12) This is what Sudjic calls the “Edifice Complex.”
Is architecture so dangerous?Is it only about satisfying our own pleasures?Is it a seductive practice that feeds on the emotionally vacant hearts of sad dictators and insecure billionaires?
Attention to the materiality of space reveals the social and cultural history embedded within different types of built environments.
Henderson, R. (2013). The Gardens of Suzhou. Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press.
Forgan, S. (2005) Building the Museum: Knowledge, Conflict, and the Power of Place.Isis 96: 4, 572-585.
Reinhardt, D. & Jakovich, J. (2009) ’Trivet Fields’: The Materiality of Interaction in Architectural Space.Leonardo, 42: 3, 216-224.
Ding, G. (2014) ‘Experimental Architecture’ in China.Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 73:1, 28-37.
Chun, A. and McDonald, T. (2002) Translation and Materiality: The Space of Invention between Designing and Building.Journal of Architectural Education, 55: 3, 183-185.
Tishler, W. (2000) Midwestern Landscape Architecture. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Ashraf, K. K. (2007) Taking Place: Landscape in the Architecture of Louis Kahn.Journal of Architectural Education, 61: 2, 48-58.
Kramer, E. F. (2004) The Walter Gropius House Landscape: A Collaboration of Modernism and the Vernacular.Journal of Architectural Education, 57: 3, 39-47.
Museums stand at the intersection of scientific work and display.
Forgan, S. (2005) “Building the Museum: Knowledge, Conflict, and the Power of Place.” Isis 96: 4, 572-585.
Schatzberg, E. (2012) “From Art to Applied Science.” Isis 103: 3, 555-563.
Jones, B. G. (1986) Protecting Historic Architecture and Museum Collections from Natural Disasters. Boston: Butterworths.
Giebelhausen, M. (2003) The Architecture of the Museum: Symbolic Structures, Urban Contexts. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Bedini, S. A. (1965) “The Evolution of Science Museums.” Technology and Culture, 6: 1, 1-29.
Cohen, J. (2000) “Designer Labs: Architecture Discovers Science.” Science, New Series, 287: 5451, 210-214.
Bennett, J. (2005) “Museums and the History of Science: Practitioner’s Postscript.” Isis, 96: 4, 602-608.
Lai, D. (2014) “Idealizing a Chinese Style: Rethinking Early Writings on Chinese Architecture and the Design of the National Central Museum in Nanjing.” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 73: 1, 61-90.
The Museum of Modern Art. (1968) “Architecture of Museums.” Members Newsletter, 1, 1-2.
Sirefman, S. (1999) “Formed and Forming: Contemporary Museum Architecture.” Daedalus, 128: 3, 297-320.
Experiences of urban spaces are reshaped and augmented through new technologies.
Darroch, M. (2014). Cartographies of Place: Navigating the Urban. McGill-Queen’s University Press
Rosenberg, D., & Grafton, A. (2010). Cartographies of Time. New York, Princeton Architectural Press.
Arnade, P; Howell, M. & Simons, W. (2002) “Fertile Spaces: The Productivity of Urban Space in Northern Europe.” The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 32: 4, 515-548.
Poster, M. (1993) “Culture and History: The Cases of Leisure, Art, and Technology.” French Historical Studies, 18: 1, 131-135.
Swyngedouw, E. (1992) “Territorial Organization and the Space/Technology Nexus.”
Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 17: 4, 417-433.
Huyssen, A. (2007) “Modernist Miniatures: Literary Snapshots of Urban Spaces.” PMLA, 122: 1, 27-42.
Srivastava, S. (2009) “Urban Spaces, Disney-Divinity and Moral Middle Classes in Delhi.” Economic and Political Weekly, 44: 26/27, 338-345.
Levine. A. (1986) “Commentary: Space Technology and Societal Regulation.” Science, Technology, & Human Values, 11:1, 27-39.
Different types of built forms are essential to shaping ideas and the dissemination of ideas.
Piotrowski, A. (2011). Architecture of Thought. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.
Delbeke, M., & Morel A. F. (2010) “Metaphors in Action: Early Modern Church Buildings as Spaces of Knowledge.” Architectural History, Vol. 53 (2010), pp. 99-122
Kieckhefer, R. (2004). Theology in stone: Church architecture from Byzantium to Berkeley. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wolniewicz, R. (1997) “Comparative Ethnic Church Architecture.” Polish American Studies, 54: 1, 53-73.
Robinson, W. (1990) “Early Anglo-American Church Architecture in Texas.” The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, 94:2, 261-298.
Heatwole, C. (1989) “Sectarian Ideology and Church Architecture.” Geographical Review, 79: 1, 63-78.
University projects are sites of contest and mediation of governance among institutions of power and knowledge.
Pattie, C. & Paddison , R. (1993) “Urban Governance.” Area, 25: 2, 176-177.
Perry, B. (2011) “Universities and Cities: Governance, Institutions and Mediation.” Built Environment, 37: 3, 245-259.
Yigitcanlar, T. & Sarimin, M. (2011) “The Role of Universities in Building Prosperous Knowledge Cities: The Malaysian Experience.” Built Environment, 37: 3, 260-280.
Charles, D. (2011) “The Role of Universities in Building Knowledge Cities in Australia.” Built Environment, 37: 3, 281-298.
Ng, M. & Tang, W. (2004) “Theorising Urban Planning in a Transitional Economy: The Case of Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China.” The Town Planning Review, 75: 2, 173-203.
Wang, C-H. (2006) “Planning Taipei: Nodal Status, Strategic Planning and Mode of Governance.” The Town Planning Review, 77: 3, 283-309.
I was duly impressed with the depth of reflection the students provided on the first Reflection Notes assignment. That said, I have a few general comments, and a few specific thoughts:
Treat this writing as public writing by making it legible. Not only should many of you use spell check (to start with), but try to make your paragraphs legible, use headings, etc. so that the block of text is not so intimidating to read. Here are two links that provide more advice on Readability:
You don’t have to show a thesis statement in your final paper if the thesis is evident in the writing. In other words, you should be able to write the thesis in a single sentence, but that sentence doesn’t have to be in your writing word-for-word.
As for using the terminology, methods, and patterns of things you read, it is worthwhile to understand how others structure their writing to engage an audience. Even though you are “not going to do what he is doing”, you can still learn from the writing as we learn from precedent buildings in studio.
great observation that the writing about persuasive writing was not as engaging. William Zinsser is a great author who writes about writing, and it’s a pleasure to read. He has On Writing Well and Writing to Learn that are great resources.
As for learning how to read a building, the week we spend on Semiotics will be exactly that.
Owen: Great point about exhausted topics. It sounds like some think that the topic of New York is exhausted. I wonder why? What are other “exhausted” topics in PSU Architecture?
I enjoyed your summary of the article’s main lessons:
This article’s main lessons, in terms of thesis writing, include having a specific voice and opinion (which doesn’t have to be monotonous and institutional), providing enough description for readers to have a clear visual of the subject matter, and using a wide variety of language to enhance the argument and to keep the audience intrigued.
great observation about something being of no use if you don’t feel inspired by it or use it as evidence for your point
As for the declarative statement that can’t be a thesis, we can discuss this next Monday. A statement of fact is not something that is worth trying to persuade someone about, and therefore, isn’t very interesting to read.
Though you do not have to “hide” your thesis, read my comments to Lili above regarding the relationship between a piece of writing and a thesis statement.
Brad: Excellent point about not examining what makes a building bad. This could be a wonderful thesis for your term writing!
Alison: See advice to Lili above as well in terms of where to put the thesis.
Lauren: Yes, as your topic changes, you in turn change your thesis statement. Just because you start with a particular thesis statement doesn’t mean that it can’t change as you research & learn new information.
You state that the readings suggest a lack of flexibility. You argue for stream of consciousness, but if you look at your own post, your stream is much more coherent than other people’s stream of consciousness, and your arguments are more structured than you might think. As long as the argument and writing is clear, it doesn’t really matter if it is either casual or (a logical person’s) stream of consciousness.
Stephanie: Your criticism of Lange is very interesting and insightful. However, think about writing as joining a conversation. If there are no citizen critics, then there is no one to read the “better” or “more professionally trained” critics. In other words, there is no community of conversation around the topic.
[NOTE: This citation is incorrect and incomplete. Mr. Brooks was born in 1870 & the book was published in 1924. I also provided a link that is more appropriate than the earlier one. -RH]
[NOTE: the above article is a book review about a book focused on chemical structures. Again, I doubt that it will provide much use to you in supporting your thesis above.]
Verkaaik, O. (2014).Religious architecture: Anthropological perspectives. Amsterdam University Press.
Architecture is built on the needs of people, and that’s how Islamic architecture arrised.
Architecture has the power to drop crime rate drastically, which has shown to be evident in the city of Medellin.
>(article within journal) Security, the State, and the Citizen: The Changing Architecture of Crime Control, New Criminal Law Review: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal, published by University of California Press http://www.jstor.org/stable/797618?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
