Mom can we dive at the nave? And other issues of architectural identity

What do we mean when we say that buildings should speak for themselves? How do we even start measuring the legitimacy of that claim? What are buildings supposed to talk about anyway? In his book Architecture of Happiness Alain de Botton argues that:

“If buildings can act as a repository of our ideals, it is because they can be purged of all infelicities that corrode ordinary lives. A great work of architecture will speak to us of degree of serenity, strength, poise and grace to which we, both as creators and audiences, typically cannot do justice- and it will for this very reason beguile and move us. Architecture excites our respect to the extent it surpasses us.” 1

capable of succeeding, evolving and often failing, just as humans do. Can those ideals really reside in the architectural typologies of brick and mortar and be universally perceived or is it just another set of semantic games that we play in order to create something that “surpasses us”. Do churches and cathedrals really bring us closer to the divine and is this spiritual goal the sole reason churches look the way they do?

Some people would argue that we as architects create objects and spaces that genuinely reflect the ideals we believe in often at the cost of our physical comfort. In Peter Eisenman talks about the often oversimplified relationship between our never ending pursuit of ide- alistic values and the immediate pragmatic function.

accommodation-the program and the way it is materialized-and a concern for articulation of ideal themes in form-for example, as manifested in the configurational significance of the plan. These concerns were understood as two poles of a single, continuous experience. Within pre-industrial, humanist practice, a balance between them could be maintained because both type and function were invested with idealist views of man’s relationship to his object world.” 2

Eisenman argues that after the rise of industrialization that balance was impossible to maintain since the programmatic requirements became too complex.

“Within preindustrial, humanist practice, a balance between them could be maintained because both type and function were invested with idealist views of man’s relationship to his object world.

“And as the functions became more complex, the ability to manifest the pure typeform eroded… Thus, in the nineteenth century, and continuing on into the twentieth, as the program grew in complexity, the typeform became diminished as a realizable concern.” 3

In his book The Architecture of the City Aldo Rossi writes; “In almost all European cities there are large palaces, building complexes or agglomerations that constitute whole pieces of the city, and whose function is no longer the original one. When one visits a monument of this type… one is struck by multiplicity of different functions that a building of this type can contain over time and how these functions are entirely independent of the form. At the same time, it is precisely the form that impresses us; we live it and experience it, and in turn it structures the city.” 4

The relationship Rossi talks about is significantly more complex than form follows function or vice versa. These relationships change over time; sometimes gradually as result of steady evolution in mindset of users or a rapid change that may be a result of religious or political changes, shifts in paradigms, wars and other similar conditions. This shifts in perception of the building may be best understood under the framework of primary and secondary functions. If we consider the primary function to be the more utilitarian one and the secondary one to be the symbolic meaning we assign to objects the we can observe how these things overlap or grow apart throughout a given phase. Uberto Eco talking about denotative (primary) and connotative (secondary) functions of architecture made it clear that architecture does not only function but it also communicates and this communication happens in the semiotic terrain. Everything from the primitive caves to Gothic cathedrals are subject to se- miotic analysis. However this analysis has a temporal dimension as non of the functions or symbolic mean-

RELEVANCE OF IDEAS, IMPORTANCE OF FORMS Role of political agenda in our perception of buildings

Berlin Wall,Berlin

Does the importance of an object simply diminish the moment its initial purpose becomes obsolete? A chunk of reinforced concrete that sliced the city in two, left the families and lovers on the different sides of the city, turned people against each other and left absolutely everyone living in fear.

It’s been more than 40 years since the wall came down and the ideologies that led to the erection of the wall

are no longer relevant. But the wall as a physical object is still encountered and experienced by millions on a yearly basis. However, these encounters happen not only in Berlin but all around the world. Ever since the wall started coming down some people quickly realized the potential value these pieces of concrete may eventually acquire. Today we can see those pieces in places that seem relatively appropriate; like the embassy of Germany in Chile or in Schengen, Luxembourg which is known to be the “border-less city”. However, there are some more questionable instances like when a 12 foot tall piece of the wall was presented to Usain Bolt by Mayor of Berlin, Klaus Wowereit 10 or

the part of the wall that ended up in the bathrooms of the Main Street Station Casino in Las Vegas. It has four urinals mounted to it and a big sign on top.

When a piece of architecture becomes a signifier of itself. It is not the books or images that talk about the wall, it is the wall that talks about itself. But what does the wall become in a bathroom thousands of miles and decades away from a point where it clearly had an identity.