> BACK
revised on 2010.10.16
III. Reorientation
6. Post-modernism
(1) The
resurgence of sensibility and mannerist hedonism
The movement to reject modern rationalism started in
Mass society, which was a theme of the 20th century, was based on
the principle of sharing with everyone, and arrived at the view point
that science and functional rationality were the foundation of
everything. However this held nothing more than aesthetics that embodied
vast yet shallow values like pop art, which is easily understandable for
everybody. The meaning of Pichler’s words was that in order to find
depth in aesthetics, we should avoid situations like a mobocracy and
rely on the talents of a few. If we take his words at face value then
they mean that we should discard modernism and return to the Renaissance
in the early modern ages. The House of Medici in
On the other hand, Hollein said,
“A building is itself. Architecture is
purposeless (*2).”
He posited that architecture must have an absoluteness that does
not conform to anything. Architecture also does not play a subordinate
role like serving some kind of purpose. The theory of usefulness and
appropriateness to a purpose that began to be supported by Otto Wagner
at the turn of the century in Vienna began to be overturned in this very
Vienna. Furthermore, the systematic thinking of purpose-rationality that
should have been organized in the functionalism of the 1920s was
discarded.
During the move toward functionalism and structural theory,
architecture was in the position of being analyzed, theorized, and
reformulated as a servant of man. With the relationship between purpose
and means always in mind, Hollein released architecture from the
shackles of this kind of purpose-rationality and attempted to return to
an absolute viewpoint. This meant completely ignoring the process of
trial and error of modern rationalism.
If this was the case, how would architecture evolve? The left
brain alone, which is responsible for intellectual judgment, cannot
produce thoughts. The idea that architecture would follow the instincts
of itself was that the architect would create by following his
intuition. However, of course, buildings were not to be formed only on
the basis of visions drawn from the right brain. What he had advocated
was the unlocking of sensibility that had been suppressed by reason,
where reason was made subordinate to sensibility.
In 1964, Hollein drew a shocking collage that features a large
aircraft carrier placed against a gently undulating idyllic background
(Fig. III-1). Depending on one’s point of view, this could be seen as a
variation of the
“
Of course, a battleship in this location would be unable to
execute any of its original purposes. This surrealistic image of
Hollein’s surpassed the logic of purpose-rationality and the aircraft
carrier was self-sustaining as an independent entity. In other words,
architecture as a high-level technique was not buried under a slew of
purposes as per structural theory but was considered as fulfilling its
own vitality.
Hollein designed the library building in the Museum Abteiberg
(1972-1981) with one corner of a square prism melted by solvent (Fig.
III-2). This square prism, which was coated with mirror glass and
appeared only as a grid outwardly, surely symbolized the cubic
systematic rationality of the early half of the 20th century, while the
melted area symbolized artistic intuition that completely ignored
artificial systems. This also represented the phenomenon of competition
between and the dissolution of two value systems, which can also be seen
in
“The Urban Mark”
by Peter Cook. Thus, the autocracy of reason was already being
undermined. Even so, systematic rationality could not be completely
ejected from architecture, and there could only be proposed a
continuation of the dualistic competition between formal order and free
amorphism.
Although the architectural forms at the early 20th century
exhibited a variety of trends, the geometrical silhouettes and white
coatings that were aggregated in the International Style were
precipitated as common items. There was a trend of compressing
information, which was nothing but the work of the reason. With the rise
of post-modernism, the sensibility began to create artistic
possibilities, and having a lot of information was seen as good on the
contrary. Therefore, diverse colors and raw materials became acceptable,
and there was also no need to follow precise geometry.
In the colorful interior of the Museum Abteiberg, where there are
bright white walls flooded with light, there are also walls dark like a
cellar’s that are inlayed with erotic reds and blacks. The walls also
feature a mixture of various shape elements, from geometrical forms such
as rectangular volumes and grids to the amorphous shapes of a saw-roof
and twisting retaining walls. All possibility of expression were
attempted and one-dimensional rigidity was intentionally avoided.
Critical composition that the systematic rationality was
destroyed and the free sensibility were fomented, was an essential
mechanism for prompting the shift to post-modernism.
“Critical”
implies both
“urgency”
and
“to critique and to review,”
and attempts were made to exaggerate and express this urgency. This did
not result in a period of naïve sensibility but somehow destroyed the
initiative of reason and prompted a move to the initiative of
sensibility.
Back in the late renaissance period, that is, the period of
mannerism, there were architects who stood on this kind of borderline.
One was Giulio Romano, who was active in
From Italian word
“maniera,”
which means
“manner,”
the word
“Mannerism
(Manierismo)” was
coined. Compared to the ages of the brain,
this was the age of the hands. In other words, there was a change from a
period of ideas to a period of sensibility that were free from reason.
The high renaissance was a period of idealism, that is, popular ideas
such as the ideal of the divine proportions of human body. This was a
period marked by the perfect order that was virtually imprinted on the
brain of people, and then the passion for idealism eventually cooled and
people began to demand the restoration of humanistic things. The hands
began to act freely in order to get away from the dominance of reason.
Arata Isozaki criticized the initiative of the reason at the
early half of the 20th century and plotted its demise by borrowing the
methods of mannerism. He studied the works of the surrealist Marcel
Duchamp and intentionally broke functional rationality and systematic
completeness such as by embedding doors that did not open, designing
seat backs based on the curves of Marilyn Monroe, and presenting
incomplete structural images cutting off abruptly the beams that should
be extend further. This was very similar to the irony of Giulio Romano.
The Tsukuba Center Building (1983) designed by Isozaki
incorporated motifs of the Piazza del Campidoglio of Michelangelo and
the columns of C. N. Ledoux, which exhibited the method of
“quotation”
intentionally destroying the myth of originality, and it satirized the
myth of completeness with a design that appeared as if part of the
building had been destroyed (Fig. III-3). For a naïve, ordinary person
who carries around a common image of the completeness of a building,
this broken building and the parrying design is incomprehensible, and
they want to blame the architect for betrayal. However, this type of
mannerism was actually attempted in Japanese “Sukiya” style of
architecture in 16th and 17th centuries, that is, the tea houses design
which enjoyed intentionally parrying the architectural rules and myths
of the high-quality.
Mannerism is an intellectual game, and the
raison d'être
for its existence is to break the perfect
order of reason. Although this was a critique against the initiative of
reason, it differed from the romanticism of the 1930s in that it did not
aim to completely resolve and discard reason. It was sufficient to free
the right brain that had been suppressed and to release one’s
sensibility. To establish the communication based on sensibility between
the creator and the viewer visualizing the falling down of a rational
object formed the art. The intention of Hollein who created an object as
if a pure geometric prism was melting down was also the same.
(2) The
semantics of the consumer society
Although modernism departed in search of new forms and spaces
suitable for the mass society of the 20th century and initially
exhibited a trend toward utopian socialism that sought the reawakening
of free exchange between people, the capitalist economic system
immediately commoditized the structures of modernism. In the America of
the 1920s where it can be said that brute economic force was emphasized
as the reason for living even more than artistic will, the motifs of the
form of modernism were borrowed for the decorations of skyscrapers (Fig.
III-4). Passionate artistic intentions were chopped up and fragmented by
unemotional economics. There is also another aspect in that, thanks to
this, the motifs of the form of modernism dotted the scenery of the city
and were therefore actually able to be seen by the public. Thus, while
capitalism was giving birth to millionaires on the one hand, on the
other it was promoting an age of popular art of mass society.
The patrons of architects of the 20th century were no longer
kings and nobles. In the 19th century, the patrons were joined by
industrial capitalists and in the 20th century they were joined by the
communal rights of mass society. Although in the East Bloc the socialist
governments formed only from the public become the new patrons, in the
West the invisible faceless mob of the countless masses of consumers
became the new patrons. In any case, an architectural culture wherein
the social system itself became the patron was established, and the
architectural styles also reflected this characteristic.
In the 1970s, an American architect Philip Johnson suddenly
revived post-modern historicism who was once mentored by Mies. Among the
skyscrapers in New York where the style of modernism had become standard
starting with the Seagram Building by Mies, he introduced the AT&T
high-rise building with a Romanesque entrance hall and a crown of a
Chippendale chair decoration (Fig. III-5). In addition, high-rise
buildings in a variety of historicist styles were created one after
another, such as high-rise buildings crowned with minarets with a
gothic-style motif and coated with mirrored glass. Although much of
intellectual followers of modernism frowned at his betrayal, the general
public applauded the high-rise buildings that became landmarks of the
urban landscape and were not merely square boxes. Johnson departed from
the ascetic design ethics of Mies and insisted on reviving the
pleasurable aspects that was originally inherence in architecture.
However, reviving historicism meant only focusing on a small
aspect of the aesthetics of architecture. Because the original nature of
post-modernism was to revitalize all possibilities of architectural
beauty that had been suppressed by reason, the post-modernism of Johnson
was only one of many styles. In particular, the historicist styles of
post-modernism in the United States of America were notably remarkable
compared to Europe, and this can be understood as America, having only a
brief history, might have had an inferiority complex against the
historical styles of Europe.
Michael Graves also
attempted to modernize historicism in the same way by using classical
styles as a motif using vibrant colors, and it could be said that he was
attempting to modernize the decorative architecture of the Art Deco
style. This direction of polychromy was also the antithesis of the
International Style that exhibited abstemious forms in the neutral
colors of white and black. The tendency toward classicism meant to
revive the formalism of, for example, columns arranged and displayed
regularly, and also to discard the successes of functionalism.
Johnson’s style emphasized sometimes the appearance of gothic
forms modified by Expressionism even more than 19th century historicism
and had the will to restore everything relating to the pleasure of
shape. The fact that the revival of Art Deco occurred alongside
post-modernism demonstrates the trend toward the commodification of
artistic shapes in post-modernism. This commodification was not merely
the simple desire for imitations sold at a store but was related to the
deeper principles of the system of capitalism.
Karl Marx had already shown that capitalism itself was based on
simple and clear principles and was a clever system for recreating the
value in the relationship between products and money, and Baudrillard
focused on the fact that the economic system of capitalism created a gap
between the true value of a product and its symbolic value, and he
explained the start of the spontaneous movement of symbols or signs
alone (*3). Artistic works give rise to imitations, and the world of
simulations called
“simulacra”
is created by the process of simulation.
The set of objects left by the first wave of historicism within
post-modernism can be understood using this concept of simulacra. The
Chippendale-style form as used by Johnson in the high-rise building did
not necessarily have logical consistency. Even in the gothic style,
although there was certainly an expression of the perpendicular intent,
the gothic styles of the Middle Ages bear absolutely no relation to the
structure of modern high-rise buildings. This kind of image that uses
historical forms was created in another dimension, and this image was
not only preferred by Johnson but it was also desired by the general
public. The image was separated from reality to create an isolated world
within the common vision of the public.
Through his book
“Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture,”
(*4) Robert Venturi argued against the academic thesis of modernism that
architectural designs must have a uniform systemization, and in
“Learning from Las Vegas,”
(*5) he positively approved of the raison d'etre of huge billboards and
placed value on the representational aspect even more than on the
architectural body itself. That meant that the items that had captured
vulgar interest were understood as the reality of simulacra in a
capitalist society and then the genre called
“pop architecture”became
independent (Fig. III-6).
On the one hand, the independence and consistency of architecture
and the ethics to preserve these were completed based on the necessity
theory of modernism starting at the end of the 19th century. On the
other hand, there is the principle of capitalism that functions on the
principle of increasing money. And there is a tug-of-war between the two
extremes. Post modernism proceeded to follow a path of giving priority
to the latter, dissecting architecture into pieces and transforming it
into an aggregation of simulacra. The billboard architectural style of
Venturi and the figurine architectural style of Johnson have developed
the vulgar interests of capitalism into a firm architectural art genre.
As its extension, architecture as a set of simulacra was realized, which
is a mixture of a classical column, ruins, and hi-tech style as in
“M2”
by Kengo Kuma (Fig. III-7).
The modernism that idealized the architectural image as a
one-dimensional rational system starting from a cube stood helpless
facing the condition of the individual parts being fragments of
scattered simulacra. The fact that consistency in architectural design
was merely one ideology became known at this time. However, this was
certainly considered to be necessary for starting a new age in the early
half of the 20th century, and this was a time when ideology was useful.
After the problems significant for the human history in the early half
of the 20th century had already been resolved, the usefulness of
ideology in society was lost. The difference between Mies and Johnson
was the symbolization of this changing of the times.
What modernist architects aimed for was that mass society, in
other words, even those with the lowest levels of income, enjoy the
architectural qualities, as is seen in the proposals of the Siedlung and
existence-minimum housing. This was a global theme of the 20th century,
from socialism to social democracy that surpassed the conflict between
the East and West Blocs. Even the mass of people became soon no longer
find their ideals in the ordered space created by the communal apartment
blocks and those housing estates. People began to prefer private
ownership of
“differentiated”
houses with some kind of decoration, no matter how minimal, and
advocated individualism over communalism. The age was dominated no more
by the socialist utopia of the early 20th century but by the
pseudo-utopia of capitalism where the simulacra flitted about.
The thing that monolithic socialism could not withstand is best
described as the political forms of the post-modern phenomenon.
Socialism called for the abolition of classes and attempted to
reconstruct society based on one scientific principle in order to remove
all of the historical and traditional evil practices. Society was
re-started from zero, everything was decided by reason, and a consistent
public system was constructed. This was symbolized by the system of
geometrical shapes that Russian Constructivism attempted to build.
While fractures appeared in the system constructed by reason, the
architectural image was dissolved by the change to an aggregate of
autonomous parts and finally became a mixture of pluralist values. In
the same way as that, in the 1980s, the system of socialism also
suddenly collapsed due to the actions of the young people acting freely
guided by their own sensibility. This must not be seen as merely a
simple collapse but as representing a process of reorientation from the
initiative of reason to that of sensibility of the tide of the 20th
century.
(*1) Walter
Pichler, Hans Hollein, ‘Absolute architecture’(1962),
in: Urlich Conrads (ed.), “Programs
and Manifestoes on 20th-Century Architecture”, English translation: Lund
Humphries, Londn & MIT, Cambridge, 1970, p.181.
(*2) Ibid,
p.182.
(*3)
Jean Baudrillard, "Le Système des objets", 1968 (Japanese translation by
Akira Unami, Hosei Univesity Publishing, 1980).
(*4)
Robert Venturi, "Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture", The
Museum of Modern Art Press, New York 1966. (Japanese translation by
Kobun Itoh,
Kajima Shuppankai, Tokyo, 1982).
(*5)
Robert Venturi, "Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture", MIT
Press, Cambridge MA, 1972, (Japanese translation by Kobun Itoh,
Kajima Shuppankai, Tokyo, 1978).
7. Typological
classicism
(1) Cubic
typology
The fortress of unitary dominance of modern rationalism was
attacked from various directions. Concerning the idea of the absolute
architecture of Hollein et al. there emerged another kind of absolute
architecture. While Hollein followed a direction of dissolving form,
there was a reverse way to liberate humans from the yoke of modern
rationalism through strengthening formalism that made form even more
firm.
Louis Kahn created a unique world with a mysterious sense of form
using simple geometric shapes while at the same time searching for the
logic of spatial structure theory. In the Dhaka capital plan that he
started in 1962, this was given a large-scale form (Fig. III-8). The
national assembly building had an strong order with central plan
integrating simple shapes such as squares, circles, semicircles,
octagons, and triangles. Although these simple solid shapes, plain wall
surfaces and openings are missing detailed functional considerations and
the structure does not appear very comfortable, it is unparalleled
concerning monumentality as a national assembly building.
In the meaning of absoluteness that exceeds function, another
kind of absolute structure is displayed here in the form of bloated
formalism. This was the aesthetics of transcendence expressed in altars
and temple buildings such as ziggurats and pyramids in a period when
society was dominated by ancient myths. It was, as it were, the
rejuvenation of the ancient in a modern society. The parliament is
believed to be a place of openness and transparency in a democracy and
there was a trend to design parliament buildings without too much
dignity. Thus, Kahn’s method represented a revival of ancient mysticism
that modernism should have completely discarded.
As the systems of modern rationalism become more complete, the
designs of Kahn that transcended this were viewed as heroic.
Architectural theory which is believed to have started with Vitruvius in
ancient Rome was divided under the establishment of the modern teaching
system into architectural science as a scientific system on the one
hand, and an essay on architecture as the poetic and philosophy of
poiesis on the other hand. And the design style of Kahn was indeed the
one that rejected scientific architecture and simply embodied essay on
architectural as the poetic philosophy of geometry. The spatial
structure theory that stood on the an
extension of modern reason was also transformed into something poetic by
his words.
Although James Stirling from England presented a unique
intellectual design method starting from the functional rationalism in
the 1960s, like the faculty of engineering of Leicester University, the
history faculty library at Cambridge University, and the Queen’s College
in Oxford, he turned in the 1970s to formalism which arranges
geometrical units. In Runcorn New Town (since 1967), a simple structural
form can be seen of a structure with a horizontal volume running on
space supported by pillars that appear to have been inspired by the
colonnades of fascist architecture (Fig. III-9).
Architects Kahn and Stirling who followed completely different
systems formed a single movement based on this point of aspiring to form
that transcends function. This was converging on another kind of
rationalism of the
“typology.”
This rationalism was distinguished from the scientific spirit build by
the modern reason, and paradoxically to be said irrational rationalism
in some ways.
The
“typology”
of the 1970s mentioned here turned the future-aspiring psyche of
modernism on its head and was born from the idea of reconstructing the
log of architecture by returning to its point of origin. During this, in
the middle of the 18th century, Laugier reevaluated the theory of
primitive huts mentioned in the
“Essai sur l’architecture,”
and the interest on the neoclassicism of Ledoux and Boullee during the
French Revolution grew significantly. The essence of neoclassicism,
known as
“typology”based
on the return to the primitive and simple geometry, was reconstructed as
a 20th century theory. This theory was carried forward in particular by
the brothers Leon Krier and Rob Krier as well as by Aldo Rossi.
Laugier’s theory that columns should stand independently is said
to have influenced on Le Corbusier who used columns standing separate
from the walls. The preference for geometrical solids found in the
architects during the French Revolution is also the roots of the purism
of Le Corbusier. It seems as if Le Corbusier’s cube that had been
exhibited as a representation of purism was revived at this time, but in
fact the pure geometry of this typology had always something mystical
and had an aura. Here solids were self-asserting as objects and came
into conflict with each other.
Rossi remembered his own discomfort in the architectural
education that was an extension of modernism and created designs
emphasizing forms that had monumentality beyond function. In the Modena
Cemetery, he focused on the expression of monumentality with the use of
platonic solids by giving pure geometrical shapes like cubes and cones
to traditional Italian grave facilities (Fig. III-10). At the elementary
school in Fagnano Olona, he expressed by means of abstracting
geometrical shapes the authoritarian image of a large wall and a clock
which children use to have in mind for school building. Here was used,
as it were, a method of extracting architectural typology from the
archetypal image since his own childhood, which was the design principle
of giving shape to memory.
On the other hand, Leon Krier attempted to use pure geometric
shapes in order to reconstruct the urban space. He was active as an
architect who was particularly good at clear conception and sharp
theory. His proposal to install huge cubic frameworks at strategic
locations in the city center matched the appetite for monumentality of
the age. The idea of hollow cubes as a symbol of the city landscape was
realized by Johann Otto von Spreckelsen in the
“Grande Arche”
in Paris(1989) and by Hiroshi Hara in the
“Umeda Sky Building”in
Osaka (1993) (Fig. III-11, 12). In the genealogy of 20th century
architecture that was related to the cube, the cube here was turned from
a purist object into a colossal cube with monumentality.
There was an intention to profile and symbolize the urban squares
as solid spaces that had a social meaning as a result. Leon Krier had an
understanding that the exceeded freedom held by capitalist economies
brought about a confusion to the urban landscape, and his giant cube was
an embodiment of publicness and was so to speak an urban temple of the
20th century.
While it could be supposed that this transcendental form was
affected by the typology method of Stirling, and he found also a model
in Albert Speer who developed the architectural style of the Nazis as a
close aide architect of Hitler, and dared to publish a works of him. In
the post-modernist period that came into its own in the 1970s, there was
a trend to search for various wellsprings as alternatives to modernism,
and Nazi architecture was also one of them.
This was related to somewhat complex political nature and
aesthetic theory and was prone to misinterpretations. Particularly in
Germany, where sweeping away items related to the Nazis was a national
issue, there was nervousness about this type of action which might lead
to the return of Nazism. On the other hand, in other countries, the Nazi
architecture that had been taboo seemed to become paradoxically an easy
target of superficial journalism and could be reevaluated relatively
easily. Leon Krier focused on fascism as a way to rescue the splitting
and the chaos of the urban landscape marked by liberal capitalist
economics. This architectural style came to be seen as being able to
provide the symbolism that should be common to mass society. Although
the form of the
“rationalism”
of pure geometry had previously been used for the public manipulation of
mad political collectives, it was thought that the form alone could be
utilized as an effective social design method if the mad parts were
taken away.
Aldo Rossi can be otherwise called a new type of post-modernist
socialist architectural theoretician. He also tried to draw inspiration
from the socialist realism of the Stalin period (*1). Even in practice,
he revived partially the classical ornaments that had been rejected
during the 20th century and should have been swept away, and took such a
method as to put cubic forms that occupied locations like foreign bodies
in the urban space and to decorate them with cornices. This method was
even exhibited in the Italian palazzo architectural style of the
“Il Palazzo”
hotel built in Japan (Fig. III-13). The architectural style that Adolf
Loos had obtained through a method of simplification of classicism
during the initial stages of modernism returned in this period.
With this trend, the neoclassical architecture around the 1800s
such as Schinkel of Berlin suddenly grabbed the spotlight in addition to
Ledoux from Paris, but in terms of to what degree this
“rationalism”
of the 1970s was similar to the original neoclassicism needs to be
examined carefully. The reason is that the original neoclassicism that
emphasized rules and standards, and had, similar to Constructivism,
attempted to begin from the most abstract spheres and cubes against the
background of a new world view, would be supposed to form an beginning
stage of a new paradigm, and that this therefore resembled the character
of the period of modernism from the 1910s to the 1930s.
In fact, in the Krier brothers and Rossi is acknowledged the
trend to recreate neoclassicism based on sensibility rather than reason
and the attempt to find an intuitive sympathy for platonic solids and
pure geometrical shapes. This was equivalent rather to the mental
structure of the neo-renaissance and differed from the original
neoclassicism under the initiative of reason.
The
“rationalism”
of the 1970s resembled the
“Movimento Italiano per l'Architettura
Razionale”
(MIAR) that had supported Italian fascism and utilized the form of the
order of rationalism by irrational impulses and was incompatible with
the original scientific modern rationalism. The 1970s’ architectural
theory of typology that replaced the 1960s’ spatial structure theory was
understood for the first time in terms of this meaning and became a part
of rationalism in the 20th century.
(2)
Palladian classicism
As a method of creating spatial systems, rationalism is best
symbolized by a grid. The arrangement of columns is determined by the
intersection of checker-patterned lines arranged equidistantly along the
beam and digit directions. When the orderly arrangement of the columns
is broken by a deviation, manual intervention is required to change the
shapes of the beams. On the other hand, if it is considered as a freely
distortable and bendable space then a lot of manual intervention is
required. This was attempted by the form of organicism during the 1930s,
where it required a sophisticated yet flexible spirituality.
When Oswald Mathias Ungers consistently used the grid, it was
with a different intention from this kind of utilitarian rationality. He
also applied grids to areas where free design was possible and covered
everything in monistic spatial ordering. He even used stereo-grids by
doing the same not only for horizontal planes but also for elevations.
This was not merely a problem of the arrangement of columns and beams
there but became a curtain wall with smaller scale square grids.
Even when Constructivist design from the 1910s to the 1930s was
applied in the form of orthogonal three-dimensional coordinate systems,
this was an expression of the aspiration to reduce the degree of
freedom. There was born the Constructivist method to decompose volumes
into shape elements and to expand and reconstruct them. Compared to
this, Ungers' grids had the characteristic of simply reducing the degree
of freedom and tying up the building (Fig. III-14). The rigidity itself
had meaning. If the rationalism at the beginning of 20th century
searched for the new system as a norm longing for new freedom, then on
the other hand this grid rationalism asserted its own existence as an
isolated object for own purpose.
The installation of an unmoving object is the principal of
monuments. They were occasionally made of stone like an Egyptian pyramid
and became eternal existence. Although the spatial grid was nothing more
than a virtual form drawn in space, it made a deep impression and was
also a kind of monument that
became rooted in one’s consciousness. Just as the pyramids were simple,
monuments retained in the memory must be simple yet pure, and the
spatial grid also needs to have the most simple logic based on squares
and cubes. The grids that were extended up to losing functional
rationality and exceeded utilitarian comprehension could be even called
manneristic.
Ungers’ grid style of this kind was the complete opposite of
functionalism. If this formal rationalism were to be compared to the
moralistic efforts made toward the functional rationality of the early
20th century, it would be rather irrationalism. The fact that
“rationalism”
was advocated even by Aldo Rossi and the Krier brothers in the 1970s is
not something that should be understood supeficially (*2). In
architecture, formal rationalism has without doubt created a variety of
cultures throughout history. That is the architectural culture of
classicism that can be seen throughout the history of Europe since the
time of ancient Rome. The abstracted form of a grid is an important
indicator for understanding the classicism of the 20th century.
Even among the modernist architects, Mies van der Rohe in
particular frequently used grids that adopted transcendental, absolute
forms. This can be seen in particular on the external walls of high-rise
buildings and the grid ceilings incorporating a steel skeleton of
horizontal roofs covering large spaces. However, this is the result of
purpose-rationality under the guise of structural form, and the grids of
post-modernism as own goal had a fundamentally different character.
While post-modernism intended to revive an action of linguistic
signification by criticizing and breaking the neutral yet transparent
rationality of modernism on the one hand, the grids displayed an
autonomy which refuses such action on the other hand. The grids expanded
infinitely before the eye without any meaning.
In the Museum of Modern Art in Gunma by Arata Isozaki, a spatial
grid is used that includes slight variations from the rigid grid of
Ungers and that exhibits the transcendental feeling of the temple style
(Fig. III-15). Although it is packed with slightly manneristic elements,
the silhouette of the spatial grid itself forms a manneristic expression
of a modern rationalist temple. The words, coexistence of mannerism and
classicism, were actually used for Andrea Palladio who was active around
Venice in the 16th century.
Palladio was not an ironic mannerist like Giulio Romano. He
applied a wide variety of techniques of naïve classical ornaments and
introduced an order as a way of arranging them. The Villa Rotonda was an
incredibly famous work of formal rationalism that had the form of
central-plan with a circular hall in square plan and had four splendid
templar facades attached to its four facades. The glorious accumulation
of ornamental motifs of Palladio should have ended with a collection of
simple elements without the geometrical order of the plan, the column
axes in the elevations and a proportional system based on a
three-layered composition of classicism.
The play of mannerism seems to pull in always classicism. The
freedom of the parts get balance only after the systematic order of the
whole is obtained. As is unexpected, post-modernism stood on the balance
between the development of mannerism with rich sensibility on the one
hand and the classicism of formal rationalism on the other.
If we try taking away manneristic irony and critical methods, we
can see the world of formal beauty with Palladian grammar. In the series
of architectural works of Fumihiko Maki such as
“Tepia”in
Tokyo, items that directly use a grid, items that do not use a grid but
adhere to an orderly orthogonal three-dimensional coordinate system and
form an open system based on the methods of Le Corbusier can be observed
(Fig. III-16). There can be found a dimmension of aesthetic taste
resembling Japanese “Sukiya” architecture of tea house composed of the
formal grammar and its free performance. This resembled the classicism
of Palladio which adopted as its theme creating a formal syntax that was
easy for anyone to apply and promoting the individualization of works.
Maki again modernized the classical templar form in the National Museum
of Modern Art in Kyoto and displayed outright classicism while using
modern metal materials.
At the very start of the 20th century, there was the
neoclassicism of Behrens and Loos, and this was inherited by Gropius and
Mies. Then there was the classicism of the fascism of the 1930s, and in
a roundabout way, post-modernism also exhibits classicism. Although all
of these are classicism with cubes and formal systems as their theme,
each has a different meaning and background and is not the same at all.
Classicism exists as the axis of architecture. There could be seen the
broad-mindedness of classicism that it appears and disappears in time on
the surface and back following the fluctuation of axis, and displays the
flexibility to reflect the psyche of each age.
If we consider the classicism of the early modern times was the
employment of the styles of ancient Rome in renaissance age, then the
classicism of the 20th century is found in the more profound tradition
of abstract geometry. The beginnings are highlights in the Suprematism
of Malevich and the purism of Le Corbusier. Although Le Corbusier and
Mies were harshly criticized within the stream of post-modernism, a Le
Corbusier revival occurred in the architects of so-called New York Five,
etc., and the shadow of Mies was seen in the trends of minimalism. While
modernism was criticized on the one hand, on the other it was on the
road to becoming the classics.
The fundamental requirement of becoming the classics was the
original presence of the elements of classicism. The assertion that
there is actually a deep classicist spirit within modernism which
expanded freely and vigorously in a diverse way could invite
misinterpretation at the current stage where the 20th century is not yet
the distant past. However, the time will come when the modernist
movements of the early 20th century will be considered as yet another
form of classicism, in the same ways as the return to the classics
during the early renaissance of Brunelleschi and others was a movement
toward freedom from the scholarly academic system of gothic cathedrals.
The manneristic classicism from the 1970s to the 1980s made this
subconscious modernist classicism the visible classicism which became
the subject of the design operations of formalism.
Of course, 20th century classicism is not something that
recreates the ornamental system of classical order but is a return to a
more deep and original formal spirit. And therefore it derived a system
of forms by abstraction while drawing inspiration from sources such as
the simple stacked forms of the early romanesque and the vernacular
architecture around the area of the Mediterranean Sea including Africa
as well as the wooden architecture of Japan. The idea of grids can also
be considered a response to the demands of turning to classicism as a
most original means of space design.
(3) Hybrid system and
picturesque
The post-structuralist philosopher Jacques Derrida conceived of
the profoundly fascinating concept of
“deconstruction.”
This had a particularly strong effect on architectural design. This
concept was originally an attempt to highlight the new systematic image
in the process itself of dissecting and destructing the existing system
of modern rationalism, and it swept the world as a fashionable style
that was exhibited in the complex forms of buildings as if the view of
decomposing architecture itself had become fixed.
While critically inheriting from structuralism, he clarified the
dualistic structure of language culture created by humans, for example,
he contrasted the ideography called
“écriture” against the dominance of logical
and transparent phonograms. While structuralism highlighted the
structure and theory even within casual scenery and considered that
there could be found the subconscious order at the depths of reality
observed vague, Derrida criticized this kind of aspiration toward
structural order and attempted to restore humanity through the blood
that appeared by dissecting this like a terrorist.
The architects read into this message the means of destroying
monistic structures. First the structure of the grid was dissected
diagonally, and this was displayed symbolically using a method of
operating on the grid system by duplicating and overlapping offset axes.
Peter Eisenman sought the motif of the manipulation of shape in the
concept of deconstruction in particular by taking theoretical
architectural design as the theme. His method of combining squares and
cubes that had their roots in Dutch Constructivism finally resulted in
the composition of grids with offset axes and exhibited a display of the
process of shifting the logic of shape (Fig. III-17).
Richard Meier had indeed also used grids with offset and
duplicated axes, but he was more focused on their poetic expression than
conceptual logical evolution like Eisenman, and this was a manneristic
game that aimed to create an unexpected feeling of liberation at the
divide between two inconsistent systems (Fig. III-18).
Modern rationalism generally offered clear idea and made ideology
in order to create new society of 20th century, and built a posture to
go forward to the active reformation on all aspects to realize them.
However, this kind of rational reform had the unfortunate side effect of
wiping out indistinct cultural phenomena. In architectural expression,
the theme of universality was applied too much, and individual poetic
expression in particular was viewed as redundant and discarded. The role
of post-modernism was to revive anew the diversity and depth of poetic
expression as something indistinct.
This was consistent with the semantics seen, for example, in the
expression
“generating meaning”
within a homogeneous space. The orderly grid axes pursued by Mies were a
product of sound modern rationality, but a kind of autocracy of reason
occurred in order to build a consistent system and rejected
indistinctness as a result. Although Mies himself limited the job of
architects with the use of the words
“less is more”
and in particular attempted to leave a diversity of possibility to the
user and resident, the business-like architects of the industrial
society that was the epigonen of Mies often made effort to exaggerate
the existence of products of simple skeletal structures or to give an
aura, and the resident who was originally to have been given freedom was
sidelined. It is therefore believed that it is unavoidable for reviving
humanity to destruct the overly strong monistic systems.
On the other hand, attempts to destroy the order created by
reason can be undertaken by introducing foreign matter that is repulsed
by monistic order. It is sufficient to place objects that deny being
understood as part of the order within a neat grid. The typology of
Rossi that used platonic solids also had meaning with regard to this
point. The independent solids of cones, pyramids, cubes, spheres, and
cylinders produce a strong centricity when placed in the center of a
grid and often used for this purpose, and if they are placed off-center
then this instead produces a force that rejects systemization (Fig.
III-19).
If a foreign object that cannot be understood within a system is
to be introduced, it does not necessarily have to have a geometric
shape. It could be a symbolic shape that has meaning within itself as a
historical monument or even a freely designed shape, as long as the
placement has an unpredictability and suddenness that ignores the
context. Furthermore, it is probably also good if the person who
provides it is someone other than the architect that provided the
overall space system. This is because the mind that creates an element
that is mismatched with a system should think of creation in a different
context.
The large golden fireball-shaped object that Philippe Starck
placed along the Sumidagawa River of Tokyo had the characteristic of a
foreign object with such a meaning (Fig. III-20). This shape rejected
existing rational interpretation and did not match the context of the
city and can be viewed as the existence of some kind of meaning or
history. These objects held meaning only as occupying spaces as the most
opaque objects within a modern city which continues getting transparency
and systematization. This is able to function as a source to generate
meaning only by giving the feeling of a foreign object to the viewer and
makes the ordinary city scenery that has lost the ability to generate
meaning more inspiring. Although it seems that the environment and the
object are in conflict just like Hollein’s aircraft carrier floating in
the desert, in this case, the shape of the object floats between
abstract and concrete and defies any attempt to read a meaning into it.
When monistic order is dismantled, spatial systems themselves are
diversified, and the values of each of the groups of abstract, concrete,
and semi-concrete objects are reconfirmed, it is not necessarily true
that only one of the methods is valid, and it is also applicable to take
a mixture of all of the methods. This is best called
“eclecticism”
or the appropriate selection and application of mixing. From the middle
of the 19th century, although probably due to the evolution of
historicism into eclecticism, the gothic and renaissance and other
historical styles were catalogued and selected as appropriate for the
building type and purpose, and in some cases different interior styles
were even applied to different rooms of a single building. In comparison
to this, the range of eclecticism in the 20th century was the group of
geometric and concrete shapes that had been typologized, and the
paradigms of architectural design of the 20th century were reconfirmed
as being relatively abstract, formal concepts.
James Stirling was an architect who certainly grasped the new
eclectic principles that should be called
“typological eclecticism.”
In his
“Derby Civic Centre Proposal”
(1970) he had already typologized historical architecture such as by
building a historical guild hall in a courtyard surrounded by a
horseshoe-shaped arcade exhibiting modern-style shapes and placing an
assembly hall facade standing at an angle like a foundering ship (Fig.
III-21). Here, the post-modern historicism became the design of elements
floating in a contemporary urban space. This became a more abstracted
method in the
“Research Center”
in Berlin, where in addition to preserving the existing brick building,
adding an arcade like an ancient Greek store, a restaurant building with
Latin cross shape like a church, a lecture building like an
amphitheater, and a medieval castle-style building, it became a
composition with abstracted plans of various historical architectural
types (Fig. III-22).
This kind of method was overall presented like a parody of
historical architecture that was viewed as no different from a fantastic
medieval castle in the middle of Disneyland, and it seems also as if it
were a personal joke of the architect. However, this actually built the
basics of the logic of typology in the 1970s, and if it can be
understood that this was the result of the contributions of historicism
and eclecticism, then it is clear that this was an ideology created
through the process of transformation of 20th century architectural
theory.
This set of randomly scattered independent objects created an
overall scene rich in variations that delighted its beholders and was
reminiscent of the methods of picturesque. In the 18th century, in a
landscape garden with an artificial lake, ancient temples, ruins of
gothic chapels, grottos and a variety of follies included gazebos were
arranged, and viewing points and observation decks, and a site was
created to enjoy various elements and calm scenery. Something like that
revived against the background of the 20th century values. In the
“Neue Staatsgalerie”
in Stuttgart, Starling was based on the Berlin neoclassical museum of
Schinkel with a variety of historical elements inlaid at unexpected
locations to create a motif like a Le Corbusier’s work and was worked on
such that the scenery smoothly melted into a hillside of the urban
district (Fig. III-23). This resulted in a clever overall structure
exceeding a group of simple objects, with typological eclecticism fused
with landscape design. Such method was tied to the unique mannerist
aesthetics in the Museum Abteiberg by Hollein who mixed a group of
geometrical solids with the surrounding historical buildings and
landscape, implemented complex interior design utilizing the hillside
contours, and summarized these into a spatial picturesque that contained
all kind of changes.
On the other hand, in the
“Parc de la Villette”
contributed by Bernard Tschumi et al., a method was created of mixing
diverse elements such geometrical distributions of the site, axial
designs, a group of structures like follies arranged on the grid
intersections, a large spherical object like a memorial hall, a large
structure exposing its superstructure like a fragment of civil
engineering, and a 19th century style steel skeletal structure that was
preserved and renovated (Fig. III-24).
The urban garden that only opens out into a horizontal plane of
the past was transformed into three dimensional space and conversely the
structures were integrated with the gardening of
post-modern design feeling into
the unique form of a
“park.”
This new park concept that cemented the modern architectural design and
landscaping method also became a type of theme park that incorporated
the new technology known as the
“media park”
such as that demonstratied in the design competition in Cologne.
The meaning of the new picturesque of the 1970s and 1980s was a
continuing rejection of the perfect order of the early half of the 20th
century, but instead of returning to the 19th century, and instead of
creating an anarchist state completely lacking in order, a new dimension
was created that lay somewhere between order and chaos. Even while the
rational ordering of overall space was utilized as one method, rather
than being absorbed by order, objects and devices that created a
diversity of meanings were inlaid without losing the diversion.
If the creation of a park that displays this kind of modern
picturesque is turned into a single facade as is, it creates a new type
of decorative urban structure such as the
“Spiral”in
Tokyo by Fumihiko Maki. Here, the group of typological objects of grids,
cones, and staggered forms is attached with superb balance to an
asymmetrical wall with a slight fold (Fig. III-25). Although this could
also be referred to as a facade with a Japanese “Sukiya” feeling, it
also has a global universal common feeling of a two-dimensional
picturesque.
This kind of eclectic and picturesque phenomenon has an aesthetic
that shares diverse values and well reflected the process of advancing
designs since post-modernism. This therefore is thought to be comparable
with the fundamental tones of European eclecticism that featured
mixtures of diverse styles developed from the 1860s to the 1870s and the
picturesque asymmetrical residential buildings that started to become
generally widespread from then.
(*1) Aldo
Rossi, “Architettura della Citta”, Clup, Milano, 1987 (Japanese
translation by Tetsuzo Ohshima & Seiken Fukuda, Tairyudo, Kyoto,
1991)
(*2)
"Architecture rationnelle = Rational architecture", Archives
d'Architecture Moderne, Bruxelles , 1978.
> BACK