Odyssey of Dwelling - Srce

ReviewpaperUDC1:72(045)doi:10.21464/sp33214

Received:November21,2017

Astrit SalihuUniversityofPristina,FacultyofPhilosophy,Rr.“NënaTerezë”,p.n.,XK–10000Pristina

[email protected]

Odyssey of Dwellingchallenge of Modern Architecture

AbstractThe main focus of this article is on philosophical and architectural problems of dwelling. At these junctures, a great debate is again incited regarding the alleged problems in paral-lel with challenging the standpoints that led to a deadlock which was caused by a modern discourse. A referential figure re-thinking the dwelling outside the framework of modernity is a Norwegian architect and architectural theorist Christian Norberg-Schulz. Inspired by phenomenologists Martin Heidegger and Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Norberg-Schulz will strive to achieve a coherent argument regarding the inseparable link between existence and space; in other words, to settle down an argument about the existential roots of the architectonical space. This premise contests entirely the indifference and arbitrariness of modern architects who remain prone to neglect the fundamental segment of human spatial existence in their works. Having delved deeply into the question of existential and architec-tonical space and asserting a close connection between the two, Norberg-Schulz developed a widely discussed conception in recent years: the concept of geniusloci. By this approach, finally, the self-maintaining discourse of modernity is discarded. The relevance of context, eclectic and recovering of that which is traditional will return from the zero-level of denying the tradition. In this way, the concept of geniusloci seems to be highly useful in plain and different architectural definitions, which seem to challenge our existence perpetually. This paper will try to explicate the theoretical consequences on the problems of dwelling, as an essential axis of our Being.

Keywordsmodernity,architecture,dwelling,space,existence,genius loci,ChristianNorberg-Schulz

Themodernideasarenowheremoretangiblethaninarchitecture.Architectureembodiesthegrandvisionandtheexhilaratedquestforthenew–thenovum–thatmarksthemoderndiscourse.However,atthesametime,theparadoxesthatcharacterizethemoderntenetbecomepeculiarlypalpable.Irrespectiveofnumerousproclamationsstemmingfromthedistinctfieldsofmodernarchi-tecture,aimingtoreassessthoroughlythetraditionalarchitectureasawhole,theywillprincipallyintersectwiththeideaspropoundedbyLeCorbusierinhisfamousbookToward an Architecture.Perhapsthewidespreadenthusiasmdrivenbythefuriousindustrialdevelopments,amongothers,ismirroredinhiscrucialideaofprojecting‘anapartmentofanidealsize’,a‘dwellingmachine’,ashewouldcallitlateron.Inthisbook,LeCorbusierconfirmedtheneces-sityof‘massproductionspirit’,“thespirittobuildmassproductionhouses,toliveinmassproductionbuildings,thespiritofconceivingmassproduction

https://doi.org/10.21464/sp33214

SYNTHESISPHILOSOPHICA66(2/2018)pp.(527–538)

A.Salihu,OdysseyofDwelling528

houses”.1Today,thesewordssoundalmostpropheticsincethecurrentwayofdwellingisgroundedinthesequentiality,disfigurement,lossofidentityandthedullpatternsoftheheapsofcagesstructuredinconcrete.However,tech-nologicaladvancementwassupposedtoopenupnewalternativesolutionsintheprocessofconstruction.Planes,automobilesandtrainsarebeingproducedinfactories–claimedafascinatedLeCorbusier–implyingthatthesameprin-ciplecouldbeappliedinconstructinglivingspaces.Theelementaryexistentialissueofsheltering-dwellinginthepost-WorldWarIperiod,basedonLeCorbusier’sview,hasalreadytakenplace.Theuncon-ditionalopennesstowardthefuture,towhatisnewandthatwhichisdiffer-ent,perhapswasanepicalturningpointinthemodernconsciousness–itisalreadyfindingapathinmodernarchitecturaldiscourse,namely,initsutterlyrationalisedplanningof thefunctionallyreducedspaceof thedwelling.LeCorbusierindicativelypointedoutthefactthatalready‘newagehasbegun’,meaningthat“theproblemofdwellingisaproblemoftime.Thebalanceofsocietydependsonit”.2TheechoofsuchanattitudewillbecomeevenlargerthanLeCorbusierhimselfcouldhaveeverimagined,peculiarlybecausehispositionwillcruciallydeterminethegeneralorientationofmodernarchitec-ture,behindwhichtheideasofdemiurge-architectsremainhidden.Plansformassivehabitationshavealreadybeendrivenbynumerousarchitects.Alongwiththis,ErnstMaysetsontoconstruct15000apartmentsinFrankfurt(1929)whichwillbethereasontocallouttheSecondCongressoftheICMAwhere-inthemaintopicwillbe‘socialdwelling’.Perhapstheoutcomesofsuchanapproach are still lasting nowadays,whereby no definitive answer for theproblemofdwellingisofferedyet.Theanswersgivenregardingtheproblemsofdwellingwill generally exert an important role in architects’ reflectionsthroughoutthe20thcentury.Yet, thesolutionsprovidedbyarchitectsseemtoinfluencetheverysocialcore;itaffectstheentiremodernbeings’wayoflife,hencefosteringnumerousreactionsinsocialandespeciallyphilosophicaltheories.Amongtheconsequencesyieldingfromthegreatindustrialdevelop-ments,reflectedinthemoderndiscourseistheeradicationoftheindividualfromitstenacioussocialtieswiththetraditionalwayoflife.Acontinuouslyincreasingdiversityandcomplexityinlifeorganisationconfinesthefreein-dividual,itsunrestrainedexistenceandthedriftinginthesocialspace.Massproductionhouseswithhighlysimplifiedandreducedfunctionsperhapsarethe adequate response to the highly required social mobility. The issue ofdwelling,amongothers,willapparentlyevolveinthemosteminentapproach-esofurbanism,which,atthesametime,willbeanexpressionofdemiurgiccentralizationofarchitects/urbaniststhatmanipulatewithspacebyimposingvariouspoliciesandstrategiesofusingspaceasanemptyconcept.Lefebvreaptlyholdsthattheissueathandisimposedfrom‘above’as“theapplication of a homogenous and quantitative space, a requirement that‘livedexperience’allowsitselftobeenclosedinboxes,cagesor‘dwellingmachines’”.3Atthesejunctures,agreatdebateisincitedagainregardingthealleged problems in parallel with challenging the standpoints that led to adeadlockcausedbythemoderndiscourse.

Rethinking Dwelling4

Perhapsitisamodernarchitecturethathastakenovertheentireprocessofshapingandorganisingofourdwelling.However,regardlessoftheaspirationtocontriveapproachesthatwouldmatchdailydwellingneeds,muchofthe



basicneedsanddailyvital functionsareeffectively leftout from thispro-jection.Assuch,modernarchitecturaldiscoursesuccumbstophilosophicalre-evaluationpreciselyduetothequestionofdwelling–foran‘existentialspace’ – which remains perceived by architects solely from a geometricalangle.Initially, thequestionofdwelling,whichaims to rethink the issueat stakeoutofalreadyestablishedmodernistpatterns,ispropoundedbyHeideggerinhiswell-knownlecture“Building,Dwelling,Thinking”heldin1951.Thisisamongtheemblematictextswheretheissueofdwellingisunfoldedinamuchbroadercontextthanthatofanarrowedspacingoftheprimaryandexploit-ablefunctions.Almostinparallel,seeminglyundertheintenseconcernaboutthisissue,Heideggerheldanotherlecture,“PoeticallyManDwells”,whereintheissueofdwellingisexploredmoredeeply.Heideggerdepartedfromtheelementaryrelationshipbetweenbuildinganddwellingbygivingprimacytodwelling,because‘webuildsothatwecoulddwellandwecandwell’.Thus,abuildingservessolelyasameanstoachieveadwelling.Also,tofindtheessenceofdwellingassuch,HeideggerturnedattentiontotheissueofLanguageitself–recall:Being is Housed in the Lan-guage –becauseBeingitselfspeaksthroughlanguage.Further,delvingdeep-erintothisissue,Heideggermaintainedthatthedwellingitselfisunravelledthrough language. Interestingly, Heidegger considered the meaning of theGermanwordbauen(build)asrelatedtotheroot-wordbuan(inhabit).Thus,accordingtoHeidegger,

“…whereverthewordbauenstillspeaksinitsoriginalsense, it tellsus towhichextent the‘dwelling’matterhasreached.Bauen,buen,bhuareinfactthesamewordasthewordbin(am)asinIchbin,Dubist(Iam,youare)andtheimperativebis(be).”5

Heidegger’sstancewheredwellingandbeingarethesametohumanbeingsrecallstheoblivionofbeingandreflectsthewidespreadcrisisrelatedtotheproblemofdwelling.Heidegger,therefore,claimsthat

“…despitehowhardandbitter,hamperingandthreateningthelackofhousesremains,therealplightofdwellingdoesnotliemerelyinalackofhouses(…)therealdwellingplightliesinthis,thatmortalseversearchanewforthenatureofdwelling,thattheymusteverlearntodwell.”6

Heideggerpressesupontheessenceoftheproblemwhichmodernarchitec-turealtogetherwithitsdemiurge-architectswastakingoverasitsmission,toprojectouractualwayofdwelling.ThefinalsentenceofHeidegger’slecture

1

LeCorbusier,Drejt një arkitekture [Towards New Architecture],translatedbyArtanRaça,Phoenix,Tiranë2000,p.189.

2

Ibid.,p.187.

3

AnriLefevr[HenriLefebvre],Urbana revo-lucija[Urban Revolution],translatedbyMir-janaVukmirović-Mihailović,Nolit,Beograd1974,p.95.

4

Elementsofthischapterwerediscussedinfi-nerdetailin:AstritSalihu,“Heideggerilimi-šljenjearhitekturekrozbitak”[“HeideggerorThinkingArchitecturethroughBeing”],Filo-

zofska istraživanja 38(2018)3,pp.637–650,doi:https://doi.org/10.21464/fi38313.

5

MartinHeidegger,Leksione dhe Konferenca [Basic Writings],translatedbyUrimNerguti,Dritan Thomollari, Plejad, Tiranë 2003, p.146.Cf.MartinHeidegger,“Building,Dwell-ing,Thinking”,in:NeilLeach(ed.),Rethink-ing Architecture: A Reader in Cultural The-ory, translatedbyAlbertHofstadter,London–NewYork,Routledge2005,pp.94–119,p.96.

6

M.Heidegger,Leksione dhe Konferenca, p.163.



ondwellingwillofferthemainguidancefordevelopinganarchitecturaldis-course which will radicalise the meaning of existential space. Heidegger’sinitiation–wepointouttothewordinitiationpurposively–somehowrecu-peratesthereflection,thinkingofdwelling,whereinthinkingwaslimitedandcloakedunderthecommodityofunerringassumptionsonplanningprinciplesofmodernarchitects.Assuch,Heideggerchallengesthediscourseofmodernarchitectureprimarybecauseheconceivestheissueofdwellingasindistin-guishablefromthethinking:‘thattheyoughttobuildstartingwithdwelling,thinkingaboutdwelling’.Thus,theconsequencesofHeidegger’sthoughtcanbeeasilypresumedeventhoughhedoesnotformulatethemexplicitly.Thehighlycomplexquestionofdwellingdoesnotsolelyconsistof theal-legedidentificationofdwellingandthinking.EnsuingthinkinginspiredbyHeidegger unfolds other relevant viewpoints on established structures ofcasualmodernliving.Lefebvre,forinstance,despitehis‘reluctance’goesonintoafreeinterpretationdrawingacoextensivelinebetweendwellingandtheunconsciousness inpsychoanalysis.Hemaintains thatperhaps thequestionofdwellingissuppressedtothedegreethatweremaininutterignoranceofdwelling.Heholdsthat

“…tofinddwellinganditsmeaning,toactualiseit,wehavetoacquireconceptsandcategoriesthatareacknowledgedthrough‘thelivedexperience’,towardstheunknownandtheunrecog-nisedofeverydaylife–andthatalsogoeswaybeyondtowardsgeneraltheory,philosophyandmetaphilosophy.”7

LefebvrecontendsthatHeidegger’sstanceisapartofthemetaphilosophicalapproach,asathoughtthatincreasesgeneralawarenessformodernman’sre-ducedwayofdwelling.However,eventhoughcriticaltoHeidegger,itisevi-dentthatthinkingondwellingcertainlyremainsthemainchallengeofmod-ernarchitecture.Thereasonisobvious:Heidegger’slineofthinkingleadsustowardstheidentificationofdwellingwithtradition,harmony,thesecurityofthesituationofalifewhichgrantscohesionandmeaning.Meanwhile,lifeinthemodernworldissuchthatforeignersandimmigrantsofferthemodelfortheexperiencesofeachinmodernsociety,whichismobileorflexible.8Thisisperhapsthetensionwherethemodernarchitectureanddwellingstands:thatistosay,infindingsolutionsforthequestionofdwellingoutofthepeculiarrelationwithtraditionalroots.ThistensionrelyingontheveryquestionofdwellingispointedoutalsobyHeynen,aspiringtoeaseouttheopposingstandpointthroughanunderstand-ingofan‘ambivalence’ofmodernity itself.Contestingofauthenticdwell-ingfromtheangleofillusorypretentiontorestoretheharmonioustieswithtradition, at the same time, questions the possibility to tie up architecturaldiscourse with any conservative ideology that has given to the respectiveissue the ‘mythicalcharacter’.On theotherhand, indifference towards the‘emptysigns’ofthemodernproject,inwhichtherelationofahumanbeingwithspaceitselfremainsentirelyneglected,issolelyanothersideofthecoin,whichalso inevitablyresult inreducedoppressionofhumanneeds.Exclu-sionarydiscoursescontinuetoscrutinizetheissueofdwelling,butitseemsthattheultimatechallengeistofindanalternativepathwayinwhichvariousamalgamicmomentscouldprevail,preservinganewpluralistageinthearch-itectonicalshapingofthespacesweliveintoday.PerhapsthisisthereasonwhyHeidegger’sapproachfurtheredbyNorberg-Schulz,lateron,cannotbeconsideredsolelyfromtheperspectiveofaradicalcritiqueofmodernitythatwouldfinallyleadtotheeradicationofmoderndiscursivepremises.Irrespec-tiveofhowconservativetheirargumentsmightseem,revaluationofmoder-



nity is imposedasanecessityaltogetherwith thequest foralternativeandattractivesolutionswhichareademandoftime.

Space and existence

Thegreatdebate,beginningwithHeidegger, iscontinuedandadvancedbyChristianNorberg-Schulz9whoexpandstheunderstandingofcomplexstruc-turesofspaceswhereourexistencetakesplace.Theevaluationofexistentialspace,whichisinterrelatedwitharchitectonicspace,wouldhavetoformthe‘architectonictotality’thathasoftenbeenunpretentiouslyreducedintosome-thingthatcanbemodelled-modifieddifferentlyandtediously.InhisbookExistence, Space and Architecture,Norberg-Schulzsaysthat“…itisunderstandablethatgeometryispartofarchitectonicalspacesyntax,butthishastobeintegrated inall-encompassing theory(…)wehaveemphasize thefact that thehumanenvi-sioningofhisspace,forhisexistentialspace,isimpossibletobedescribedrelyingonlyontheconceptsofgeometrycircles.”10

Norberg-Schulz’sclaimunveilsanewanddifferentdemandfromthosestriv-ing to ideal platonic geometrical shapes of modern architects whereby thefundamentalrelationshipbetweenmanandspaceisentirelymissedout.Nor-berg-Schulzreferstomanyworksofphilosophersthathavetreatedthecon-ceptionofspace,startingfromMerleau-Ponty’sfamousworkPhenomenology of Perception,Bachelards’Poetics of Space,andHeidegger’sstandpointonspacetreatedintheaforementionedlecture,toachieveacoherentargumentregardingtheinseparablelinkbetweenexistenceandspace;inotherwords,to settle down an argument about the existential roots of the architectoni-calspace.Thispremisecontestsentirelytheindifferenceandarbitrarinessofmodernarchitectswhoremainpronetoneglectthefundamentalsegmentofhumanspatialexistenceintheirworks.Elaboratingthenotionofspace,orthesystemofthesame,accordingtoNor-berg-Schulz,impliestheimmediatedifferentiationoffiveconceptsofspace:1) pragmatic space; 2) perceptual space; 3) existential space; 4) cognitivespace;and5)abstractspace.Norberg-Schulzwritesthat

“…pragmaticspaceintegratesmanwithitsnaturalorganicenvironment,perceptualspaceisfundamentalforhisidentityasaperson,existentialspaceengagesmanintoacertainculturalandsocialtotality,cognitivespacemeansmaniscapabletothinkaboutspaceand,finally,logi-calspaceservesasameanstodescribeallthepreviousspaces.”11

Theidentificationofexistentialspacewhichisintrinsicallyrelatedtotheso-cialandcultural totalityswiftlyreveals thefact thatmodernarchitectureisgroundedondiscardingsomeoftheseimportantpremises.Assuch,forNor-berg-Schulz,humanspatialexistenceisintrinsicallyrelatedtothestructure

7

A.Lefevr [H.Lefebvre],Urbana revolucija [Urban Revolution],p.95.

8

See:HildeHeynen,Architecture and Moder-nity,MITpress,Cambridge1999,pp.18–19.

9

ChristianNorberg-Schulzhasapproachedtheissueof space and architecture in his booksIntentions in Architecture (1963),Existence, Space and Architecture (1971) and Genius

Loci. Toward a Phenomenology of Architec-ture(1979,Englishprint1980).

10

Kristijan Norberg-Šulc [Christian Norberg-Schulz], Ekzistencija, prostor i arkitektura[Existence, Space and Architecture],GK,Beo-grad2006,p.20.

11

Ibid.,p.17.



of existential space as such.To the conceptionof ‘existential space’,Nor-berg-Schulz comes through a psychological conception called ‘schemata’,propoundedbyPiaget.Asregards‘schemata’,Norberg-Schulzarguesthat“…spaceschemataconsistofelementsthatareunchangeable,likebasicuniversalstructures(archetypes)andconditionedstructuresinsocietyorcultureandalso,lastly,somepersonalidi-osyncrasies.Allthese,ingeneral,forma‘mirror’ofman’senvironment,respectivelyastablesystemofthree-dimensionalrelationsbetweenobjectsandtheirdifferentmeanings.Thatiswhyweunifyalltheschematainourconceptofexistentialspace.”12

Perhapswecouldseeherehowadeeperfocusontheanalysisofspacere-sults in more complex structures related to the basic relationship betweenmanandspace,namely,theapproachaimingarbitrarymodificationofspaceplacesmanintoinadequatespatialcadre.Whereasidentificationofexistentialrootsofspaceisofparticularimportance,theabstract-logicalorgeometricalconceptionofspaceremainssecondary.Relatedtothis,Norberg-Schulzcon-tends:“…ifweweretointerpretthebasicpresumptionsofthepsychologyofperceptioninageneralsense,thenwecouldsaythatthebasicorganisingschemataconsistofspacecentres(proximity),pathsorstreets(continuity),andlandsorfields(enclosure).Tobeoriented,manmustprimaryhavesuchrelations,basedonwhichgeometricalschematadevelopsmuchlatertoservesomeotherclosepurposes.”13

Theallegedpsychologicalpremisesofperceptionarenecessarybecausetheyemphasisetheelementsofexistentialspace,suchascentre,path,anddomain.Existentialspace‘gainstherealdimensionofhumanexistence’onlythroughthecombinationofaninteractionbetweentheseelements.Otherlevelsofex-istentialspace(geography,landscape,urbanlevel-house,things),whichformthetotalityofexistentialspace,naturallyappearbasedonspecificrelationsbetweentheelementsofexistentialspace.Norberg-Schulzclaimsthat“…levelsofexistentialspacerepresentthestructureofspacetotality,whichcorrespondstothestructureofhumanexistencebecausemanexistsaboutmanyobjects:physicalobjects,psycho-logical,socialandculturalones.”14

These relations do not emerge simply from spontaneous processes but, asNorberg-Schulzclaims,thereareseveralpermanentaspectsofspacerelationsor‘stablesystemofplace’which,inturn,giveidentitytotheplaceitself.Inthiscontext,itisclearthatsubtractingsubstantialelementsoftheexistentialspace isequivalent to theeradicationof the individual fromthecontextofmodern socialmobility.Current developments in global scale,meanwhile,remaininfavouroftheallegedmobility.Norberg-Schulzhimselfisawareofthis.Heclaimsthat:“…whilethehumanenvironmenthaditsstructurethatrespondedtoexistentialspacethusfar(…), today’s tendenciesseeminglyspeak in favourof thedevelopmentofanewmovement.Technologicalcommunicationtoolshaveliberatedusfromdirecthumancontacts,andevermorepeoplearebecomingphysicallymobile.”15

Thisisperhapsthenaturalconsequenceofthedevelopmentofcontemporarysocieties,hencethedemandformobilityremainssomehowalwayspresup-posedinthearchitectonicalprojectsaswell.Assuch,thinkingaboutthean-tinomybetweenmobileandstablestructuresofexistentialspaceinevitablyimposesaquestion:doesthehumandemandforstableworldinexistentialspaceentailretractionfromtheimposedmobilitybycurrentdevelopments?Thisquestionperhaps leads todifferent andvarious findingswhichwouldnothaveultimatedetermination,norpresupposeanyfinalclosure,neitheronunfoundedmobilitynoronrootingandconfininghumanwithinstablestruc-



tures.Norberg-Schulzopposesthe‘ideaofthemobileworld’,yet,hediag-nosesanimportantproblemontherelationshipbetweenmanandspace.HereferstoLynch’sideathatthehumanenvironment’sfunctionremainsthatof‘enablingmeaningfulhumanmobility’.Theissuethathasbeenputforwarduntilrecentlyregardingwhetherpeopleshouldlivein‘familyhouses,indi-vidualhousesorinapartmentbuildings’,isnowtransformedintotheissuefromwhicharisestheproblemofthehumanenvironmentandthequestionofhowitcan‘becomeasatisfyingpartofhumanexistence’.Norberg–Schulzthinksthatinthemobileworld

“…physicalandpsychologicaldistancesaremixedup,andtrueidentificationisbeingsubsti-tutedbychaoticallytakingdifferentstimulants.”16

Thisoccursbecauseofthelackofthecentralisedrelevanceofmanaswellasduetotheinabilitytoidentifyitwithspace.TounderstandNorberg-Schulz’sidea,wehavetoputhisentireconceptofexistentialspaceindirectrelationtoarchitectonicalspacebecause

“…existentialspace,asoneofthepsychologicalstructuralelementsofthehumanexistenceintheworldhasitsrealreflectioninarchitectonicalspace.”17

Norberg-Schulzalsothinksthatarchitectonicalspaceismerelythe‘concre-tised’existentialspace.Theallegedorganicinterrelationbetweenexistentialandarchitectonicalspaceisseeminglyabstractedinnumerousmodernarchi-tecturalplanning,whichputsamanintoadisintegrated,unidentifiablewhirl-wind.Thewidelyproclaimedfreedomofmodernspatialformation,accordingtoNorberg-Schulz, remains part of a big social disequilibrium.Related tothis,heconcedesthat

“…maninhis‘free’arrogancehaspartedhisplaceandhas‘conquered’theworld.Yet,hedidnotachievetruefreedomandallthathewasleftwithishopelessemptiness.”18

TheOdysseanmotifremainspertinentforNorberg-Schulz,asafigureexpress-ingthetensionbetweenfreedomandhome.PerhapsAdornoandHorkheimeralsorelatethe‘dialecticsofenlightenment’tothefigureofOdysseywhich,as we shall see, is applicable in the very logic ofmodern architecture aswell.Havingdelveddeeplyintothequestionofexistentialandarchitectoni-calspaceandassertingacloseconnectionbetweenthetwo,Norberg-Schulzwoulddevelopawidelydiscussedconceptioninrecentyears:theconceptofgenius loci.

Genius loci: Space, Identity, Meaning

PerhapstheexistentialrootsofspacebroughtupbyHeidegger’sstanceondwellingledNorberg-Schulztowardssustainableconclusionsabouttheinter-relationbetweenexistentialandarchitectonicalspace.Allofhis theoreticalpremises find support inHeidegger, peculiarly in the broader phenomeno-

12

Ibid.

13

Ibid.,pp.31–32.

14

Ibid.,p.58.

15

Ibid.,p.63.

16

Ibid.,p.64.

17

Ibid.,p.68.

18

Ibid.,p.64.



logicalconceptwhichuncoversthestructureof‘being-in-the-world’.SinceNorberg-Schulzhasalreadyidentifiedtheexistentialrootsofspace,hepavesapathtodeterminealltheflawsinthereductiveapproachregardingtheprob-lemofspaceanddwellinginmodernarchitecture.Whenitcomestospace,notonlylogical-mathematicalconnectionsaretheonestoconsider,butalsothatwhich‘capturestherelationbetweenmanandhisenvironment’asamorecomplexrelationshipabouthisidentifyingandthemeaningthatitcarriesforman.Inthissense,Norberg-SchulzfindsthepropertermintheRomancon-ceptofgenius loci.Forthis,heclaimsthat“…sinceantiquity,genius lociorthe‘spiritofplace’isknownasadistinctrealitywhichmanissubmittedtoinhisdailylife.Architecturesignifiesvisualisationofgenius lociwhileanarchi-tect’spurposeistocreatemeaningfulplacesthatwouldhelpmandwell.”19

Architectural planning shouldnot be aproduct of categorical apparatusoftheabstractmindwhicharbitrarilymodifies space,but ratherofa specificarrangementofspaceapproachedfromacontextualperspective.Thiswouldavoidthearchitecturaldetachmentfromthecontextwhichisplannedforthelivingneeds.Thisenablestherecuperationoftheauthenticandmeaningfuldwellingand,furthermore,eludingthereductionofdwellingintosheltering.Thisispreciselybecausethedwellingitselfismorethansheltering.AsNor-berg-Schulz says, “mandwellswhenhe findsmeaning in theenvironmentaround him, or simplywhen being able to experience his environment asmeaningful”.20 Genius loci is an early architectural quality which is com-pletelyabstractedinmodernarchitecture.Genius lociisnotsimplyapartofsimplisticenvisioningof the surroundingenvironment,but rathera radicaleffortagainsttheneutralizingoftheenvironmentintoanutterlymanipulatingand exploitable spacewith no specific character at all.As such,Norberg-Schulzexpoundsthestructureinwhichthesurroundingenvironment,anditsowncharacter,ismanifested.Placeistheunitwhereinthesurroundingenvi-ronmentisreduced.Placeisthespacewherelifesprings/manifests,whereintheflowofhappeningsunfolds.Withouttheconceptionofplace,itisimpos-sibletoimaginelifeofwhatsoeverevent.ThisiswhyNorberg-Schulzholdsthatplaceisthecorrectnametoexplainthatwhichweusuallycallenviron-ment.Thestrikingfeatureofplaceisthat‘itisaspacewithitsdistinguishedcharacter’.Ifweweretodefineplace,accordingtoNorberg-Schulz,thenwewould find that it is ‘something more than an abstract location’. Definingaplacewould include“a totalitymadeupofconcrete thingshavingmate-rial substance, shape, texture and colour.Together, these things determinean‘environmentalcharacter’,whichistheessenceofplace”.21Additionally,Norberg-Schulzmaintains thatplace is ‘a totalphenomenon’whichcannotbeapproachedfromthereducedaspectsofspatial relationships.Aplace isaqualitativetotality,henceabstractingitsproperties,andaquantitativeap-proachwouldonlyloseitscharacterandparticularitythatitholdsforman.Thisimpliesthatthequantitativeapproachitselfisanabstractapproachwhichpresupposes solely a ‘spatial dispersing and dimensioning’ in a functionalsense.Norberg-Schulzclaimsthat“thefunctionalapproachleftouttheplaceasaconcrete‘here’,leavingitwithoutparticularidentity”.22

ThisissufficientforNorberg-Schulztosuggesttheorientationofarchitecturetowardsphenomenologywhichissupposedtoenablethe‘returningtothings’toovercomeall theshortcomings inmodernarchitecture that remainscon-cernedmostlywiththeabstractorganisationofspace.Theconsequencesofmodernarchitecturetodayareapparentintheuniformity,barrennessandmo-notony,hencestrippedoutfromtheirindispensablerelationshipwithplace.



Intheanalysisof‘today’splace’,Norberg-Schulz,therefore,pointsoutthesymptomofthe‘lossofplace’.Heclaimsthat“mostofthemodernbuildingsexistinthe‘nowhere’;theydonotrelatetolandscapenortothecoherentandurbanentity,butlivetheirownabstractlifeinamathematical-technologicalkindofspace”.23Inspiredbyanoblecausetofindoutanadequatesolutionfordwelling,modernarchitecture isperhapsbeing increasinglydetached fromitsinappropriate,formalandabstractapproaches.Thisispeculiarlypalpableafter thedegradationof ideasof themodernmovement inarchitecture thatis widely known as ‘vulgar functionalism’. Irrespective of some attractiveinhabitingsolutioninLeCorbusier’sVilla SavoyeorinMiesVanderRohe’sTughendhat House,which laidout a newwayof living and an acceptablesolution was achieved in fulfilling human dwelling and identifying needs.Yet,when‘transferredintheurbanrealm’,theallegedsolutionsturnedouttobedifferentiatedanddeficient, inapplicablealternatives to thedwelling.Norberg-SchulzthinksthatevenFrankLloydWright’sdemandforanorganicarchitecturewasadirectexpressionofa‘hungerforreality’,whichwaslostcompletelyintheabstractgeometricalcleannessofthemodernbuilding.Hecontendsthat“Wright’sapproachtowardsnaturalphenomenadidnotconsistintheabstractoutlookwhichwascommoninEurope,butindirectexperi-encing of archetypal and meaningful ‘forces’”.24 Certainly, it is necessarytopointoutthefactthattherewereotherinputsinthemodernarchitecturalmovement.Also, inmodern ideas, there havebeen sufficient resources toexploreandachievemoreadequateandmoreacceptablesolutions.Althoughitisimpossibletospeakfor,sotosay,lineardevelopmentofmodernarchi-tecture,yetfunctionalismandrationalismweremostlyimplementedwhichledtothegeneralcrisisbeingdiagnosedtoday.Norberg-Schulzperhapswillreducetheentirecrisisofmodernarchitecturepreciselyintotheallegedab-stractingofplace.Heexplicitlymaintainsthattheproblemsofmodernar-chitecturestandin‘deficientgraspingofthenotionofplace’aswellasthearchitecture’suniformedstandinthearchitectonicalexpressionofthatwhichisknownas‘internationalstyle’.Onlybyturningtoplace,onlythroughthetheoryaboutaplacecanweavoidalltheproblemsthatmodernarchitectureis facing today.Solelyby returning to theplace,only througha theoryofplace, one can copewith the respective problemsofmodern architecture.Norberg-Schulzwritesthat

“…placetheorynotonlyintegratesdifferentcontributionsandoffersasummarizedconceptontherelationshipbetweenmanandhisenvironment,butitalsoshowsthatthehistoryofmodernarchitecturehasadirectionandanaim:architectureasarecoveryofplace(…)moreovertheconceptofplaceconnectsmodernarchitecturetothepast.”25

Thus,Norberg-Schulz’sambitionisreturningtowardcontextualismand,atthesametime,theexplicitcontestationofconceptualism.Thesetwoapproaches

19

Christian Norberg-Schulz, Genius Loci, Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture,Rizzoli,NewYork1980,p.5.

20

Ibid.

21

Ibid.,pp.6–7.

22

Ibid.,p.8.

23

Ibid.,p.190.

24

Ibid.,p.192.

25

Ibid.,p.201.



describetheparadigmaticelementoftwodifferentanddistinctdiscoursesthatarewidelyknownasthemodernandthepostmodern.Thistensionisapparentinarchitectureaswell;revisingthemoderndiscourseinarchitectureisdevel-opedpreciselywithinthisparadigmaticshiftfromconcepttowardscontext.Moreover,Norberg-Schulzconsidershistheorysustainedingenius loci asthefinalexpressionregardingthecoursethatmodernarchitectureistakingwithitsturningtowards‘regionalism’.Hecontendsthatthe‘thirdgeneration’ofmodernarchitectsisheadingtowardreinstatingthelostconnectionsbetweenplaceandarchitectonicalplanning.However,thistwist,forhim,isnotsimplyaprotestagainstorwithdrawalfrommoderndiscourse;hencehestillholdsacriticaldistance.Heclaimsthat“…thenewregionalism is indeeda reaction towardsvulgar technocratic functionalism,butaboveall, it represents thenatural courseofdevelopmentof themodern.By theconceptofgenius loci,Iattempttoassurethetheoreticalgroundsforsuchanaim.Originallythismeantanescapefromabstractionswhicharealientolifeandfromthewastedstimulantsoftoday’sworldsothatwecanreturntothings.”26

Attentive analysis of place and environment in architecture is a necessaryconditioninbringingbackthemeaningfuldwellingofmanwhoislostinthedefacedurbanismcreatedafterthe‘destructionoftraditionalurbanforms’.27Adoptingconcreteandsubstantialelementsinarchitecturalplanningseemstobeanecessaryconditioninreturningtheidentityandcharacterofourdwell-ingspace.Inthissense,hemaintainsthat“…thereturningtothingsinarchitecturemeansonceagaintalkingaboutlandscape,theexteriorandarticulation.Thesearenotshapes,ordinaryshapes,butmeaningfullymouldedthings,hu-manworldelements,sotospeak.”28

Norberg-Schulz’sstandpointisthatwhereinthenotionof genius lociispecu-liarlyconsidered,itcontainsanostalgicintonationforthelostharmonyandwarmthinman’straditionalwayofliving.Althoughwell-elaborated,inthecourseofthecoherentargumentationfortheneedtoconsiderman’smeaning-fuldwelling,Norberg-Schulz’sviewsoftenchallengetherealimplementingpossibilitiesbecauseofthesociety’scurrentmobilityprocess.Itisnotaco-incidencethathisdisagreementwithincreasingsocietalmobility,numerousinterpretersunderstoodhisstandpointtobeanefforttoconfinemanwithinstable structure which has always been associated with violent totalitariansocieties.29Whenitcomestothetensionbetweenrootednessandfreedomofman,forinstance,Norberg-Schulzisinfavourofman’srootednessbecausehe considers thatmobility,moving, and incapability to identifywithplacebringsmantowardsimbalanceandestrangement–anexistencestrippedofmeaning.Apart from numerous reluctant implications regarding modern discourse,therearevariouselementstobeattainedinadvancingman’scurrent livingwaysaimingtofindmeaningfulelementsforhisexistence.This,ofcourse,impliestheneedtofindoutathirdoption,astillundefinedpath,buttheonewhichisstillbeingexploredinthecurrentresearchonarchitecture.Thisprimarilymeansthatoneshouldavoidone-sidedcommitmentstobothradical modernism and radical anti-modernism. Adopting modern radicalpremisescouldleadtowardsthelossofdwellingitself,lossofthemeaningandlossofman’sidentity,whichresultsinvariousdeficienciesandwithpeo-ple’sgeneraldeprivationindefacedsuburbsofmanycitieswherethemodernplanshavebeenimplemented.Ontheotherhand,theaimtobringback‘thespiritofplace’,traditionandstableconfinedstructuresofdwellingarealloutofcontextofthetimeweliveinandbasedonwhichsocietyfunctionstoday.



Thus, this is still adisputable issueandanon-goingdebateon thecurrentdirectionsofthearchitecture,namely,foritsorientationtowardregionalism,contextandtradition.However,thequestionhereiniswhetherthisisamererevisionofmodernarchitectureorisitaparadigmaticshifttowardpostmod-ernarchitecturaldiscourse?Givenelementsthatareconstitutiveofmoderndiscourse, it seems to bemore a paradigmatic shift, a great shift perhaps,towardwhatisknownasthepostmodernarchitecture.Bythisapproach,fi-nally,theself-maintainingdiscourseofmodernityisdiscarded.Namely,therelevanceofcontext,eclecticandrecoveringofthatwhichistraditionalwillreturnfromthezero-levelofdenyingthetradition.Inthisway,theconceptofgenius lociseemstobehighlyusefulinplainanddifferentarchitecturaldefinitions,whichseemtochallengeourexistenceperpetually.

Astrit Salihu

Odiseja obitavanjaIzazovi suvremene arhitekture

SažetakGlavni je fokus ovog članka problem stanovanja u filozofiji i arhitekturi. U problemu stvorenom ovim načinom nametanja objašnjenja stanovanja u modernizmu, započeta je velika debata gdje se iznova promišlja stanovanje kao relevantno pitanje za stvorene probleme i istovremeno kao neposredan način izazova mogućim alternativama izlaženja iz zastoja do kojih je dovela moder-na sa svojim idejama i vizijama. Glavna figura novog promišljanja arhitekture izvan moderni-stičkih shema norveški je arhitekt Christian NorbergSchulz. Inspiriran Martinom Heideggerom i Mauriceom MerleauPontyjem, pokušat će postići koherentnu argumentaciju o narazdvojivo-sti prostora i egzistencije, ili o egzistencijalnom korijenu arhitektonskog prostora. Pretpostavka ove teze kontestira indiferenciju i svojevoljnost modernih arhitekata, koji samoutemeljuju arhi-tektonsku projekciju izostavljajući fundamentalni segment prostorne egzistencije čovjeka. Udu-bljivanjem u problematiku egzistencijalnog i arhitektonskog prostora, evidentiranjem tijesnog nadovezivanja među njima, NorbergSchulz će razviti jedan, ne malo diskutirani pojam: pojam geniusloci. Njegovim će se pristupom napokon apstinirati od samoutemeljenja moderne, i od njene nulte premise odbacivanja tradicije u kojoj će se povratiti kontekst, eklekticizam i rehabi-litacija tradicionalnog. Na ovom putu pojam geniusloci nameće se kao potpomažući u jasnom i drugačijem definiranju arhitekture koja je u stalnom izazovu naše egzistencije. Ovaj članak pokušava eksplicirati teorijsku konzekvencu problema stanovanja, kao osi našeg bitka.

Ključne riječimoderna,arhitektura,stanovanje,prostor,egzistencija,genius loci,ChristianNorberg-Schulz

26

Christian Norberg-Schulz, “Genius Loci”,Lotus International13(1976),pp.57–67;cf.MilošPerović,Antologija. Teorija arhitekture XX veka [Anthology. Theory of architecture in 20th century],GK,Beograd2009,p.569.

27

M. Perović, Antologija, p. 562 [Norberg-Schulz].

28

M. Perović, Antologija, p. 569 [Norberg-Schulz].

29

H.Heynen,Architecture and modernity, pp.22–24.



Astrit Salihu

Odyssee des WohnensHerausforderungen der zeitgenössischen Architektur

ZusammenfassungDer Hauptfokus dieses Artikels ist das Problem des Wohnens in Philosophie und Architektur. In dem Problem, das durch diese Art der Erklärungsaufdrängung bezüglich des Wohnens im Mo-dernismus geschaffen wird, hat eine große Debatte begonnen, in der aufs Neue über das Wohnen reflektiert wird, und zwar als relevantes Thema für die geschaffenen Probleme und zugleich als eine unmittelbare Art der Herausforderung an die möglichen Alternativen, aus dem Stillstand her-auszukommen, zu denen die Moderne mit ihren Ideen und Visionen geführt hat. Die Hauptfigur der neuen Reflexion über die Architektur außerhalb der modernistischen Schemata ist der norwegische Architekt Christian Norberg-Schulz, inspiriert von Martin Heidegger und Maurice Merleau-Pon-ty; er wird versuchen, zu einer kohärenten Argumentation über die Untrennbarkeit von Raum und Existenz oder über die existenzielle Wurzel des architektonischen Raums zu gelangen. Die An-nahme dieser These kontestiert die Indifferenz und Eigenwilligkeit moderner Architekten, die die architektonische Projektion selbst fundieren, indem sie das fundamentale Segment der räumlichen Existenz des Menschen ausblenden. Durch die Vertiefung in die Problematik des existenziellen und architektonischen Raums und die Evidentierung der engen Anknüpfung zwischen ihnen wird Norberg-Schulz einen nicht unterdiskutierten Begriff entwickeln: den Begriff des geniusloci. Durch seinen Ansatz wird man letztendlich von der Selbstgründung der Moderne ablassen, wie auch von deren Ausgangsprämisse der Zurückweisung der Tradition, in der der Kontext, der Eklektizismus und die Rehabilitation des Traditionellen wiederhergestellt werden. Auf diesem Weg zwingt sich der Begriff des geniusloci als Unterstützung einer klaren und andersartigen Definition der Architektur auf, die sich in der ständigen Herausforderung unserer Existenz befindet. Dieser Artikel versucht, die theoretische Konsequenz um das Problem des Wohnens als Achse unseres Seins zu explizieren.

SchlüsselwörterModerne,Architektur,Wohnen,Raum,Existenz,genius loci,ChristianNorberg-Schulz

Astrit Salihu

L’odyssée du logementLes défis de l’architecture contemporaine

RésumeCet article porte essentiellement sur le problème du logement vu par la philosophie et l’architec-ture. À partir de ce problème, créé par une certaine façon d’imposer l’explication du logement à l’époque moderne, un grand débat est né au sein duquel le logement est repensé en tant que question pertinente pour les problèmes créés, et en même temps, en tant que manière directe pour lancer des défis aux possible alternatives qui visent à remédier au point mort entraîné par les visions et les idées de l’époque moderne. L’architecte norvégien Christian Norberg-Schulz, ins-piré par Martin Heidegger et Maurice Merleau-Ponty, est la figure principale de cette nouvelle manière de penser qui s’éloigne des schémas modernes. Norberg-Schulz tentera d’aboutir à une argumentation cohérente sur l’inséparabilité de l’espace et de l’existence, ou encore, sur la ra-cine existentielle de l’espace architectonique. L’hypothèse de cette thèse conteste l’indifférence et l’arbitraire des architectes modernes dont le travail se résume à fonder un projet architectonique, ne prenant pas en considération le segment fondamental de l’existence spatiale de l’homme. En approfondissant la problématique de l’espace existentiel et architectonique et en relevant le lien étroit entre eux, Norberg-Schulz développera un concept, qui sera néanmoins discuté : le concept de geniusloci. C’est à la suite de son approche qu’on évitera les principes de base réducteurs de l’époque moderne et de ses prémisses inexistantes qui rejettent la tradition au sein de laquelle va s’opérer un retour du contexte, de l’éclectisme et de la réhabilitation du traditionnel. Sur ce che-min, le concept de geniusloci s’impose comme un concept qui contribue de manière claire et dif-férente à définir une architecture, qui de manière continu, défie notre existence. Cet article tente d’expliquer la conséquence théorique du problème du logement, en tant qu’axe de notre être.

Mots-clésépoquemoderne,architecture,logement,espace,existence,genius loci,ChristianNorberg-Schulz

Odyssey of Dwelling - Srce

Documents

Transcript of Odyssey of Dwelling - Srce