Drawing the Line

DRAWING Examining Deconstruction Within Coop Himmelblau’s Design Process: Determining Where Art Ends, and Architecture Begins

The Journey from First Sketch to Built Project

THE LINE

4

INTRODUCTION

Although some such as Nikos A. Salingaros believe that it is a “deliberate aggression on our senses” causing “physical anxiety and discomfort” (Salingaros, 2004, p.38), Mark Wigley argues that deconstructivist architecture is “not demolition”.

At what point is instability marginalised? (Wigley, 1988, p.15).

Deconstruction in terms of Jacques Derrida’s theory is a strategy used to examine philosophical or literary texts, in order to fully understand the many layers of meaning they hold.

It is not intended to overthrow modernist beliefs of purity of form, merely challenge them – it bends the rules, but does not break them. The purpose is to challenge harmony, and coax out flaws within the building, with the view that they are “intrinsic to the structure” (Wigley, 1988, p.11).

It means “burrowing deep” and to find out what the “blind spot in the author’s eye cannot see.” (Muller, 1991, p.10).

The way I feel this theory is translated onto architecture of the deconstructivist period, is that architects of the time subjected their projects to the same kind of interrogation as Derrida “applied to textual matter” (Muller,1991, p.10).

The role of the deconstructivist architect is to locate “inherent dilemmas within the building” (Wigley, 1988, p.11) and celebrate them, in a way that brings structural tension and visible energy.

The interrogation of form involves “formal strategies developed by the Russian avant-garde in the early twentieth century” (Wigley, 1988, p.11). The Russian Constructivism period “posed a threat to tradition by breaking the classical rules of composition” (Wigley, 1988, p.11).

The constructivists saw art as a practise for social purpose, which is precisely how it was translated into architecture.

While using art as a social tool can be powerful, architecture is an even more powerful tool, as it is a practise so deeply rooted in society. The two cannot be detached.

The avant-garde saw this opportunity and so the artwork became more spatial. However, poised on the brink of an architectural movement, these ideas faded, “not for political or technical reasons” (Wigley, 1988, p.15), but because to translate these drawings into built projects, would be resolving them, and through resolution, the forms would become unstable, and not show the same message as the earlier pre-revolution work.

The movement was halted, until the 1980s when a group of seven architects began to show “a similar approach with very similar forms as an outcome” (Wigley, 1988, P.7).

Amongst these architects was the architecture firm Coop Himmelblau.

In this essay I will discuss the manifestation of deconstructivist theory in Coop Himmelblau’s Rooftop Remodelling, with a particular focus on their condensed design process. Not only does deconstruction theory inform their work, but the way they design too.

I will also interrogate Coop Himmelblau’s design process in terms of how closely it resembles the process of making art as opposed to the process of design. I want to determine where the line is drawn in the journey of a project – at what point do architectural constraints enter the scene and alter decisions?

5

THE PROCESS

Coop Himmelblau became known in the post-modern era, and were labelled deconstructivists, but unlike many believe, deconstructivists were not opposed to their modernist predecessors, or the rules they laid down.

Deconstructivism is not destruction – it’s simply about analysis of existing, established forms, and the treatment of architecture as a language, exposing it to similar processes as Derrida’s deconstruction with regards to literature.

6

“In the last five-to-ten years we have begun to shorten the actual process of design, to condense it.�

7

THE FEELING

Coop Himmelblau’s focus on the feeling of a space, as opposed to its physical function, from the early stages of design right through to the final outcome, shows movement forward from the confines of Modernism, and a closer likeness to the process of making art.

The first “moment” is kept “free of all material constraints” (Prix, 1991, p.20), so as to arrive at a “physiological ground plan” (Prix, 1991, p.22) that focuses purely on the feeling of the space.

This way of thinking challenges previous beliefs about design process; usually it would be spatial and material constraints that are analysed first, and determine the outcome of many design decisions. During the modernist period, buildings were primarily organised around what people do, not what they feel. There was a need to analyse physical activities to see how these would influence the physical space, rather than imagining how the physical space would make you feel, and making decisions based on evoking feeling and emotion.

This shows how “form follows function” has been scrutinized by deconstructivists – not discarded, just pulled apart and restructured in an arguably better way. In this new idea, form still follows function, but this function is not physical: it is an emotional function.

Falkestrasse Rooftop Remodelling is an example of a project that has a clear progression from initial concept to final design.

Although in this case physical constraints were considered early on, but how could they not be?

The task was to renovate 4,300 square feet of attic space of a traditional apartment block in Vienna (Wigley. M, 1988, p.81). In this case the site informed the context and the concept.

The context: the relationship between street and roof, and the concept: an inverted streak of lightning…the line of energy that arches over the roof and tears it open” (Prix, 1991, p.24).

“We do discuss the project, but we do not discuss the spatial repercussions.

We try to define the feeling…”

Does this stage of the design process fall into the category of art, or architecture? For at this point, all we have is an idea, a concept trapped inside one’s head, of an imaginary space, and a collection of feelings. This is how artwork starts out, the difference between the two practices comes later, when the idea is translated into physical matter.

9

“And then suddenly we have a drawing, sometimes on a sheet of paper, sometimes on the table, sometimes even on the wall or the floor…”

10

THE DRAWING

For Coop Himmelblau, the first sketch captures the feeling of the space – as in, the atmosphere that they wish the final built space to emanate. They often create this sketch with their eyes closed, to avoid all distractions, even “the act of drawing itself” (Prix, 1991, p.23). It is the first “emotional confrontation with the psychic spaces” (Prix, 1984, p.202).

This stage of design is still purely about feeling, except now it is drawn on the page. It is the first time that a thought, a feeling, is translated into visual matter.

On the opposite page is the initial sketch for Falkestrasse Rooftop Remodelling, which is arguably not too dissimilar from the final built project. It is not simply a similarity of form, moreover a continuation of the initial spark and energy, throughout the project and into the final physical space.

The lightning bolt – the converging lines through the centre of the sketch, is a design feature that is kept right until the end; the energy line.

Drawing from the early sketch, and building a similar outcome isn’t necessarily a lack of resolution as many would think it to be, instead the design has been resolved around the importance of the flow of energy, and the feeling this gives.

The layout of spaces is considered, but is of secondary importance to light, views, and heights that make up a spatial experience.

11

THE MODEL

“…and at the same time model evolves…

The model does not hav scale; like the drawing, i intended to be a prelimi impression of the emerg building.”

The simultaneous evolution of the model alongside the drawing makes for an energetic three-dimensional representation.

Still there is no scale, no site, therefore no distraction from the primary aim of design through feeling.

However, this is the first step into the real world. The initial concept has now been brought to life on paper as an abstract two-dimensional sketch, but now it has been thrust into three-dimensional space, with forces such as gravity to contend with. The previously arbitrary shapes in sketch and plan now have spatial qualities, light qualities, and tension.

No matter what scale the model, there are now material demands, and a whole new set of decisions to make.

The model is the point at which in which the idea has no choice but to become resolved in terms of balance, and stability, harking back to the Russian Avant Garde who hit this point and then paused. It is the point at which drawn forms are extruded, twisted, inverted, and balanced, creating tension and dynamism.

Many have described deconstructivism as “an alien hatched inside a structure, trying to break out” or even “a virus” (Muller, 1991, p.11) portraying the idea that deconstruction has to operate from the inside, seeing the internal system, finding out how it works and then re-wiring it.

This is the process Coop Himmelblau used when remodelling the rooftop – they first had to examine the original structure, as Derrida would examine a text, and unpack what is already there in order to see weak spots and flaws, and think how best to re-work it.

12

ea

ve a it is inary gent

13

THE OBJECT

The object at first does not have a direct purpose, or reason of being, which argues that the process is in close relation with the practise of fine art. Even at this late stage in the design journey, the firm still focus their attention almost entirely on feeling, and are not concerned with making things that necessarily work, or are based around physical function.

14

AND THE INSTALLATION

The installation is the initial concept at human scale – a space that tests human reactions. In a way it may be better at communicating feeling than the actual building, for it is the penultimate step; there are fewer constraints to deal with, and more to experiment with.

The installation is so close to the formation of a building, yet it is associated with art and galleries.

When designing an installation, you think about the structure in terms of the space around it, and imagine how it would make people feel if they stood next to it, under it, or above it. You think of it as a spatial experience, rather than merely a visual one.

Instead of being hung on a wall in a gallery the installation is often a central piece, one that is meant to be viewed from all angles, and to be interacted with.

Yet at this point, in order for it to be allowed to stand in a gallery and endure physical interaction, it must be safe and stable – surely this now matches the constraints of a final building? Is it not a fragment of the whole?

15

16

17

THE BUILDING

Art ends when an idea is subjected to constraint after constraint until it must in some way conform to the needs of society, the abrasion of the elements, the test of time, and the limits of materials. It may be for this single reason that Coop Himmelblau choose to defer this path of thinking until the very end of the design process, with the aim of creating a space, a structure that is almost purely a physical representation of a feeling, that is almost existing beyond this world’s real-life limitations. While art can happily sit in the confines of the gallery, it is not expected to perform any function other than evoking thought and feeling, whilst architecture must adhere to so many restrictions, perform so many functions, and have the ability to morph over time depending on society’s needs, it cannot quite break free.

18

19

20

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Rendell, J. (2006) Art and Architecture: A Place In-between.

Crysler, C., Cairns, S. and Heynen, H. (2013) The SAGE Handbook Of Architectural Theory. London: SAGE Publications.

Davies, C. (2017) A New History of Modern Architecture.

Prix, W.D. (2005) Get Off of My Cloud.

Coop Himmelblau. (1984) Architecture Is Now. Mรถnninger, M. (2010) Coop Himmelblau Complete Works.

London. Taschen.

Wigley, M. (1993) Architecture of Deconstruction.

Noever, P. (1991) Architecture in Transition.

Salingaros, N,A. (2004) Anti-Architecture and Deconstruction.

Miles, M. (1997) Art, Space and the City.

Johnson, P. and Wigley, M. (1998) Deconstructivist Architecture.

21

22

IMAGE REFERENCES In order of appearance 1. (Front cover) http://www.coop-himmelblau.at/architecture/projects/rooftop-remodeling-falkestrasse 2. House with the Flying Roof https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/507992032953563097/ 3. Hot Flat (drawing) http://www.coop-himmelblau.at/architecture/projects/hotflat 4. Architecture Must Blaze (drawing) http://cargocollective.com/drawnandwritten/following/ drawnandwritten/Blaze-Tent 5. Sketch for Falkestrasse Rooftop Remodelling http://www.coop-himmelblau.at/architecture/projects/rooftop-remodeling-falkestrasse 6. Falkestrasse Model https://divisare.com/projects/305869-coop-himmelb-l-auwolf-d-prix-partner-rooftop-remodeling-falkestrasse-wien 7. Restless Sphere http://www.coop-himmelblau.at/architecture/projects/restless-sphere 8. Architecture Must Blaze http://www.coop-himmelblau.at/architecture/philosophy/ architecture-must-blaze 9. Face-Space – Soul Flipper http://www.coop-himmelblau.at/architecture/projects/ soul-flipper 10. Falkestrasse Interior https://www.archilovers.com/projects/69384/rooftop-remodelling-falkestrasse.html 11. Falkestrasse Exterior https://www.archilovers.com/projects/69384/rooftop-remodelling-falkestrasse.html 12. In Context https://www.flickr.com/photos/roryrory/2447734023

23