Page 68 - Studio International - September October 1975

isolation, contain more revolutionary of the overall vision. Architecture not experienced as an abstract object
power than its numerous transfers into constitutes the abstraction of absolute already transformed by conscience, but
the objective realities of the building truth, while this very truth gets in the way as an immediate and concrete human
industry and social housing ? Does the of feeling. We cannot both experience and activity : as a praxis, with all its
social function of architecture lie in its think that we experience. 'The concept subjectivity. This importance of the
very lack of function ? In fact, of dog does not bark' ; the concept of subject is in clear opposition to all
architecture may have little other ground. space is not in space. philosophical and historical attempts to
Just as the Surrealists could not find In the same way, the achievement of objectify the immediate perception of
the right compromise between scandal architectural reality (building) defeats reality, for example in the relations of
and social acceptance, architecture seems architectural theory whilst at the same production. To talk about the Labyrinth
to have little choice between autonomy time being a product of it. So theory and and its praxis means to insist here on its
and commitment, between the radical praxis may be dialectic to one another, but subjective aspects: it is personal and
anachronism of Schiller's 'courage to in space, the translation of the concept, requires an immediate experience.
talk of roses' and society. If the the overcoming of the abstraction in Opposed to Hegel's Erfahrung and close
architectural piece renounces its reality involves the dissolution of the to Bataille's 'interior experience,' this
autonomy by recognizing its latent dialectic and an incomplete statement. immediacy bridges sensory pleasure and
ideological and financial dependency, it This means in effect that, perhaps for the reason. It introduces new articulations
accepts the mechanisms of society. If it first time in history, architecture can between the inside and the outside,
sanctuarizes itself, in an art for art's sake never be. The effect of the great battles between private and public spaces. It
position, it does not escape classification of social progress is obliterated, and so is suggests new oppositions between
among existing ideological compartments. the security of archetypes. Defined by its dissociated terms and new relations
So architecture seems to survive only questioning, architecture is always the between homogeneous spaces. This
whenever it negates itself, whenever it expression of a lack, a shortcoming, a immediacy does not give precedence to
saves its nature by negating the form that non-completion. It always misses the experiential term, however. For it is
society expects of it. I would therefore something, either reality or concept. only by recognizing the architectural rule
suggest that there has never been any Architecture is both being and non-being. that the subject of space will reach the
reason to doubt the necessity of The only alternative to the paradox is depth of experience and its sensuality.
architecture, for the necessity of silence, a final nihilistic statement which Like eroticism, architecture needs both
architecture is its non-necessity. It is might provide modern architectural system and excess.
useless, but radically so. Its radicalism history with its ultimate punch-line, its
constitutes its very strength in a society self-annihilation. 21. This 'experience' may have
where profit is prevalent. Rather than an repercussions that go far beyond man as
obscure artistic supplement or a cultural 19. Before leaving this necessarily its 'subject.' Torn between rationality and
justification for financial manipulations, brief exploration of architecture as the demand for irrationality, our present
architecture is not unlike fireworks, for paradox, it is tempting to suggest a way of society moves towards other attitudes. If
these 'empirical apparitions', as Adorno accepting the paradox, while refuting the system plus excess is one of its symptoms,
puts it, 'produce a delight that cannot be silence it seems to imply. This we may soon have to consider
sold or bought, that has no exchange conclusion may be intolerable to architecture as the indispensable
value and cannot be integrated in the philosophers, in that it alters the complement to this changing human
`subject' of architecture, you and I (and praxis. Architecture in the past gave
production cycle.' 3
one knows logicians are never drunk). linguistic metaphors (the Castle, the
18. It is hardly surprising therefore It may be intolerable to scientists who Structure, the Labyrinth) to society. It
that the non-necessity of architecture, its want to master the 'subject' of science. may now provide a cultural model.
necessary loneliness, throws It may be intolerable to artists who want As long as social practice does not
architecture back on itself. If its role is not to objectify the 'subject.' absorb but rejects the paradox of ideal
defined by society, architecture will have Let us first examine the Labyrinth. and real space, imagination - interior
to define it alone. Until 1750, architectural In the course of this argument, it has been experience - may be the only means to
space could rely upon the paradigm of implied that the Labyrinth shows itself transcend it. By changing the prevalent
the ancient precedent. After that time, as a slow history of space, but that a total attitudes towards space and its subject,
until well into the 20th century, this revelation of the Labyrinth is historically the dream of the step beyond the
classical source of unity progressively impossible because no point of paradox can even provide the conditions
became the socially determined transcendence in time is available. One for renewed social attitudes. Just as
programme. In view of the present-day can participate in and share the eroticism is the pleasure of excess rather
polarization of ontological discourse and fundamentals of the Labyrinth, but than the excess of pleasure, so the
sensual experience, I am well aware that one's perception is only a part of the solution of the paradox is the imaginary
any suggestion that they now form the Labyrinth as it manifests itself. One can blending of the architecture rule and the
inseparable but mutually exclusive terms never see it in totality, nor can one experience of pleasure.
of architecture requires some elucidation. express it. One is condemned to it and
This must begin with a brief description cannot go outside and see the whole. But
of the apparent impossibility of escaping remember: Icarus flew away, towards the
from the paradox of the Pyramid of sun. So after all does the way out of the
concepts and the Labyrinth of Labyrinth lie in the making of the
experience, of immaterial architecture as Pyramid, through a projection of the
a concept and of material architecture as a subject towards some transcendental
presence. objectivity ? Unfortunately not. The
To restate my point, the paradox is not Labyrinth cannot be dominated. The
about the impossibility of perceiving top of the Pyramid is an imaginary
both architectural concept (the six faces place, and Icarus fell down: the nature
of the cube) and real space at the same of the Labyrinth is such that it
time, but about the impossibility of both entertains dreams which include the
questioning the nature of space and at the dream of the Pyramid.
same time making or experiencing a real
space. Unless we search for an escape 20. But the real importance of the
from architecture into the general Labyrinth and its spatial experience lies
organization of building prccesses, the elsewhere. The Pyramid, the analysis of
paradox persists : architecture is made the architectural object, the breaking-
of two terms that are interdependent but down of its forms and elements, all cut
mutually exclusive. Indeed, away from the question of the subject.
architecture constitutes the reality of Along with the spatial praxis mentioned
experience while this reality gets in the way earlier, the sensual architectural reality is

142