06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
Transcript of 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
1/17
THE END
OF
THE
CL SSIC L
CHAPTER 3
The End
of the
Beginning theEnd
ofthe End
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
2/17
' º 'm a..&SSfQl
Architccture from the fifteenth century to the prescnt bet>n under the influence of three
· f i c u o n ~ . N o m ~ t h s t a n d m g the apparent succession
of
architectural styles. cach
ith
its
0\\11
label-classicism. neo·classicism, romanticisrn. modcrnism. post·modernism. and
so
on into the
futurc-thcsc lh r('('
fictiorn;
have
persisted in one form or another for
five
h11nd red years. They are represe
11tation, reaso11
and
his101y.
1
Each of
the fictions
hat.I
;in
underl
ying
purposc: rcprcscntalion
was
to
emhody the
idea
of
meaning:
rcason
was lo cod
i
fy
the
idea of Lruth:
history
was to
recover the idea
of
the timeless
from
the
idea of
change.
Because of he persistcncc of these
c a t e g o r i e ~ . it
\\ill be necessal') to considcr this period
as manifesting a continuity architectural thought. TI1is continuous mode of thought can
be
reforred
to as 11 1: classical.
was not until the
lat
e twentieth century that thc classical could be appreciated
asan
abstract systemofrelations. Such rccognilion occuntd because the architecturc of tbe early
part oí thc twent ieth ce11lury ltself carne to be considcrcd part ofhistory. Thus il is now pos·
sible
to
sec that. although stylistically different from previous architcclures, "modem"
architecture exhibits a ststcm of rclalions similar 10 Lhe classicaJ. • Prior to lhis time. the
classical
\V3S taken
to be eitherS}'llOn)mous
ith
";udtitecture•
conceived
oí
as
a continuous
tradition from antiquity
or.
by the mid-nineteenth Cl'ntury. a historicizcd Sl)'ic. Todar the
pcriod
of time dominated by
the classical ciln
Ul' ~ c c n
as au
·episteme.
to
emplor Fou ·
tenn- a continuous pcriod ofknowledgc thal includes the early twcnticth cc nlury.•
Despite thc pr
ocla
imcd
11.1pture in
botb id
eolo¡iy
ami
slylc
associated
wilh
the Modern
Movement, the three fictions have never been qul"•tioned and so remain intact. 11lis is to
say Lhat architecture sincl' tite mid-fiftecnth ccntury aspired to be a paradigm of the
classic
of
that which
is
timekss.
mta11111gfi1l
and
1me.
1
n
thl
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
3/17
the ir timelessness depended on a necessa ry historicity.
Th
is
shif
t.
as
ha5 = bec1
gested, occurred because language hacl ceasecl to intersect with r p r s e n t a ó o n r - , ; . ~
?: .
because it was
not 111eaníng
but a messag
e
that
>vas
displayed
in
the object.
Modern architecture clairned to rcctify and liberate itself rom the Renais::.a.no::
f
of representation by asserting that it was
not
necessary for architecture iO r ~
. o a : : :
another
architecture; architecture was
so
lely to embody its own
fimction.
ith
ilie
-
tive condusion tbat form follows function, modem architecture introduced the idea ~ 2
building should express - that is. look like - its function. or like an i m of funai ll
it should manifest the rationality
of
its
proct>.sses of
production and composition .- TI:::;:s.
in its effort to distance itself from the earlier representational traditiou, modem axcno:a:
ture attempted to s trip itself of the outward trappings of "class ical " s¡yle.
This
proa:s.s
reduction was caJJed
abstractio11
A column without a base
and
capital was thoueh: ~ ¡ e ~
abst:raction. 111us reduced, form was believed to embody function more "hon
estlr
5 .xh -
column
looked
more
like a
real
column
, he simplest possible load-ca rf)
ing
eleme¡::;
:he
one
provided with a base and capital bearing arboreal or anthropomorphic motif".
This
reduct
ion to pure fUnctionality was, in fact,
not
abs traction; it was an
atieI:; :lC
represent reality itself ln this sense func:tional goals mere )•replaced thc orders oí
,,,..-tjcz;
compositi
on
as lhe starting poinl for arch itectmal design. T11e moderns· attempt ~
•·realism• with
an
u ndecorated, functional object was a
fi
ction equivalen to lhe s
imulac -
of the classical in Renaissance represen tation. For whaL made runct ion any more i := · ¡
source of imagery
than
el
ements
chosen from
ant
iquity? The idea of ftmction.
in
this
e
lhe message of utility as opposed to the message of anliqui
ty
, was raised toan ~
proposition a
self-evident starting point for design analogous to typology or
hislllric::z :
quotation. The
moderns
' attempt to
represenl
realism is, then, a manifestation ,,,
the
same
Jiction wherein meaning and ' 'alue reside
ou
tside the world ofan architecture ·a:: zs..•
in whicl1 representation is about its own meaning rather than being a messag , of
previous
me
aning.
Functionalism turned out to be yet another styl istic conclus ion; this
on
e based ll i
scientific and
tedm
ical positivism, a simulation of efficiency. From this perspecm-e
~
Modern Movemen t can be seen to be contin uous with the ard1itec
hir
e that p recede(j
Modern ard1i te
ctur
e t
her
efore failed to embody a new
va
lu e in itself. For
i
hying
to
mbi r
a rch
itettu
r
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
4/17
UDOf
WlCW SKAl
decorated shcd is a building 1hat functions as a billboard, where 30 kind of imagery
(excl'pl its interna functiou) - letters, palterns. cven architectural elemenls- convcys a
mtssage
accessible to all.
n
this
sense
lhe stripped-down "abstractions" of
modemism
are
still referential objects: technological rather than lypological ducks.
llut the post·rnodernists fail
lo
make another dislinction wbicl1 is exemplified
in
Vcnturi's
comparison
of
the Doges' Palace in Vcnice, which be calls a decorated shed. and Sanso·
vino·s library
anoss 1hc Piana
San
Ma
r
co,
which
he
says is a duck.9 TI1is obscurcs the
more significant distinction between architecturc "as
is"
and archilecture as mcssage. Thc
Dogcs' Palace is nota decorated shed bl'cause it was not representationa l oíanother arcbi·
tecture: lts signilicance camc directly from the meaning cmbodicd in the figmes 1hem·
seh'cs; i was
an
architecture •as is." Sansovino's library may seem to be a duck, but only
beca use it
fa
lis inlo the history of library types. Thc use of the orders
on
Sa nsovinds library
spcaks not lo lhe function or type
of
the library. but rather to the rcpresenlation
of
a previ·
ous architecture.
The fas:;ides
of Sansovino's library contain a rnessagc. not
an
inherent
meaning; they are signhoards. Venturi's misreading
ofthesc
buildings seems motivated
by
a prcference for the decorated shcd. Whilc the replicalion of lhe orders had signilicance in
Sansovinós rime {in thal lhey definc
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
5/17
strategy for arriving ata predetermined goal;
it
was the mecbanism bv wh'cl •
order, represented in lhe orders, was translated into a speciñc fo1m. R e a a i n ~ ~
cosmological goals
of
Renaissance composition, Enlightenment arcbitecruré ' ~
rational process ofdesign whose ends were a product of
pur
e. secular reason
ratM-d:=
divine or
na became the moral and aesthetic basis
of
modern architecture. And the
re
prt>sen?>,o;--"'
ta
sk
o íarchitecture in
an ag
e of reason was to portray its own modeos of
kn
owing.
At this point in the evolution ofconsciousness
so
meth ing occurred: reason turna s:s
focus onto itselfand thus began the process ofits own undoing. Queostioning its º 11
~
ami
mocle of knowing, reason exposed itself to be a fiction." The proccsses for -nowu:::=
measurement
, Jogical proof, causality- tu.rned
out
to be a network of value-laden
ments, no more than effective modes of persuasion. Values were dep
en
den
on
ano:ber
tclcology, anothe r end fiction, Lhat of rationality. EssenLially, then, nothing had
changed from the Rcna issancc idea
of
origin. Whclhcr the appeal was to a div
ine o:-:mt
ural order. as in the ñfteenth century. orto a rational technique a11d t)•pological fünC'11ln. a:
in
Lhe
post-Enlightenment period, it ul
ti
mateJy amounted to the same thing to the jea
that architecture's value
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
6/17
senled an aesthetic of the expeiience of (the persuasiveness of and desire
for)
reason.
Analysis, and the íllusion
of
proof, in a continuous process thal recalls Nietzsche's charac·
terization of
.
trnth," is a uever·ending series of figures, metaphors, and metonymies:
/11
a
cognitive
environment i11 which reason lias been
revealed
to depend 11 a belief 11 lmowl·
edge,
therefore to
be
irreducibl¡•
met(lphoric.
a
dussiml architccture
- that
is,
an arc/1itecture w/1ase
proccsses o raniformatio11 are va/ue- ade11
strategies grow1ded
on self-evide11t ora priori origins
tvill alwo
ys be a11
arcltitectu o
restatement a11d not
o
epresmtatio11, no
matter
liow ngeniously
tJie
01igins
are sele.cted
for tl1is
tra11sfom1atio11, 11
01
·
/1ow
inl entive
tlie
lrcl/1sfonnatio1i
is.
Architectural rcstalcmeul. replication.
s
a nostalgia for the seauity ofknowing. a belief
in the contimtity of\Vestern lhought. Once analysis and reason replaccd sel
f evi
dcncc
as
thc
means by which tmth was rcvcaled, the classic or timeless guality of h·uth ended and the
need for verification began.
The Fiction of
History:
The
Simulation
of
the
Timeless
l11e
tbird "fiction"
of
cfassical Western architecture
is
that
of
history. Prior to the mid-fifteenth
cenlury, lime was conccived n o n d i l e t i l l } from antiguity to the Middle Ages there was no
concept
of
the "
ro
rward movemeut" oflime. Arl did
nOl
seek its justification in tcrms ofthe
past or future; il was ineffable and timeless. Jn ancient Greece the temple and the god were
one and t
he same; architecturc was divine and na tural. For this reason itappeared "class
ic
"
to the "dassical" epoch that followed. The
dassic
could not be represented or simulated. it
could on ly be. In its straightfonvard assertion of itsclf t was nondialectical and timeless.
In mid·fifteenth century the idea
of
a tempqral origin emerged, and with it the idea
of
the
past. This intenupted the eternal cycle of time
by
positing a
fi.xed
point of beginning.
Hencc the loss
of
the timeless, for the existence
of
origin requi red a temporal reality. The
attempt of the dassical to recover the timcless tumed, paradoxically, to a time-bound con·
cept ofhistory as a source oftimelessness. Moreover, the consciousness oftime's forward
movement carne to explain" a prncess ofhistorical change.
y
the nineteenth centtir)• this
process was secn
as
"dialectical. With dialectical time carne the idea of the zeitgeist, with
cause and effect rooted
n presentness-that
is, with
an
aspired-to timelessness
of
the pres
ent.
ln
addition to its aspiration to timelessness. the
s
pirit
of
the age" held that
an
a pri·
ori relationship existed between history and ali its manifestations at 3ll} given moment. t
was necessary only to identify the governing spiril to know what style
of
a1·chitectut·e was
properly
ex-press
ive of. and relevant
to
, he time. Implicit was the notion that man shonld
always be "in
harmony -or at
least in a non-disjunctive relation- with his time.
In its polcmic rejection
of
the histo1y that preceded it, the Modern Movement
attempted to appeal to values for tlüs (harmonic) relationship othcr than those that embodied
the eternal
or
universal. In see
in
g itself
as
superseding the values
of
the preceding archi
tecture, tbe Modern Movement substituted a universal idea of relevance for a universal idea
o
history, analysis of progr;un for analysis of history. t presumed itself to
be
a va lue-free
and collective form
of in
ten'ention,
as
opposed to the virtuoso individualism and informed
connoisseurship personified
by lhe
post-Renaissance architect. Relevance
n modern a.rchi
tecture carne to lie in embodying a va lue other than the natural or divine; the zeitgeist was
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
7/17
Q:OO TAllWSIW
seen
to
be contingent and
of
the present, rather than as absolure
and e ermi
difference in value between prcsenlness and the uni\'ersal-between the
O l l C
-
~
oí
1he zeítgeíst and the elernal \'alue
of
the dassical-only re
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
8/17
The result. thcn.
of
seeing classicism and modemism as part
of
a single historical con·
tinuity is the understanding th;it lherc are no longer any se
lf-
cvident values in representation.
reason, or history
to
confer legitimacy on the object.
TI1is
loss
of
sdf.evídenl valuc
allows
th
e timeless
lo e cut
free from thc meaningful and the truthfuL lt pcrmirs lhe ;iew that
there is no one truth (a timeless lruth). or onc meaning (a timeless meaning}. but merely
the timeless. When the possibihl:) is raiscd that the nmeless can
be
cut adrift from the
limeful (history).
so
too can thc timelcss be cut
away
from universality
to
produce a time·
lessness which is no1 u11i
vc
rsal. This separation makes
it
unimportant whethcr origins are
na rural or dh•inc or fi.mctional; tlitts.
il
is no longer nccessary 1 produce aclassic-that is,
a timeless-architecture b) recoursc to thc dassical valucs inherent
in
representation,
reason,
and histOl).
he
Not
Casslcal:
rchitectu
re as Fl
ctlon
TI
e
necessity
of
the
quot
ation
marks around
thr
term
fiction
is
now
obv
iou
s.
The three
'ictions jusi discussed can
be
seen not as fictions but rather as simulations. As has bccn
:>aid. fiction becomes simulation when
it
does not recognize its condition as fiction, when it
:ries to simula ti' a condition
of
reality. truth. or non-fiction. The simulation
of
representation
m architecture has led, first ofali ,
toan
excessive conccntration of invenl
i\'C
cnergies in thc
re
presentational objcct. Whcn
co
lurnns are seen as SLJrro
ga te
s oftrees
ancl wirtclows
rescm·
ble the portholes
of
ships. architcclural elements become representalional figures canying
an
in
ordinate burclcn ofmcaning. 1n othcr disciplines representation is not the only pur·
po
e of figuration. In literarurc. for example. metaphors and similes hai;c a
ider
range
of
applic
ation-poetic
, ironic. and thc
like-and
are not limited to allegorical or referential
functions. Conversely.
in
r c h i t c c t u r ~ only one aspecl of the figure is tra
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
9/17
architecn
ll"e
r a t i o n a l l )
for
strategics and solutions are ves tiges
of
a goal-0nenred ~ ~ =
the world.
lfthis
is
Lhe
case.
Lhe
question becomes. What can be the model for archr
:rc;-;
7
whcn thc esscnce of what
was
efíecUve in
the
classical model- the pr
esu
med r ~
value
of
structures, representations. methodologíes
o
o
ri
gins a
nd
ends. a.nd
processes-has been shown to be
a
simulation?
Jt
is
not possible to answer such a questíon with
an
altemative
mo
d
eL
But a
series
f
characterístícs
Glll
be proposed lhal typify this apoda, this loss in
our
a p t o o ~
tualize a new model for architechire. These characteristics, outlined below, arise
from thi
which cannot be:
thcy
forrn a structure of
abs
e
nces
. • The
pu
rpose in proposing
them
tS
nat
to reconstitute what
has
just been dismisse
cl
, a model for a
t11eo
ry ofarch
itecture-
for ~
such models are ultimately futile. Rather what is bcing proposed is an e
xp
ansi
on - o n :
the limilaUons presented
by
the classical model to the realizalion of r
l i i
ú t rt as ª " 1n c-
pendeut o u r s ~ free
oí externa values- classical or any
other-that
is, the
i l l l e r s e ~
of the meaningjree, the rbitr ry
ancl
thc timeless in the artificia
l.
The meaning-íree, r b i t r a ~ and timeless c1eation ofartificiality in th is sense
mus: be
distinguished from what Baudrillard has called simulation": '; it is
notan
attempt to r
~
the dassical distinction between reality and representation-thus again making :m:hí=
ture a set
of
conventions simulating the real; il is , rather, more like a ilissimula·ior_
Whereas simula ion allempts
to obliterate the difference between real and imagin
aT\
·
D ·
simulation leaves untouchecl the difference between reality
and
illusíon. The t i o ~ - . . i ; ;
between dissimulation and reality is similar to the signification embodied in the
mas..l;; tbe
sign
of
pretending to be no/ what one is- that is, a sign
whicl1
seems not to s ignify
3"J·
thing besides itself (the sign
of
a sign,
or
the
negation
of
what is behind it
).
Such
a: .:;,..
simulation in architecture can be given the provisional title of the "not·classical : As d <
simu
lation is not the inverse, negative, oropposite
of
simulation, a "not·dassical"
r h i ~
is not the inverse, negative, or opposite.
of
class ical arcbitectu
re;
it is merely different from a ;
other than. A "not-dassical"
aTch
itecture is no longer a certification ofcxperience ~
tion of history. reason, or reality in the present. lnstead, it may more appropriately e descr.. ie:
asan other
manifestation,
an
architecture as is, now as a
fi
ction.
It
is a reprcscntation
of
itsáf.
of
its own valucs
and
interna) experience.
The claim that a "not·classical" architecture is necessary, that
ít
is proposed
by
the
ne
epoch or the rupture in the continuity of history. would be another zeitgeisl argument. The
"not
·d
assical" rnercl)• proposes an end
lo
the dominance of classical values in ordc-r
w
rev
eaJ
other values. ft proposes,
nota
new
val
ue
ora
new zeitgeist, but merely
an
other
con
dition-one of
reacling architecture as a text. There is nevertheless no question that
li;:S
idea
of
the read
ing of
architecture is initiated
by
a zeitgeist argument that today the cb
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
10/17
O m O USJUl
The ndof the
eg
inning
.\n origm of1alue implies a stale ora condition oforigin before valuc has been gil-en to it.
A beginning is such a condition pr i
or
lo a valued origin. 1n order to reconstruct tbe time·
ess the
stat
e of
as is
of face va lue .
one must
begin: bcgin by eliminating thc lime-bound
concepts
of
the classicaJ. which are primarily origin and end. The cnd
of
the beginning is
abo the e nd
of the
beginning
of
valuc. But it is not possible to go back to thc carlier,
pre
h1'1oric state of gyace, thc Eden of timelcssness before origins
and cnds
were valued.
\Ve
must begin in lhc present- withOll l necessarily giving a value to presentncss. The attempt
to
re
construct the timeless today
must
be a fiction which recognizcs the fictional ity oí its
º 11
task-that
is , it should nol attempt to simulate a limcless reality.
As has
been suggested above, latent in Lhc
das
sical appeal to
origi11s is
the more gen
eral problem
of
cause and elfect. This formula, part
of
the fictions
of
reason and histot;
•.
rt'duces architE'ct11re loan "added
10
"
or
• incssentiaJ• object by making it simply
an
cffect
of certain causes trndcrstood as origins. This problem is inhcrent n ali ofclassical architec
rure. i
nduding
its modernist aspee . T
he
idea
of
architcctu
l e
as something "aclded to" rather
:han
somethrng
with its own being - as adjectival rather than nominal or
ontological
eads
to
the perccption
of
architecturc as a practica de..-icc.
As
long as architecture
is
primarily
de\icc designated for use
and
for shelter-that is, as long as il has r i g i n in programmatic
functio s il will alwa¡•s 'onstilule
an
effect.
But once this "sclf.evident" characlcristic ofarchitectme is dismissed
and
archltccture
is seen as having no a priori origins -whether functional . divine.
or l u r ~ l l t e m
t i v
+lctions for the origin
can
be proposed : for example.
one that
is arbilm1')'.
one
that has no
enernal
va
l
ue
dcrived from meaning. truth,
or
timelcssness.
lt is
possiblc to imagine a
beginning internally consistent but no1 c.onditioncd by or contingent on historie origins
with supposedly S(•lf-evi
dent
values. '
7
Thus,
while classical origins were thought to have
their source
in
a divine or
natural
ordE'r and modem origins were held to derive their value
from deductive reason , "not-dassical' origins can be strictly arbitrar)". simply starting
j)'lints. without value . They can be artificial and rclative, as opposed
1
natural, divine, or
uni..-e
rsal. Sud1 artificiality delermined beginnings can be free of universal values
l>eca
use
they are
me
rely arbitrary points in time, when the ard1ilcclural process com
me
nces. One l'xample of an artificia l Ol'igln is a graft, as in the genetic insertion of
an
alíen
body into a hosl to provide a new rcs ult. ' , As opposed to a collage
ora
monta
ge
. which lives
'"ithin a
cont
ext a11d alludes lo
an
origin, a grafi is
an
im'
ented
site, which
does
not
so
much have objecl characteristics as thosc oí process. A graft
is
not
n
itself genetically arlll·
y
. lis arbitrariness is
in
its freedom frorn a valuc system
of
non-arbitrariness (that is,
the classical). is arbitrary in its provision ofa choice of reading which brings
no
exlernal
;alue to the process. Bul further. in its artificial and relative nature a graft is not in itself
necessarily
an
achievable result, bul mcrely a site
tha1
contains motivation for aclion- that
:s. the beginning ofa process.'
0
). otivation lakes
something
arbitrary - thal is, something
in
its artificial state which
;< not obedient toan externa Slrttclure of values - and implies an action anda movement
concerning an interna structw·e which has an inherent order and an interna logic. This
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
11/17
raises the question of the motivation or purposc from an arbitrary origin. How can sorne-
thing
be arbitrary and non-goal-oricnted butstill be intcrnally motivatcd? Every state h
be argued, has a motivation toward its own being-a
motion
rather than a direction lb"t
because architecture cannot portra¡r
or
enact
reason
as a value
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
12/17
..
oO
1111 CWSlW
the arbitrary orig
in
cannot be known in advance
(in
a cog11it
iv
e sense), it does aot depend
on know ledge dcrived from
1hc
classical lradition and thus cannot engender a strategy.
In this context architcctural form is revealed as a "place oíinvention• rather lhan as a
subservient representation
of
anothcr
ard1i1ecturc oras
a strictly
practica
l
devicc
.
To
invent
an archi tecture is to a
llow
architecturc 10 be a
cause:
in order to be :1 cause, it musl arise
from
something outside a directcd strategy
of
composition.
The end
of
the end also concerns
tl1c
end
oí
the object represcntation as 1hc only
metaphoric subje-c1 in architecwre. In the pasl thc metaphor in architecturc was used to
convey such f o r c ~ s as tensio
n,
compression, extension. and clongation; these were quali
ties tbat could be seen,
if
not literally in the objects t h e m ~ e l v e s tlien in rhe relationship
between objects. The idea of 11e metaphor here has notliing
to
do with the quahties gcn
era1
ed
between bu ildings or between buildings and spaces:
rnther,
1t has
10
do witli the idea
that the internal process itselfcan genera
e
a kind ofnon-represenutional figuration
in
the
object. This
is
an appeal not
to
the classical aesthetic
of
the object, but to the potential
poetic oían architectural text. Thc problem, then, is to distinguish texts from representa·
tions.
to convcy
the
idea
that what one
is
sccing,
t11e
material object,
is
a tcxt rather than a
series
of
image refcrences
to
othcr objects or values.
This suggests the idea of ard1itecture as "writing· as opposed to ard1itecture as image.
What
is
being "wrillcn• is not thc objectitselí i ts mass
and volume b
ut 1he act oímassing.
This
idea gives
a metaphoric
body to
the act
oí
architecture. lt
tl1en
signals its
re-ading
through
an
other system of signs. called
traces ª
Traces are not to be read literally. since
they
have
no other
value tlian
to signa the
idea
that therc is a reading e\·ent and
tha1
read
ing should
take
place;
trace slgnals the
idea
10
rea
d.
Thus a trace is a partial or fragmen
ta )'
sign; it has no objecthood. lt signifies an action that is in process. In this sense a trace
is no1 a simulation of reality;
it
is a dissimulation because it
reveals
itselfas distinct from
its
fonner
reality. t does
not sinrnlate
tl1e real,
but represents
and records
the
action
inherent
in a fonncr or future reality which has a value no more or lcss real han the trace itself. TI1at
is, trace is unconccmedwith forrning an imagc whidi is tl1e rcpresentation of a previous arclti
tecturc or
of social
customs and usages; rather, il
is
concemed with the marking-litcrally
thc
figuration of it
s own internal processes. Thus the trace is tite record of motivation.
the
reco rd
of an action, notan image oíanolhcr objec
t·
origin.
In
this case a ·not-classic:al" architecture begins acthcly
to
itl\'olve an idea
of
a reader
conscious of bis own identity as a reader rather than as a user or obsen·er. t proposes a
new reader distanred írom
any
externa]
yaJu
e system (particularly
an
architectural·histori·
cal system). Such a reader brings no prior competence to 1he act of reading olber than an
identi1y
as a reader. That is. sud1 a reader has no preconceh·ed knowledge of
what
archi·
tccture should be
(in
terms
of
its proportions,
te:\."tures.
sea e. and the
like):
nor does a •not
classica1
" architecture aspi
re to
make itself understandable through these preconceptions.1•
The competence of he reader (of ard1itecture) may be defined as the capacity to dis·
tinguish a sensc
o
knowing from a sense
ofbelieving
At any given time t11e conditions for
"knowledge" are "deeper• han philosophic conditions: in fact,
they
provide the possibility
of distinguishing philosophy from líteraturc, science rrom magic, and religion from myth.
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
13/17
UDOfTll CIASSIW
The new competcnce comes from the capacit}' to rcad per se. to know how to read, and
more importan
tl
y, to know how
toread
(bul not necessarily decode) architccture as a text.
Thus the ncv. "object mus t have the capacity to reveal itself firsl ofali as a text. as a read
ing evenLThe archítectural ficrion proposed here differs from the classical ficlion in íts pri·
mary condition as a text
and
in the way it is read: the new reader is no longer presumed to
know the na
tu
e
of
truth in the objec
t.
e ith
cr
as a represcn1a1ion
of
a ralional origin
oras
a manifestation of a universal set of rules govcrning proportion. harmony, and ordering.
Bul further, knowing how 10
decodc
ís
no longer importa.ni; simply, language in this con·
text is no longer a code to assign meanings (that
rl1is
means thar). Tbe activit}' of reading is
lirst and foremost in the recognition
of
something as a language (that
il is).
Reading, in this
sense. rnakes availab
le
a
leve of icatio11
rathcr
tha11
a
level
of meaning or expression.
Tberefore.
to
propase
1he rnd of
the bcginning
and
thc
end of
the
end
1
is lo proposc
the end ofbeginnings and
ends ofvalue-10
propose
an olher
•1imeless· spacc ofim•en·
tion. lt is a "timeless"' space in the present '"ithouta determining relalion toan ideal fuhire
or 10
an
idealizcd past. Architechrre in 1
he r resent
is scen as a process of inventing
an
artificial past and futureless presenl. lt remcmbers a no·longer future.
This
paptr
is basal 011 llm
:e
verifiable
assumplions
or
values:
timeless originless.
endltss) arcl1iteclure;
n o 1 1 - r e p r ~ s e 1 1 1 a t i o 1 1 a l
objectless) arcl1itecture; and artificial
arbilrary,
reaso11/ess)
archi
tectu
re.
Notts
t Jean Baudrillard,
Si11114 atio11s (Now
York: Semío1cxt(c), 198})• 83. Je3n Baudrillard porlr•y• tho: period begln·
níug in thc fií1icar is often confu.«I \>ilh 1he ide• of he •cbssic" •nd wilh the •l)liSlic rncthod o í das3i·
rism.• That which is classic, according to Joseph Rykwert. itwokes the idt• of •nciem and ••ernpl•ry"
•nd
sug·
gests a
uthority
and disunclion' : it is a model of ''ha1 is excellent or ol thr fina rauk. ~ 1 o r r ; - ilnport.an1.ly. h
implies ns 0011 urnelessness. thc uka that it i :::
ñ ~ l
r:ank atan)'
tin1P.
C l a ~ s k i s : m . as oppoc;td to thc classical.
";U
be
deñncd h• ..,
as
a method
of
attempting lo
rmduce
a ·dassic"
r ~ u l t b)•
appealing lo a •cJ•ssíaJ• poSI.
Thi•
a
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
14/17
UIDOfTH(
ClASS
lt l l
J· Michcl Fou e church in the fiftcenth ccnn1ry w•s similar.
How
el'cr.
lt
Is quite anothcr mattcr
to
overla)
thc tcn1plc front \\ith the triu1nphal
ard1.
See
R.
Wirtko\\'er.
Ar,f1irmumf
P r i n c i p l ~ in rJ c
Age
of u n 1 t A n i s n ~
(Ne\\• York:
\V. W.
Norton. 1971). and also
D.
S. Cha1nbcrs,
Patrous and
Artisis in rht Rt ttaissanc¿ (London:
MacMillan. 1970).
lt is
35
if Alberti \\'ere saying that \\
"'ilh lhe au
lh
Ol'it) or God hl que-st
ion
. 1n-a111nus t l'f'SOfl
to thr. 5)111001,:; of
Ws
O\\
D
Pº'\'er to
re:ril
)- tbe church. Thus. the use of the triu1nphal arch becon1es a n1essage on the
f ; J ~ i l d é oí
S:.utt'.A.Jtdrc:i
r:s1h
cr than an embodintt1H ofits inhe.rtnt me3 ning.
7.
Jeff Kipnis. from a seminar ot lhe Graduate School
of
Design. HOJ"-ard Univer-ity. Ul Febnmy 1984. "F
orm can
·
not
follo\V
func.tion until func.tio11 {induding but nor linúted
t
use)
h.a
fi.rsr eniergcd .as a pos.sibílny of form ..
8.
Roben Venluri, Dtnise Scon
·a rO\vn, 2nd
Stt\'tn
Ittnour. l ittn1ingfrou1 Uu ~ ht Forga.:1.e n Sj'fltlu:ili-.nn
of
Ar l1llrc11oral
Form
, rev. ed. (Cambridge: MIT Pre>s. '977) 8¡
9. See the film,
Dq·und
U1opla:
CJ1mv¡i11g
A1rio•des ' Amtn.:an
Ar.hit .ruu ¡ . ; ~ . ,
York \liclr.iel
B l o c ~ w o o d
Pruductions,
198})
.
10. Baudrilfard,8. 9. ln rcfccring to thc
dcod1 of
thc reality
of
God, Baudrillud 'S, M c t i ¡ ~ i a l des¡¡air came
fi·om the idea that thc in1ages concealed notbing at .all .and dlat in fact ther
\•.-ere
not un.ages but acrually
pctfect shnulacra,"
u . leone BattL;ra Alberti,
011
Pni111i11g
(New Haveu
: Vale Uníversity f'ress, 1966). 68
-74
12
. 1'.1on·is Kline, Mcultt111at
-
cs.: 111.t l A ~
of
Ctrla inry (NM'' Yorlc Oxíord Univers:ifl• Press. 1980).
5.
1
3.
Martín Heidegger, "On lhe Fssence
ofiruth.
in
Basi
c \Vrifoigs ed. Oovid Farrell Krell
(New
York: Harperand
Ro'''· 1977).
133.
E r ~ O C ) '
¡
e 1he esseruial counter·essence lei 1he p l i r n o r ~ i a l essenct" of1n1th. Erranc)
1
opetls
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
15/17
DOfnn cwm:.o.L
itselfupas the open region for cvcry oppositc csscntial r u t h Ertoncy the concealing
of
what is concealed
belong to the pritnordiaJ essen·ce
oí
truth
..
14. Cille• Odcuze. "Plato
•ad
thc Sinmlacrum." Oaober. no. 27 (Wintcr 1983). Deleuzc uses o slighdy difforent
terminolog)' to •ddress
a
very similar set of ssues: he d]sCTL>Ses the rlotonic distinction between model, copy.
and "
simulacromH
as a
n ~ n s
of :.ssigning
\•:ilue Jnd
hi
er.ard1ical
position to objecls and ideas. He e
xploiins
the ovcnhro\\•of Platonii;1n .as
Lhe
suspension oí tht a priori valut·Jaden
'Status of U1t
Pla.tonic ropy in ordtr to
"raise up shnulacra.
to
3$St rt their
rig.ht:s
ove r icous ar copies. The
problt"nl
no longerconct':rus the distlnction
Essence{Appearanoü• original and copy buth
m o d ~ I
ond reproduction. Of the
at
least h\'o
dh
·ergent series in1eriorized in the sin
1u1acru
.m neithe-r can be
assigned as ori :,rinal oras
copy.
lt doesn't
evc.n
\Vork
to
ilt\'oke the rnodeJ of he Other,
becau,:,e
no
nlode1
rcsi5"ts
thc ,..,rtigo
of
thc simulacrum· (52.
¡3).
Simulation
is use<
here in a
sense
which dosely
ap¡>roximates
Deleuie's
use
of
copy
or
kon,
while
dissimulation
is
conceptuallyveryclose to his descript
íon of
he prt-Socratic símulacr•.
1 · Oauclrillard, z.. In
th.e
cssay MThc Precession
of
Sin1uJ3cra
.
· 83udrill:i.rd ~ C L L . ' > s e s the
nruure of
im11la1inn 3nd
tite hnplicahun
ur
prescnt·day
s1n1\tlacra
oa our
pcrccption
of he
nan1reof
reality :ind representation: "Sonle·
Uting
has diSllppeared; the sovercign differcncc
bcl\\'CCll
thcm (d1c
real
and • • . símulation models) that
w3s
the abst.raction·s
charm."
16
. Br1 can produce sclf·evident
p r o c c . d u r e ~
that have
a.o lotem;i,I
n1otivat
ion.
18. The idea ofarbitrary or artificial m ~ i i s sense musi be distinguished from thc classical idc3 of 3rchitcc:turc as
al'tificíti1 uah1re or from the idea
of
the arbitrarincss oí
rr.he
sigu in language .A.rbitrary in L h l ~ conlext means
having no natur.d conncction. ThC' insight that origins a:re a contingency of languagf" is h:ased on an
appeaJ
to
re-.a.ding: the origin can be arbitrou-y because it
is
contingient on a reading that brings its
O\
Vll strategy \vith iL
i9 . Jonathaa Culler,
On D
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
16/17
IHD DfTMI CWSICAL
\lmttion ducid4tes he hettt0g•noígraft..
1
ts uscd In this
papt
rmy
, . , ~ bttn pl.ccd UllCOfüCÍOUSI) in. .-ed
hett
m •
"º'
tlut
cJ,,.,.I)
r? '-'Ork .u m m t r . t l ) f e t t \ ~ niponttnt
oí
dt:t..01npositiot1. \Vhllc cxt"nsion
is
anr
tnove
rneut
fro
rn un origin (or
:in initial condition).
Jnodifi(..ation ¡,a
spccific
fon11 oí
e.xtensicnl
co11ct1rned
"'lth presen;ng thc cvtdcnce ()f
11i-
tiol
ample. throush no •ddítion
º'
sublroclion oí
111a1tin¡¡uíshcd from )acque• Dtrrid.-S
115• ofthc
renn. for
~ m e l a d i t t e t l ~ ·
"''""" th• i d ~ of •Jifl•n:nce· to
the
fact that tt is impossible 10 ~ b t t ' p t t - ~ as: an ennt)·. "'lhr prC 'i< nCt oí nmtian ts conct-1\0lblt' unh ulSOfaras
"'
-
8/20/2019 06 Eisenman. the End of Classical
17/17
º'
nuCUS.Sf
CAl
>J. W• have
alwa¡s
rcad "rchile.)ing th>i >rchil«turc is m ~ ¡ languagc. We FTad whethcr we know whai l • ~ g we are readin11
or
noL \Ve
can n-ad Frt"nth
,,;1
h
ou1
undtf')Qnding Frtn(h
. 'e c:an knO\\ o m ° n ~
1s spcakin3 n o n s ~ u s e
or
noli>e. Beforc
t
:are
con1petcn1 coread
aud u11dcrstand ¡lOt'IT) '
r
can kno'v sornc.•th111¡J
to be
ia
ngu:igc:. Readiug
in
this coutext is
not
conccmcd
ith dt:eoding for
rncarüng
or
for J>Ol lic
content but
r.ather
for
ind•tiition.
25. C. F. Franco Rtlla. "Tempo drl la fine e tempo delfiniZto· fThe Age oí
End
and
lh4'
Age of the fk:¡mning).
CmobrJ a
48. no. 498 99 O•n.-F. 1984 :
to6-8.
n
••
•imilarit)' 10
1he
lltl< of
Fnncn
Rella's
art1de
is
COÍll·
cldcn1al, for IV<
use
the trrms ..l>.:ginn ng" ond "cud . for e1uir.Jy diRertm p u r p o ~ • s . Rrlla i d e n t i f i c ~ the pres
rnl
s
the a¡¡e
of
lhe cnd.Sl•tang
tb>t tht
par.tdo:ucü re.:uh
of
pro¡¡rcss
has
b.en lo t roaie • culiurc
1hot
simul·
tan