"Architecture and Simulacra."

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

Project Title: ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCIA-SANCHO 1372025 Architecture Thinking: ARCHITECTURE PROBLEM STATEMENT (DRAFT) Urban Asymmetries. 5th March 2009.

1/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

TABLE OF CONTENTS ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA......3 URBAN SIMULACRA AND THE PROJECT OF THE NEOLIBERAL CITY......5 THE OTHER CITY.......8 FUNCTION, FORM AND MATTER......11 BIBLIOGRAPHY......15

2/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA. In the logic of late capitalism, it seems that spatial practices are being progressively integrated into commodity production1. We could set this tendency in a 'regime of flexible accumulation,' as Harvey describes it, characterized by intensified innovation, unceasing emergence of new possibilities and rapid and constant shifts.2 Undoubtedly, this framework will influence not only our processes of material organization,3 but radically challenge the way we understand space and time. 4 However, in a system that is based in service sectors (or shifts the location of industrial production to less-developed regions), denies use value and is rooted in the flow and growth of fictitious capital, the tangible has apparently lost its primacy. This duality appears to fit the Marxist description of the capitalist system as a 'concrete abstraction' or an “abstraction that becomes true through practice.”5 However intertwined the conception and production of our cities might be with the socioeconomic system that supports them, the relation they bear and how they affect each other is something hardly discussed in any contemporary mainstream architecture. There is a certain paradox, then, between buildings that take a necessary distance from reality in order to accomplish an aesthetic goal, but at the same time give a material base for that reality and allow it to prevail in time. The postmodern drive towards an 'aesthetic populism,'6 as Jencks puts it, turns the building into symbols that emit signs and messages, creating an aesthetic object focused in communication, contrasting with the 'transaesthetic' constructions of the high modern.7 Harvey comments on this mutation of space: “Whereas the modernists see space as something to be shaped for social purposes and therefore always subservient to the construction of a social project, the postmodernists see space as something independent and autonomous, to be shaped according to aesthetic aims and principles which have nothing necessarily to do with any overarching social objective.” 8 1 Jencks asserts that “aesthetic production today has become integrated into commodity production generally,” to later point out that “[o]f all the arts, architecture is the closes constitutively to the economic, with which, in the form of commissions and land values, it has a virtually unmediated relationship.” Charles Jencks, “Critical modernism: where is post-modernism going?”, London: 2007, Wiley-Academy, p 4-5.

2 David Harvey, “The condition of Postmodrnity”, Oxford: 2004, Blackwell Publishing, p 147.

3 Alejandro Zaera-Polo, “Mind after Matter”, from “Matter and Mind in Architecture”, Hämeenlina: 2000, Kirjapaino Karisto, p 102.

4 Harvey talks about a “time-space compression,” David Harvey, “The condition of Postmodrnity”, Oxford: 2004, Blackwell Publishing, p 147.

5 “Space as Concrete Abstraction: Hegel, Marx, and Modern Urbanism in Henri Lefebvre” Łukasz Stanek, from “Space, Difference, Everyday Life: Henri Lefebvre and Radical Politics”, London: 2008, Routledge p 96.

6 Charles Jencks, “Critical modernism: where is post-modernism going?”, London: 2007, Wiley-Academy, p 2 7 Note 2, Ibid, p 420.

8 David Harvey, “The condition of Postmodrnity”, Oxford: 2004, Blackwell Publishing, p 66.

3/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

It is precisely this independence sought by the postmodern space what makes impossible for it to reference, let alone interfere, the social space it is invading. In this sense, the architect is relegated to an ornamental role, being only able to beautify the structures of the system he works in, but never to challenge them.9 We could link the project of the postmodern space perhaps to Debord's notion of the 'spectacle' with which, he asserts “reality considered partially unfolds, in his own general unity, as a pseudo-world apart, an object of mere contemplation.”10 A flattening process seems to take place, by which buildings are designed, conceived and mediated as images. Michael Hayes talks about how the envelopes of these buildings are designed with complex digital software that is not exclusive to architecture but also used in the production of 3-D animation, implying that “the reception of the architecture thus produced will be woven into the same general media fabric as video games and televisual leisure, part of the smooth media mix.”11 Digitalization is thus a key element for the creation of these new 'morphogenetic design,'12 which creates complex routines and patterns that generate the illusion of the random, the unplanned, “not because of human non-accuracy, but thanks to computational processing of diversity.” 13 The generation of external laws to guide the design process leads often to a presentational work, “the new morphological codes are presented as ends in themselves.”14 The idea of an external logic, alien to reality, which will later take place gives us a first link to the concept of the simulacrum. Described by Plato as “the identical copy for which no original has ever existed,”15 we could argue tentatively that the original for these architectures, which are conceived and developed in the virtual, is not buildable as such in reality, but has to be somehow materialized. This materialization (which recalls again that “abstraction made true”) is the logic that is building our cities; nevertheless, buildings are being branded, perceived and mediated, as their virtual simulations. They embody images that, as Debord predicted “become the final form of commodity reification.”16

9 Miguel Robles-Durán quoted Teddy Cruz in his statement: “Architecture is only beautifying the structures of power that opress us.” Miguel Robles-Durán, “The new urban question” lecture series, 25 Sep 2009, TU Delft.

10 Guy Debord , “Society of the Spectacle” , Detroit: 1983, Black & Red, paragraph 2.

11 Michael Hays, “The envelope as a mediator”, from Berard Tschumi and Irene Cheng (Ed), “The state of architecture at the beginning of the 21st century” New York, 2003, Monacelli Press, p 66.

12 Charles Jencks, “Critical modernism: where is post-modernism going?”, London: 2007, Wiley-Academy, p 187.

13 Kas Oosterhuis“A New Kind of Building”, from “Crossover: Architecture, Urbanism, Technology” Arie Graafland (ed), Rotterdam: 2006, 010 Publishers, p 246.

14 Charles Jencks, “Critical modernism: where is post-modernism going?”, London: 2007, Wiley-Academy, p 188.

15 Charles Jencks, “Critical modernism: where is post-modernism going?”, London: 2007, Wiley-Academy, p 18.

16 Quote from “The society of spectacle”, Fredric Jameson, “Archaeologies of the Future. The Desire Called Utopia and Other Science Fictions.” New York: 2005, Verso, p 18.

4/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

URBAN SIMULACRA AND THE PROJECT OF THE NEOLIBERAL CITY Ángel Martín Ramos argues about simulacra to talk about its most extreme example: amusement parks.17 He tries to analyze them according to parcellation, urbanization and building,18 all of which coincided to be perceived as somehow strange, perhaps even uncanny. Parcellation is non existent, at least not in the sense of the traditional city. There is one extensive parcel, clearly bounded and with very few entrances, thus creating a very powerful inside. The ownership is thus only one; public space as such is inexistent. Urbanization takes place in strong axis, normally over sized and with routes that follow the logic of strategic nodes of commercial activities or services. Finally, the building has, necessarily, no relation to its surroundings, because it is conceived to represent somewhere else, somewhere that might even not exist in reality. The construction is most of the time deceitful: stone is not stone, proportions and dimensions are forced, but somehow we take it for granted in a process of make-believe. Perhaps a good adjective would be the term 'subjunctive',19 a mood of the verb that necessarily expresses wishes or possibility, opposed to the indicative which is bond to the facts. The realm of the 'as if' 20 is thus the natural space of proliferation of simulacra.

Even though more subtle, the late urban renewal projects could be regarded as subjunctive, as they are also soaked in wishes and intentions. Perhaps we can even find in them some of the tautological features of the 'spectacle', which “flows from the simple fact that its means are simultaneously its ends.” 21 To change and renew urban centers has been a major effort of most city councils; it is a “political and economical issue, dominated by powerful actors that take decisions without the participation of the neighbours”22 in most of the cases. Even though these processes are not new, I would argue that they 17 Ángel Martín Ramos, “Urbanística II” lecture. Spring semester 2005, Chair of Urbanism, School of Architecture of Barcelona.

18 Parcellation, Urbanization and Building (Edification); P+U+E are the three basic factors used by the chair of Urbanism at the School of Architecture of Barcelona to identify, measure and compare different urban models.

19 According to the Oxford Dictionary, subjunctive is “expressing what is imagined or wished or possible.” Term extracted from: Margaret Mackey “Stepping into the Subjunctive World of the Fiction in Game, Film and Novel”, http://journals.sfu.ca/loading/index.php/loading/article/viewFile/46/42 (25th Feb 2009) 20 I first encountered this term in an essay by Pedro Azara about funerary architecture and the difficulties of facing death: “we enter the world of the 'as if', the region of metaphors.” Pedro Azara, The House of the Dead (On modern tombs). From “La última casa/ The last house.” Mónica Gili (ed). Barcelona: 1999, Gustavo Gili, p 15.

Rubert de Ventós also talks about the 'as if':“The fear of the 'as if' [from the Modernists], of the effects that dissimulate reality of the thing, talk about an architecture with the same search of autonomy than the rest of arts.”

Xavier Rubert de Ventós, “El arte ensimismado”, Barcelona: 1997, Anagrama, p 143.

21 Guy Debord , “Society of the Spectacle” , Detroit: 1983, Black & Red, paragraph 13.

22 Monika Streule Maimaitekerimu, “La festivalización de los centros históricos.” Ciudades: Revista Trimestral de la 5/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

have shifted their strategies and perhaps radicalized in some ways in the last few years. To help me describe it, I would like to link this present-day processes with the rise of a new social class according to Richard Serra: the 'creative class', which is defined as a group of professionals that are related to arts, design, media and which also include the knowledge-workers.23 The book only explores their role in the United States, but I would say it can easily be extrapolated to a global scale. This sector of society, according to the author, have a distinct and well-defined lifestyle and set of values (what he calls 'ethos') which clearly characterizes them as a separate social class (a term that Neoliberalism has repeatedly tried to render as obsolete in the current situation). There are many different elements that shape this social construct. We can find elements of classical liberalism, as it is the assurance that everybody is able to enter this new elite, because we all have creativity that we can exploit. 24 The members of this group are, however, presented as non-conventional enfant terribles with tattoos and piercings which value diversity and openness25: an image which distances them from the unpopular world of the neocons. The fact that the new store of value lies in an immaterial good (creativity), which cannot be sold or bought, also tries to detach it from classical capitalism. It is, nevertheless, naive to think that because a resource has abstractly no economic value, it won't influence the economy (translated in wages, prices of creative work, etc) and thus is able to create economic inequalities. The very essence of the creativity (creation) is linked to the capitalist obsession with the new.26 There is, in fact, a stress throughout the book on how this new class will dramatically alter the world as we know it today. 27 And of course, cities are not an exception. According to Florida's discourse, the newborn class “need to live in places that offer stimulating, creative environments.”28 This is naturally a wake up call for city councils who want to attract creative individuals, well-respected professionals that have a profile of middle-high income, higher education, no problems with cultural and social integration (Western or Westernized) and that normally are consumers of specialized and expensive commodities.

Serra states that “[c]reativity is the ultimate economic resource” 29 and the effect it has on the real state market can be clearly seen if we compare a map of the United States showing the concentration of creative centers and another one of prices of property, to see that they are practically interchangeable.

Red Internacional de Investigación Urbana, no. 79, Jul-Sept 2008, p 41.

Richard Florida, “The rise of the creative class”, New York: Basic Books, 2004, Preface to the paperback edition.

Ibid 8.

Ibid, p 77.

Miguel Robles-Durán goes as far as to say that the never ending search for the new is the quality that best defines Capitalism. Miguel Robles Durán, The New Urban Question Lecture Series, 25th September 2008, TU Delft.

27 The full title of the book itself remarks “ How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life”.

28 Richard Florida, “The rise of the creative class”, New York: Basic Books, 2004, p 95.

29 Id, p xiii, Preface to the paperback edition.

23 24 25 26

6/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

With the creation of high profile art (or creative) related institutions (the Bilbao effect) as a way of renewing urban centers, city scale administrations try to attract private capital for the creation of housing (either new built or restoration-transformation), which results in a desired urban renewal. The paradox is that the public administration (which is always in the city scale) is investing mainly in the creation of very expensive public buildings (with very timid social housing programs), which constitute a very small percentage of the city fabric, and leaving the in the hands of private developers.

The Fòrum 2004, in Barcelona, is another one of the countless urban renewal projects that are sprouting in most First World cities. Perhaps what makes it different is the unanimous criticism, both from architects and neighbours, that it arose before and after construction. It was presented as a kind of update of the Expositions Universelles of the 20th century, in which debate about peace, sustainable development, human rights and respect for diversity would be held. Its materialization included spectacular buildings signed by international architects, office towers for the supporting companies and an urban design project which, in fact, resembled a lot an amusement park. The shadiness of the intentions of the project were criticized by Josep Maria Montaner, which called the project a simulacrum: “The most striking thing is that nothing is called by its genuine name. The most evident example is the fact that the plain [...] which is called La Plaza [The Public Square] will not be a plaza, because a plaza is a public place and never a plot with restricted access, with an entrance fee.”30 The traits of the simulacrum, and the process of deceit or reality are apparent, and also the subtle tools that are used to maintain them, through names and conventions. Montaner continues to argue that “Even today, [when it has already been built,] the Fòrum is not reproduced in the media with real aerial photos, on the contrary renders, drawings and photoshopped photos are still being used, in the fashion of an average private housing development.”31 It is in fact, disturbing, that the 'spectacle' of the Fòrum has phagocyted its own simulacrum, stating that its “complete form and goals are identically the total justification of its goals.”32 The actual constructions also show, in a way, this uninterest for the real. The main piece of architecture of the ensemble, the Fòrum Building, by Herzog and de Meuron had two major features as a project: the free ground plan permitted a roofed public space, and the water roof allowed natural cooling 30 Josep Maria Muntaner, “El Fòrum que no será un fòrum” (“The Fòrum that won't be a forum”), http://www.arqa.com/index.php/esc/colaboraciones/el-forum-que-no-sera-un-forum.html (25th Feb 2009).

Translated from Spanish by the author.

31 Ibid.

32 Guy Debord , “Society of the Spectacle” , Detroit: 1983, Black & Red, paragraph 6.

7/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

(connecting with one of the axis of the Fòrum itself, which was sustainability). However, once constructed, the public space became unusable for safety reasons, and the cooling system merely didn't work, becoming necessary the installation of a system of air conditioning. These difficulties in materializing, show the bast gap that existed between the simulation and the simulacrum, resulting in a kind of fraudulent advertising campaign. “[...] the Fòrum building, already built, cannot fool anyone, like it did when it was a model or a render.”33

THE OTHER CITY. The above mentioned projects of urban renewal are being constantly exposed to the public, reproduced in the media and pumped up with both private and public capital. Its reverse, which remains hidden, developing in the silence of suburbia, is nevertheless completely necessary to sustain the other.

These urban dynamics mimic the performance of the Neoliberal scheme at a global scale, which clearly divides the world in two segregated realities, a clear differentiation between nodes of massive consumption and those of cheap production (or developed and developing countries), thus asserting and sustaining a tendency of 'uneven geographical development,' 34 not only in terms of wealth, but also in terms of urbanity.

To show the differences of the conflicting models of urbanization, we could take a look at Mexico City; an urban setting that is undergoing many urban renewal projects like the one's mentioned above, creating an accumulation of wealth and power, but at the same time producing an amazing suburban sprawl in the shape of 'vivienda de interés social'35 [social interest housing]. These are extense developments of gated communities planned, built and managed by a handful of large housing Mexican corporations (Casas Ara), and financed partly by the Federal Government (through INFONAVIT, National 33 Josep Maria Muntaner, “El Fòrum que no será un fòrum” (“The Fòrum that won't be a forum”), http://www.arqa.com/index.php/esc/colaboraciones/el-forum-que-no-sera-un-forum.html (25th Feb 2009).

Translated from Spanish by the author.

34 In David Harvey's writing we can find an attempt to theoretize about this uneven form of (global) development, which he sustains is caused by a constant competition between territories and Neoliberal states engaging in practices of 'accumulation by dispossession.' David Harvey, “A Brief History of Neoliberalism”, Oxford: 2007, Oxford University Press, p 87.

35 This is the general term that is used in Mexico to define current social housing programs, which from the midnineties onwards determine “the production of cheap, serial housing” by private developers with State financing.

Emilio Duhau, “Los nuevos productores del espacio habitable.” Ciudades: Revista Trimestral de la Red Internacional de Investigación Urbana, no. 79, Jul-Sept 2008, p 21.

8/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

Fund for Worker's Housing). Note that both examples, through very different, are financed (at least partially) by public money.

The size of it, to start with, is notorious. A development of “Las Américas” (Ecatepec, Estado de México) consists of 14 000 single housing units in gated condominiums, arranged in a simple square grid that sprawls over the territory. The whole development (fraccionamiento) was built in little less than three years on a land that was previously empty. It is an urban fabric planned, built and managed by a private entity, which has a de facto monopoly over the land, planning, construction and urbanization). This condition enhances the idea of an island detached from the surrounding city, that is visible in the difference of construction and housing models, but also materialized in a wall that segregates the two fabrics. The carelessness of the new development towards the existing city is complete: not even the city grid is respected, with street disruptions appearing. “Las Américas” sets its own rules; the outer world does not exercise any power in them. This features (big extension of land, detached from its surroundings, gated), disturbingly recalls the example of the amusement park.

Inside “Las Américas”, the model of serial housing or toothpaste architecture is visible at first glance. Even though there are three different typologies of houses, they are bearably distinguishable from the outside; they are hidden between the two alternative models of façade (modern or colonial) that repeat rhythmically along the whole development. There is a sense of displacement in this isotropic model, a literal lack of any point of reference. Furthermore, the system itself is subject of repetition to any other spot where the market conditions and the availability of land allow it, which creates a generic environment that could virtually be placed anywhere in the world. The final consequence of this 'insular urbanism' 36 is precisely that: the complete negation of the place or any trace of it.

The sense of 'irreality' is again present in this urban setting, that also looks like something that is not. Even though this model of gated communities could give the idea of jet-set housing, the target group for which the plan was envisioned are workers who own around 2.5 to 5 times the minimum wage. 37 I would argue that what these dwellers are buying is a simulacrum of a house, which mimics the image of the single family house to sell a very low quality product. In that sense, the Neoliberal urban strategies of centre and periphery would be based in the same element: the simulacrum as the motor that speeds speculation and revalorization, always proposing projects which respond to a partial vision of reality. In city 36 Emilio Duhau, “Los nuevos productores del espacio habitable.” Ciudades: Revista Trimestral de la Red Internacional de Investigación Urbana, no. 79, Jul-Sept 2008. p 23.

37 Id, p 7.

9/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

centres, as a collection of espectacular landmarks or envelopes which often contain tedious office spaces, aligned in Central Business Districts. In the periphery, the spatial arrangement is of a collection of interiors which is completely indifferent to their surroundings and serves one and only goal: to pump up as much as possible their exchange value in the conditions set by the market.

The parasitic condition is present in the very urban model that the development of “Las Américas” is proposing. The monofunctionality of the land use (strictly residential) and the low density scheme create a lack of urbanity that makes it inevitable not to depend on the surrounding city for its sustainment. The low densities arise as a consequence of the excessive space given to the cars, not only in the wide connection roads (that due to the wall that encloses the development have hardly any traffic) but also inside the gated condominiums, where the individualistic dream of parking one's car in front of one's house results in up to forty percent of the internal space empty (not built). This dependency on the city will be later transferred to the Municipality once the development is finished and the construction company is not liable anymore (having sold the houses and given back the roads as public space).The legacy of it is then an urban fabric that is completely unsustainable, dependent on the car, with huge amounts of open roads to maintain and a disperse bunch of low income inhabitants to pay taxes. The materialization of these urban dreams shows again, however, difficulties in landing in the material, where it creates a completely unsustainable model, which also defines and sets urban inequality in space.

FORM, FUNCTION AND MATTER38.

There is a certain need to escape from this uncontrolled profusion of images and abstractions that produce such urban inequalities. This “turn to material could thus be understood as a reaction to a world that daily bombards us with messages clamoring for our attention, to the point where such clamor reduces to a white noise.”39 In most of the examples of contemporary architecture there is a disappearance of the materials that conform a building, creating a scission between the actual construction and the apparent construction, a “disjunction between inner and outer, revamped in the terms of the indifference of

38 These three concepts are used to draw relations by Mary Mc Leod, “Form and Function today”, from Berard Tschumi and Irene Cheng (Ed), “The state of architecture at the beginning of the 21st century” New York, 2003, Monacelli Press, p 50.

39 Karsten Harries, “Is Stone Today “More Stone than it Used to Be”?”, from “Matter and Mind in Architecture”, Hämeenlina: 2000, Kirjapaino Karisto, p 11.

10/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

material to form and form to construction.”40 These changes serve mainly for the purpose of achieving an aesthetic appeal, coming through as a valid aesthetic object.

Karsten Harries warns us, however, about the differences between judging aesthetically a painting and a building: the involvement of ourselves in the building, the interaction and use, make it difficult to perceive it in the same uninterested, aesthetic experience. 41 However, the scale and monumentality some examples of architecture evoke, make it possible to adopt that 'aesthetic distance'42, to be regarded as a landmark, a he claims to be missing. Harries continues: “Buildings should carry meanings if they are to function: houses should look like houses, doors like doors.” 43 Nevertheless, as we have seen, buildings are emptied out of meaning in favor of image, and things don't look like we expect. Besides, most recognizable vernacular elements of architecture are being swifted away by technological solutions, such as the curtain wall. It seems that, in postmodern construction, “the question (…) is no longer what role a particular material is intended to play within a construction but what optical effect it can achieve.” 44 Zaera-Polo proposes the idea of the architect working in new 'grounds' which are “the extension where our practice unfolds in time and space” and constitute “artificial layers already containing the figures of architectural colonization.”45 This grounded perspective seems to prevent, in some way, the fluttering away of the image by trying to find logics in the existing reality and not import them from external sources . However, precisely one of the features of high modernism was precisely a detachment from the ground, a certain disdain towards everything that was there before. As Colomina points out, “He [Le Corbusier] advocated pilotis to detach buildings from the wet, humid ground where disease breeds.” 46 The true paradox of Modernist buildings regarding their construction was the issue of transience.

Modernist buildings can be seen as 'virtual sculptures,'47 that, like Utopias, projected themselves as stable, immutable – with no possibility of change, and no prospect of aging.

40 Frei Hans, “Neuerdings Einfachheit”, Bundersamt für Kultur, “Minimal Tradition, Max Bill und die 'einfache' Architektur 1942-1996”, Baden: 1996, p 122. Quoted from Frank R. Werner “The New Simplicity: A Problem of Representation in Architecture and Town Planning?”, from “Crossover: Architecture, Urbanism, Technology” Arie Graafland (ed), Rotterdam: 2006, 010 Publishers, p 141-154.

41 Karsten Harries, “The Ethical Function of Architecture”, Cambridge MAS and London: 1997, MIT Press, p 18.

42 Id. 43 Id. 44 Frank R. Werner “The New Simplicity: A Problem of Representation in Architecture and Town Planning?”, from “Crossover: Architecture, Urbanism, Technology” Arie Graafland (ed), Rotterdam: 2006, 010 Publishers, p 144.

45 Alejandro Zaera-Polo, “Mind after Matter”, from “Matter and Mind in Architecture”, Hämeenlina: 2000, Kirjapaino Karisto, p 102.

46 Beatriz Colomina, “Skinless architecture”, rom Berard Tschumi and Irene Cheng (Ed), “The state of architecture at the beginning of the 21st century” New York, 2003, Monacelli Press, p 68.

47 Charles Jencks, “Critical modernism: where is post-modernism going?”, London: 2007, Wiley-Academy, p 2.

11/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

“(...) it is inconceivable to enjoy the 1929 German Pavillion [in Barcelona, by Mies van der Rohe] in the form of the sad hypothetical spectacle of rusted and dented chrome plating, the bottom of the pool of water filled with slime.” 48 The same materials with which this works of architecture were built, could not “manifest themselves as such – that is, mutable.”49

The editorial of a certain issue of “Quaderns”50, devoted to the topic of materiality, starts by suggesting an scission in the conception and production of architecture in the 1990s, “after the onslaught of postmodernism.” 51 It identifies two groups, which are described as “desperate escape valves” that made clear from the beginning their “irreconcilable antagonism.”52 The first group, it proceeds, experimented with the new possibilities that arose from the use of the computer in the design process, which enabled, through the processing of large amounts of information, a previously unimagined geometrical complexity.

The second group assumed an opposite discourse, disregarding formal experimentation in favor of a certain sobriety, focusing in a much more 'tectonic' 53 approach. The editorial goes on to conclude that both ways of dealing with architecture have become somewhat convergent in the last years, the former developing an increasing interest in the material treatment of projects (specially in facade construction) and the latter gradually giving in to more complex geometries. The final assessment is that the current conditions “are redirecting attention from the tectonic and complex to the material”. 54 Even though the English translation of the journal talks about the “material”, the word used in the original (in Catalan) is “matèric”, which is far more specific and intentional than the usual Catalan adjective “material”.55 “Materic” (as I shall henceforth refer to it in English) is a term linked to art, and used almost 48 Ramon Faura Coll, “Blessed corruption”, Quaderns, no. 246, June 2005, p 95.

49 Ibid, p 96.

50 “D'allò tectònic a allò matèric” (“From the tectonic to the material”). Editorial. Quaderns d'Arquitectura I Urbanisme, 246, June 2006, p 12-13.

51 Ibid, p 12.

52 Id. 53 'Tectonic' refers to the relation that bonds the architectural space to its material qualities, and was described by Sekler as “a certain expressivity arising from the statistical resistance of constructional form in such a way that the resultant expression could not be accounted for in terms of structure and construction alone.” Eduard F. Sekler, “Structure, construction and tectonics.” Connection: Visual Arts at Harvard, March 1965, p 3-11. Quoted from footnote 36, Kenneth Frampton, Studies in Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of Construction in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture.” Chicago: 2001, The MIT Press.

54 Original in Catalan: “reorienta l'interès per allò tectònic I allò complex cap a allò matèric.” “D'allò tectònic a allò matèric” (“From the tectonic to the material”). Editorial. Quaderns d'Arquitectura I Urbanisme, 246, June 2006, p 13.

55 “Material” is defined as “Relative or pertaining to matter”, “Constituted of matter” and “That is related to the physical nature of the human being: his bodily necessities, interests, etc.” From the second edition of the “Diccionari de la Llengua Catalana”, Institut d'Estudis Catalans. “Material” http://dlc.iec.cat (March 1st 2009).

12/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

exclusively linked to 'materic painting', an influential pictorial style that developed in France, Spain and Italy through the late forties and fifties. Its main characteristic is “the complete preponderant role of matter over any other component of the work of art, specially form (…) [thus] becoming truly relevant which is the procedure chosen to carry out the piece.” 56 Art brut, Italian Spatialism and even Arte Povera are described in Spanish references as “materic”, being perhaps the most representative reference the work of Antoni Tàpies.57 Thus, a materic painting not only has a material base (as any painting would, at least in a traditional sense) but somehow particularly expresses its materiality, becomes more material than other paintings. Tàpies' uneven surfaces are in fact very different from the clean geometric compositions of Frank Stella, a painter brought as an example by Karsten Harries in order to build a preliminary description of an 'aesthetic object'.58 Both works of art share a certain self-sufficiency (they “present [themselves] as a whole”, they intend “not [to] mean but [to] be”59), nevertheless the former example stays closed very much in itself, in its materiality. While Stella's perfectly defined shapes and coloured surfaces are easily conceptualized, able to detach themselves from the process of painting to become abstract, Tàpies' complexity (adding textures, different media, sometimes even waste material completely alien to the painting) makes the piece of art definitely bond to its concreteness.

Thus, the main question about the materic approach the above mentioned editorial predicted is how is it translatable to architecture. Buildings, Harries claims, cannot be regarded as self-sufficient aesthetic objects: never presented in their totality, but in multiple perspectives; the necessary 'aesthetic distance' erased by our inhabitation. 60 Despite the difference that use and function bring about, I wouldn't like to reduce these proposed materic qualities to an overexploitation or exaggeration of the material condition of a building, as we have seen in recent examples of facades, which feature elaborate processes of texturization. These “new morphological codes”, almost invariably explored through complex digital tools, “are presented as ends in themselves.”61 It is perhaps more interesting to understand this materic feature as precisely the inverse of the simulacrum, an intimate relation between the building and the built, between the material qualities it provides and the grounds in which it operates. This new grounds open up as possibilities to become part of the city, but at the same time give a material base to develop their very There is no entry for “matèric.”

56 Lourdes Cirlot names Antoni Tàpies as a first reference of 'materic painting' in “La pintura informal en Cataluña, 1951-1970”, Barcelona: Anthropos Editorial, 1983, p 23.

57 Ibid, p 69.

58 Karsten Harries, “The Ethical Function of Architecture”, Cambridge MAS and London: 1997, MIT Press, p 16. The particular piece shown is “Newburyport”, Frank Stella, 1962.

59 Ibid, p 17.

60 Ibid, p 18.

61 Charles Jencks, “Critical modernism: where is post-modernism going?”, London: 2007, Wiley-Academy, p 188.

13/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCĂ?A-SANCHO

own urban culture and identity. Perhaps then, the stress should not be put on the individual (the individual creativity, the individual building, the individual house) but rather on enabling the collective, the shared, a social bond between equal citizens.

14/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO

MAIN BIBLIOGRAPHY.

Theodor W. Adorno, “Functionalism today”, from “Rethinking Architecture: A reader in cultural theory”, Neil Leach (ed), 1997, Routledge.

Guy Debord , “Society of the Spectacle” , Detroit: 1983, Black & Red. Karsten Harries, “Is Stone Today “More Stone than it Used to Be”?”, from “Matter and Mind in Architecture”, Hämeenlina: 2000, Kirjapaino Karisto.

Karsten Harries, “The Ethical Function of Architecture”, Cambridge MAS and London: 1997, MIT Press.

David Harvey, “The condition of Postmodernity”, Oxford: 2004, Blackwell Publishing.

Charles Jencks, “Critical modernism: where is post-modernism going?”, London: 2007, Wiley-Academy.

Mary Mc Leod, “Form and Function today”, from Berard Tschumi and Irene Cheng (Ed), “The state of architecture at the beginning of the 21st century” New York, 2003, Monacelli Press.

Alejandro Zaera-Polo, “Mind after Matter”, from “Matter and Mind in Architecture”, Hämeenlina: 2000, Kirjapaino Karisto.

ADDITIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY Michael Hays, “The envelope as a mediator”, from Berard Tschumi and Irene Cheng (Ed), “The state of architecture at the beginning of the 21st century” New York, 2003, Monacelli Press.

Beatriz Colomina, “Skinless architecture”,from Berard Tschumi and Irene Cheng (Ed), “The state of architecture at the beginning of the 21st century” New York, 2003, Monacelli Press.

Frank R. Werner “The New Simplicity: A Problem of Representation in Architecture and Town Planning?”, from “Crossover: Architecture, Urbanism, Technology” Arie Graafland (ed), Rotterdam: 2006, 010 Publishers, p 241-271.

Miguel Robles-Duran, “Anti-Avantgarde”, http://www.cohabitationstrategies.org/ANTIAVANTGARDE.html (11th Nov 2008) Fredric Jameson, “Archeologies of the Future. The Desire Called Utopia and Other Science Fictions.” New York: 2005, Verso.

Beatrice Galilee,“If you want to change society, don't build anything.” Icon, November 2008, p 98-106.

Julie Eizenberg, “Architecture Isn't Just for Special Occasions.” First published by The Monacelli Press 2006. Architecture (NY), vol 95 n. 4, April 2006. p 29-34. Łukasz Stanek, “Space as Concrete Abstraction: Hegel, Marx, and Modern Urbanism in Henri Lefebvre” from “Space, Difference, Everyday Life: Henri Lefebvre and Radical Politics”, London: 2008, Routledge , p.

62-79.

Langdon Winner, “Do artifacts have politics?”, from “The social shaping of technology” Donald MacKenzie and Judy Wajcman (ed). Philadelpia: 1988, Open University Press.

15/16

ARCHITECTURE AND SIMULACRA Carlos GARCÍA-SANCHO Félix Guattari, “Chaosmose” Buenos Aires: 1996, Manantial. (“Caósmosis”, Spanish Edition; translated by Irene Agoff).

Xavier Rubert de Ventós, “El arte ensimismado”, Barcelona: 1997, Anagrama.

Allen Carlson, “Reconstructing the Aesthetics of Architecture.”, first published in Journal of Aesthetic Education 20 (4), 1986, from “Aesthetic: Critical concepts in Philosophy.” (v IV), James Young (Ed.), Routledge, New York, 2005.

Robert E. Goodin, “Utility and the good”, from “A companion to Ethics”, Peter Singer (Ed.), Basil Blackwell, Cambridge (Massachusetts), 1991.

Berard Tschumi and Irene Cheng (Ed), “The state of architecture at the beginning of the 21st century” New York, 2003, Monacelli Press.

Ramon Faura Coll, “Blessed corruption”, Quaderns, no. 246, June 2005, p 86-97.

Alberto Pérez-Gómez, “Architectural representation in the age of simulacra.”, Skala, nr 20, 1990, p 40-43.

Santiago Cirugeda, “Situaciones urbanas”. Barcelona, Telnov, 2007.

Andrés Fernández Rubio, “Cheaper by the dozen.”, Architecture (NY), vol 95 n. 4, April 2006. p 48-54.

Teddy Cruz/ Estudio Cruz, “Levittown Retrofitted. An Urbanism beyond the property line.” from “Visionary Power. Producing the contemporary city.” Rotterdam, Eelco van Welie (Nai Publishers), 2007.

Monika Streule Maimaitekerimu, “La festivalización de los centros históricos.” Ciudades: Revista Trimestral de la Red Internacional de Investigación Urbana, no. 79, Jul-Sept 2008. p 36-44.

Emilio Duhau, “Los nuevos productores del espacio habitable.” Ciudades: Revista Trimestral de la Red Internacional de Investigación Urbana, no. 79, Jul-Sept 2008. p 21-28.

16/16