Architecture

It is a fact that there is ethical criticism about art. Art critics, the general public and even artists point out moral flaws in artworks while evaluating them. Philosophers, however, have maintained a hot debate on the meaning of such criticism. This debate can be understood as a disagreement about the kind of relation between the artistic value of artworks and their alleged moral value. While some claim that moral value can contribute to artistic value (moralism), others claim that there (...) cannot be such a contribution (autonomism). Since at least some works of architecture are artworks, that debate also concerns architecture. A moderate moralist view claims that some works of architecture have moral flaws/merits that bear on their artistic evaluation. In an apparently promising version, the contention is that some moral flaws/merits are aesthetically relevant. In this paper I argue against such contention and defend an autonomist view. Following some taxonomy remarks I distinguish the views in the debate and present two points in favour of autonomism: its simplicity and not having the burden of proof. Then I discuss Carroll’s merited response argument for moralism and I argue that in its best interpretation either it begs the question against autonomism or it is compatible with it. I conclude with some possible objections that may help further investigations on the subject. (shrink)

Der Tagungsband versammelt Beiträge des 2. Forums Architekturwissenschaft zum Thema Architektur im Gebrauch, das vom 25. bis 27. November 2015 im Schader-Forum in Darmstadt stattfand. Die Beiträge nähern sich dem Thema grundlegend in zwei Perspektiven. Zum einen interessiert die lebensweltliche Verankerung von Architektur: die Gebrauchserfahrungen und die vielfältigen Weisen, in denen das Gebaute im Alltag jedes Menschen in Erscheinung tritt. Zum anderen werden die Vorstellungen vom Gebrauch in Prozessen des Planens und Bauens untersucht. Dabei treten unweigerlich auch Spannungsverhältnisse auf - (...) zwischen Planerinnen und Nutzern, aber auch zwischen unterschiedlichen Gebrauchsweisen. Sowohl in theoretischen Auseinandersetzungen zu einem Begriff von Gebrauch in der Architektur als auch in empirischen Studien zu einzelnen Bauten und Bautypen, zeitgeschichtlichen Gebrauchsphänomenen und Situationen des Alltags wird dem auf den Grund gegangen. (shrink)

[Against Method: Karel Kosik on Architecture and Urbanism] A critical analysis of the views of a prominent Czech philosopher who transitioned from humanist Marxism to Heideggerian conservatism. This philosophical development is also reflected in his occasional reflections on the built environment.

While the Vienna Circle had virtually no impact on the Czech-speaking philosophical community during the 1930s, one can find a curious meeting point in the field of theory of architecture. There is now a growing literature on Otto Neurath as a theorist of architecture and urbanism, who emphasized the social aspects of modern building and approached architecture from his idiosyncratic viewpoint of Marxism interpreted as a physicalistic social science. It is less well known that a young Czech architecture critic and (...) theorist, Karel Teige, cultivated strikingly similar views during the same period—from 1920s to 1930s—albeit without any knowledge of Neurath’s thought in particular, or for that matter the Vienna Circle in general. The chapter reveals similarities as well as differences between Neurath and Teige on Marxism, science and architecture, and the Bauhaus, as well as a discussion of the relations of both to the contemporaries, most importantly Adolf Loos, Josef Frank and Hannes Meyer. (shrink)

This article explores the relationship between the bodily presence of other humans in the lived urban world and the experience of everyday architecture. We suggest, from the perspectives of phenomenology and architecture, that being in the company of others changes the way the built environment appears to subjects, and that this enables us to perform simple daily tasks while still attending to the built environment (to a certain, relatively minimal degree). Our analysis shows that in mundane urban settings attending to (...) the environment involves a unique attentional mode, which does not rely on concentrating on, or appreciating the architectural objects, but rather on social attention and on the subject’s kinesthesis in relation to the built environment. (shrink)

LEGO tells about not just LEGO architecture but architecture generally: its objects, its aesthetic properties, and how people judge them. To illustrate how thinking about LEGO can help people with such matters, this chapter considers some scenarios. These scenarios illustrate two very different ways of thinking about architecture. On the one hand, people might think architectural objects (more commonly, "works of architecture"), like buildings, bridges, and aqueducts, have forms that stand on their own, and which thereby do not depend on (...) historical, environmental, or any other contexts. On the other hand, they might think that architectural objects are best understood (maybe only understood) if they have one or more kinds of contextual information. From a different angle, some might see formalism as a better fit with original LEGO world design than with real‐world architectural design. Proponents of formalism take note of what makes architectural objects distinctive. (shrink)

Architecture is apparently unlike the other plastic arts in that we tend to attribute to it, nearly universally, a social nature. But what, if anything, makes architecture intrinsically ‘social’? There are two leading candidate reasons that architecture is considered as a social art: (S1) the aim of architecture, as determined or realized by architects’ underlying intentions, is to design shelter—a social need, and (S2) the practice of architecture requires interpersonal relations of a social nature; hence as an art form it (...) is inherently a social process or activity. (shrink)

Philosophical ethicists have not yet fully explored, or even mapped out, the problems posed by architectural practice. While some have attempted such explorations, their accounts suffer assorted philosophical deficits, and generally miss the aim of reasoned moral analysis. I believe that the most fruitful attempts to think about such issues in philosophical terms—in lieu of an analytical architectural ethics—are found in the body of architectural law. There we may glimpse some promising philosophical considerations pertaining to such matters as intellectual property, (...) the judgement of others’ actions, and responsibilities to others. (shrink)

The German philosopher Martin Heidegger’s seminal essay “Building, Dwelling, Thinking”, published in 1954, is one of the texts which has had most influence on architectural thinking in the second half of 20th and early 21st century. What much of modern and postmodern architectural thinking extracts from Heidegger’s text and revolves around is the understanding of building and dwelling as more or less abstract forms of being without taking into account the people inhabiting space. In these traditions little has been said (...) about what the Danish architect Jørn Utzon adds to the term “being” and announces as the most important aspect of architecture: Well-being understood as human well-being. The present paper means to re-interpret Heidegger’s text critically in order to rethink dwelling and building within an architectural context, presenting Jørn Utzon’s work and thinking as a lifelong search for the architecture of well-being. (shrink)

This paper argues that while Heidegger showed the importance of architecture in altering people's modes of being to avoid global ecological destruction, the work of Christopher Alexander offered a far more practical orientation to deal with this problem.

How the interpretation of architecture differs from that of other artworks.

A discussion of the role of metaphor and reinterpretation in extending architectural vocabularies.

The second part on the discussion of communal self discernment in seeking goals and values for making places and architectural planning.

First part of a discussion about what kind of guidelines we can find in our group or cultural identity for our place making and architectural planning.

A critical examination of the different kinds of irony relevant to architecture, especially romantic and postmodern irony, and a suggestion for a less self-sure haughty kind of irony.

A discussion of the problem of creating unified places in a pluralistic multicultural society.

A discussion of "postmodern" architecture in the sense in which the term was used in the late 1980s, namely, the introduction of historical substantive content and reference into architecture, disrupting the supposedly ahistorical purity of modernist architecture. Argues that postmodern use of history is really another version of the modern distance from history.

discussion of the extent to which architects can float about history and the inevitable finitude of architectural possibilities from any historical standpoint.

Discussions of place and whom need to take more account of the multiplicity of centers in the modern city/suburban environment.

Kolb discusses postmodern architectural styles and theories within the context of philosophical ideas about modernism and postmodernism. He focuses on what it means to dwell in a world and within a history and to act from or against a tradition.

Book review: The Aesthetics of Architecture By: Roger Scruton Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013. Reviewed by Hilde Heynen.

As the general concern of this journal issue is the relevance of Wittgenstein’s thinking for the philosophy of architecture, I will take the task quite literally. Accordingly, the aim of my paper is to explore whether there is evidence for systematic ideas about architecture in Wittgenstein. Reading Culture and Value, it may well seem as if architecture ranked among the subjects Wittgenstein did think about—at least from time to time. I will provide some context concerning the status of these remarks—as (...) well as that of some others not included in Culture and Value—in Wittgenstein’s work. (shrink)

Ludwig Wittgenstein was deeply embedded in Viennese architectural Modernism, culturally as well as personally. His assimilation in recent historiography to existing trends within the local architectural movement—namely Loos—are based on aesthetic and intellectual simplifications. The simplifications eclipse the distinctive contribution Wittgenstein’s Palais Stonborough makes to architecture, to Viennese Modernism, and perhaps to philosophy. The present paper seeks to rectify this constellation by re-situating Wittgenstein as an architect in his own right by re-sensitizing us to the idiosyncrasy of Wittgenstein’s architecture.

The post-modernist approach to architecture often presents tradition as a problem of image. Postmodernism prioritizes the display of stylized images of historic buildings in order to prompt one to deal primarily with the visual appeal of the historic forms rather than the experience of the buildings.

This paper seeks to present a kind of skeptical, and, in an indirect way, Wittgensteinian perspective upon purpose and meaning in architecture. The argument presented here revolves around the two notions that, first, there are different categories, which we have available for making architecture seem intelligible to us, and, second, that there are distinct historical discourses in which architecture has been made intelligible in specific ways.

The term "pastiche" originally means a "pasty" or "pie" dish containing several different ingredients. It has come to be used synonymously with a variety of terms whose meanings are rarely fixed with clarity: parody, montage, quotation, allusion, irony, burlesque, travesty, and plagiarism. Al;though some definitions of pastiche strive to remain neutral, others have taken on a pejorative sense. Still others are more positive, especially within the realms of twentieth-century postmodern art and architecture.

In this essay Noël Carroll explores the question of whether a moral defect in a work of architectural art can ever also count as an aesthetic /artistic defect. Adopting the stance of a moderate moralist and mobilizing what has been called the “uptake argument,” he argues against the moderate autonomist that sometimes a moral defect in an architectural artwork can also be an aesthetic/artistic defect.