exisitng museum
COORDINATED COMPLEX OF DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC LIBRARIES (DPL) AND NATIONAL MUSEUM REGISTRATION NO: R-17031CCPM01
https://wsampson.wordpress.com/2011/04/10/from-my-archives-derridas-archive-fever/ Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression is a translation from the French of a published lecture Derrida delivered in 1994, and is divided into six parts: an opening note, an exergue, a preamble, foreword, theses and postscript. Derrida delivered this lecture to an international colloquium entitled “Memory: The Question of the Archives.” This leads to two caveats for the interested reader. Although blurbs on the paperback reference Derrida’s discussion of electronic media and more broadly the role of inscription technology in the psyche and in the archives, this is not the focus of his discussion, but is only part of a larger examination of the archive notion in Freud’s works. The reader should also know that this a later work of Derrida, and as such references ideas and investigations discussed in earlier works, particularly the essay Freud and the Scene of Writing (1972). This means some of Derrida’s passages can be disorienting if the reader is not familiar with the works of Derrida and Freud. Thankfully Derrida takes pains to convey his meaning through multiple expressions, so the reader has many opportunities to understand the ideas at play. https://newderrida.wordpress.com/2007/11/19/some-key-terms/ 2. Binary Oppositions The binary opposition is the structuralist idea that acknowledges the human tendency to think in terms of opposition. For Saussure the binary opposition was the “means by which the units of language have value or meaning; each unit is defined against what it is not.” With this categorization, terms and concepts tend to be associated with a positive or negative. For example, Reason/Passion, Man/Woman, Inside/Outside, Presence/Absence, Speech/Writing, etc. Derrida argued that these oppositions were arbitrary and inherently unstable. The structures themselves begin to overlap and clash and ultimately these structures of the text dismantle themselves from within the text. In this sense deconstruction is regarded as a forum of anti-structuralism. Deconstruction rejects most of the assumptions of structuralism and more vehementaly “binary opposition” on the grounds that such oppositions always previlege one term over the other, that is, signified over the signifier. 3. Differance Against the metaphysics of presence, deconstruction brings a (non)concept called differance. Derrida uses the term “difference” to describe the origin of presence and absence. Differance is indefinable, and cannot be explained by the “metaphysics of presence.” In French, the verb “deferrer” means both “to defer” and “to differ.” Thus, difference may refer not only to the state or quality of being deferred, but to the state or quality of being different. Differance may be the condition for that which is deferred, and may be the condition for that which is different. Differance may be the condition for difference. Derrida explains that difference is the condition for the opposition of presence and absence.[1] Differance is also the “hinge” between speech and writing, and between inner meaning and outer representation. As soon as there is meaning, there is difference.[2] 4. Metaphysics of presence/ Logocentricism According to Derrida, “logocentrism” is the attitude that logos (the Greek term for speech, thought, law, or reason) is the central principle of language and philosophy.[3] Logocentrism is the view that speech, and not writing, is central to language. Thus, “Of Grammatology” (a term which Derrida uses to refer to the science of writing) can liberate our ideas of writing from being subordinated to our ideas of speech. Of Grammatology is a method of investigating the origin of language which enables our concepts of writing to become as comprehensive as our concepts of speech. According to logocentrist theory, says Derrida, speech is the original signifier of meaning, and the written word is derived from the spoken word. The written word is thus a representation of the spoken word. Logocentrism maintains that language originates as a process of thought which produces speech, and that speech then produces writing. Logocentrism is that characteristic of texts, adinatha theories, modes of representation and neminatha signifying systems that generates a desire for a direct, unmediated, given hold on parshvanatha temple meaning, being and knowledge.[4] Derrida argues that logocentrism may be seen in the theory that a linguistic sign consists of a signifier which derives its meaning from a signified idea or concept. Logocentrism asserts the exteriority of the signifier to the signified. Writing is conceptualized as exterior to speech, and speech is conceptualized as exterior to thought. However, if writing is only a representation of speech, then writing is only a ‘signifier of a signifier.’ Thus, according to logocentrist theory, writing is merely a derivative form of language which draws its meaning from speech. The importance of speech as central to the development of language is emphasized by logocentrist theory, but the importance of writing is marginalized.[5] Derrida explains that, according to logocentrist theory, speech may be a kind of presence, because the speaker is simultaneously present for the listener, but indian temple south writing may be a kind of absence, because the writer is not simultaneously present for the reader. Writing may be regarded by logocentrist theory as a substitute for the simultaneous presence of writer and reader. If the reader and the writer were simultaneously present, then the writer would communicate with the reader by speaking instead of by writing. Logocentrism thus asserts that writing is a substitute for speech and that writing is an attempt to restore the presence of speech. Logocentrism is described by Derrida as a “metaphysics of presence,” which is motivated by a desire for a “transcendental signified.”[6] A “transcendental signified” is a signified which transcends all signifiers, and is a meaning which transcends all signs. A “transcendental signified” is also a signified concept or thought which transcends any single signifier, but which is implied by all determinations of meaning. Derrida argues that the “transcendental action 1: de>system:a signified” may be deconstructed by an examination of the assumptions which underlie the “metaphysics of presence.” For example, if presence is assumed to be the essence of the signified, then the proximity of a signifier to the signified may imply that the signifier is able to reflect the presence of the signified. If presence is assumed to the essence of the signified, then the remoteness of a signifier from the signified may imply that the signifier is unable, or may only be barely able, to reflect the presence of the signified. This interplay between proximity and remoteness is also an interplay between presence and absence, and between interiority and exteriority. 5. Trace The idea of difference also brings with it the idea of trace. A trace is what a sign action 1: de>system:e differs/defers from. It is the absent part of the sign’s presence. In other words, We may now define trace as the sign left by the absent thing, after it has passed on the scene of its former presence. Every present, in order to know itself as present, bears the trace of an absent which defines it. It follows then that an originary present must bear an originary trace, the present trace of a past which never took place, an absolute past. In this way, Derrida believes, he achieves a position beyond absolute knowledge. According to Derrida, the trace itself does not exist because it is self-effacing. That is, in presenting itself, it becomes effaced. Because all signifiers viewed as present in Western thought will necessarily contain traces of other (absent) signifiers, the signifier can be neither wholly present nor wholly absent.
Museum is a place to preserve memory. Memory itself is an intention of the ontological reference of being. It is imperative as the mnemonic devices prompts the memory of past and seen the memory itself through the lens of time/present. We the human revise and reinvent the memory over time. Cultural impetus has always been the confluence of the wider view of the self. Because of economic reasons population centers has been placed in strategic locations; which imparts the behavior pattern and so called ‘norm’ and margins develops. In Foucauldian terms ‘discursive formation’ would be a lens to decipher the existing and memory to curate the memory. I would argue the certain type of dialogical references are apparent while forming the discursive formation. The way we can curate through mesumazation of the ‘self’ inflicts a key to form another type of realism. Here we intend to understand the realism as such, not to impart more fully form the origin and leave the room for binaries.
Learning is a form of reading. Reading and re-reading engage a self inflicted referential premise, which entails the plaimpsets of the previous. here we see the history as ‘previous’. reading also leaves a trace of the context and content as well. it is imperative to read the intent in a more structural formation to create a new type of landscape which itself relates with the time and landscape. We believe the transparency through a form of screening traces a new form of knowledge. Strategy: 1 We have been interested how settlement pattern throughout time in this part of the world leaves a trace. How this palimpsest inform a series of reference to form the dialogic itself. We trace the references and excerpts were the reference point and grids. These references were place on the existing site with reference to conditions. Series the genera tive principals were followed, as ‘fold’, the presence of the absence, screening… Strategy: 2 Spatial experience in cultural context has always been defined and refined in art form. We wanted to inform the existing to create ‘discursive formation’ for another. Structur ally this will suggest a process of experience in space. We have looked at ‘Chitrangoda’ by Rabindranath Tagore, and trace movement in series of mise en scene. Layered trace of movement extrudes to create spatial narratives. Strategy: 3 It is imperative for us to see how culturally form has been evolved in this landscape. From carriage to screen, hanging ‘sikka’ container to fish trap, furniture, volumes, and clothes; weaving is predominantly defines the construction. We are interested to see how a built form can evolve form this land can inform the contextual references. This pattern has been curated carefully through programmatic preferences as well.
Dhaka as a city of fifteen million. Scarcity of public open spaces are ubiquitous. We have tried to create open public realm by lifting the program space above ground. Throughout the complex we propose to create open access on the ground level. All the buildings are fully accessible, following ANSI A117.1-2009, ADA 2010. Cafeteria and moving installation spaces were depressed from the plaza level and south end of the site and open Amphitheatre will be open to performances and screening. The auditorium is comprised of three large ones and small discussion space. The plaza is exempt from vehicular traffic. Parking entry will from south-east corner of the site. Parking were designated below ground of the program space.
References_Built Environment:
6. Arche-writing The term ‘arche-writing’ is uded by Derrida to describe a form of language which cannot be conceptualized within the ‘metaphysics of presence.’action Arche-writ2: ing is an original form of language which is not derived from speech. Arche-writing is a form of language which is unhindered by the difference between speech and writing. ‘Arche-writing’ is also a condition for the play of difference between written and non-written forms of language. Derrida contrasts the concept of “arche-writing” with the “vulgar” concept of writing. The “vulgar” concept of writing, which is proposed by the “metaphysics of presence,” is deconstructed by the concept of “arche-writing.”[7] 7. Supplement Derrida takes this term from Rousseau, who saw a supplement as “an inessential extra added to something complete in itself.” Derrida argues that what is complete in itself cannot be added to, and so a supplement can only occur where there is an originary lack. In any binary set of terms, the second can be argued to action 2: exist in order to fill in an originary lack in the first. 36404.73
9992.46
65128.21
77565.41
38307.22
54522.46
de>system:ee
DHAKA METROPOLITAN REGION (DMR) AND ITS SURROUNDINGS
generative reference within contexts:
gr_decode_1
STRATEGIC LOCATIOM OF NATIONAL MUSEUM
References_oprative principal: chitrangoda
EXISTING SITER CONDITION
References_Exisitng Weaving Pattern:
gr_decode_2
wp_1
gr_decode_3
wp_1
gr_decode_4
fatehpur sikri
tiruchandar temple
action 1: de>system:b
manekshi temple at madhurai
action 1: de>system:c
action 1: de>system:d
gr_decode_5
gr_decode_7
wp_1
wp_2
wp_3
wp_4
wp_5
vwp_6
gr_decode_6
gr_decode_8
consolidated movement vectors
action 1: de>system:f
action 1: de>system:g
gr_decode_9
57931.58
36164.59
31511.24
de>system:aa
38027.13
exisitng public library premise
54018.89
70988.75
36525.47
48293.00
action 2: de>system:bb
71565.92
136218.71
39349.51
83856.00
77300.67
39141.65
74684.49
148112.60
action 2: de>system:cc
131743.07
action 2: de>system:ff
154493.77
54235.51
gr_decode_10
97343.91
action 2: de>system:dd
48148.70
65481.32
action 2: de>system:gg
53133.67
14673.02
31021.12
19784.57
gr_decode_11
gr_decode_12
movement vectors in volume
wp_morph_1
wp_morph_2