patrik

schu
mach
er
theories
The Architecture of Movement
Patrik Schumacher 1996
Published n: ARCH+ 134/135, Wohnen zur Disposition,
Dezember 1996 German: Architektur der Bewegung
"To see the system of movement as a key to space remains
an exception in architecture. n other areas, e.g. dance, such
ideas have been conceived."(1)
1. The quest for the space of movement as the quest for an
Other Space
Can there be a theory or a conception of space beyond the
"arch-architectural" space of modular control?
s there an alternative tradition, an alternative paradigm of
space or at least the theoretical possibility of defining space
through movement alone, without an independent and prior
system of reference? How do design a system of circulation
without presupposing points to be connected? A system of
connection that defines its points of destiny from within itself? The
circulation-system runs in circles and turns into its opposite, a
dance: a movement without motivation, ultimately to be
understood as the escape from the architectonic system. How
does the dance define itself and its space without cartesian grid?
Not without fundamentally subverting the whole notion of
definition, of rationality and objectivity as resting on regularity and
reproducability. The "definition" of space through movement
becomes the solipsistic fiat of gratitious subjectivity. Per definition
such escapist "architecture" must remain exceptional. This
escape from Architecture - to be traced historically - becomes a
revolt against architecture and attains a philosophical as well as
political dimension, in as much architecture as "the system of
systems"(2) remains the original reference of any notion of
structure and order. (Here emerges the problematic of a
selfconcious deconstructivism.(3))
The idea of an "architecture of movement" depends upon an
architecture of (modular) order being presupposed logically as
well as historically.
Logical: a-rythmic, creative movement is only identifiable
through its negative definition as de-viation from the
algorythmically compartmentalized space. The perception of
space becomes "subjective" as deviation from the objective order
of space. Time becomes "subjective" as deformation of the
objective relations established by mechanically produced time:
the hand traverses the modular space of the clock's face.
Freedom/subjectivity registers and thinks itself against the
framework of an institutionalising "architecture". The technology of
architecture gives birth to such concepts. ("Architecture" sigifies
not any kind of built something, but first of all a formal system,
postulating a structure as an ordered whole conceived and
errected in reference to such system.)
Historical:
The space of movement and experience of the picturesque
English landscape garden emerges in the 18th Century as the
artificial reconstruction of the natural. t offers itself as the
unknown and confronts us with the unforeseen. t does this
playfully and comfortably, embedded in the familiar and
transparent order of architecture that has already conqered the
unknown alien. More existential than playful seems Baudelaire's
flaneur who's dis-tracted and desire-driven movement dis-figures
the architectural space of the 19th Century city. Guy Debor's
psychogeographical "derive" continues this dis-membering anti-
tradition in the 20th Century: The disoriented drifting within the
body of the city has (anti-)method as it expects unexpected
spaces of encounter, potentially revolutionary "situations" that re-
open the possibility of the "Other". Debor's Situationism is Anti-
CAM, Anti-planning, Anti-architecture, an architecture of
movement. All those architectures of movement are
comprehensible only as atempts to suspend the territorialized
architectural space. This counter-movement is always also part of
a political movement, because the order of architecture is always
also a political order. This regards also the movement of the
English landscape garden, that was part of an aesthetic revolution
carried forward by the ascending bourgeoisie of the 18th Century.
The landscape garden validated and took part in the unrestrained
usurpation of space by early industrial capital. Considering
parallel developements in France, Manfredo Tafuri (4) identifies in
Laugier's naturalizing architectural theory the urban ideology of
capitalism, which aetheticizes as vital "uproar and tumult" the
dynamism of urban growth that can no longer be contained within
the formal system of baroque planning.
n the case of Debor the political dimension is absolutely
selfconscious and ecxplicite, and his movement becomes part of
the movement towards 1968. The same applies to the philosophy
of Deleuze and Guattari (5) that is the basis for the recent
american architectural debate around the notion of folding: a
political critique as critique of a rigid, hierarchical and
"territorializing" order is put forward in the form of a quasi-
geometry. Deleuze and Guattari are scetching open, flexible and
fluid anti-architectures, permanently moving in and out of shifting
networks of relation. The space of the nomades - a "smooth
space" defined in opposition to modular "striated space" - is the
paradigmatic metaphor.
Here, within the ambit of 1968, one finds as well the political
and philosophical origin of Deconstructivism, propably the the
most extreme and selfconscious anti-architecture of movement in
the 20th Century. But before deconstructivism makes sense, a
long historical process of construction has to be presupposed.
2. The Production of Space as Elimination of the Other
Architecture is geo-metry, the founding technique of man's
appropriation of space. Following Mark Cousins, the history of
mankind, in relation to space, might be described as a successive
internalization, in real as well as in conceptual terms, an
integration of the surrounding into the interior of the city. Athens
still had an edge-condition, whereby it met the unknown and
uncontrolled Other. Greek cosmology can still ask questions
concerning the end of the world. The whole middle ages exist
within aristotelian cosmology, the city remains a closed circle,
departure from it being adventure, and the map stops at the white
terra incognita.
Architecture's formal systems start to conquer the landscape
during the Renaissance. The italien villa emerged as the castello
could shed its fortifications and the control over the hinterland
was completed and asserted by way of extending architecture's
geometry - the order of the city - all the way to the horizon, thus
placing all of nature under its spell. This finds its pendent in the
representation of space through perspective construction which,
according to Alberti, starts with the gridded horizontal plane, thus
domesticating everything in advance. Everything that might
happen to occupy space is always already safely positioned. The
medieval realms are trancended. City, landscape and villa are
unified into the "integrazione scenica". Venice's reclaimation of
the Veneto in 16th century was the politico-economic agenda
setting the task for the Palladian Villa. The villa transposes the
urban architectural order into the hinterland, formally sizeing upon
the colonizing grid imposed under the centuriatio system that
devided the land relentlessly into squares of 625sqm. The Villa
was placed at major crossing points within this system formally
enhancing the intersecting axes. Palladio recommends to raise
the axial streets against the fields and to line them with a regular
rythm of trees, while the piano nobile was again raised above the
intersection. This was the first precise articulation of a
comprehensive modular and hierarchical order. Here emerges the
space of the controlling perspective, which found its historical
peak in the service of 17th century French Absolutism, as the land
was built into a state.
(This historical process of appropriation is traced by Clemens
Steenbergen and Wouter Reh's "Architecture and Landscape"(6),
a brilliant study attentive to the various formal strategies by which
the ever-resistant geo-morphology is forced under architecture's
rule.)
3. First Dance: Toying with the tamed Other
18th Century England: The period in which Palladianism and
its dialectic extension - the english landscape garden - is
proliferating in England is the period when the land is finally
brought under the total jurisdiction of private property and made
accessable through the comprehensive transport network of
roads and canals. This process of territorialization leaves no
space for ambiguity. All formerly common land is turned into
private property according to parliamentary act regulating this so
called "enclosure". This process of appropriation is accompanied
by a rationalization of the agricultural geometry. The resulting
1/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
chessboard pattern was marked by hedges and drywalls. The
canals imposed a horizontal datum: an architecture of dykes,
tunnels and aqueducts defined the hilly topography as de-viation.
The roads were straightened and their surface hardened.
Signposts and milestones were introduced, effectively subsuming
space and movement under the modular order of the map.
Manufacturing industries, accompanied by new settlements,
spread out into the country, utilizing the water-energy available
along the rivers. A whole new class of country nobility (with
bought titles) settled on country estates crowned by Palladian
Villas. This massive urban colonization of the countryside was the
framing context of the emerging landscape gardens, those
artificial zones of nature's irregularity and freedom, playful
escapes from the architectonic system. The picturesque garden
was a labyrinthine, mythically charged space, without visual
boundaries, impenetrable by the controlling gaze, only to be
revealed through movement. But this movement was no longer
measured by milestones and signposts, it followed another
drama, allowing for surprise and even sublimated horror. Such
sublimated experience of the danger of untamed nature was
theorized in Burke's 'Philosophical nquiry into the Origins of our
deas of the Sublime and the Beautiful' from 1756, postulating a
new aesthetic category.
f the Sublime and the Picturesque are signalling moments of
relief, moments of freedom from and a reaction to Architecture,
they also pave the way for an urban developement which is no
longer fully controllable by the (baroque) architectural formalism.
4. Modern Modularity
One might argue (with Tafuri) that the sublime as aesthetic
value became a means by which the emerging bourgeoisie could
sublimate and aesthetizise its chaotic industrial urbanization,
unbearable to a classical sensibility.
n this respect one might then interpret Modern Urbanism as
a late atempt to finally bring the chaotic capitalist urban landscape
into the domain of architecture. The urban models of Tony
Garnier, LeCorbusier, Frank Lloyd Wright, Ernst May, Ludwig
Hilbersheimer etc., all these are based on the classical geometric
canons of modularity, conceived as tabula rasa structure. The
more complex and open spatialities emerging through
suprematism, futurism, cubism, and neoplasticism are assimilated
into (anti-)architectural spatial experiments on the scale of the
villa only. This new sensibilty and concept of space, which
Sigfried Gideon (7) termed "space-time", did involve subjectivity
and movement, whereby the identity of a spatial unit (a "room")
would shift with the respective position of the moving subject. The
spatial units - or rather no longer units - would enter into
successive alignments, dissolving the possibility of unitary identity
implied by the notion of the room or module.
Giedion discovers within the "Parkways" around New York an
architecture of movement on an urban scale. "The fundamental
law of the parkway: there must be unobstructed feedom of
movement."(8) Because the highways neither follow straight lines
nor any algorythm, but are rather lead by the natural topography,
they convey to Giedion the illusion of a totally free movement: "a
feeling like nothing else so much as sliding swiftly on skis through
untouched snow."(9)
Despite Giedion's claim that "space-time" represents the
essence of the modern epoque it remained marginal within overall
20th Century construction, which, based on the fordist mode of
production, was bound to be relentlessly modular. The history of
20th Century urbanism between 1920 and 1980 was following the
paradigm of the modular "Siedlung", being reproduced on an
everextending scale throughout this period.
5. Movement within the module
Within and against this modular mass production LeCorbusier
developes the seemingly unproblematic idea of an architecture of
movement, best exemplified by his classic icon of modernity: the
villa Savoye, one of the few built experiments in modern "space-
time". Within his Oevre Complete, edited by LeCorbusier himself,
the photographic sequence through the interior of the villa is
inconspicuously subtitled "promenade architecturale". f the thus
suggested analogy to promenading through a park, landscape, or
urban environment is taken serious, one faces an uncanny
(unhomely) paradox: The inhabitant of such an environment
would have to be conceived as a flaneur, a stranger in his own
house. n his own house, where he once knew himself safely kept
and reassured of his identity, the scene should constantly vary,
offering change, surprise and the unknown, re-emerging over and
again as the unfamiliar and never becoming his home.
A similar spirit haunts the Villas of Adolph Loos: Spatial
sequences merging across the shifting levels prevent fixed
identities to take root anywhere. Communism would move
through such spaces, if the exterior would not have been secured
architecturally as a discrete, hermetic unit. The same is true for
LeCorbusier's Villa, who's landscape-like quality is constricted into
a cartesian envelope, thus clearly and objectively defined as
object and property. Only within the four walls does spontaneous
movement extrude its space from the given, inexhaustably
ambiguous spatial substance.
6. Movement beyond the module: Two limit cases
Such a conception of space as generated by spontaneus
movement entails an understanding of Being and Dwelling at its
point of disappearance. Architecture can only approximate or
simulate its implied disappearance. The work of Zaha Hadid and
of Berkel&Bos might be interpreted as such an anti-Architecture.
Particulary shall reference two residential projects, where the
question of Being (and being at home) is most radically
challenged.
Ben van Berkels multi-storey housing project for Borneo-
Sparenberg radicalizes the dissolution of the stable, modular
framework of orientation that would locate one's home within the
structure. Ten maisonette units - three-dimensionally complex
figures - are entangled into one another, thus constituting a
rectelinear mass. Within this tangle the single unit looses its
identity and integrety. The dweller is no longer able to overlook
where his property starts and ends. He disappears into an
inconceivable burrow-geometry. The public outside space
penetrates and "erodes" the block. The three-dimensional jigsaw
conjures a continuous labyrinth of interstitial spaces, that, while
operating as access and lighting space, allows for a strange
"promenade architecturale". A potentially liberating space, that
comes as surprise within a multy-storey building, a type that has
hithertho been the paradigm of modularity.
Zaha Hadid's design (1991) of a villa for the Hague ("Spiral in
the box") proceeds from what seems at first to be a purely formal
contradiction or contrast: between a violently dynamic interior and
a strictly modular exterior. The envelope is prefigured by the
setback rules and rigidly positioned within the grid of Koolhaas'
masterplan. This given volume is conceived as indivisible
continuum. Any form of devision into levels or cells is suspended.
The dichotomous distinction between programme areas and
circulation areas is erased. Everything seems to be shot through
with movement. This dynamic thrust seems caught and fixed
within the given cubic grid, yet it remains unsettling in as much as
the cube itself is undermined and distorted by the thrust of the
"movement".
The internal anti-geometry touches, twists, and cuts the
architectural envelope. The facades seem to follow the spiralling
drift as they transform along a sequence from opaque,
translucent, to transparent.
The spiral is the means by which the whole three-dimensional
field of the volume remains open and continuous. t is not to be
understood as geometric figure. t does not follow any geometric
rule but bends and twists out of pure "willfullnes". Endless design
variations bear witness to the indeterminacy of the morphology,
within limiting parameters like maximum incline, smoothness of
curves etc. Exact geometrical determination - a constant or
algorythmically controlled radius - is excluded, like anything that
would lead to uniformity. Everywhere variations within the field are
offered as local (and temporary) possibilities of identification,
without ever implying an unambiguous territorialization of the
space. A dynamic of inhabitation is thus suggested that
radicalizes Adolph Loos' "Raumplan" and further enhances the
fluidity of the relational play.
This "topography" of movement deterritorializes - potentially -
the hierarchical structure of the family as well as the related
rigidity of the functional zoning of the house. The creative play -
the (anti-)principle of the "soft" free-form furniture of the sixties - is
here swollowing the whole house. The inescapable identification
and labelling of the standart territories like "living room", "master
bedroom" etc. is always possible and can even utilize certain
valences or latencies offered within the free-form morphology.
2/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Nevertheless, such labels remain subject to the destabilizing
forces of movement and subjectivity. Those inscriptions mutate
into absurd stipulations. The spiral-house remains an unhomely
bunble of open questions, born from willfullness, lust and an urge
for freedom. This overstretched architecture tears at a brittle
social edifice and sets it into motion.
References:
1. ARCH+, Nr. 131, "nformation der Architektur", p.14,
Joachim Krause interviewd by ARCH+,
2. Denis Hollier, "Against Architecture", M..T. Press, 1989, S.
33
3. Mark Wigley, "The Architecture of Deconstruction", M..T.
Press, 1993
4. Manfredo Tafuri, "Architecture and Utopia", M..T. Press,
1976
5. Gilles Deleuze, Felix Guattari, "Mille Plateaux", Les
Editions de Minuit, Paris, 1980
6. Clemens Steenbergen, Wouter Reh, "Architecture and
Landscape", Prestel 1996
7. Sigfried Giedion, "Space, Time and Architecture", Harvard
University Press, 1941, Fifth Edition 1967
8. ebenda S. 824
9. ebenda S.825
Soja 's "Postmodern Geographies"
- a political reading
Patrik Schumacher 1996
Lecture delivered at Architectural Association, London
A "political reading" generally assumes that the possible
meanings of theory in the "humanities" ultimately reside in the
political consequences that are drawn or might be drawn from
such theorizing. The meaning of theory fulfills and reveals itself in
the practise it directs. Soja himself conceives his critical theory as
a form of political writing, "a source of emancipatory insight and
practical political consciousness."(p.1)
Soja's main thesis is that geography can contribute to the
emancipatory political project as much as history, which has
supposedly been unduly priviledged over the last hundred years.
This neglect of geography (and its subject matter space)
concerns not only the established social sciences, but particulary
the Marxist tradition to which Soja wants to contribute: Soja's
claim is that 'Marxist Historical Materialism' has to become
"historico-geographical materialism"(p.7).
The first 156 pages (chapters 1-6) of Postmodern
Geographies are telling the story of this neglect and the dawning
of a reassertion of space, most prominantly in the writings of
Lefebvre, Foucault and recently David Harvey. n chapter 5 Soja
is trying to ground his argument in "ontology", claiming an
"existential spatiality of being".(p.131) But pragmatist
epistemology precludes the question wether "space matters" to
be established in the abstract. The political relevance and
emancipatory potential of geography remains a more or less
plausible working hypothesis until substantiated by the
elaboration of a concrete political geography. The arguments of
these first 6 chapters thus remain abstract claims that need to be
tested by a political reading of the last three essays (chapters)
which - in Soja's own words - "atempt to give greater empirical
and interpretive substance to these arguments."(p.7)
Capter 7 - "The historical geography of Urban and Regional
Restructuring" - identifies the political task for a critical socio-
spatial science as "making theoretical and practical sense of the
contemporary restructuring of capitalist spatiality". (p159)
Geographically uneven developement, indeed a crucial fact to
be tackeled by any emancipatory politics, is recognized by Soja
as central to his case for the political relevance of space. For Soja
"geographically uneven developement, ... reproduced at multiple
scales, is inherent to the concretization of capitalist social
relations ... both as medium/presupposition and as
outcome/embodiment."(p163) More than just being a projection of
class-relations on to virgin space, a particular spatiality
(territorialization) is sized upon, as indispensible and effective
instrument of class-forcement (my words).
Soja sees contemporary restructuring (like all previous shifts
within the socio-economic order) as being rooted in crisis - this
time in the urban insurrections of the sixties and the world
economic recession of the early seventies.
"Capitalism's 'inner contradictions'" constitute explicitely the
"enduring central theme"(p.158) of Soja's analysis. Soja describes
"spatialization" as an "ideological process associated with the
developement and survival of capitalism"(p.158) Capitalist
restructuring and (re-)spatialization are interpreted from an
implied if not explicite revolutionary perspective as fundamentally
defensive mechanisms warding off revolution (my words), or at
least as mechanisms of social containment, disciplinary control
and dissipation of class-struggle. The analysis intends to reveal
how the spatial organization of society is implicated in the survival
of capitalism, i.e. in the reproduction of class-society. Soja is
talking about the developement and survival of capitalism, but
what does not come out explicitely enough is that this process is
indeed double edged, that developement and survival are - from a
marxist point of view - increasingly in contradiction with each
other, that the survival of class-society has to be continually re-
organized according to progressively developing technologies of
production, which in turn are fettered and incarcerated by
repressive class-relations. Spatiality and spatial restructuring
participates on both sides in this double-edged and contradictory
process: it establishes the integral spatiality of the next stage of
the developement of the forces of production, yet overdetermined
and distorted by the concerns of capitalist class rule. n Soja this
contradiction remains hidden in mere juxtaposition (developement
and survival), allowing for a reading of spatial organization purely
as an instrument of repressive class-control. (Marx's dictum that
all history is the history of class-struggle does not imply that
history is nothing but the history of class-struggle.)
Before going into the specifics of contemporary postfordist
restructuring and the concurrent postmodern geographies, Soja
sketches a history of previous periods of restructuring. He is
adapting a well-established marxist periodization by shifting the
focus of analysis towards the respective spatiality. Historical
Materialism becomes "historico-geographical materialism". (The
stratification of the time-continuum into distinguished epoques
remains defined on the basis of the regulationist-marxist notion of
'regime of accumulation' as a subdevision of Marx's notion of
'modes of production' rather than 'regimes or modes of
spatialization' - my words.)
Soja starts with freely competitive capitalism, being spatially
organized along a hierarchical subnational regional devision of
labour between industrialized territories and subsidiary agrarian
regions, "internal colonies" exploited as reservoirs of cheap
labour. He identifies in 19th Century regionalisms the spatially
defined political resistance against this imposed and hierarchical
spatial devision of labour, resonating also in the anti-state and
decentralist principles of anarchism, posing the most radical
challenge to capitalism in this period.
The primary source of exploitation and with it the arena of
struggle shifts in the phase of corporate monopoly capital and
imperialism. "Underdevelopement (in colonial and semi-colonial
territories) became more important to the survival of capitalism
than subnational regional differentiation."(p.165) "The old city-
countryside relationship became ... a global structure of capitalist
core and periphery"(p.165) "Within the core-nation "the overall
intensity of regional inequalities was significantly reduced."(p.166)
and one should add here that the labour-movement within the
imperialist heartlands was effectively ameliorated and even
coopted into the first imperialist world war and the knife-edge
survival of capitalism immediatly after the war, while the
communist parties (which emergred from the disintegration of the
international labour movement as splinters of the dominant
socialist parties) stressed the international character of the
revolutionary project, proclaiming the absolute necessity of
seeking active solidarity with the oppressed colonial people and
starting crucial organisational links across the continents. 20th
century Marxism has identified imperialism - effectively a devide
and rule strategy towards the international proletariat - as the
main mechanism of capitalist survival. And this fundamental
mechanism fundamentally involves territoriality, that is a spatially
defined devision of the working class. Space becomes an
indispensible instrument of class-enforcement. But then again:
3/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
The international devision of labour in the sense of an
international integration of production is not reducable to the
survival of capitalism. The ports, railways, telegraphs ect. are as
much part of early 20thCentury spatiality as border-enforcement,
colonial ghettoization and spatial regimes of apartheid.
The postwar regime of state-managed (fordist) capitalism did
not suspend imperialism (neo-colonialism), but went much further
in smoothing out internal contradictions through state-intervention
and planning. Soja relates the particular spatialization of this era
of urban planning - the forceful decentralization enacted in the
British New Town Programme, the similar French programme and
taly's re-distributive regional welfare planning - to regional unrest
and regional political movements. But as Soja points out, these
atempts to balance regional inequalities were always halfhearted
and remained more promise than reality. This system of state-
managed fordist capitalism suffers political and economic crisis in
1968 and 1973-75 respectively. Here lie the seeds of the current
restructuring towards Postfordism.
Before going into a detailed account of Postfordism, Soja has
a second take on the history of the socio-spatial dialectic, this
time more concerned with the structure of the (american) city
rather than the macro-scale overall spatiality of the economy.
Again the story focusses on the history of class-struggle (my
words).
This time he starts with the mercantile city which suffered
crisis because the spatial proximity of wealth and poverty became
a source of social unrest. Soja quotes David Gordon: "Because
the commercial city retained the precapitalist transparencies of
immediate, intimate, and integrated social relationships,
commercial capitalist profits could not be masked. The quest for
such a disguise ... played a central role in prompting a turn to a
new and ultimately more opaque mode of capital
accumulation."(p.176)
Soja follows on describing the next phase of the competitive
industrial city: "new kinds of cities and hierarchical city-systems
added to the growing traditional functions of social control,
commercial accumulation, and political administration ... the
agglomeration of industrial production."(p.177) The shift from
water-energy to the steam-engine allowed for this urban
concentration of industry opening the "wellspring of agglomeration
economies" (p.177). "The efficient geographical centralization of
factories and working-class communities ... seemed to be
breeding a strengthened working-class consciousness and
militancy."(p.179) Concentric zoning is interpreted as the urbanist
fix: "The zonation was largely a matter of class, as the
antagonistic social structure of competitive industrial capitalism
became spatialized in segregated and socially homogenous
urban compartments and enclosures (p.177) ... a hidden
instrumentality ... a disciplinary spatialization designed not by
some conspiracy of capitalist architects but artfully designed
nonetheless."(p. 178) Here the contradictory dialectic of
technological progress and rearguard social containment comes
out clearly, although not explicitly reflected thus by Soja.
But the inner-city zoning was insufficient in controlling the
workers. n the Corporate-Monopoly Capitalist City ... "the
separation of management and production functions reorganized
the spatial devision of labour in capitalist urbanization."(p.179) A
policed central business district (corporate headquarters, financial
and government institutions) was served by rings of working class
and ethnic enclaves, industry moved into satelite centres and the
white collar manegerial class joint the bourgeoisie in a surge of
suburbanisation. "This fragmented, policentric ... urban
regionalization assisted industrial capital in escaping from
agglomerated working class militancy. Employers could more
easily move away from organized union pressures, the workforce
became more segmented and residentially segregated."(p.180)
This process was facilitated by a mass-rail transit system and
increasingly also by the emerging auto-mobile system, L.A. taking
the lead from the very beginning.
This tendency was substantially expanded in the following
State-Managed Urban System. "Suburbanization was markedly
accelerated after the Second World War. With substantial state
support and encouragement, sizable portions of working class,
blue as well as white collar, settled into suburban tracts and
privatized enclosures ... accompanied by an even greater
fragmentation of political jurisdictions."(p.181) One might add
here that this localized planning jurisdiction facilitated the
segregative character of the respective settlements by way of
setting indirect income thresholds via the stipulation of minimum
sizes of building sites.
Concerning the contemporary situation, i.e. here the late
eighties, Soja asserts that we are in the middle of an unresolved
process of restructuring. "A new upswing ... has not yet
begun."(p.183) Soja also warns us that "the recovery of capitalism
through restructuring is not mechanical or guarantied." (p.183)
However, "the contemporary period must be seen as another
crisis-generated attempt by capitalism to restore the key
conditions for its survival: ... Central to the resurrection of
expansive superprofits is, as usual, the institution of invigorated
means of labour discipline and social control." (p.184) This
formulation gives opportunity to elaborate once more on the
dialectic of economic developement and capitalist survival. Not
only is survival in contradiction with developement as its fetter - if
judged against a potential developement beyond class-society -
but survival itself is double-edged as it not only has to ward off
revolution, but has the delicate and dangerous task to organize
and discipline a production- and labour-process that remains
alienating and breeds resistance under the given conditions of
unequality and disempowerment. Capital under todays increasing
competitive pressure remains forced to develope the forces of
production, continually re-coopting labour into a restructured
process, while simultanly, under the spell of deregulated profit-
maximization, having to betray labour over its participation in the
benefits of increased productivity, thus turning what was more like
co-optation in the postwar regime into coercion and aggressive
exploitation now, at least for the growing bottom of a re-
differentiated hierarchy of labour.
Postfordism emerges from the mutually enhancing but also
contradictory interaction of factors and processes. Soja's mere list
of postfordist phenomena (pp.185,186) does not atempt to
analyse the dialectic tangle of positive and negative feedback
mechanisms and he fails to make the politically crucial distinction
of aspects that pertain to productive progress from those that
pertain to the intensification of exploitation, class-struggle and
class-control. The inability to distinguish Post-fordism as a new
paragigm of production attaining new levels of productivity from
the simultaneous neo-liberal offensive that utilizses (and the
competing capitals force each other to utilize) the unsettled
relations of production for a decisive shift in the underlying class-
relations, this inability leads the political struggle down the road of
regressive utopia.
n my analysis the three main progressive and productive
factors of Postfordist restructuring are the following:
1. globalization, i.e. a new level of international integration of
production
2. flexible specialization - made possible by the computer-
revolution
3. the organizational revolution - i.e. the relative de-
hierarchization and de- beaurocratization of work.
Those features would need to be recuperated within an
emancipatory politics. Under current capitalism these features are
distorted, compromised and borne out to the disadvantage of the
majority of the world population.
1. Globalization takes the form of a re-emergence of
interimperialist rivalries, militarism, enforced austerity
programmes, the break up of national welfare compromises
between capital and labour, resulting in a fierce downward
competition of labour-costs, i.e. of the majority's standart of living.
Also overall productivity suffers as long as the world allocation of
material and labour resources remains driven by an irrational ,
militarily guaranteed , and thus ultimately very costly "cheapness"
of labour, which allows the squandering of millions of potentially
much more productive lifes.
2. The new flexibility and potential richness of life-work is
borne out and experienced by labour as existential insecurity. On
the product side the new economies of scope are abused for
stratification and status consumption rather than non-exclusive
diversity. They become barriers rather than means of social
communication.
3. The rationale of discursive cooperation rather than
command type of work-organization, which is forced upon the
capitalist corporation by the new degree of complexity and
4/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
flexibility of the total production process within which it has to
function, remains nevertheless highly compromised and limited by
the reality of class-society with its inherent hierarchy and irrational
hingeing of authority upon property.
So much for Postfordism's promise and its neo-liberal reality.
For its Geography should hand back to Soja. Soja's exploration
of postmodern urbanization is focussing on Los Angeles'
Metropolitan region. Soja justfies this focus via the supposed
paradigmatic character of L.A.'s developement. n as much as
L.A. is one of the leading "superprofitable growth poles" it is well
chosen according to marxist principles of materialism, finding in
superproductivity (which under ideal capitalism translates into
superprofit) as the incontestable criterion for identifying the future
within the presence. From a world system perspective - i.e.
Marxism at its most concrete level of analysis - such isolated
study remains necessarily abstract.
But Soja's analysis of L.A. seems to suggest that the L.A.
Metropolitan Region is like a "mesocosm" that reproduces within
its own spatiality the complexity and contradiction of the global
economy. "Seemingly paradoxical but functionally interdependent
juxtapositions are the epitomizing features of contemporary Los
Angeles. ... One can find in Los Angeles not only the high
technology industrial complexes of the Silicon Valley and the
erratic sunbelt economy of Houston, but also the far-reaching
industrial decline and bankrupt urban neighbourhoods of rust-
belted Detroit or Cleveland. There is a Boston in Los Angeles, a
lower Manhattan and a South Bronx, a Sao Paulo and a
Singapore."
With this internalization of the peripherie comes the largest
homeless population, soaring rates of violent crime and the
largest prison population within the US. The militarization of the
world economy translates here into the rule of a militarized LAPD.
(The anti-racist explosion of 1992 testifies to this.) The
simulteneity of growth and decline, locating the leading high tech
industrial sectors next to the abandoned industrial wastelands,
and a growing low-wage economy of industrial sweatshops,
posits an uphill battle for social control and calls to task the
friction of distance of spread city L.A. (my words). Yet the
postmodern geography of L.A. differs from the postwar broad-
acre-anti-city type suburbanization. Orange County is described
as "an amorphous regional complex that confounds traditional
definitions of both city and suburb."(p.212) The postfordist
landscape integrates a loose and open network of research,
production and service systems, interspersed with leisure
environments and alternating expensive residential
developements with enclaves of cheap and manipulable labour.
The interpenetration of different activities succeeds even despite
the problems of social control and the cost of policing caused by
the engendered proximity of increasingly polarized incomes. One
might speculate about the spatial and architectural possibilities
and productive synergies to be released beyond the need for
spatial policing.
Another marked spatial phenomenon has been superimposed
on the polycentral spatiality of the L.A. postfordist landscape: the
decisive re-centralization of corporate headquarters within the
downtown core, reversing the trend of the fordist era. This revival
of the central business district and selective gentrification of the
inner city, and which one might add was the material basis for the
boom of Postmodern architecture, reflects the postfordist
organisational shift in corporate structure and business
organisation. Larger but looser and diversivied conglomerates, in
permanent negotiation with banks, surrounded by flexible clusters
of consultancy and service firms, establishing project-based
networks and alliances to flexibly adapt to a far more volatile and
globalized market etc., meant a shift in the requirement for
business-communication and a highly mobile manegerial
workforce of mainly single professionals that would find in the re-
invented downtown its appropriate work-environment, cultural and
consumption needs (my elaboration). Soja is linking this
downtown renaissance also to the "increasing internationalization
of the local economy. "(p.215) Citadel L.A. has become one of the
major control centres of the world economy, a place from which
US multinationals reach out and where foreign capital moves in.
More than half the prime downtown properties are foreign owned
and as much as 90% of recent multistorey building construction
was financed by foreign investment. This hub of business-
communication is the milieu where new architectural types, like
Portman's big Bonaventura, mushroomed on fertile ground. "The
Bonaventure Hotel, an amazingly storeyed architectural symbol of
the splintered labyrinth that stretches sixty miles around it. ... The
Bonaventure has become a concentrated representation of the
restructured spatiality of the late capitalist city: ... seemingly open
in presenting itself to view but constantly pressing to enclose, to
compartmentalize, to circumscribe, to incarcerate ... everything
imaginable appears to be available in this micro-urb but real
places are difficult to find ... its spaces confuse effective cognitive
mapping ... and encourage submission instead ... entrance is
encouraged at many different levels ... once inside however it
becomes daunting to get out again."(p.244)
Soja's maps chart the marked spatial displacement of
industrial activity into the hinterland. The new postfordist growth
sectors are decidedly not taking up the space left behind by the
plant closures that mark the end of Fordism. The new
developements seemed paradoxically repelled rather than
attracted by the dense infrastructure and labour-supply left
behind. The irrational capitalist rationale was dicounting
infrastructure and workers for the possibilty to exploit virgin land
and virgin, that is non-unionized labour. Membership of the
industrial labour unions went into deep decline. Soja speaks of a
selective occupational recycling, polarising the labour market by
wage differentials. "The middle segment of skilled, unionized, and
well paid blue-collar workers has been shrinking, with a small
number of its expelled labourers floating up to an expanded white
collar technocracy but a much larger proportion perlocating
downward into a relatively lower skilled and lower-wage reservoir
of production and service workers, swollen by massive
immigration and part-time and female employees."(p.207) Soja
cites the garment industry as an example for such a sweat-shop
industry which "tends to be highly labour-intensive, difficult to
mechanize, and organized around small shops to adapt more
quickly to rapidly changing fashion trends. ... Unionization rates
are low and infringements of minimum wages, overtime, child
labour and occupational safety laws are endemic."(p.207) One
should add here that the life-squandering exploitation of such
cheap labour, made available by class-society - here utilizing
patriarchy and racism as 90% of workers here are female
immigrants - puts a direct barrier to the progressive extension of
available technology to such work supposedly "difficult to
mechanize", while the appropriate CAD/CAM technology of
flexible specialization is precisely what has been developed in the
current period. L.A. reproduces on its territory the contradiction of
the capitalist worldeconomic system, reproducing precisely the
active underdevelopement that has kept whole continents in the
status of so called "developing countries" for more than 100 years
of so called and supposedly aided developement.
n conclusion: These violent processes of socio-economic and
spatial restructiuring proceed with "remarkably little resistance"
(p.219) "The labour movement ... remains in a Fordist mode of
fighting against an enemy that has become too slippery and
diffuse to negotiate with in traditional ways."(p.219) With
organised labour being decimated and illegal immigrant labour
being excluded from political activity, Soja sees glimpses of
potential in urban movements around housing and rent-control as
emerged in Santa Monica. Ephemeral inspirations towards an
urban revolution mobilizing around issues of urban space - a
would be corroboration of Soja's central thesis that an
emancipatory social science needs to include an urban
geography. Geography directing the struggle.
End.
Materialism vs Morality - Part 1
Patrik Schumacher 1997
Lecture delivered at Architectural Association, London as part
of the Graduate School Ethics Lecture Series
0.
When - two month ago - was asked to speak here within the
Graduate School Ethics lecture series it dawned on me that
should use this opportunity to venture across the limit of a purely
academic exposition and - as it were - 'come out' and expose my
5/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
political and philosophical position to your criticism. n fact to do
anything else at this occasion would have meant a betrayal - or to
avoid a moral term here - it would have meant the effective
abandonment of this position and of the project it wants to
become.
Some of you might already have witnessed that am
operating from a fairly consolidated theoretical postion, i.e.
Marxism. would also like to call myself a communist. But what
can that mean today practically? am not an activist although
there still is a number of organised revolutionary marxist groups in
Britain and have been in loose contact with quite a few of them
over the last ten years. (1)
However, have chosen to focus on trying to build a carrier in
architecture, professionally as well as academically. But in this
process continue to suffer from capitalist class society.(2). Or to
put it positively: continue to gather and evaluate experience in
the light of the marxist hypothesis that there could be another
superior socio-economic and political regime that would allow us
to engage and collaborate in more democratic and more
productive relations.
n order to mediate and share here some of the resultant
speculations and insights want to pick up an initially arbritrary
series of issues which seem to fit into a lecture on ethics in
architecture, in order to demonstrate how from a marxist
perspective every issue and problem can be driven to expose the
political barrier to its solution.
The first isue will raise is the question of the disciplinary
boundaries in the organisation of knowledge and professional
progress.
1.
This lecture series is one more example for the way in which
the AA continues to operate in defiance of what one might expect
to be the limit of the discipline of architecture. Some remarks on
the underlying rationality of such deterritorialization is a
necessarry preface to my lecture as it questions not only various
disciplinary boundaries but ventures beyond what you might
deem the proper limits of the theoretical and academic.
From an ethics lecture one might here expect reference to
particular moral dilemmas the profession sometimes admits to
like the one wether alligeance is owed to the private client or the
general public interst, or questions of moral value as they arise in
public projects , in social housing, for instance the dilemma of
catering for of divers ethnicities etc. maintain that such questions
can not be adressed and solved in isolation but inevitable drive
towards general questions of philosophy and ultimately political
strategy.
One might point out here that in all professions, disciplines
and specialist knowledges the most advanced proponents in each
discipline consistently find themselves rehearsing and potentially
challenging philosophy. Philosophy at it's best is nothing other
than the attempt to adress and work through the general
questions of method and purpose which arise in any research or
systematic activity. Any innovative and rigorous specialized
inquiry or practise will move beyond provisionally useful but
ultimately arbitrary disciplinary boundaries and tendentially will
have to recuperate, synthesize and advance the systematic
totality of knowledges, experiences and practises. And do link
the regressive postmodern ideological abandonment of
totalization to the political hegemony of capital in this period.
The very notion of Architecture versus mere building seems to
call for innovation and theoretical grounding: great architecture
was always innovative building and what we call architecture
always - since the Renaissance - comes along with theory, most
notably since modernism, post-modernism, deconstructivism etc.
That is what we expect from ourselves as ambitious architects
and from architecture versus mere building: that it knows what it
is doing and that it can make an argument for itself. But such
arguments have to reach beyond architecture. Architecture can
have no value in itself - that would be fetishism. That means that
once you enter architectural theory you are already on the drift
towards deterritorialization and totalization: architecture and
urbanism have been and have to be theorised as facilitating
society, the good polis, social progress, institutional innovation,
manifesting contemporary cultural and moral values etc. all of
which obviously transcends the bounds of the expert knowledge
required to merely build something.
The exercise and transmission of routine operations within the
profession are of course also part of an architecture school's
agenda, and such exercise rests comfortably within the
discipline's boundaries. The rationality of these operations might
safely be taken as corroborated by their pervasive survival and
reproduction. When it comes to critique, innovation and the
formation of new practises - and the AA as any academic
institution does and should claim such ambitions - a responsible
account of these practises has to transcend the disciplinary realm
of specialized professional expertise. n the place of the
guarantees of a corroborated standart practise an anticipatory
theoretical speculation is required in order to ascertain, predict or
at least bracket the effect of new architectural repertoires on
social relations and the life process in general. And this would
ultimately require architecture, sociology, business organisation,
economics and political theory to be studied in their dialectical
relations. But since capitalism atomizes the relevant decisions,
such integrated science has no audience. Such integration
already fails relative to the disciplinary neighbors architecture and
urbanism. That disciplinary boundaries might be useful for routine
operations embodying an economy of complexity reduction but
are incompatible with innovation and progress can be seen with
regard to the relation between architecture and urbanism. The
disciplinary boundary between architecture and urban planning is
obstructing innovation in both disciplines and thus of the rational
developement of the built environment. They exist as two
separatly institutionalized practises arresting each other in mutual
deadlock. Whereas urban planning is limiting its options in
advance by always already presupposing the same set of building
types as given from outside its domain (office tower, detached
house, ...) as the basis of its planning strategies (zoning laws
ect.), architecture in turn finds its narrow limits in the planners'
prescriptions. The two disciplines hold each other back intead of
propelling each others progress. There is only one built
environment. But to stop at an integrated architecture/urbanism
would be equally arbitrary. Ultimately the built environment is only
one subsystem of total social material reproduction. nnovative
architecture thus requires transdisciplinary theoretical speculation
to assess its possibilities and effects, and to establish a criterion
to identify the new as innovation. Moral questions might arise and
in the last analysis a political philosophy seems to be inevitably
presupposed.
The separation of the disciplines of architecture and urbanism
is not a theoretical deficiency nor a mere institutional problem of
academia. The politico-economic agents of the respective
disciplines are categorically separated: architecture is private,
urbanism is state matter. The categorical dichotomy between
architecture and urbanism, between house and city, is specific to
capitalism, where only the unavoidably collective connecting
infrastructures are socialized and democratically planned. All
other decisions are privatized and therefore atomized. The
theoretical quest for a comprehensive science of the built
environment faces a political barrier. The revolutionary urbanism
of the modern movement was unleashed by the post first world
war social revolutions in Germany and Russia and in as much as
it remained unfulfilled it was limited by the limited and
compromised character of the revolution in Germany.
And want to generalise here and make my first political
statement: n the last analysis the solution to any technical
problem also involves the political and is up against a political
power structure that systematically blocks progress. And this is
the rationale behind my attempt to push academic into political
discourse. The underlying hypothesis is that - more than ever -
the technological, organisational and cultural resources are in
place to construct a higher, more democratic and more productive
form of socio-economic and political organisation beyond
capitalist class society and imperialism.
This is acknowledged in the rythm of this lecture which will
recursively drive the issues it engages towards a totalising
political statement.
2.
Architecture is usually seen to be concerned with aesthetics
rather than ethics. Some remarks on the relationship of ethics and
aestetics might therefore seem as an appropriate way to
introduce a lecture on ethics in an architecture school. Ancient
Greek philosophy is said to having naivly identified the good and
6/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
the beautiful. n Kant they seem to be strictly set apart and we all
know the bad conscience that comes with the indulgence in pure
aesthetics and the pursuit of the beautiful.
Earlier this year gave a short paper on what titled "the
dialectic of the aesthetic and the pragmatic". The paper contains
what would call a marxist , i.e. materialist analysis of aesthetic
regimes, an analysis which would like to extend here also to
moral regimes: "Within a consistently materialist outlook aesthetic
regimes have to be analyzed as sublimations of an underlying
performativity. At the root of any style or typology (which goes
beyond the drawing board and effectively shapes the built
environment) lies an economic - and might add here moral -
rationality.
The aesthetic judgement of cities and buildings is rational in
as much as it operates as an immediate intuitive appreciation of
performativity, shortcircuiting first hand comparative experience or
extended analysis. Aesthetic judgement thus represents an
economical substitute for experience. t depends on a tradition
that disseminates accumulated experience via extrinsic and
dogmatic rules. This dogmatism is the virtue as well as the limit of
aesthetically condensed intelligence.
For instance: The Vitruvian or Palladian regime of proportions
represents a condensation of accumulated building experience,
allowing for the 'blind' design of sound stone-structures. The
classical orders are regulating column-height to width-ratios,
spans, foundations, minimum roofangles for drainage etc. The
Palladian rules concerning room proportions guarantee certain
standarts of daylighting and air-volume. Any such rule-system
embodies an economy of performance as well as an economy of
design effort. Those regimes participate in a dogmatized science
of building.
Over and above these technological principles the aesthetic
rules concerning e.g. (Vitruvian) city-layout or the (Palladian) rules
for the suburban villa enshrine and make easily reproducable
specific social - and again might add here moral - organizations
which in turn are easily read off by the trained eye identifying the
(morally) right environment aesthetically. With the developement
of society and the availability of new building technologies
(reinforced concrete, steel etc.) and new concepts of human
association the classical aesthetic regime lost its rationality and
became a fetter upon the further developement of the built
environment. What once was an accumulated wisdom became an
irratioinal prejudice that had to be battled also on the ideological
plane of aesthetic value."
Materialism explicates the seriality of modern housing, urban
zoning and the principles of specialisation evident in functionalist
architecture as structural aspects of the socio-economic regime of
fordism. t allows a proper assessment of modernism historical
role rather than falling for the ahistorical claim of its supposed
failure in terms of human values. Materialism also furnishes a
criterion to identify the role and rationality of Postmodernism and
Deconstructivism within the logic of post-fordist restructuring. The
recent return to minimalism in architecture seems to be a
rearguard move as it clings to precisely those formal orders that
the logic of socio-economic and institutional development has
identified as its incarcerating fetters. n a period of crisis and
intensified restructuring such (conservative) aesthetic investment
is bound to decline into a stance of defensiveness and self-
victimization. This purist sensibility will suffer and reject all that
which becomes operational, vibrant and vital in the current
transformations. Under Capitalism productive relations are still
progressing, although far less than what is possible beyond this
political barrier. And the new spatialities of folding which seem to
share a vocabulary with the latest drift in productive relations
point in many ways beyond class society: dehierarchization,
deterritorialization, fieldspace, nonlinear and open networks etc.
These remarks are supposed to demonstrate how Materialism
offers a criterion to take a postion relative to various current
architectural trends.
So what am suggesting here is that aesthetic judgement
might be reconstructed and redeemed as an intuitive appreciation
of the vital and productive. t also might be said to contain a
hidden moral sentiment. The beauty of Mies's Crown Hall or of
Falling Water rests with the fantasies, and anticipations we project
onto the space, it's suggestiveness for the wonderful encounters,
collaborations and forms of human association those spaces
allow us to envisage. But we have to go beyond this edifying
moment into a rather less comfortable territory to find out what
stands in the way of those beautiful and ethical anticipations.
f aesthetic sentiment can be recuperated as moral sentiment,
moral sentiment itself can not be taken as god-given, but needs to
be rationalised and recuperated within a pragmatist or rather
materialist framework. could rewrite my paper on the "dialectic of
aethetics and pragmatics" as "the dialectic of ethics and
pragmatics".So morality moves from the position of explanans to
the position of explanandum and again the second term -
pragmatics - is the stronger term in the dialectical relation. The
initial statement therefore reads now:
Within a consistently materialist outlook moral regimes have
to be analyzed as sublimations of an underlying performativity.
The moral judgement is rational in as much as it operates as an
immediate intuitive appreciation of performativity, shortcircuiting
first hand comparative experience or extended analysis. Moral
judgement thus represents an economical substitute for
experience. t depends on a tradition that disseminates
accumulated experience via extrinsic and dogmatic rules. This
dogmatism is the virtue as well as the limit of pragmatic
intelligence condensed into ethics. With the developement of
society and the availability of new technologies and organisational
patterns - the classical moral regime lost its rationality and
became a fetter upon the further developement of the overall
forces of production. What once was an accumulated wisdom
became an irrational prejudice that had to be battled also on the
ideological plane of moral value.
n my analysis the status of a whole series of moral values
that guide our patterns of behavior today are exposable as fetters
upon production and therefore expose as irrational the capitalist
class relations upon which they depend. The best way to go
beyond such a general political declaration might be to analyse
and critique my own immediate political conditions of production,
the concrete micro-political relations under which educational and
academic institutions operate today. This might very well be seen
as a challenge to the AA and my own position here. But also
know that the structure of the school is such that it can not easily
be challenged. n all its parts and because it falls into many more
or less autonomous parts, the school can choose to ignore any
challenge even in the absence of the intellectual resources to
counter and refute such a challenge. The school does not really
exist as a intellectually positioned entity. t lacks the respective
constitutional level. There is no constituted faculty which could
formulate a position.
This quality of unchallengeability pertains of course to the
institutional structure of the school rather than to any of its
individual members and any criticism of this structure is here
made in good faith towards all its members and the collective in
nuce the school might be projected to be or become. And of
course the AA is just one of a consistent type of institutions, like
any other university on the one hand and the art-circus on the
other hand, participating in and limited by late capitalist class
society under the spell of imperialism.
The pursuit of rigoros argument is constantly frustrated and
alienated by the exchange- and class-relations through which we
are constantly forced to exclude each other from what we are
pursuing here in academia as much as in the profession at large.
Secrecy is pervasive and obscurantist publications are nothing
but another form of secrecy. Or call it 'Spectacle'. Any serious
contribution perverts into an existential threat for those who are
adressed as much as for those who are trying to offer it. You
might not feel this as strongly as long as you are moving within a
consensus or as long as it does not occur to you that you could
take those things you teach or learn or do professionally for real
and serious instead of something you are trading casually as
career-building stock. Nevertheless know you all had at least
glimpses of what am talking about - of course you have.
To point out that this lecture as much as any other event or
articulation in this carrier-building institution is always already
corrupted and alienated from its content appears prima facie as a
straight forward moral condemnation.
Two remarks need to be made here to set the trajectory of the
argument: First: the whole point here is to attempt a materialist
reconstruction or supersession of moral judgements. Each of
these reconstructions or interpretations rely on a totalizing
7/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
science of history. All the obvious morally revolting aspects of
class-society in general and academic careerism in particular,
i.e.leadership being based on property or bureaucratic position,
territorialism, pretenciousness, obscuratism, and the rhetorical
sealing of all the cracks and questions etc. because the exchange
of contributions is integrated only through a scamble for
priveledge, all these horrors are ultimately institutionally
constituted and they are serious infringements upon production,
and this spells their historical dimension. Contemporary moral
judgements are at best intuitive reactions to the immediate social
or political barriers of production and productive progress. But
they might also be dogmatic ossifications of practises which are -
although at some stage historically validated - no longer
conducive to the developement of industrial civilization. Finally at
worst moral tenets become reactionary defence mechanisms for
long since entrenched vested interest. Second immediate note:
The institutional political barriers and limits upon serious
communication and with it those patterns of intercourse which
revolt us are also protected by a whole host of moral defenses.
Some of the older moral defenses, traditional moral
sentiments like personal loyalty, (to be translated as "partners in
crime defending their vested interests") or reverence to seniority,
although they might still have a waning force, might nevertheless
safely assumed to be on the way out. What one rather has to
focus on and challenge are those seemingly modern or rather
post-modern values which appear less contentious, even
progressive. Sentiments like the celebration of difference,
pluralism, the liberal tolerance that comes with a half-
acknowledged relativism, the value of academic autonomy, the
dogmatic or bureaucratic independence of all teachers, as well as
of all students, an institutional culture which allows only an
immanent criticism, the rejection of substantial leadership; the
fetishisation of individualism, individuality and so called personal
intellectual or artistic interests; the fetishistic respect for
authorship and the forced invisibility of anonymous collective work
etc. etc. All these wonderful moral values - again: pluralism,
tolerance, autonomy, independence, individuality etc. - while
participating in the contradictory fusion of progressive post-
fordism and regressive neo-liberalism and - of course - having to
be defended against any looming authoritarianism from above,
are to be criticised from below, i.e. from the vantage point of a
radicalised notion of democracy, a notion of democracy that does
respect the wholly arbitrary and crippeling defintion of a public
versus a private domain as little as the equally arbitrary and
increasingly ineffectual national definition of the public as the unit
of societal self-determination. Both these limits of the public
democratic domain need to be challenged. n their respective
moral cloak - respect for privacy and patriotism, private and
national self-determination - those illusions remain amongst the
most powerful ideological bullwarks for class-society and
imperialism.
But it seems again that am jumping to conclusions too
quickly introducing notions which today can no longer be taken for
granted as being self-evident.
Therefore let me go back - as it were - and build my argument
by picking up the question of morality from where bourgeois
politics and academic discourse has left it.
The question of ethics or morality - how should we live,
behave, interact with each other, commit ourselves to each other
etc. - might initially be approached emprically or even on a
personal level. t seems as if through the further questioning of
what one finds historically or empirically or even through one's
personal dilemmas one sooner or later feels compelled to enter
what one might be inclined to call the plane of philosophical
reflection. For most of us this is tricky territory and it seems as if
one would have to rest with ultimately unaccountable stipulations
or beliefs. "That's how feel, that's who am." And this is indeed
what a considerable part of the anglo-saxon philosophical
tradition in the 20th Century settled for. Morality and 'ultimate
values' are to a large extent seen to be outside of the domain of
rational inquiry and critique. A position which - by the way - rests
comfortably with an increasingly privatising society.
This wholly agnostic and defeatist stance results theoretically
from the narrow conception and artificial isolation of the issue and
discipline of moral philosophy. From this perspective one might
start to distinguish the various modes of philosophical analysis in
respect to the scope of phenomena that would enter the analysis
of morality. A lot of the latter day Oxford Philosophy of Ethics
starts and concludes with the analysis of language use. Some
moral philosophies would include references to biology, or
psychology, or the sociology of every day life, some include a
certain degree of historical reflection, or abstract reflections about
the liberal democratic state, but ultimately moral philosophy ends
up insisting on its own original turf, formulating abstract and
eternal criteria of evaluation: utilitarianism, contractualism,
consequentualism, emotivism etc. According to my previous
definition this is 'philosophy' only by name, a closed off discipline
which itself can be brought to task only through a totalizing
philosophy like Marxism.
What would be required here is the systematic historical
analysis of socio-economic relations. But within bourgeois
academia such an inquiry is consigned to another department
which in turn, as it touches on moral issues from within its own
trajectory, receives abstract and eternal moral truth as bullwark
against the radical thrust of its own rationality. This kind of
constriction of reflection to a circumscribed area of supposed
relevance and expertise achieves a conservative mutual
deadlock. This is a general hallmark of bourgeois academic
discourse, although one that is being increasingly challenged
recently through all sorts of interdisciplinary researches. But
nowhere is the irrationality of these constrictions more evident
than concerning the fundamental question of ethics - how to
relate to each other, i.e. how to organize our materially
interdependent lifes. What bourgeois philosophy seems to be
lacking is even the inkling that what is required to answer this
question is nothing short of a totalizing science of history that
reflects and reconstructs moral categories and cultural patterns in
respect to the evolving conditions of total social material
reproduction on a world scale. As witnessed here in this lecture
series three weeks ago, bourgeois academia thinks it possible to
contribute to what it calls 'Political Theory' ahistorically as well as
apolitically, i.e. without any reference to the latest socio-economic
and political developements - post-fordism, neo-liberalism,
globalisation, hegemony of international capital over nationally
organized labour etc.- and refusing to draw conclusions in the
form of a political position and thus leaving all its terms for ever
indeterminate and undecisive.
But bourgeois society lacks much more than the right insight.
t rather has long since become itself an irredeemable obstacle to
the constitution of the transcendental subject that is the
democratic discourse through which alone the necessary
theoretical synthesis, this totalizing science of history can
emerge.
Within the marxist discourse those incarcerating disciplinary
boundaries and the political limits of discourse are materially
challenged. The explosion of these limits is one of the founding
moments of this radically different intellectual paradigm and
practise which crucially fuses theoretical work with concrete
political organisational work. The vitality and intellectual
breakthrough of this paradigm into which philosophical reflection
is transposed and brought to task depends inalienable on its
alignment and synthesis with a new political force - the global
industrial working class and the hypothesis and promise of
international communism. Marx and Engels elaborate the crucial
breakthrough towards the science of history in the process of and
through their involvement with the organisation of the First
nternational, and their insights could not have come to maturity
outside of this engagement. Once stated it is irresistable and self-
evident that philosophy and science can only fulfill their ambition
through an alignment with the forces of resistance from the very
bottom of society which due to their very position are bound to
constitute themselves democratically and can only proliferate
through a universalizing movement. What transpires here -
despite all the impurities and contradictions that might beset any
concrete struggle - is something that indeed was already
demonsrated by the dynamic of 18th Century enlightenment: the
irresistable epistemological thrust of what Lenin calls the
'universal class'. n order to mediate these insights for you might
have to go back and take on bourgeois morality and philosophical
moral reflection at its most sophisticated, profound and edifying
elaboration as it is articulated in the work of Kant.
8/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Materialism vs Morality - Part 2
Patrik Schumacher 1997
Lecture delivered at Architectural Association, London as part
of the Graduate School Ethics Lecture Series
Kant seems to have given the conclusive formalization of the
fundamental principles of bourgois morality, a morality we still
inhabit as might transpire through the edifying force of Kants
exposition. What will also transpire is that certain key moments in
his reflection already point beyond the bourgeois order. Those
moments are a reflection of the universalizing logic of the
bourgeois ascendance from below and are as such recuperable
for more radically democratizing movements. Other moments of
bourgeois liberation have now to be analysed as moments of
containment.
Kants moral discourse is in many ways the culmination of
18th Century philosophical work developing in the context of the
proliferating sciences on the one hand and the emerging capitalist
economic and political relations on the other hand. The very
notion of a principled formal investigation of the total system of
moral categories against and above a mere empirical
engagement with particular moral tenets is most clearly brought to
bear in Kant's critique. Such a project significantly suspends all
traditional values and precepts and in this respect can become a
force in alignment with the dynamic of emergent capitalism and
modernization. n his famous text from 1784 "What is
enlightenment ?" Kant takes self-determination as the ultimate a
priori of practical life: "The criterion of everything that can be
agreed upon as a law by a people lies in this question: Can a
people impose such a law on itself?" This selfdetermination
requires the free use of public reason which is therefore treated
as a priori of any enlightened civil society. At the bottom of it one
finds in Kant the notion of progress. Any specific order is
provisional, and any attempt to frieze - even if by contract - any
social order or law is, according to Kant, impossible and in
contradiction to the notion of self-determination. "Such a contract,
whose intention is to preclude forever all further enlightenment of
the human race, is absolutly null and void, even if it would be
ratified by parliaments. One age cannot bind itself, and thus
conspire, to place a succeeding one in a condition whereby it
would be impossible for the later age to expand its knowledge.
That would be a crime against human nature, whose essential
destiny lies precisely in such progress; subsequent generations
are thus completely justified in dismissing such agreements as
unauthorized and criminal."
*A radical reading of Kant would construct from this a
commiment to permanent revolution, whereby the only dogma
would be the insistence of absolute anti-dogmatism, the only
categorial constitutional prerogative would be defined through the
constitutional conditions of further progress, the protection of
unrestricted public reason, the only exclusion from its
universalizing thrust would be the exclusion of the excluders, the
only limit of freedom is the logic of freedom itself etc. n the
following want to trace how this enlightenment as bourgeois
enlightenment turns into its opposite. The radical character of the
bourgeoisie pertains to its movement from below. But this
movement soon becomes contradictory in as much as it - while
still moving forward against the feudal order and the aristocracy -
it already engages in a reargarde movement of containing the
lower orders. This reargarde aspect becomes more pronounced
as the bourgeoisie consolidates its power, also through striking a
deal and compromise with sections of the aristocracy.
But let me try to rehearse and historically interpret in detail
the logic of morality which Kant articulates at this historical
juncture. will reverse the order of Kant's presentation in the
"Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals" and start with what he
ends with, namely freedom and free will as the most fundamental
premise of morality. Before elaborating Kants notion want to
pose Marx's reminder to remain in the back of our minds that the
freedom the bourgeoisie stands for has an economic rationale:
the freedom of labour from the feudal bond to become freely
hireable and fireable, the freedom to choose one's profession, the
freedom to buy or sell anything including land, free markets and
free trade. n a formulation closest to Kants discourse one would
say: the freedom to engage freely in realations by contract.
n the Groundwork Kant analyses a network of related terms -
freedom, morality, autonomy, universality and reciprocity - as
dependent upon each other as each others necessary
presupposition. Some of Kants reconstructions seem prima facie
counterintuitive but would second his claim that he adds nothing
that is not already implicit within ordinary moral judgement.
Freedom he claims exists only within and through the rational
selfsubjection to a selfimposed universal moral maxim or law.
Freedom - is the very opposite of that state where we do as
we please and fancy. Freedom of the will can only exist where we
are free from empirical and contigent moods, inclinations and
desires: "it is just this freedom from dependence on interested
motives, for otherwise we would have to be regarded as subject
only to the law of nature - the law of our own needs." The free act
is thus the act which demonstrates the resistance to natural
determination through rational volition. t is clear that the criterion
of such conduct can only be absolute selflessnes and thus points
towards the necessary moral dimension of freedom. Only if
determine my will and action on the basis of a universal moral law
which is essentially defined through the exclusion of any personal
or special interest can be sure that my actions are free. And
can test the necessary universality of the unfderlying maxim of my
action by posing the question of the consistency of my will relative
to an assumed universal reciprocity. Kant poses this criterion as
the categorical imperative of practical reason: "Act only on that
maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should
become a universal law." This imperative obviously avoids any
specific moral tenet. t neither defines the moral act through its
results. t furnishes a formal criterion for moral qualifications: the
possible universality of its principle.
The most convincing and recurring example Kant gives
relates to the capitalist institution of credit: He demonstrates that
any maxim that would allow me (in moments of existential need)
to resort to the borrowing of money without the full ability and
commitment to the promise of paying back is selfcontradictory
since such an allowance - if universalised - would dissolve the
very institution of borrowing want to rely on. "it would make
promising , and the very purpose of promising itself impossible,
since no one would believe he was being promised anything, but
laugh at utterances of this kind as empty shams."(p.85)
Abstract universality is the form social rules of intercourse
have to take in the anonymous mass society of capitalism.
Personal relations no longer stretch far enough. n this light one
might read the following statement which relates morality to
abstract rational beings and excludes reference to any notion of
allegiance to specific human, cultural or national qualities of
character. "The practically good is that which determines the will
by concepts of reason, and therefore not by subjective causes,
but objectively - that is on grounds valid for every rational being
as such." (p.77)
This reflects the need of capitalist anonymous mass society
where personal relations have ben replaced by abstract money
relations, where strangers enter the market of exchange and
contractual obligation, without personal loyalty, bondage or means
of coercion. The universality of bourgeois morality depends
historicaly of the universality of money relations superceding
feudal loyalty. The freedom presupposed by bourgeois morality is
the freedom of the capitalist market again superceding feudal
bondage. n bourgeois morality and law freedom of will is and free
choice of action is a precondition for being guilty and accountable.
The only good (or evil) is the good (or evil) will, rather than the
results of action. This is what Kant starts with. Such a
sophisticated practise of validation and sanction which inquires
into underlying intentions operates as a more productive mode of
social regulation, approriate for a more complex social
organisation, but also presupposing a relatively generalised
regularity of law, knowledge of and adherence to it.
What these remarks should hint at is the possibility to explain
notions of morality as modes of social regulation relative to
historically attained relations of production. But so far my remarks
set the bourgeois morality off against the older feudal order.
So far those priniples of bourgeois morality seem now
uncontentious and recuperable in a socialist society: Universality,
reciprocity and the presupposition of freedom. The first thing one
would have to say here that capitalist class society and
9/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
imperialism consistently and substantially fall short of delivering
even the explicitly bourgeois ideals of justice: universal recirocity,
universal rule of law, exposed through the universal and free use
of public deliberation, equality before the law, equality of rights
and opportunity etc. My claim here is that capitalist class society
-i.e. the system of private property of the means of production and
the private appropriation of the results of combined and integrated
production - is a systemic obstacle to the realization of those
rational ideals. This was already clearly understood by Trotsky
and Lenin, who realised that the bourgeoisie under imperialism
could no longer universalise its own revolution. That the
bourgeoisie outside the advanced imperialist core , i.e. also the
russian bourgeoisie, could no longer fulfill the historical tasks of
the classical bourgeois revolutions. They themselves had to take
over and move through this stage. On a politcal level theories of
economic liberalism of perfect and purely economic that is
productive competion have to be exposed as ideological in as
much as they consistently fail to analyse to acknowledge the
systematic drive towards monopoly and the systematic
instrumentalization of the national state against the principle of a
universally regulated world market for capital, goods and labour,
against true economic competition, replacing it with diplomatic
coercion and military regulation. The ideological nature of neo-
liberal discourse is exposed in its hypocrisy aligning themselves
and systematically failing to indict the very forces of imperialism,
exemplified by Thatcher and Reagan and their heirs, actively
utilizing all the possibilities of diplomatic and military competion,
which crucially includes the restriction of movement and
imigration through the establishment of policed national borders.
The second thing one would have to say is that marxism also
proposes a substantial critique of the essence of bourgeois
morality and justice.
The abstractness and formal character of universal bourgeois
right allows for and legitimizes substantial material inequalities.
Bourgeois equality of treatment is understood as equality of
treatment of people in equal positions allowing for extreme
material differences and differences in the power of decision
making as long as in abstract principle no one is excluded from
access to any of those positions. For each according to his or her
due relates to the principle of private economic exchange, where
any contribution to the integrated production processs has to
individually negotiate and extract its renumeration. At a certain
stage of developement it might be worth while to speculate about
the rationality or overall efficiency of this process of production
distribution where every productive effort engenders a sand
universal scramble for preveledge and perrennial efforts to
secure, legally protect, and police the always precarious means of
private survival. And the more under post-fordism economic
relations become fluid the more time and energy has to be spend
on reestablishing and renegotiating the various differential private
claims upon the results of production. The capitalist system is
forced by threat of total stoppage to relentlessly and
unambiguously determine the private ownership for any economic
move and particle within the complex and long since global web
of interdependend productive activities. The resources going into
this unproductive effort, this shadoe economy of differential
distribution, might be counted as costs imposed by the social
system of capitalism. This unproductive economy comprises large
parts of the state administration, foreign office, the judiciary, the
whole legal profession, the police , the penal system, tax
administration, the banking system, the whole military, all private
security services and systems. The percentage of total labour of
those activities must be substantial. This is the light in which
materialism asks us to evaluate the communist proposal to
replace the capitalist - for each according to his due - with the
principle: from each according to ability to each according to
need. The fetishistic notion of justice is thrown out of court here in
this argument , although the new regulatory principal will also
attain the status of justice as an internalised rationality.
The more and more irrational capitalist insistence and
obsession with rightful property derives its legitimacy from the
originally rational and plausible but long since gone economy of
individual or family producers exchnging their products in the
market.
Beyond the mounting of directly professionalised
unproductive labour the capitalist imposition of the scramble for
preveledge potentially distracts and distorts all of productive
efforts from the productive rational that makes work effective only
as integrated work. Under capitalism producers are always
induced to keep knowledge in reserve, and the need to
continously hedge in productive capacity and information acts as
barrier of communication and scientific progress.
The materialist question of socialism or communism concerns
the conditions and prospects of radical egalitarian democracy and
its potential ability to sustain and propell the next stage in the
developement of global industrial civilization. And to pose this
question ultimately on the level of the world economic system is
not hybris but the inevitable and really real context for any
practical reflection.
n the last section of the lecture want to make the distinction
between historically arguable and materialistacally questionable
moralities and the always aldeady practical - and if you like the
'moral' or prefer to it the political principle, which is the
precondition and implicit presupposition of materialism or
marxism, and can not be questioned within marxist discourse, or
any other discourse for that matter. This principle which is already
contained in Kants discourse and is historical achievement of the
enlightenment - is the principle of undiscriminatory access to
public reason and exposure of any practical or truth-claim to
public critique. This principles reflects and poses the practical and
political condition of the very institution of discourse and science.
That is the essence of discourse ethics which was the central
target of Chantal Mouffe's critique here.
However much the ideological abuses of this aproach might
merit critique, Chantal Mouffe failed to allow us to understand the
fundamental hrust of this insight which for me becomes one more
and may be the fundamental element of the necessary and urgent
critique of capitalism. The very institution of science and
rationality already embodies and implies a whole series of
historically battled moral positions:
- the rejection of authority and hierarchy in the establishment
of thruth and knowledge. - the n on-discriminatory and universal
access to discourse, which is embodied in the scientific
requirement of the universal reproducability of a scientific effect,
as its precondition to enter the body of scientific knowledge
- the absence of involvement of any vested or special interest
in the scientific inquiry. any suspicion here suspends the results of
any inquiry until impartial procedures are insured
Any suspicion of power-relations existing between the
participants of a discussion a priori devalues and annulls any
outcome of the discussion. Even those in power would not know if
their argument really is valid or just succeeds through
intimidation. Under such conditions nobody gains knowledge.
(This is by the way a serious problem for corporate as well as
bourgeois academic rationality where power presides and the
neccessary drift has been towards dehierachisation and
democratisation, always compromised by what is possible under
the capitalist class system, which is an inherent obstacle to
science. This is not so much evident in the politically largely
uncontentious natural sciences, but all the more obvious in the
social sciences of psychology, history, economics and politics.
Under capitalism which continously cuts the already materially
fully integrated and existentially interdependent world population
into opposed vested interests the evident question of the shared
interest of an efficient world production - which is of course no
zero sum game - can not even be theoretically posed never mind
comprehensively discussed, even less of course are there means
of implementing any possible recommendation of such
deliberation. All decisions arec atomized and have to reckon with
to total agglomeration of decisions as an alien and unconcious
force. As Marx put it mankind has not yet attained
selfconsciousness, is slave of its own blind social processes, has
not yet moved from prehistory to history, that is the active and
conscoius making of history. The transition to history in this sense
is the most profound promise of world communism and what the
hypothesis that real take off towatrds unheard of productive,
scientific and cultural developement lies beyond the treshold
socialist word revolution.
The fundamental problem is that capitalism does not even
allow and sytematically prevnts the full theoretical elaboration of
socio-economic and political possibilities. All research is funded
and aimed towards the calculation of vested and partial interests
10/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
which never allow their preveledged position to be questioned
and therefore always take the class-system and imperialist world
sys tem unquestioned for granted as absolute as if naturally given
limits of speculation. The labour party as any other political party
in this world institutionalises only the wholly arbritrary level of the
intersts of the citizens of this island as an a priori of any
calculation of its intersts. As if the intersts of us here are only
definable as british interests. Even the level of entering into an
institutional acknowledgement of interests we might have as
Europeans is put under the strictly shortterm precondition that the
entering of the new alignment saveguards british preveledges.
Therefore the new game never gets off the ground and acts as
treshold denying the take off of the non zero sum game.
The Dialectic of the Pragmatic and
the Aesthetic - remarks on the
aesthetics of data-scapes
Patrik Schumacher 1997
Lecture delivered at Architectural Association, London as part
of the 150 Years AA Celebrations
This is an attempt to rationalize the tension within the data-
scape approach between pragmatism and aesthetic excitement.
The notion of 'datascapes' conceives architectural form as the
translation of certain determining parameter or 'data'. The notion
may be understood analytically - interpreting existing urban
formations - as well as describing hypothetical design
experiments based on selective extrapolations testing the
quantitative or qualitative limits of the respective selected
parameters. Those parameter describe certain performance
criteria of the urban fabric, like density, light-conditions,
ventilation, visual penetration, structural limits, traffic flows,
institutional use patterns etc.
The spirit of these experiments is explorative rather than
pragmatic. They are trying to turn design-constraints into design-
engines testing what form architecture might take if one really
gives up all aesthetic prejudice and just follows the morphological
thrust of certain selected functional parameters, ready to take it
as it comes - and the stranger it comes the better. This is the spirit
of ruthless modernization - also on the aesthetic plane.
Aesthetic judgement is delayed but in the end remains the
ultimate ground of contestation for the high cultural institution of
Architecture. At the end of the 20th Century this institution will not
liquidate itself into pragmatism, and the AA will certainly not
become a vehicle of such a liquidation.
Data-scaping offers its own aesthetic sensibility, expressing
an urge for the new, a readiness for the unfamiliar. Abstract and
synthetic environments are offered as the next human habitat.
Nevertheless the polemic and ideological importance of the
data-scape approach rests in the rebuttal of purely aesthetically
driven discourses (like minimalism). The reaffirmed 'functionalism'
of data-scaping starts with the rejection of poetic sensibility and
artistic intuition as points of departure for architectural and urban
design. "Design" looses all its connotations of style, taste,
compositional delicacy etc. t becomes a creative force precisely
as it temporarily suspends aesthetic and moral prejudice in order
to experiment with and elaborate new and forward looking
aesthetic and moral sensibilities in tune with contemporary
performance criteria (e.g. allowing for new and unseen degrees of
massivity). But rather than abandoning all pretensions towards
the aesthetic realm datascaping pursuits the conscious subjection
of its evolution to the dynamic criterion of performativity.
Within a consistently materialist outlook aesthetic regimes
have to be analyzed as sublimation of an underlying
performativity. At the root of any style or typology (which goes
beyond the drawing board and effectively shapes the built
environment) lies an economic rationality.
The aesthetic judgement of cities and buildings is rational in
as much as it operates as an immediate intuitive appreciation of
performativity, short-circuiting first hand comparative experience
or extended analysis. Aesthetic judgement thus represents an
economical substitute for experience. t depends on a tradition
that disseminates accumulated experience via extrinsic and
dogmatic rules. This dogmatism is the virtue as well as the limit of
aesthetically condensed intelligence.
For instance: The Vitruvian or Palladian regime of proportions
represents a condensation of accumulated building experience,
allowing for the 'blind' design of sound stone-structures. The
classical orders are regulating column-height to width-ratios,
spans, foundations, minimum roof-angles for drainage etc. The
Palladian rules concerning room proportions guarantee certain
standards of day-lighting and air-volume. Any such rule-system
embodies an economy of performance as well as an economy of
design effort. Those regimes are - as it were - dogmatized data-
scapes.
Over and above these technological principles the aesthetic
rules concerning e.g. (Vitruvian) city-layout or the (Palladian) rules
for the suburban villa enshrine and make easily reproducible
specific social organizations which in turn are easily read off by
the trained eye identifying the right environment aesthetically.
With the development of society and the availability of new
building technologies (reinforced concrete, steel etc.) the classical
aesthetic regime lost its rationality and became a fetter upon the
further development of the built environment. What once was an
accumulated wisdom became an irrational prejudice that had to
be battled also on the ideological plane of aesthetic value. This
necessary battle was waged and won by the heroes of the
'modern functionalism'. The technological and social revolutions
called forth an aesthetic revolution, establishing and
aestheticizing non-classical proportions, a new tectonic and new
compositional, i.e. organizational patterns. An earlier but equally
significant aesthetic revolution concerning the image of the good
city is analyzed by Tafuri: the shift from the strictly formalized and
centrally controlled Baroque absolutist city-planning to the call for
a picturesque city-scape celebrating "chaos, uproar, and tumult"
(Laugier) as the fitting impression of a vital city. The picturesque
was dismantling the former aesthetic regime that had become a
fetter upon the development of early capitalist accumulation and
privately driven urban growth. The new sensibility was able to
identify with the emergent vital production- and life-processes
rather than being locked into a reactionary gesture of repulsion
and rejection.
The 'radical functionalism' of the twenties (e.g. ABC group)
was going beyond a mere post-rationalization and aesthetic
codification of spontaneously emerging forms and posed the total
suspension of any aesthetic regime and argument, projecting a
scientific elaboration of architecture. This anti-art position was
productive in this period of fundamental technological, socio-
economic and political transformation.
The subsequent codification of the results of a decade of work
in the notion of an nternational Style should not be interpreted as
a reactionary move, but has to be understood within the
productive dialectic of material performance and aesthetic
codification. After the new social and technological conditions and
potentials have been allowed to formally crystallize, style
lubricates their dissemination. n the 25 year post-war boom this
codification and the resulting economy of easy aesthetic
appropriation was indeed a productive factor in the fast world
wide proliferation of the achievements of modernism.
But any extended reliance on aesthetic judgement creates the
idealist illusion that the well-designed can be identified and
ascertained aesthetically beyond the limits of a specific historical
period - an illusion the profession is still infested with. Although
conceded above that the aesthetic dimension remains a powerful
and inescapable dimension of Architecture, it does not operate in
a vacuum. n the last analysis it has to mediate the economies of
performance within total material reproduction of society. From a
'materialist' perspective the real and perennial driving force
behind aesthetic and moral development originates in the
economic realm.
Koolhaas also grasps this and wants to surf the wave of
(commercial) development and is keen to hunt for new forms that
emerge from new programmatic/demographic/technological
forces. n order to avoid the erosion of its relevance the discipline
of Architecture had to open itself to the material forces and
revolutionize its idealist discourse retrospectively learning from
Manhattan, Las Vegas and more recently from the successes of
11/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Portman's big buildings. The data-scape approach tries to push
further and speculate about new and uncharted potentials of
pragmatic form.
n conclusion: The point is not to start with 'nice ideas' or
fantasies of the beautiful in order to suffer their inevitable
corruption (quite pathetic), but to find beauty within the logic of
modernization and the social relations this process throws or
allows us into, like high density, mobility, diversity, anonymity
...etc. The point is to construct, and aesthetisize the latest
possibilities of the development of social productivity.
End.
Productive Patterns
Patrik Schumacher 1997
Published n: architect's bulletin, Operativity, Volume 135 -
136, Slovenia and in: architect's bulletin, Volume 137 - 138,
Slovenia German: Produktive Ordnungen
Published n: ARCH+ 136, Your Office s Where You Are,
Berlin
Productive Patterns - Part 1
The 'architecture' of business-organization is liquefying. The
classical modern strategies of rationalization based on the vertical
integration of work into clearcut functional hierarchies is failing
today in respect to the complexity and dynamism of the overall
socio-economic process. The ongoing socio-economic
restructuring is being theorized under the key notion of"Post-
Fordism". The recent ideas about modes of spatial organization
as elaborated by 'deconstructivism' and developed further in the
latest trends towards a "new architecture of folding"(1) are related
to the new ideas in organization- and management-theory (de-
hierarchization, matrix- and network-organization, flexible
specialization, loose and multiple coupling etc.). Although the
parallels between the two discourses - "post-fordism" and "new
architecture" - are striking, they remain unexplored. This is thus
the aim of this text, to "ground" the new architecture in post-
fordism and "redeem" it through its conscious and critical
involvement with the progressive aspects of current socio-
economic restructuring, with specific focus on recent
developements in business organization and organization theory.
(2)
Convergence
The convergence of recent architectural and managerial
vocabularies offers the opportunity to prove that the new ideas
and graphic spaces are more than fashion fads and have a
degree of profundity. The degree, specificy and operationability of
this convergence will be the criterion for the vitality and relevance
of the new architecture, i.e. its ability to contribute to the ongoing
socio-economic restructuring. The task posed is to identify those
progressive realities in which the proposed new spatialities could
fulfill their "architectural effects" and performative promises,
beyond the iconographic symbolism at which a lot of the work is
resting and earning its premature laurels. The brief has already
been written in the call for the new "synergetic technopoles"(3),
business clusters and no-longer-corporate office-scapes of the
industries spearheading postfordism. What will become evident is
the striking "pre-established harmony" of terms between the two
discourses, i.e. between the latest conceptions of socio-economic
restructuring and business organisation on the one hand and the
latest ideas about spatial organisation on the other. The possibility
to compare (and exchange) the conceptual tools of architecture
and organisation theory resides in the mediating language of
formal (configurational) analysis. n organisation theory - as much
as in architecture - the drawing (or rather the diagram) plays an
important role in enabling (as well as limiting) conceptualization.
The "organigramme" is a standard tool of management
consultancy. Both - architecture and management theory -
encounter the limits of the line and experiment with graphic tools
beyond traditional hard edge delineations.
The diagram, or rather the repertoire of diagrams is the key
resource of architectural speculation. t is more than a
representational device. t is a key resource of registering, of
thinking through and manipulating the programmatic and social
relationships before they can become the brief for a built
architecture. "Architecture" in this sense is always already at
work.(4) But this 'primordial' dialectic between (the conceptions
of) social and spatial order is far from guaranteeing the
convergence of their most recent anticipatory formulations. E.g.
the recent return to minimalism and purism in architecture seems
to cling to precisely those formal orders that the logic of socio-
economic and institutional development has identified as its
incarcerating fetters. n a period of crisis and intensified
restructuring such (conservative) aesthetic investment is bound to
decline into a stance of defensiveness and self-victimization. This
purist sensibility will suffer and reject all that which becomes
operational, vibrant and vital in the current transformations. The
vocabulary developed by the New Architecture seems much more
in tune with those transformations. But the suspension of
aesthetic judgement is here also good advice. Aesthetic
judgement only becomes productive when it can serve as the
intuitive short-circuiting of accumulated experience or analytical
insight into the operational qualities of form which remain the
ultimate criterion of any architecture's historical prospect. This
experience has yet to be gathered and analysed before aesthetic
investment aquires a degree of reliability.
Just another import?
The suggested exchange between the realm of socio-
economic analysis and management theory on the one hand and
architecture and architectural theory on the other hand, might
appear to be just one more attempt to cross-fertilise disciplines, to
open just another source realm for the import of new terms,
metaphors and analogies into architecture along the line of
previous and recent imports from literary criticism, chaos theory
and biology. Without diminishing the fertility of those previous
exchanges and imports, it has to be stated that something else is
at stake in the alignment with socio-economic organisation: the
relationship is not analogical but real and direct and always
already operational. An architectural effect might be inspired by
certain phenomena in the animal kingdom but its effectiveness
takes off or perishes with its participation and alignment with the
organization of social reproduction.
A profession in Transition
One of the underlying hypotheses of this paper is also that
the business of architectural consultancy might itself be one of
those realms of production prone to postfordist restructuring:
there seems to be evidence that this process is gathering pace.
The professional restructuring of the architectural profession is
therefore reflected as the most immediate chance for the
architectural avant gardes to redeem its speculations through
contact with the realities of social reproduction. n a reverse move
the profession might thus utilize its own disciplinary advances of
the organisational imagination to optimize its professional
productivity. The current identity crisis of the architectural
profession - expounded by endless editorials in the organs of the
professional bodies - is to be analysed in the context of the
accelerated global economic restructuring affecting the building
industry (and the organisation of architectural production) as
much as every other sphere of production. The open question
here, as everywhere, is how the challenge of an increasingly
differentiated and fluid market can be met, i.e. which forms of
work organisation (division or intergration of labour) will be able to
deliver under the evolving market conditions and within the
progressing technological framework. Although these forms will
indeed be manifold, there is no guarantee that the professional
office, as we know it, figureheaded by the architect, will survive
this restructuring process.
1. Postmodernity ( and Post-Fordism )
The forceful emergence of Postmodern architecture in the late
seventies - sweeping the market like an avalanche in the eighties
- represented much more than a new aesthetic sensibility. t
heralded a new and distinct phase of capitalist development.
Post-modern aesthetics - the (unheard of) rejection of the
aesthetic values of homogeneity, coherence and completeness -
and the celebration of diversity, collage and fragmentation signal
the departure from the regime of bureaucratically organized
mass-production. Deconstructivism and Folding are in this
12/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
respect extensions of this fundamental break with modernism
rather than signifying a further break.
Post-modern architecture found its market in the rediscovery
and "detournement" (5) of the historical city as business hot
house, catering for the privatised and highly differentiated
demand for offices, retail, gastronomy and housing. The new
enterprise and yuppie culture could not flourish in suburbia or on
secluded green field sites.The wave of "young" architectural
offices pushing POMO and quickly claiming serious ground from
the established modernist corporations were typifying this new
enterprise culture within the field of the architectural profession
and were themselves spearheading the re-inhabitation of the
historic centre in loft-conversions etc.
Like the early modernists, those who would become the new
leaders of the profession, were prepared to suspend dogma and
learn from the new realities: Venturi "learning from Las Vegas"
and Koolhaas writing a "retro-active manifesto for Manhattan".
More recently Koolhaas derived his most compelling spatial
innovation - the suspended voids of the Paris National Library
project- by making explicite and extrapolating the already vastly
proliferating reality of a new building type first produced by John
Portman. Koolhaas recent written manifesto, promoting "Bigness"
as a new category in architecture to be consciously engaged, is
thus as retro-active as his previous "Delirious New York".
That the raison d'etre of Postmodernism is to be identified in
the "epoch-making transformation" (6) of the structure of
(world-)production became clear as the socio-economic changes
that accumulated since the mid-seventies started to delineate the
contours of a new system, a system that by the late eighties had
found its canonical theoretical elaboration in (Marxist) social
theory under the name of "Post-fordism"(7). Simultaneously
bourgeois organization theory reflected this process in its
implications for corporate structures and business gurus
produced a flood of "revolutionary" management literature that
was proclaiming a paradigm change in business organization for
the "post-industrial information society".
Recent macro-level analysis of (international) restructuring
proceeds from two (related) explanatory schemes: Postfordism
and Globalization. These references are crucial to establish the
conditions and prospects of architectural production - concerning
its output as much as its organizational structure.
Postfordism emerges from the mutually enhancing but also
contradictory interaction of technological and political
developments and the related dynamics of the world market
which together brought the post-war "economic miracle" of stable,
extended growth and the whole paradigm of the "Social Welfare
State" (State-Capitalism) into crisis. The first recession occurred
in 1966/67, followed by the political struggles of 1968, the oil-
crisis in 1973, the breakdown of the international exchange-rate
system, and a deepening of the recession in 1974. The former
growth-rates could not be regenerated during the whole decade.
The stabilizing remedy of anti-cyclical debt-financed state-
investment lead to inflation without growth ("stag-flation"). By the
end of the seventies it became clear that the recession had to be
seen as a structural (systemic) crisis that called for new political
strategies (UNDO 1979, OECD 1983)(8). Thatcherism and
Reaganomics launched the neo-liberal offensive that to this day
continues to break down the post-war social order.
Post-fordism as an analytical category that goes beyond
market turbulences and political strategies to the basis of the
economic process, the dialectic between the forces and relations
of production, is of distinctively Marxist provenance. The
underlying notion of "Fordism", originally put forward by Gramsci,
characterises the epoch of Corporate- and State capitalism since
World War (and coming into its own fully after World War ) in
reference to its production system: the new paradigm of the
assembly line as pioneered by Henry Ford. This notion of Fordism
was systematically developed by the French Regulation School of
(Marxist) economic analysis, initiated with Aglietta's "A Theory of
Capitalist Regulation"(9). Aglietta attempts to reconceptualize and
systematize Marxist conceptions of the stages of capitalist
development (free market-, monopoly-, state-capitalism) by
organizing their procession around the following dimensions:
1. the production process - the techno-industrial paradigm
2. the circulation/growth cycle of capital - the regime of
accumulation
3. the social and political institutional framework - the mode of
regulation
Each particular stage of capitalist development is defined by
the systemic cohesion of those three dimensions of total social
reproduction. Following Althusser, Aglietta asserts that those
dimensions are engaged in a dialectic that grants each a status of
semi-autonomy, although in the long run the developement of the
forces of production remains "determining in the last instance". A
structural crisis arises if one or more of those dimensions breaks
out of this synchronized ensemble. An extended period of crisis
and intensified class-struggle creates revolutionary potentials for
a solution beyond capitalism, or a new regime might crystallise
and allow the stabilization of a new stage of developement within
capitalism.
2.The specific structure of fordism and its manifestation in
architectural production.
Fordism is based on the assembly line, i.e. large scale, long
term fixed capital investment into a single purpose operation.
Fordism, as a socio-economic rather than a merely technological
paradigm, presupposed the social revolutions that - in the
aftermath of Word War - tore down 19th century class-societies
and established the working masses and their representatives as
an organised political force demanding participation in the results
of industrial productivity and thus constituting themselves, for the
first time, as the primary market for industrial consumer products.
According to Aglietta the distinctive advance of Fordism was
the qualitative shift in the ability of industry to make the workers'
consumption goods the object of comprehensive industrialization.
(10) Fordism signifies the progressing industrialisation and
comodification of all the necessities of the reproduction of labour
(textile, food-processing, transport, household: washing machine,
fridge etc.). This amounts to a shift from absolute to relative
surplus-production as the cost of labour could be reduced by
means of rationalizing it's reproduction rather than by deprivation.
Aglietta calls this the transformation of extensive into intensive
accumulation as accumulation finds its dynamic within itself,
generating its own market as basis for further accumulation. A
virtuous circle emerged where capitalist investment in industrial
mass production was breeding its own safe market as industry-
and nation-wide collective bargaining with the trade unions
guaranteed a general and stable wage level and consumption
standard. This level was regularly rising, thus generating a
predictably growing market as a basis for capitalist expansion,
while the equally predictable ability to increase productivity
through further economies of scale and the extension of the
assembly-line technology to ever more areas of material
reproduction, made sure that the rising level of wages did not
diminish profits. Any residual turbulences and recessions were
bridged by the keynesian social welfare state which secured
income and demand during recessionary unemployment and
evened out the flow of investment via an anti-cyclical state-
investment policy.
This regime of stable growth became possible as the working
class - through the mediation of social democracy - gained a
degree of power-sharing after World War . This meant that the
masses became, for the first time in history, the client of
architecture. This also implied a revolution in the leadership of the
architectural profession. The academically educated, stately
stylists of the imperial institutions were replaced by self-educated
architects (Behrens, Gropius, Corb, Mies) re-inventing the
discipline by identifying in the mundane ( mass-housing, mass-
furniture, factories) the worthy and urgent tasks for a modern
architecture. The social democratic municipalities constituted the
planning bureaux through which modern urbanism was produced.
Berlin, Frankfurt, Hamburg , Rotterdam, Vienna etc. were
represented by figures like Taut, May, Schumacher, Oud, Wagner
etc. Theses institutions had no longer much in common with the
ateliers of a Wallot or Theophil Hansen (11).The task posed was
the developement of a new typology, of establishing standards:
the house for the "Existenzminimum" which became the universal
receptacle for a whole series of mass consumer durables like the
living room set, dining set, (Frankfurt-)kitchen, bathroom fittings,
washing machine, and later the fridge, television and
automobile.The new paradigm of Functionalism implied an
objectification of design in analogy to science. Engineering based
on calculation replaced the traditional proportional guarantees
13/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
and the atelier transformed into the modern architectural office
that increasingly distinguished a series of specialists within its
operation.
The art (of architecture) was transformed into a technical
discipline. This process was carried furthest in the Soviet Union
where all artistic pretensions of individualist expression where
weeded out under the slogan of "productivism". Productivism
knows no artist-architects. What once was called art is mere
formal/ material study as propedeutic for industrial design and
production. Art and architecture were to dissolve into the scientific
and bureaucratically collectivised construction of the new urban
system centred around the factory. The economic potential for
large scale operations was reached only in the thirties. West
European protagonists like May, Meyer and Schmidt got involved
and the American expertise was imported as exemplified by the
enormous commissions secured by the office of Albert Kahn, who
virtually became the Soviet state architect to realize (e.g.in
Magnitogorsk) the ultimate fordist urbanism. Albert Kahn's Detroit
architectural office represents the ultimate fordist corporation in
the field of architecture, able to deliver a complete standard
industrial city.
The fact that the most rigorous extrapolations of the logic of
the fordist stage of capitalist developement were possible only
beyond the capitalist system is also born out by the fact of the
unheard of growth rates the Soviet Union was able to achieve in
the thirties and forties whereas the capitalist West was only
achieving similar rates in the fifties as State-capitalist
arrangements allowed for an economic planning closer in
character to the socialist "regime of accumulation".
The techno-industrial paradigm of fordism is the assembly-
line as pioneered by Ford. ts strength lies in the cheap mass-
fabrication of standard mass-products. Early attempts to gear
architectural production to such industrialisation are to be found,
on the one hand, in the attempt to define a universal standard -
the house for the 'Existenz-minimum' - and on the other, in the
attempts to device a modular system of fabrication (panel-
systems) as pioneered by Gropius in 1920ies. An early record in
mass housing construction was set in Germany already in the late
twenties by Ph.Holzmann PLC, constructing, on a site in Leipzig,
1018 flats in 46 weeks, averaging at 2,1 hours construction time
per flat.
Even if most of the early modernist 'Siedlungen' were not yet
produced on a fordist assembly-line, they certainly exemplify the
emergence of a social consumption standard, while their seriality
is the direct aesthetic expression of the logic of fordist mass-
production, which became a full-blown operative reality in the
post-war reconstruction boom.
The larger the mass of products to be produced the more it
pays to analyse and break down the production process into
separate parts and to develope optimized single purpose
equipment. This logic is mirrored inmodern architecture when the
structure is separated from the skin, each being optimized
according to their respective task to be explored by respective
experts, or in the organisation of the building via the separation of
functions into specialized and separately optimized volumes. (The
Dessau Bauhaus is paradigmatic in this respect: Residential,
administrative and workshop functions are separately articulated,
allowing for depth, height and facade to be optimized for each
respective programme independently. n turn the interior
functional distribution is easily read of the exterior.)
n the factory this process of extreme technical division of
labour offers economies of scale which derive from the ability of
fine-tuning and optimizing the proportions between the various
integrated types of labour through large numbers of workers
(while the multiplication of individual producers would not make
much economic sense.) This possibility to exploit economies of
scale thus leads via horizontal integration (mergers) to colossal
corporations approaching monopoly status. The stability and
predictability of this system of accumulation also fosters the
comprehensive vertical integration of production, as it were, the
integration of all the processes that feed into the making of a final
commodity (the car, the house) into a single "assembly line"- from
the extraction of raw-materials, to manufacture, transport and
distribution or in the case of the building industry the integration of
all trades and consultancy services in the design&built
corporation. (12) (This process which is a general tendency of
capitalist development since the emergence of manufacture,
extended and fulfilled in Fordism, is for the first time being
systematically reversed in the current restructuring.)
The internal organizational regime of the large (horizontally
and vertically integrated) fordist corporation is fiercely hierarchical
and bureaucratic. The extensive system of labour-division
allocates to everybody a clear and repetitive task within the
overall machinery. The integration of all the different activities into
one meaningful operation under the administrative command of a
single capital is organized via an extensive bureaucratic hierarchy
that itself operates on each successive hierarchical level -
according to the principle of separation and specialisation.
Departmentalisation and sub-departmentalisation - the perfect
examples of Deleuzian "territorialization" - are the structural
principles of the bureaucratic mode of organisation. The
hierarchical tree guarantees the single line of command. Every
administrator (as well as operator) has a clear superior and a
definite number of inferiors. Everybody finds a clearly fixed
position and rigid job-description within this machine. Each
individual administrative task is as far as possible routinized
(mechanised). The intelligence of the bureaucratic sytem lies in its
overall design. The precondition of its efficiency is the stability of
its environment, .i.e. the repetitiveness of its task. The post-war
boom was such an environment, also for the construction
industry. Standard building types were developed for all
institutions. Prefabrication gained considerable ground. The
hegemony of the modernist international style remained
unchallenged. The large corporate architectural offices - like
S.O.M. or C.F.Murphy - typify the essence of the epoch in
architectural production as well as organisation. Skidmore,
Owings and Merrill (S.O.M.), founded in Chicago in 1939, became
the biggest and most proliferous US architectural office in the
fifties. ts organizational diagram from 1957 exhibits a rigid
departmentalisation distinguishing 27 formalized departments
(e.g. Accounting, Personnel, Research, Contracts, Master
Planing, Building Design, Civil Engineering, Structural
Engineering, Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Construction
Management...) organized under the four main categories of
administration, design, production, and construction (13) - an
archetypal fordist bureaucracy.
Productive Patterns
Patrik Schumacher 1997
Published n: architect's bulletin, Operativity, Volume 135 -
136, Slovenia and in: architect's bulletin, Volume 137 - 138,
Slovenia German: Produktive Ordnungen
Published n: ARCH+ 136, Your Office s Where You Are,
Berlin
Productive Patterns - Part 2
3. From Fordism to Postfordism
n the late sixties the Fordist system of assembly-line mass
production, corporate concentration, collectively bargained
consumption standards and macro-economic state-regulation was
challenged along all its dimensions.
The foundation of the bureaucratic mode of operation, the
stability and predictability of its environment, was fractured.
Drifting Markets: The Modernist housing standard
("Existenzminimum") became the very thing everybody wanted to
escape from. The standard family upon which it was premised
was in a state of dissolution. Postmodernism started to cater for
this differentiating market.
With the overall growing complexity of the division of labour
and the proliferation of white-collar labour salaries started to
stratify. n a related move, and with generally growing affluence
beyond the saturation of the most basic needs, markets started to
diversify, allowing for status and identity consumption to initiate an
acceleration of aesthetically motivated product-cycles. These
developments placed a reward on innovation and flexibility rather
than the lowest price achieved through optimized mechanization
and economies of scale. The house as the main site of
consumption, soon became itself drawn into the logic of
differential identity and income. But Late-20th-Century market
differentiation complicates beyond a simple stratification along the
14/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
single scale of income. This is reflected in the proliferation of
classificatory matrices employed by market researchers trying to
comprehend and strategize the field of consumption. Translated
into the terms of cultural politics, these developments engendered
a complex web of identities reflected in the discourse of dentity
Politics. (This discourse abounds with spatial metaphors like
territory, positionality, dislocation, displacement, nomadism etc.)
Most recent formulations of identity politics dissolve the very
category of identity through its re-conceptualization via notions of
irreducible ambivalence and hybridity. (14) dentities are
constructed as intersections of multiple dimensions of
differentiation, involving overdetermination, multiplicity,
hybridisation and a dynamic that implies a logic of differance,
rather than mere difference, i.e. an economy, where every new
investment into a given network of mutually dependent terms
shifts the whole topology of differences through which these terms
are always only provisionally defined. Post-structuralism emerges
as the epistemology or meta-language of those new political
discourses and makes a new and sophisticated logic -
intertextuality, differance - available to other disciplines, not least
to architecture. (One of the insights/impacts of post-structuralism
is the dissolution of disciplinary boundaries. This is also reflected
in the increasing uncertainty regarding the "proper" professional
as well as academic territory of Architecture. Those uncertainties
had a profound impact on architectural education: the total
dissolution of any sense of a definitory curriculum.)
The first wave of appropriation of (post)-structuralist semiotics
by Postmodern Architecture (Venturi, Rossi, Jencks)remained
oblivious to the radical challenge structuralism posed to the naiv
understanding of how meaning is constituted.(15) POMO dealt in
banal symbolisms, ascribed meanings and loud surface
operations, revealing a crude conception of the economy between
sign and signified. That an effective semiotic speculation about
the emerging universe of fluid and multiple identities required new
spatialities rather than mere surface manipulations, i.e. that the
organizing spatial structure is dialectically involved with signifying
operations irreducible to the immediate presence of a sign or
symbol, was beyond the grasp of POMO. Deconstructivist
Architecture - with the active intervention of Derrida - started to
elaborate a discourse involving space and the invention of new
spatialities in sophisticated semiotic - but not only semiotic -
operations (subversions, displacements, re-contextualizing juxta-
positions, superimpositions etc.).(16)
Flexible Production: New computer-based production
technologies developed the ability to offer product diversity (small
runs) without the enormous relative cost of handicraft production
that had previously limited deviations from the mass-product to
the realm of luxury. This is the crucial material factor in the whole
process: the micro-electronic revolution offering a productivity
leap in the production of the desired economies of scope (rather
than scale).
Theses technological possibilities (CAD-CAM)) soon became
available also in the building- and interior fit-out industry, allowing
a greater formal and stylistic diversity of expression. Flexible
specialization became a technological possibility, making inroads
into the monopolized mass-product market and thus eroding the
predictability of the economic environment and implying an overall
liquefaction of production networks. The dislocation of traditional
work and management arrangements became an economic
necessity.
The ongoing globalization of the division of labour tends
towards the transfer of the typical fordist factory production to the
developing countries (Asia, South-amerika and now Eastern
Europe) while in the centres of the 1st World we witness a shift of
balance towards research&developement, management&finance,
consultancy, the culture industry etc. - productive activities less
prone to standardization and bureaucratization. Postfordist
production concentrates in the 1st world metropolitan centres
whereas elsewhere something that looks more like a mixture of
Manchester Capitalism and Fordism is still on the ascendance.
Geographically uneven development and globalization engage in
positive feedback loops.
Vanishing State-regulation: As products and markets
differentiate, economies of scale are recuperated through
international expansion. The resultant Globalization has the effect
to erode the macro-economic competence of the nation state, i.e.
its ability to anti-cyclically smooth out the dangers and
disturbances of the business-cycle to stabilize the economic
environment within its national boundaries. Globalization means
international economic integration and interdependency. The
1973 oil-price shock suddenly shifted the import- and export
dependency of most national economies. The more national
markets became international markets, the less was it
economically feasible and sustainable to sponsor national
demand that would invite foreign suppliers while burdening solely
the national producers, thus enchroaching upon their competitive
ability abroad or even on the very home market they are
sponsoring. As those policies became increasingly unsustainable
and state finance went into crisis, a withdrawal from Keynesian
macro-economic regulation in general and a systematic
dismantlement of the social welfare state is engendered - a
process that continuous to this day. Living standards are in a state
of flux, downward as well as upward.
Bureaucracies are rigid single purpose machines that can be
re-geared only very slowly - too slowly to capture the flux that
leaves them stranded. The fordist giants of optimized efficiency
become the mal-adapted dinosaurs, doomed because unfit to
float within the new fluidity of markets. The poles of class-society
are re-polarized while simultaneously the space between is filled
with a field of continuous variation.
Exploding Labour relations:
A positive feedback loop in the liquefaction of relations
between supply/capital and demand/labour has gathered pace:
The volatility of markets tears on the institutions of collective
bargaining (of the conditions of employment). This in turn makes
markets even more unpredictable. Employment contracts become
shorter. Mobility increases. Regular employment is replaced by
"casual labour" and "self-employment".
4. Paradigm change in organization- and management theory
A superficial glance at the expanding sections of business
and management literature in any highstreet bookshop will suffice
to capture the ongoing frenzy of restructuring: Titles (and
subtitles) as the following abound: "Welcome to the Revolution",
"The new Paradigm for Business", "Disorganisation for
Nanosecond Nineties", "The Postmodern Organisation",
"Deconstructing Organisations", "Catching the wave", "The One
Minute Manager", "Thriving on Chaos" etc.(17)
n order to make sense of the historical rift those slogans
proclaim, previous landmarks in the development of organisation-
and management-theory need to be sketched out. A closer look at
the history reveals that, what might finally appear as an abrupt
break, has been prepared by a series of drifts, each offering
interesting points of connection to various problematics within
architectural discourse.
a) The mechanistic paradigm - the organisation as machine
Organisation theory as a separate formalized science
(systematically gathering evidence and formulating laws and
principles) emerges in the early 20th Century, at the time of
intense corporate concentration (most extreme in the U.S. and
Germany). One of the first systematic elaborations was Henri
Fayol's "General and ndustrial, Management" (first published in
French in 1916). The "principles of management " Fayol puts
forward - later critically referred to as mechanistic and
bureaucratic - have become the embodiment of classical
management theory. ndeed, those principles are requiring from
the corporation (in Fayol's French coinage "corps social") a
degree of regularity and precision equal to the machine-system it
is supposed to administer. Classical Management theory
synthesises and codifies a combination of military and
engineering principles. The reformation of the Prussian army in
the 18th Century produced the prototype of the mechanistic
organisation: the hallmarks of the reform were the introduction of
ranks and uniforms, the formalisation of rules, the creation of a
command language, and the specialization and standardization of
tasks and equipment. At the same time the development of
manufacture in England discovered similar modes of
organisation, which were sharpened with the ascendance of the
factory system in the 19th Century. Already in 1835 the factory
could be described as "a vast automaton, composed of various
mechanical and intellectual organs, acting in uninterrupted
concert for the production of a common object, all of them being
subordinate to a self-regulated moving force."(18) Marx describes
15/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
how the making of the commodity is segmented, mechanized, the
workers integrated as appendages moving to the rhythm of the
machine, only to be replaced by further mechanization. At the end
of the century the administrative apparatus is going through an
analogical development. This mechanization process of the 'body
corporate' found its most extreme, exhaustive and notorious
formulation in Taylorism, where detailed time-motion studies of
each task and sub-task where part of a systematic effort to
subject any work to scientific control. The "first principle" of
F.W.Taylor's "Scientific Management" identifies the implied
transferral of the intelligence from the individual worker into the
structure of their combination as the conscious task to be
assumed by scientific management:"the gathering in on the part
of those on the managenent's side of all the great mass of
traditional knowledge, which in the past has been in the heads of
the workmen, and in the physical skills and the knack of the
workmen, ..., recording it, tabulating it, ..., finally reducing it to
laws, rules and even mathematical formulae."(19) (The 19th
Century is the Century of mechanization. This includes
architecture - or at least should have in the view of the early 20th
Century - as is demonstrated by Siegfrid Gidion's "Mechanization
takes command".) Whereas Taylor goes into the minute details,
the classical exposition of overall structural principles is found in
Fayol(20). He lists 14 principles. Here are the most crucial ones
as he introduces them:
"1.Division of Work: ... results in specialization of functions
and separation of powers.... As society grows, so new organs
develop destined to replace the single one performing all
functions in the primitive state." (Progress as progressive
functional segmentation.)
"2.Authority and Responsibility: Authority is the right to give
orders and the power to exact obedience. ... Wheresoever
authority is exercised responsibility arises."
"3.Discipline: ... Sanctions (penalties) must be judiciously
applied."
"4.Unity of Command ... For any action whatsoever, an
employee should receive orders from one superior only. ... Should
this be violated, authority is undermined, discipline is in jeopardy,
order disturbed and stability threatened."
"5.Unity of Direction: ... One plan for a group of activities
having the same objective."
"8.Centralization: like the division of work, centralization
belongs to the natural order; this turns on the fact that in every
organism, animal or social, sensations converge towards the
directive part, and from the brain or directive part orders are sent
out which set all parts of the organism in movement."(The
analogical reference to organisms does not put into question the
mechanistic character of Fayol's system. t rather exposes his
mechanistic conception of organic life. The point of this lengthy
quote is to show how fundamental and unquestionable those
principles are in the classical formulation.)
"9.Scalar Chain: The scalar chain is the chain of superiors
ranging from the ultimate authority to the lowest ranks. The line of
authority is the route followed - via every link in the chain - by all
communications which start from or go to the ultimate authority."
Lateral communication is excluded. This principle describes
precisely the tree-structure which - according to Christopher
Alexander's critical analysis - is the fundamental structure of the
modernist planned city. Everything is connected unambiguously
over the centre via a single succession of subcentral nodes.
Lateral connections are excluded. (21)
"10.Order: ... in the case of material things:'A place for
everything and everything in its place'. The formula is the same
for human order: 'A place for everyone and everyone in his place'.
... For social order to prevail in a concern there must, in
accordance with the definition, be an appointed place for every
employee."
"12. Stability of tenure of Personnel: ... nstability of tenure is
at one and the same time cause and effect of bad running."
These principles describe the ideal organisation of the fordist
corporation.
The same set of principles could have been extracted from
Max Weber's famous and detailed analysis of the modern
administrative state bureaucracies (also written in 1916):
Monocratic hierarchical subordination, specialization, and
formalization, i.e. jurisdictional, abstract and impersonal
competency, executed according to general, exhaustive and
stable rules(22). The structure of hierarchical departmentalization
is obviously endemic within architecture (estate - building - room).
The single line of command translates as the linear mode of
access via a sequence of controlled entrances.
The 'mechanistic' or 'bureaucratic' form of organization
deserves such a lengthy and explicit exposition as this form
entails the founding and defining principles of the very notion of
organization (and order). Any attempt to elaborate other, more
complex and dynamic forms of organization will inevitably relate
back to the founding form as its complication, dynamization,
temporary suspension, distortion, subversion etc. This is borne
out by the evidence of the subsequent literature. Classical
organization theory remains the general backdrop of reference,
including the latest extremes of anti-organization.
b.) The organismic paradigm - organisation as organism
will base my discussion of what has been called the
'organismic approach' largely on the work of T. Burns (and G.M.
Stalker)(23), who, in the early sixties, explicitly introduced the
distinction between "mechanistic" and "organismic" organization
as a lever for organizational innovation. will argue that the
proposed innovations do not yet cross the threshold from a fordist
to a post-fordist form.(24) (The metaphor of the organism
obviously does not pre-determine the conceptual logic it enters
into. As with Fayol, so within the modern movement, e.g. with
Hugo Hring, the metaphor of the organism ("organic
architecture") ends up referencing the same set of functionalist
principles as the metaphor of the "house as machine". We will see
below how - through the same metaphorical reference to organic
life - logics evolve which would locate beyond the threshold.)
Burns point of departure is the recognition that the "new, more
insecure relationship with the consumer... in the Affluent Society"
creates problems for the industrial bureaucracies. Burns defines
"two 'ideal types' of working organizations, the one mechanistic,
adapted to relatively stable conditions, the other, 'organismic',
adapted to conditions of change." He explains: " ... when new and
unfamiliar problems and requirements continually arise ...
definitive and enduring demarcations of functions becomes
impossible." So far the result is negative. n positive terms the
consequences are that "responsibilities and functions, and even
methods and powers, have to be constantly redefined ...
nteraction runs laterally as much as vertically, and
communication of people with different rank tends to resemble
'lateral' consultation rather than 'vertical' command." n this
account responsibility and function remain indispensable
categories. Their definition is not suspended, only their
distribution is dynamised. The important "configurational" new
principle is the shift from vertical to lateral communication. But
although this shift seems to have direct consequences for
architecture - Burns cites the example of a dynamic electronic
concern operating with two thousand people within a single-
storeyed building - the shift implied is not so much configurational
or structural as it is 'social': the abolition of authoritarian tone and
the de-emphasising of hierarchical status etc. The logic of
functional segmentation and functional hierarchy remains intact. t
is merely more frequently re-defined. Therefore the need for
social softening, i.e. to avoid resistance and loss of face etc.
which would get in the way if positions would still carry so much
social investment. All this does not yet imply real structural
change of the kind promoted later. Even a formulation like - "any
individual's job should be as little defined as possible, so that it
would 'shape itself' to his special abilities and initiative"- lowers
only the degree of definition, and this only initially, still
presupposing a definite shape to work towards. Although Burns
also offers other progressive formulations which e.g. imply a
higher degree of dissemination of knowledge within the
corporation, to a certain degree even anticipating the recent
slogan of group work, choose to follow a conservative reading of
Burns rather than reading the latest discourse into his
formulations, because he again exposes his inability to break with
classical management categories when he discusses what he
callspathological forms. n identifying in the "super-personal
committee system" a pathology Burns exposes his
unpreparedness for the internal democratization called for. The
second pathology is the "ambiguous figure system", i.e. one of the
paradigms of post-structuralist discourse, and the very principle
16/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
which Colin Rowe promotes - under the name of "phenomenal
transparency"(25) - as an exciting architectural possibility. Burns
"pathological ambiguous figure system", i.e. the blurring of the
line of command through multiple allegiances, is soon
systematized into a clearly regulated ambiguity in the so called
matrix organization, where each employee belongs to two
organizing systems simultaneously: departmental- and project-
division. This principle, which becomes a standard in organization
theory (and practise) in the seventies, finds its architectural
pendent in the pathbreakingly explicit introduction of
superimposition (of multiple spatial structures in one plane) in
Tschumi's award winning La Vilette project in 1983.
Productive Patterns
Patrik Schumacher 1997
Published n: architect's bulletin, Operativity, Volume 135 -
136, Slovenia and in: architect's bulletin, Volume 137 - 138,
Slovenia German: Produktive Ordnungen
Published n: ARCH+ 136, Your Office s Where You Are,
Berlin
Productive Patterns - Part 3
c) From systems approach to the eco-system paradigm
System Theory (and the management approach derived from
it) formalizes Burns' distinction between mechanistic and
organismic organizations - aiming to understand the structural
conditions of adaptability - via the elaboration of the distinction
between "closed" and "open" systems. According to the systems
approach, classical management theory treated the corporation
as a closed system, preoccupied with principles of internal
design, in the absence of any relevant notion of context. System
theory is expanding the conceptual repertoire, also concerning
internal relations and operations. The fundamental point here is -
and this is what makes system theory so attractive to
management discourse in the late sixties - that all these new
concepts are geared towards the comprehension of systems in
responsive relation to (dynamic) environments: homeostasis
(steady-state exchanges), requisite variety (internal differentiation
matching the environment's (relevant) differentiation), equifinality
(allowing for different ways of arriving at a given end state), and
most fundamentally the concept of negative and positive
feedback loops.
(These conceptual tools originate from contemporary
approaches in biological science (also referred to as organismic
as against mechanistic biology), from the theory and technology
of cybernetics (producing a new generation of self-regulating
automata), as well as from computer- and information science.
The social sciences are quick to follow and "General Systems
Theory"(26) attempts to abstract/construct an overarching logic
for the new sciences. This period also witnesses the proliferation
of explicite system-theoretical approaches to urban analysis and
urban planning. System theory offers to architecture the
conceptualization of sytem-effects and system-dependency upon
environment as a model to conceive the building as a system
(rather than mere agglomeration) of spaces and to think through
the buildings relation to context as well as to programme.)
The system-theoretical notion of feed-back involves more
than simple reciprocal interaction between variables (as some
vulgarizing presentations seem to imply). t goes beyond a direct
response mechanism (e.g. the reflex arcs of behaviorism). "The
behavior of complex, open systems is not a simple and direct
function of impinging external forces, as is the case with ...
gravitational systems. Rather, as open systems become more
complex there develop within them more and more complex
mediating processes that intervene between external forces and
behavior. At higher levels these mediating processes become
more and more independent or autonomous, and more
determinative of behavior."(27) What "emerges" here is some
degree of self-regulation. (The notions of "self-organization"
and"emergence" originate in sixties' system theory, preceding
chaos-theory.)
The system-theoretical notion (of feedback) implies the
notions of an underlying "internal" or internally ascertained
"function", "purpose" or "direction", internal parameters defining or
bracketing "goal-states".
These are the (previously irreducable) hallmarks that seem to
distinguish higher order organizations like organisms,
corporations, cities, societies etc. from physical systems. System
theory claims to explain the phenomenon of seemingly goal-
oriented behavior by reducing to "efficient" causes, operating here
and now, what was previously understood in reference to
teleological (meta-physical) notions of "final causes". Feedback is
analysed as a mechanism through which the "orientation" of the
system can be explicated as being embodied in the complex
configurational relations of the system itself (rather than hovering
above, e.g. in the intense will of a corporation's CEO).
(System theory thus offers itself to architecture as an
invitation to elaborate a more sophisticated and effective
understanding of the "function" and "meaning" of a building,
beyond the commonplace notion that buildings passively receive
both function and meaning from an external and pre-established
consciousness - man in his original identity - as "final cause".
What am pointing at here is what E. Soja calls "the socio-spatial
dialectic". Following H.Lefebvre and D.Harvey, he recognises
"spatiality as simultaneously a social product (or outcome) and a
shaping force (or medium) in social life.")(28)
The simplest case of a (cybernetic) open system, is the case
of a steady-state (morphostasis) being maintained in a changing
environment via negative feedback mechanisms. n the limit case
the internal order is reproduced identically. n more complex
scenarios a system undergoes directional (systematic) evolution.
Generally open systems , according to W.Buckley, are defined
through the following 4 definitory requirements:
1. bracketing of internal criterion variables
2. selective sensitivity, or mapped relationship to environment
3. ability to distinguish deviations of the system's internal
states from goal-states
4. negative or positive feedback, reducing or increasing the
deviation of the system from its goal-states or criterion limits.
Without grasping that allowing the second option under point
4 in effect opens a (yet) unbridgeable conceptual abyss within
system theory, Buckley goes on to distinguish between
morphostasis and morphogenesis and complains that "these
(former) conserving, deviation-counterbalancing processes have
come to be emphasized in the literature at the expense of
structure-elaborating, deviation-promoting processes that are
central to an understanding of higher level systems such as the
sociocultural."(29) Buckley seems to point at development even
beyond the dynamic teleology of a directed goal-state evolution
and thus touches the black hole which Derrida is conquering that
very year.(30) But Buckley's 'systems theory' is not equal to the
task. His notion of a system of progessive deviation can maintain
the definitory goal-state only as a metaphysical entity: as the
goal's operational life fades away (via deviation), its ghost must
take over, presiding over the measurement of deviation. Steeped
in aristotelian logic, systems theory can not survive its ambition to
comprehend 20th Century's socio-cultural dynamic. (Trying to
tackle the hitherto uncharted issues of morphogenesis in biology,
meterology, and cosmology, it shifted gear (and name) to turn into
Chaos- and Catastrophe-theory.(31)) The rather rigid character of
the system theory framework restricts its application to rather
trivial problems - trivial compared to the problem of post-fordist
survival. The rigidity of the conceptual apparatus turns into
metaphysics in the face of a discussion that calls for dialectic
conceptual movements. For instance: The principle of requisite
variety - demands that the internal differentiation of a system
matches the differentiation of its environment. The environment
(e.g. the global economy) has necessarily a (vastly) higher variety
than the system (e.g. the corporation). t can obviously only be a
matter of matching the relevant environmental variety. And this
relevant environmental variety (e.g. of the particular niche-market
adressed by the corporation), being defined only in reference to
the very system (the corporation) it is supposed to measure and
determine, can not, therefore, count as an independent and prior
measure or parameter. The Aristotelian idea of matching
collapses here into tautology. The phenomenon of the dialectical
reactive-constructive relationship between (post-fordist) marketing
and market escapes the formalizations offered within the system
theory framework.
The same limits are placed upon the notion of an internally
17/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
(pre-)set parameter. Again the notion cuts into substances and
identities what can only emerge from an interdependency of
terms. At the end of the 20thCentury - under conditions of rapid
and 'catastrophic cultural morphogenesis' - the language of
system theory can no longer describe e.g. how a family (system)
is moving into a new flat (environment). To do this with a degree
of effectiveness - worthy of an effective architectural design-
speculation - requires a language beyond systems analysis (and
structuralism).
Nevertheless, system theory has been applied to managerial
problems. n its most rigorous form - operations analysis - it was
also confined to the most trivial scope of problem, e.g. small
logistical subsystems of organizations. There also have been
attempts to employ the vocabulary to the overall problem of
corporate organization in relation to types of environment. A good
example , combining the introduction of concepts with case-study-
analysis, is given in P.R.Lawrence & J.W.Lorch "High performing
Organizations in Three Environments", relating "organizational
states and environmental demands"(32). Although a lot of insights
have been channeled through this paradigm in the sixties, its
rigidities and limitations were soon critisized within organizational
discourse. The undialectical presupposition of a given
environment (differentiated or dynamic) was questioned and
challenged by a "concept for organizational ecology"(33), allowing
for mutual rather than one-way determination between
environment and organization and actively promoting new forms
of interorganizational relations interactional field). This new
paradigm of the business-eco-system gained currency in the
second half of the seventies. Recently it has been restated
referring to "the death of competition"(34) and insisting on the
inevitability of co-evolution. Competition is not vanishing, rather
the logic of competiotion is transformed from efficiency (price-
competition ) within a market to a competition around the creation
of new markets. This has consequences for corporate
organization since major innovation and the creation of new
markets involves the co-evolution of a whole techno-economic
and cultural field. This requires a network of multiple contributers,
the blurring of corporate identity/integrety. Operators in one (not
yet established) market, who might have been conceived as
competitors according to older conceptions, are now often
depending upon each others survival. The eco-system approach
realises that a new product category distorts a whole subsystem
of commodities. As example might serve the abrupt 'revaluation of
all (architectural) values' effected by POMO (which also involved
the co-evolution of new building technologies). Another example -
although confined to the realm of architectural (avant-garde)
culture rather than operating in the economy at large - is the
impact of Zaha Hadid's Hong Kong Peak entry which - in a flash -
relegated the competion between Graves, Krier, and Ungers
irrelevant, all appearing equally outdated. The most efficient
competitor perishes with his field of competition.
The move from the system to the eco-system - from
evolution/coexistence to co-evolution - implies a shift from the
passive adaptation to markets to the active creation of markets.
The product becomes pro-creative, function seems to follow form.
Markets are no longer conceived, as according to the neo-
classical ideal of perfect competition, to be beyond the influence
of any single corporation. The stage seemed set for a game-
theoretical approach to business organization. Whereas system
theory - like neoclassical economics - aggregates competitors into
the impersonal force of the market, game theory allows the
players to reckon with competitors as equally strategizing players.
The next chapter will show how this prima facie paradigmatic
advance collapses under the load of unmanageable complexity,
producing another brand of metaphysics in an attempt to uphold
an ultimately inadequate vocabulary.(34)
d) Beyond structuralism
Sixties (Anglo-saxon) system theory and (French)
Structuralism (Durkheim, de Sassure, Levi-Strauss) are
analogous paradigms. (n their respective disciplines - biology,
cybernetics and organization on the one side and sociology,
linguistic and anthropology on the other side - both approaches
are able to understand certain 'higher order' phenomena - 'life',
'goal-orientation', 'successful firm', 'the individual', 'function' - as
system-effects, or respectively as properties of structures
configured from lower order elements. Bill Hillier is operating in
this tradition when he is trying to explicate such elusive concepts
as 'urbanity' via configurational analysis.)(35) The intellectual
break-through of structuralism was achieved by F.de Sassure via
the deliberate departure from "historical linguistics", i.e. in
deliberate abstraction from change. He defines his science of
language as synchronic, as "static linguistics". Precisely this lever
of progress becomes - since the end of the sixties -
structuralism's weakness, when the acceleration of change in
technology, culture and language called for a new logic and meta-
language: post-structuralism.
From a materialist perspective it is not a miracle that
management- and organization-theory, exposed to the same
stresses of 'liquefaction', had, by the mid-seventies,
independently, without any reference to the respective French
writers, in effect made its own move from structuralism to post-
structuralism. Even if less sophisticated and self-reflective, and
without the same pervasiveness, organizational "post-
structuralism", not known by this name(36), is equally driven to
paradoxical formulations (e.g."Technology of Foolishness",
"productive self-deception", "friutful misunderstanding"). Before
entering this discourse briefly present an example of the game-
theoretical approach as a mediating link from system- to 'post-
system theory: M.Crozier's 'Comparing structures and comparing
games' (37) from 1976 critisizes the systems-approach as too
"deterministic" to be "adequate for a phenomenon of high-order
complexity as organization." (This formulation already exposes
his framework as oblivious to history, essentializing organizational
'high-order complexity'.) "The dominant paradigm revolved around
the basic question concerning structure: how contextual variables
determine the basic structural features of an organization and
how these features command the behavior of the members and
the performances of the organization. The new paradigm first
emerges around the idea that the contextual features should not
be considered as variables determining the structure, but as
problems to be solved. ... There is , then, a second kind of
theoretical orientation, which is the consideration of an
organization as a system of games for solving the problems
raised by the contextual constraints, and not only as social
system who's activities are finalized."
Although Crozier is here certainly on the move towards further
liquefaction, he has not crossed the threshold of structuralism. He
still relies on the notion of system (system of games) and only
objects to activities being finalized, while still assuming stable
goals. Games are defined by rules, players have goals, and
choose between strategies. All these notions become questions
pointing beyond structuralism. Crozier is not yet trying to come to
terms with paradoxes like 'un-systematic systems', 'inconsistent
strategies' and 'shifting goals' - realities of the seventies' calling
for a post-structuralist logic of diffrance. ndeed, the formal
organisational hierarchies and specialized competencies (i.e. the
formal system) were increasingly hollowed out by actual
'adhocracies'; and strategy formulation turned increasingly into
the post-rationalization of the latest contingencies.
Sophisticated and explicite arguments beyond structuralism
are developed in J.G.March and J.P.Olsen 'Ambiguity and Choice
in Organizations" (1976) - a devastating critique of engrained
notions of choice, decision, goal, reason, rule, experience, history
etc. The whole logos of Western rationality is challenged in a text
with no direct philosophical ambitions. From within management
discourse, brought forward in the form of a critique of formal
decision analysis (the peak of modern rationality), the whole
edifice of Western philosophy is brought down, involving
formulations that could have been cut straight out of the major
texts of Derrida; and may easily be read as a challenge of
engrained assumptions about architecture, architectural history,
the plan, planning, and the design process.
Within most of the Western world individuals and
organizations see themselves as making choices. March & Olsen
start their argument by analysing what is presupposed in the
concept of choice and identify the following three underlying
assumptions: the pre-existence of purpose, the necessity of
consistency, and the primacy of rationality. Those ideas, deeply
embedded in modern society, are made the explicite axioms of
decision theory. "t is fundamental to those theories that thinking
should precede action; that action should serve a purpose; that
purpose should be defined in terms of a consistent set of pre-
18/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
existenting goals; and that choice should be based on a
consistent theory of the relation between action and its
consequences. Every tool of management decision that is
currently part of management science, operations research or
decision theory assumes the prior existence of a set of consistent
goals. Almost the entire structure of micro-economic theory builds
on the assumption that there exists a well-defined stable, and
consistent preference ordering." (March&Olsen)
How could it be otherwise, how could one not start the
building with the foundations?
What decision theory and the ideology of choice can only
ignore or conceive of as deficiency - the reality of "the fluidity and
ambiguity of objectives"(M.&O.) - needs to be 'redeemed' within a
new and more complex understanding of rationality. The whole
economy of rationality involving the network of concepts like
freedom, coercion, identity and progress will be
deconstructed/reconstructed. "Goals are thrust upon the
intelligent man. We ask that he act in the name of goals. We ask
that he keeps his goals consistent." (Just as function is thrust
upon form in architecture.) ntentionality is seen to be the defining
moment of human consciousness, in its individual as well as
colllective (organized) existence. March does not indulge in an
abstract negation of goal-oriented rationality, he proposes its
sublation into "more complicated forms of consistency", i.e. a
more complex rationality which allows for degrees of temporary
laxity, able to offer procedures ("plans") for the
discovery/construction of new goals and values. The current
reality of shifting goals seems to force us to "choose now in terms
of the unknown set of values we will have at some future time. ...
This violates severely our sense of temporal order."(M.&O.) Such
a "choice" is, according to the "ideology of choice", utterly non-
sensical. The hypothesis here is that the latter (ideology) has to
be challenged, not the former (reality) exorcized. Late eighties'
design-process experiments in architectural education had
precisely this warped time structure: 'choose' now, 'motivate' later.
The aleatoric process was endemic in London architectural
schools in the second half of the eighties. This process or method
involves the radical suspension of everything usually associated
with "design" as deliberate purpose-lead activity. This was
reflected in the reversal of the order of programme and form in
the slogan "Form to Progamme"(39) Freedom and progress are
here mediated through coercion in the sense of the designers
(temporary) submission to an arbitrary determination. ("Coercion
is not necessarily an assault on individual autonomy. t can be a
device for stimulating individuality."(M.&O.)) n the aleatoric
design method the formal process is running amok and
programme (life) is read into it a posteriori, allowing for an
innovative (re-)alignment of both new form and new function - the
perfect strategy to create new markets instead of competing in old
ones. The aleatoric "play" is an instrument of intelligence, not a
pure negation or substitute. March comes to the same conclusion
in relation to business strategy: "Playfulness is the deliberate,
temporary relaxation of rules in order to explore the possibilities of
alternative rules. When we are playful we challenge the necessity
of consistency. n effect, we announce - in advance - our rejection
of usual objections to behavior that does not fit the standart model
of intelligence. Playfulness allows experimentation. At the same
time, it acknowledges reason. t accepts that at one point ... it will
be integrated into the structure of intelligence." n further reversals
and re-valuations March proposes to treat 'goals as hypotheses',
'intuition as real', 'hypocracy as transitional'(somebody
experimenting with new ideals), 'memory as enemy', and
'experience as theory' - hitting at a fundamental Derridian insight.
March: "Experience can be changed retrospectively. By changing
our interpretive concepts now, we modify what we learned earlier.
Thus we expose the possibility of experimenting with alternative
histories. ... Personal histories, and national histories, need to be
rewritten continuously as a base for the retrospective learning of
new self-conceptions. ... Planning in organizations has many
virtues, but a plan can often be more effective as an interpretation
of past decisions than as a program for future ones. ... n an
organization that wants to continue to develope new objectives, a
manager needs to be relatively tolerant of the idea that he will
discover the meaning of yesterday's action in the experiences and
interpretations of today."(M.&O.)
(This is a real life example of the very phenomenon Derrida's
central notion of differance (40) - the combination of difference
and deferrence - points at: The fact that, always already (but only
now accelerated into visibility), language (and thinking) is a
system of differences that continuously defers its resolution via its
permanent retro-active re-writing of all its terms. Derrida: "... all is
not to be thought at one go ... "(41) and this has bewitching
consequences: A thought might no longer speak the language of
its own beginning. Below we will start to speculate about an
architecture of differance.)
March realizes that "play" is not necessarily constricted to the
domain of the individual. "Organizations can be playful even when
the particpants in them are not."(M.&O.) How does the
(anti-)structure of such an organization look like? How can get
architecture involved? What kind of spatialities would this
suggest?
A new architecture beyond structuralism might offer itself to
inhabitation as an aleatoric field, anticipating and actively
prefacing its own detournment. The late sixties "soft rooms" and
toy-like environments may have been the moment architecture
got closest to such an ambition. The "Brolandschaft" (office
landscape) of the seventies was, in a far more serious context,
also already pointing to such a potential, as demonstrated in the
extrapolating projections of Archizoom. An aleatoric field is always
a specific field and offers more (and less) than the abstract
freedom of blank neutrality. The abstract freedom of neutrality
forces the inhabitants to fall back and rely on the pre-conceptions
they bring to such a space. Such a space is reproductive rather
than generative. A generative and liberating architecture can only
work via a degree of coercion. t becomes a generative force via
resistance rather than offering the path of least resistance. Laxity
as an active force is proposed to substitute the ideas of abstract
openess on the one hand and passive flexibility on the other.
Laxity implies a productive imprecision not always associated with
flexibility (which mostly offers a choice between clear cut options).
Laxity also involves a degree of stiffness (its definitory other with
which it shares a scale) (42), a productive 'anexact' coercion. This
side of the dialectic seems underdeveloped in the foregrounding
of "deformation", "weakness", and "submissiveness" of the new
"compliant" strategies of "Folding". The framework of e.g. Greg
Lynn's "Architectural Curvilinearity" is too easily misread as still
operating within the conceptual economy of system theory, when
he emphasizes time and again "complex deformations in
response to ... contextual influences", or the "incorporation of
external influences into a pliant system".(43) What remains
unexamined is what the pliant system brings into the exchange.
This question can not be answered in the abstract. Laxity has
always to be bracketed with a degree of specificity. We know what
it is no longer: a matrix of hard-edged zones and sub-zones,
based on precedent and type. When Lynn is criticizing the notion
of an ideal type he is certainly not resting with its pure negation.
He sublates type into "internal force", participating in a "zone of
co-present forces: both internal and external". nspired by D'Arcy
Thompson he proposes an "alternative type ... capable of both
bending under external forces and folding those forces internally.
These transformations develope through discontinuous involution
rather than continuous evolution."(44) The emphasis and effort is
again directed towards allowing for the incorporation of
contingencies rather than focussing on the particular modes,
limits and specific resistances to incorporation (and easy
appropriation). What is also left out is the deformation suffered by
the external force , and more profoundly, the fact that what might
or might not count as an external force depends on the internal
logic that receives it. Lynn's "curvelinear logic seeks to internalise
cultural and contextual forces within form"(45). The strategy of
Laxity views architectural space as a (lax) subject in the strong
sense that a cultural force can no longer be referred to as a priori
given, prior to and independent of the architecture it enters into.
Concerning e.g. the question of cultural identity: architecture is,
together with all the other paraphernalia of every day life, always
already involved in the construction of (the system of differential)
identity. And this not only as a part of the 'system of objects' or
'fashion system', but more profoundly in the teritorializing matrices
in which those systems operate. Architecture operates as a
gigantic sorting machine, that has you always already sorted
(even if within rather wide brackets at times). f architecture can
incarcerate (Bataille, Foucault, Lefebvre), it can become the site
19/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
of a liberating inflection. Every new building has a lever upon the
total structure and can initiate a chain-reaction of subversion
(creating a new "market"). Laxity is emphasizing this demiurgic
power of architecture. This power is not inherent, it operates like
certain eastern martial arts, relying on the force of "typical"
architecture and the tensions building up within it. One strategy
could be to play surface-significations against spatial order - a
strategy analogous to surrealist painting(46) (and another
argument to forget the abstract strictures against reference Kipnis
is suggesting). t seems as if the amorphous, facetted fields, first
identified as "New Architecture", are not only semantically empty,
but also spatially too blank, too abstract, leaping too far into the
realm of the unknown and alien, too unmediated to be able to
carry all the sophisticated effects that the carefully calibrated
algebra of new words ascribes to them as their ambition. Multiple
affiliation, deformation, morphing, field organization, intensive
coherence, pliancy, smoothness etc. are certainly timely tropes for
a new architecture. gnoring for a moment that we are supposedly
moving from a Derridian to a Deleuzian discourse (Kipnis),
would agree with Derrida that one has to put the received forms
to work, because "to claim to do away immediately with previous
marks and to cross over, by decree, by a simple leap ... is, apart
from the risk of engaging in an interminable "negative theology",
to forget that these ... have never constituted a given system, a
sort of ahistorical thoroughly homogenous table, but rather a
dissymmetric, hierarchical space whose closure is constantly
being traversed by the forces, and worked by the exteriority, that it
represses; that is, expels and, which amounts to the same,
internalizes as one of its moments."(47) t seems we are always
already within "curvilinearity" - folded into a logic of differance.
Productive Patterns
Patrik Schumacher 1997
Published n: architect's bulletin, Operativity, Volume 135 -
136, Slovenia and in: architect's bulletin, Volume 137 - 138,
Slovenia German: Produktive Ordnungen
Published n: ARCH+ 136, Your Office s Where You Are,
Berlin
Productive Patterns - Part 4
6. Specifications for the new organization and political
consequences
What might present itself here in the form of a conclusion can
not be plucked from the geneological tree upon which it grows.
Even the mechanistic paradigm still leaves heavy traces and
should not be considered exorcized. Theoretically: The history of
the concept of 'organization' remains the complication of its origin.
Practically: Although management rhetoric runs rampant and
corporate restructuring is gathering pace, the bureaucratic mode
of organization is far from extinct. t remains an entrenched reality.
My overview over the development of management discourse
does not go beyond the mid-seventies. Although the explosion of
"revolutionary" management literature comes later, no further
significant theoretical advance has been made. The most
important slogans are listed below. All the following features -
contradictions are endemic and no attempt is made here to
systematize - have become real agendas in today's business re-
organization:
a) internal:
- flattening of hierarchies
- decentralization of operations
- devolution of authority
- collegial rather than command style of communication
- dispersal of creative intelligence throughout the corporation
- fragmentation into autonomous profit-centres
- group work, team-work and shared responsibility
- participatory structures tapping the knowledge and creative
intelligence of all employees
- liberation of communication through information systems
that allow communication to flow in all directions (even if
communication in person is still confined to the scalar chain)
- departmentalization is replaced or overdetermined by
project-organization
- short contracts increase mutual independence even within a
formal employment relation
- hybrid conglomerats rather than functionally integrated
corporations
b) internal/external:
- the blurring of the internal-external dichotomy
- employees become self-employed
- outsourcing, franchising, subcontracting
- dismemberment of large conglomerats
- the the paradigm of the 'loosely coupled network'
c) external, resp. inter-corporate
- globalization as corporate strategyv - collaborative
manufacturing involving informal networks of firms
- temporary strategic alliances
- eco-system approach in industrial regions ('synenergetic
technopoles')
Although the word democratization is not among the slogans
circulating around the management 'revolution' it seems to be
pointed towards by most arguments put forward. Democratization
seems the repressed driving logic of recent (and future)
productivity gains. Democratization seems to be (the dangerous
and potentially undermining but) inevitable panacea for industry
(capital) in order to cope with the new challenge of permanent re-
orientation and innovation. The more information-based, the more
dependent upon research & development production in the
western metropolis becomes, the less can it proceed
autocratically.
The new organizational paradigms (e.g. the rhizome), which
Deleuze & Guattari elaborated in the late seventies, in dialogue
with the anti-Leninist forms of revolutionary struggle and
organisation, most explicitly elaborated in the talian "autonomia"
movement (48), seem to become the very paradigms of corporate
restructuring: The aborescent command pyramid of classical
corporatism is mutating towards the rhysomatic plateau upon
which the leadership is distributed in a permanently shifting
multiplicity where every point bears the latency of becoming a
temporary centre. A whole series of striking parallels can be
drawn between the seventies counter-culture and 80ties/90ties
establishment: - The autonomous revolutionary "groupuscule" and
the new business strategy of autonomous profit centres, group
work and temporary task-forces.
- The rotating leadership on the left and general shortening of
contracts (the "one minute manager") in business. - The
disintegration of (international) party discipline in favour of the
"free circulation of struggles" and the disintegration of the large
corporation into a network of subcontractural relations.
What does this involuntary imitation signify? Certainly not a
capitalist utopia. And certainly no democratization on the political
level. Here we witness rather the reverse: Privatization,
increasing class-polarization, militarism etc. What it might signify
is that the developement of productivity points beyond the
rigidities of class-society.
Current socio-economic restructuring proceeds through the
contradictory interaction of technological, organizational and
political processes. t is crucial to distinguish those aspects that
pertain to productive progress from those that pertain to the
simultaneously evolving political conditions that frame and
overdetermine ('distort') productive restructuring. The ability, to
distinguish Post-fordism as a new paragigm of production
attaining new levels of productivity from the simultaneous neo-
liberal offensive that utilizses (and the competing capitals force
each other to utilize) the unsettled relations of production for a
decisive shift in the underlying political relations, is crucial to any
assessment of architecture's prospect.
n my analysis the three main progressive and productive
factors of Postfordist restructuring are the following:
1. globalization, i.e. a new level of international integration of
production
2. flexible specialization - made possible by the computer-
revolution
3. the organisational revolution - i.e. the relative de-
hierarchization and de- beaurocratization, i.e. democratization of
work. Under current capitalism these features are distorted,
compromised and borne out to the disadvantage of the majority of
the world population.
1. Globalization takes the form of a re-emergence of
interimperialist rivalries, militarism, enforced austerity
programmes, the break up of national welfare compromises
20/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
between capital and labour, resulting in a fierce downward
competition of labour-costs, i.e. of the majority's standart of living.
Also overall productivity suffers as long as the world allocation of
material and labour resources remains driven by an irrational ,
militarily guaranteed , and thus ultimately very costly "cheapness"
of labour, which allows the squandering of millions of potentially
much more productive lifes.
2. The new flexibility and potential richness of life-work is
borne out and experienced by labour as existential insecurity. On
the product side the new economies of scope are abused for
stratification and status consumption rather than non-exclusive
diversity. They become barriers rather than means of social
communication.
3. The rationale of discursive cooperation rather than
command type of work-organization is forced upon the capitalist
corporation by the new degree of complexity and flexibility of the
total production process within which it has to function.
Nevertheless it remains highly compromised and limited by the
reality of class-society with its inherent hierarchy and irrational
hingeing of authority upon property.
This contradictory dialectic of capitalist progress/regress(49)
is exemplified in the limited and distorted form in which the logical
managerial consequences of the reproduction process of
postfordism (flexible specialization) as drawn out by business
think-tankers - abolishment of hierarchies through networks,
devolution of authority etc. - have been (mis)implemented within
capitalist business. Despite of its highly compromised
implementation, the theoretetical congruency of recent
organizational theory with the seventies' anarchist ideas of
revolutionary organization (as shown above) remains remarkable.
This discourse entered architectural discourse via the abstract
and generalized forms and formulations propagated by Deleuze
and Guattari in their 'Thousand Plateaus' from 1980. This book,
which presents radical politics in the form of a quasi-geometry, is
obviously the main source of inspiration for the formal claims and
strategies of the "New Architecture" of "Folding". Those
strategies, as they align themselves to the most innovative and
progressive developements within capitalism, also point to
something beyond.
Repercussions in architecture:The"Loosley Coupled Network"
and the "School of Fish"(50) t seems as if innovating business
becomes the congenial audience and client for the recent
architectural avant-gardes of deconstructivism and folding. The
organisational changes in the architectural profession itself too
point in the very direction which is suggested by this list of catch
phrases and slogans.
The large corporations dissolve into clusters of consulting
offices which in turn dissolve into clusters of free-lancing
consultants: a universe of swarming atoms where densities occur
in the zones of hyper-mobility. Only short-term, project-based
forms of associations are realised. Even during a single "project",
which itself is often only a certain phase within the production of a
building, the cluster of consultants is in permanent flux. (The
vanishing point of the network idea leaves the architect either as
shifting pinball at the margins or in the rarefied realm of the star-
system, at the diminishing central node, as "value-added
remarketer" or "systems house", not much more than a brand
name franchised out to the various production conglomerates. But
this franchising node has only the appearance of an originating
centre. n reality it is rather just one point of temporary gravity in
the moving swarm.)
All this suggests that the architect will have to re-conceive
himself and his operations via the very terms through which the
recent avant-gardes of postmodernism, deconstructivism and
folding have revolutionised architecture's conceptual apparatus,
formal techniques and spatial paradigms: Those new forms of
operation will be characterised by notions like heterogeneity,
multiplicity, ambiguity, super-imposition, multiple affiliation, fluidity,
the pliant and the supple, blurring, field versus object, loose
control, laxity etc. The rhizome, as expounded by Deleuze and
Guattari, will replace the tree not only in the vocabulary of
architecture and urbanism ("A city is not a tree") - the rhizome is
becoming the organisational paradigm of the professions own
constitution. (The building of flexible networks of small specialized
firms is a strategy recommended in recent issues of the official
organ the German chamber of Architects - DAB) The architect's
office becomes multiplicitous, it transforms - to borrow one of the
most immediate Deleuzian examples of rhizomatic organisation -
its regular standing army into the fluid squads of guerrilla warfare.
notes / references:
1. The currency of "New Architecture" is due to Jeffrey Kipnis'
"Towards a New Architecture" (AD, Folding in Architecture,
London 1993) - a manifesto-type attempt to synthesize and
formalise the underlying notions, methods and formal strategies
apparent in a series of recent projects and texts that seem to
crystallise into a new paradigmatic discourse beyond
Deconstructivism. Although a series of distinct
nuances/emphases and some new concepts/qualities might
warrant another manifesto, the direct lineage from
Deconstructivism is as obvious as the polemic attempt to
establish distance. My paper therefore uses "New Architecture"
more loosely as pars pro toto including most of
"Deconstructivism" and even some "Postmodernism". "Folding" is
the term that seems to have gained most ground as label for a
new avant-garde and refers exclusively to the work of Lynn,
Kipnis, Shirdel, a co-opted Eisenman etc., i.e. the work Kipnis
refers to as "New Architecture".
2.Concerning the relation of Postfordism and Organisation
Theory: The former elaborates an explanatory theory that
encompasses the whole of socio-economic development on a
macro-scale and in historical perspective while the latter might be
considered as a sub-discourse that is directly concerned with the
development of corporate structures and often understands itself
as a design discipline. The relation to architecture is here much
more immediate. That the design of the organisation and the
design of its building(s) are related is reflected in the recent
tendency of large corporations to synthesise their departments for
personnel, real estate and information technology.
3.The fundamental dialectic exchange between architecture
and the foundations of thinking (as ordering) is evident in the
abundance of architectural metaphors in philosophy (foundation,
structure, edifice) and most explicitly demonstrated in Mark
Wigley's book on deconstruction. Wigley, M., The Architecture of
Deconstruction: Derrida's Haunt, Cambridge MA.1993
4. Castells, M. & Hall, P., Technopoles of the World, London &
N.Y. 1994
5. "All the elements of the cultural past must be "reinvested"
or dissapear." (Asger Jorn, 'Detourned Painting', quoted in Guy
Debord's 'Detournement as negation and prelude', nternationale
Situationniste #3, December 1959, translated in: Situationist
nternational - Anthology, Knabb, K.(Ed.), Berkeley 1981.
6.Ash Amin, p.1, ntroduction to "Post-Fordism - A Reader",
Oxford / Cambridge MA.1994
7.Besides the above mentioned Anthology edited by Ash
Amin, the notion of Postfordism is extensively discussed and
employed in: Robin Murray, Fordism and Postfordism, in S. Hall &
M.Jacques, New Times, London 1989 W. Ruigrok & R. van
Tulder, The Logic of nternational Restructuring, London, New
York 1995 Hirst,P. & Zeitlin,J., Flexible Specialization versus post-
Fordism, London 1991 David Harvey, The Condition of
Postmodernity, Oxford / Cambridge MA. 1989 Edward W. Soja,
Postmodern Geographies, London, N.Y. 1989
8. UNDO (United Nations ndustrial Developement
Organisation), Structural Change in ndustry, Vienna 1979 OECD
(Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Developement),
Positive Adjustment ploicies: Managing Structural Change, Paris
1983
9. Michel Aglietta, A Theory of Capitalist Regulation - The US
Experience, London 1979
10. n the previous period industrial production gained ground
on a market still dominated by middle class consumption, while
worker's consumption was, as a rather precarious market, still
partially served by petty production and to a certain extent even
still based on subsistence, as exemplified by the vegetable
gardens which most working class families still maintained in the
19th century.
11. These are two examples of leading architecture being
identified with neo-classical state representation. The main task
was the articulation of the facade. Wallot was the architect of the
'Reichstag' in Wilhelminian Berlin, Theophil Hansen was the
architect of the Vienna Reichsrat 1883.
12. The paradigm of the assembly-line, on the one hand
21/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
multiplies those processes by furthering the technical division of
labour while on the other hand furthering their integration under a
single command via the concentration of capital. This
concentration couples the increase of the technical division of
labour with a reduction of the social division of labour. Marx
distinguishes between technical and social division of labour.
(Capital Vol.) The former refers to the partition and distribution of
tasks between operatives within a firm and the latter describes
the division of labour between firms integrated only through the
market. Each type might be transformed into the other. The
emergence of manufacture and the capitalist firm from
precapitalist commodity production implies the two-fold process of
absorbing the social division of labour by integrating various crafts
within one economic unit while simultaneously breaking down the
former artisan's labour into a series of partial tasks. Those might
in turn become the basis for specialised enterprises, possibly to
be re-integrated at a later stage of developement. Although each
new technical division of labour opens the possibilty of a further
social division of labour, i.e. the comodification of partial products,
the dominating tendency, especially during the whole historical
epoch of monopoly capitalism, has been the comprehensive
integration of production into super-corporations where large
administrative beaurocracies planned the complex internal
allocation of resources thus taking over the organization of
considerable chunks of the economy from the (less reliable)
invisible hand of the market.
13. Boyle, B.M., Architectural Practice in America, 1865-1965
- deal and Reality in: Kostof, S. (Ed.), The Architect - Chapters in
the History of the Profession, Oxford 1977
14. Hybridity, in contra-distinction to the notion of mere
"tolerant" juxta-position of cultures in liberal "multi-culturalism",
becomes the axiom of recent "postcolonial criticism" as
represented by Homi K. Bhabha. " want to take my stand on the
shifting margins of cultural displacement - that confounds any
profound or "authentic" sense of a 'national' culture or 'organic'
intellectual - and ask what the function of a committed theoretical
perspective might be, once the cultural and historical hybridity of
the postcolonial world is taken as the paradigmatic place of
departure. ... This is a different dynamic from the ethic tolerance
in liberal ideology which has to imagine opposition in order to
contain it ..."
15. The mis-appropriation of semiotics in architecture is
criticized in Agrest, D. & Gandelsonas, M., Semiotics and
Architecture - deological Consumption or Theoretical Work,
(originally published as "Critical Remarks on Semiology and
Architecture", in Oppositions No.1, N.Y.C. 1973), in: Nesbitt, K.
(Ed.), Theorizing a new agenda for architecture - anthology of
architectural theory 1965 -1995
16. The recent rejection of the semiotic dimension in
architecture by Kipnis , Lynn, Allen etc. seems as one-sided as its
previous predominance. Experience (rather than any a priori
'ontological' argument) shows that concern for "effect" and
"performativity" can not remain oblivious to semiotic effects that
operate disregarding intentions of "blankness" and the the
exorcism of reference. This holds for the majority of problems
architects are trying to solve (including such (abstract) effects as
'multiple affiliation') - notwithstanding the acknowledgement of fact
that some really interesting effects concerning circulation patterns
have recently been simulated with particle animators, thus
demonstrating that patterns that seemed to presuppose
intelligence and culture can be reduced to a 'blindly" operating
configurational logic.(Frank Schweitzer, nstitute for Physics,
Humboldt University, Berlin)
17. Cannon, T.: Welcome to the Revolution - Managing
Paradox in the 21st Century, London 1996 Ray, M. &
Rinzler,A.:The new Paradigm for Business, L.A. 1993 Peters,T. :
Liberation Management - Necessary Disorganisation for
Nanosecond Nineties, N.Y. 1993 Peters, T.: Thriving on Chaos,
N.Y. 1987 Bergquist,W.: The Postmodern Organisation -
mastering the art of irreversable change, New York 1993
Kilduff,m.: Deconstructing Organisations, Academy of
Management review 18 Blanchard,K.& Johnson,S.: The One
Minute Manager, New York 1982 Bower,J.L.: Disruptive
Technologies - Catching the Wave, Harvard Business Review,
Jan./Feb.1995
18. Ure, Andrew: The Philosophy of Manufacture: or an
Exposition of the Scientific, Moral and Commercial Economy of
the Factory System in Great Britain, London 1835, quoted in
Marx, Karl: Capital, Vol., p.395, Lawrence &Wishart, London
1954(1st engl. edition 1887).
19. Taylor, F.W.:Testimony to the House of Representatives
Commitee, 1912, in: Scientific Management, p.39, Harper &Row
1947
20. Fayol, H.:General and ndustrial Management, Pitman
1949, chapter 4, (French original published in 1916)
21. Alexander, Ch.: A City is not a Tree, in: Feher,M. &
Kwinter, S. (Ed.): Zone 1/2, N.Y.
22. Weber,M.: Bureaucracy, in: From Max Weber - Essays in
Sociology, N.Y. 1946, edited by H.H.Gerth & C. Wright Mills
(originally published in German in 1916 as part of Wirtschaft und
Gesellschaft, part , chap.6)
23. Burns, T. & Stalker, G.M. , The Management of
nnovation, London 1961 all quotes from: Burns, T., ndustry in a
new age, New Society, Jan. 1963
24. t has to be admitted: Firstly that the notion of post-fordism
is here brought to - rather than derived from - management
discourse. Secondly that a fiat - though heuristically motivated
and historically argued for - is involved in insisting on a
fundamentally binary structure in analysing 20th Century socio-
economic developement (from Fordism to Post-Fordism) rather
than prioritizing a manifold of 3 or 4 steps or a smooth and
undifferentiatd evolution along a certain scale or vector (e.g.
degree of functional differentiation, productivity etc.). Such scales
certainly can be identified, but something more is asserted when
one talks about a systemic shift (from Fordism to Post-Fordism).
And this is also something other than an even phasing between
two poles, although the notion of sytems, while implying integrety,
does not a priori exclude a smooth evolution (as seems to be the
case in natural evolution). Socio-economic history looks different:
here we certainly witness an uneven distribution of change. Here
the move from one sytem to another involves crisis, transitional
mal-operation and acceleration of institutional change (revolution)
- as is evident in the history of the 20th Century. So want to go
ahead with the working hypothesis of a fundamental boundary,
even if this boundary is fuzzy. f not a line, a ridge might be looked
for in each (and identified in most) realms of social life. ts profile
might vary and be rather flat in some realms, steep in others. Also
one might have to allow for substantial asynchronies. ( Which
language one uses - 'shifts', 'systems', 'scalar progress', 'crisis' -
should (and ultimately will) be regulated by pragmatics, i.e. the
predictive performance of the respective language in relation to
agendas, consciously pursuit (or sytemically asserted)).
27. Buckley, W. , Sociology and Modern Systems Theory,
New Jersey 1967
28. Soja, E.W. , Postmodern Geographies - The Reassertion
of Space in Critical Theory, N.Y. 1989
29.Buckley, W. , Sociology and Modern Systems Theory, New
Jersey 1967
30. 1967 was the year Jacques Derrida published three of his
most important books: Of Grammotology, Writing and Difference,
Speach and Phenomena.
31. But even in its updated forms the theory is not easily
geared towards a productive social analysis.
32. P.R.Lawrence & J.W.Lorch "High performing
Organizations in Three Environments", in Organization and
Environment, Harvard University Press 1967
33. Trist, E.L. , A Concept of Organizational Ecology,
Australien Journal of Management, 2, 1976
34. Since adequacy (requisite variety) as a category was
questioned on this page: without being able to argue it in a note:
can sustain an operational (political) notion of adequacy, beyond
aristotelian logic, within a framework of a historical dialectical
materialism that recuperates the post-structuralist advances and
participates in the convergence towards a pragmatist
epistemology.
35. Hillier,B., Space is the machine, Cambridge 1996 also:
Hillier, B. & Hanson, J., The social Logic of space, Cambridge
1984.
36. By now there has been reference made to so called 'Post-
modern Perspectives' in organization theory. Hatch, M.J.,
Organization Theory - Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern
Perspectives, Oxford 1997
22/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
37. Crozier, M., Comparing structures and comparing games,
in Hofstede, G. & Kassem, S.(eds.), European Contributions to
Organization Theory, Van Gorcum 1976
38. March, J.G. & Olsen, J.P., Ambiguity and Choice in
Organizations, 1976
39. A dense collection of student work, and a sophisticated
(as well as polemical) account of the form-to-programmme-
method, is available in: Rhowbotham, K., Form to Programme,
Black Dog Publishing, London 1995
40. Derrida, J., Differance, in Margins of Philosophy, Chicago
1982, French: Paris 1972
41. Derrida, J., Of Grammotology, p.23, Baltimore 1974,
French: Paris 1967
42. refer to the kind of stiffness want to point at via its
opposite - the lax - in order to remain on constant alert against its
misreading as deterministic rigidity.
43. Lynn, G., Architectural Curvilinearity, p.10, in: AD Folding
in Architecture, London 1993 am saying "easily misread as"
instead of "implies", because Greg Lynn's writings contain
everything need to make my subsequent argument. Especially
his "Multiplicitous and norganic Bodies" (Assemblage 19) is to be
recommended as first hand introduction to a new architecture
(beyond structuralism). My arguments are arguments of
emphasis.
44. bid., p.12
45. bid., p.12
46. Surrealism (as an active cultural practise rather than mere
commentary) plays an enormously important role in the
developement of all the ideas one would have to refer to here.
Lefebvre's 'moment', the Situationist 'situation', Bataille's 'in-forme'
etc.
47. Derrida, J., Disseminations, p.5, Chicago 1981, French:
Paris 1972
48. taly: Autonomia - Post-political Politics, Semio-text(e),
N.Y.C.1980
49. Progress is no metaphysical a priori of history but first of
all defined materially through the (empirically) evaluable
parameter of productivity.
50. The scholars Piore and Sabel derived the network
paradigm and the underlying concept of "flexible specialization"
from their 1984 study of the booming industrial district of Northern
taly's Emilia-Romagna ("Third taly") where according to their
analysis the success was based on networks of small firms being
able to flexibly supply an inovative variety of sophisticated
products for volatile consumer preferences. "School of fish" is one
of the latest analogies proposed by Jeffrey Kipnis to point towards
a new architectural concept beyond the dichotomy of object and
space.
Rational in Retrospect - Reflections
on the Logic of Rationality in Recent
Design
Patrik Schumacher 1999
Published n: AA files 38, Annals of the Architectural
Association School of Architecture
One of the most striking aspects of Un Studio's Arnhem
Central master plan is its ability to maintain its radical spatial
concept in the face of the constraints and pressures that come
with such a big investment. The project formulates an infra-
structural knot that comprises two bus terminals to be linked with
a train station. The key to the political and economic robustness
of this spectacular public space might not only lie in the scheme
and the design method from which it emerges, but rather in the
seamless presentation of the project and its design process as
eminently rational. The process itself has a veritable complexity
as it brackets ongoing formal experiments with a rigorous form
finding process based on the geometric and quantitative analysis
of all traffic functions. The claim is made that the project evolves
through the articulation of the various required transfer flows.
However, the real unfolding of this process is not reducible to the
logic of linear functional determination. Neither is the design
imposing a preconceived architectural figure. t rather operates
via the experimental groping into design options not yet at hand.
Any determination is relative to a presupposed ontology, i.e. a
given 'design worlda that opens and delimits a space of
possibilities in which a certain optimisation is definable. The jump
into unexpected spaces of possibility will undercut any previous
determination and set up another optimisation cycle according to
new rules. This happened in the case of the Arnhem project when
the investigation moved from the two-dimensional plane into a
three-dimensional single surface, i.e. a layered space that
multiplies the available transfer surface while avoiding the usual
bottlenecks and the dichotomous segmentation of stacked space.
This solution could not have been derived within a linear
engineering process that operates within a given, well-formalised
ontology. The a posteriori documentation and rationalisation of
this process becomes the medium to convert an explorative
experiment - with all its leaps, bounds and loops - into a
reproducible professional repertoire. Through such reflection the
project is able to legitimize itself as an effective material
contribution to a given site as well as an innovative contribution to
the culture of architectural research.
This condensed sketch and appraisal of a project, its method
of development and its final self-legitimization is pointing towards
a complex new logic of legitimate design speculation that requires
to be elaborated in more detail in order to be fully appreciated.
This is thus the aim of this paper: to utilise the project and design
process of the Arnhem master-plan to clarify questions
concerning the methods, purposes and final rationality of current
research and practise in architecture.(1)
n their contribution to Any Magazine 23 Ben van Berkel and
Caroline Bos express the uncertainty and vacillating mood of
current avant-garde practises with respect to the question of
rational principles that might guide and legitimize the work. They
are among those struggeling to define a practise that, on the one
hand assumes it to be "natural and right that architects strive to
be reasonable, responsible partners" (2) in a cooperative process
with clients, authorities and users, so that "large investments can
be safely entrusted to them"(3), while on the other hand becoming
increasingly sceptical with respect to the pressure of rationality
and "the demand to present the "right" solution, even when the
contents of that concept have become very uncertain".(4) Van
Berkel and Bos are referring to the objectivity and rationality
demanded by the client (and delivered by the architects) as a
"retrospective justification" or "after-theory" that "blocks the view
of what went on behind it".(5) They bemoan the lack of "real" (vs
post-rationalising) architectural theory. They speak of the way
their strategies react to their dependence on being selected for
work and of the resultant fear to critically analyse their internal
discourse. This frank admission of being somewhat alienated
from their own discourse marks a courageous step, but yet begs
the question of how a free and self-critical practise would proceed
and present itself.
The method and rhetoric of functional determination
Prima facie Un Studio's (Van Berkel & Bos) Arnheim Project
participates in the recent re-orientation of Dutch avant-garde
architecture towards a parameter driven elaboration of spatial
form. As a complex infra-structural project, i.e. a transport
interchange required to integrate train, bus, taxi, car, bicycle, and
pedestrian movement, it could well become a paradigmatic
testbed for the scope and validity of the method of parameter
based derivation of form. Such a method - the so called 'data-
scape' method - has been most explicitly proclaimed and
practised by MVRDV. (6) n its most ruthless guise, this approach
considers the design-process as an explicit optimisation process
guided by some (narrow) set of performance criteria. Viewed as
such it would follow in the tracks of Hannes Meyer and the 60s
and 70s efforts to resolve architectural design into a formalisable
science.(7) Although important differences in "sensibility" need to
be registered, the continuities with historical functionalism should
not be denied. The data-scape method is to be understood as the
relativist heir to a realist functionalism. n my opinion this is a
tradition that deserves to be claimed. Attempts to pose and
formalise systematic accounts of design method and result
remain indispensable, even if such accounts will become ever
more complex, transitory and relative.
23/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
The various presentations of the Arnhem project have
witnessed ( by Ben van Berkel himself and by the project
architects Tobias Wallisser and Peter Trummer) tell a fairly
systematic and straightforward story of functional determination:
All required transfer routes are plotted out as required. The lines
swell into volumes according to the respective circulation
quantities etc. The account comes close to be thoroughly
convincing, although from the outside real and rhetorical rigor are
hard to tell apart.
n order to trace the uncertainties and gaps in the design
process that give its traditional format of presentation the sense of
unease that van Berkel & Bos express in the Any 23 article, it is
required here not only to rehearse the design process, as it has
been presented, but moreover to attempt a reconstruction
according to the ideal schema of formalised decision analysis. On
the basis of such a logical reconstruction it will be possible to
appreciate the deviations and complications of the non-traditional
forms of rational procedure that actually operate here.
The justification of the Arnhem scheme usually takes the form
of tracing its rational design process. n the outllook of traditional
decision analysis this is perfectly respectable. n the ideal schema
of rationality one would expect that the hierarchy of arguments -
from the overall system level to successive subsystem levels -
that justifies the resultant scheme, would re-present the string of
successive decisions - from major to minor decisions - by which
the actual design or decision process did proceed. n this
scenario the occurrence of post-rationalisation would throw doubt
on the rigor and certainty of both process and result. (Behind the
fact of post-rationalisation lurks the accidental and therefore
precarious nature of the supposed "solutions".)
However, the direct translation between design process and
legitimation does no longer hold relative to recent practise. At
least in education post-rationalisation has become a (legitimate)
common place. Today's design process gropes, stumbles,
backtracks and only then succeeds. The emergent rationality of
this process, i.e. a structured, reproducible method, can only be
reconstructed retrospectively by cutting the dead ends, short-
circuiting the loops etc. nnovative theory is always "after-theory".
Therefore van Berkel & Bos' frustration with "a posteriori
rationalisation" and "after-theory"(8) must be interpreted as
concerning the pretence of such after-theory to describe the
actual process rather than the fact of post-rationalisation as such.
(Through the fact of post-rationalisation shines the open-ended
nature of research.)
The ideal schema of rationality
Before we embark on the concrete reconstruction (of some
key aspects) of the Arnhem project we should visualise the most
basic formal structure of a rational design or decision process as
given in fig.A.
The design process is structured as a hierarchical decision
tree. The process follows the ramifications of an initial decision in
a linear fashion. t is analogous to the navigation through a menu-
structure. Each choice opens up a further finite series of
dependent sub-choices. A decision, in order to qualify as rational,
needs to be reconstructed as such a successive selection from
measurable sets of alternatives. The minimal requirement for any
act to be worthy of being called a decision at all, would thus be
that it proceeded by comparison, i.e. evaluation against at least
one specified alternative. The ideal case of a rational process,
combining the strongest claim with the simplest structure, would
be defined through the following conditions whereby decisions are
1. Hierarchical: The rational decision process is fully
resolvable into a linear chain of discrete and self-sufficient
decisions. This means that there is a clear hierarchy of decisions
whereby a later ramification can never put previous decisions into
doubt. (No loops and iterations are required.)
2. Ranked: The hierarchy of decisions presupposes a finite
and stable list and ranking order of all objectives or performance
criteria to be addressed.
3. Comprehensive: On each level or branching point of the
decision tree the menu or space of options is finite (or at least
computationally exhaustible) and known to be comprehensive.
4. Decidable: At each level the space of solutions is
measurable and unambiguously decidable relative to given
performance criteria.
5. Coherent: A primary objective that was giving reason to a
primary decision can not be sacrificed for another reason at a
later stage without subverting the whole process.
6. Decomposable: n as much as there are parallel objectives
(as well as objectives in an order of subsumption) those parallel
objectives will be adressed in parallel decision trees. This requires
the independence of those objectives and their solutions from
each other.(9)
Rationalising the Arnhem design process
On the basis of this schema we can know investigate the
deviations and complications encountered in the Arnhem project.
The given situation and the first decision may seem simple
enough: The major access road to the site runs parallel to the
train tracks at about 120-meter distance. The project is wedged
between those two edges.
The part of the project to be considered here - the most
significant and formally richest part - is the pedestrian zone of
interchange that mediates between the major means of transport
that meet on the site. This zone is framed by the train station
(north); the pedestrian access from the city (east and south); the
regional bus-station (west); and the trolley bus station (south-
east). To separate the latter two was the first major project
decision that framed the further study of possible configurations.
This way a central space was established in which the necessary
transfer flows could be configured. This concentric figure has
been established by comparison with (and elimination of) a figure
according to which regional and city busses would have been
butted against each other, and where the interchange/waiting
space would have been the bulk head instead of the centre of the
system (fig.1). This decision might seem self-evident but in order
to be formalised and made transparent the selection criterion
would have to be stated, i.e. the primary criterion of this primary
decision. Also:The quality and credibility of the decision would be
enhanced if the selection would proceed from a greater number of
configurational options. deally it would have to be shown that the
offered alternative configurations exhaust the space of
configurational possibility. Only then could we reach "the
triumphant conclusion that the particular design under discussion
is the only objectively justifiable one."(10) The simplest way to
formally assure exhaustion of possibilities at any stage is to
proceed by means of successive dichotomies.
Concerning the missing explicit objective or selection criterion
for the chosen centralising configuration, any of the following
might be proposed:
- the veto on any visual obstruction between any two means
of transport to be linked.
- the provision of a point of total visual orientation
- the maximisation of such points
- the veto on any indirect (or chained) link between any two
means of transport
- volumetric compactness ( ratio of circumference to surface )
of the transfer space for the sake of "urbanity"
- the minimization of total length of transfer paths to be
constructed
- the minimisation of the average detour-factor imposed upon
any desired transfer link etc.
Any of these criteria (or certain combinations) would privilege
the selected alternative. We might even feel inclined to cite them
all as so many good reasons to choose and start with the
centralising figure. But as, e.g. the last two criteria are going to be
placed into direct contradiction when it comes to delineate the
paths that run across the central space, the mere enumeration of
good reasons at any point does not by itself qualify for a rational
design process. Not all criteria will be maintainable throughout
and it could very well make a difference for the further elaboration
of the scheme which criterion was implied as primary. n order to
maintain coherence the performance according to the respective
postulated criterion (e.g. orientation) would have to be protected
from cancellation in the further development of the scheme.
The next series of diagrammes that Un Studio offers (fig.2-3)
to describe the further elaboration of the scheme share the
ubiquitous notation of network analysis. Fig.2 determines the
necessary connections that have to be made between the various
means of transport. Each means of transport is represented as
node in the network, whereby the relative quantities of
passengers that each means of transport brings to the system are
represented by the relative size of the respective node. The links
24/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
are differentiated by line thickness thus classifying and ranking
(rather than quantifying) the respective binary transfer quantities.
Spatial relations are represented topologically.
Fig.3 somehow translates fig.2 into a scaled plan
representation. The density of originating pedestrian traffic as well
as pedestrian transfer traffic density is now annotated by absolute
quantities (cardinal numbers). Fig. 3 therefore is in certain
respects more concrete, in other respects more abstract than
fig.2.
Design Worlds and Deleuzian diagrammes
Both representations (fig.2 & fig.3) think of the problem -
traffic interchange - in terms of nodes and links between nodes.
This seems natural and straightforward enough. But in order to
capture a key aspect of the new rationality that is evolving here -
the proliferation of modes of representation - , we have to reflect
upon the categorical imposition that any type of diagramme or
notational language effects. Any analysis or design operation that
proceeds via network graphs presupposes that the world consist
(or should consist) of nothing but nodes and links, as well as
higher order entities like full networks, rings, chains, trees, stars
etc. nstead of speaking of the notational language we might
speak of the formal a priori, the graphic universe, or the "design
world."(11) Each design world, i.e. each diagramming technique,
drawing type, or software package imposes is own brand of
primitives, rules of association and manipulation and thus opens
and delimits a universe of speculation in which both problems and
solutions are lodged. Each design world implies a quasi-ontology
and quasi-laws of nature. We might start to critisise them in terms
of what they leave out. We can do this by reference to another
tool that in turn has its own limits. The double-bind of revelation
and blindness of any language is definable only relative to other
languages. There is nothing self-evident, objective or compelling
in the imposition of any language or design world. t remains an
arbitrary imposition until it is rationalised by means of comparative
evaluation against alternatives. But such are not at hand at will.
Below we will sketch out what it takes to create a language or
design world, i.e. a recurrent social practise. Also: Different
languages or design worlds might well be incommensurable and
can be compared only on the basis of an arbitrating meta-
language. We lack an ultimate meta-position. All we can do is to
experiment practically within various given languages and hope
that viable repertoires crystallise through competition in practise.
The standard scheme of rationality implicitly assumes that
such a competition has already resulted in a stable and ranked
selection of tools: An appropriate tool for each specifiable task.
This rationality thus assumes that progress and history has come
to a standstill, at least as far as the evolution of design worlds are
concerned.(13) What we do today is thus no longer (fully) covered
by that schema of rationality.
Only in the last 20 years has the architectural avant-garde
experimented with new types of diagrammes, drawings and
recently new digital tools. Since the refoundation of the discipline
in the early 1920s the architect's design world has been a singular
and stable system of hierarchically scaled line drawings. From the
scale-less (topological) sketch to the working drawings this world
distributes nothing but outlines and boundaries. Everything is
about the distribution of horizontal and vertical planes. The
meaning of each drawing resides in its position and role in the
chain of translation from one drawing to the next (more detailed)
drawing and from there to the construction process and the
building itself. Within this routinised practise of translation, from
the abstract to the concrete, it is habitually known how each
drawing constraints the next set of decisions, until the detailed
lines finally translate into physical edges. (And we all have
learned to perceive and inhabit space along those edges.) Only
within such an order of repetition can one speak of a well defined
notational system. The concept of a drawing - here termed
"representation" - that is firmly lodged in such routine practise, is
the model against which the Deleuzian "diagramme" is defined.
The difference does not reside within the object, but in the
patterns of its use. The question here is whether or not (yet) it
functions within a stable social practise. The diagramme does not
yet know its place in a routine operation. t is creatively engaged
in the formation of such a (potentially reproducible) practise. t
therefore is worked upon without stable interpretation, without
predetermined consequences. Work is assimilated to play.(14) At
least since the mid-eighties virtually all design efforts at the AA,
and soon after at most other schools in London, were conducted
through "diagrammatic" processes. Only recently these not-yet-
methods (or drifting non-methods) have been moving into real life
practise.
Leaps and loops
The reflection on the dependency of any design effort upon
the design world it operates in, allows the discussion of the next
crucial "steps" of the Arnhem design process.
"Movement studies" are set to be "the cornerstone of the
proposal". (15) Such movement studies could have taken many
forms. Plotting a network graph is only one (rather economical)
form such a study could take. Although the graph does constrain
the further design moves, and thus is certainly not meaningless, a
strict rule of translation from such a graph into a floor plan does
not exist. The claim that the "station emerges from these motion
studies" (16) is therefore as yet rather anecdotal than rational.
Without rule there is no determination. What can be rightfully
claimed here, at least, is the negative implication that the main
space of the station was not based on a preconceived (platonic)
figure or any known (classical plaza) typology. ndeed it seems to
be the amorphous irregularity of the scheme (fig.4-7) which
inclines us to grant credibility to the cited claim that the figure
emerges from movement studies.
The move from fig.3 to fig.4, in terms of network- or graph-
theory, implies an abrupt shift from an all- line graph to a
branching graph (see fig). Another leap is the emergence of
irregular curves in fig.4. (Figure 5 is just the 3D version of this
preliminary diagramme.)
The leap from fig.3 to fig.4 is certainly not (yet) motivated by
any known routine practise. (Only in the recent avant-garde
canon are such irregular figures at all.) That does not mean that
one could not, in the end, legitimately post-rationalise such shifts
and leaps by constructing a rule that would define the one figure
as the regular translation of the other. Principally any anecdotal
connection might be found to be productively reproducible and
thus can be retrospectively elevated from a haphazard leap into a
rational, methodical move.
What would motivate or justify the branching graph (fig.4/5)
here? The centralisation of control? The economy of paths? t
depends. What we do know is that (according to formalised
decision analysis) any motivation or justification would have to
take the form of a criterion-based selection from a field of possible
configurations as have tried to specify in figureB. But any such
rationality is vulnerable to subversion when yet unthought of
possibilities emerge. Van Berkel and Bos are talking about
providing a hybrid between a centralised and an all line system
(fig.6). My list (fig.B) does not know of "hybrids". But once things
called "hybrids" have been admitted into this world, any analysis,
decision or motivation based on my list is obsolete.
Figure 9 suggests a hyberdization of figures 6&7. t also
seems to be inspired by the so called Klein-bottle, assuming
transformational qualities in analogy to the spatial logic of the
bottle (fig.8) These moves are far from being well defined. One
might be inclined to dismiss the introduction of the Klein-bottle as
an arbitrary graft. But then again, to refuse the bottle and rest with
the usual a priori ontology of platonic primitives etc. would even
be more arbitrary. n Fig.6 the project suddenly appears in the
guise of a 3D computer model operating with smoothly bent
cones. As these cones traverse the space they intersect, merge
and branch. Yet another new design world has been opened,
irreducible to any network graph. This world does not know of
nodes and links between nodes whereas in turn the graph did not
know of interpenetrations and fusions. Are these really cones?
Are we looking at one, two, three, four or five pieces here? n
figure 6 it is, in fact, impossible to unambiguously count the
number of elements to be distinguished. There are no discrete
elements here and no clearly nameable spots and places. The
project leapt into a different world, a yet uncharted world.
However, rules of translation back into a network graph might
very well be definable. One could even construct such translation-
rules that would allow any graph like fig.2 or fig.3 (plus some
additional information e.g. about peak time flows ) to be
transformed into an image like fig.6. But those rules do not yet
exist, at least they have not been made explicit. And no
performance criteria have been specified yet. But again, it is
25/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
never too late. We are never principally unprincipled. We might
learn to trust our intuitions and expect that at least some of our
creative action will assume their principle retrospectively, against
the arrow of time.(17)
Figure 7 announces a further transfiguration of the design
process into yet another irreducible ontology and system of
spatial manipulation: a single surface that peels and splinters
smoothly into differential levels. This is the crucial moment
referred to in the opening paragraph. This way the design process
exploits and responds to existing differential levels on the site.
This solution could not have been derived within a linear
engineering process that would always be presumed to operate
within a given, well-formalised ontology. No such response was
available to the discipline until fairly recently.(18) Once discovered
this possibility offers surprising advantages: a space is created
that multiplies the available transfer surface while avoiding the
usual bottlenecks (lifts or stair-cases) and the disorienting
dichotomous segmentation of orthogonal, stacked space.
Conclusion
The logic of design innovation is analogous to the logic of
biological evolution. t goes through the necessary moments of
mutation, selection and reproduction. Methodologically it is
important to notice that the last reflections were inspired by the
formal universe of the single surface with its subtle distribution of
gradients, moulds, ridges and sweeping cuts. Only on the back of
the original leap into this world could the ambitions of a certain
type of choreography be envisaged. A system of tunnels, lifts and
travelators, which would have been a much more straightforward,
linear elaboration of the initial network graphs, could never have
brought forward this discourse. Here we would have remained in
the realm of mechanical traffic management. Throughout the
design process new good reasons have been (and will continue
to be) introduced. Those reasons will post-validate explorations
that were not necessarily and at all times covered by the
strictures of the ideal schema of rationality. But even the result of
a strict process might reveal unexpected qualities. n any such
case, in order to recuperate the option of principled and rational
conduct, one would have to admit the subversion of one's course
of action, precisely because one has found more reasons than
one was looking for. Armed with those new values and criteria
one would have to loop back and reinvestigate the design path
traveled, and give systematic account of any "final" result , on the
basis of both well established and newly acquired knowledge. The
attempt to reconstruct the Arnhem design process makes it
abundantly obvious that the overall dynamic pattern of current
design and design-research can no longer, at all times and in its
totality, be cast into the mould of the ideal schema of rational
conduct presented above. Nevertheless it deserves to be noticed
that we are not strictly talking about the abandonment of the
schema. Rather we are witnessing its dynamisation and
complication. As a backbone of definition from which the new
practises deviate but ultimately around which they oscillated and
gravitate, and to which they recursively return , if only in a relative
and temporarily mode, the ideal schema of a formalised decision
process remains indispensable. When we design today we will,
overall, still be climbing up a decision tree, however much we will
temporarily spread out laterally. We still will have to segment our
process: Pick up this tool first and address another task later. We
will therefore try to identify a hierarchy and start with the most
important decisions. Should we find that the order of importance
turned out to be otherwise, there still remains, until further notice,
an order of importance to be considered. But we will have to give
up that we could know or take account of all options at each
junction. New branches will sprout as we move up the tree. They
also grow besides us from below, may be precisely because we
moved up the other branch. We will have to loop back or jump
branches. No time to backtrack. A previously abandoned
sidetrack might afford help. But for the next time we know the
straight line. A whole new tree might cast our whole path into the
shadow. But it is too risky to jump and too late to go back to the
root. But then the latest branches of the new tree might fall back
onto the old tree. Now several path seem to converge rather than
ramify further. The pursuits of parallel objectives get entangled.
We will initially seek synergies but then cut as much as possible
to keep the process manageable. The tree keeps mutating into a
rhizome. We keep trimming it into a tree-shape. This is not
fundamentalism but a matter of economy. We are moving from
the illusion of absolute rationality to "bounded rationality"(19) and
"good enough reason". Reason and research don't always come
cheap and easy. How can one assess the balance of investment
in time and resources between research and execution? There is
no answer outside experience. The competitive economy is the
final court of appeal. t passes verdict on any course of action but
without locating the moments of failure or triumph within it. We
know we have won or lost but we are never told exactly where
and why.(20) Research, more than ever, means taking risks.
End.
Business - Research - Architecture
Patrik Schumacher 1999
Published n: Daidalos 69/70, Deutsche Ausgabe: Wirtschaft
Forschung Architektur
Why research?
The business of Architecture is not excepted from the
challenge of competitive innovation. The accelerating economic
restructuring is affecting the organisation of architectural
production as much as every other sphere of production. The
question is how the demands of an increasingly differentiated and
fluid market can be met, i.e. which new and relevant products or
services are to be developed and which forms of work
organisation will succeed within the evolving market and
technological framework. Although these forms will indeed be
manifold, there is no guarantee that the architectural atelier,
figureheaded by the architect, will survive this restructuring
process. ndeed the traditional reliance on the architect's "idea" or
"parti", whether based on precedent or "original intuition", appears
increasingly inept. n a time of momentous restructuring,
questions concerning design product and process can only be
adressed within an academic framework that understands
architecture as a research based business rather than a medium
of artistic expression. This is acknowledged by the reorientation of
the 'architectural avant-garde' from philosophical critique to an
interest in 'operativity'.
Materialism and the inertia of good taste
n his 1990 lecture on Atlanta Rem Koolhaas contrasted the
massive commercial developments, sadly proceeding without
backing through parallel academic research, with the "critical"
self-marginalisation of the avant-gardist academic scene.
Koolhaas called on institutions like the AA to abandon the margin
and take on the tasks posed by the forces of economic
development. At the same time he was launching a new type of
building - later theorised under the slogan of "bigness". The series
of projects then presented - Zeebrugge, French National Library
and ZKM Karlsruhe - made explicit the possibilities of a new kind
of building that was already succeeding outside of the rarefied
realm of acknowledged Architecture. The fat and opaque volumes
(hotels & malls), made possible by mechanical air conditioning,
offered an exciting new interior dimension, but violated the
ingrained modernist sense of proportion (based on naturally lit
and ventilated slender slab-structures). The new spatiality could
only be retrieved and radicalised once these aesthetic prejudices
were suspended.
This pattern whereby the architectural avant-garde achieves
its innovations (and re-evaluation of aesthetic values) via the
acknowledgement of what proliferates despite of the high art of
architecture, has been pervasive in the history of 20th Century
architecture: Koolhaas' Delirious New York, a retro-active
manifesto embracing the anti-aesthetic of congestion, Robert
Venturi's explicit "Learning from Las Vegas", and most importantly
the heroic modern movement learning its principles from
anonymous factory buildings and other products of industrial
civilisation shunned by Beaux Art architecture. The high art of
architecture reproduces itself primarily within the realm of
ideology and is thus inherently conservative. The dynamic of
development originates within the economic base where the
pressure of innovation is permanent. 'Avant-garde are those who
update the aesthetic ideology in line with the logic of production.
Aesthetic regimes have to be analysed as sublimations of an
underlying performativity. At the root of any persistent morphology
26/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
lies an economic rationality. Emergent morphologies will initially
contradict dominant styles and acknowledged typologies. The
(subsequent) process of aesthetisation has its own economic
rationality: The aesthetic judgement of cities and buildings is
rational in as much as it operates as an intuitive appreciation of
performativity, economically short-circuiting first hand experience
or analysis.
Functionalism revisited
A parallel might be drawn between the current
'operationalism' (within the context of postfordist restructuring)
and the historical circumstances under which modern
functionalism asserted itself, i.e. the dramatic socio-economic
transformations of the early 20th Century. The 'radical
functionalism' of the twenties (e.g. ABC group) was going beyond
a mere post-rationalisation and aesthetic codification of
spontaneously emerging forms and posed the total suspension of
any aesthetic regime and argument, projecting a scientific
elaboration of architecture. The subsequent codification of the
results of a decade of work in the doctrine of an nternational
Style was in line with the regime of fordism: After the new social
and technological potentials have been allowed to crystallise,
style lubricates their dissemination. n the 25year post-war boom
this codification, allowing for easy aesthetic appropriation, was
indeed a factor in the fast, world-wide proliferation of the
achievements of modernism. But any extended reliance on
aesthetic judgement creates the idealist illusion that the well-
designed can be identified aesthetically beyond the limits of a
specific historical period - an illusion the profession is still infested
with. Today one might assume that one of the hallmarks of the
post-fordist era is permanent revolution rather than the
establishment of a new order of repetition that would allow the
mineralisation of a new reliable style. An experimental and
research-based architecture might be here to stay and the current
tendencies (Deconstructivism and Folding) might be conceived as
contributing to this 'line of flight' rather than being expected to
consolidate. This would be consistent with the trend whereby the
structure and pattern of economic activity in general is assimilated
to the processes of research and science(1), also within (and
against) the discipline of architecture.
Two examples: 1. DEGW is an international space planning
firm specialising on corporate environments and facilities. DEGW
offers a new type of research-intensive architectural service. The
design is preceded by extensive analysis of the way in which the
corporate client operates, communicates and uses space. Over
and above the concrete project research DEGW conducts generic
investigations which are set up as multi-client R&D projects (e.g.
ntelligent Buildings ).(2) 2. The Space Syntax Laboratory is a
space planning consultency firm that grew out of a research unit
at London University. Claims are made for rationalising
composition - the central expertise of the architect - in the form of
a "configurational science" through the employment of
computeraided analysis and measurement of spatial patterns,
evaluating e.g. hierarchy and connectivity in networks.
Configurational parameters are correlated with empirical field
research as basis for the prediction of use patterns. Work is
centered on urban masterplans but also includes organisational
space planning for corporate clients.(3)
These examples encourage us at the AA DRL (Design
Research Laboratory) (4) in our attempt to identify an area of
architectural research that is not only intellectually engaging but
promises economic relevance and vitality.
DRL Agenda: Spatialising the complexities of business
The design research at the DRL investigates the theory and
practise of corporate organisation as a source realm for design
briefs. The realm of business organisation is a well prepared field
to put the formal repertoires of Deconstructivism and Folding to
the test. The business discourse furnishes well formalised
programmatic material in the form of organisational charts,
communication- and work-flow diagrammes, scenarios etc. for the
"translation" into spatial terms. The well-articulated corporate
briefs offer the heuristic advantage of specifically demanding
specific interpenetrations, multiple affiliations, simultaneities,
specific temporal patterns, and recontextualisations etc. (5)
Our point of departure is the convergence of terms between
new management theory and recent architectural theory
(deconstructivism/folding). The 'architecture' of business-
organisation is indeed liquefying. Architectural notions like
'simultaneity', 'multiple affiliation' and 'smoothness' correspond to
organisational tropes like 'matrix', 'loosley coupled network' and
'blur' (6). Such concepts demand a sophisticated discourse and
nuanced repertoire of spatial ordering, territorial distinctions, and
morphological differentiations - all to be conceived as virtualities
rather fixed realities. The insatiable demand for flexibility ideed
determines the endgame of all contemporary business
operations. Also: Recent corporate headquarters point towards
the need for ever higher levels of overall spatial and visual
integration. nternal cuts across floors have become a persistent
feature. One might therefore pose a tendency towards a three-
dimensional, multi-level Fieldspace. This leads us to design
experiments with porous, sponge-like spatialities utilising the
transient internal furnishings as crucial space-making substance.
Methodology - Design as Research
The project based research we are conducting at the AA DRL
appears rather informal. This is only partly a symptom of our
infancy. Although we certainly recognise the power of a formalised
analytical framework, we do not think that the fully formalised
demarcates the scientific. Our method involves the admission of
form to programme heuristics, the renunciation of any real or
conceptual tabula rasa, and promotes the non-linearity of the
design/research process, thus extensively relying on post-
rationalisation. But these procedural anomalies and the
precariousness of final product evaluation, should not dissuade all
claims to scientific rigour. Rather than mere deficiencies, these
are complications which are beginning to be acknowledged as
forms of rationality, not least within business organisation and
management theory. The necessary relaxation of premature
demands for formalisation are certainly not meant as carte
blanche. Our project is geared towards the synthesis of play and
analysis. Our polemic calls for the necessity of a scientific
elaboration of new form-function relations, even though our
methodology and concept of science is in many important ways
quite different from the linear and determinist conceptions of the
early functionalists (7).
We are considering design work itself - under certain
conditions - as a distinct form of research. Those conditions are
not necessarily identifiable within each project. They pertain to the
specific academic context in which the projects are developed,
assessed and superceded. Scientific work is never separable
from its ongoing process and self-criticism. The following
principles and strategies have been guiding our work so far: 1.
Analysis : Design work is preceded by analysis of built projects,
while the notion of analysis is stretched to include the speculativ
extension of identified logics. 2. Extended catalogues &
Comparative evaluation : Each analytical finding is assessed
relative to a space of possibilities or extended lists of alternatives.
There is no pretension of absolute ('root and branch') rationality.
3. solation of parameters and aspects (dimensions) : Any
sytematic investigation of a (pseudo-concrete) architectural task
has to be broken down into factors or "themes" elaborated in
focussed investigations and speculative projects. We make this
necessity (and the resultant 'academic' status of the respective
projects) explicit. One initially separate the following dimensions
of architectural research: a) The formal dimension is operating
with compositional (configurational) categories like degrees of
(poly)centralisation, relations of containment, typical patterns of
adjacency (e.g. string, matrix, network etc.), depth and pattern of
hierarchy etc. (8) Formal categories are not restricted to
classification but also admit ordinal ranking and numerical
quantification. b) The operational (functional & technological)
dimension is elaborating criteria and categories specifying
architectural performance relative to (more or less) definite life-
processes. c) The semantic (& phenomenological) dimension
recognises that buildings do not only operate like mechanical
systems but function through historically evolving subjects who
navigate and inhabit space also on the basis of its legibility within
contextualising systems of signification. d) The social/political
dimension relies on the categories furnished by the social and
historical sciences, e.g. Post-fordism. (But space is so profoundly
implicated in the establishment and reproduction of political
patterns that the priority of political categories can not be
maintained as absolute.) 4. Extremism : We are extrapolating
observed tendencies and push isolated parameters to their
27/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
formal/functional limit. 5. Totalisation : The 'final' elaboration of
design projects needs to be conceived (at least in outline and
principle) as a totalising effort, abandoning (at least tendentially)
thematic focus.
Although a shared apparatus of categories and strategies
(like the check-list sketched out above) is crucial to any
systematic work claiming the title of (design) research, it should
not be expected that each DRL project is in advance girded this
way. The design-research process can not be assumed to
proceed via ticking each successive box in the checklist, even if
the checklist is at times a great facilitator and even more often a
redeeming schema of post-rationalisation. The actual process is
turning on contingencies and random encounters. This fact
deserves recognition. ndeed: Playing, grafting and automatic
processes have been corroborated as productive anti-methods.
The challenge is to systematically exploit the creativity of random
processes (absract machines), thus no longer leaving chance
findings to pure chance. But only against the backdrop of a
'hungry' categorical grid can chance findings really be harnessed
and incorporated into an evolving (soft) system of knowledge.
nnovation : the rhythm of plan and play
n various fields of research and professional work, not least
in business organisation and architecture, it seems necessary to
incorporate random mutations into strategies of innovation. The
role of chance discoveries in the progress of science and
technology is long since proverbial without systematic
acknowledgement on the part of epistemology. Even today the
notion of random pursuits rings anti-thetical to notions of strategic
conduct or rationality. Nevertheless, in the history of science (9),
as well as in management theory and economics, a new notion of
rationality crystallises. Groping, the incorporation of random play
and a margin of indetermined, uncontrolled investment, are now
seen to be necessary ingredients of any strategy aimed at
innovation.(10) Sophisticated arguments which challenge the
traditional antithesis of (random) play and (strategic) plan are
developed in J.G.March and J.P.Olsen "Ambiguity and Choice in
Organizations" (11). From the vantage point of management this
critique of formal decision analysis suspends engrained
'certainties' about the logic and rationality of planned, strategic
action. The whole edifice of Western rationality is shaken in this
text with no explicit philosophical ambitions.
Within most of the Western world individuals and
organisations see themselves as making rational choices. This
concept assumes the pre-existence of purpose and poses the
consistency of conduct. Those ideas, deeply embedded in
modern society, are made the explicit axioms of decision theory.
"t is fundamental to those theories that thinking should precede
action; that action should serve a purpose; that purpose should
be defined in terms of a consistent set of pre-existenting goals;
and that choice should be based on a consistent theory of the
relation between action and its consequences. Every tool of ...
management science, operations research or decision theory ...
(and) the entire structure of micro-economic theory builds on the
assumption that there exists a well-defined stable, and consistent
preference ordering." (March&Olsen). How could it be otherwise,
how could one not start the building with the foundations? What
decision theory and the ideology of choice can only regard as
deficiency - the reality of "the fluidity and ambiguity of
objectives"(M.&O.) - needs to be 'redeemed' within a new and
more complex understanding of innovative rationality. The whole
economy of rationality involving the network of concepts like
freedom, coercion, identity and progress will have to be
deconstructed/reconstructed. "Goals are thrust upon the
intelligent man. We ask that he act in the name of goals. We ask
that he keeps his goals consistent."(M&O) (Just as preconceived
function is thrust upon form in architecture.) ntentionality is seen
to be the defining moment of human consciousness, in its
individual as well as collective existence. March & Olsen do not
indulge in an abstract negation of goal-oriented rationality, rather
they propose its sublation into "more complicated forms of
consistency". On this basis a more complex rationality can be
elaborated which allows for degrees of temporary laxity, able to
offer procedures for the discovery/construction of new goals and
values. The current reality of shifting goals seems to force us to
"choose now in terms of the unknown set of values we will have
at some future time. ... This violates severely our sense of
temporal order."(M.&O.) Such a "choice" is, according to the
ideology of choice (dicision analysis, rational choice theory),
utterly non-sensical. But it is the ideology of 'rational' choice that
has to be challenged, not the pervasive reality of 'irrational'
conduct.
Deconstructivist design-process experiments had precisely
this warped time structure: 'choose' now, 'motivate' later. The
design process was systematically purged of any preconceived
intention and replaced by an ever extending series of (initially)
arbitrary formal moves: mappings and extended series of formal
transformation as form-generating aleatoric processes. Such a
process or "method" involves the radical suspension of everything
usually associated with "design" as deliberate purpose-lead
activity, directed to solve well-defined problems according to
known and explicit criteria. Progress can no longer be monitored
as the systematic accumulation of solutions on that basis. nstead
of such step by step accountable conduct, initially unaccountable
graphic proliferation was the order of the day. Freedom and
progress are here mediated through coercion in the sense of the
designer's (temporary) submission to the arbitrary determination
of the graphic process. ("Coercion is not necessarily an assault
on individual autonomy. t can be a device for stimulating
individuality."(M.&O.)) n the aleatoric design method the formal
process is running ahead and a meaning (programme) is read
into it a posteriori, allowing for an innovative re-alignment of both
new form and new function. The aleatoric play is an instrument of
intelligence, not its negation or substitute. As in biological
evolution, the necessary condition for the ability to harness
chance for the purposes of innovation is reproduction, i.e. the
ability to reproduce an initially unintended and uncontrolled effect.
The machinic process becomes domesticated and human. What
was play has become method. "Playfulness is the deliberate,
temporary relaxation of rules in order to explore the possibilities of
alternative rules. When we are playful we challenge the necessity
of consistency. n effect, we announce - in advance - our rejection
of usual objections to behaviour that does not fit the standard
model of intelligence. Playfulness allows experimentation. At the
same time, it acknowledges reason. t accepts that at one point ...
it will be integrated into the structure of intelligence." n this
context March & Olsen arrive at the Derridian insight about the
temporal logic of becoming: "Planning in organisations has many
virtues, but a plan can often be more effective as an interpretation
of past decisions than as a program for future ones. ... n an
organisation that wants to continue to develop new objectives, a
manager needs to be relatively tolerant of the idea that he will
discover the meaning of yesterday's action in the experiences and
interpretations of today."(M.&O.) (12) What to many yet appears
as an assemblage of disjointed trials and tribulations, might soon
cohere into a worthwhile trajectory, career and oeuvre.
ntervention research: towards an unpredictably productive
architecture
Aleatoric experimentation is not necessarily to be confined to
the design process, but might continue in the building itself. Who
is to judge and deny a priori that a strange building will not attract
and engender a strangely productive occupation. Such
speculative investment might become accepted as intervention
research. The structure of post-modern time allows and perhaps
even demands such reasoning. A decoded architecture might
offer itself to inhabitation as an aleatoric field, anticipating and
actively prefacing its own detournment. The late sixties "soft
rooms" and toy-like environments may have been the moment
architecture got closest to such an ambition. An aleatoric field is
always a specific field and offers more (and less) than the
abstract freedom of blank neutrality. Emptiness forces the
inhabitants to fall back on the pre-conceptions they bring to such
a space. Such a space is reproductive rather than generative. A
generative and liberating architecture can only work via a degree
of coercion. t becomes a generative force via resistance rather
than offering the path of least resistance. Laxity as an active force
is proposed to substitute the ideas of abstract openness on the
one hand and passive flexibility on the other. Laxity implies a
productive imprecision not always associated with flexibility
(which mostly offers a choice between clear cut options). Laxity
also involves a degree of stiffness (its definitory other with which it
shares a scale), a productive coercion. The strategy of Laxity
views architectural space as a (lax ) subject in the sense that a
28/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
cultural force can no longer be referred to as a priori independent
of the architecture it enters into. Concerning e.g. the question of
cultural identity: architecture is, together with all the other
paraphernalia of every day life, always already involved in the
construction of (the system of differential) identity. And this not
only as a part of the 'system of objects' (fashion system), but
more profoundly in the territorializing matrices in which those
systems operate. Architecture operates as a gigantic sorting
machine. f architecture can incarcerate (Bataille, Foucault,
Lefebvre), it can become the site of a liberating inflection. Every
new building has a lever upon the total structure and can initiate a
chain-reaction of subversion, creating a whole new "market".
Laxity is emphasising this demiurgic power of architecture. t
requires and deserves systematic research and critique as well as
speculative intervention.
Notes and references:
1. see: Patrik Schumacher, Arbeit, Spiel und Anarchie in:
Work & Culture - Bro.nszenierung von Arbeit Herausgeber:
Herbert Lachmayer und Eleonora Luis, Ritterverlag, Klagenfurt
Loasby, Brian J., Equilibrium and Evolution, Manchester & N.Y.
1991
2. DEGW (Duffy, Eley, Giffone, Worthington) F. Duffy, C.Cave,
J.Worthington (eds.), Planning Office Space, The Architectural
Press Ltd., London F. Duffy, The New Office, London 1997
3. The Space Syntax Laboratory Hillier,B., Space is the
machine, Cambridge 1996 Hillier, B. & Hanson, J., The social
Logic of space, Cambridge 1984.
4. The AA Design Research Laboratory is part of the
Graduate School of the Architectural Association School of
Architecture, London.
5. Such a brief offers a sufficiently sympathetic and
determinate resistance to avoid the radical gratitiousness of an
infinite "space of becoming" or an ever undifferentiated "field of
continuous differentiation". The lack of such resistance, which
was necessary to proliferate the new formal potentials, has now
become a dangerous quicksand. Any further postponement of
tangible and productive applications can only serve to discredit
the potential that has been created.
6. Stan Davis & Christopher Meyer, BLUR - The Speed of
Change in the Connected Econnomy, Reading Massachusetts
1998
7. Modern functionalism, in its purest form (H. Meyer, L.
Hilbersheimer) tended to assume a linear determinism,
proceeding from a coherent catalog of needs, placed onto a clean
slate (tabula rasa) and posing the calculated optimisation of
solutions on the basis of known techniques. The mechanical
principle of linear decomposition which was the key to the
productivity advances of the whole fordist mode of production
became also the key principle of the modern architectural
rationality. see: Patrik Schumacher, Produktive Ordnungen (engl.:
Productive Patterns) in: ARCH+ 136, April 1997, Berlin, pp.28-33,
pp.87-90
8. The categories of formal analysis are fundamental and are
always presupposed by functional and social categories, as the
discourse of those supposedly higher order phenomena relies on
spatialising techniques and metaphors in its very conception. This
insight in the dialectical dependence of functional (and social)
categories upon formal categories does not imply idealism or an
idealist conception of history. The point of historical materialism is
not to deny the creative force of formal systems and languages.
The point is precisely to see languages and ideas as material
forces surviving or collapsing within a material (economic) world.
Platonic truth has no bearing here.
9. Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,
Chicago 1970 Feyerabend, Paul, Against Method, New Left
Books, London 1975
10. Bergquist, William, The Postmodern Organisation:
Mastering the Art of rreversable Change, San Francisco 1993
11. March, J.G. & Olsen, J.P., Ambiguity and Choice in
Organizations, Oslo 1976, chapter 5 "Technologies of
Foolishness, pp.69 -82
12. The implied warped time is a rather late insight within the
history of philosophy. Derrida, J., Differance, in Margins of
Philosophy, Chicago 1982, French: Paris 1972
End
n Defence of Radicalism - On the
Work of Zaha Hadid
Patrik Schumacher 2000
Published n: City Visionaries, Venice Biennale of
Architecture, Catalog for the British Pavilion, Cornerhouse
Publications, Manchester
Zaha Hadid has been a persistent radical in the field of
architectural experimentation for the last 20 years. The
importance of her contribution to the culture of architecture lies
primarily in a series of momentous expansions - as influential as
radical - in the repertoire of spatial articulation available to
architects today. These conquests for the design resources of the
discipline include representational devices, graphic
manipulations, compositional manoeuvres, spatial concepts,
typological inventions and (beyond the supposed remit of the
discipline proper) the suggestion of new modes or patterns of
inhabitation. This list of contributions describes a causal chain
that significantly moves from the superficial to the substantial and
thus reverses the order of ends vs. means assumed in normative
models of rationality. The project starts as a shot into the dark,
spreading its trajectories, and assuming its target in midcourse.
The point of departure is the assumption of a new medium (multi
perspective projection) which allows for certain graphic operations
(multiple, over-determining distortions) which then are made
operative as compositional transformations (fragmentation and
deformation) leading to a new concept of space (magnetic field
space, particle space, distorted space) which suggests a new
phenomenology, navigation and inhabitation of space no longer
oriented along prominent figures, axis, edges and clearly
bounded realms. nstead the distribution of densities, directional
bias, scalar grains and gradient vectors of transformation
constitute the new ontology defining what it means to be
somewhere.(1)
This assessment of Hadid's oeuvre in terms of the expansion
of architectural methods, resources and repertoires is
independent of the success and merit the various built and unbuilt
projects might have with respect to the particular tasks they are
addressed to solve. Rather than fulfilling only their immediate
purpose as a state of the art delivery of a particular use-value -
e.g. a fire station or an exhibition venue - the significance and
ambition of these projects is that they might be seen as
manifestos of a new type of space. As such their defining context
is the historical progression of such manifestos rather than their
concrete spatial and institutional location. The defining ancestry of
e.g. the Vitra Firestation or the Millennium Mind Zone includes the
legacy of modern abstract art as the conquest of a previously
unimaginable realm of constructive freedom. Hitherto art was
understood as mimesis and the reiteration of given sujets, i.e. re-
presentation rather than creation. Architecture was the re-
presentation of a fixed set of minutely determined typologies and
complete tectonic systems. Against this backdrop abstraction
meant the possibility and challenge of free creation. The canvas
became the field of an original construction. Through figures such
as Malevitsch and vanguard groups such as the DeStijl
movement this exhilarating historical moment was captured and
exploited for the world of experimental architecture. A key
example is Rietveld's House Schroeder. The value and
justification of this building does not only depend on the particular
suitability to the Schroeder's family interests. t operates as an
inspiring manifesto about new compositional possibilities which
much later are further extended in the Vitra Firestation - Hadid's
first built manifesto to be understood within Zaha Hadid's oeuvre
at large.(2) Both these manifesto buildings radically violate the
typological and tectonic norms of their time and dare to suggest
compositional moves hitherto unknown to the discipline of
architecture.
The introduction of categories such as "manifesto", "the
discipline of architecture " and "oeuvre" suspends but does not
cancel or deny concerns of utility. These categories are not set
absolute, autonomous and forever aloof from the functional
concerns of society. Rather the concrete uses and users are
bracketed for the sake of experimenting with new, potentially
29/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
generalisable principles of spatial organisation and articulation
with respect to emerging social demands and use patterns.
Functional optimality according to well corroborated criteria is
thus renunciated for the experimental advancement of social
practises of potentially higher functionality. The very nature of the
kind of iconoclastic research of "the avant garde" is that it thrusts
itself into the unknown and offers its challenging proposals to the
collective process of experimentation in a raw state rather than
waiting until the full cycle of experimentation, variation, selection,
optimisation and refinement is complete and ready to present
secure and polished results.
Despite the often precarious status of its partial and
preliminary results will argue that this radicalism constitutes a
form of research; an unorthodox research in as much as it's
methods include intuitive groping, randomisation and automatic
formal processes, i.e. the temporary relaxation and even
suspension of rational criteria.
The dialectic of the New
Hegel grasped that the New is always consuming its
immediate precursor as its defining opposite, maintaining and
carrying it along like a shadow. And this shadow carries a further
shadow etc., so that a cultural innovation can only be identified
and appreciated by those who are able to place it within the whole
historical evolution. Such appreciation therefore becomes a
relative, graded and ultimately infinite act. (And it is essential for
the culture of architecture to insist that a new architectural
position can not be reduced to an isolated form or gesture, but -
like a scientific idea - involves a whole network of historically
cumulative assumptions and ambitions.) This process, which
Hegel called sublation, is borne out by the fact that the definition
of the New, e.g. of deconstructivism or folding in architecture,
stretches across hundreds of magazine and book pages, broadly
retracing architectural history, referencing classic as well as
modernist tropes.
But - and this is beyond the grasp of hegelian dialectic - each
time the sequence is traversed it is twisted and retro-actively
realigned by current contingencies and emerging agendas. The
history of (architectural) history reveals how distinctions and
relative newness are redistributed, emerge and collapse under
the force of current innovations, a force that thus works to a large
extend against the arrow of time and this has bewitching
consequences: A thought might no longer speak the language of
its own beginning. As Derrida puts it "... all is not to be thought at
one go ... " and "The necessity of passing through that erased
determination, the necessity of that trick of writing is
irreducible"(3).
Resources of the Radical magination
Creative Revilalism
t is no accident hat the New in the arts always announces
itself in the guise of a revival. Hadid's career starts with the
reinterpretation of Malevitch's tectonics. Her early work has
indeed been (mis-)understood as Neo-constructivism. Also one
might recount how Peter Eisenman takes off from the early Le
Corbusier. Revivalist appropriation is the easiest and most
immediate option to articulate dissatisfaction and resistance
towards a dominant practise. But this has nothing to do with
repetition. For instance, to pick up the unfinished project of
modernism on the back of post-modernism can not be a simple
re-enactment, even if one initially works with literal citations. For a
culture which reflects its own history, this history can never be
circular. Although there have been attempts to write a circular
history - e.g. the history of western art as swinging back and forth
between an appollonian and dionysian sensibility - , discursively
the second time can never be the same. Also: what usually
follows on from the second time clearly reveals its irreducible
newness. Revivalism - the hurling back in front of what was left
behind - has been a pervasive and effective mechanism in the
production of the New. The re-introduction of formal systems
leads inevitably to over-determination, distortion and
transformation.
Re- combination: Collage and Hybridisation
The second mechanism that has to be mentioned here is the
dialectic of re-combination and hybridisation. The important
reminder here is that the result of combination is rarely just a
predictable compromise. Synenergies might be harnessed:
Unpredictable operational effects might emerge and, on the side
of meaning, affects are engendered as the whole taxonomy of
differences is forced into an unpredictable realignment. The new
combination re-contextualises and reinterprets its ingredients as
well as its surroundings.
Abstraction
Abstraction implies the avoidance of familiar, ready-made
typologies. nstead of taking for granted things like houses,
rooms, windows, roofs etc. Hadid reconstitutes the functions of
territorialisation, enclosure and interfacing etc. by means of
boundaries, fields, planes, volumes, cuts, ribbons etc. The
creative freedom of this approach is due to the open-endedness
of the compositional configurations as well as the open-
endedness of the list of abstract entities that enter into the
composition. (To maintain the spirit of abstraction in the final
building a defamiliarising, "minimalist" detailing is avoiding that
cuts turn into windows again.)
Analogies
Analogies are fantastic engines of invention with respect to
organisational diagrammes, formal languages and tectonic
systems. They have nothing to do with allegory or semantics in
general. Hadid's preferred source realm of analogical
transference is the inexhaustible realm of landscape formations:
forests, canyons, river deltas, dunes, glaciers/moraines, faulted
geological strata, lava flows etc. Beyond such specific formations
abstract formal characteristics of landscape in general are
brought into the ambit of architectural articulation. The notion of
an artificial landscape has been a pervasive working hypothesis
within Hadid's oeuvre from the Hong Kong Peak onwards.
Artificial landscapes are coherent spatial systems. They reject
platonic exactitude but they are not just any "freeform". They have
their peculiar lawfulness. They operate via gradients rather than
hard edge delineation. They proliferate infinite variations rather
than operating via the repetition of discrete types. They are
indeterminate and leave room for active interpretation on the part
of the inhabitants.
Another source realm is food stuffs: sandwiches, melted
cheese, chewing gum, papadams, spaghetti. Ultimately anything
could serve as analogical inspiration. Often such analogies
become to be considered as the concept of the project: The
Cardiff Opera House as an inverted necklace, the Copenhagen
Concert Hall as a block of terrazzo, the Victoria and Albert
Museum extension as 3D TV, i.e. a three-dimensional pixelation
etc.
Surrealist mechanisms
One of the most significant and momentous features of
architectural avant-garde of the last 15 years is the proliferation of
representational media and design processes and the attendant
theoretical reflection on those media and processes. Hadid's
audacious move to translate the dynamism and fluidity of her
calligraphic hand directly into equally fluid tectonic systems, her
incredible move from isometric and perspective projection to
literal distortions of space, from the exploded axonometry to the
literal explosion of space into fragments, from the superimposition
of various fisheye perspectives to the literal bending and melt
down of space etc. - all these moves must initially appear
rampantly illogical, akin to the operations of the surrealists. But
then these strange moves - once taken seriously within the
context of developing an architectural project - turn out to be
powerful compositional options when faced with the task of
articulating complex programmes. The dynamic streams of
movements within a complex structure can now be made legible
as the most fluid regions within the structure; overall trapezoidal
distortions offer one more way to respond to non-orthogonal sites;
perspective distortions allow the orientation of elements to various
functional focal points etc. What once was an outrageous
violation of logic has become part of a strategically deployed
repertoire of nuanced spatial organisation and articulation.
The initially "mindless" sketching of graphic textures (see
Vitra sketches) in endless iterations operates like an "abstract
machine" proliferating difference to select from. Once a strange
texture or figure is selected and confronted with a programmatic
agenda a peculiar form-content dialectic is engendered. An active
figure-reading mind will find the desired conditions but equally
new desires and functions are inspired by the encounter with the
strange configuration. The radically irrational and arbitrary detour
ends up hitting a target.
30/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
This "miracle" can be explained by recognising that all
functionality is relative, that all well articulated organisms have
once been monstrous aberrations and still are such - relative to
other "higher" and more "beautiful" organisations. Before we
dismiss arbitrary formalisms we need to realise that all our time-
tested typologies themselves adhere dogmatically to the arbitrary
formalism of orthogonality and platonic simplicity derived from the
constraints of measuring, making and stabilising of structures
handed down to us from a rather primitive stage of our civilisation.
To remain locked in within these figures at this time and age
would be more than arbitrary. The only way out is radical
proliferation and testing of other options. All points of departure
are equally arbitrary until tested against presumed criteria. There
is no absolute optimality. Every measure starts with a finite array
of arbitrary options to compare, select from, adapt and thus
working away from absolute arbitrariness. t is significant in this
respect that the logic of evolutionary innovation starts with
mutation: mutation, selection and reproduction. Hadid has been a
vital engine of mutation with respect to the culture of architecture.
Harnessing the power of chance
More and more it seems to become an urgency to incorporate
the category of random accidents and chance mutations into our
theories of innovation and progress, even though these terms -
randomness and progress - have hitherto been absolutely anti-
thetical. Randomness seems to be the absolute antithesis of any
notion of strategic conduct or rationality.
Should one not know what one is doing? Not necessarily if
one is alert towards finding one's purposes along the way. One
might very well learn and define what one was doing
retrospectively, after the event.
Deconstructivist design-processes significantly have had this
folded time structure: 'choose' now, 'motivate' later. The design
process was systematically purged of any preconceived intention
and replaced by an ever extending series of initially arbitrary
formal moves: mappings and extended series of formal
transformation as form-generating aleatoric processes. Such a
process or method involves the radical suspension of everything
usually associated with "design" as deliberate purpose-lead
activity, directed to solve well-defined problems according to
known and explicit criteria. Progress can no longer be monitored
as the systematic accumulation of solutions on that basis. nstead
of such step by step accountable conduct, initially unaccountable
graphic proliferation and groping was the order of the day.
Freedom and progress are here mediated through coercion in the
sense of the designers (temporary) submission to the arbitrary
determination of the graphic process. n the aleatoric design
method the formal process is running ahead and a meaning and
programme is read into it a posteriori, allowing for an innovative
(re-)alignment of both new form and new function. The aleatoric
"play" is an instrument of intelligence, not its negation or
substitute. As in biological evolution, the necessary condition for
the ability to harness chance for the purposes of innovation is
reproduction, i.e. the ability to reproduce an initially unintended
and uncontrolled effect. The machinic process becomes
domesticated and human. What was play has become method.
"Playfulness is the deliberate, temporary relaxation of rules in
order to explore the possibilities of alternative rules. When we are
playful we challenge the necessity of consistency. n effect, we
announce - in advance - our rejection of usual objections to
behaviour that does not fit the standard model of intelligence.
Playfulness allows experimentation. At the same time, it
acknowledges reason. t accepts that at one point ... it will be
integrated into the structure of intelligence. ... tolerant of the idea
that he will discover the meaning of yesterday's action in the
experiences and interpretations of today."(4) Such reasoning
might grant us some breathing space for experimentation not only
on the drawing board, but also - within certain limits - with the
building itself. Who is to judge and deny a priori that a strange
building will not attract and engender a strangely productive
occupation.
The work exhibited at the Venice Biennale, British Pavilion
The British Pavilion features a series of recent projects that
work with ribbons : folded, twisted, bundled, splintered. Three of
them are bridges funneling and distributing various trajectories.
The forth project also foregrounds movement and trajectory,
moving visitors through the story of the MND. To select the work
on the basis of a set of related analogical themes - flexing and
folding ribbons as well as splintering bundles - reflects Hadidas
design heuristics, i.e. the development of the work via families of
conceptually related projects. The folding ribbon was first
explored in 1994 for the housing project to be constructed over
and between the railway viaducts running alongside the Danube
canal in Vienna. t was further explored with the Blueprint Pavilion
built in Birmingham in 1995 and in the larger structure for the
Mind Zone at the Greenwich Millennium Dome in 1999.
The folding structure offers a spatial interplay and
confrontation with the subject matter whereby the path folds back
upon itself allowing certain items/phenomena to be re-
encountered from different perspectives in different contexts. The
overall ribbon breaks here into three parallel parts each
describing a peculiar trajectory respectively representing the
mindas aspects of "input", "process" and "output". Each of the
three ribbons reaches out into the space with a large cantilever.
The bundle concept was first explored with the winning
competition entry for a Habitable Bridge across the Thames River
in London in 1996.
The bridge is conceived as a bundle of trajectories and cluster
of volumes crossing the Thames diagonally. As the bridge crosses
to the South side the tight bundle splinters and spreads
connecting widely into the South Bank and Coin Street. Within the
volume of the bridge various forms of habitation co-exist: living
accommodation of different types combine with recreational and
cultural spaces. n the middle of the river the bundle of volumes
tears clearing the view along the axis of the river. Only the thin
pedestrian routes bridge this cleft and precariously hold the
shearing bundle together.
This concept was re-applied and elaborated on a smaller
scale with the the winning competition entry for the Holloway
Road Bridge in London in 1998. The pedestrian bridge - again as
bundle of trajectories - serves the University of North London
campus hich is dispersed within a mixed urban field and cut apart
by Holloway Road. Within this urban field exists a secondary layer
of routes and corridors that forms the Universityas internal
circulation system. The project funnels and extends this internal
network across Holloway Road, connecting three University
buildings above grade, revealing the internal pedestrian flows.
The project offers a deliberately incomplete composition ready for
further branches and offshoots to be attached in the second
phase when further facilities will be build and connected.
Finally there is the 3rd Bridge Crossing Abu Dhabi.
The architectural concept proposes a smooth dune-like
structural wave propelling across the creek. The wave bifurcates
and describes a complex three-dimensional figure as it rises
between the bulging highway decks to dip down and rise again
hugging the decks from the outside. The touch down points are
unevenly spaced allowing for a big span across the main
navigable channel. A pedestrian path is thread through the
structure below the main decks. The landscape design interprets
the bridge as emerging from a field of parallel ribbons gathered
on one shore from which single strands are lifted and undulated
across the water plane.
Conclusion
What is at stake is Hadidas ouevre is the attempt to push the
development of the discipline of architecture itself, its spatial
concepts and formal registers. But these formal innovations do
not just produce arbitrary difference for the sake of newness.
Rather it is possible to explicitely frame the general thrust of
innovation: towards new levels of formal complexity. Elsewhere
(5) have argued in detail that this general thrust has an
underlying progressive rationality: it represents the potential to
engage with the complexities and uncertainties of emerging post-
fordist social arrangements.
My main point of contention here is that formal innovation can
be opposed to programmatic functionality only on the level of an
individual project or career, but never on account of the discipline
as a whole. Formal innovation deserves respect in as much as it
has the status of a deferred potential for higher functionality. A
particular project or oeuvre might be formally innovative without
itself yet delivering any respective programmatic innovation.
ndeed the initial proliferation of spatial concepts and formal
techniques flourishes best in the absence of functional and
programmatic constraints. This is the raison d'etre of the oeuvres
31/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
of a lot of the protagonist of the current neo-avant garde. But the
rationality of such practice can not be posed as absolute. Rather
it depends on its partiality, i.e. its embeddedness within an
effective division of labour that separates formal experimentation
from its functional exploitation. The value of this formal innovation
lies precisely in the promise that a formally enriched discipline will
be more versatile and resourceful in the spatial organisation and
articulation of the evolving life process.
The functional implementation of the newly elaborated
formalisms is often regarded as trivialisation. But without its
"trivialisation" - which indeed is its only redemption - this
formalism would be nothing but an irresponsible fetishism. Any
new formal concept reveals its power and productivity (and
would argue even fulfils its full aesthetic affect) only as a lived
space. Zaha Hadid is very well aware of this and aims operate on
the integrated front of formal and functional innovation.
Notes:
1. Of course these innovations have been (and continue to
be) produced within an international collective/competitive milieu
of experimenters. The totality of discoveries emerging within this
milieux immediately appropriated - and rightly so - by each and
every contributor. The elaboration of the ambition, meaning and
achievement of the oeuvre of Zaha Hadid therefore makes no
claim here concerning the question of original authorship - a
question which can only distract from any substantial discussion.)
2. Hadid's oeuvre in turn can be defined as an attempt to
push ahead with "the incomplete project of modernism". This is
the most general account Zaha Hadid has - on many occasions -
given of her work. The "incomplete project of modernism" as
Hadid understands it is more tilted towards Russian
Constructivism rather than German Functionalism giving greater
prominence to formal innovation rather than scientific
rationalisation. But this opposition is one of degree rather than
principle. For all shades of the modern movement the historical
intersection of abstract art, industrial technology and the social
progress conquered in the wake of the 1st world war have been
the indispensable ingredients.)
3. Derrida, J., Of Grammotology, p.23, Baltimore 1974,
French: Paris 1967
4. March, J.G. & Olsen, J.P., Ambiguity and Choice in
Organisations, 1979
5. Patrik Schumacher, Produktive Ordnungen (engl.:
Productive Patterns) in: ARCH+ 136, April 1997, Berlin, pp.28-33,
pp.87-90 see also: a) Patrik Schumacher, Productive Patterns -
Restructuring Architecture. Part 1 in: architect's bulletin,
Operativity, Volume 135 - 136, June 1997, Slovenia b) Part 2, in:
architect's bulletin, Volume 137 - 138, November 1997, Slovenia
End
The AA Design Research Lab -
Premises, Agenda, Methods
Patrik Schumacher 2000
Paper delivered at Conference: Research and Practise in
Architectutre, at Alvar Aalto Academy
Published in: Research and Practise in Architecture. Editors:
Esa Laksonen, Tom Simons, Anni Vartola, Building nformation
Ltd
would like to start with Bill Hilliers reminder that what is
recognised as architecture vs mere building is marked by radical
innovation and theoretical argument. One might paraphrase this
by saying that architecture as distinguished from mere building is
inherently academic and that every great architecture constitutes
a form of research.
The most striking examples are Alberti, and Le Corbusier, but
virtually every architect that has been charted by the historians of
the high art of architecture was (with very few exceptions) both an
innovator and a theorist or writer, especially in the 20th Century:
virtually all modernists, post-modernist, and deconstructivists.
Mere building (i.e. the vernacular) relies on tradition, on well
proven solutions taken for granted. nnovation questions the way
things are done and requires an argument which transcends the
mere concerns and competencies of building. nnovation requires
theory. This ultimately involves conceptions of the good life and
the good society. Great architecture and ambitious architectural
theory relates architectural progress with social progress. The
status quo does not require theory. Theory offers an implicite
utopia. However, utopian speculation is rather dubious today. n
recent years the very notion of progress and the ambition to
project a different future has come to be regarded as suspect.
The history of (built and unbuilt) Modern Architecture has
been paraded as villain and quoted as a symbol for the vanity of
failed utopian claims. But however one judges the radical
concepts (concerning the structure and morphology of the
modern, industrial city) that were formulated at the beginning of
the 20th century by Tony Garnier, Le Corbusier, Ludwig
Hilbersheimer and Frank Lloyd Wright etc., they have shown an
unbelievable anticipatory power. After 50 years of runaway
success and world wide adoption the (utopian) projections and
principles of the modern heroes they can hardly be discussed as
"mistakes", even if the socio-economic transformations of the last
two decades - achieved on the back of the material advances of
the modern period - mean that the social ideals, desires and
requirements with respect to the architecture of the contemporary
city have since developed in radical anti-thesis to the modern
utopias.
What are the new needs, demands and questions that
contemporary society raises for architecture and urbanism? Are
there protagonists that take up this challenge within their research
or creative practise? There is no easy or immediate answer here.
n the last 10-15 years the discourse of the architectural
avant-garde was driven by the principle of negativity. Concepts
like de-construction, dis-location, de-coding and de-
territorialization have been dominating the scene. Key concepts
like multiplicity, heterogeneity, otherness, indecidability and
virtuality are defined in opposition to the key concepts of
modernity and signal the end of universality, predictability and of
any notion of a (future) ideal order. The total social process has
become far too complex to be anticipated within a single vision
and utopian image. Other strategies are called for.
Classical modern rationality would demand that new form
would be derived from new function. The limit of this procedure is
given with the formal a priori of any question/solution, i.e. the
limits of the given/current space of formal possibilities within
which the functional solution is searched and selected. This poses
the question of expanding the formal universe. This might be
done "strategically" by means of transforming and recombining
certain already well tested tropes and patterns. But ultimately the
expansion of formal repertoires is a non-linear matter beyond
calculation and narrow goal-orientation. There might be solution
spaces which can only be tapped into by resorting to the
mechanism of "random" mutations to open up possibilities upon
which a goal-oriented search- or selection engine can then
operate. Thats the mechanism of evolution: the cycle of mutation -
selection - reproduction. Mutations are initially purely other, i.e.
negative. The unpredictability of emergent socio-economic
patterns casts doubt upon straightforward goal orientation in
planning and design. From this follows a strategic retreat from the
immediate program of progress. What emerges as competitive is
the option of nearly unrestrained experiment, providing the
rationale for an unheard of proliferation of new formal possibilities.
What one is left with is the (nearly) random production of the
new and "other", without yet being able to make the claim to
provide measurable improvements. A phase of pure mutation is
introduced whereby the selection and reproduction of the new
material points beyond the capacity of the individual author
towards a collective process of appropriation. n various fields of
research and professional work, not least in architecture, the
necessity to incorporate random mutations into strategies of
innovation has been asserted in practise and starts to be reflected
in theory. The role of chance discoveries in the progress of
science and technology is long since proverbial without
systematic acknowledgement on the part of epistemology. The
notion of random pursuits still rings anti-thetical to notions of
strategic conduct or rationality. Nevertheless, in the history of
science as well as in recent design methodologies, a new notion
of rationality crystallises. Groping experimentation, the
incorporation of random play and a margin of indetermined,
32/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
"uncontrolled" investment, are now seen to be necessary
ingredients of any strategy aimed at innovation. "Uncontrolled"
investment? Not quite. There is systematic randomisation within
definite brackets and constellations and with definite techniques.
The radical architectural projects emerging within the current
avant-garde discourse in architecture are not offering themselves
as utopian proposals in the sense of elaborated proposals for a
better life. They do not claim to have a sure meaning in this sense
- yet. They pose questions and withdraw the familiar answers.
They are open-ended mutations that at best might become
catalysts in the co-evolution of new life processes. (Of course
there is also the risk to remain alien to everything and everybody.
That risk has to be taken.) Experimentation is not necessarily to
be confined to the design process, but might continue in the
building itself. Who is to judge and deny a priori that a strange
building will not attract and engender a strangely productive
occupation. Such speculative investment might become accepted
as intervention research. What right now appears as an
assemblage of disjointed trials might soon cohere into a
worthwhile development. A decoded architecture - made strange -
offers itself to inhabitation as an aleatoric field, anticipating and
actively prefacing its own detournment.
But the argument has been pushed too far here. Selection
can not just be left to the material life-process itself - although
would defend a certain margin of "irresponsible" or adventurous
investment. Selection should be anticipated and proceed via
systematic criteria on the basis of theorised hypotheses. We do
need to raise the question of the new needs, demands and
purposes that the new architecture might adress with respect to
contemporary society and we do need to speculate about the
effectiveness of spatial and architectural operations in this
respect. The specific crux of architectural theory therefore
remains to hypothesise form-function relationships. n
consequence those "architectural theories" that restrict
themselves to the elaboration of formal possibilities constitute an
incomplete effort. They are mere descriptions of new forms and at
best new languages rather than theories in the strong sense
claimed here. A lot of what passes for influential contemporary
architectural theory is "theory" only in the weak sense of
description of new formal/spatial tropes) - and needs to be
complemented by a systematic functional evaluation. But
Eisenman and Kipnis explicitely reject any functional measure as
futile and alien to what they believe to be the discipline of
architecture. am recognising the heuristic productivity of this
attitude. t is the productivity of any single-minded specialisation.
The unforgiving demand for functional and social justification is
bound to slow down and hamper formal proliferation. The
decomposition of the problem of architectural innovation and the
disciplinary division of labour between the proliferators on the one
hand and the mediators and evaluators on the other hand will
continue to be fruitful. What needs to be challenged therefore is
not Eisenmans ouvre but his claim for the self-sufficiency of the
partial contribution of formalism. This claim constitutes fetishism.
This does not mean that this work is friutless. The work of
Eisenman, Kipnis and Greg Lynn has been the most powerful
resource of innovation within the architectural discourse of the
1990s. But it remains a suspended, incomplete contribution as
long as its function and its potential contribution to the
development of contemporary society has not been reflected and
assessed.
This is what the AA DRL has set itself as its primary task: to
redeem the recent vast expansion of formal registers by means of
theorising its spatial tropes with respect to the emerging social
configurations and patterns of post-fordist societies and to "test"
them, i.e. think them by means of detailed design proposals for
quasi-clients that seem to be in the vanguard of the momentous
socio-economic and social changes we arguably witness today.
The specific research agenda will present is the quest to
spatialize the complexities of recent business organisation.
Progressive corporate restructuing and innovation in
management is a very dynamic field these days. This is the
momentous social realm we put on to the agenda of avant garde
architecture, to make practical sense of the new formalisms.
will show a series of images of recent student work at the
DRL - reading the various projects as various instances of a fairly
new and promising principles of spatial definition and
organisation. The claim here is that these principles of spatial
organisation - complex modular games, super-imposition spatial
reference systems, smooth interpenetrations of spatial figures,
multiple affiliations, blurred or fuzzy territorialisations, field
articulations via directionality, gradient density distributions,
radiating deformations ect. - are well suited to spatialise, facilitate
and orient emerging forms of social organisation within the realm
of post-fordist work processes. New patterns in the division of
labour and the allocation of competency like the matrix
organisation, new dynamic patterns of collaboration, like open
networks, with shifting centres of authority and blurred lines of
responsibility and specialisation ect. These are intricate
organisational structures that can be spatially registered by recent
architectural languages.
The high rate of correlation we seem to be able to establish
between the new architectural formalisms and the new social
patterns we find within the field of innovative corporate
organisation suggests that the formal research of the 1990s was
less random than suggested earlier. Of course certain buzzwords
are in the air and disseminate concepts without explicite
reference or engagement. One might also point here to the
transmission function of the philosophy of Derrida and Deleuze
who have acted as veritable seismographs for emerging social
logics and abstracted and condensed them into spatial metaphors
then played upon and proliferated by Eisenman and others. This
transmission through philosophy is obviously rather loose and
offers no a priori guarantee or justification. t is only offered as an
explanation of what otherwise might appear as a preestablished
harmony between the latest trends towards a "new architecture of
folding" and the new social patterns as we encounter them e.g. in
recent business organisation theory and practise. However, on
the level of general formal/organisational principles we can start
our work on the basis of a close fit between recent ideas in
architecture and management. Our task is to develop these ideas
into convincing innovative design proposals and thus help to
achieve a real effective, operative correlation (beyond the realm
of mere ideas). The striking precedent for this correlation is the
close fit between fordism and modernism, i.e. the identity of
organisational principles of classical management theory and
modern architecture: hierarchical, functional differentiation and
serial repetition of the specialised units. Today we are moving
beyond this mechanistic paradigm to more complex and fluid
patterns. These new social patterns need to be liberated from
their current architectural incarceration.
End.
The Work of Beauty & the Beauty of
Work
Patrik Schumacher 2001
Published n: 3D to 2D - The Designer's Republic adventures
in and out of architecture with Sadar Vuga Arhitekti and Spela
Mlakar, Laurance King Publishing
As a friend and "peer", to critique and comment on an
achievement that is very close to one's own ambitions - 'd wish
had done this building - is a rather soul-searching exercise.
Beyond the immediate identification with this obvious, tangible
success and beyond the feeling of gratitude for the hard work that
gave us what "we all" seem to be striving for, lurks the question :
What exactly makes this building a success? What exactly are
"we" striving for here?
Sadar and Vugaas new building for the Chamber of
Commerce and ndustry of Slovenia is in all imaginable respects
a fantastic achievement. A success on all fronts: t satisfies the
functional and aesthetic ambitions of its client and user as
personified in the ambitious president of the chamber of
commerce; it promises to fulfill its purpose as an effective space
of business communication and representation; this was achieved
within the constrains of the original tight budget; the project is a
major vehicle to evolve and establish Sadar in Vuga Arhitekti as a
confident professional firm able to take on and fulfill further
serious engagements; the building is a success as a local popular
33/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
symbol; and last but not least it is a beautiful building that makes
a sophisticated and innovative contribution to the culture of
(international avant-garde) architecture.
The following reflections will address the status of this "last
but not least" achievement - an achievement that, however
elusive, some (if not most) architects would rank as the "final"
(most important) achievement of architectural work. But what is
the status of this cultural achievement? A superfluous decoration?
Or rather the very essence of the art of architecture (the rest
being just its mundane and accidental vehicle)?
What is "beauty" and what is this "culture of architecture" that
is posed after all the good reasons for why the project is
worthwhile have been enumerated. n which sense does this
project point towards transcendental values, i.e. values that point
beyond the immediate advantages of the building?
Before engaging with this transcendental dimension of
architecture it has to be stated that this project is (will be) firmly
lodged in the mundane realities of contemporary life. (And it is no
mean thing to effectively contribute to the reproduction (as well as
advancement) of the material social production process that
delivers the comfort, safety and material freedom we all are taking
for granted!)
But the project under scrutiny here has evidently - also "other-
worldly" qualities. Empirically and viscerally "we" (architects)
seem to know what am talking about - we know "it" when we see
it. The new French National Library is one of the few recent
buildings that has got it. And this new Chamber of Commerce has
got it too! t is a real and nearly inescapable force for us
architects. But how is it more than a vain fetish? What is the
secret rationality of our infatuation with what we might call original
beauty?
The riddle of the transcendental can only be demystified
when we realize that what touches us here is not a simple
presence. The touch of beauty and the genius of originality are
effects whoas real substance or ontological status is not being
revealed by an immediate experience. Rather the effect depends
on social practices and effects that are distributed in time and
space. The perception of beauty (aesthetic judgement) is an act
of the condensed appreciation and anticipation of drawn out
social life patterns that have come to be associated with certain
architectural morphologies. Aesthetic appeal embodies an
(emotionally charged) social/material expectation. Otherwise the
aesthetic dimension would be a mysterious distraction from
(rather than a part of) the vital mechanisms of (social) life.
Within a consistently materialist outlook, based on theories of
historical and biological evolution, aesthetic regimes have to be
analyzed as sublimations of an underlying performativity. At the
root of any style or typology (which goes beyond the drawing
board and effectively shapes the built environment) lies an
economic rationality.
The aesthetic judgement of cities and buildings is rational in
as much as it operates as an immediate intuitive appreciation of
performativity, short-circuiting first hand comparative experience
or extended analysis. Aesthetic judgement thus represents an
economical substitute for experience. t depends on a tradition
that disseminates accumulated experience via extrinsic and
dogmatic rules. This dogmatism is the virtue as well as the limit of
aesthetically condensed experience.
For instance the aesthetic rules concerning e.g. (Vitruvian)
city-layout or the (Palladian) rules for the suburban villa enshrine
and reproduce specific social organizations which in turn are
easily read by the trained eye identifying the right environment
aesthetically.
But with the development of society what once was an
accumulated wisdom becomes an irrational prejudice that has to
be battled also on the ideological plane of aesthetic value. Such a
battle was waged and won by the heroes of the 'modern
functionalism'. The technological and social revolutions called
forth an aesthetic revolution, establishing and aestheticizing non-
classical proportions, a new tectonic and new compositional, i.e.
organizational patterns. An earlier but equally significant aesthetic
revolution concerning the image of the good city is analyzed by
Tafuri(1): The shift from the strictly formalized and centrally
controlled Baroque (absolutist) city-planning to the call for a
picturesque city-scape celebrating "chaos, uproar, and tumult"
(Laugier) as the fitting impression of a vital city. The picturesque
was dismantling the former aesthetic regime that had become a
fetter upon the development of early capitalist accumulation and
privately driven urban growth. The new sensibility was able to
identify with the emergent vital production- and life-processes
rather than being locked into a reactionary gesture of repulsion
and rejection. Like the aesthetic of the picturesque, the advent of
modernism represents the post-factum validation and stylistic
recuperation of a new and vital morphology: the industrial
architecture of the new industrial era (railway sheds, bridges,
factories, silos etc.) that evolved outside and despite of the
recognized architectural canon.
The results of a decade of iconoclastic and innovative work
were then codified in the notion of an nternational Style: After the
new social and technological conditions and potentials have been
allowed to formally crystallize, style lubricates their dissemination
and a new aesthetic dogma was solidified. Such ossification of
performance rules into aesthetic dogma has its own economy: it
economizes on design effort, research, education, polemic
dispute etc. n the 25 year post war boom this codification and the
resulting economy of easy aesthetic appropriation was indeed a
productive factor in the fast, world wide dissemination of the
achievements of modern architecture. But any extended reliance
on aesthetic judgement creates the idealist illusion that the well-
designed can be identified and ascertained aesthetically beyond
the limits of a specific historical period - an illusion the profession
is still infested with. New aesthetic revolutions were bound to
follow in the wake of the new socio-economic dynamics of the
latter half of the 20th Century.
The argument of the previous paragraph relies on an
interpretation of aesthetic values as an inherently conservative
social mechanism perpetuating normative conventions. The
underlying psychological mechanism might be posed as a simple
mechanism of conditioning. n this interpretation the act of
aesthetic revolution would be an exceptional act - an inherently
anti-aesthetic act of iconoclasm - possible only in a moment of
socio-economic crisis. The crisis that has sparked the most recent
series of aesthetic innovations in architecture (since
deconstructivism) might be described as the crisis of fordism.(2)
But rather than a mere moment of crisis, post-fordism tendentially
approaches the condition of permanent crisis and permanent
revolution.
As technological and managerial innovation as well as the
complimentary margin of experimentation with new and unknown
work and life-patterns becomes an ever more pervasive economic
necessity, a different social and aesthetic sensibility emerges that
is less bound by conventionality and that seeks the new and
unconventional rather than being repulsed by it. This aesthetic
sensibility is bound to be amplified in the so called creative
professions. "Making strange" has become one of the most
powerful aesthetic strategies. The aesthetic sensation of the new
embodies anticipations of a different social life. Today such
anticipations have become energizing rather than threatening.
We are no longer talking about taste (as a substantial
category). We have to talk about (a taste for) formal innovation.
(The strange and unknown first acquired its aesthetic status in the
early phases of the capitalist revolution: the aesthetic category of
the sublime understood as the sublimation of the horror of the
unknown - a tool of discovery.)
nnovation is the key here. What is at stake is the ongoing
development of the discipline of architecture itself, its spatial
concepts and formal registers. But these formal innovations do
not just produce arbitrary difference for the sake of newness. t is
possible to frame the general thrust of innovation: towards new
levels of formal complexity. shall argue that this general thrust
has an underlying rationality; it represents the potential to engage
with the complexities of the emerging post-fordist social
arrangements.
Jeffrey Kipnis is prominent among those contemporary
architects who not only made a major contribution to the
repertoire of the discipline but takes the position that the essence
of the discipline lies precisely here, in the development of its
formal/conceptual repertoire, considered to be absolutely beyond
considerations of program and functionality.
will have to take issue with this position. My point of
contention is that formal innovation can be opposed to
programmatic functionality only on the level of an individual
34/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
project or career, but never on account of the discipline as a
whole. For me, formal innovation deserves respect in as much as
it has the status of a deferred potential for higher functionality. A
particular project or oeuvre might be formally innovative without
itself delivering any respective programmatic innovation. But the
value of this formal innovation lies precisely in the promise of
functional innovation, in the promise that a formally enriched
discipline will be more versatile and resourceful in the further
spatial organisation and articulation of the evolving life process.
Kipnis the great formal (and conceptual) innovator is himself
not concerned with the instrumentalisation of the formal
innovations he is pursuing. He rather feels - and rightly so - that
such concerns rather get in the way of formal creativity. ndeed
the initial proliferation of spatial concepts and formal techniques
flourishes best in the absence of functional and programmatic
constraints. This is the raison daetre of the oeuvres of Jeffrey
Kipnis and Peter Eisenman. But the rationality of such practice
can not be posed as absolute. Rather it depends on its partiality,
i.e. its embeddedness within an effective division of labour that
separates formal experimentation from its functional exploitation.
The functional implementation of the newly elaborated formalisms
is often regarded as trivialisation. But without its "trivialisation" -
which indeed is its only redemption - this formalism would be
nothing but an irresponsible fetishism. Any new formal concept
reveals its power and productivity (and would argue even fulfills
its full aesthetic affect) only as a lived space.
To pose as a critic implies a vantage point, a project, a
pursuit, a career.
For me the design and construction of the new Chamber of
Commerce and ndustry of Slovenia is a prime example of the
creative and substantial application of recent spatial repertoires.
As such it is very close to my own ambitions to "redeem" the
fantastic formal innovations of the last decade by identifying and
engaging key aspects of the contemporary social life process. My
main focus of research (at the AA Design Research Lab)
concerns the very dynamic realm of recent corporate
restructuring. There is indeed a massive paradigm shift under way
in management philosophy and the practice of corporate work
organisation. And the organisational terms of the new paradigm -
decentralisation, loosely coupled networks, interpenetration of
competencies etc. - are to a large extend compatible with the new
formal repertoires of spatial organisation. nstitutions such as the
Chamber of Commerce will have to respond and adapt. The
spatial organisation (and its architectural articulation) of the new
building for the chamber of commerce provides a convincing
armature for the emerging types of business communication
processes. The new building effectively offers many of the formal
and spatial resources the avant-garde of the discipline of
architecture has been able to elaborate in the last 10-15 years. (n
this respect the building rivals the achievement of MVRDVas
recent administration and production centre for VPRO Television
in Hilversum.)
The primary organisational distinction that the building
articulates is between the regular administration functions on the
backside appropriately articulated as a hermetic, modernist slab
constituted from the repetitive series of standard office cells - and
the semi-public communication functions of the street side -
articulated as a lively play of semi-transparent volumes.
The most striking spatial quality within the interior of the
building is its varied levels of (visual) porosity. We encounter quite
a range of means of visual connections and semi-exposure, from
the vertically pervasive central void to the more nuanced cuts and
slivers that are distributed throughout the building. By means of
(often oblique) visual penetration the various meeting and
exhibition spaces are revealed to the visitor, thus offering a sense
of overview and indirect participation in the communications of the
institution. For this purpose Sadar and Vuga exploit the subtle
disjunction of levels between the front and backside of the
structure. These level shifts proliferate the visual exposure, while
at the same time avoiding direct full and frontal exposure of any
activity. The central void is neither central nor a single spatial
figure. t is a deep and formless space, reminiscent of Piranesias
haunting Carceri series. Today such spaces are thrilling rather
than threatening. They are spaces of discovery or "spaces of
becoming".(3) The Chamber of Commerce offers itself as such a
space of becoming, i.e. a latent multiplicity of figures to be
revealed by the moving subject. t might better be described as a
bundle of virtual trajectories rather than a space. Within this
multiplicity several points offer considerable visual depth in all
directions. There are no clear boundaries to frame those (visual)
trajectories. Layer by layer the visitor will be peeling away the
sophisticated screening surfaces which wrap "the void". From the
exterior a subtle definition of the interior void is given via a
corresponding exterior "void" and the vertical louvers which give a
specific texture and light.
These spatial qualities give me a visceral sense of an open,
communicative working atmosphere. can imagine to participate
in the life of this institution and be productive here. This sensation
resonates with a new concept of work that has nothing to do with
routine "drudge".(4) This work is no longer about the isolated and
diligent concentration upon a given task but about navigating a
dense web of lateral communications. The building is supporting
this type of net-working. The aesthetic experience of the building
is bound up with such anticipations of the beauty of productive
work. ts aesthetic energy is drawn from its social charge. The
respective architectural qualities are generalisable and will inspire
further architectural research and work.
n todayas media age, more than ever, good architecture is
more than the fulfillment of its immediate social (institutional)
purpose. t is a manifestation of an ongoing research; an
architectural manifesto; a tool for social imagination and a
promise of further social progress. This promise is the
transcendental dimension of inspired architecture (which we
perceive as its beauty).
Notes:
1. Manfredo Tafuri, "Architecture and Utopia", M..T. Press,
1976, See also: Patrik Schumacher, The Architecture of
Movement, ARCH+134/135, December 1996
2. Patrik Schumacher, Produktive Ordnungen (engl.:
Productive Patterns) in: ARCH+ 136, April 1997, Berlin, pp.28-33,
pp.87-90
see also: a) Patrik Schumacher, Productive Patterns -
Restructuring Architecture. Part 1 in: architect's bulletin,
Operativity, Volume 135 - 136, June 1997, Slovenia b) Part 2, in:
architect's bulletin, Volume 137 - 138, November 1997, Slovenia
3. see: Peter Eisenman, Processes of the nterstitial, in: El
Croquis 83, Madrid 1997
4. Patrik Schumacher, Arbeit, Spiel und Anarchie, in: Work &
Culture - Bro.nszenierung von Arbeit, Herausgeber: Herbert
Lachmayer und Eleonora Luis, Ritterverlag, Klagenfurt And: Patrik
Schumacher, Business, Research, Architecture, n: Daidalos
69/70, December 1998/January 1999.
end.
Architektur fuer eine wissensbasierte
Oekonomie (Architecture for a
Knowledge Economy)
Patrik Schumacher 2001
Paper delivered at conference Serve City: living and working
in the interactive city, Bauhaus Dessau Foundation, Dessau
Mein Titel unterstellt grundsaetzlich eine
Erklaerungshierarchie von Basis und Ueberbau sowie speziell
das moderne Prinzip der letztlich funktional ausgerichteten
Formgenese.
Die Produktivkraftentwicklung bleibt weiterhin global
massgebendes Kriterium fuer gesellschaftliche Entwicklung, aber
die Logik, Struktur und Verkehrsmuster des Wirtschaftens sind im
Umbruch. Es zeichnen sich neue oekonomische
Gesetzmaessigkeiten ab, die Kernprinzipien der neoklassischen
Oekonomie auf den Kopf zu stellen scheinen. Wissensbasierte
Oekonomie produziert Produkte und Dienstleistungen mit
vergleichsweise sehr hohen R&D-anteilen (z.b. Computerchips,
Software, Satelliten, Medikamente, Finanzdienstleistungen ect.)
n der Oekonomie der Wissensgesellschaft kommt Wissen als
entscheidender Faktor zu den traditionellen Produktionsfaktoren -
35/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Land, Arbeit, Kapital - hinzu. Wissen als Produkt und
Produktionsfaktor ist dabei mehr als blosse abgespeicherte
nformationsmasse. Wissen meint hier effektiv, in relevanten
Kontexten spezifizierte, produktiv angewandte nformation, d.h.
Wissen nicht in Buechern und auch nicht in den Koepfen der
ndividuen, sondern kontextbezogen aufbereitet und umgesetzt in
organisierte Kommunikationsprozesse. n dieser Form laesst
Wissen sich nicht einfach wie Maschinen oder Arbeitskraft auf
dem Markt einkaufen - es sei denn man ist in der Lage ganze
Organisationen sammt ihren komplexen
nformationsverarbeitungs- und Kommunikationsprozessen zu
kaufen und sich anzugliedern. Auch dann bleibt die
Eingliederung, Einpassung und Vermittlung mit den eigenen
Prozessen erst noch zu leisten.
Das fixe Kapital des industriellen Kapitalismus ist traditionell
im materiellen Wert der Gebaeude und Maschinen veranschlagt.
Heute spricht man dagegen von ntellektuellem Kapital das in den
Mitarbeitern verankert ist oder von sozialem Kapital, das
ausgehend von selbst-organisierten Kompetenzverteilungen und
Geschaeftsprozessen zwischen den Mitarbeitern in Form
emergenter KommunikationsStrukturen erst entsteht. Diese
emergenten Kommunikationsnetze lassen sich nicht auf die
Leistung einzelner zurueckfuehren und dennoch macht es den
einzelnen als historisch-individuell gewachsenen Netzknoten fast
unersetztbar, ganz in Gegensatz zur klassischen ndustriellen
Massenproduktion. Waehrend materielle Kapitalgueter bei
Gebrauch verschleissen und ihren Wert verlieren, waechst das
intellektuelle und soziale Kapital im Gebrauch.
Waehrend bei materieller Produktion jedes Stueck immer
wieder den gleichen Aufwand an Material und Arbeit abverlangt
ist einmal erarbeitetes Wissensprodukt fast kostenlos
reproduzierbar. Auch das Gesetzt des Abnehmenden
Grenznutzens ist auf den Kopf gestellt: Waehrend bei materiellen
Konsum-oder Kapitalguetern fuer den Nutzer gilt, dass sein
Nutzen pro erworbenem Exemplar abnimmt, je mehr Gueter
dieser Sorte er bereits hat, gilt fuer Wissensgueter umgekehrt,
dass je mehr Wissen und Kompetenz ein Nutzer (sei es ein
ndividuum oder eineOrganisation) bereits in einem
Wissensgebiet angereichert hat, um so wert- und gehaltvoller
werden zusaetzliche nformationen sein und ihren vollen latente
Beziehungsreichtum erst auf diesem Niveau entfalten. Soweit
meine Andeutungen zur oekonomischen Logik der
Wissensproduktion, die es erlaubt von einer spezifischen
Wissensoekonomie zu sprechen.
Die Analyse oekonomischer Prozesse beleuchtet allerdings
nur Teilaspekte einer dynamischen Totalitaet, die sich in
verschiedenen Perspektiven betrachten laesst. Disziplinen wie
die Oekonomie, die Soziologie, die Rechtswissenschaften, die
Kulturwissenschaften, der Urbanismus und die Architektur ect.
lassen sich nicht mehr an Hand ihrer vermeintlich
unterschiedlichen Objektbereiche unterscheiden. Die Entwicklung
ist immer eine Totalitaet und inzwischen viel zu dynamisch um
Teilaspekte noch sinnvoll ueber einen laengeren Zeitraum hin
isoliert bearbeiten zu koennen. Vielmehr nimmt jede Disziplin die
Gesammtgesellschaftliche Entwicklung ins Auge, allerdings je aus
der Perspektive ihrer spezifischen Aufgabenstellung heraus.
Unser Symposium ist ein angemessener und inzwischen mehr
oder weniger alltaeglicher Ausdruck dieser komplexen Situation.
Die Architektur muss sich - wie auch das Recht, die Politik, die
Kunst und wie jede andere Disziplin auch - ihre fuer sie
relevanten gesellschaftlichen Anknuepfungspunkte erst - und
immer wieder neu - erarbeiten. Das Symposium fordert
Stellungnahmen zur Hypothese "interaktive Dienstleistungsstadt".
Mein Anknuepfungspunkt ist das wissensbasierte Wirtschaften.
Als Quereinstieg dazu mag Pierre Levys Begriff der >kollektiven
ntelligenz< dienen. Dem entspricht in der neuren
Organisationslehre der Begriff des organisationalen Wissens und
Lernens, das sich nicht auf die blosse Agglomeration von
individuellem Wissen und Lernen reduzieren laesst, dieses nicht
einmal bei allen Beteiligten unbedingt voraussetzt., sondern erst
im komplexen Kommunikationsnetz der Organisation entsteht.
Und hier sei schon einmal meine These - auch gegen Levy -
angedeutet, dass dieses Kommunikationsnetz kein rein
elektronisches Netz ist sondern immer auch im Raum funktioniert
und auf territoriale Distanzen, Naehen, Abstufungen,
Querverbindungen und vor allem auf orientierende raumliche
Artikulationen absolut angewiesen bleibt.
Bei Levy wird das nternet zum eigentlichen substrat der
Kollektiven ntelligenz. ndividuelle dentitaet ist ganz neu zu
definieren in diesem neuen Raum, den Levy als den 4.
Anthropologischen Raum tituliert. Die drei vorgaengigen
Anthropologischen Raeume mit ihrer je eigenen Form der
dentitaetsbildung existieren rudimentaer fort und lassen sich
auch heute noch - z.B. an Hand von Visitenkarten -
nachvollziehen. Unser Name erinnert nur noch an dievormalig
dentitaetsstiftende Kraft der Abstammung und
Blutsverwandtschaft aus der Zeit der Stammesgesellschaften,
dem ersten Antropologischen Raum. Unsere mehr oder weniger
permanente Adresse erinnert an die dentitaetsstiftende Kraft des
Wohnorts als bodenstaendige Heimat, Herkunft und
Zugehoerigkeit in einem land-gebundenen Feudalismus als dem
zweiten, dem territorialen Anthropologischen Raum. Unsere
Berufsbezeichnung - z.B. Architekt - identifiziert und lokalisiert
uns im System der industriellen Arbeitsteilung. Der Beruf - sofern
noch vorhanden und bezeichenbar - ist auch heute noch
identitaetsstiftend im 3. Anthropologischen Raum. Aber die
Eindeutigkeit von Berufsbezeichnungen und Karriereverlaeufen
verliert sich mehr und mehr in ganz persoenlichen, kontingenten
Werdegaengen, die sich nicht mehr in einem stabilen, eindeutigen
System der Arbeitsteilung verorten lassen. m kommenden
4.Anthropologischen Raum wird dentitaet und ndividualitaet
ganz von dem biographischen Weg durch das weitgespannte und
bewegte Netzwerk der produktiven Kommunikationen bestimmt
sein. dentitaet kann sich dabei auffaechern in simultane, multiple
Affiliationen. n diesem Raum waere der bis dato hoechste Grad
an ndividualitaet, Kollektivitaet und Komplexitaet erreicht.
Kulturentwicklung war allerdings immer schon an
Komplexitaetsteigerung in der Form der Vergesellschaftung
gebunden. Auch der Sprung in die moderne, kapitalistische
ndustriegesellschaft war ein Sprung in der Komplexitaet der
Vergesellschaftung und laesst sich nicht allein mittels der
Dampfmaschine erklaeren. Ebensowenig laesst sich die
gegenwaertige Entwicklung allein auf den Computer
zurueckfuehren, auch wenn hier jeweils eine materielle basis
erreicht ist auf die vorher ungeahnte soziale Moeglichkeiten
aufsatteln.
Aber sowohl das zunaechst Dampfbetriebene maschinelle
Fabriksystem als auch die im Computer verwirklichte
Mechanisierung der Datenverarbeweitung sind umgekehrt aus
sozialen Maschinen hervorgegangen: Das maschinelle
Fabriksystem geht aus der immer weiter getriebenen
Arbeitsteilung der Manufaktur hervor, bis die ins kleinste
ausdifferenzierten Handgriffe schliesslich mechanisierbar wurden.
Der Computer ist die letzte Konsequenz der Uebertragung des
Taylorismus von der Produktion auf die die Produktion
anleitenden Verwaltungsprozesse, bis schliesslich die Armee
Buchfuehrer und menschlichen Transistoren von elektronischen
ersetzt werden konnten. Frederic Taylor war vielleicht der erste
der Wissen oekonomisch organisiert und konsequent rationalisiert
hat. Taylor hatte sich zum Ziel gesetzt, alles implizite Wissen,
dass in der handwerklichen Tradition angereichert und in der
intuitiven Geschicklichkeit der Arbeiter verborgen ist, explizit zu
machen, dem gut-duenken der Arbeiter zu entreissen, zu
rationalisieren, und in ausgefeilten, repetitiven, systematisch
verketteten Prozessen zu objektivieren. Ruckblickend kann man
das hier erreichte durchaus schon als eine Form explizit
organisationalem, d.h. ueberindividuellen Wissens bezeichnen,
allerdings eine Form, die auf der Ausschaltung und Vernichtung
des individuellen Wissens beruht. Man mag jeder Organisation,
die eine Vielzahl individueller Leistungen systematisch integriert
organisationale, ueberindividuelle ntelligenz zuschreiben. Dem
vorindustriellen Handwerksbetrieb, der von der Tradition als
Erfahrungskondensat lebt in ihr aber auch gefesselt bleibt,
ebenso wie dem bureaukratisch durchrationalisierten
ndustriebetrieb, der aufgrund Wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis
soziale und maschinelle Ablaeufe einrichtet. Allerdings geht es
hier jeweils nur um ausfuehrende Organe und Prozesse.
Organisationales Wissen besteht in den komplexen und
erfahrungsangereicherten Organisationsmustern, die das
effektive ineinandergreifen und Verketten einzelner kognitiver
Leistungen leisten, d.h. in den zumeist konditional formulierten
Regeln, Routinen und standartisierten Kommunikations- und
36/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Geschaeftsprzessen einer komplexen Organisation. Niklas
Luhmann singt entsprechend "das Lob der Routine". Von
kollektiver ntelligenz, neuer wissensbasierter Oekonomie und
von organisationalem Lernen laesst sich aber erst dann wirklich
reden wenn der kollektive Kommunikationsprozess reflexiv
geworden ist und sich seine eigenen Verfahren und
Kommunikationsmuster immer wieder selbst schreibt und
umschreibt. Damit geht die klassische dee von Organisation als
stabiler Fixierung von Ordnung, als Hierarchie mit eindeutiger
Befehlslinie, Verteilung von Kompetenzen und Verantwortung ect.
verloren. Anstatt dessen gibt es mehr oder weniger informelle
Prozesse der Selbstorganisation und permament aktive Meta-
instanzen der reflexiven Selbstregulation, wie Planungs- und
Strategiestaebe, permanente Unternehmensberatungseinsaetzte
ect.,d.h. nstanzen, die staendig nicht nur in sondern an den
Kommunikationsmustern arbeiten. Hierarchien werden fluessig,
Kompetenzgrenzen oscillieren, verschwimmen und werden
perspektivisch verzerrt. ect.ect. Dabei ist es entscheidend, das
die Organisation Organisationsformen und Mechanismen findet
und interne KOMMUNKATONSKULTUREN KULTVERT, die es
ihr erlauben sich selbst staendig neu zu formieren. Dazu bedarf
es eines raumlichen Substrats, dass wahrscheinlich seine
notwendige Flexibilitaet nicht aus Neutralitaet und Leere gwinnt
sonder aus formaler Ueberfuelle aus der die Selbstorganisation
ihre changierenden Muster schoepft und sich selbst simmer
wieder neu und anders selektiert. Diese Konzept latent
ueberstrukturierter, das heisst redundant strukturierter
Raumlichkeiten schliesst den Exzess von sowohl Trennungen als
auch Verbindungen ein. Der exponentielle Zugewinn an
Verbindungsmoeglichkeiten springt allerdings aufgrund des
historischen Kontrasts zum extrem segmentierenden
Ordnungsmuster der Fordistischen Bureaukratie besonders ins
Auge: Schwammartige poroese, tiefe Raume. Auf
staedtebaulicher Ebene findet man die Abloesung der Trendenz
zum autarken Grosskomplex auf der gruenen Wiese hin zur Re-
urbanisation der historischen Zentren mit dicht vernetzten
Clustern von flexiblen Produktionseiheiten, auf der staendigen
Suche nach Allianzen, Symbiosen und
Andockungsopportunitaeten.
Nachtrag: "Konsumgesellschaft" als theoretisches "Unding".
Eine fundamentale Unterscheidung steht am Anfang jeder
oekonomischen Theorie, die Unterscheidung von Konsumption
und Produktion. Diese zwei Bereiche oder Aspekte der
gesellschaftlichen Reproduktion haengen natuerlich voneinander
ab, aber der Schluessel zum Verstaendnis der gesellschaftlich-
geschichtlichen Entwicklung liegt fast ausschliesslich auf der
Seite der Produktion. Deshalb ist bei Marx auch der
Produktionsmodus das Fundamentalprinzip der Epochenbildung.
Die "Konsumgesellschaft" ist insofern ein theoretisches Unding.
Es ist offensichtlich, dass nur das konsumiert werden kann, was
vorher produziert wurde. Aber ist nicht auch umgekehrt die
Reproduktion der Produktion auf eine entsprechende
Konsumption angewiesen? Allerdings. Konsumption ist
darueberhinaus sogar die Produktion der Produzenten, d.h. der
Arbeiter. Aber aus dieser wechselseitigen Abhaengigkeit laesst
sich keine Symetrie in Bezug auf die historische
Entwicklungsdynamik ableiten. Zum einen sind
Konsumptionsmuster historisch wesentlich stabiler als
Produktionsweisen - sie bleiben wesentlich enger an die
biologische Konstitution des menschlichen Organismus gebunden
- bei aller kulturellen Entfaltung. Es geht primr immer wieder nur
um Nahrungsmittel, Kleidung, Wohnraum ect. Natrlich gibt es
auch hier Neuerungen. Die sind zumeist allerdings relativ trivialer
Art, z.B. Kellogs Cornflakes anstatt Kartoffeln. Der wesentliche
materielle Fortschritt in der Konsumption liegt auf der Ebene der
Quantitt und der Sicherheit der Lebenssicherung. Diese
quantitativen Zugewinne sind erkauft ber radikale qualitative
Umstrukturierungen der gesellschaftlich organisierten Produktion.
Allerdings gibt es im 20sten Jahrhundert auch profundere
Neuerungen auf der Ebene der Konsumption, wie z.B. den
Flugtourismus, das Telephon, den auto-mobilen ndividualverkehr,
das Fernsehn und das nternet. Aber diese Errungenschaften sind
zunaechst als Militaer- und Produktionsmittel und nicht direkt und
allererst als Konsumartikel entstanden.
Der wesentliche Punkt schliesslich, der die These des
entwicklungsgeschichtlichen Primats der Produktion begrndet ist
der offensichtliche Umstand, dass die die Entwicklung
kanalisierenden Huerden und Wiederstaende allein auf der Seite
der Produktion liegen und nur hier Fortschritte zu erobern sind.
Konsumption ist dagegen relativ voraussetzungslos. Jeder kann
sich ins Flugzeug setzen, sich im Hotel ausstrecken, TV glotzen
und im nternet shoppen. Aber es gehoert eine ganze Menge
dazu ein Flugzeug, einen TV-Film, oder die naechste Generation
von software zu produzieren. Waehrend der Konsum als
individueller Akt unabhaengig und indifferent stattfinen kann, ist
die Produktion, Aufrechterhaltung und Weiterentwicklung der
beim Konsum einfach vorausgestzten nfrastrukturen und
Produktionssysteme nur auf einem extrem hohen
Koordinationsniveau zu haben. Daran scheitern viele
Gesellschaften (Entwicklungslaender), waehrend deren Eliten,
kein Problem haben auf hoechstem Niveau zu konsumieren.
Die Welt der Produktion kann ganz anders aussehen als die
Welt der Konsumption. Das haengt ab vom historischen Grad der
Ausdifferenzierung dieser Aspekte als mehr oder weniger
getrennte Betreiche, genauer als rauemlich, zeitlich, und/oder
sozial getrennte Bereiche.
m Stadium des Jaeger-und Sammlertums findet Produktion
und Konsumption fast simultan an Ort und Stelle statt. m
Feudalismus gibt es zunaechst die soziale Differenzierung (die
einen produzieren, die anderen Konsumieren) und dann
Anfaenge einer gewissen zeitlichen Trennung (Sonntag als Tag
der Ruhe, zeitlich festgelegte Frondienste, aber noch kaum
eindeutige raeumliche Separation. Erst die ndustrialisierung
unter kapitalistischem Vorzeichen bringt die konsequente zetliche
und raeumliche Differenzierung von Produktion und Konsumption.
n der ersten Phase der ndustrialisierung bleibt die Stadt und die
Lebensweise des Gentleman unberuehrt von der monstroesen
Welt der ndustrieproduktion. m spaeten 19.Jahrhundert wird die
Stadt zur industriellen Produktionsmaschine.
Auch wenn die Bereiche am Ende des 20sten Jahrhundert zu
verschwimmen erscheinen, ist mein Fokus auf die Stadt als - nun
tertiaere - Produktionsmaschine gerichtet, eine produktive
nformationsverarbeitungsmaschine, Ort einer
voraussetzungsvollen, produktivkraftfoerdernden
Wissensproduktion. Hier muss sich jede Stadt der ersten Welt im
Wettbewerb behaupten. Dabei spielen reiche
Konsumptionsmoeglichkeiten und kulturelle Angebote - als
Reproduktion von Produzenten eine Zulieferer Rolle, aber kein
sich selbst tragendes Prinzip mit substantieller Eigendynamik. m
Bereich der kulturellen Angebote, die man traditionell der
Konsumption zurechnet in Form des Entertainment, verstanden
als Zerstreung und relaxierende Weltflucht - zeicnen sich
Mutationen und Hybridformen ab, die in der Tat zu wesentlichen
Faktoren, der Wettbewerbsfhigkeit von Produktionsstandorten
der Wissensoekonomie avancieren. Diese "Freizeit-angebote"
sind aber nur dann effektiv, wenn sie gerade nicht der
Zerstreuung, sonder der konzentrierten Reflektion und
professionellen Kommunikation dienen. Ein wichtiges Beispiel
sind in diesem Zusammenhang die zur Zeit vehement
proliferierenden Zentren fuer Gegenwartskunst. Das sind nfo-
tainment- , sowie Forschungszentren, die zum einen die Kunst als
innovatives Experimentierfeld fuer die wesentlichen Branchen,
der Wissensbasierten Wirtschaft ausweisen: fuer T, nternet,
Design, Medien-, Film-, und Werbeindustrie, und zum anderen
durch staendige, vielfaeltige Austellungs und Konferenzereignisse
entscheidene Foren der Wissens-Elitenkommunikation
instutionalisieren. Die Teilnahme an solchen Ereignissen
transzendiert die Klassifikation nach Konsumption versus
Produktion. Mein heuristischer Forschungsvorschlag in dieser
Hinsicht waere es diese Phaenome als Produktionsphanomene
zu untersuchen, d.h. nach ihrer produktiven effektivitaet und
oekonomischen Rationalitaet zu fragen, anstatt nach ihrer
Beliebtheit, ihrem Unterhaltungswert oder Wert als
Touristenattraktion.
End
Going Post-Corporate
Patrik Schumacher 2001
Paper delivered at 5th Graz Biennial on Media and
37/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Architecture
Session: Structural Changes and Urban Realities
Postmodernity is marked by the simultaneity of multiplicitous
diverging tendencies. This also applies to patterns of
urbanisation: The tendency of extensive sprawl exemplified in
exopolis L.A. (Edward W. Soja) continues in parallel with
processes of metropolitan concentration (Saskia Sassen). No
overriding paradigm dominates the scene. As architect one might
choose one's research focus where one presumes a viable
potential for innovative architectural engagement. The tendency
of choice explored here is the business-led reclamation of the
historic urban centres after many years of suburbanisation and
urban decline.
The reclamation of the historic city has many facets. am
neither concerned with tourism nor with the way corporations
seem to brand and privatise the urban domain or use iconic
architecture to advertise their presence on the urban skyline.
What am focussing on is the city as an authentic and effective
place of work. The density, diversity and service intensity of urban
centres has been rediscovered as a conducive milieu for the new
patterns of corporate organisation and the culture of business
relations that mark the emerging era of the post-fordist knowledge
economy. Tourism, retail and entertainment are only relevant in as
much as they help to financially maintain the various
infrastructures (transport, hotels, restaurants) and cultural
establishments that support sophisticated business communities.
ndeed the rich cultural life (the arts, universities) of the big cities
feed directly into the productive capacities of high value
"industries" that specialise in areas like the media, T, design,
finance etc.
The appropriate slogans and catch-phrases that could be
cited here to circumscribe the relevant cluster of phenomena
might be taken from the discourse of management theory:
Business eco-systems, loosely coupled networks, de-
hierachization, participatory structures, out-sourcing,
interdisciplinary team-works, hybridity, self-organisation etc.
The backdrop against which these emerging phenomena
stand out is given by the orthodox corporation characterised by
clearly set purpose, definite boundaries, strict hierarchy and well-
defined internal division of competencies. The orthodox
corporation is based on the incorporation of all types of work
required for the production of the final service or commodity into
its hermetic domain. These nearly autarchic systems withdrew
from the constraining and chaotic conditions of the inner cities in
order to create their own orderly and centrally planned productive
universe on new tabula rasa green field sites. This was indeed the
dominant spatial pattern of corporate organisation with respect to
both industrial plants and administrative headquarters during the
whole post war era until the early 1980s. As paradigmatic
examples one might quote the Headquarters of John Deere & Co
near Moline, llinois, designed by Eero Saarinen and Associates
in 1956 or Saarinens work for BM. These developments are at
the heart of the degeneration of the historic inner cities in this
period.
This spatial pattern has become utterly dysfunctional with
respect to the current flow of working relations that moves across
multiple corporate boundaries and indeed leads to the blurring of
corporate territories through the inflation of alliances and the
loose attachment of an endless stream of temporary, independent
consultants. While the orthodox system is premised on a rather
stable economic environment that allows for long term planning
and the build-up of elaborate structures, the self-organising
network system is in a permanent state of flux, regroupment and
reorientation. Underlying this is a general shift of balance from
physical production towards design, the culture industry,
research&developement, marketing, management&finance etc. in
the most advanced economies. These are all creative and
knowledge intensive productive activities that defeat the classical
forms of corporate organisation. nevitably a new organisational
paradigm emerges.
The urban expression of this new paradigm can be found in
urban quarters like London's Clerkenwell district where dynamic
business clusters (design, media, T) flourish and feed of each
other in loft conversions build into the predominantly late 19th and
early 20th century fabric that formerly sustained light industry like
printing and various types of light manufacturing. Or one might
take a look at London's more central Fitzrovia district where a
dense web of corporations benefit from each other's expertise
and are able to utilise shared resources. Here the AADRL (1)
investigated the work/space patterns of two prominent service
sector businesses that are world players in their respective fields:
The engineering firm Ove Arup Partnership and the advertising
agency M&C Saatschi. Both firms occupy multiple buildings (while
hardly ever occupying a whole building) within close proximity.
Arup has 9 different locations here. This reflects their organisation
as a cluster of semi-autonomous groups (companies within the
company) that each developed a certain identity and engages in
multiple alliances with architects and other professionals around
specific projects. The street space between the buildings
becomes an informal communication space for the company
while the rich choice of various lunch places and restaurants
replaces the canteen buried in corporate orthodoxy. The so called
"knowledge centre" emerged from the corporate basement library
to become a publicly accessible research facility with street-level
shop-window. ts video conferencing facility is offered for hire
while Arup in turn hires large meeting and conference facilities for
its specialist seminar series on demand from a nearby university.
Subcontracting, outsourcing and freelancing blur the corporate
boundary as internal support services like the T department start
to offer their services to outside customers to fully utilise (develop)
its resources. Arup T even starts to market certain specialised
software products and is soon to emerge from the corporate
hinterland into the urban surface of interchange. The challenge of
ever-changing tasks and permanent competitive innovation
requires an ongoing internal as well as external re-routing of the
spatial lines of communication while the distinction between in-
house vs. out-of-house is sliding.
The patchwork pattern of occupation allows for great flexibility
in terms of contraction and expansion into and out of the urban
web. Additional pieces of space can be easily acquired or
released back into the market. There is always some space
readily available. The gain in flexibility afforded here counts for
more than the convenience of a unified territory that can not be
maintained in this way. Such flexibility is obviously unattainable on
the green field site - not to mention the required communication
and interface density with external collaborators called for by the
new ways of production.
On the basis of these observations and insights one might
analyse the upheaval of modern urbanism and the rapid
ascendance of postmodern (and then deconstructivist)
architecture/urbanism as the superficial/profound expression of
that radical transformation of patterns of production that has been
theorised as the move from Fordism to Post-fordism.(2) Post-
modern architecture found its market in the rediscovery and
"detournement" of the historical city as business hot house,
catering for the needs of the new forms of business organisation
based on clusters and networks of semi-independent units rather
than strictly integrated corporations. The new enterprise and
yuppie culture could not flourish in suburbia or on secluded green
field sites.
Rather than regarding cultural phenomena like
individualisation, life-style diversification and branding as primary
factors that might explain post-modern architecture, the
explanation focuses on the development of the system of
production and the attendant re-organisation of the labour
process as the generative force of socio-economic and cultural
development. Tendencies in architecture and urbanism are to be
assessed on the basis of their participation in the overall progress
of social productivity. Here in heart of the western metropolis it is
a question of facilitating the latest trends and the apparent best
practises in the organisation of an advanced knowledge economy.
The question of contemporary urbanism can not be what appeals
to this or that moneyed audience. Rather the following question
must be posed: What does it take in terms of people,
infrastructure and spaces of communication to produce a world
class newspaper, a cutting edge engineering solution or the
hottest trend in web-site design?
Each product produced in the knowledge economy is a new
product elaborated in temporary interdisciplinary project teams.
This implies a veritable explosion in communication requirements
which can only partially be absorbed by the expansion of
38/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
telecommunication means. A large part of everybodyas working
day is engaged with face to face meetings and the movement
between meetings. The office transforms into a conference venue
on multiple scales and bleeds out into the urban field (business
meetings in restaurants, hotel lobbies etc.). Here the difference
between work and entertainment dissolves. Another large part of
the working day/week is taken up by research and permanent
education. This aspect also escapes the dichotomy of work
versus free time. The social principle underlying the modernist
zoning - the distinction of working versus leisure time - is
subverted as both are transformed into an equally relevant
"gathering of experience" as aspects of the "continuous self-
development" that elaborates personal skill-sets as the building
blocks of the productive networks of self-organisation. The urban
environment starts to reflect this rhizomatic seamlessness. The
dense and porous spatial texture of these urban quarters offers a
fertile matrix of interface surfaces and the rich articulation of
degrees of semi-enclosure and intimacy for the various subunits
woven into the otherwise continuous web of production.
Post-modern aesthetics - the (unheard of) rejection of the
aesthetic values of homogeneity, coherence and completeness -
and the celebration of diversity, collage and fragmentation signals
the departure from the fordist regime of bureaucratically
organised mass-production and heralds the beginnings of the
new urban complexity. Deconstructivism and Folding are
extensions of this fundamental break with modernism rather than
signifying a further break. Here we find the further radicalisation of
pertinent conceptual and formal repertoires that might be able to
organise and articulate the new spaces for the knowledge
economy with respect to their complex network patterns, their
organisational hybridity, their smooth transitions and multifaced
identities.
End.
Notes:
1. The Design Research Lab at the Architectural
Association School of Architecture (AADRL) in London
has been studying the spatial implications of recent
developments in management theory and corporate
restructuring by means of case studies and speculative
design projects. A first summary of the results has been
documented in: Patrik Schumacher, Business -
Research Architecture, n: Daidalos 69/70, The Need of
Research, December 1998/January 1999
2. For a detailed discussion and applcation of the notion
of post-fordism to architecture see: Patrik Schumacher,
Produktive Ordnungen (engl.: Productive Patterns) in:
ARCH+ 136, April 1997, Berlin, pp.28-33, pp.87-90
After Ford
Patrik Schumacher & Christian Rogner 2001
Published n: Stalking Detroit, Editors: Georgia Daskalakis,
Charles Waldheim, Jason Young
The moment of Detroitas deepest crisis coincides with the 'Death
of Modern Architecture' as announced by Charles Jencks in 1977.
(1) This is no coincidence. The emergence of postmodern
architecture and urbanism in the seventies - sweeping the market
in the eighties - represents much more than a new aesthetic
sensibility. The postmodern rejection of homogeneity, coherence,
and completeness; and the explicit celebration of heterogeneity
mark a radical departure from fifty years of modernist
development. The force behind these developments, rather than
emerging from within the architectural discipline itself, is to be be
found on the socio-economic level. Postmodern cultural
production coincides with the historical crisis in the regime of
mechanical mass-production, first developed by Ford in Detroit.
(2)
The historical closure of fordism as a model of socio-economic
progress spelled the demise of Detroit, once the proud origin of
modern industrial development. "Detroitism" became a globally
emulated recipe for economic prosperity. Now Detroit stands
devastated; overburdened by the infrastructural, architectural and
human sediment of its fordist past. Central parts of Detroit are
empty, large buildings stand as ruins: offices, schools, train
stations and vast urban territories have been abandoned. Urban
planning proposals counter this drastic situation with equally
drastic measures: The demolition of whole urban quarters and
their conversion into parks. Greenbelts are proposed to cut the
vast, fragmented field into recognizable "communities", sealing
the ultimate fate of Detroit: to become the suburb of its own
suburbs. Those extended suburbs are alive and well, forming a
polycentric conurbation where typically post-fordist service
industries settle at a safe distance from inner city wastelands.
But it would be wrong to assume that post-fordism is the era of
suburbia and fordism the era of the city. Suburbanization was the
general rule of (mature) fordist urbanization. Postfordism breaks
the universality of suburbanization. The new model of post-fordist
urbanism re-inhabited the historic city. Postmodern architecture
found its market in the rediscovery and "detournement"(3) of the
historical city not merely as brandable commodity but as
necessary communication hub for the new economy. Jane Jacobs
rendered a critical verdict on Detroit in 1961, at the height of its
economic power. "Virtually all of Detroit is as weak on vitality and
diversity as the Bronx. t is ring superimposed upon ring of failed
gray belts. Even Detroitas downtown itself cannot produce a
respectable amount of diversity. t is dispirited and dull, and
almost deserted by seven o'clock of an evening."(4) Monotony,
lack of diversity; these are the typical "ills" or "failures" of the
modern city. To avoid Jacobas ahistorical condemnation of the
industrial city, one must grasp the economic rationality
underpinning its development. This includes the intentional
rationality and social meaning of urban monotony, zoning, and the
various symptoms of industrialized urban arrangement. Over half
a century of rationally planned coherent city building can not have
been a "mistake". But what was progressive then has indeed
become dysfunctional today. The new socio-economic logic of
Postfordism offers a reading of the current prospects of Detroit
and other cities caught in the dynamic of global economic
restructuring. Any understanding of Detroit must begin with the
socio-economic logic of fordism and its urban implications.
Fordism as a Technical and Spatial System
Detroit served as a visible model of fordist industrial development
during the first half of the twentieth century. As an economic
monoculture it mirrored the prosperity, growth and decline of the
automobile industry. Detroit offers a paradigmatic case study of
fordism as an organizational model of urbanization and for the
collusion between industry and architecture, as personified by the
collaboration between Henry Ford and Albert Kahn. One might
speak of three phases of the fordist revolution: (5)
Phase 1: Taylorization takes command.
Automobile manufacturing in the pioneering days is organized
around the work of autonomous artisan-engineers. To increase
the speed and scale of production, Ford applies Tayloras
principles of scientific management. Work becomes a scientific
object, observable, controllable and modifiable. ndividual
laboreras tasks are recorded, analyzed and broken down into
elementary movements. Efficiency is optimized by the
reconfiguration of tasks within time and space according to the
dialectic of differentiation and repetition. Within this concept of
order the flow of production over time is the controlling parameter.
Albert Kahn provides the required architecture and spatial
organization. The Kahn System of Reinforced Concrete enables
wide spaces offering freedom of movement and flexibility for
functional adaptation to various production lines. Fordas Highland
Park plant (1909) with large expanses of clear space allowed the
unconstrained organization of various production cycles, each on
its floor. Discrete processes were stacked vertically, joined via
floor openings and fed by a flow of material from top to bottom.
This vertical architectural organization enabled the production of
the first complex assembly-line product: Fordas Model T. (6)
Phase 2: The factory under one roof is super-ceded.
The assembly line concept is applied to an overall urban complex.
Several single story buildings are joined together, each
accommodating a specific task, and extruded to the length
desired. Entire buildings act as elements of multi-building
assembly lines. At the River Rouge plant (begun 1917) the flow of
materials and sub-components determine the overall "urban"
layout as an integrated machine. This is literally the "city as
machine" later proclaimed by the ideologues of modernist
39/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
urbanism (Le Corbusier, Hilberseimer etc.).
Phase 3: Production patterns are decentralized.
Just after creating the worldas largest industrial complex at River
Rouge, Ford proposed a decentralizing anti-urbanism. Fordist
decentralization involves the re-application of fordist principles of
production on a regional and national scale. Kahnas task became
the construction of specialized production sites scattered across
the country, and linked by infrastructural networks. This phase of
fordism shaped a regional and then nation-wide division of labor
and demanded the subsequent construction of national highway
and communication systems. This extension of fordist productive
patterns fueled the rapid decompression of urban industrial cities
and the decentralization of both mass production and mass
consumption.
The economic success of fordist principles in the US found a
multitude of echo-effects abroad. Fordismas controllable mode of
production and consumption (with equally calculable profits)
found its own interpretation and implementation through various
political systems internationally. Fordist production techniques
were sought after and implemented in Nazi-Germany as well as in
the Soviet Union of Stalin, where Albert Kahn realized 500 major
production complexes (1929-1932) under the developmental
program of the famous first Five Year Plan.
Fordism as a System of Total Social Reproduction
Fordism is a generalization of the production principles and
policies of the Ford Corporation. "Mr. Ford is not a human
creature. He is a principle, or better, a relentless process."(7)
"Fordism" in 1920as Europe signified the possibility of social
progress through new forms of comprehensive industrialization.
Ford made social advance tangible through high, universal wages
(the famous five dollars per day) while allowing for an eight-hour
day and a forty-hour work week three decades before these
norms were legislated by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
Fordism gave workers access to the results of their productive
efforts as the new scales of mass production turned luxury goods
like the motor car into achievable commodities for every worker.
The system could reproduce its own market in a self-fulfilling
prophecy of economic expansion. The material basis of modern
mass society and the "American dream" was established.
As a production system fordism is premised on Taylorism, i.e. the
scientific decomposition of the work process into a system of
measurable operations. This required the transference of
production knowledge from the worker into the mechanism of the
assembly line. At each point only the most basic, repetitive task is
required, leading to the homogenization of individual labor. This
endless repetition and mindlessness of daily labor afforded
access to the consumption of universal mass products. Fordism
understood as a socio-economic category, rather than a merely
technological paradigm, presupposes the systematic integration
of the reproduction of labor into a new and totalizing capitalist
cycle. The advance of fordism (8) was a qualitative shift in the
ability of industry to render workersa "basic needs" (food, clothes,
shelter, transport, etc.) the object of comprehensive
commodification.
The Fordist Logic of Modern Architecture and Urbanism
The totalizing notion of fordism became instrumental to the
underlying rationality of modern architecture and urbanism. n
Europe this regime of fordist urbanization became possible after
the working class (through the mediation of social democracy)
gained a degree of power sharing after World War , establishing
the socio-economic basis for modern architecture. (11) These
developments implied a revolution in the leadership of the
architectural profession. The academic stylists of the imperial
institutions were replaced by self-educated architects (Behrens,
Gropius, Corb, Mies) who re-invented the discipline by identifying
in the mundane (mass housing, mass produced domestic
furnishings, factories) worthy and urgent tasks for a modern
architecture. The social democratic institutions of the welfare state
became the mechanisms through which modern urbanism was
advanced. The Fordist task posed was the development of
optimally efficient standards and the taylorization of modern living.
The house for the "Existenzminimum" became the universal
receptacle for a series of universal mass consumer goods: living
room, dining set, (Frankfurt-) kitchen, bathroom, washing
machine, and later the refrigerator, television and automobile. The
new paradigm of Functionalism implied an objectification and
analysis of the design process and architectural composition was
assimilated to the principles of fordist organization:
decomposition, differentiation, repetition and integration.
This logic is evident in the organization of separate functions into
specialized and separately optimized volumes. The Dessau
Bauhaus is paradigmatic in this respect where residential,
administrative and workshop functions are separately articulated,
allowing for depth, height and facade to be independently
determined for each respective function. The same principles are
at work in the canonical conception of the modernist city. Le
Corbusieras Ville Radieuse (1933) is the most comprehensive
and rigorous application of this logic of differentiation (zoning and
distinct functionalist articulation of each zone), repetition
(homogeneity of each zone) and hierarchical integration
(transport system). Lafayette Park (1955) by Mies, Hilberseimer,
and Caldwell offers the most legible post-war example of these
principles of modernist planning applied to the renovation of the
city of Detroit. Hilberseimeras 1949 publication The New Regional
Pattern rendered these same fordist principles of decentralization
and differentiation, by intertwining transportation, communication,
and production infrastructures across the natural environment of
North America.
From Fordism to Postfordism
n the late sixties the fordist system of universal mass production,
corporate concentration, collective bargaining and state-
regulation was challenged on all fronts. The first serious break in
the post-war boom occurred with the recession of 1966/67. The
political struggles of 1968, the oil-crisis in 1973, the breakdown of
the international exchange-rate system, and a deepening of the
recession in 1974 followed. The automobile industry was in free-
fall and Detroit, site of the oldest and least competitive plants,
was hit hardest. By the end of the seventies it was clear that the
recession had become a structural (systemic) crisis that called for
new political and economic strategies (12).
The origins of the crisis in fordism and an outline of emergent
postfordist tendencies can be found in several concurrent socio-
economic transformations. Among these were shifting commodity
markets, increasing electronic control of production, decreasing
state regulation, increasingly global capital markets, and
deteriorating labor relations. Market Stratification: With the
growing complexity of the division of labor and the proliferation of
white-collar labor, salary stratification increased. Affluence beyond
the saturation of the most basic needs meant that markets began
to diversify, allowing for status and identity consumption to
accelerate aesthetically motivated product-cycles. These
developments placed a reward on innovation and flexibility rather
than simple cost reduction achieved through mass-market
economies of scale. The house, as the main site of consumption,
was itself drawn into the logic of differential identity, status, and
income. The Modernist housing standard ("Existenzminimum")
became the very standard against which market differentiation
was measured. Postmodernist design, architecture and urbanism
catered to this demand and reconceived of the "failed" modern
city as a site for destination recreation and brandable post-urban
tourism.
Flexible Production: New computer-based production
technologies made possible greater product diversity (small runs)
without the enormous cost of handicraft production that had
previously limited deviations from the standard. The crucial
material factor was the micro-electronic revolution that offered
greater productivity through desired economies of scope, rather
than scale. Flexible specialization became a technological
possibility, and the subsequent fluidity of production demanded
the dissolution of static fordist labor and management
arrangements.
Vanishing State-Regulation: As products and markets
differentiate, economies of scale are recuperated through
international expansion. The resultant international economic
interdependency has the effect of eroding the economic
competence of the nation state, and its ability to smooth out
disturbances in the business cycle. As markets globalized, the
less economically feasible it became to protect national
producers. With the increasing internationalization of mobile
capital, a withdrawal from Keynesian macro-economic regulation
and a systematic dismantling of the social welfare state became
40/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
inevitable. This process continues to this day, and Detroit serves
as one of the most thoroughly developed models of this tendency.
Globalization of Capital Markets: Globalization emerges as a new
model of international integration between production and
consumption. ncreasingly volatility in capital markets results from
speculation in "emerging" economies. Outsourced labor and off-
shore production optimize profits by driving down wages through
international competition. Globalization takes the form of a re-
emergence of inter-imperialist rivalries, militarism, enforced
austerity programs, the break up of national welfare programs,
and a downward pressure on labor-costs. The majority's standard
of living, even in the most advanced economies, stagnates or
declines while the class disparity increases. (15)
Exploding Labor Relations: The increasing volatility of global
markets and the abdication of state responsibility erodes
collective bargaining. Capital-labor compromises and state
sanctioned collective bargaining agreements are displaced in
favor of "free market" neo-liberalism (Reaganomics and
Thatcherism.) Downsizing and outsourcing labor becomes the
norm, replacing regular employment with increasingly flexible
arrangements. This in turn makes markets even more
unpredictable. Employment contracts become shorter. Mobility
increases. "Casual labor" and "self-employment" replace regular
employment.
Patterns of Postfordist Production
The crisis in fordist production forced a reorganization of
corporate structures as they faced a new pace of change and the
increasingly global competition for markets. The ongoing
organizational revolution tends to render corporate organization
non-hierarchical and replaces command and control mechanisms
with participatory and open structures. Although the drive of
corporate restructuring towards discursive co-operation remains
compromised by the systemic barrier of capitalism that hinges
authority upon property rather than discourse, the thrust of
development tears and shakes the corporate edifice of fordism.
The Space of Corporate Re-organization
The 'architecture' of business organization is liquefying. Fordist
strategies of rationalization and hierarchy are giving way in favor
of post-modern production patterns. These patterns of
arrangement reflect not only a response to the economic and
material conditions of production, but also portend an equally
important transformation in the structure and organization of
corporate space itself.
Fordist principles of corporate organization were generalized from
their origin in industrial production to the organization of the
service sector and ultimately served as a model of state
administration. The whole of society was eventually subsumed
within this rigid pattern of hierarchical organization. Everywhere a
comprehensive, bureaucratic, functional hierarchy allocated rigid
job-descriptions and repetitive tasks within coherent chains of
command. The modernist pattern of urbanization is the projection
of this total social machine into space.
With the failure of stable cycles of reproduction and expansion,
post-fordist production paradigms are increasingly organized
around principles of decentralization, horizontality, transparency,
fluidity, and rapid mutability. Concurrently, the organization and
management of these post-fordist processes and other forms of
social arrangement are increasingly based on a set of similar
post-modern principles. (14) The new tendencies evident in
corporate restructuring can ultimately be summarized as follows:
1 flattening of hierarchies into horizontal fields
2 decentralization and devolution of authority/responsibility
3 self-organization rather than bureaucratic task allocation
4 collegial communication and evaluation rather than command
and control
5 dispersal and sharing of information and/or technologies
6 team-work, informal or temporary alliances, 'loosely coupled
networks'
7 hybrid conglomerates and ad-hoc assemblages replace
integrated entities
8 increasing reliance on outsourcing, temporary and self-
employment
9 mutability, mobility, and indeterminacy as positive values
10 processes analogous to ecological or biological systems (15)
These organizational tendencies are presently evolving in
response to the challenge of permanent innovation in production.
One could expect (and can find emergent in contemporary work)
an analogous set of developments in the cultural sphere including
the spatialization of these ideas in the making of architecture and
urbanism. The possibilities of a post-fordist urbanism are among
the many interesting questions raised by Detroit in general and
this anthology in particular.
The radical organizational paradigms elaborated by Deleuze &
Guattari in the late seventies seem to foreshadow the paradigms
of todayas corporate restructuring. The arborescent command
pyramid of fordist arrangement is mutating towards the rhizomatic
plateau upon which leadership (and all other social functions) is
distributed in a permanently shifting multiplicity. Functions and
positions reveal their mutual dependency within the unlocked
dialectic of co-evolution. Permanent transition implies ambiguity
and virtuality as new qualities demanded of both people and
places. Every point bears the latency of various crossing
trajectories. The modernist city with its strictly coded stereotypes
and neat allocation of zones - a place for everything and
everything at its place - can not serve as the catalyst for these
vital processes of networking and self-organization. Cities such as
Detroit are abandoned to an entropic demise under the weight of
the previous regime, and await an indeterminate future.
Post-Urbanism
As for developments in the spatialization of postfordist principles,
the work of the so-called "LA School" cultural geographers and Ed
Soja in particular have offered extensive analysis of the coming
post-fordist urbanism. Soja's exploration of postmodern
urbanization focuses on metropolitan region of Los Angeles. n as
much as LA is one of the worldas leading "superprofitable growth
poles" it allows us to identify the future of postfordist urbanization.
LA in this regard plays the role Detroit once occupied as the "most
thoroughly modern (fordist) city in the world".
Soja's analysis of LA suggests that contemporary post-fordist
patterns of urbanization function as a "mesocosm" that
reproduces within its own spatiality the complexity and
contradictions of the global economy. "Seemingly paradoxical but
functionally interdependent juxtapositions are the epitomizing
features.... One can find in Los Angeles not only the high
technology industrial complexes of the Silicon Valley and the
erratic sunbelt economy of Houston, but also the far-reaching
industrial decline and bankrupt urban neighborhoods of rust-
belted Detroit or Cleveland. There is a Boston in Los Angeles, a
lower Manhattan and a South Bronx, a Sao Paulo and a
Singapore."(16)
The simultaneity of growth and decline, locating leading high tech
industrial sectors next to abandoned industrial wastelands, and a
growing low-wage economy of industrial sweatshops, posits an
uphill battle for social control and exacerbates the friction of
distance in the "spread city". (17) Sojaas postmodern geography
(spread city) differs markedly from the process of post-war
suburbanization. t is best described as "an amorphous regional
complex that confounds traditional definitions of both city and
suburb."(18) This postfordist landscape integrates a loose and
open network of research, production and service systems,
interspersed with leisure environments and alternating expensive
residential developments with enclaves of cheap labor. The
interpenetration of different activities succeeds even despite the
problems of social control and the cost of policing caused by the
proximity of populations increasingly polarized along lines of
class, race, and ethnicity.
Another marked spatial phenomenon has been superimposed on
the polycentric spatiality of the (LA) postfordist landscape that is
also evident in Detroit: the decisive re-colonization of corporate
headquarters within the downtown core, reversing the trend of the
fordist era. This revival of the central business district and
selective gentrification of the inner city, including recreational and
pseudo-historic tourist events catering to a largely suburban
population reflects the postfordist organizational shift in corporate
structure along lines of contemporary production and
consumption patterns. The ongoing annexation of Detroit by its
own suburbs continues apace as suburban (fordist) wealth
simultaneously speculates on property values at the both the
agricultural perimeter and abandoned industrial center of what
remains one of the largest and most prosperous metropolitan
regions in the US.
Detroitas precipitous and public demise may have stepped over a
41/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
kind of critical threshold, offering a uniquely clear-sighted and
unequivocal image of post-fordist dis-investment. n this sense,
Detroit offers the most legible indictment of fordist patterns of
urbanization. The recent and by now regular injections of
recuperative capital, evident in the Renaissance Center project,
new casinos, sports stadia and other urban "cures", have failed to
promote a revitalization of Detroitas downtown. Some already find
delight in the ruins, indulging in a voyeuristic aestheticism. Others
are determined to save the city through social missionary work;
others hope to spin it, using media hype and political spin
doctoring to influence property values through real-estate
speculation. Post-fordist analysis of Detroit offers an image of a
post-industrial ex-urban center annexed by its own suburbs
creating an extensive and non-hierarchical horizontal field of post-
urbanization. Will Detroit benefit from this new form of
development, and what are the possibilities for practicing
urbanism in this context? Will Detroitas already evident future
come to pass as a destination tourist commodity and name
brandable recreation center engulfed by pockets of abandonment,
disinvestment, and decay? f so, even this unenviable future will
need to overcome a century of rusty prejudices.
END
Notes:
1. Jencks, Charles, The Language of Post-Modern Architecture,
London 1977.
2.Post-fordism as a category of socio-economic periodization is of
Marxist provenance and has been the central term of a wide and
fruitful debate. See: Ash Amin, p.1, ntroduction to "Post-Fordism:
A Reader", Oxford / Cambridge MA. Robin Murray, Fordism and
Postfordism, in S. Hall & M.Jacques, New Times, London 1989
David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity, Oxford /
Cambridge MA. 1989.
3. "All the elements of the cultural past must be "reinvested" or
disappear." Asger Jorn, 'Detourned Painting', quoted in Guy
Debord's 'Detournement as negation and prelude', nternationale
Situationniste #3, December 1959, translated in: Situationist
nternational - Anthology, Knabb, K.(Ed.), Berkeley 1981.
4. Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, first
published Random House 1961, Pelican Books, Middlesex 1965,
p.1962
5. Bucci, Frederico, Albert Kahn, Princeton 1993
6. Ford, Henry, Mass Production, in Encyclopedia Britannica,
vol.15, London-New York 1929, p.40, quoted after Bucci,
Federico, Albert Kahn, Princeton 1993, p.42. For Albert Kahnas
description of the division of labor in architectural production see
A.Kahn, Architectural Trend, in Journal of the Maryland Academy
of Sciences, vol., no.2, April 1931, p.133, quoted after Bucci,
Federico, Albert Kahn, Princeton 1993, p.126/127.
7. Josephson, M., Henry Ford, in: Broom, Oc. 5, 1923. Quoted
after: Fehl, Gerhard, Welcher Fordismus?, n: Zukunft aus
Amerika, Fordismus in der Zwischenkriegszeit, Stiftung Bauhaus,
Dessau 1995
8. The systematic, theoretical (Marxist) notion of fordism (and
neo-fordism) was developed by the French Regulation School of
economic analysis, initiated by Michel Aglietta. See Aglietta,
Michel, A Theory of Capitalist Regulation: The US Experience,
London 1979.
9. Ford anticipated this logic and instituted his own corporate
welfare scheme for his workers, including quasi-public facilities
like hospitals and schools as well as a reliable pension scheme.
10. Marx distinguishes between technical and social divisions of
labor (Capital vol. .) The former refers to the partition and
distribution of tasks between operatives within a firm and the
latter describes the division of labor between firms integrated only
through the market.
11. n Europe this could only be achieved via the social
revolutions that tore down 19th century class-societies and
established the working masses and their representatives as an
organized political force. By demanding participation in the results
of industrial productivity, the laboring classes constituted
themselves, for the first time, as the primary market for industrial
consumer products and as a client for architecture.
12. See UNDO (United Nations ndustrial Development
Organization), Structural Change in ndustry, Vienna 1979, and
OECD (Organization of Economic Co-operation and
Development), Positive Adjustment policies: Managing Structural
Change, Paris 1983.
13. Overall productivity suffers as long as the world allocation of
material and labor resources remains driven by an irrational,
militarily guaranteed, and thus ultimately very costly "cheapness"
of labor, which allows the squandering of millions of potentially
much more productive lives.
14. See (among others):
Cannon, T.: Welcome to the Revolution - Managing Paradox in
the 21st Century, London 1996.
Ray, M. & Rinzler,A.: The New Paradigm for Business, L.A. 1993.
Peters,T. : Liberation Management: Necessary Disorganisation for
Nanosecond Nineties, N.Y. 1993.
Peters, T.: Thriving on Chaos, N.Y. 1987.
Bergquist,W.: The Postmodern Organization - Mastering the Art of
rreversible Change, New York 1993.
Kilduff,m.: Deconstructing Organisations, Academy of
Management Review #18.
Blanchard,K.& Johnson,S.: The One Minute Manager, New York
1982.
Bower,J.L.: Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave, Harvard
Business Review, Jan/Feb 1995.
15. Castells, M. & Hall, P., Technopoles of the World, London &
N.Y. 1994.
16. Edward W. Soja, Postmodern Geographies, London, N.Y.
1989.
17. With this internalization of the periphery comes the largest
homeless population, soaring rates of violent crime and the
largest prison population within the US. The militarization of the
world economy finds itself replicated here in the rule of a
militarized LAPD. The anti-racist explosion of 1992 testifies to
this.
18. Edward W. Soja, Postmodern Geographies, London, N.Y.
1989, p.212.
End.
Robotic Fields: Spatializing the
dynamics of corporate organization
Patrik Schumacher 2002
Published n: Designing for a Digital World, edited by Neil Leach.
Based on the conference E-Futures: Designing for a Digital World
RBA, London
"Robotic fields" is a chapter within a 3 year design research effort
"Corporate Fields" conducted at the AA Design Research Lab(1).
This research experiments with architectural responses to
emergent forms of corporate organisation. With respect to recent
patterns of corporate management a number related tendencies
stand out that concern our attempt to offer atrchitectural
translations:
1.The enormous increase in communication density translates
into an insatiable need for spatial connectivity and points toward
deep, porous spaces.
2. A momentous accelaration of organisational restructuring
translates into an insatiable request for flexibility with respect to
the spatial distribution of domains and activities, pointing towards
kinetic systems.
3. The tendency to move from management by means of
command and control to strategies of self-organiation implies an
open, under-determined environment, that allows for an ongoing
aleatoric play of interpretation and appropriation.
4. A new level of organisational complexity calls for strategies of
super-position, hybridization and multiple affiliation.
Architectural solutions to these challenges might be enhanced by
robotic capabilities. The possibility to augment architecture by
means of electronic intelligence has been investigated in the
context of the overall expansion of spatial repertoires that
emerged from the discourses of deconstruction and folding in
architecture. For example: an under-determined and formally
42/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
excessive "space of becoming"(2) might be further "virtualized"(3)
by means of augmenting various architectural elements with an
electronically engineered kinetic spontaneity which allows the
variously activated spatial features to participate in the aleatoric
play of (re-)appropriation. One of the three projects to be
introduced below - "Learning Environments" - has been exploring
this possibility of mutual play and learning between users and
kinetic architectural elements. Another project - "ntelligent Fields"
- took on the quest for self-organisation to establish a level of
organisational complexity that might not be achievable on the
basis of human concepts of order. Complex patterns of
flocking/clustering are computed on the basis of profiles
administering multiple project affiliations. A third project - "Office
Life Game" - has been steering emergent organisational patterns
on the basis of local rules of association.
Before elaborating these projects a few general remarks outline
the socio-economic setting and the overall intentions that have
been guiding the research.
dentifying an emancipatory project: non-hierarchical work
patterns
We live in a period of political reaction. The political areana has
been eroded by the frustration of national politicies in a globalised
world. The eighties suffered the Sneo-liberala reversal of earlier
social reform programmes. This continued in the nineties
combined with a further erosion of civil democracy. The co-
optation and disintegration of any organised left opposition
implies that an architectural commitment to progress and
emancipation can no longer be guided by a straightforward
political agenda.(4)
But while politics proper stagnates, one can identify progressive
tendencies within the process of corporate restructuring. The
modern strategy of rationalisation based on the rigid
segmentation and routinised specialisation of work within clear-
cut functional hierarchies is failing today in respect to the
complexity and dynamism of the overall socio-economic process.
New ways of organising the labour-process are emerging in
organisation-theory. A glance at the booming literature in
management theory will suffice to capture the ongoing frenzy of
restructuring: "Welcome to the Revolution", "The new Paradigm
for Business", "Liberation Management - Disorganisation for
Nanosecond Nineties", "The Postmodern Organisation",
"Deconstructing Organisations", "Catching the wave", "The One
Minute Manager", "Thriving on Chaos", "The Complexity
Advantage", "Competing on the Edge Strategy as Structured
Chaos", etc.(5)
Although the word Sdemocratizationa is not among the slogans
circulating around the management 'revolution', democratization
seems the repressed logic of recent (and future) productivity
gains, a necessity for the corporation to be able to cope with
permanent re-orientation and innovation. The renunciation of
command and control is forced upon the capitalist enterprise by
the new degree of complexity and flexibility of the total production
process within which it has to function. The more information-
based, the more dependent upon research & development
production becomes, the less can it proceed autocratically. These
hard facts of production - more than ever seem to confirm left
intuitions about the effectiveness of radically democratic,
participatory relations on an advanced level of socio-economic
complexity.
The left wing organizational paradigms (e.g. the rhizome), which
Deleuze & Guattari elaborated in the late seventies, in dialogue
with the new left forms of revolutionary struggle and organisation
(6), seem to become the very paradigms of corporate
restructuring: Deleuzian de-territorialisation (7) is dissolving the
rigid departmentalisation of competencies and the aborescent
pyramid of classical corporate organisation is mutating towards
the rhisomatic plateau upon which the leadership is distributed
within a permanently shifting multiplicity of latent centres.
Today there is no better site for a progressive project than the
most competitive contemporary business.(8)
Spatialising organisational knowledge
Contemporary business processes are more about the generation
of knowledge than about producing immediate material values.
More and more work takes place in the realm of ideas and
information rather than immediate physical production. Thus the
structure and pattern of economic activity in general is assimilated
to the processes of science. This is the hallmark of the new
economy as knowledge economy.(9)
As an organisation shifts from being straightforward manufacturer
or provider of a standard service to become a creative innovator,
it no longer just utilizes a given knowledge, but needs to operate
as original producer of knowledge. The new discipline of
knowledge management takes account of this situation.
Management theory offers concepts like "the learning
organisation"(10) or "the intelligent enterprise"(11). Here learning,
knowledge and intelligence are attributed to organisations rather
than individuals. For us this is just the first step towards the
further expansion of the notion of organisational intelligence to
include the various spatial systems that structure and facilitate the
vital communication processes within the business.
Knowledge becomes the most precious resource within the
organisation. But this resource can not be bought in from outside
like energy or labour. t can not be aquired readymade.
Knowledge involves much more than information, it is the right
information employed at the right time and place, evaluated and
adapted within a complex praxis. Organisational knowledge,
again goes beyond individual knowledge. Organisational
knowledge resides within the organisational pattern itself, in the
corporate system of communication and collaboration, i.e. in the
distribution and dynamic integration of competencies, in the
mechanisms, forms and modes of interaction between the various
knowledge workers. The spatial distribution and the nuanced
articulation of territories, boundaries and spatial interfaces has an
important role to play here.
Those architectural patterns contribute to the constitution of the
collective intelligence that transforms information into vital
operative knowledge.
One might ascribe intelligence/knowledge to every organisation
that integrates a series of individual intelligent agents/knowledges
into a larger, more complex intelligence/knowledge. Within a
beaurocratic hierarchy all organisational knowledge is condensed
and fixed within the proper procedures to be followed at every
specific position within the administrative machine. Here learning
can only take place at the top in the form of adjusting and re-
writing the system of rules. Within a non-hierarchical network
organisation the system of rules can evolve only if the
organisation is at the same time based on self-organisation rather
than a fixed constitution. The organising and orienting spatial
structures, i.e. team-spaces, have to co-evolve alongside the
determination of the social system of collaboration, its temporary
division of labour, its groupings and channels of communication.
The potential advantages of kinetic systems and the attendant
possibilities of utilising artificial intelligence - in the form of life-
game rules or flocking scripts ect. - are to be investigated with
respect to specific corporate scenarios.
n contrast to the hype about the supposed collapse of space and
the end of architecture in an age of tele-communication our
working hypothesis is that the desired production of operative
knowledge can be catalysed and sustained by built architectures
which remain the indispensible spatial substratum of
organisational life.(12) Architecture increases its impact as the
content of corporate production undergoes a process of
progressive dematerialisation. This hypothesis does not deny the
increase of tele-communication. Rather it assumes that this
increased capacity of communication is swamped by an
exponential demand for business communication that can only be
adressed by means of new levels of spatial complexity and
connectivity - further augmented by kinetics and electronic
43/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
intelligence embedded within the spatial organisation.
From (animated) diagramme to (animated) space
The translation of organisational patterns into space utilises the
organigramme as a spatial (2D) medium of articulation that
architecture shares with organisation theory and the practise of
management consultancy. The graphic repertoire employed
determines the scope of organisational patterns that the
consultancy business is able to work with. This repertoire is
currently limited to two-dimensional Venn-diagrammes operating
with boxes within boxes and network diagrammes operating with
lines connecting nodes. The combination of the two formalisms is
utmost of complexity that has been achieved within the domain of
corporate organisation design. Therefore graphic representation
does not really play an innovative role within this discourse.
n contrast, the expansion of graphic diagramming repertoires has
been a key aspect of our research. This includes the systematic
incorporation of layering, the articulation of gradients, the
employment of morphing to produce morphological series and
matrices of similitude, the move to complex three-dimensional
diagrammes and the computer animation of 4-dimensional time-
figures. These time-figures are geared to capture, model and
manipulate the dynamics of organisational life on various time
scales: the daily patterns of movement and commmunication
within the company, the formation and re-formation of team-
structures across the cycle of a project, as well as more long term
corporate growth/re-structuring scenarios.
Each design language is dependent on a given or chosen formal
a priori, i.e. graphic language or "design world"(13): a certain set
of graphic primitives and attendant rules of aggregation and
transformation. While the computer expands available repertoires
it nevertheless represents a strictly bound design world, further
constrained by the choice of tools and specific ways of building up
the formal structures in each project. While this reduction of
complexity is unavoidable it is all the more important to choose on
the basis of comparative exprimentation with various formal
systems and to be aware of the contingency of any
argument/result upon the initial formal choices. For example:
when it comes to articulating an organisation in terms of the
grouping of individuals various formalisms might be considered.
One might start with rectangles next to/within rectangles to
express relations of division and subsumption. Alternatively one
might operate with circles next to/within circles. At first sight these
too formalisms might seem functionally equivalent. But the
formalism on the basis of circles has a number of important
iconographic advantages: The circular system allows the
hierarchical level of a domain to be read off locally from its radius
and the distinction between inside and outside can be read off the
difference between concave and convex while the orthogonal
system remains mute in these respects. n the case of
overlapping domains the orthogonal intersection between two
rectangles might be read as just another rectangle, while the
intersection of various circles can not be mistaken for just another
circle. t clearly reads as a domain of intersection, revealing as
well the number and size of the intersecting domains.
The move from 2D to 3D, from intersecting circles to
interpenetrating spheres has the further advantage of allowing for
the articulation of a more complex pattern of overlap than can be
managed within a two-dimensional plane. At an even higher level
of complexity the diagramme might have to resort to deformed 3-
D blobs to avoid accidental/unintended intersections.
This comparative evaluation demonstrates how formal decisions
might be rationalised within a functional context that poses the
semantic dimension of architecture, i.e. orientation through
articulation, to be crucial. This also shows why - once an
articulate level of the visualization/spatialisation of organisationsal
relations has been achieved within the diagramme - the directive
for the translation of the diagramme into an architectural space
can only be: as literal as possible in order to maintain the
orienting features of the formalism.
f this slogan is applied to the animated time-diagrammes which
claim to model and articulate the temporalisation of organisational
complexity as an essential component of the organisational
system, then the literal translation of the respective time-figures
into robotic fields is called for. The hypothesis is that animated,
kinetic spaces will have a critical advantage with respect to
facilitating and orienting the dynamic life of the organisation.
Layers of transience - furnishing the dynamic of social
communication
The first step in making this vision of an animated architecture
tangible is the recognition of the total mass of furnishings - fixed
as well as mobile as the crucial space-making substance rather
than regarding it as an accidental filling of an already constituted
space. The dichotomy of space versus furniture is dissolved into a
layers of transience that start with the most ephemeral flux of light
or images on computer screens, the movement of people and
paper across the space of the office, files, mobile chairs, trollies
and the semi-mobile swarm of light-fixtures, the more stable
tables, shelfs and cabinets, the semi-fixed partition walls ect. all
the way to the supposedly permanent structural shell and external
envelope. The tendency of our design research has been to blurr
these typologies and to aim for an overall increase and
acceleration of transience and mobility within all of these strata
(including structure). On the other hand the attempt is made to
increase the space-defining power of each system with the result
of dynamising what is phenomenologically recognised as the
space. Once the substance of spatial articulation is thus put in
motion the electronic augmentation and steering of the behavior
of these substances can be elaborated. The invention/refinement
of behavioral patterns and their dynamic spatial coordination is
the challenge of this new paradigm of animated design. The
consideration moves from mere form to morphology in relation to
behavior: types of movement, modes of transformation, and the
agglomeration into collective organisms.
The organisational function of corporate headquarters depends
heavily on interior furnishings, both in terms of the diversity of
types as well as with respect to the coherent inter-relatedness of
the various typologies. A closed semantic universe is constituted
subject to a complex matrix of differentiations: formal informal,
fixed flexible, individual collective, demarcating connecting etc.
There is an immediate configurational as well as material
engagement with the human body and its close range activities,
both individually and with respect to the formation of groups and
patterns of collaboration. n the final analysis it is the speculation
about new social configurations and patterns of communication
that we are concerned with.
3 projects
The following projects are embedded in the general research
agenda of corporate restructuring within the emerging knowledge
economy. Each successive year one project was marked out to
investigate the incorporation of robotic capabilities into the spatial
construct. n this sense the following examples of "robotic fields"
are special cases of the "corporate fields" explored within the
AADRL.
Each project team was working with a quasi-client: DEGW, Ove
Arup, Razorfish - companies that exemplify the general
tendencies of corporate development discussed above. These
companies and their organisational strategies served as a
concrete point of departure for the development of experimental
spatial scenarios resulting in proposals for the respective London
headquarters of these enterprises. On a more general level these
scenarios attempt to translate key concepts and stratagems
proposed within recent management theory.
Office Life Game DEGW
AADRL 1997/98, Kevin Cespedes, Chin Jung Lin
44/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
DEGW (14) is an internationally operating space planning firm,
integrated into a larger management consultency business. ts
expertise coincides with our overall research agenda: spatial
organisation as tool of corporate restructuring. DEGW has used
its own corporate space for a radical demonstration of the
organisational potential of a system of multiple de-personalised
work settings, regulated by occupation protocols. The DRL project
radicalises this approach through the idea of space making
protocols conceived in analogy to life-games producing emergent
global patterns from local rules. Such an indirect quasi-control
leaves each individual move indeterminate. A number of
entangled ambitions has been pursuit and balanced:
1st ambition: the creation of a feasable kinetic system with a
sufficiently large universe of possibility/difference. 2nd ambition:
the search of temporary protocols that restrain and order this
universe in harmony with certain social activities.
3rd ambition: the rules should nevertheless leave a large margin
of free choice for the users, i.e. the social order is perceived to
emerge on the basis of freedom.
Here the solution is a system of circular intersecting tracks which
allow the movement and aggregation of a small number of
modules (concave/extrovert, convex/introvert, chiasma/transition)
into a suprisingly rich diversity of configurations. A series of
dramatic transformation of the global space is possible: from a
nearly isotropic distribution of individual fragments, to a number of
strongly articulated, separate circular domains, to a single large
congregation for special occasions that involve the totality of the
firm.
Social and spatial oscillations are investigated in exploring the
idea of a corporate office landscape that re-emerges every time
according to the geometrically installed rules of a space-making
game. t is an attempt to create a spatial life-game through latent
territorialization and moveable space-fragments that would
temporarily capture and fix a distinct spatial order out of the
fluidity of potential collaborative relations. The moving pieces are
semi-enclosing furniture units which also engage in multiple
sectional relations and share their essential formal features with
the fixed spatial envelope in order to allow the more transient
layers to appear quite substantial in each of their temporary
states. The mobile elements in effect extend and transform the
otherwise fixed conditions.
Learning Environments - Ove Arup Partnership
AADRL 1998/99 - Theo Lorenz & Anna Sutor
Artificial life elaborates the concept, geometry and aesthetics for a
new computer based form of spatial malleability. The aim is the
formulation of a generalised logic widely applicable to any
working environment requiring dynamic social patterns of
collaborative grouping and re-grouping in space.
The point of departure for this research project is the modelling of
the spatio-temporal rhythms of team working scenarios within the
Ove Arup Partnership via animated time-figures. These time-
figures find their translation on a number of different scales from
the overall spaceframe that operates without any fixed members
through to shifting and folding floor surfaces and a series of
robotic, self-deforming furniture elements.
The building is conceived as an interactive territory almost as
flexible as the interface available to a computer user. Embedded
touch-screens would become the interface to lead operations and
changes not only on the screens but also within the physical
space surrounding the employee, letting his/her environment be
transformed and modelled like objects in a cad programme.
The integrated family of transformable elements populates a
space-frame which in turn displaces its structural members and
thus constantly redistributes the structural voids that are possible
within the system. The system of furnishings generates dynamic
configurations constantly subject to further transformations
through the individualas intervention. The overall environment will
thus be subject to cumulative changes generated by multiple local
interventions. The environment operates symbiotically with the
users co-producing an artificial intelligence where users and
robotic elements mutually engage in a process of collective
learning. The furniture pieces produce spontaneous, randomized
self-deformations which act as suggestions to the users who
might either pick up on those suggestions, thus learning new uses
and reward the element or otherwise intervene and re-model the
piece as well as the local configuration between pieces. The
pieces will "remember" the respective correlation of movements
by adjusting the statistical likelihood of the respective correlations
for its future suggestive behavior. Strict determinations are
excluded and a measure of random mutations remain at play for
further evolution. New social tropes and communicative situations
emerge through the aleatoric play and mutual learning between
furniture and employees.
ntelligent Fields Razorfish
AADRL 1999/00, Marcel Ortmans, Markus Ruuskanen, van
Subanovic, Yu
n contrast to the universal formalism of the animated folds of the
previous project this project operates by way of articulating
discrete and diverse creatures with distinct behavioral capacities.
However, these discrete creatures are nevertheless derived from
a number o base modules and tectonic/kinetic principles and
exhibit certain geneological similitudes.
The project investigates the thesis of structured self-organisation
by means of computer programming robots within an overall
techno-ecology. The fluid and complex patterns of project and skill
affiliation that should determine the distribution and grouping of
people (i.e. individual workstations) and resources (e.g. meeting
rooms) are tackled by means of the robotic mobilization of all
workstations and facilities. Each element is scripted with respect
to their temporary project assignments which in turn are
programmed as fields of attraction engendering the re- positioning
of individual elements. The various workstations are differentiated
according to skill category and developed as distinct species in
terms of morphology and behavioral pattern: Moth, Walker,
Stalker, Silverfish, Whale ect. the beginnings of a veritable
techno-diversity. The temporary script or profile of the robotic
species establishes its weighted sensitivity to the various fields
competing for resources. Fields are either fixed around project
foci (static fields) or emerge from the mutual attraction of affiliated
individuals (dynamic fields). The human agents are guided by the
intelligent flocking patterns of their robotic chairs, worktops,
meeting tables ect. while maintaining the power to override,
redirect and even "enslave" or chain their robotic resources to
their own movement. ndividualised elements have the potential
to couple, embrace and cluster into larger assemblages and
collective organisms all the way to camouflaging and blending
into the overall living structure.
The space populated by the robots is conceived as a
differentiated fitness landscape that produces its own peculiar
biases: stepped versus ramped sections, bottlenecks versus wide
access ect. n relation to the various creatures and their capability
- rolling, walking, gliding, hanging these biases and their dynamic
manipulation (tightening of bottlenecks, flattening of ramps ect)
act as functional equivalents (material computing) to the
eclectronic scripting of attractions/repulsions
Outlook
The technique of scripting allows to define temporalised functions
between the properties (position, movement, deformation,
transparency ect.) of any set of objects. This opens up a new
paradigm of design speculation: Each architecture creates its own
dynamic universe, complete with itas own ontology and quasi
laws of nature.
End.
45/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Notes & references:
1. The DRL is the MARCH course at the Architectural Asocation
School of Architecture, London. For a summary of the research
agenda Corporate Fields see:
Schumacher, Patrik, Business - Research Architecture &
Steele, Brett, Data(E)scapes.Design as Research
n: Daidalos 69/70, The Need of Research, December
1998/January 1999
2.Eisenman, Peter, Processes of the nterstitial, in: El Croquis 83,
Peter Eisenman, Madrid 1997
3. Massumi, Brian, Sensing the Virtual, Building the nsensible, in
AD: Hypersurface Architecture, London 1998
Rajchman, John, The Virtual House, Any Magazine No. 19/20,
1997
4.The current wave of anti-capitalist protests - gathering
momentum around occasions like the G8 summits or the annual
meetings of the World Bank - is united only on the basis of a
diffuse rejection of the status quo without yet achieving sufficient
levels of programmatic resolution to orient a progressive research
effort.
5. Cannon, T.: Welcome to the Revolution - Managing Paradox in
the 21st Century, London 1996
Ray, M. & Rinzler,A.:The New Paradigm for Business, L.A. 1993
Peters,T. : Liberation Management - Necessary Disorganisation
for Nanosecond Nineties, N.Y. 1993
Peters, T.: Thriving on Chaos, N.Y. 1987
Bergquist,W.: The Postmodern Organisation - mastering the art of
irreversable change, New York 1993
Kilduff,m.: Deconstructing Organisations, Academy of
Management review 18
Blanchard,K.& Johnson,S.: The One Minute Manager, New York
1982
Bower,J.L.: Disruptive Technologies - Catching the Wave, Harvard
Business Review, Jan./Feb.1995
Kelly, S. & Allison M.A.: The Complexity Advantage, New York
1998
Brown, S.L.& Eisenhardt, K.M.: Competing on the Edge Strategy
as Structured Chaos, Boston 1998
6.Deleuze and Guattarias philosophy relates to the radical talian
"autonomia" movement.
See: taly: Autonomia - Post-political Politics, Semio-text(e),
N.Y.C.1980
This discourse entered architecture in the form of the
philosophical abstractions propagated by Deleuze and Guattarias
'Thousand Plateaus', the main source of inspiration for the formal
strategies of "Folding".
7. Departmentalisation/sub-departmentalisation as the structural
principle of the bureaucratic mode of organisation is a perfect
instance of Deleuze/Guattarias concept of "territorialization".
8. This serves here as a hypothesis, even if one has to
acknowledge that the corporate reality remains suspended within
the contradiction of participatory production and divisive
distribution and the promised "liberation management" remains
constrained by the strictures of class-society.
9. A number of fundamental economic laws have to be rewritten
as the logic of knowledge production/consumption increases its
weight with respect to the determination of economic rationality:
n contrast to material production the cost of re-producing and
disseminating a knowledge product is negligible in comparison to
its research and development component. n contrast to material
capital like raw materials or machinery knowledge resources
appreciate rather than depreciate with employment. Utilization
gathers rather than consumes value - here in the form of
contextualising information products.
See: Wilke, Helmut, Systemisches Wissensmanagement,
Stuttgart 1998
Steward, Thomas, ntellectual Capital. The new wealth of
organisations, New York 1997.
10. Senge, Peter, The Fifth Discipline, New York 1990
11. Quinn, James, ntelligent enterprise. A knowledge and service
based paradigm for industry. New York 1992
12. The ongoing tendency of spatial concentration in places as
Wall Street and the City of London seem to confirm this thesis.
See: Sassen, Saskia,
13. Mitchell, William, The logic of Architecture, Cambridge,
Massachusetts 1990
14. DEGW: Duffy, Eley, Giffone, Worthington
end.
GRAPHC SPACES - Aspects of the
Work of Zaha Hadid
Patrik Schumacher 2002
Published n: DEA - nternational Graphic Art, No.293, Tokyo
One of the most significant and momentous features of
architectural avant-garde of the last 20 years is the proliferation of
representational media and design processes. n the early
eighties Zaha Hadid burst onto the architectural scene with a
series of spectacular designs embodied by even more
spectacular drawings and paintings. The idiosyncrasies of these
drawings made it difficult to read them as straightforward
architectural descriptions. This initial openness of interpretation
might have led some commentators to suspect "mere graphics"
here.
But this predicament to start (and ultimately stay) with two-
dimensional drawings has been architectureas predicament ever
since its inception as a discipline distinguished from construction.
As Robin Evans pointed out so bluntly: architects do not build,
they draw.
Therefore the translation from drawing to building might be
problematic at least under conditions of innovation. Architecture
as a design discipline that is distinguished from the physical act of
building constitutes itself on the basis of drawing. The discipline of
architecture emerges and separates from the craft of construction
through the systematic differentiation of the drawing as tool and
domain of expertise outside (and in advance) of the material
process of construction. The first effect of drawing (in ancient
Greek architecture) seems to be an increased capacity of
standardization, precision and regularized reproduction on a fairly
high level of complexity and across a rather wide territory. Roman
architecture could benefit from this but also shows hints towards
the exploitation of the capacity of invention that the medium of
drawing affords. Without drawing the typological proliferation of
Roman architecture is inconceivable. Since the Renaissance (via
Manerism and Baroque) this speculative moment of the drawing
has been gathering momentum. But only 1920s modernism really
discovers the full power and potential of the drawing as a highly
economic trial-error mechanism and an effortless plane of
invention.
n this respect modern architecture depends upon the revolution
within the visual arts that finally shook off the burden of
representation. Modern architecture was able to build upon the
legacy of modern abstract art as the conquest of a previously
unimaginable realm of constructive freedom. Hitherto art was
understood as mimesis and the reiteration of given sujets, i.e. re-
presentation rather than creation. Architecture was the re-
presentation of a fixed set of minutely determined typologies and
complete tectonic systems. Against this backdrop abstraction
meant the possibility and challenge of free creation. The canvas
became the field of an original construction. A monumental break-
46/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
through with enormous consequences for the whole of modern
civilisation. Through figures such as Malevitsch and vanguard
groups such as the DeStijl movement this exhilarating historical
moment was captured and exploited for the world of experimental
architecture
My thesis here is that the withdrawal into the two-dimensional
surface, i.e. the refusal to interpret everything immediately as a
spatial representation, is a condition for the full exploitation of the
medium of drawing as a medium on invention. Only on this basis,
as explicitly graphic manoevers, do the design manoevers gain
enough fluidity and freedom to play. They have to be set loose,
shake off the burden to always already mean something
determinate. Obviously, this stage of play and proliferation has to
be followed by a tenacious work of selection and interpretation. At
some stage architectural work leads to building. But not in every
"project". Some architectural projects remain "paper projects"
which are "translated" later, by other projects. The discipline of
architecture has learned to allow for this. Whole reputations are
made on this basis.
One of Hadid's audacious moves was to translate the dynamism
and fluidity of her calligraphic hand directly into equally fluid
tectonic systems or so it seemed. Another incredible move was
the move from isometric and perspective projection to literal
distortions of space and from the exploded axonometry to the
literal explosion of space into fragments, from the superimposition
of various fisheye perspectives to the literal bending and melt
down of space etc. All these moves initially appear rampantly
illogical, akin to the operations of the surrealists.
The level of experimentation reached a point where the distinction
between form and content within these drawings and paintings,
was no longer fixed. The question which features of the graphic
manipulation pertain to the mode of representation rather than to
the object of representation was left unanswered. Was the
architecture itself twisting, bending, fragmenting and
interpenetrating or were theses features just aspects of the multi-
view-point fish-eye perspectives? The answer is that over an
extended process and a long chain of projects the graphic
features slowly transfigured into realizable spatial features. The
initial openness in this respect might have led some
commentators to suspect Smere graphics" here. Within Zaha
Hadidas studio this uncertainty was productively engaged through
a slow process of interpretation via further drawings, projects and
finally buildings.
These strange moves which seemed so alien and "crazy" - once
taken seriously within the context of developing an architectural
project - turn out to be powerful compositional options when faced
with the task of articulating complex programmes. The dynamic
streams of movements within a complex structure can now be
made legible as the most fluid regions within the structure; overall
trapezoidal distortions offer one more way to respond to non-
orthogonal sites; perspective distortions allow the orientation of
elements to various functional focal points etc. What once was an
outrageous violation of logic has become part of a strategically
deployed repertoire of nuanced spatial organisation and
articulation. Painterly techniques like colour modulations,
gradients of dark to light or pointillist techniques of dissolving
objects into their background assume significance in terms of the
articulation of new design concepts like morphing or new spatial
concepts like smooth thresholds, "field-space" and the "space of
becoming"(Eisenman). Jeff Kipnis also deserves recognition here
as someone who has emphasized such possibilities of "graphic
space".
The initially "mindless" sketching of graphic textures in endless
iterations operates like an "abstract machine" proliferating
difference to select from. Once a strange texture or figure is
selected and confronted with a programmatic agenda a peculiar
form-content dialectic is engendered. An active figure-reading
mind will find the desired conditions but equally new desires and
functions are inspired by the encounter with the strange
configuration. The radically irrational and arbitrary detour ends up
hitting a target.
This "miracle" can be explained by recognising that all
functionality is relative, that all well articulated organisms have
once been monstrous aberrations and still are such - relative to
other "higher" and more "beautiful" organisations. Before we
dismiss arbitrary formalisms we need to realise that all our time-
tested typologies themselves adhere dogmatically to the arbitrary
formalism of orthogonality and platonic simplicity derived from the
constraints of measuring, making and stabilising of structures
handed down to us from a rather primitive stage of our civilisation.
To remain locked in within these figures at this time and age
would be more than arbitrary. The only way out is radical
proliferation and testing of other options. All points of departure
are equally arbitrary until tested against presumed criteria. There
is no absolute optimality. Every measure starts with a finite array
of arbitrary options to compare, select from. Adaptation is a slow
process that starts with and works away from absolute
arbitrariness. The logic of evolutionary innovation starts with
mutation: mutation, selection and reproduction. Hadid has been a
vital engine of mutation with respect to the culture of architecture.
Her medium has been 2D. The consequences start to aquire the
third dimension.
End.
AADRL - From Education to
Research
Patrik Schumacher 2002
Published n: Arch+ , Magazine for Architecture and Urbanism,
#163
AADRL - From Education to Research
The AADRL - Design Research Laboratory at the Architectural
Association School of Architecture in London - is a 16 month post-
professional course offering a Master of Architecture (MARCH)
degree. n a time of rapid technological change and momentous
socio-economic restructuring, the reliance upon the reproduction
of given architectural typologies becomes ever more
questionable. As the half-life period of any given 'best practise' is
rapidly diminishing, so is the value of an education understood as
the process of teaching a given set of architectural solutions. As
the demand for research increases, the value of such education
decreases. This new dynamic pushes education towards
research.
Apprenticeship - education - research
The teaching of architecture has traditionally been operating on
the model of apprenticeship. To a certain extent this still
continues, inevitably, as architecture is a profession as much as a
discursive discipline. Since the Renaissance this practise of
apprenticeship has been combined with the dissemination of
theoretical treatises. On this basis a formal education was first
institutionalised in France with the founding of the "Academie de
l'architecture" in 1671. Academic teaching was adopted in
England and America at the end of the 19th Century and is now
everywhere the primary mode of professional training. However,
there is as yet no institutionalised form of research in architecture.
nstead the task of innovation within architecture is left to the
"avant-garde" segment of architectural practise on the one hand,
and to post-graduate architectural education on the other hand.
Each of these two surrogate processes has its peculiar
limitations. Avant-garde practise, as professional practise, is
struggeling to turn any particular commission into a vehicle for the
investigation of new architectural principles that might be
abstracted and generalised. This in turn demands the
renunciation of full attention to all aspects of the concrete project
at hand. Also, the establishment of a coherent research agenda
across a random string of commissions is rather difficult. An
academic institution is unconstraint with respect to the
establishment of a coherent research agenda, but a special effort
is required to steer a course that remains relevant to the concerns
of society. A severe limitation for research in educational
47/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
institutions resides in the short-term tenure of the student-
researchers and the attendant burden of taking on a whole new
generation of students/researchers every year. However, the
institutions of post-professional education seem to offer the most
promising opportunities to construct a systematic research
practise within architecture.
n the domain of the sciences the traditional double-task of the
university - research and education - is progressively
differentiated into separate engagements, each followed through
independently with respect to its specific demands. n contrast, in
architecture the very notion of research is so new (and as yet
vague) that there is neither recognition nor funding for something
like an architectural research institute. Under these circumstances
an incipient research practise relies on the institutional support
structure of the certain schools of architecture. t is the post-
professional students who become the resource which might be
forged into an incipient research institute. Thus, while the
sciences are moving beyond the classic formula of
research&education, architecture is first of all building a research
practise in the cradle and guise of education. Ultimately, one
might expect, that the limitations posed by wedding research to
education, will lead to the full emancipation of research in
architecture. n the meantime the educational institutions are
mutating from within.
The mutation of education into research has a number of
characteristic consequences, which the AADRL successively
discovered and implemented: 1. The shift of emphasis from
education to research is reflected in the shift from individual work
to collective work. All work takes place in teams. 2. The
prerogative of a collective work also applies to the staff. All
teaching staff focusses upon a single, coherent research
programme. All assessments are conducted together. 3. The
installation of an open source infrastructure and culture makes all
work readily available to everybody. No claim of individual
authorship or copyright prevents the proliferation of ideas. 4. n
contrast with typical models of teaching that set a different project
brief every semester, thus mirroring the condition of the
professional practise that has to construct its career across a
random string of commissions, the AADRL outlines long term
research programmes that allow for the systematic build up of
innovative work.
Design Research
Architecture is a design discipline. nnovation in architecture
involves the invention of new types of spatial constructs and the
attendant speculation about new possibilities of social use and
occupation within a thus transformed built environment. Therefore
research can not be confined to the description and explanation
of a given reality. While such empirical information and theoretical
explanation is a necessary component of architectural research
that sets it apart from mere intuitive design, this analytical
component has to be instrumentalised within a generative
practise that is able to synthesise new constructs. Therefore
architectural research must be based upon design projects. The
key question here is under which conditions design work can be
regarded as a form of research. Those conditions can not be
identified within an isolated project. They pertain to the specific
academic context in which the projects are developed, assessed
and super-ceded. The individual projects are embedded within a
whole series of projects that are processed together according to
a well-defined research agenda that furnishes the level of
abstraction, comparative scope and criteria of success or failure
according to which the projects are assessed and moved forward.
Scientific work can not be considered separate from its ongoing
process of self-criticism.
A double edged research programme
At the same time as a restless society pushes architecture by
posing a new set of characteristic problems, the new digital
design media and the micro-electronic revolution pulls
architecture into an uncharted territory of opportunity. The key
question here is whether the exploration of the new creative
opportunities can be directed towards offering new architectural
resources that can help to answer the problems thrown at
architects today. nnovation is always suspended between two
poles: the investigation of a domain of problems on one side and
the expansion of the domain of potential solutions on the other
side. Within the discipline of architecture this polarity of innovation
has often been an occasion for a productive division of labour
between the analysis of new societal/programmatic demands on
the one side and the proliferation of new spatial repertoires on the
other side. Embodied by Dutch avant-garde and the US avant-
garde respectively, both aspects have been pursuit semi-
independent from each otherthe, with considerable success. This
however, lead to two opposing ideologies, equally one-sided. The
independent elaboration of the two domains begs the question of
their synthesis. The synthesis requires a broad-minded as well as
light-footed oscillation between the two domains. This is no trivial
matter, but itself an act of creative intelligence. There are no one-
to-one correspondences between "problems" and "solutions". No
obvious matches anounce themselves. nstead systematic search
engines have to be launched that can process huge series of
trials against a set of test criteria. Solutions can go in search of
problems as well as problems in search of solutions. What we call
design research is the attempt to systematise this oscillation
within a well circumscribed frame that narrows down both the
realm of problems and the realm of solutions.
The initial mission statement of the AADRL, formulated at in 1996,
promised such an innovative synthesis. The task was to give a
socio-economic/programmatic interpretation to an intense wave of
formal proliferation that has been advancing for a considerable
period without any problematic to work against. The wave
seemed adrift and in danger to collapse onto itself, in the absence
of any problem domain that could offer friction and resistance to
select, shape and substantiate the work. The strategic problem
domain to be investigated was identified: The paradigm shift
within the theory and practise of business organisation, from
clear-cut corporate hierarchies toward open, self-organising
networks of collaboration. For three years our design research
focussed on "Corporate Fields", systematically instrumentalising a
well-constraint band-width of recent formal and conceptual
repertoires for the spatial organisation and articulation of an
equally well-constraint set of recent concepts, tendencies and
practises within the emerging post-fordist enterprise culture. The
managerial problematic of self-organisation, together with the
insatiable need for flexibility and permanent reconfiguration,
encountered in the new business culture, inspired the as yet
uncharted utilisation of animation software for the design of
kinetic, self-organising environments. The current research
programme of "Responsive Environments" was abstracted from
the latest instantiations of "Corporate Fields" where the dynamic
of the work-flow and team reconfigurations was reflected in the
scripted responses of a kinetically adaptive office-scape. The
research was re-focussed to foreground this new capacity to
design spaces that actively engage with their users. We believe
that this capacity opens a whole new domain of design research,
a new paradigm where design moves beyond the delineation of
form to the creation of complex behavioral systems.
Responsive Environments
The research programme is founded upon two technological
presuppositions: 1. Various sensor as well as actuator
technologies become readily available, easily linked by computer.
At the same time robotics research is trailblazing further towards
ever more advanced forms of artificial intelligence, including
sophisticated possibilities of distributed problem solving and
learning. 2. The tools to design and simulate responsive systems
are readily available in the form of animation software like 3ds
max and Maya. These software packages offer modelling tools
that allow the designer to set up complex systems of dynamic
interaction involving techniques like scripting, force-fields, inverse
kinematics etc. Any parameter of any object might be dynamically
correlated with any parameter of any other object within the
model. This means that the designer has the freedom and power
to craft artificial worlds, each with their peculiar "laws of nature".
48/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
On this basis The AADRL design environments that are
augmented with electronic sensitivity and intelligence, proposing
artificial life-processes that would be symbiotic with prospectively
transformed human life-processes. The speculate about these
symbiotic life-processes the dynamic modelling always includes
the modelling of occupational patterns. Thus it becomes possible
to work on complex social scenarios and to speculate in detail
about prospective behavioural patterns unfolding within and in
response to the proposed dynamic spatial configurations.
end., P.Sch
The Autopoeisis of Architecture
Patrik Schumacher 2002
Published in: LATENT UTOPAS - Experiments within
Contemporary Architecture. Springer Verlag, Wien/New York 2002
Karim Rashid's slogan " want to change the world" works as
ironic gesture against all odds. t entertains as a crass
contradiction of the all too evident impossibility of designing a new
world. Karim Rashidas sense of humor thus indicates how far
utopia has been left behind.
There are two related tendencies that conspire to frustrate any
straightforward utopian impulse within architecture and design:
1. The dissolution of the utopian politico-cultural discourses of
emancipation and social progress, as expressed in Lyotards
notorious formula of "the end of grand narratives".
2. The increasing autonomy and self-referential closure of the
discipline of architecture, as expressed most explicitly in the
influential work and writings of Peter Eisenman.
(Both phenomena are also tackeled in the contributions of Bart
Lotsma and Andreas Ruby.) t might seem that the second
tendency is a direct consequence of the first: architecture
withdraws into itself because no compelling social project exists
that could inspire and direct architectural speculation. However,
there is another way one could theorise the relationship between
these two phenomena.
Differentiation and Self-referential Closure
The tendency towards architectural autonomy might be
understood as a moment of an overall societal process of
differentiation, whereby social communication fragments into a
series of autonomous domains - the economy, politics, the legal
system, science, art etc. - establishing self-referentially closed
subsystems within society. Each of these autonomous discourses
contributes, in its specific way, to the overall social process. But
this overall social process - society - does no longer have any
control centre over and above the various increasingly
autonomous communication systems. The differentiated
discourses establish their own sovereign independence with
respect to their underlying values, performance criteria,
programmes and priorities. n this sense the various subsystems
operate self-referentially. Scientific truth is constructed and
validated within the scientific communication process. Positive
law is continuously re-written, interpreted and applied on the
basis of its own legally validated procedures. The establishment
of economic rationality is long since internal to the economic
process (capitalism). The astonishing emancipation of art is
perhaps the most familiar example of self-referentially enclosed
autonomy.
Politics can no longer control any of these subsystems of society.
The political system is but one of the subsystems which produce
society through their co-evolution. Each subsystem follows its
own logic and conceives of society in terms of its specific
problematic, within its particular (and increasingly
incommensurable) conceptual framework. Political decisions can
neither determine judicial outcomes, nor can they replace
economic exchanges, or dictate scientific concepts or artistic
paradigms. n turn scientific arguments do not force political
decisions. The evolutionary advantage of separating these
discourses, i.e. of establishing "near-decomposability" of the
societal subsystems, is enormous: a huge gain in the ability to
experiment with adaptations to a turbulent environment on many
local fronts simultaneously, without the need to synchronise all
moves, and without running the risk that failures rip too deep into
the social fabric. This has to be paid with a certain loss of control
and sense of vertigo.
The society that reproduces itself via the co-evolution of
autonomous subsystems has been able to built up new levels of
dynamic complexity that effectively exclude the reintegration of
society into a single project governed by a single rationality. Legal
rationality is neither political nor scientific rationality. And one
might add here: design rationality too can neither be reduced to
nor controlled by any other than its own logic.
Any attempt to reduce all value systems to one - a form of
regressive totalitarianism - could only serve to blunt the operative
complexity achieved by the co-evolution of the self-enclosed
discursive systems with catastrophic consequences.
Functionally differentiated Society
This sketch of a society as a communication process without
centre and without binding self-representation is based on Niklas
Luhmannas theory of "functionally differentiated society".
According to Luhmann this internally differentiated system of
communication works, because the process of differentiation
follows a functional logic, crystallising self-referentially closed, but
structurally coupled, function systems. Luhmann defines modern
society - the post-modern being but its most expressed form - as
a society in which functional differentiation has replaced
stratification (feudal order) and segmentary differentiation (tribal
societies) as primary mode of societal differentiation. Stratified
society still contained the privileged position that could guarantee
central control and a unified self-description with respect to social
communication: the monarch, heading the internally stratified
aristocracy at the peak of the social pyramid. The irreversible
result of societal differentiation is a society without centre and
therefore without unified, hegemonic self-description that could
become a vehicle of utopian self-projection.
Now the hierarchy of causation between the two tendencies - the
end of utopia and the increasing self-reference of discourses -
seems reversed. The self-referential closure of the differentiated
subsystems of societal communication spells the end of utopia.
Utopia as a coherent project and blueprint, i.e. as the wholesale
reinvention of society integrating politics, law, economy and
architecture, breaks up in the face of an insurmountable
complexity barrier. Vitruvius and Alberti could still think of
themselves as participating within a unified civic discourse.
Architecture and good design were inseparably bound up with the
good life, just society and cosmological harmony (science). To a
certain extend this is still true, if only subjectively, with respect to
Le Corbusier. An educated man of Albertias stature was at ease
in all domains of social communication and the integration of
those aspects of society, which later differentiated into
autonomous subsystems, was as yet unproblematic. Society still
had an identifiable address, to which utopian speculation, with
due deference, could be addressed. Political, judicial, economic
and ideological power was still concentrated at the top of the
stratified order. Therefore it is no empty politeness if Albertias "De
re aedificatoria" is dedicated to his powerful patron Lorenzo dea
Medici. Today society has no address, no centre and no
opportunity to generate a binding representation of itself and its
destiny.
Autopoeisis
Luhmannas theory of modern society as a functionally
differentiated society is embedded in his general theory of social
systems. The problem of systems theory the constitution,
maintainance and evolution of continuous (rather than stable)
systems within changing environments is also the problem of
Luhmannas sociology. n particular Luhmann appropriates
Maturana & Varelaas theory of autopoeisis. Autopoeisis defines
biological life-processes as the circular self-reproduction of
recursive processes that constitute a unity of interaction (the
49/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
system) within a domain of interaction (the environment). The
environment is not assumed to be given as the same for all
organisms but each organism occupies a peculiar niche in
accordance with its peculiar mode of life, sensitivity and
responsiveness. Each system thus determines what counts as its
relevant environment, i.e. which differences make a difference
versus those aspects that remain indifferent. Maturana poses
divergent "observers", distinguished on the basis of different
cognitive/metabolic mechanisms. Although Maturana talks about
interactions, observers, distinctions, reference, self-reference and
the constitution of the observed through the observer, he is not
implying consciousness as the necessary medium with which
such terms traditionally are associated. Luhmannas transferral of
Maturanaas conceptual schema to the domain of social systems
maintains this (initially counterintuitive) refusal to imply
consciousness as the agent and medium of "distinction", "(self)-
observation", "(self-)reference" ect. nstead the bearer (quasi-
subject) of these "operations" is the social system which in turn is
nothing but the self-constraining recursive network of those very
operations.
Everything social is theorised as autopoeitic communication
systems. This accounts for friendships, families, ephemeral
gatherings, conversations, distributed intellectual communities
(discourses), rituals, organisations such as corporations,
universities, hospitals, nation states and, last but not least, the
great modern function systems like the economy, the legal
system, the political system, the mass media, and the scientific
system with all its disciplinary subsystems. Luhmann avoids to
give a complete list of all modern function systems. Architecture -
so far - did not receive separate recognition within Luhmannas
theoretical system. Luhmann refers to architecture within his "The
art of society" where he treats art a as self-referential social
system. t is my contention here that this treatment of architecture
and design under the umbrella concept of art is an anachronism -
at least since the re-foundation of the discipline as modern
architecture during the 1920s. However, if architecture and design
are still, at times, brought into proximity with the art system, this
does not necessarily indicate an adherence to a traditional
formula. Rather this re-assimilation of art and architecture/design
is due to the recent, quite significant fact, that architecture, in its
avant-gardist and experimental mode, uses the tropes, tactics
and spaces of artistic communication. However, notwithstanding
such partial similarities and cross-fertilizations, architecture and
design have clearly separated from art and constitute an
independent function system within (post-)modern society.
rritation versus determination
Differentiation can not be the full story. Obviously autonomy and
self-referential closure can not imply hermetic isolation. Luhmann
posits the formula: openess through closure. This formula poses
the task of continuous adaptation of the system to the relevant
changes it distinguishes within its environment. This process of
adaptation in turn implies self-referential autonomy for the system
with respect to the task of organising its response. The impact of
the environment does not pervade and directly determine the
system. Unlike the billard ball that is pushed around without
options, the autopoeitic (living or social) system is absorbing
environmental impacts into its complex web of processes so that
no "response" can be regarded as immediate one-to-one effect of
a singular cause. History plays a part here. Thatas the difference
between kicking a dog versus kicking a ball.
t is important to sharply distinguish two types of communication:
communication within a given subsystem of society and
communication between different subsystems. Within a given
system communications are constituted recursively within a
shared conceptual framework or horizon of understanding. Across
system boundaries communications do not share the same
horizon and are therefore not understood in the same specific and
elaborate way. Here communication can only rely on the rather
simple, common denominator of colloquial understanding. The
distinction of its own versus alien communications, is actively
made within each autopoeitic social system. Communications
within a particular system have to be able (and mostly are able) to
recognize each other as mutually relevant, and reject (as
irrelevant) any foreign intrusion. This active boundary
maintenance is a crucial part of autopoeisis. Only within this
bounded zone can a specific complexity of discursive structures
be elaborated beyond the mediocre level of everyday
conversation. Within the autopoeitic system communications
recursively refer to each other. Across the boundary lies the
"environment" which remains an unpredictable source of irritation,
because the various specialized discourses are not mutually
mastered and thus remain largely intransparent with respect to
each other. Specialized communication is thus contrasted with
irritation. This formulation is reminiscent of Maturanaas notion of
perturbation as the mode in which the autopoeitic system
engages with its environment.
This notion of external irritation is not only distinguished from
internal communication, but is then sharply contrasted with any
notion of external determination. This contrast focuses on two
aspects:
What can or can not become an irritation for a system depends
first of all upon the historically elaborated structure of the system.
"Living systems as units of interactions ... can not enter into
interactions that are not specified by their organisation." Secondly
the responsive behavior of the autopoeitic system is specified by
its peculiar sensitivity (information processing apparatus) and its
current momentary/historical state. Thus there can be no talk of
external determination with respect to an autopoeitic system,
except in the purely negative and trivial sense of a crude physical
disruption. (Hitler and Stalin had to resort to such crude, and
ultimately self-defeating, means of control. This also included the
political control of architecture which in effect obliterated their
countriesa participation in the discourse of architecture.) But the
reverse is also true - as much as the system retains its
sovereignty with respect to its adaptive response to external
"irritations", it in turn can only irritate, never control and positively
determine the operations of the various other autopoeitic systems
it is able to locate within its environment.
All it can do is absorb perturbations and intervene by counter-
perturbation. The result of this imprecise type of exchange, in
case of recurrent and continuous mutual perturbation, is termed
structural coupling. As a dynamic process this implies co-
evolution and structural drift. This set of related concepts replaces
the idea of integration, implying a far more loose and
unpredictable coupling of aspects of the overall social process.
This leads to an enormous acceleration of evolution. But at the
same time, paradoxically, such autopoeisis in flux, with the only
prerogative of continued communication, by whatever means
necessary, and in whatever mutant forms, might be presumed to
be far more robust and resilient than any supposedly stable or
static social formation (Fourth Reich, Soviet Union).
The "loss" of a single, integrated social formation implies that we
have to move from the pursuit of a single, a priori posited utopia
to the playful and "opportunistic" browsing across multiple latent
utopias that circulate as "irritations" between the co-evolving
subsystems of society. Architecture has to allow itself to be
irritated by its societal environment and in turn should become a
productive irritant.
Architecture as autopoeitic system of communications
The dispute within architecture about itas degree of autonomy
might be clarified and assessed within the framework of
Luhmannas theory of social autopoeisis.
Architectureas autonomy within society does not imply
indifference to society. Rather it is a necessary mode of
contributing to society with sufficient flexibility and sophistication.
Contemporary society is far too complex and too dynamic to
establish clear and fixed hierarchies of values/priotities that would
in turn allow the societal division of labor to be conceived as
chains of instruction, whereby centrally/democratically set
purposes are to be fulfilled by the various appointed function
systems. nstead each function system is condemmed to self-
governance. Architecture too can only appoint itself, and define its
own purposes, both with respect to the identification of the most
urgent architecturally relevant social problems and with respect to
the appropriate selection of architectural means to tackle such
problems. However architecture, like all the other subsystems of
50/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
society, is doing this under risky conditions of mutual
interdependence. Failure to self-organise effective responses
leads to irrelevance and spells extinction.
This is why Eisenmanas stance of absolute autonomy can only be
a subsidiary moment within the overall constitution of the
discipline. Equally one-sided however is the attempt to return to
the tenents of a radical functionalism that pretend to be able to
react directly to socio-economic demands, without any discursive
detour into the depth of an elaborated (and to be elaborated)
formal universe. The formalist stance finds its partial rationality in
the fact that initial proliferation of spatial concepts and formal
techniques flourishes best in the absence of functional and
programmatic constraints. This is the raison daetre of the oeuvre
of Peter Eisenman and his followers. However this stance can not
be generalised across the discipline. That would indeed be
suicidal.
When we compare different stages in the evolution of system
differentiation within a society we can observe an increase in the
(degree of) the autonomy of the developing systems. The
systems increase the selectivity of their irritability, sharpen their
relevance criteria, construct longer chains of communications,
distributed across time (and space), and increasingly establish
their own independent temporal rhythms.
The autopoeitic system, as a complex, historically evolving
system, always uses time and involves whole series of events
into its "responses", so that simple, predictable one-to-one
correlations between environmental impacts and system
responses are out of the question.
With respect to architecture, any attempt to establish immediate
and determinate correlations between architecture as a discipline,
with its current analytic/synthetic procedures on the one hand and
its social environment on the other hand, is as futile as the related
attempt to determine fixed one-to-one relations between functions
and forms. Changes in the socio-economic environment
(functions) do not straightforwardly determine new architectural
concepts and types (forms) although some response(s) might
sooner or later be elaborated, and perhaps several responses are
released in parallel. Any impact is absorbed and mediated via a
route through the evolving internal complexity of the system. One
important aspect of this mediation is the subordination of the
response to the systemas own temporal regime, i.e. the response
is delayed and various impacts might be aggregated and dealt
with en bloc, or an impact might be worked through piecemeal via
a long series of different responses, stretched out across time.
Such mediation might involve an extensive internal processing of
options before a response is established. This has enormous
advantages if compared with immediate action: A client might try
to force the "straightforward" adaptation of a design to his brief or
a crowd might simply overrun its allocated and articulated space
to create an ad hoc "event architecture" from the spatial features
at hand. Compared with such myopic immediacy, the absorption
of functional demands into architectural design processes (that
are all about processing and selecting from options) allows the
integration of the current concern with a whole number of other
concerns through the application of procedures that represent the
condensed experience of discipline. We might refer to those
experiences, that have sedimented within the operating
distinctions and routines of the discipline/profession, as the
discursive structures of architecture. However delayed,
roundabout and self-determined/structure-determined the
response, some form of adaptation will be required.
A mark of the self-referential closure of architecture is that design
decisions are tightly knit to their kind and only obliquely/indirectly,
i.e. en bloc, refer to external demands and circumstances. Design
decisions always refer to other design decisions which in turn are
embedded in the extensive chain and network of architectural
discourse. Design decisions also have financial as well as legal,
sometimes even political implications and they respond to such
external concerns. However, they do so only indirectly, only en
bloc, and on the basis of the architectural structures (concepts,
principles, routines) that guide all individual operations. Political,
legal or financial concerns are not immediately architectural
concerns. No one-to-one correlations can be established here
however much a client in distress might like this to be the case.
The network of implications is too complex. Any architectural
response has to involve whole networks of design decisions on
the basis of architectural (theoretical) principles. This is a
measure of the sophistication of architecture, it can not be bullied
into a knee-jerk response. This is the raison daetre of autopoeitic
closure.
A client might force his way nevertheless, but the result will have
little chance of being recognised as architecture. Architecture is
innovative architecture on the basis of mutated principles
combining both variation and redundancy. Neither repetition of old
formulas nor mere deviation qualify as architecture. The
distinction of avant-garde versus mainstream, merely commercial
"architecture", remains constitutive for the discipline. Only
innovative, generalisable contributions are considered, i.e.
contributions that are deeply entangled in the autopoeitic network
of architectural communication, and therefore are able to move
this network.
The degree of autonomy that architectural discourse has
established by differentiating itself from the immediacy of
everyday talk about buildings, and thus the complexity of the
discursive detour which mediates a particular impact/response,
should grow with the overall complexity of society. The more
complex the societal environment the more autonomous - the
more selective and specific - must every social system operate in
order to cope with the various, often contradictory demands that
challenge the respective social system.
Architecture has to react to societal and technological changes. t
has to maintain its ability to deliver solutions. But its very
problems are no longer predefined. n fact, these problems are
themselves a function of the ongoing autopoeisis of architecture.
Architectural experimentation has it to leap into the dark, hoping
that sufficient fragments of its multiplicitous audience will throw
themselves into architectures browsing trajectory. Risks have to
be taken. Obviously, architecture - armed with architectural theory
- tries to aim in the right direction. Current experimental work
focuses on issues of organisational complexity (layering,
interpenetration of domains), the production of diversity (iteration
vs repetition), the spatial recognition of fuzzy social logics
(smooth vs striated space), ways of coping with uncertainty
(virtuality vs actuality), and engagement with new production
technologies (file to factory) etc. Thus architecture is trying to take
aim at what seem like relevant targets popping up in its societal
environment. However, the resulting manifestos remain
precarious, relative and are often based on retrospective
discoveries rather than prospective visions. Utopia is latent within
the stray trajectories of architectural speculation, but to the extend
that they cross the path of the projectiles that escape from the
other domains of social communication.
notes:
This is the title of Karim Rashidas monograph: Karim Rashid -
Want to Change the World, Universe Publishing, New York 2001
Jean-Franois Lyotard, La condition postmoderne, Editions de
Minuit, Paris, 1979
Herbert Simon, The Sciences of the Artificial, Cambridge
Massachusetts 1969, 1980, chapter 7, The Architecture of
Complexity.
Niklas Luhmann, Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft, Suhrkamp
Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1997, Kapitel 4, V, Funktional
differenzierte Gesellschaft
Humberto R.Maturans & Francesco J.Varela, Autopoeisis and
Cognition - The Realization of the Living, 1980, Dordrecht ,
Holland.
Humberto R.Maturans & Francesco J.Varela, Autopoeisis and
Cognition - The Realization of the Living, 1980, Dordrecht ,
Holland, p.10. Further: "What is from one perspective a unit of
interaction, from another may only be a component of a larger
51/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
one, or may be several independent units"., p.31
These structures are brought to bear on new experiences/cases.
This in turn even if ever so slightly leaves a trace on those
structures. Thus the discursive structures evolve through use.
end., P.Sch
LATENT UTOPAS
Patrik Schumacher 2002
ntroduction to: LATENT UTOPAS - Experiments within
Contemporary Architecture. Springer Verlag, Wien/New York
introduction in forthcoming book: LATENT UTOPAS -
Experiments within Contemporary Architecture, Ed. Zaha Hadid &
Patrik Schumacher, Springer Verlag, Wien/New York 2002
Latent Utopias focuses on current experiments with radically new
concepts of space that are proliferating on the back of the new
electronic design media available today. This proliferation of
possibilities requires the profession to "play" and experiment. n
this respect the mode of production of the architect is assimilated
to artistic processes. The final purpose, meaning and fulfillment of
these experiments lies beyond the scope of the architect/designer
and requires the creative appropriation through its audiences. We
believe that the proto-architecture that emerges under these
circumstances requires public exhibitions as forum of exposure
and testing ground.
The works presented by the various architects/designers will
therefore aim for engaging/interactive forms of installation, and
construct experiences rather than merely delivering information.
The featured projects venture into the realm of radical abstraction.
nitially the results might seem bizarre. What is the hidden
meaning and potential purpose of these creative practises? How
does this "neo-avant-garde" relate to the old questions of
progress? s it possible to unearth a utopian potential here?
Every time needs its utopia(s). A society that does no longer
reflect its development is uncanny, a monstrosity. However,
utopian speculation is rather dubious today. n recent years the
very notion of progress and the ambition to project a future has
itself come to be regarded as monstrous. Utopian thinking seems
naiv, dangerous hubris.
The history of (built and unbuilt) Modern Architecture has been
paraded as villain and quoted as a symbol for the vanity of failed
utopian claims. But however one judges the radical concepts
(concerning the structure and morphology of the modern,
industrial city) that were formulated at the beginning of the 20th
century - they have shown an unbelievable anticipatory power.
After 50 years of world-wide adoption, the projections and
principles of the modern heroes can hardly be discussed as
"mistakes", even if the socio-economic transformations of the last
two decades - achieved on the back of the material advances of
the modern period - mean that the social ideals, desires and
requirements with respect to the architecture of the contemporary
city have since developed in radical anti-thesis to the modern
utopias.
What are the new needs, demands and questions that
contemporary society raises for architecture? Are there
protagonists that take up this challenge within their creative
practise? There is no easy or immediate answer here.
n the last 10-15 years the discourse of the architectural avant-
garde was driven by the principle of negativity (creative
destruction). Concepts like de-construction, dis-location, de-
coding and de-territorialization have been dominating the scene.
Apparently positive concepts like plurality, multiplicity,
heterogeneity and virtuality are in fact defined in opposition to the
key concepts of modernity and signal the end of universality,
predictability and of any notion of a (future) ideal order. t no
longer makes sense to try to articulate the Zeitgeist. Every
architectural concept or trope is relative with respect to divergent
perspectives and interests. Every architectural form multiplies in
the kaleidoscope of multiple, temporary audiences. The total
social process has become far too complex to be anticipated
within a single vision and utopian image. Other strategies are
called for.
Mutations
The unpredictability of emergent socio-economic patterns spells
the impossibility of straightforward goal orientation in planning
and design. n the face of this predicament there is a necessary
strategic retreat from the immediate program of progress. The flip-
side of this impossibility of straightforward progress is the
necessity (and the freedom) to experiment. This is providing the
rationale for an unheard of proliferation of new formal possibilities.
What one is left with is the (nearly) random production of the new
and "other", without yet being able to make the claim to provide
measurable improvements. A phase of pure mutation is
introduced whereby the selection and reproduction of the new
material points beyond the capacity of the individual author
towards a collective process of appropriation. n various fields of
research and professional work, not least in architecture, it the
necessity to incorporate random mutations into strategies of
innovation has been asserted in practise and starts to be reflected
in theory.
The role of chance discoveries in the progress of science and
technology is long since proverbial without systematic
acknowledgement on the part of epistemology. Even today the
notion of random pursuits rings anti-thetical to notions of strategic
conduct or rationality. Nevertheless, in the history of science as
well as in recent design methodologies, a new notion of rationality
crystallises. Groping experimentation, the incorporation of random
play and a margin of underdetermined, uncontrolled investment
are now seen to be necessary ingredients of any strategy aimed
at innovation.
The radical architectural projects presented here are not offering
themselves as utopian proposals in the sense of elaborated
proposals for a better life. They do not claim to have a meaning in
this sense. They pose questions and withdraw the familiar
answers. They are open-ended mutations that at best might
become catalysts in the co-evolution of new life processes. (Of
course there is also the risk to remain alien to everything and
everybody. That risk has to be taken.)
Experimentation is not necessarily to be confined to the design
process, but might continue in the building itself. Who is to judge
and deny a priori that a strange building will not attract and
engender a strangely productive occupation. Such speculative
investment might become accepted as intervention research.
What to many yet appears as an assemblage of disjointed trials
might soon cohere into a worthwhile development.
A decoded architecture - made strange - offers itself to
inhabitation as an aleatoric field, anticipating and actively
prefacing its own detournment. Latent utopias are hiding within
this domain of strangeness.
We do not answer the question of the new needs, demands and
purposes that the new architecture might adress with respect to
contemporary society.
The answers have to be discovered within the various formal
experiments that are proliferating today. Utopias can no longer be
constructed on the basis of explicit intentions. They can only
emerge as latent tendencies that might come to fruition when a
social practise discovers a vital potential within those strange
spatio-material constructs thrown into the public domain.
Exhibitions are a vital part of this process. The latent social
content of the new, strange, abstract spaces that are on the
drawing boards of the current architectural avant-garde(s) may be
teased out by publicly staging scenarios of another "everyday
life".
Z.H. & P.S.
52/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
End.
What is an architect in society today?
Patrik Schumacher 2002
Survey appearing in: Hunch Magazine, No.5, The Netherlands

1) What is an architect in society today?
The avant garde architect is a radical innovator in the field of
spatial organization.
This rather small and particular segment of avant garde
production is nevertheless taken to define the essential character
of the discipline and it's practitioners define the role model of the
architect. The distinction between avant-garde and mainstream
or the high art of architecture vs commercial architecture remains
a constitutive undercurrent for the self-image of the architect. This
logic can not be overcome by fiat: the Dutch attempt to embrace
banality from within the avant-garde discourse can not collapse
this distinction. We do not regret this. We think this division of
labor makes sense with respect to the promotion of the spatial
aspects of the socio-economic development.
2) How do you define an innovative architect?
nnovation is the constitutive moment and defining task of
architecture as discipline ever since its conscious inception in the
renaissance. Ever since all great architects have been radical
innovators that's the stuff that architectural history is made of.
And architecture observes itself historically. What is recognised as
architecture is marked by radical innovation and theoretical
argument. Mere building (i.e. the vernacular, the mainstream,
commercial architecturte) relies on the repetition of well proven
solutions taken for granted. nnovation questions the way things
are done and requires an argument which transcends the mere
concerns and competencies of building. nnovation requires
theory. This ultimately involves conceptions of the good life and
the good society. Great architecture and ambitious architectural
theory relates architectural progress with social progress. The
status quo does not require theory. Theory offers an implicit
utopia.
However, utopian speculation is rather dubious today. n recent
years the very notion of progress and the ambition to project a
different future has come to be regarded as suspect. Architecture
as a discipline and discourse is faced with a large number of
shifting variables and conflicting interests. The complexity of the
situation precludes straightforward goal orientation. A playing field
for experimentation is required to explore possible
problems/solutions. This is the raison d'etre of architecture's
relative autonomy. Experimentation requires a certain distancing
from immediate performative pressures and the demand of best
practise delivery.
3) How does one practise the profession ?
Again this is specific to the wether one is concerned with avant-
garde or mainstream practise.
For innovative production a playing field for formal research and
spatial invention is required where both functional and economic
performance criteria are less stringent than in the commercial
sector. However, research is not institutionalised within
architecture neither as publicy funded university research nor in
the form of research departments within the big architectural
firms. nstead the discipline relies on two substitutes for proper
research : architecture schools and avant garde architects. The
commissions of avant garde architects have to function as
vehicles of architectural research. This is possible within a
special segment of the architectural market - the segment of
high profile cultural buildings.
From the architect's perspective such cultural icon buildings
demands a certain type of design office and a mode of working
that is not easily adapted to the mundane projects that are locally
around the corner. t requires a world market of cultural project
opportunities to feed a 50 people strong crew specialized in
creative work. Thus also from the supply side the partition of the
profession is reinforced.
Art centers and other cultural buildings usually have only loosely
defined briefs that allow for interpretation and experimentation.
Architecture as a discipline and discourse revolves around such
buildings. The public character and media attention attached to
these experiments make them into vehicles of experimental
engagement with a wide array of audiences. This offers an
opportunity to gather feed-back and use such buildings as focal
points for participatory innovative processes. The burden of
argument and proof is to this extent - lifted of the shoulders of
the individual architect even if written statements that try to make
sense of strange, experimental designs are an essential part of
the professional practise in the avant garde/research segment of
the profession. Unfortunately the next step - the translation of new
spatial and formal repertoires into the mainstream - is a matter
that largely takes place outside the critical attention of the
discipline or else is deningrated. This evaluation of the
mainstream in terms of a lack of originality, or a compromise of
tectonic/aesthetic principles misses the point the raison d'etre of
the division of labour within the profession.
4.) What are the responsibilities of an architect ?
The responsibilty of architecture is split according to the division
of labour between high art and mainstream. The sole
responsibility of the avant garde architect is to innovate. His/her
work is a manifesto, it's value transcends the immediate task of
the building at hand. The responsibility of the mainstream
architect is to adopt what can be adopted according to
circumstance.
However the exchanges between the two fields are no one-way
street. We subscribe to Koolhaas' method of the retro-active
manifesto. nnovations are more than just new and different. Not
everything goes. Alternatives have to link up with realities. Also
:nnovation might be hidden in the ugly deviations of
commercial development. Taking clues from aspects of
mainstream/commercial developments that are not traces of high
architecture but rather enforced deviations is a useful technique
of seeking out phenomena to extrapolate from.
Tendencies might also be mutated. The question is how much
alterity can be digested at once. The burden of responsibility for
success can no longer be shouldered by the architect alone. This
would choke the development.
5) What is your definition of the laboratory ?
Laboratory research in distinction to avant-garde practise can not
be conducted on the basis of chance commissions. n the
absence of properly instituted research post graduate teaching
offers the closest approximation. Schools become laboratories in
two distinct but equally important ways :
1. One task is to scan society to find architectural problems and
define briefs even if no client is articulating them. This updates the
agenda of architecture.
2. A second task is to explore new design media and modelling
techniques. This is closely related to the proliferation of new
formal repertoires. nitially such research should be independent
of any stringent brief or strict criteria of instrumentalisation. The
task is to untap potentials that might inspire the search of
problems on the basis of discovered solutions . This reversal
of the usual means to ends logic is impossible within professional
practise and highly constrained within avant garde practise. The
freedom to post-rationalise is greatest where no specific problem
53/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
is posed from the outside the only requirement being that a form
function relationship is established at the end.
The function of this academic laboratory research is to criticise,
irritate and inspire avant garde and then mainstream professional
practise. The idea that academia itself could establish models of
best practise is utterly misguided.
6) f you would educate the students at the Berlage laboratory
what would you educate them ?
The Berlage has been strongest in the field of urban research and
critical brief writing, i.e. the expansion of architecture's
programmatic agenda and it's possible domain of intervention.
This was assisted by the assimilation of contemporary
sociological theory and cultural criticism. We assume that a
respective ethos has taken root within the student body. t is
inevitable that any future work will build upon this ethos. However,
against this backdrop we would want to emphasise the
independent validity of formal research and the exploration of new
design media. The Berlage - on many occasions - has been
producing innovative formal solutions - however without making
formal problems/possibilities the explicit issue of debate and
research.
Once this distinction between two domains of architectural
innovation - programmatic vs formal innovation - has been
posited the call for synthesis seem irresitable : the pursuit of new
agendas by means of new media and new forms. ndeed such a
synthesis is crucial. However - neither new agendas nor new
forms are readily available and their mutual fit rarely obvious.
Both ingredients of architectural research require an independent
life before synthesis can be attemted. The appropriate technique
of coping with this is oscillation - either within a project or
between projects.
Autopoeisis of a Residential
Community
Patrik Schumacher 2002
From the book Negotiate My Boundary - Mass-customisation and
Responsive Environments Ed. by Brett Steele and +RAMTV AA
publications, London
Negotiate Your Boundary provokes as the attempt to deploy the
full panoply of recent 4D modelling techniques and its attendant
formal registers in the pursuit of neighborhood/community
architecture. More-over this prima facie unlikely attempt locates
itself within the heart of London, i.e. in one of those relentless
metropolitan maelstroms that have been spelling the proverbial
death of community for more than one hundred years. To increase
the stakes even further this challenge is launched without seeking
refuge at the margins of society or relying on any remnant of
traditional community life. nstead the contemporary absence of
neighborhood community is taken as the inevitable starting point.
Then the claim is made that new types of spatial community can
be forged precisely from the typical individualistic, fragmented
and alienated human material that is charted in the scattergrams
of capitalist market research.
Thus the project compounds the unexpected with the unlikely -
the perfect heuristics to produce productive design research
hypotheses - and we shall see if it indeed succeeds in making the
improbable probable.
The project put forward here deserves attention as a new effort to
elaborate an architecture with an ambitious social agenda . A
series of new ingredients with respect to this effort allow us to
revisit the otherwise discredited/suspended ambition of using
architecture to facilitate social communication in general and to
promote neighborhood community in particular.
These new ingredients are systematically connected to form a
plausible strategy for a socially effective architectural practise that
does not rely on well tested types but dares to speculate. The
following five paragraphs elaborate the key components of this
strategy:
1. The reconceptualization of the status and role of the social
goals within the design intent.
The strategy moves away from any preconceived ideal of
community life and instead is concerned with facilitating
processes of communicative self-organisation where goals evolve
in response to opportunities. The formation of social systems is
understood as an ongoing process of evolution and autopoeisis.
The distinction between system and environment is pivotal.
Systems actively distinguish themselves from their environment,
trying to preserve their distinctness and to maintain their identity.
Their self-referential closure and boundary maintenance is a
crucial part of their development. The design intent therefore
moves onto a more abstract level and offers spatial and
morphological material for potential territorializations and
identifications, i.e. focuses on delivering boundary and identity
rather than aiming for determinate social patterns.
2. The reorganisation of the role of the architect within the
design process.
The project abandons well-defined typologies both on the level
of the neighborhood masterplan as well as on the level of the
individual residential units. nstead of designing full blown and
final layouts the design process is phased and intercepted by end
user participation in the design process. The architect designs the
building blocks as well as the rules of spatial combination and
manipulation that structure the participatory game. On the level of
the urban layout a field of opportunity is framed and structured.
On the level of the residential units the distinction of geno-type vs
pheno-type opens up a space for the articulation of individual user
preferences as well as for the negotiation and interarticulation of
adjacent users. The design of a successful geno-type, i.e. one
that is latent with many divers pheno-types, requires a risktaking
attitude the more the domain of possibility for final manipulation
and articulation into pheno-types is opened up. The architect
shifts his/her concern from fixing a result to the question of
instigating and steering a vital game of appropriation and
negotiation.
3. The reconceptualization of what constitutes the realisation
(life)of the project.
The first stage in the life of the designed project is its existence as
a set of visualisations that the developer uses to sell (pre-let) the
project. Here the project is launched as a virtual real estate
property. Negotiate my boundary goes one step further and
incorporates the communicative power of the internet to build up
a virtual community in anticipation and preparation of the real
residential community. This is a crucial step that significantly
lowers the treshold of personal communication and allows the
self-selection and communal self-organisation to take off in the
safe and non-committal virtual domain. This is also the domain in
which participatory design processes finally become plausible. n
effect it is precisely those design processes of choice,
articulation and negotiation that become the vehicle for building
up the social relations that might lead to new forms of community.
The build up of community unfolds within the framework of
negotiation set up by the architect/developer.
4. The reappraisal of the socio-economic dimension.
The project rejects the dependence upon those utopian socio-
economic models which have traditionally been associated with
notions of community. nstead the strategy works creatively with
the realities and opportunities afforded by the currently prevalent
economic forms. The project specifically suggests a combination
of mass-customization models a la Dell with the model of the
stock-exchange/auction. The private developer is redefined as
someone who sells a platform of community formation through
selection and negotiation between customers engaged in a drawn
54/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
out act of buying. This communication process engendered
between potential future residents is no zero-sum game of
bargaining but allows for an effective value-engineering of the
project, thus creating a social surplus distributed between the
various involved stakeholders including the developer. The
architect - in recognition of the delicate dialectic between planning
framework and individual choice - crafts the spatial rules and
architectonic bargaining chips of the process rather than throwing
readymade products onto the market. nstead the market evolves
with the product. The developer/planner (in this respect not unlike
the 19th century London Landlord) personifies social synthesis as
his economic interest (global value maximisation) aligns with the
collective interest of the overall residential community as opposed
to the individual interests of the residents.
5. The animation of scenarios by means of advanced 4D
visualisation techniques.
The effective deployment of new presentation and modelling
techniques offered by advanced animation software is an
important component in raising the overall profile and prospect of
this ambitious project. 3D modelling is prominently involved in
offering tangible choices for participating customers and in
establishing an intuitive framework for the boundary negotiations
that are crucial for the virtual on-line formation of the scheme. The
further strategy to script elaborate socio-architectural scenarios -
one day in the life of the neighborhood - is supported by 4D
simulation capabilities that include people animators. Finally it
becomes possible to devise and work on complex social
scenarios and to speculate in detail about prospective
behavioural patterns unfolding within and in response to the
proposed spatial configurations. This new technique of design
speculation affords a leap in our ability to innovate beyond the
mere adaptation/reconfiguration of familiar types. Only on the
basis of those new Hollywood productions can the imagination
be stretched and led deep into unfamiliar territory without loosing
every chance to make itself plausible.
End.
Digital Hadid: Landscapes in Motion
Patrik Schumacher, Birkhauser, London 2004
91 000 characters (with spaces)
101 images (13 projects)
Contents
ntroduction
. The prehistory of the new digitally based architecture
The quest for new design media
Zaha Hadid in her own words
Graphic Space
Post-modernism, Deconstructivism, Folding
Mechanisms of nvention

. Current work towards a new digitally based architectural
language
Organic nterarticulation
Centre for Contemporary Art, Rome
Art Centre, Graz
Quebec National Library, Montreal
One North Masterplan, Singapore
BMW Central Building, Leipzig
ce-storm, Lounging Environment
Z-Scape, Lounging Furniture
BBC Music Centre, London
Fine Arts Centre, University of Connecticut
Fast Train Station, Florence
Fast Train Station, Naples
Temporary Guggenheim Museum, Tokyo
Guggenheim Museum, Taichung

Further Reading
Project Credits


ntroduction
Digital Hadid will explore the contribution of Zaha Hadid and of
Zaha Hadid Architects to the development of the new architectural
language and paradigm that is fast becoming hegemonic within
avant-garde architecture today. There is an unmistakable new
style manifest within avant-garde architecture today. ts most
striking characteristic is its complex and dynamic curvelinearity.
Beyond this obvious surface feature one can identify a series of
new concepts and methods that are so different from the
repertoire of both traditional and modern architecture that one
might speak of the emergence of a new paradigm for architecture.
t seems difficult to give a unified name to this new paradigm that
succinctly captures the essence of the current trend. One difficulty
lies in the question whether such a defining term should refer to
the formal features, the guiding concepts or the
methods/techniques that characterize this new paradigm.
Contenders are Blob-architecture, Folding , Deformation,
Parametric Architecture, Digital Architecture. This new language
(or style) of architecture seems to be based upon the adoption of
a new generation of 3D modeling tools. ndeed a lot of
commentators tend to construe a direct causal link from this new
paradigm back to the T revolution that has transformed the
discipline in last 10 years. ndeed the choice of a
representational/design medium has a huge impact on the
character of the design results. The medium is never neutral and
external to the work. t constitutes and limits the design issues
treated and the universe of possibilities for effective design
speculation. Design thinking is bound to the representational
medium and its scope can be expanded by the expansion offered
by the new digital design tools. The reflection upon design
worlds (Mitchell 1990), and their embeddedness in the
discursive formations (Foucault 1972) of the discipline, is a
necessary component of taking a progressive stance towards the
possibilities of design research. However, shall argue and
demonstrate that such a simple reduction of the new type of work
to the availability of computing in architecture would be a fallacy.
While it is undeniably true that the arrival of the new tools (3ds
max a.o.) had a huge impact and that these tools have been able
to monopolize the production of contemporary work - without
these tools nothing goes - will argue that the adoption of
animation tools was not at all inevitable, but rather had to be
prepared by certain conceptual and methodological advances that
preceded the arrival of these tools. To uncover and explicate this
pre-digital pedigree of the current digital architecture will be the
task of the first part of the book. n this prehistory one can locate
Zaha Hadid's most original and path-breaking contributions to the
development of contemporary architecture. n this era the
1980s - Hadid was one of the key protagonists in a field of radical
conceptual and formal architectural research, and her pre-
eminent reputation was established on the basis of pictorial
research without the completion of a single building during this
first decade of her career. During this period the computer was
absent from Hadid's design studio. However, the innovation of
certain analog design media deployed was crucial in the
formation of her work.
The second part of the book will focus on the development of the
work since the introduction of the computer in 1990. Here will
introduce a series of key projects and key concepts that have
been important with respect to the development of the current
flourishing of digital architecture both within and beyond Hadid's
practice. This period in also the period in which Hadid's
architecture has made the transition from concept to material
realization without compromising its innovative thrust. The
involvement of the 3D modeling tools in this process of realization
will be explained. Finally, will present and discuss the most
recent work of Zaha Hadid Architects which is marked by the fact
that a new level of structural complexity, tectonic fluidity and
plastic articulation has been mastered with precision and
confidence. While the book presents two parts representing two
phases in the development of Hadid's oevre pre-digital and
(post)digital - think the work has a strong continuity overall. The
55/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
computer was introduced in the late eighties, early nineties, when
we started with simple forms of 3D-modelling with Model-shop
and later FormZ. That was a process parallel to hand drafting and
painting. They were quick three-dimensional sketches. The
computer was used because it was helpful for what was already
established as an architectural language. The computer programs
that work with splines and smoothly deformable meshes were
introduced much later, in the second half of the nineties. The 2D
computer-drafting, for the plans and sections, started in the mid-
nineties. That was a big shift, because it meant not just working in
layers, which you can also do on transparent paper, but it meant
that we could work on all plans simultaneously. The latest shift is
the introduction of 3D modeling and complex curvelinearity. That
made more complex compositions possible. But the desire for
complex form was always building upon the formal and
conceptual innovations achieved previously. The tools came in as
soon as they were available, keenly taken up to support the
ambitious design manoevers already under way. t was a dialectic
amplification, in which the new work spurned the search for new
tools and the introduction of new tools facilitated the work further,
pushing the most ambitious tendencies to new extremes. This
process was an evolution of many smaller steps, not of a few
singular breaks.

. The prehistory of the new digitally based architecture

The quest for new design media

One of the most significant and momentous features of
architectural avant-garde of the last 20 years is the proliferation of
representational media and design processes.
n the early eighties Zaha Hadid burst onto the architectural scene
with a series of spectacular designs embodied by even more
spectacular drawings and paintings. The idiosyncrasies of these
drawings made it difficult to read them as straightforward
architectural descriptions. This initial openness of interpretation
might have led some commentators to suspect 'mere graphics
here.
There is an obvious parallel here with the skepticism which
confronted the early, abstract experiments in computer surface
modeling in the mid-nineties. However, these unusual modes of
representation played a fundamental role in the development of a
series of highly original and influential expansions of the formal
and conceptual repertoire of architecture. Modes of
representation in architecture are at the same time modes of
generation. The creative process to a large extent resides in
these modes and means. The creativity and information
processing capacity of the imagination or inner eye is rather
limited and itself dependent upon being trained and developed in
conjunction with the development of the media. That is why
Digital Hadid is part of a significant series of investigations.
Computer technology, i.e. the new digital design tools have had
an important and increasing influence on the work of Zaha Hadid
Architects over the last 10 years. This concerns primarily the
handling of increasingly complex geometries within the designs.
However, the desire for such tools to be imported from the
animation industry originated in the fact that the tendency towards
complexity and fluidity was already manifest in the work before
those tools were available. Hadid's early elaborate techniques of
projective distortion - deployed as a cohering device to gather a
multitude of elements into one geometric force-field - were
already setting the precedence of the current computerbased
techniques of deformation and the modeling of fields by means of
pseudo-gravitational forces. Hadid used axonometric and
perspective projection in a new way to dynamize the implied
space. nitially such projections were deployed according to their
proper function as means of representation. However, it soon
became apparent that there was a self-serving fascination with
the extreme distortion of spaces and objects that emerged from
the ruthless application of perspective construction no0t unlike
the anamorphic projectionsone can find in certain 17th Century
paintings. Hadid built up pictorial spaces within which multiple
perspective constructions were fused into a seamless dynamic
texture. One way to understand these images is as attempts to
emulate the experience of moving through an architectural
composition revealing a succession of rather different points of
view. Another, more radical way of reading these canvasses is to
abstract from the implied views and to read the swarms of
distorted forms as a peculiar architectural world in its own right
with its own characteristic forms, compositional laws and spatial
effects. One of the striking features of these large canvasses is
there strong sense of coherence despite the richness and
diversity of forms contained within them. There is never the order
of monotonous repetition, but the field continuously changes its
grain of articulation. Gradient transitions mediate large quiet
areas with very dense and intense zones. Usually these
compositions are poly-central and multi-directional. All these
features are the result of the use of multiple, interpenetrating
perspective projections. Often the dynamic intensity of the overall
field is increased by using curved instead of straight projection
lines. The projective geometry allows to bring an arbitrarily large
and divers set of elements under its cohering law of diminuation
and distortion. The resultant graphic space very much anticipates
the later (and still very much current) concepts of field and swarm.
The effect achieved is very much like the effects currently pursuit
with curve-linear mesh-deformations and digitally simulated
gravitational fields that grip, align, orient and thus cohere a set
of elements or particles within the digital model.
A second prevalent feature of Hadid's large paintings is the
technique of layering and the concomitant technique of rendering
elements as transparent to reveal the depth of the composition.
This transparent superposition of the elements of a drawing
anticipates the literal spatial interpenetration of geometric figures
in order to create more complex organizations. A third
characteristic of Hadid's early work that anticipates a pervasive
preoccupation of the recent avant-garde is the idea of
manipulating the ground plane by means of cutting and warping.
(Tomigaya, Al Whada, Duesseldorf) This elaboration of the ground
as manipulated/moulded surface anticipates the current use of
digital surface modelers and the attendant idea of architectural
articulation by means of surface foldings implying the concept of
the building as a single continuous surface.

Zaha Hadid in her own words:

Here is what Zaha Hadid had to say about the role of design
media in general and digital media in particular in an interview
with the Chairman of the Architectural Association School of
Architecture Mohsen Mostafavi (El Croquis 103): MM: You
touched on the question of mechanisms or means of
representation. How do you think your approach has changed in
the last 5 or 10 years? What is the tension between your own
drawings/conceptualisations and the way in which in your own
office computers are playing such a central role ? ZH: still think
that even in our later projects, where the computer was already
involved, like for instance the T project, the 2-dimensional plan
drawings are still seminal. still think the plan is critical. The
computer shows what you might see from various selected
viewpoints. But think this doesn't give you enough transparency;
it's much too opaque. Also, think it is much nicer on the screen
than when it is printed on to paper, because the screen gives you
luminosity and the paper does not unless you do it through a
painting. Further think if you compare computer renderings with
rendering by hand must say that you can improvise much more
with hand drawing and painting. As you go along, there is another
layer of operation, while you're working on the drawing which is
somehow missing in the computer rendering. Some people still
have this raw talent. Some people can do drawings and plans (by
hand or by computer). They can manipulate them so much.
Somebody like Patrik can do plans like nobody else. Some
people have an incredible way of dealing with 3-dimensional
modelling in the computer; but they don't have the same value.
You can achieve certain things through technology. But you can't
abstract in the same way. When drawing a perspective by hand
you can decide that you want to show and edit out some other
things. t's not about wire-framing. Rather you can decide to focus
on the thing you want study at the time as you're doing the
56/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
drawing. t focuses you more on certain critical issues. However,
because 'm sitting there with 15 or 20 computer screens in front
of me and can see them all at the same time, it gives me yet
another repertoire. You can see at the same time the section, the
plan and several moving 3-D views, and in your mind you can
see them in yet a different way. So 'm not sure if it weakens or
strengthens your view. just think it's a different way. And we still
do physical models all the time, and still do the sketches. MM:
With your drawings you were often dealing with a certain notion of
distortion, which allowed certain conventions to be looked at
again. ZH: Yes, but what is interesting is that these ideas, at the
time we did these drawings, allowed us to see a project from
every possible and impossible perspective. May be you can do
that now with the kind of animated fly-over. You can. But the nice
thing about the elaborate drawing is that, because they take such
a long time to construct, they give you the time to add many
layers. With physical models it is the peculiar nature of the
material which affords design opportunities. Because am always
doing the contouring of the site in plexi we began to see a
similarity between liquid space and rock. Such discoveries can
be productive. By the sheer use of the model, almost by total
accident, you begin to look at things in different ways. So 'm
saying that the presentation began to inform the work and it gives
you ideas. n the case of the Tomigaya project in Tokyo we did
these every difficult drawings where we saw everything
simultaneously in 3-D. This coincided at the time with the
appearance of the plexi model, about 15 years ago. What does it
mean to see in a transparent way through a building? One of the
implications for us was the realisation that we do not have to have
the vertical circulation operate like an extrusion or vertical core
but rather allow the vertical path to shift from one level to the next.
This was discovered because we had the different plans overlaid
with each other, to construct a way to connect the levels in a new
way. think that in a way one can say that these very elaborate,
complicated drawings without saying that they are definitely
finished - did their job at the time. At the time could not present
the work in a normative way. The work could not be done just
through a simple set of plans and sections only. There was an
element of shock, really, which was to shock or challenge normal
conventions. But it's not enough to just, say, do anything formally
different. think that 20 years ago, when my formal repertoire has
developed over a number of years, in every project, the idea of
the project was first challenged, and then it was worked on
formally. We never set out explicitely with the intention of formal
discovery, through a drawing with the prediction that we would
discover something. All these drawings which were quite
elaborate needed a scenario. These drawings were developed
over a considerable length of time. Therefore would say, the
formal repertoire that emerged was not completely accidental,
perhaps a bit of accident at the beginning may be, prior to the
development of the project. But then those accidental discoveries
have been worked out through very precise drawings. Graphic
Space The predicament to start (and ultimately stay) with
drawings, i.e. with objects lacking the third dimension, has been
architecture's predicament ever since its inception as a discipline
distinguished from construction. As Robin Evans pointed out so
bluntly: architects do not build, they draw. Therefore the
translation from drawing to building is always problematic at
least under conditions of innovation. Architecture as a design
discipline that is distinguished from the physical act of building
constitutes itself on the basis of drawing. The discipline of
architecture emerges and separates from the craft of construction
through the differentiation of the drawing as tool and domain of
expertise outside (and in advance) of the material process of
construction.
The first effect of drawing (in ancient Greek architecture) seems
to be an increased capacity of standardization, precision and
regularized reproduction on a fairly high level of complexity and
across a rather wide territory. Roman architecture could benefit
from this but also shows hints towards the exploitation of the
capacity of invention that the medium of drawing affords. Without
drawing the typological proliferation of Roman architecture is
inconceivable. Since the Renaissance (via Manerism and
Baroque) this speculative moment of the drawing has been
gathering momentum. But only 1920s modernism really discovers
the full power and potential of the drawing as a highly economic
trial-error mechanism and an effortless plane of invention - in
fact inspired by the compositional liberation achieved by abstract
art in the 1st decade of the 20th Century. Drawing accelerates the
evolution of architecture. n this respect modern architecture
depends upon the revolution within the visual arts that finally
shook off the burden of representation. Modern architecture was
able to build upon the legacy of modern abstract art as the
conquest of a previously unimaginable realm of constructive
freedom. Hitherto art was understood as mimesis and the
reiteration of given sujets, i.e. re-presentation rather than
creation. Architecture was the re-presentation of a fixed set of
minutely determined typologies and complete tectonic systems.
Against this backdrop abstraction meant the possibility and
challenge of free creation. The canvas became the field of an
original construction. A monumental break-through with enormous
consequences for the whole of modern civilisation. Through
figures such as Malevitsch and vanguard groups such as the
DeStijl movement this exhilarating historical moment was
captured and exploited for the world of experimental architecture.
My thesis here is that the withdrawal into the two-dimensional
surface, i.e. the refusal to interpret everything immediately as a
spatial representation, is a condition for the full exploitation of the
medium of drawing as a medium on invention. Only on this basis,
as explicitly graphic manoevers, do the design manoevers gain
enough fluidity and freedom to play. They have to be set loose,
shake off the burden to always already mean something
determinate. Obviously, this stage of play and proliferation has to
be followed by a tenacious work of selection and interpretation. At
some stage architectural work leads to building. But not in every
project. Some architectural projects remain paper projects
which are translated later, by other projects. The discipline of
architecture has learned to allow for this. Major contributions to
the history of architecture have been made on this basis. Today
we see architectural experiments and manifestos proliferating
within the virtual space afforded by the computer. Although the
working interface (computer screen) as well as the various output
media (printing, video-projection) remain strictly two-dimensional,
the virtual three-dimensionality afforded by 3D modeling software
offers a new way of working that combines the intuitive
possibilities of physical model making with the precision and
immateriality of drawing. Further, as will discussed in more depth
below, certain 3D modeling and animation tools introduce whole
new series of primitives and manipulative operations which are
highly suggestive with respect to new architectural morphologies
and the conceptual build up of an architectural composition.
However, these new compositional techniques still share some of
the productive under-determination of the experimental drawing.
3D modeling can be equally abstract and ambiguous with respect
to the final translation into physical constructs. One of Hadid's
most audacious moves was to translate the dynamism and fluidity
of her calligraphic hand directly into equally fluid tectonic systems.
Another incredible move was the move from isometric and
perspective projection to literal distortions of space and from the
exploded axonometry to the literal explosion of space into
fragments, from the superimposition of various fisheye
perspectives to the literal bending and melt down of space etc.
All these moves initially appear rampantly illogical, akin to the
operations of the surrealists. The level of experimentation
reached a point where the distinction between form and content
within these drawings and paintings, was no longer fixed. The
question which features of the graphic manipulation pertain to the
mode of representation rather than to the object of representation
was left unanswered. Was the architecture itself twisting,
bending, fragmenting and interpenetrating or were theses
features just aspects of the multi-view-point fish-eye
perspectives? The answer is that over an extended process and a
long chain of projects the graphic features slowly transfigured into
realizable spatial features. The initial openness in this respect
might have led some commentators to suspect 'mere graphics
here. Within Zaha Hadid's studio this uncertainty was
productively engaged through a slow process of interpretation via
further drawings, projects and finally buildings. These strange
moves which seemed so alien and crazy - once taken seriously
within the context of developing an architectural project - turn out
to be powerful compositional options when faced with the task of
articulating complex programmes. The dynamic streams of
57/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
movements within a complex structure can now be made legible
as the most fluid regions within the structure; overall trapezoidal
distortions offer one more way to respond to non-orthogonal sites;
perspective distortions allow the orientation of elements to various
functional focal points etc. What once was an outrageous
violation of logic has become part of a strategically deployed
repertoire of nuanced spatial organisation and articulation.
Painterly techniques like colour modulations, gradients of dark to
light or pointillist techniques of dissolving objects into their
background assume significance in terms of the articulation of
new design concepts like morphing or new spatial concepts like
smooth thresholds, field-space and the space of
becoming(Eisenman). These concepts came to full fruition only
with the latest digital 3D modeling and animation software. Jeff
Kipnis deserves recognition here as someone who has theorised
such possibilities of graphic space. But it was Zaha Hadid who
went first and furthest in exploring this way of innovating
architecture without as well as with support of advanced
software. Zaha Hadid has been a persistent radical in the field of
architectural experimentation for the last 20 years. The
importance of her contribution to the culture of architecture lies
primarily in a series of momentous expansions - as influential as
radical - in the repertoire of spatial articulation available to
architects today. These conquests for the design resources of the
discipline include representational devices, graphic
manipulations, compositional manoeuvres, spatial concepts,
typological inventions and (beyond the supposed remit of the
discipline proper) the suggestion of new modes or patterns of
inhabitation. This list of contributions describes a causal chain
that significantly moves from the superficial to the substantial and
thus reverses the order of ends vs. means assumed in normative
models of rationality. The project starts as a shot into the dark,
spreading its trajectories, and assuming its target in midcourse.
The point of departure is the assumption of a new
representational media (x-ray layering, multi perspective
projection) which allow for certain graphic operations (multiple,
over-determining distortions) which then are made operative as
compositional transformations (fragmentation and deformation).
These techniques lead to a new concept of space (magnetic field
space, particle space, continuously distorted space) which
suggests a new orientation, navigation and inhabitation of space.
The inhabitant of such spaces no longer orients by means of
prominent figures, axis, edges and clearly bounded realms.
nstead the distribution of densities, directional bias, scalar grains
and gradient vectors of transformation constitute the new
ontology defining what it means to be somewhere. These
innovations have been (and continue to be) produced within an
international collective/competitive milieu of experimenters. The
totality of discoveries emerging within this milieux is immediately
appropriated - and rightly so - by each and every contributor.
This assessment of Hadid's oeuvre in terms of the expansion of
architectural methods and formal resources is independent of the
success and merit the various built and unbuilt projects with
respect to the particular tasks they are addressed to solve. Rather
than fulfilling only their immediate purpose as a state of the art
delivery of a particular use-value - e.g. a fire station or an
exhibition venue - the significance and ambition of these projects
is that they might be seen as manifestos of a new type of space.
As such their defining context is the historical progression of such
manifestos rather than their concrete spatial and institutional
location. The defining ancestry of e.g. the Vitra Firestation or the
Millennium Mind Zone includes the legacy of modern architecture
and abstract art as the conquest of a previously unimaginable
realm of constructive freedom. A key example for such a
manifesto building is Rietveld's House Schroeder. The value and
justification of this building does not only depend on the particular
suitability to the Schroeder's family interests. t operates as an
inspiring manifesto about new compositional possibilities which
much later are further extended in the Vitra Firestation - Hadid's
first built manifesto
to be understood within Zaha Hadid's oeuvre at large. Both these
manifesto buildings radically violate the typological and tectonic
norms of their time and dare to suggest compositional moves
hitherto unknown to the discipline of architecture. Hadid's oeuvre
in turn can be defined as an attempt to push ahead with "the
incomplete project of modernism". This is the most general
account Zaha Hadid has - on many occasions - given of her
work. The "incomplete project of modernism" as Hadid
understands it is more tilted towards Russian Constructivism
rather than German Functionalism giving greater prominence to
formal innovation than to scientific rationalisation. But this
opposition is one of degree rather than principle. For all shades of
the modern movement the historical intersection of abstract art,
industrial technology and the social revolutions succeeding in the
aftermath of the 1st world war have been the indispensable
ingredients. The introduction of categories such as "manifesto",
"the discipline of architecture " and "oeuvre" suspends but does
not cancel or deny concerns of utility. These categories are not
set absolute, autonomous and forever aloof from the functional
concerns of society. Rather the concrete uses and users are
bracketed for the sake of experimenting with new, potentially
generalisable principles of spatial organisation and articulation
with respect to emerging social demands and use patterns.
Functional optimality according to well corroborated criteria is
thus renunciated for the experimental advancement of social
practises of potentially higher functionality. The very nature of the
kind of iconoclastic research of "the avant garde" is that it thrusts
itself into the unknown and offers its challenging proposals to the
collective process of experimentation in a raw state rather than
waiting until the full cycle of experimentation, variation, selection,
optimisation and refinement is complete to present secure and
polished results. Despite the often precarious status of its partial
and preliminary results will argue that this radicalism constitutes
a form of research; an unorthodox research in as much as it's
methods include intuitive groping, randomisation and automatic
formal processes, i.e. the temporary relaxation and even
suspension of rational criteria. Post-modernism,
Deconstructivism, Folding Hegel grasped that the New in artistic
and intellectual history is always consuming its immediate
precursor as its defining opposite, maintaining and carrying it
along like a shadow. And this shadow carries a further shadow
etc., so that a cultural innovation can only be identified and
appreciated by those who are able to place it within the whole
historical evolution. Such appreciation therefore becomes a
relative, graded and ultimately infinite act. (And it is essential for
the culture of architecture to insist that a new architectural
position can not be reduced to an isolated form or gesture, but -
like a scientific idea - involves a whole network of historically
cumulative assumptions and ambitions.) This process, which
Hegel called sublation, is borne out by the fact that the definition
of the New, e.g. of deconstructivism or folding in architecture,
stretches across hundreds of magazine and book pages, broadly
retracing architectural history, referencing classic as well as
modernist tropes. But - and this is beyond the grasp of hegelian
dialectic - each time the sequence is traversed it is twisted and
retro-actively realigned by current contingencies and emerging
agendas. The history of (architectural) history reveals how
distinctions and relative newness are redistributed, emerge and
collapse under the force of current innovations and concerns, a
force that thus works to a large extend against the arrow of time
and this has bewitching consequences: A thought might no longer
speak the language of its own beginning. As Derrida puts it "... all
is not to be thought at one go ... " and "The necessity of passing
through that erased determination, the necessity of that trick of
writing is irreducible".(Derrida 1974) However easy and natural
the latest innovations (layerings, deformations) might seem to us
now, they did constitute radical violations of the implicit rules of
architectural order and for the mainstream audience this
oppositional character still dominates their perceived meaning.
The innovative architect has no choice but to reckon and work
with this dialectic determination by opposition or contrast. t will
take time for the differences internal to the new language to
emerge from the shadow of the stark difference of new vs old.
One argument here is that while the current avant-garde
language of architecture - with its incredible surge of creative
energy and power, fuelled by the ongoing T revolution, is
conceptually still working out the ramifications of a series of
dialectical reversals first launched by deconstructivism. Further
we should not forget that the follow on movement of folding too
was initially elaborated with pen and paper before it soaked up
the new digital possibilities. Folding was counterposed to
deconstructivism by a series of further reversals and oppositions
58/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
defined within the framework established by deconstructivism.
The rapid succession of these three movements within avant-
garde architecture (1970s to 1990s) created the conceptual and
formal resources from which the current digitally liberated work
took off in the second half of the nineties. Venturi's Complexity
and Contradiction, and Colin Rowe's Literal and Phenomenal
Transparency offered seminal conceptual innovations that can still
guide ambitious design agendas today.
Peter Eiseman's method of transformational series, whereby he
was working with series of successive over-determinations of an
initial platonic primitive, anticipates the method the CAD-systems
use in modeling 3D solids via the Boolean operations of addition,
subtraction and intersection. Eisenman's process is explicating
his complex compositions as the end result of an explicit and
retrievable series of such operations. This is mirrored in the ability
of the CAD-system to keep a retrievable record of the history of
object construction. The designer is enabled to retrace his steps
and intervene in the recorded history of design steps, and
depending upon the combinatoric dependencies between
operations, he can make alternative choices at any point in the
sequence of over-determination. Eisenman was also the first
inspired by Colin Rowes insightful analysis of cubism - to employ
the method of superposition of incongruent geometric
organizations. The resulting accidental clashes and interferences
were cherished as interesting new compositional effects. t was
Tschumi's contribution to foreground and radicalize this method
most effectively in his seminal project for the Parc de La Vilette in
Paris. (The competition drawings were much more striking and
influential than the built project which took many years to
complete.) This project stated the principle of layering in crystal
clear radicality. Multiple, divers spatial reference systems were
occupying the same site. However, at this stage in the
development of a new language of spatial complexity the layered
spatial reference systems point-grid, meandering line, system of
platonic figures - were indifferent to each other. The layers are
breaking through each other without registration of each other.
There is no mutual inflection, adaptation or any attempt at
integration. This was first achieved by Zaha Hadid who realized a
seamless coherence in her complex and deep pictorial textures.
Even her contribution to the competition for La Vilette already
displays the seeds of these characteristics. The interarticulation of
various spatial layers went hand in hand with the curvelinear
distortion and dynamization of the complex spatial arrangements.
t was Jeff Kipnis' and Greg Lynn's contribution to elaborate the
theoretical terms that allow us to focus our attention on these
most advanced formal characteristics. Concepts like smooth vs
striated space (taken from Deleuze & Guattari's Thousand
Plateaus), deformation as registration of programmatic and
contextual information, multiple affiliation, and intensive
coherence were offered as poignant descriptions and worthy
ambitions. Greg Lynn soon moved ahead with the strategic
deployment of brand new animation software tools to explore
effective design techniques that could help to deliver the spatial
qualities described in those concepts: meta-balls (=blobs), nurb
meshes, inverses kinematic skeletons etc. Zaha Hadid
Architects was quick to upgrade their digital toolkit to continue
and intensify their exploration of dynamic and organically
integrated complexity. n fact, even before these new software
systems were brought in Zaha Hadid Architects were already
using the Xerox machine to partly mechanise some of the most
pertinent design moves: smearing drawings across the
xeroxmachine following a curved or s-curved trajectory produced
the desired dynamisation and smoothing effects. While it is
important to reveal the genealogy of the formal and conceptual
apparatus of the current architectural avant-garde (which includes
Hadid as one of its practitioners and precursors), such a
genealogy is not written in a spirit that wants to reduce what is
going on now to what has been, or foreclose the current and
future potential for developing the repertoire in new directions.
That can not be the purpose of Digital Hadid. We nearly reached
the point in our argument where we have to pose the question
given this genealogy - what is fundamentally new now and what
points towards further radical mutations of architecture in terms of
its methods, concepts and forms. The best way to approach this
question might be via a review of the most recent series of
projects coming from Zaha Hadid Architects. However, before we
do this we should make yet another short excursion into the
methods and mechanisms of invention that have been prevalent
in Hadid's previous work: Mechanisms of invention.
Re- combination: Collage and Hybridisation
A key mechanism that has to be mentioned here is the dialectic of
re-combination and hybridisation. The important reminder here is
that the result of combination is rarely just a predictable
compromise. Synenergies might be harnessed: Unpredictable
operational effects might emerge and, on the side of meaning,
affects are engendered as the whole taxonomy of differences is
forced into an unpredictable realignment. The new combination
re-contextualises and reinterprets its ingredients as well as its
surroundings. Currently it is the various morphing tools that afford
the most sophisticated form of formal hybridization resulting in
hybrids that appear as seamless wholes, leaving no trace of any
conflicting figures in their origin. Kolatan & Macdonald focused
attention on this form of hybridization, introducing the suggestive
term chimera to denote the resultant effect.
Abstraction
Abstraction implies the avoidance of familiar, ready-made
typologies. nstead of taking for granted things like houses,
rooms, windows, roofs etc. Hadid reconstitutes the functions of
territorialisation, enclosure and interfacing etc. by means of
boundaries, fields, planes, volumes, cuts, ribbons etc. The
creative freedom of this approach is due to the open-endedness
of the compositional configurations as well as the open-
endedness of the list of abstract entities that enter into the
composition. To maintain the liberating spirit of abstraction in the
final building a defamiliarising, "minimalist" detailing is preventing
that volumes immediately denote rooms and cuts turn into
windows again. This minimalism withdraws the familiar items that
otherwise would allow the inhabitants to fall into habitual patterns
of behavior. nstead they confronted with an abstract composition
that needs to be discovered and made sense of in a new way.
nstead of points, lines, and planes we now work with control
points, splines, nurb surfaces, and force-fields etc. Analogies
Analogies are fantastic engines of invention with respect to
organisational diagrammes, formal languages and tectonic
systems. They have nothing to do with allegory or semantics in
general. Hadid's preferred source of analogical transference is the
inexhaustible realm of landscape formations: forests, canyons,
river deltas, dunes, glaciers/moraines, faulted geological strata,
lava flows etc. Beyond such specific formations abstract formal
characteristics of landscape in general are brought into the ambit
of architectural articulation. The notion of an artificial landscape
has been a pervasive working hypothesis within Hadid's oeuvre
from the Hong Kong Peak onwards. Artificial landscapes are
coherent spatial systems. They reject platonic exactitude but they
are not just any "freeform". They have their peculiar lawfulness.
They operate via gradients rather than hard edge delineation.
They proliferate infinite variations rather than operating via the
repetition of discrete types. They are indeterminate and leave
room for active interpretation on the part of the inhabitants.
Ultimately anything could serve as analogical inspiration. Often
such analogies become to be considered as the concept of the
project: The Cardiff Opera House as an inverted necklace, the
Copenhagen Concert Hall as a block of terrazzo, the Victoria and
Albert Museum extension as 3D TV, i.e. a three-dimensional
pixelation etc. Most recently Zaha Hadid Architects are exploring
the possibility to exploit analogies with organic systems.
Surrealist mechanisms
Hadid's audacious move to translate the dynamism and fluidity of
her calligraphic hand directly into equally fluid tectonic systems,
her incredible move from isometric and perspective projection to
literal distortions of space, from the exploded axonometry to the
literal explosion of space into fragments, from the superimposition
of various fisheye perspectives to the literal bending and melt
down of space etc. - all these moves resemble the illogical
operations of the surrealists. The initially "mindless" sketching of
graphic textures (see Vitra sketches) in endless iterations
operates like an "abstract machine" proliferating difference to
select from. Once a strange texture or figure is selected and
59/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
confronted with a programmatic agenda a peculiar form-content
dialectic is engendered. An active figure-reading mind will find the
desired conditions but equally new desires and functions are
inspired by the encounter with the strange configuration. The
radically irrational and arbitrary detour ends up hitting a target.
This "miracle" can be explained by recognising that all
functionality is relative, that all well articulated organisms have
once been monstrous aberrations and might later seem crude
and deficient - relative to other "higher" and more "beautiful"
organisations. Before we dismiss arbitrary formalisms we need to
realise that all our time-tested typologies themselves adhere
dogmatically to the arbitrary formalism of orthogonality and
platonic simplicity derived from the constraints of measuring,
making and stabilising structures handed down to us from a
rather primitive stage of our civilisation. To remain locked in within
these figures at this time and age would be more than arbitrary.
The only way out is radical proliferation and testing of other
options. All points of departure are equally arbitrary until tested
against presumed criteria. There is no absolute optimality. Every
measure starts with a finite array of arbitrary options to compare,
select from, adapt and thus working away from absolute
arbitrariness. t is significant in this respect that the logic of
evolutionary innovation starts with mutation: mutation, selection
and reproduction. Hadid has been a vital engine of mutation with
respect to the culture of architecture.
. Current work towards a new digitally based architectural
language
The work presented and discussed here is a selection of projects
of the last five years which demonstrate the increasing impact of
the new 3D modeling and animation software on the development
of a new language for architecture. Starting with the seminal
winning competition for the talien Contemporary Art Centre in
Rome now on site and ending with the design for a new
Guggenheim museum in Taichung, Taiwan. This string of projects
is a quest for an increasingly organic approach to the articulation
of architectural space and form. The projects selected are those
projects within Zaha Hadid Architects which strongly manifest this
ambition towards a new organic language. The author of this book
is also the co-designer of the string of projects featured here.
Organic nterarticulation
The analogy of building and organism is as old as the self-
conscious discipline of architecture itself. Traditionally the analogy
focused on key ordering principles like symmetry and proportion.
These principles were seen as integrating the various parts into a
whole by means of setting those parts into definite relations. n
this conception the organism is approximating an ideal type which
implies strict rules of arrangement and proportion for all parts. t
also assumes a state of completeness and perfection. The
organism is a closed form: nothing can be added or substracted.
The Palladian Villa is perhaps the best example in of this idea of
the organism as ideal of perfect order.
Our projects remain incomplete compositions, more akin to the
Deleuzian notion of assemblage than to the classical conception
of the organism. Our concept of organic integration does not rely
on such fixed ideal types. Neither does it presuppose any
proportional system, nor does it privilege symmetry. nstead
integration is achieved via various modes of spatial interlocking,
by formulating soft transitions at the boundaries between parts
and by means of morphological affiliation. The parts or
subsystems that are brought together to form a larger organic
whole do not remain pure and indifferent to each other, but are
mutually adapting to each other. The extreme example of organic
fusion is perhaps our design for the lounging environment ce-
storm. Here a series of previously discreet elements are
interarticulated by means of morphing them into a larger
encompassing structure. n this fashion everything becomes
literally continuous a seamless form that is modulated and
transformed to join the exact sectional profile of the embedded
furniture pieces or to establish something akin to key to key-hole
relations.
Another example is our design for a new Guggenheim Museum in
Taichung. Here the two gallery wings are mediated by letting both
meld into the central communication space which itself is made
continuous with the surrounding park-scape. All transitions are
made smooth. Changes in surface material never coincide
(reinforce) changes in geometry. There are no add-on parts that
could easily be separated out of the overall composition. The
ramps and paths are cuts and folds molded into the ground-
surface as well as into the envelope of the building. The lattice of
the roof bridging across the central public space between the two
gallery wings is not a neutral grid but an irregular triangulation
that is adapted to the wedge-shaped gap between the two wings.
Those structural beams are formally affiliated to the pedestrian
bridges that cross this canyon-space below. The glass-mullions of
the roof glazing are continuing this game of triangulation on a
smaller scale. The openings within the building envelope are not
punched out as arbitrary shapes. nstead the surface is spliced
along its lines of least curvature to create louvered openings akin
to gills that are respecting the integrity of the surface.
n the case of the project for a new Music Centre for the BBC in
London the openings are created like worm-holes by means of
turning the surface inside out so that the most inner surface of the
very deep wall fuses with the most outer envelope.
n the case of the Florence Train station the openings are as
three-dimensional and curvelinear as the overall body of the
building itself - and not the imposition of plantonic figures on an
otherwise organic form.
These various treatments of the problem of articulating openings
within an envelope are examples of our concept of organic
interarticulation. n each case the attempt is made to avoid an
arbitrary interference or interruption of the envelope. nstead the
quest is to integrate the openings into the structural and tectonic
system of the envelope. n a similar way all compositions are
seen as tasks for creative organic interarticulation. A refined
organic architecture resists easy decomposition a measure of
its complexity. Centre for Contemporary Art, Rome The Centre
for Contemporary Arts addresses the question of its urban context
not by means of stylistic pastiche but by an assimilation in terms
of urban geometry. The project appears like an 'urban graft', a
second skin to the site. The initial design move was to flood the
site with streams of parallel walls. Those walls variously converge
and dissect, thus generating a pattern of interior and exterior
spaces. The next step was to differentiate those walls into those
bounding major linear spaces and those inbetween which were
lifted to become ribs structuring the roofs and ceilings of the major
spaces.
The result offers a quasi-urban field, a ,world to dive into rather
than a building as signature object.The Campus is organised and
navigated on the basis of directional drifts and the distribution of
densities rather than key points. This is indicative of the character
of the Centre as a whole: porous, immersive, a field space. An
inferred mass is subverted by vectors of circulation. The external
as well as internal circulation follows the overall drift of the
geometry. Vertical and oblique circulation elements are located at
areas of confluence, interference and turbulence.
The premise of the architectural design promotes a disinheriting
of the 'object' orientated gallery space. nstead, the notion of a
'drift' takes on an embodied form. The drifting emerges, therefore,
as both architectural motif, and also as a way to navigate
experientially through the museum. The 'signature' aspect of an
institution of this calibre is sublimated into a more pliable and
porous organism that promotes several forms of identification at
once.
n architectural terms, this is most virulently executed by the
figure of the 'wall'. Against the traditional coding of the 'wall' in the
museum as the privileged and immutable vertical armature for the
display of paintings, or delineating discrete spaces to construct
'order' and linear 'narrative', we propose a critique of it through its
emancipation The 'wall' becomes the versatile engine for the
staging of exhibition effects. n its various guises - solid wall,
projection screen, canvas, window to the city - the exhibition wall
is the primary space-making device. By running extensively
across the site, cursively and gesturally, the lines traverse inside
and out. Urban space is coincidental with gallery space,
exchanging pavilion and court in a continuous oscillation under
the same operation. And further deviations from the Classical
composition of the wall emerge as incidents where the walls
become floor, or twist to become ceiling, or are voided to become
60/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
a large window looking out. By constantly changing dimension
and geometry, they adapt themselves to whatever curatorial role
is needed. .By setting within the gallery spaces a series of
potential partitions that hang from the ceiling ribs, a versatile
exhibition system is created. Organisational and spatial invention
are thus dealt with simultaneously amidst a rhythm found in the
echo of the walls to the structural ribs in the ceiling that also filter
the light in varying intensities.
t is important to note that the whole project was initially
composed of 2D splines and the crucially lifted into 3D (in
3dsmax) where the integration between the primary levels was
elaborated by means of voids, terracing galleries and ramps.
Art Centre, Graz The determining factor for the proposal was the
desire to project and cantilever the building high over the street
towards the riverbank. These considerations lead to the concept
of a large canopy (raised 12m over the ground) that covers a tall
volume of flexible space and acts as a large public room,
transparent and inviting. Arising from a forest of mushrooms the
canopy has a depth (height) varying between 3 to 6 metres. The
underside is perhaps the stongest feature where the various
structural stems bleed into the surface of the cantilevering
volume. The composition was build up from contour lines and has
been developed by a game of symmetry and deformation
creating figures of distorted symmetry. ts morphology is on the
one hand derived from the urban context- as it was projecting
forward the profile of existing fabric on the back of the site and
on the other it has developed from the structural logic of the
tapering mushroom columns. The art centre is entered below the
strongest cantilever. The main vertical circulation through the
building moves through the hollow stem of the large mushroom.
The volume below the canopy is a clear, open spatial expanse,
which offers the lobby, commercial spaces and an exhibition area
on the ground floor as well as the flexible exhibition area on a flat
level above ground. n contrast the space within the canopy is
enclosed, even compressed and highly articulated. t provides for
those spaces, which require intimacy, acoustic enclosure and
darkness such as lectures and performances, the media centre
and the photography forum. The structure comprises inverted
trumpet forms and cores organised to act as primary inhabited
vertical supports. These forms are of reinforced concrete
construction with doubly curved surfaces to prevent deformation.
The effect of splaying the fans out at the top allows large hoop
tensions at the upper levels of the form giving way to hop
compression at the bottom. The splays also assist in reducing the
spans of the horizontal plates. The upper floors are
interconnected with walls to allow the formation of a three
dimensional vierendeel structure with the horizontal plates
acting as flanges. Cantilevers over the existing building and road
are then made possible. The rigid horizontal form merges into the
vertical fans with a seamless junction transferring vertical loads
down to the ground. Quebec National Library, Montreal The
overall massing proposed fills the urban block while leaving a well
sized urban plaza on the corner. The structuring of this mass
emphasizes the pattern of public circulation through and within
the building. A deep visual penetration of this mass is offered by
means of deep cuts and crevices articulating access points as
well as internal movements revealing the manifold choreography
of public events within the thick skin of the building.
The two bulk heads of the site are articulated as public entrance
rooms, piercing deep into the building.
The main architectural concept is based on the articulation of a
continuous navigation space that sequentially unfolds the various
bodies of human knowledge contained in the different collections
of the library. This navigation space follows the branching logic of
successive disciplinary differentiation - the tree of knowledge. The
navigation space is architecturally expressed as the veins eroding
the solid mass of the building. The actual circulation through the
buiding traces these voids and crevices allowing for diagonal
vistas and good orientation across levels.
E is withstanding the erosion are the collection spaces filled with
books and the reading rooms. The overall formation of this mass
is undercut like an overhangig cliff exposed to view at the main
entrance. This way a main public void is created at the front of the
buiding offering the visitor revealing glimpses of the successive
strata of the library. The view can follow the branching veins
upwards before choosing his or her trajectory to the collections
and reading rooms. The major collections are shaped like
terrassed valleys lined with books on the perimeter and the
reading areas in the middle. The terrassing offers differentiation
as well as overall orientation. The reading rooms at the top of the
building are taking advantage of the possibility of filtered daylight
from above. The predominant interior material here is wood
providing intimacy and quietude. Atmosherically these rooms are
conceived in analogy with the canopy level of trees. The overall
spatial organisation is treated as a threedimensional information
design utilizing the ramifying pattern of the classification tree as
circulation diagram. The system of paths thus successively
bifurcates according to the branches of human knowledge. This is
also the path from the general to the particular. The more general
information like the news library and encyclopedias are followed
by the major division of human knowledge into the humanities
and arts on the one hand and the hard sciences on the other
hand. Each has its own root and trunk on the groundfloor and
ramifies upwards into the building like two intertwining trees. The
humanities bifurcate into the arts (incl. music and litterature) on
the one hand and history and the social sciences on the other
hand. The hard sciences branch into natural science vs applied
science or technology. The natural scieces are further
differentiated into life sciences vs physics ect. But this linear
system of ramification is only the most basic backbone and point
of departure for a whole series of overlaps, cross-overs and
lateral connections - e.g. economics is an important field of
conversion and intersection between the humanities and hard
sciences. The system becomes a network of multiple path which
allows for explorative browsing while the primary distinctions give
an orienting armature to the increasingly complex labrinth. The
structure should underline the organisational logic of the library
and reinforce the oblique trajectories through the building.
Therefore we suggest to utilize the necessary division walls as
primary structural elements. These primary elements also orient
the flows through the building. The structure is primarily
constituted from interlocking structural walls. These walls do not
need to line up vertically but rather act as transfer beams, criss
cross and brace each other forming a stiff three-dimensional
lattice. This allows for the major spans which give the building its
sense of generosity. The structural walls are selectively
constructed in concrete or steel as approriate. Concrete
dominates in the lower part of the building while steel is
introduced as cantelivering increases towards the top. There is a
transition from the heavy base to a lighter top, gaining the benefit
of strength to weight ratio offered by steel construction. The top
floor is very light in atmosphere. Here the larger cantelivers
project across the crevices and the roof plane should be porous
to allow natural light to filter through. One North Masterplan,
Singapore The possibility of an urban architecture that exploits
the spatial repertoire and morphology of natural landscape
formations has been a consistent theme within the creative career
of Zaha Hadid Architects for nearly 20 years. ndeed our first
moment of international recognition was already informed by a
productive analogy with landscape conditions, here with
geological form: The wining competition entry for the Hong Kong
Peak in 1982. Our proposal for the Vista masterplan for the first
time applies the concept of artificial landscape formation to the
articulation of a whole urban quarter. The advantages of such a
bold move are striking: Our scheme offers an original urban
skyline and identifiable panorama visible from without as well as
from the park in the heart of the new urban quarter. The rich
diversity of squares and alleys engenders a unique sense of
place within the various micro-environments. The concept of the
gently undulating, dune-like urban mega-form gives a sense of
spatial coherence that has become rare in the modern metropolis.
The regulation of the building heights is normal planning
procedure and easily instituted. The powerful aesthetic potential
that lies dormant in this ordinary planning tool has never been
exploited before. An unusual degree of aesthetic cohesion and
unity is achieved by allowing the roof surfaces to join in the
creation of softly modulated surface. At the same time a huge
variety of built volumes tall, low, wide, small - is brought under
the spell of two unifying forces: the soft grid and the undulating
roofscape. The softly swaying pattern of lines that defines the
streets, paths as well as the built fabric allows the mediation and
61/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
integration of the various heterogenous urban grids of the
adjacent areas. The curvelinear pattern is able to absorb and
harmonize all the divergent contextual orientations. t is also a
machine to produce a huge diversity of building footprints without
giving up on alignment from building to building. The
morphological system allows for infinite variation within the
bounds of a strong formal coherence and lawfulness. This is the
great advantage of working with a natural geometry rather than
with a strict platonic geometry. The form is free and therefore
malleable at any stage of its development while platonic figures
(squares, circles, strict axes etc.) are too exacting and therefore
vulnerable to corruption and degradation by later adaptations.
The morphology is no less lawful and cohesive than the platonic
system; but it is much more pliant and resilient, always able to
absorb adaptations into its characterisic and recognisable form
always maintaining its coherence and character. The idea of an
artificial landscape formation occurs not only on the level of the
overall urban form. Not only the mega-form but also some of the
micro-environments could benefit from the landscape analogy. n
particular we are thinking about the hub areas. One of the
possibilities of developing the hub areas could be to introduce a
raised plaza level about 5 meter above the street level. These
raised grounds will be connected to the ground proper through
the interiors of the buildings as well as by means of broad
staircaises and shallow ramps on the exterior.Within the ouvre of
Zaha Hadid Architects there is a long series of urban schemes
which explore various artificial landscapes as a means to sculpt
public space and to impregnate it with public programme. These
schemes manipulate and multiply the ground surface by means of
sloping, warping, peeling or terracing the ground. mportant
advantages may be achieved by such manipulation:The visual
orientation within the public realm is enhanced by means of tilting
the plane into view and allowing for vistas overlooking the scene
from above.By means of a gentle differentiation of slopes, ridges,
terraces etc. the ground plane can be used to choreograph and
channel movements across the plane in an unobtrusive and
suggestive manner. The landscaped surface is rich with latent
places. Articulations like shallow valleys or hills might give a
foothold to gatherings and become receptacles for outdoor events
without otherwise predetermining or obstructing the field.
BMW Plant - Central Building, Leipzig The Central Building is the
active nerve- centre or brain of the whole factory complex. All
threads of the building's activities gather together and branch out
again from here.
This planning strategy applies to the cycles and trajectories of
people - workers (arriving in the morning and returning for lunch)
and visitors - as well as for the cycle and progress of the
production line which traverses this central point - departing and
returning again. This dynamic focal point of the enterprise is made
visually evident in the proposed dynamic spatial system that
encompasses the whole northern front of the factory and
articulates the central building as the point of confluence and
culmination of the various converging flows. t seems as if the
whole expanse of this side of the factory is oriented and animated
by a force field emanating from the central building. All movement
converging on the site is funneled through this compression
chamber squeezed between the three main segments of
production: Body in White, Paint Shop and Assembly. The primary
organising strategy is the scissor-section that connects
groundfloor and first floor into a continuous field. Two sequences
of terraced plates - like giant staircases step up from north to
south and from south to north. One commences close to the
public lobby passing by/overlooking the forum to reach the first
floor in the middle of the building. The other cascade starts with
the cafeteria at the south end moving up to meet the first cascade
then moving all the way up to the space projecting over the
entrance. The two cascading sequences capture a long
connective void between them. At the bottom of this void is the
auditing area as a central focus of everybody's attention. Above
the void the half-finished cars are moving along their tracks
between the various surrounding production units open to view.
The cascading floor plates are large enough to allow for flexible
occupation patterns. The advantage lies in the articulation of
recognisable domains within an overall field. Also the global field
is opened up to visual communication much more than would be
possible on a single flat floorplate. The close integration of all
workers is facilitated by the overall transparency of the internal
organisation. The mixing of functions avoids the traditional
segregation into status groups that is no longer conducive for a
modern workplace. A whole series of engineering and
administrative functions is located within the trajectory of the
manual workforce coming in to work or moving in and out of their
lunch break. White collar functions are located both on ground
and first floor. Equally some of the Blue Collar spaces (lockers
and social spaces) are located on the first floor. This way the
establishment of exclusive domain is prevented. The potential
problem of placing a large car- park in front of the building had to
be turned into an integral architectural feature that carries the
scheme by turning it into a dynamic spectacle in its own right. The
inherent dynamism of vehicle movement and the 'lively' field of
the car bodies is revealed by giving the arrangement of parking
lots a twist that lets the whole field move, colour and sparkle. The
swooping trajectories across the field culminate within the
building. The architecture we are developing is no longer the
architecture of repetition and pre- conceived forms. Rather, it is
an organic architecture that is able to adapt and mould itself to
the peculiarities of the terrain, to orient itself to the various
directions of access and to synthesise a complex series of
concerns into a seamless and integrated whole. This is made
possible by the curvilinear morphology that can incorporate a
multitude of forms and directions without fragmentation. New
numerically controlled manufacturing techniques make this quasi-
natural process of formal variation possible and affordable. The
result is aiming to come closer to the compelling beauty of living
organisms. ce-storm, Lounging Environment
ce-storm is an installation that was conceived and created for the
Museum of Applied Arts (MAK) in Vienna. t is a built manifesto
towards the potential for a new domestic language of architecture,
driven by the new digital design and manufacturing capabilities.
The installation is suggestive of new types of living/lounging
environments. n this respect it is a latent rather than manifest
environment. Neither familiar typologies nor any codes of conduct
are yet associated with its morphology.
The installation collects and fuses a series of previously designed
furniture elements and installations: Glacier, Moraine, Stalagtite,
Stalagmite, ce-berg, Z-Play and Domestic Wave including ce-
flow. These diverse elements are drawn into a dynamic vortex. n
addition, two new hard sofas have been designed to be integrated
into the installation. The semi-abstract, molded surface might be
read as an apartment that has been carved from a single
continuous mass. The rhythym of folds, niches, recesses and
protrusions follows a willful formal logic. This formal dynamic has
been triggert by a series of semi-functional insertions which hint
towards the potential for sofas, day-bed, desk, tables etc. The
design language explored here emphasizes complex
curvelinearity, seamlessness and the smooth transition between
otherwise disparate elements. This formal integration of divers
forms has been achieved by the technique of morphing. Via this
morphing operation the preexisting furniture pieces are
embedded within the overall fluid mass of the ensemble and
become integrated organs of the overall organism. Those
elements which are not contiguous with the overall figure - the Z-
Play pieces - are nevertheless morphologically affiliated and
appear like loose fragments that drift around the scene at
random. The installation asks the visitors to occupy the structure
and to explore for themselves this new open aesthetic which
invites us to reinvent ourselves in terms of posture, demeanor
and life-style. Z-Scape, Lounging Furniture Z-scape is a
compact ensemble of lounging furnitures for public and private
living rooms. The formal concept is derived from dynamic
landscape formations like glaciers and erosions. The different
pieces are constituted as fragments determined by the overall
mass and its diagonal veins. Along these veins the block splits
offering large splinters for further erosive sculpting. Four pieces
emerged so far: Stalactite, stalagmite, glacier, moraine. Others
are yet to be unearthed. The pieces thus derived are then further
shaped - if rather loosely - by typological, functional and
ergonomic considerations. But these further determinations
remain secondary and precariously dependent on the overriding
formal language. We do not want to offer optimized and thus
62/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
predetermined use-patterns. A margin of strangeness and
indeterminancy is desired. Stimulation emerges between
abstraction and metaphor.
BBC Music Centre and Offices, London
The design task is the creation of a powerful landmark building
acting as iconic gateway into the BBC White City Campus. The
key challenge we face as designers in this respect is the fact that
this landmark is to be composed of two separate components
with rather different functions: The BBC Music Centre on the one
side and an office building - that might or might not be occupied
by the BBC itself - on the other side. A further difficulty is that the
two components may not be constructed at the same time.
Therefore independent successive construction needs to be
possible.
Given that the office component is the larger of the two
components we think that it needs to participate in the creation of
the landmark. We feel that the music centre alone could not fulfil
this role against the backdrop of the massive buildings on site.
Therefore we are trying to create a monumental composition
whereby the office building frames the music centre enhancing it
like a gem in its setting. The office tower projects one floor out
over the volume of the music centre. This floor extends further as
a large cantilevering canopy. The result is a composition that
serves as a single iconic figure. The large canopy flying over the
music centre stretches across the internal street to cover the
stage of the outdoor performance space. This canopy also
articulates a soft threshold between urban corner and campus.
The concept for the music centre is the idea of nesting volumes,
and an onion-like layering of skins. The overall volume of the
music centre contains 4 volumes of similar shape but different
size: Studio 1 (for the BBC Symphony Orchestra and BBC
Symphony Chorus), Studio 2 (for the BBC Concert Orchestra and
the BBC Singers), the cinema and the rehearsal room. Each of
these volumes in turn has an inner rectilinear volume and an
outer, more curve-linear shell. The space between inner and outer
shell is utilised by the belts of ancillary spaces. Deep openings
cut through these shells to allow for natural light and views to
penetrate the studio spaces. The arrangement of the studio
spaces allows for a clear and convenient separation of the public
access from the internal circulation of musicians and technicians
while maintaining an overall didactic transparency of the spatial
composition. The Foyer space wraps the studio volumes and
provides reception, caf and exhibition. The tall lobby offers a
dramatic view onto the composition of volumes. The cinema-
volume projects into this space from above Studio 2. A mezzanine
level stretches between the volumes affording access to the
balcony level of Studio 1. The office building is a tower with
central access and service core. The footprint of the tower is
1,400 sqm. On level 5 the floorplate projects out to create a larger
floorplate more than double the size. On level 6 the floorplate
projects out further and bridges over the music centre. Here we
are able to offer a fantastic floorplate of over 6000 sqm. The
space is brightly lit by sky-lights and lightwells and affords views
down to the urban plaza and across West London. The oblique
openings allow glimpses into the studio spaces.
Fine Arts Centre, University of Connecticut
The building we are proposing is a sensation that speaks to all
the senses.
While all the functionally dedicated spaces required by the brief
are laid out and organised in a strictly functional and economic
manner, we are using all the lobby and circulation spaces as a
fluid mass that flows around and between the function spaces like
a stream of lava. The exterior envelope follows the same curve-
linear logic, suggestive of the urban, exterior flows that surround
and animate the building within its context. t is especially the
large performance spaces which define the main body of the
building by being wrapped by this fluid film or skin. The small
existing theatre is encircled by the fluid forms of the new building
like a rock placed into a stream. n this fashion an obstacle has
been turned into an architectural event. The expressive-organic
language of architecture gives this new Fine Art Center an
unmistakable character. However, this language is neither
arbitrary nor idiosyncratic. Rather it represents the fulfilment of a
longstanding dream of architecture to gain the fluidity, pliancy and
adaptability of natural systems. The aesthetic proposed here
portends the future in as much as this new language of
architecture projects the full potential of the new, state of the art
digital design and manufacturing capabilities.
Fast Train Station, Florence
The key challenges of the architectural project is to create an
urban event space and communication hub which is initiated by a
train that is buried 25m under the ground. The task is to give
expression to this hidden life-line and to bring this underground
event to the urban surface.
This primary task is the point of departure for our concept: To split
the ground and reveal the deep interior of the station. The slit is
articulated as a tectonic fault-line along which one side lifts up
while the other side bulges slightly under the pressure from
below. This tectonic shift is our way of mediating the existing bank
of elevated railway lines on the eastern boundary of the site with
the lower urban level on the western side (ex Macelli area).
Between the two sides a deep canyon opens up, nearly along the
full length of the station, connecting the two main entrances. The
play with large tectonic gestures also allows for the smooth and
natural mediation of the considerable level differences between
the northern and southern entrance to the site. The device of the
fault-line/canyon means that all overground structures naturally
lead down-wards into the heart of the station, unfolding a
dramatic promenade architecturale. At the same time the
canyon offers a spectacular point of arrival for those who arrive in
Florence by the new train. Direct glimpses of the sky are offered
right as the passenger steps off the train. Also: n both directions
the canyon offers an infallible means of orientation in itself not a
trivial matter in a station that measures 450 meter. The two sides
of the canyon lean inwards and - at precise moments - connect.
This way no further structure is required to support this grand
space. The digital Design process (account by Maurizio Meossi)
n other words, it is possible to describe the entire creative
process of the project describing the evolution of the digital model
and the techniques used for its realization. Differently to what was
happening in other project developed by the office in the same
period, the digital model had in fact an its own development in the
formal definition of the Station, almost autonomously from its
programmatic definition; therefore the digital model has not been
merely a three-dimensional tool to verify bi-dimensional
intuitions, but it has been the main instrument of formal
exploration. This relative independence made possible to enact a
dialectical relationship of continuous input and output between the
digital model on one side and plans-sections (bi-dimensional
drawings, traditional media of the architectural representation)
on the other; this reciprocal interaction has gone on till the layout
of the final drawings, allowing to push the formal research till the
very last minute. From a strictly technical point of view the
modelling has been an application of the cross-sections\surface
technique, a method that (through the subsequent application of
two 3dsMax commands), allows to define a complex surface
(mesh) starting with at least two curves (splines) that characterize
its main geometry. The software generates the surface through a
process of interpolation, leaving the geometrical control on the
starting curves, whose vertices become sort of grips through
which it is possible to sculpt and shape the resulting surface.
This peculiar property of the solid modelling tools of the new
generation (3dsMax as well as Maya or Rhyno) is due to two
basic features: first they operate in a parametric way, meaning
that it is possible to control each single operation through numeric
values (corresponding for example to coordinates of points
movements in space, or height of extrusion of a shape, or
function degree used by the geometric interpolation algorithm,
etc.) constantly modifiable; second, the software maintains an
historical memory of the operations made on each single object,
so that it is possible to go back and modify the primitive
geometrical entity (in our case the generative curves) in each
moment of the process. Trying to resume the entire process in its
key steps we have: 1- starting curves definition, in this case
horizontal slices of the canyon (image 1), traced on the basis of
a preliminary study with physical models; the sequential
application of the commands cross-sections and surface
generates the complex surface that represents the first digital
study model (images 2-3); 2- digital manipulation of the
63/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
obtained surface: acting on the vertices of the generative curves it
is possible to control accurately the overall geometry,
emphasizing the formal aspect of the research ( images 4-5 ); 3-
cross sections (in our case at least 10) are extracted from the
digital model; the sections become the basis for the structural and
programmatic development, with consequent modifications in the
horizontal sections (that we can now start to call proto-plans); 4-
an updated model is built according to the new horizontal
sections, giving the start to a reiterative process of the points from
2 to 4, with the aim to obtain simultaneously functional
optimisation and satisfying formal results. Experimentation on the
digital model has been of great importance also for the materic
study of the Station wrapping: passages from opaque to
transparent surfaces are made with carving operations on the
same complex surface; change of material does not mean
geometrical discontinuity (images 6-7). From representation
technique to active designing tool, able to modify the way we
think the architectural project: this is the main step represented by
the digital modelling. ( account by Maurizio Meossi)
Fast Train Station, Naples
The key challenge of the architectural project is to create a well
organized transport interchange that can simultaneously serve as
a new landmark that announces the approach to Naples a new
gateway to the city. This is the first reason why we chose to
conceive the new station as a bridge above the tracks.
The task is to give expression to the imposition of a new through-
station that can also act as the nucleus of a new business park
that will link the various surrounding towns. This is the second
reason why we conceived the station as a bridge that provides an
urbanized public link across the tracks. n fact the station is to be
approached from two sides. There is no justification in privileging
one of these two sides. Therefore the station might have two
entrances one of either side of the tracks. By implication the
central functions and the main visible body of the station should
ideally be placed in the center above the tracks, thus equally
addressing both sides. This is the third and perhaps most
compelling reason why we think that the station should be
designed as bridge. The architectural language proposed is
geared towards the articulation of movement and allows for the
smooth integration of all the flows and traffic lines that intersect in
this new transport interchange. t ties in naturally with the bundle
of railway lines, and access roads which characterize this artificial
terrain. This open and dynamic quality of the architectural figure is
pursuit further within the interior of the building where the
trajectrories of the travellers determines the geometry of the
space. The facilitation of obvious and easy access, as well as the
smooth guidance of all movements within, is the fundamental
ethos of our design.
The Temporary Guggenheim, Tokyo
Odasiba sland seems a perfect place to establish a site of
cultural experimentation. Here emerges a very dynamic urban
space, built upon synthetic land and animated by the
entrepreneurial spirit of rapid development. n this context the 10
year intervention of the temporary Guggenheim will be an instant
cultural hotspot and a catalyst for related activities.
With respect to the architectural iconography the structure should
signify the creative employment of state of the art science and
technology. As a visitor experience the object has to excite
curiosity and desire. A considerable degree of strangeness is
indispensable. The project - like any true object of desire - will at
first appear mysterious, an unknown territory waiting to be
discovered and explored. n line with the temporary nature of the
structure we are opting for a light weight envelope. A strong
signature figure is created as two folded planes like sheets of
paper - lean against each other and encapsulate a generous
space. This image of an elegant light weight wrapping seems an
appropriate response here were a space for changing exhibitions
needs to be receptive to constant internal redefinition. However
the empty space itself is already its own attraction. Although the
spatial concept is extremely simple in effect the parallel
extrusion of three simple sections - the size, level of abstraction
and dynamic profile of the folded planes insures an exhiliarating
spatial sensation. The diagonal cleft at the top excerts a dramatic
sense of vertigo as the light washes down the tilted plane. At both
ends the three extrusion are cut off at different angles. This
simple move effectively articulates the ends and allows us to
emphasizes the entrance zone with a dramatic gesture. A further
aspect to be noted is the quality of the skin. We are proposing a
snakeskin-like pixellation that allows the formally coherent
integration of various surface performances. The primary cladding
material would be large scale ceramic tiles (offering smooth
surfaces and brilliant colours). These would be interspersed by
light-boxes which allow further daylight to penetrate the space as
well as acting as artificial lightsource at night. Further panels
would be photo-voltaic elements. Finally we are proposing to
embed a large media screen in the form of honey-comb based
smart slabs. The media screen would nearly be camouflaged
into the overall animation of the skin. nternally the skin operates
according to the same concept but is aesthetically much more
muted. Here light, ventilation and heating is incorporated within
the pixel logic.
Guggenheim Museum, Taichung
The design proposal is based on the concept of the museum as
an ever-changing event space. To emphasise the aspect of
transformability of the space we would like to explore the
possibility to equip the new museum with something like a stage-
machinery. We devised a series of large-scale kinetic elements
that offer the option to radically transform the arrangement of the
gallery spaces. We would also like to make this dramatic
transformation of the space itself a spectacle, visible even on the
outside appearance of the building. Thus the internal
reconfiguration of the exhibition spaces creates a public sensation
within the urban scenery.
The site is tied into a masterplan of two crossing axes that give an
organising structure to the ensemble of 4 new landmark buildings
that shall comprise the Guggenheim Museum, the new town hall,
the city assembly and the national opera. This arrangement
implies that the museum will be approached from two main sides.
This double orientation leads to the idea of a large lobby space
that can be approached from two opposing ends and thus cuts a
public path through the museum. Much of the internal
organisation of the museum follows from this initial move,
motivated by the urban configuration. The building gradually
emerges from a soft landscape formation. The formal language
and architectural articulation is premised on the idea that the
building bleeds into the open public space of the urban axis. The
overall dynamism and fluidity of the elongated form suggests an
emphasis of movement through and around the building. Both
the public flow through the building as well as the internal
circulation through the exhibition spaces is expressed by means
of swooping ramps. Although the building can be approached
from both ends, these two ends are articulated rather differently.
On Taichungkang Road the building offers its urban edge with a
severe cantilevering volume which projects towards the
Taichungkang Road like a huge canopy. The opposing end facing
the future park-scape of the new urban ensemble is characterised
by curved ramps merging into the building.



Further Reading

William J. Mitchell, Design Worlds,
Chapter 3 in: The Logic of Architecture, M..T. Press 1990

Michel Faucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge, 1969, 1972
Michel, Foucault, The Order of Things, London 1970, French org.
1966, (Capters 2, 5)

Michael Benedict, Cyberspace, New York 1992

Colin Rowe & Robert Slutzky, 'Transparency: Literal and
Phenomenal', in: The Mathematics of the deal Villa and other
Essays, M..T. Press 1976

Jeffrey Kipnis, P-Tr's Progress, in: Peter Eisenman 1990-1997, El
64/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Croquis 83, Madrid 1997

Steven R. Holtzman, Digital Mantras - The Languages of
Abstract and Virtual Worlds, chapter 6 Postwar Serialism, chapter
7 Chomsky, chapter 8 Coda


Brian Massumi, Sensing the Virtual, Building the nsensible, in
AD: Hypersurface Architecture, London 1998

John Rajchman, The Virtual House, Any Magazine No. 19/20,
1997

John Frazer, ntroduction to 'An Evolutionary Architecture',
Architectural Association 1995

El Croquis 103, Zaha Hadid 1996-2001 - Landscape as a Plan

LATENT UTOPAS - Experiments within Contemporary
Architecture, Ed. Zaha Hadid & Patrik Schumacher, Springer
Verlag, Wien/New York 2002

Mechanisms of Radical nnovation
in: Catalog of Exhibition Zaha Hadid Architektur, Museum of
Applied Arts, Vienna
Editor: Peter Noever, Publisher: Hatje Cantz Verlag
End.
Rome: the eternal city / the vital city?
Patrik Schumacher, Rome 2003
The notion of sustainability that was orienting the various design
interventions formulated during the workshop was a notion of
social, economic and cultural sustainability rather than ecological
sustainability. However, since the notion of sustainability is usually
associated with ecological questions prefer to speak of the
ongoing vitality as the key problematic of the eternal city.
n fact this question of the social, economic and cultural vitality of
the city is much closer to the heart of the disciplines of urbanism
and architecture. t is the challenge posed to all historical entities
in the modern world: how to cope with the momentous
transformative dynamic of modern civilization. This challenge
demands permanent competitive restructuring and reinvention.
nstead the notion of sustainability places the emphasis on the
establishment of long-term cycles of reproduction. While the
capacity to survive is obviously to be presupposed believe that
the search for long-term cyclical self-sufficiency is a fallacy.
would rather promote a project of exploration that ultimately in
the long-term - ventures into the unknown whereby only medium-
term safe-guards are given. This is the difference between
reproduction and development: Development is an irreversible
process of transformation over transformation, whereby the
entities in question progressively deviate from the origin or
starting point until the original identity is irredeemably lost. Each
new level of development is a new point of no return.
n the specific case of Rome there is an obvious tension between
the preservation of a precious heritage and the quest for ongoing
vitality which requires the incorporation of modern technological
amenities and permanent reprogramming of its buildings and
urban spaces. There are some immediately obvious
compromises, for instance with respect to an efficient
metropolitan transport infra-structure. n order to safe-guard its
dense historical heritage Rome renunciates with respect to the
installation of an underground train system. This places an
unusual burden upon the on ground traffic. The historical fabric
with its narrow and irregular street further burdens the need for
efficient traffic. However, the Romans cope and compensate by
means of their extensive use of scooters. The result holds
unusual opportunities for an intensified urban communication.
While the Roman architectural and urban typologies seem robust
and resilient enough against the onslaught of new social
demands, it should not become a dogma that the historical fabric
of the city has to be preserved in its entirety. Strategic
substitutions, superimpositions and various forms hybridizations
might define the relations between old and new. That an
unleashed spatial imagination has a role to play in the
revitalization of the life of the city can not be a priori excluded. n
fact, the projects emerging from the workshop displayed a
refreshing level of creative irreverence in relation with the
historical fabric, without however descending into a crude or
vulgar attitude of confrontation.
Another tension to be resolved with regard to the question of
maintaining the historical heritage is the tension between the
needs of those who live and work in Rome versus the needs of
the tourists who threaten to swamp the breathing space of the
Romans. s Rome a giant museum to be maintained as a
destinaion for international tourism or is it to develop as one of the
most vital and productive intellectual centers of taly/Europe? This
decision has strategic economic import. Obviously tourism itself is
an industry. But is it an industry that fosters and sustains the
highest possible levels of education and material freedom within
the population? s the tourism the industry that can make the
most of the well educated and cultured population that resides
here? believe there is a productive level of tourism which helps
to maintain a convenient density of facilities like hotels,
restaurants, shops, museums, theatres etc. which can be utilized
in parallel by those who live and work within the city. But there are
levels of tourism that overcrowd and suffocate the vital life of the
city.
The same tension has to be negotiated by each museum and
cultural institution. t is important that these museums are not
prioritising tourism, but instead offer a rich, and varied programme
for the citizens who live and work in Rome. This means offering
changing rather than fixed exhibitions, offering lecture and
conference programmes etc., in order to provide regular
opportunities for cross-professional, cultural communication for
the professional workforce of the city. This also means that the
primarily art/heritage based institutions should find ways to make
their cultural programmes relevant and vital for the contemporary
culture/media industry.
The role of the Contemporary Art Centre
n this respect new cultural institutions like the new Auditorium or
the forthcoming Centre for Contemporary Art (MAXX) are of
crucial importance for the cultural and professional vitality of
Rome. MAXX will be well placed to productively fuse and
synergize a certain type of international tourism with its role as
communication platform for exchanges and cross-fertilization of
various vital contemporary industries. The location just outside of
the historic center afforded here the opportunity to experiment
with spatial scenarios.
Art today is this open-ended platform to reflect new social
phenomena, e.g. like the new condition of globalisation and multi-
culturalism. Contemporary Art is also a vital vehicle for the
experimentation with new forms of communication and possible
applications of emergent technologies, e.g. as in internet art and
interactive electronic art etc. Ultimately contemporary art is all
about the playful invention and dissemination of radically new
perspectives on life. t feeds from and into all the most vital and
advanced productive industries of the contemporary world.
Contemporary art centres offer a frame or clearing for the
unknown and untested to burst forward.
An art centre is a rather abstract, open-ended, and essentially
anti-institutional form. t is a vacant field defined only negatively
as the refusal to perpetuate the status quo and as a promise that
things might be otherwise. There can be no strict typology as
there is no positively defined function. t is subject to the open-
ended series of re-interpretations of the very concept of art by
65/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
each new generation of artists. The only certain constitutive
characteristic is that it is public, i.e. that it initiates public events
and constructs a public space. t is (or should be) a catalyst of
mutation and incubator with respect to the form and content of
public exhibitions, communications and gatherings. n principle
any political, social, economic, moral, cultural or technological
question can be brought forward for public exposition and
reflection within the domain of contemporary art. The raving
popularity of the events initiated within the Contemporary Art
Centre so far, manifests the latent need and craving for the
injection of such new urban incubators within the texture of the
eternal city.
End.
Sign as Surface: Meaning Beyond
the New Digital Aesthetic Symposium
Patrik Schumacher 2003
Afterword for the symposium: Sign as Surface: Meaning beyond
the New Digital Aesthetic,
Published n: Sign as Surface Catalog, New York

On September 9, 2003 the AA/NY Chapter Technology
Committee hosted a special two-and-a-half hour symposium
entitled, Sign as Surface: Meaning Beyond the New Digital
Aesthetic at the Cooper Union in the Albert Nerken Engineering
Building, Wollman Auditorium.
The event was co-moderated by curator Peter Zellner and Paul
Seletsky, Chair of the AA/NY Chapter Technology Committee and
featured presentations by Evan Douglis, Christopher Hight,
Kamiel Klaasse, Wade Stevens, Tom Verebes, Chris Perry and Ali
Rahim. Patrik Schumacher of Zaha Hadid Architects and Co-
Director of the Architectural Association Design Research
Laboratory responded to the architects' presentations. His after-
word to the symposium is presented here.
Divergence or Confluence?
Sign as Surface shows the second generation of two distinct
tendencies which became manifest in the mid-nineties as serious
contenders for the position of leadership in the avant-garde
segment of the architectural profession/discipline. The opposition
between these two trends - one concentrated in the US and the
other one in Holland - is a well-established fact within
architectural discourse.
While the original protagonists (i.e. Eisenman, Lynn etc. on the
one hand and i.e. OMA, MVRDV etc. on the other hand) are
realizing their concepts on a grand scale, it is interesting to look at
the emerging talents (i.e. Evan Douglis, OceanD, Servo and
Contemporary Architecture Practice on the one hand and i.e. NL-
Architects, FAT, Neutelings, Lyons etc. on the other hand) that
push the respective tendencies further along their diverging
trajectories.
Peter Zellner's programmatic statement for the exhibition
characterizes the opposition of the two competing tendencies as
the opposition between practices rooted in representation and
metaphor and those founded on material systems and
organizations. This characterization reveals that Zellner's
vantage point is in fact aligned with the US based tendency: the
cited opposition reflects the original self-demarcation of the US
tendency. While myself tend to align my own design efforts on
the same side equally refuse to locate the discourse of
signification within an alien territory. The divergence between
concerns of signification and concerns with material formation can
not be construed as an ideological choice about the future of
architecture. The semiotic dimension of architecture can not be
dismissed by fiat neither can it usurp the field of relevant
research and practice. Therefore subscribe to Zellner's attempt
to turn this confrontation into a dialog. The exhibition motto Sign
as Surface (instead of Sign vs. Surface) indicates this intention
which was further pursuit at the attendant conference hosted at
the Cooper Union.
However, the presentations initially reinforced a strong sense of
divergence. Kamiel Klaasse (NL Architects) presented a series of
built projects that were striking by means of their surreal
programmatic juxtapositions and by their ironic treatment of
familiar architectural motifs: A window doubles as basket ball
target, a sky-light doubles as centre-circle of the basket ball court,
a handicap ramp doubles as skate-board-bowl, a column doubles
as water-dispenser etc. Klaasse's laconic style of presentation
matched the dry humor of the built work itself. Theoretical
accounts were avoided - the built effects were supposed to speak
for themselves.
The presentations of Evan Douglis, Tom Verebes (OceanD), Chris
Perry (Servo), and Ali Rahim (Contemporary Architecture
Practice)- the US practices- were discussing abstract
installations exploring the new formal and material possibilities
afforded by the latest generation of digital design tools and proto-
typing technology. The presentations focused on the theoretical
descriptions (iteration, modulation, self-organization etc.) as well
as technical description (splines, nurb-surfaces, CNC-milling) of
the artifacts avoiding any reference to the potential social
deployment and meaning of these proto-architectural
experiments.
The stark contrast between the super-concreteness of NL versus
the super-abstractness of US appeared to imply an utter
incommensurability of the underlying discourses, both in terms of
language and agenda. There seemed to be no point of contact
around which a communication could be initiated. No cross-
references were made. The purpose of the exhibition/conference
seemed doomed.
What point of contact could be construed between a window and
a nurb surface? Well, Sign as Surface shows how a nurb-surface
can articulate a tectonic concept that might develop into a
structural skin with structurally integrated apertures and that might
produce intriguing window-equivalents. The profundity of such a
possibility escapes us as long as the discursive domains of
abstract technique and concrete effect remain segregated.
One of the problems that created the sense that the presented
communications were incommensurable is the fact that NL
addresses the general public while US addresses the discipline.
However, in the end both tendencies need to develop an internal
as well as an external discourse.
Another barrier resides in the fact that the US work presented
here has not yet reached the stage of implementation. However,
there are built examples that can serve to substantiate the
intentions of the US tendency: Lynn's Korean Church, Nox's
Waterpavilion, or Kol/Mac's Manhattan apartment. f one
compares these spaces with those constructed by NL one might
identify certain convergences. The two ways of working are
comparable and directly compete with respect to quite similar
intentions and effects: hybridization, subversion of typologies,
mutation of use-values, decoding of familiar meanings, making
strange etc. Both collage (NL) as well as morphing (US) produce
comparable psycho-social effects. Both tendencies equally resist
pragmatic functionalism and a priori performance criteria. Both
tendencies follow 'lines of flight' and forge unexpected
assemblages in the search of uncharted effects and (perhaps)
latent utopias. (1)
n this perspective the two tendencies can observe each other's
experiments, compare results, and transmute each other's
discoveries. The Dutch programmatic alchemy might inspire
chimerical articulations in America and vice versa.
This possibility would follow in the footsteps of Tschumi's
realization that cross-programming might be effectively spatialized
66/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
by means of superposition a radical compositional technique
pioneered by Peter Eisenman. One of the next major formal
innovations was perhaps Zaha Hadid's radical dynamization and
curvilinear distortion of the complex spatial arrangements
previously achieved. The next step was Lynn's/Kipnis' shift from
fragmentation towards the smooth inter-articulations afforded by
folding and morphing.
That an aggressively formalist agenda was pushed at the same
time can be appreciated as a heuristics of research, i.e. the
exclusive concentration on difficult formal problems that could not
be mastered without initially unburden itself from the concern with
social meaning. However, this exigency of an incipient research
program did not deserve to be glorified into an ideological
paradigm shift: the abandonment of the semiotic paradigm in
favor of a formal/organizational paradigm. The precise character
of this supposed new paradigm was shifting as the design
problematic started to expand beyond pure questions of form to
successively include structure, material and fabrication
processes. Further, as a certain strand of the folding movement
(FOA, UN-Studio) assimilated MVRDV's data-scape approach, a
(parametric rather than typological) sense of program and use-
pattern was augmenting the discourse. This successive
augmentation of the discourse is following a typical path of
maturation. Zellner's definition of a tendency founded on material
systems and organization tries to summarize this self-
augmenting bundle of concerns which is maturing together with a
definite formal/tectonic repertoire. The time might be ripe to speak
again of the growth of a new tradition. have no doubt about the
importance and profundity of this new tradition.
However, would like to argue that the persistence of the polemic
demarcation against any concern with signification which made
sense initially is response to the trivialization/exhaustion of the
postmodern and deconstructivist contributions, is becoming a
barrier for the full maturation of this new language of architecture.
t is a fallacy to counter-pose organization and signification as
incompatible paradigms for architecture. nstead it should be
recognized that both are inescapable dimensions of architecture.
n as much as architecture is inhabited by (culturally formed)
subjects the organizational effects of architecture rely to a large
extent upon effective signification. The social inhabitation of
complex institutional spaces can not be achieved purely by
means of the physical channeling of human bodies. The
effectiveness of the spatial order relies upon the active orientation
of the subjects on the basis of a reading of the spatial territory.
Current forms of differentiated office landscapes (2) may serve as
example: The traditional physical demarcation of territory by
means of solid walls is replaced by the subtle coding of zones
and the articulation of (hopefully) legible thresholds. This means
that the importance of the semiotic dimension of architecture
increases rather than decreases albeit the process of semiosis
is much more dynamic and complex than the post-modern
pioneers of semiotically conscious architecture presumed. Literal
citation and the accumulation of ready-made icons is to be
replaced by subtle de-codings, overcodings, iterant and mutant
re-codings, multiple simultaneous allusions etc. Also, an
abstracting destruction of stale iconic values is required to clear
the ground for semiotic re- and self-organisation. This work does
not move from representation to material performance, but from
simple signification to hyper-signification - and might be thus
theorized. n seems timely to reactivate and connect to certain
strands of the deconstructivist discourse in order to theorize the
semiotic potential of the current US avant-garde work. There is no
chance that this work should remain mute.
The recent research emphasis on infrastructural projects -
chosen to underline the ethos of material organization - has
obscured the necessity for a sophisticated semiotics of folding.
Such projects are indeed dominated by mechanisms of physical
channeling and think they are all the less interesting for that
matter. n fact would argue that the difference between
architecture and engineering is rooted in the degree to which
functionality can be reduced to matters of material organization.
Architecture organizes social life via the articulation/perception,
and the conception/comprehension of spatial order. This means
that representation and organization can not be pitched against
each other as a superficial reading of the exhibition might
suggest. Signification vs organization has to transmute into
signification as organization: Sign as Surface.
Patrik Schumacher, Zaha Hadid Architects, AADRL
Notes:
1. Latent Utopias was the title of an exhibition curated by Patrik
Schumacher & Zaha Hadid for the art festival Steirischer Herbst
in Graz 2002-03. The attendant catalog: LATENT UTOPAS -
Experiments within Contemporary Architecture, Ed. Zaha Hadid &
Patrik Schumacher, Springer Verlag, Wien/New York 2002
2. On this topic the author has written
(www.patrikschumacher.com):
Robotic Fields: Spatializing the dynamics of Corporate
Organization
in: Designing for a Digital World, edited by Neil Leach, 2002
Business Research Architecture, n: Daidalos 69/70,
December 1998/January
Productive Patterns, in: architect's bulletin, Operativity, Volume
135 - 136, June 1997, Slovenia and in: architect's bulletin, Volume
137 - 138, November 1997, Slovenia
Progress beyond the state of the art
Patrik Schumacher 2004
Published n: Architettura Magazine

The exhibition AAproject review, organized by the Architectural
Association School of Architecture is a kind of starting point to
begin a tour through an emerging architectural debate, exploring
a new research field, where a different architecture might soon
take form. We are looking at a territory where art, architecture,
technology, and science merge to find a new avenue of research.
Patrik Schumacher, partner of Zaha Hadid, teaching at the
AADRL post graduate course, speaks about these new domains
of architecture which represent a tough challenge for the
architectural world of tomorrow, explaining his point of view and
the variety of approaches taken by his students.

Q : AAProject review is the name of the exhibition being
organized by the Architectural Association. t represents one of
the London's must-see cultural events, attracting visitors from
around the world. t's a time when the AAschool opens its doors to
the wider community, challenging perception and encouraging
debate on the role of the architect and the discipline of
architecture, now and in the future, locally, and globally. What is
your opinion about the exhibition as a manifestation of current
thinking and production?
Patrik Schumacher:
think that the Project review at the AA is not aimed at the general
public or any kind of cultural tourism. t is an event internal to the
discipline or profession, and, curiously, an event with particular
importance to the internal communication of the school itself, i.e.
a mirror which the school puts up for itself so that the different
units - which during the year develop autonomously without
much contact can appreciate each other's work. But of course
the architectural profession, and the different architecture schools
in London make up the larger part of the audience and if there is
a sort of cultural tourist to be considered it is a group of keen
architectural students and young architects coming from abroad
to London to witness the exhibition. n particular it is the ex-
students that want to see the new generation work and who
67/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
would like to keep in touch and update themselves with respect to
the latest obsessions circulating in the school. n fact the school is
moving very fast so that it is necessary to come every year to
keep up with its pace of development. n general it is important to
understand that there is an internal discourse of the architectural
discipline and profession which does not make a lot of sense to
the general public. Why should the general public be confronted
with design processes, abstract concepts or unfinished
experiments? These issues only concern the community of
designers themselves.

Q: The AA is a school where new ideas germinate and are
expressed. The exhibition of projects shows this vitality. Can we
consider this production as a new architectural avant-garde?
How could you describe the concept of progress in architecture,
today?
Patrik Schumacher:
Since the discipline of architecture has no dedicated research
institutions and no research funding, it is the educational
institutions on the one hand and the avant-garde segment of the
profession on the other hand that take on the function of research
and innovation, which in other disciplines is pursuit by dedicated
research institutions. The private manufacturing sector has
developed large corporations that can afford to establish
dedicated R&D departments. Medicine is supported by publicly
funded research institutes operating within the University system.
n the architectural world there is neither private nor public
funding for research. Schools like the AA, and in particular the
post-graduate courses and the diploma courses , play a crucial
role in a process of research and innovation. And the work as well
as the human resources feed directly into the avant-garde
segment of the profession. This phenomenon involves a small
number of high profile schools in the architectural world, and the
AAschool is certainly operating in the forefront of the international
avant-garde discourse. This research is conducted by both
teachers and students. The teachers, who are located at the
school, collaborate with the students, leading the student's work
to participate in this sort of research. The design work is not
primarily understood as a kind of training, that attempts to teach a
kind of standard or state of the art competency. The work is all
about progress beyond the state of the art via experimentation
whereby the results are opening up new agendas rather than
offering finished products. At the same time, the work can not be
measured by a consistent standard.

Q: n the context of AA, how does the variety of methods and
approaches operate with respect to imagining and creating better
alternatives to what already exists.
Patrik Schumacher:
First of all want to reiterate that it is all about finding alternatives
to what exists, and yet it is naiv to expect that these alternatives
are immediatly better than what exists as well-tested solutions.
Alternatives in this context are first groping steps into new
directions, offering potentials and opportunities for further
research, not polished superior solutions. At its best this work
points ahead towards better solutions. The question also talks
about the variety of the methods and approaches that operate
within the school. Sometimes the school prides itself of having a
large diversity of approaches on offer. This looks like an
advantage, but think that this can also be a disadvantage if the
different units within the school are not focussed on one shared
direction. With a shared focus comes productive competition
instead of ideological strife. t means that the different units have
a lot to say to each other and a lot to learn from each other. think
that the school is self-organised in the sense that it forms
coherent movements within itself, which reduces diversity
temporarily and creates clusters of different units working on the
same thing. This originates as a group dynamic within the student
body, perhaps despite the diverse body of teachers. think this is
very important. You might compare the AAschool with its main
competititor Columbia university in this respect, and would say
that Columbia has been more coherent. t is true that the AA has
more diversity on offer, but there are also current movements
which are running between those two schools, and this creates
avenues of research in which many teachers and students feel
that they are participating in a unified research agenda.

Q: What should the visitor perceive moving through this aesthetic
experience of the exhibition? s it more art or architecture? s it
implying an utopian or radical vision of the society?...or a new
way to describe different concepts of architectural space . or a
futuristic way to live?
Patrik Schumacher:
understand your question to be asking whether we are more
concerned with spatial form or with the social content. n the end,
we have to be concerned with both. nnovation is innovation of
architectural form, of spatial form, or spatial organization, of the
logic of connection etc., but this makes only sense if in the end
the life process takes on this new form and also requires such a
new form; so it is always the double research, in terms of the
spatial vocabularies which need to be developed on the one hand
and in terms of the social tendencies, or institutional patterns on
the other hand. t is very hard to do both very well in one and the
same project. Therefore you usually have the schism between
units which are focussing more on the social research and those
other groups who are working on complex spatial forms and
perhaps those who are moving on to questions of structure and
manufacturing. t seems unfortunate that thus there are two quite
separate cultures of research, but in the end this (temporary)
separation and division of labour is necessary. However, the final
fusion and collaboration of these two areas of research is equally
necessary. Another point to underline about the strong experience
that the exhibition offers, is that it implies that the students are not
confining their ambition to the display of drawings, or abstract
representations of ideas, but they want to offer a kind of
experiential simulation, a kind of immersive space which stands in
for the building they would like to design. The exhibition space is
not only showing architectural representations but it becomes
itself a designed space that explores various spatial concepts.

Q: Your students have investigated the concept of responsive
environment trying to make an original contribution to this new
and complex field. But what really does it mean within the
architectural debate? What is your approach to the concept?
Patrik Schumacher:
Responsive Environments is the title of our current research
agenda. t is a fantastic challenge, it is a totally new field of
design, and perhaps it is not even necessary to assume that
architecture will be able to successfully claim this new field as its
own territory. nstead responsive environments might become
an independent field and it might become a field of collaboration
between industrial design and interaction design which currently
is just a sub-discipline of web-site design which in turn still
operates out of graphic design. Out of interaction design might
emerge a group of people who work both in real and virtual
environments. Anyhow think architecture, perhaps, is the most
crucial design discipline to take over this new domain. We foresee
the possibility that most (if not all) architectural space will become
responsive and be animated through intelligent kinetic capacities.
Each space will have a series of sensors which allow the
occupational patterns within the space to be registered and fed
back into the intelligent responsive structures. This can operate
on many scales and levels. think what emerges is a new era
within architecture, or between architecture and some other
disciplines, which will have a big market in the future, we are
convinced of that. t will be the next big thing in technological
development. We, as AADRL, are an isolated research and
design unit struggling in solitude, for a number of years already,
to take on this chalenge. The only kind of people which have been
working with such environments so far are artists or robotics
68/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
engineers with ties to the art world. So within the domain of art
there exists a series of pieces, installations ,environments, which
work with interactivity. This is just one more example that shows
how the domain of art is the most open, the most
underdetermined area of social and technological research. t is
here that the new phenomena are picked up first and
experimented with. Here it is possible to invest without pragmatic
purpose and performance criteria. And when architecture takes
on this developing field this implies that we are already one step
beyond the stage of pure play or the pure magic of technological
possibilities and effects. When architecture gets involved it means
that we are trying to take these mere open ended possibilities to
the next level by assuming operating conditions in institutional
settings and meaningful social scenarios. For instance, we have
been looking at the deployment of responsive systems within
residential complexes, as well as corporate environments with an
eye towards linking up with innovative tendencies within recent
business organisation. At the moment we are working on airports
as fields that sustain multiple programmes that might benefit from
new behavioural capacities of their environment.

Q: The DRL research tries to investigate how to genuinely evolve
rather than design, a new kind of ambient, and immersive
architecture. Using advanced software tools it is able to create,
control and shape a new concept of space, where the dynamic of
the people-flows and its self-organising reconfigurations are
reflected in the scripted responses of a kinetically adaptive space.
There is this new capacity to design spaces that actively engage
with their users to create complex behavioural systems. What do
you think about it?
Patrik Schumacher:
think at the Design Research Lab we are trying to develop these
new behavioural capacities, as we said earlier, which have
previously been explored in art. We are also trying to bring in
ideas from robotics and bio-mimetics. We are opening up this new
technological paradigm for the new opportunity to design a social
space as a living interactive space, on an urban scale, or on the
scale of a building, or on the scale of a room or interface. The
task is very ambitious. The difficulty is that it requires a whole
series of advanced disciplines and technical capacities. As a
school we can not buy the necessary expertise in the form of
specialist consultants. nstead we have to develop our own skill
base from within our pool of students. We create teams which
within themselves should diversifies to various kind of expertises.
We need form makers and we need to develop structures, we
need to develop kinetic mechanisms and we also we need
students who have analytical capacities and finally those who are
able to acquire some basic understanding of computer
programming. And also we need some groups of students which
have a developed social imagination and can move into the
observation, analysis and simulation of collective human
behaviour. This involves a kind of definition of behavioural
patterns that lead to the programming of agents are able to self-
organize into life-like patterns. Such simulated behaviors can then
be compared with observed patterns found in public spaces,
perhaps video recorded by the students. The patterns of
movement in public spaces are to be observed, and their social
logic has to be understood and reconstructed via programmed
agents. We take this as a design domain sui generis. This is part
of the expanded paradigm of architectural design we are
promoting. We are no longer just designing the empty shell but
we are also conceiving the kind of choreography of use-patterns
that unfolds within and in interaction with our structures. This is a
rather new exciting departure for architecture. The desire to do
this was always there. Architectures ultimate ambition was always
about designing the social life by means of designing its
container. Now we have the capacity to simulate such behaviours
within their designed environments. This is an enormous leap in
our design capacity afforded by the software tools like 3ds max or
Maya - enhanced by various plug-ins. Those tools were initially
developed for the film industry. Now these animation tools allow
us to design interactive and self-organising scenarios.

Q: At the AA exhibition ,the DRL presents its designs using
various sensor as well as actuator technologies linked by
computer that simultaneously respond to the spatial organization
of the visitors. At the same time, robotic prototypes show ever
more advanced forms of artificial intelligence and kinetic
capacities. And also the current research is focused to develop
tools to design and simulate responsive systems of dynamic
interaction involving techniques like scripting, force-fields, inverse
kinematics etc. Which new domains, in your opinion, is this
research opening ?
Patrik Schumacher:
The kind of animation software we are using, is opening not only
new technical options but also a whole new way of thinking. We
are modelling artificial worlds with their own peculiar laws of
quasi-nature. t is really like creating a little universe whereby
every object or element can be interactively related to any the
other object or element. Properties and relations of elements
within an artificial world can be scripted into functions, chain
reactions and complex networks of interaction. t is like writing the
laws of an artificial universe. So you can make a whole system of
lawful correlations and let them run through everchanging
scenarios. That is a fascinating new departure. The advancement
of software tools means that the learning curve to create such a
world is made user friendly to the point that the specialist
computer programmer is no longer necessary. The creative
designer can create these fascinating interactive worlds. These
are worlds that first of all exist in the computer, but they can be
implemented in the real world as sensors, actuators and chips
become ever more available. And this implementation of
responsive models is another big step we are currently working
towards first in the form of scaled models. We are creating
models which are activated by pneumatic muscles and which are
wired up with a series of sensors to really create the first kind of
prototype of an responsive environment. We presented three
such models for the exhibition Latent Utopia which curated for
a performing arts festival in Graz last year. The AADRL students
where exhibiting among an illustrous series of international avant-
garde architects . We were showing the same kinetic prototypes
at the AA exhibition this year. These models are not just
fascinating gadgets but they are embetted within a larger project
which is discussed with respect to its social significance and
aesthetic implications.

Q: You said :Any parameter of any object might be dynamically
correlated with any parameter of any other object within the
model. This means that the designer has the freedom and the
power to craft artificial worlds, each with their peculiar laws of
nature. s that the key to reading these new responsive spaces?
Have we arrived at what could be called a mutation stage?
Patrik Schumacher:
First of all, think this is very important. The objects and the
elements we design are always nodes in a kind of dynamic
network of elements and relations, they don't stand
autonomously. You can not design one after the other in isolation.
As you design the next object you consider its impact on the first
object. The first object in turn shifts its identity in the chain of
interlinked elements. So there is a new complexity that has to be
comprehended and mastered in this kind of design work. We can
no longer entertain simple minded ontological notions about how
the world is constituted. The world is relational rather than a world
of objects with stable properties. We have to comprehend the
world as an integrated system, not a collection of objects sorted
into a classification or composed into a static spatial arrangement.
Within a network the identity of any object or node is depending
on the total patterns of relations that it might enter into directly or
even indirectly. And this implies an ongoing process of
transformation that can no longer be type-cast into stable
essences. We are moving from typology to topology and
parametric models. The very important point is that the object can
only be identified by its position in the network of relations. And
69/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
this position is not a primarily a spatial position. Rather objects
become agents in networks of collaboration. So their identity
depends on their social role within the society of system
components. The human users might be conceptualised as a
certain subset of system components with a high degree of
autonomy. Agents also evolve historically. Memory functions can
be introduced. f this is becoming a generalised feature of our
artificial world, we can no longer describe the object without
referring to the object history, to its current position within its life
cycle or developmental trajectory. The object's life process might
involve a fixed stretch of time or one dependent upon the history
of interaction with other objects etc. The possibilities seem infinite.
Even an artificial evolution might be instigated. When you talk
about mutation, perhaps, maybe we are moving into a much more
complex game. When developing such an interactive system we
could ,perhaps, distinguish a cyclical system which has a series
of interlinked events or chain reactions which always find back to
the initial condition. The object oscillates. t has a simple life cycle.
What we are starting to look into as well, and of course we follow
computer research into genetic algorithms and genetic
programming , is the possibility that the responsive interaction
leaves traces. We would like to develop the object, mutate the
object, allowing the object to evolve and gather experience. So it
is not a prefigured life cycle, but a kind of life development of
each element. This is a fascinating new aspect to think through
we are trying to model small words where objects as well as the
system as a whole evolve. t is not a Newtonian universe of
cyclical stable systems, but a Darwinian universe of mutation,
selection, reproduction, development and evolution. t is a
fascinating challenge to take on, but it is also, perhaps a
necessary and pertinent way to think about architecture today
given the fact that the social life process is in continuous
development. And these developments are irreversible
developments rather than cycles. So architecture might be able to
participate in this mechanism. The capacity for evolution and
development thus becomes a conscious design agenda from the
very outset.
End.
Responsive Environments From
Drawing to Scripting
Patrik Schumacher 2004
The challenge presented by the new level of dynamic complexity
in the metropolitan life processes and the opportunity presented
by the development of new powerful digital design tools.
Published in: 01 AKAD Experimental research in Architecture
and Design Beginnings,
Royal nstitute of Technology, Stockholm

nitial Premises
At the same time as a changing society pushes architecture by
posing a new set of characteristic problems, the new digital
design media pull architecture into an uncharted territory of
opportunity. The key question here is whether the exploration of
the new creative opportunities can be directed towards offering
effective architectural resources that can help to answer the
problems posed today.
The AA Design Research Lab [1] is trying to address this
question. We set ourselves the task to contribute to the retooling
of the discipline of architecture in the face of what we perceive to
be two fundamental conditions:
The challenge presented by the new level of dynamic complexity
in the metropolitan life processes and the opportunity presented
by the development of new powerful digital design tools.
Therefore we start from two rather general premises as points of
departure of our work:
1. The task to develop complex spatial systems that could serve
to organize and articulate the new social complexities.
2. The task to utilize and adapt various advanced digital methods
of designing, modelling and simulation.
nnovation is always suspended between two poles: the
investigation of a domain of problems and the expansion of the
domain of potential solutions. Within the discipline of architecture
this polarity of innovation has often been an occasion for a
productive division of labour between the analysis of new
societal/programmatic demands on the one side and the
proliferation of new spatial repertoires on the other side.
Embodied by the Dutch avant-garde and the US avant-garde
respectively, both aspects have been pursuit independent from
each other. The independent elaboration of the two domains
makes sense, as a division of labour or specialization. However,
this led to two opposing ideologies, programme versus form,
equally one-sided, posing the question of synthesis. The
synthesis requires the oscillation between the two domains and is
itself an act of creative intelligence. There are no one-to-one
correspondences between "problems" and "solutions". Solutions
can go in search of problems as well as problems in search of
solutions. What we call design research is the attempt to
systematise this oscillation within a well circumscribed frame that
narrows down both the realm of problems and the realm of
solutions.
Which social arena would best allow us to explore the
architectural opportunities afforded by the new tools and the new
forms?
Spatializing Corporate Organisation
The initial mission statement of the AADRL promised such an
innovative synthesis. The task was to give a socio-
economic/programmatic interpretation to an intense wave of
formal proliferation that has been advancing for a considerable
period without any specific problematic that could offer friction and
resistance to select, shape and substantiate the work.
The following strategic problem domain was identified by the
DRL: The paradigm shift within the theory and practise of
business organisation, from clear-cut corporate hierarchies
toward open, self-organising networks of collaboration.
For four years our design research focussed on "Corporate
Fields", systematically instrumentalising a selected set of recent
formal/conceptual repertoires (primarily single surfaces and
swarms augmented with kinetic capacities!) for the spatial
organisation and articulation of an equally well-constraint set of
recent concepts, tendencies and practises within the emerging
post-fordist enterprise culture.
The premise of this choice of agenda was the general
compatibility of concepts of social organisation with concepts of
spatial organisation, and the specific convergence of terms that
could be observed when comparing recent architectural discourse
with recent managerial discourse. Principles of spatial
organisation like the super-imposition of multiple spatial reference
systems, or the concept of a continuously differentiated field, are
well suited to articulate the new corporate organigrammes like the
matrix organisation, or the idea of open networks, with
shifting/gradient centres of authority and blurred lines of
responsibility.
The managerial problematic of self-organisation, together with the
insatiable need for flexibility and permanent reconfiguration,
encountered in the new business culture, inspired the as yet
uncharted utilisation of animation software for the design of
kinetic, self-organising environments.
Our current research programme of "Responsive Environments"
was abstracted from the latest instantiations of "Corporate Fields"
where the dynamic of the work-flow and team reconfigurations
was reflected in the scripted responses of a kinetically adaptive
70/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
office-scape. The work was re-focussed to foreground this new
capacity to design spaces that actively engage with their users.
Here the design task goes beyond the delineation of form and
demands the creation of complex behavioral systems. This in turn
requires research.
Responsive Environments
The agenda of responsive environments opens up a whole new
domain of design research. t announces a paradigm shift from
the design of inert spatial form to the design of systems of
behaviour: the design of spatial systems that are capable of
interaction by means of real time reconfiguration in response to
users via embedded electronic intelligence.
This research programme is founded upon two technological
presuppositions:
1. Various sensor as well as actuator technologies become readily
available. At the same time processing power is becoming ever
more ubiquitous and cheap.
2. The tools to design and simulate responsive systems are
readily available in the form of animation software like 3ds max
and Maya.
These software packages offer modelling and simulation tools
that allow the designer to set up complex systems of dynamic
interaction. Any parameter of any object might be dynamically
correlated with any parameter of any other object within the
model. This means that the designer might craft an artificial
universe, with its own peculiar ontology and laws of nature.
The designed environments are augmented with electronic
sensitivity and responsiveness, and even spontaneity,
engendering artificial life-processes that would be symbiotic with
human life-processes. n order to effectively speculate about
these symbiotic life-processes the dynamic modelling always
includes the modelling of the movement/behavioral patterns of the
human actors. Agents both human and non-human - are
programmed and the designer observes the unfolding life-
processes with the view to calibrate the agents' profiles.
We are trying to emphasise the possible social dimension of
responsive environments, focussing on the capacity to actively
stimulate and facilitate new forms of social communication. The
task of responsive design does not have to be restricted to the
efficient processing of movement. Although the engineering of
such efficiencies is no mean endeavor, the full power of the new
paradigm of responsive architecture can only be brought to
fruition if the brief challenges architecture in its capacity to
construct and choreograph communicative situations - a
longstanding ambition of architecture.
The ability to elaborate and animate narrative scenarios - a
typical day in the life of . - is supported by 4D simulation
capabilities that include people animators. Finally it becomes
possible to devise and work on complex social scenarios and to
speculate in concrete detail about prospective behavioural
patterns unfolding within (and in response to) the proposed
spatial configurations. The animation is there as a handy artefact
to be crafted and refined element by element, move by move,
scene by scene. This new technique of design speculation affords
a leap in our ability to innovate beyond the mere adaptation or
reconfiguration of familiar types. Only on the basis of such
elaborately crafted 4D scenario-productions can a radically
unfamiliar environment be made socially plausible.
Within the Responsive Environments agenda we have explored a
whole series of programmatic briefs set within various social
contexts: corporate headquarters, residential complexes, retail
malls, arts & entertainment centres, airports. These briefs furnish
the material to construct the social scenarios. But what could be
the source of inspiration for the forms and behaviours of our
architectural agents?
Bio-mimetic nspirations
n order to expand our repertoire of geometries, structures, and
kinetic systems the design-work is preceded by a bio-mimetic
research effort. We are foraging into the world of organic life just
like robotic researchers have done for many years. Obviously
robotics itself is our most immediate inspiration. But we are also
going directly to the source: We are exploring various organic
systems - individual organisms, collective organisms,
subsystems of organisms - as source domains for the analogical
transference of principles into the domain of responsive
architecture. From the various biological models we are extracting
geometric systems, envelope systems, structural systems, kinetic
systems, sensory systems, systems of aggregation, and systems
of communication. Each of these systems might be taken from
one and the same organism. The transference of the models and
principles leads to the construction of new architectural systems
that eventually function in the context of the project scenario. t is
important to note that this analogical transference from organic
life into architectural artefact is mediated by the science of
biology. Thus we are furnished with concepts, classifications, and
measures that can be transferred alongside the organic model.
The science of biology has a rich and nuanced conceptual
apparatus for the description of complex morphologies in their
relation to functional capacities. Distinctions like homology vs
analogy, parasite vs symbiosis, genotype vs phenotype, and
autopoeisis vs allpoeisis might contribute to the emerging
conceptual framework of a responsive architecture. Architecture
has as much to learn from biology's conceptual sophistication as
from the organic world itself.
To exemplify our work would like to introduce one of our most
recent projects. The project is based on a brief calling for the
redesign of Heathrow Terminal 4 as a Responsive Environment.
Project : Heathrow.comm
Michele Pasca di Magliano, Cynthia Morales, Viviana
Musceottola, Nick Puckett
The project set itself the task of catalysing communicative
clusters within the domain of the airport. Various biological models
(as well as their scientific elaboration and computer simulation)
were studied: Slime-mold, ant colonies, and flocking of various
species of birds.
These models led to the ambition to achieve the desired
formation of communities by allowing spatial arrangements to
emerge from the responsive interaction between programmed
agents (architectural components) instead of delineating the
supposed community spaces in advance.
Heathrow.comm constructs an electronically augmented fitness
landscape catalysing the competitive formation of casual
communities. t seeks to facilitate a new level of social
communication within the airport by amplifying its existing social
dynamic through the wireless connection of its inhabitants and
architectural systems, thus merging the potentials of the airport's
diverse population with the methodologies and interests of today's
internet communities. The responsive architectural systems
(interactive walls and ceiling panels) facilitate the clumping of the
crowd in patterns defined by its dispersed movement and
exchange of information. The project draws on the latent shared
interests that are hidden within the anonymous crowd. Various
virtual attractors compete for pulling people together: e.g. info-
exchange between people heading for the same destination
versus speed-dating or game-playing. The spatial field is
registering and amplifying insipient cluster-formation by means of
(more or less) subtle territorilizations.
n it's ultimate form this is achieved by organizing the field as a
composite lattice of cellular spaces that function to both register
and prompt the users. Simulations were scripted with Alias Maya
and BioGraphic Tech's A implant plugin.
Electronically enhanced space populated by agents
71/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
The first version of Heatrow.comm existed a scripted network of 3
initially independent systems which had different types of speed
and response. The ceiling system represented the first level of
response as it was the most dynamic and rapidly changing
system. The rotating panels served to inscribe an orienting
organizational pattern into the space that extrapolated a distinct
order from the insipient formation of clusters. The interface walls
responded to the level of activity of the community users and
expanded to provide an interface and more definite boundaries as
the community became more established. The floor system
responded much slower to the inputs and created paths of the
general crowd flow over time.
The simulation generated by the script operates exclusively by
reading the individual pieces of information stored on each A..
agent. Each community unit (1interface, 1 6mX6m ceiling unit)
has the ability to function as an autonomous cell or as a larger
cluster (4 interfaces, 4 6mX6m ceiling units). This larger cell of 4
ceiling/interface units corresponds to 1 floor unit.
The first level of system response is determined by the
information gathered by each interface. The sensor in each
interface processes the participation level of each person within
the 5m radius to determine the community's activity level. The
activity level controls the rate of growth for the expanding
interface wall. When the interface wall grows large enough that it
stops rotating, the community has its birthday. Also at this point
the interface orients the ceiling panel to correspond with the
rotation of the interface. The information processed by each
interface within each 4 unit cluster is then passed to a region
infoPoint which displays the total number of people, the activity
level, and the age of the cluster/community. These totals inform
the response of the floor unit.
The augmented environment creates a new hybrid nature leading
to the disappearance of traditional space-time relations.
There is a continuous exchange between the architectural agent's
rules of response and the character's rules of navigation and
interaction. This move from drawing to scripting allows the digital
model to move from the arena of representation into the arena of
a working prototype.
The final version of the simulation engine exists as a complex
network of multiple scripts, referenced files, and a database of
information all linked by a control interface. The flight data from
Terminal 4 are downloaded from the BAA.com website and stored
in an Access database. This information loads the appropriate
number of passengers for the flight and tells the A characters
when to get to the airport, the gate number, and time of departure.
For each flight you can also customize what percentage of
passengers are members of a chat-forum, or game community.
This information is imprinted on the characters to determine the
way in which they influence their emerging community space.
Auxetics
n terms of geometry and material the research started with
simple folded surfaces
and evolved into a highly complex 3d lattice. The aim was to
construct a space-filling medium that could expand and contract.
n the final version of the design both walls and ceilings were
conceived in this way to allow for the responsive sculpting of the
space.
The term auxetic refers to any material which has an inverse
poisson ratio. Most all natural
Materials, when stretched in one direction, will shrink along the
perpendicular axis. Auxetic materials on the other hand will
enlarge on the perpendicular axis. Up until now this class of
materials has not been used as a dynamic material, but rather
explored for it's acoustic and insulation benefits. For our studies
we began by simply constructing a model of the molecular
structure of these materials at an observable scale. These models
were build up from simple base modules that captured the
capacity of bi-axial expansion. Each module can expand to 1.5
the normal scale. Those modules were then arrayed into lattices
where the deformation of each component induces a gradual
deformation in the adjacent components, which in turn generates
an overall effect in the field.

Physical prototypes

The first operable prototype was created as a mesh of 48 nodes
(4X6X2). The second version consisted of 64 nodes (4X4X4) in 4
layers. t was constructed of laser cut polypropolene and
polystyrene and used 16 dc motors to operate the different nodes.
Small non-geared dc motors were used to operate the
delamination action of the layers
The user interaction with the prototype is registered by 4 sensors
which then feed into a
controller pc via an cubeX digitizer. The values from the sensors
are processed by a custom
script created in Max/Msp which interprets these values and then
sends the appropriate outputs to the microController. The output
from max (which occurs every 20 milliseconds) instructs each
motor whether it should be ON or OFF, and whether it should be
moving UP or DOWN. The direction of the movement is
determined by the proximity of the user to the sensor and is
achieved by sending signal to a bank of relays on the control
board which opens/closes the appropriate circuit.
Digital kinematic model
After observing the behaviour of the 3d physical models and
defining it more specifically with the dynamic testing, the auxetic
behaviour could be distilled as a geometric equation which related
the rotation of each individual hinged strip to the expansion of the
whole module. This logic was then implemented through
kinematics to provide an operative digital version of the observed
behaviour. One limitation of the physical models was the inability
to apply very specific forces to the material and the ability to
quickly create variations of the geometry itself. n a first series of
studies Maya rigid body dynamics were used to investigate these
areas. To construct these simulations the same geometry is built
from individual pieces which are given a specific mass. These are
then joined at the corners by hinges which can also be assigned
certain limits and resistances. After creating the structure, forces
are applied, and the series of physical tests is extrapolated by
many more digital variants.
Scripted model
The next phase for the digital model was to both derive a way for
variable input and to automate the production of models of
different sizes. To do this each unit's behaviour had to be
understood in terms of its neighbours. Due to the basic nature of
the geometry, when one node is compressed it must effect the
rotation and the translation of its neighbours. The difficulty lies in
the fact that this influence can go beyond a unit's 4 immediate
neighbours, depending on the specific situation. After an
exhaustive trigonometric and conditional study a single script was
developed that could create an auxetic mesh of any size which
retained the properties of the material and the ability for non-
regular input.
The first step was to use the Maya dynamics engine to create the
geometry and replicate the behaviour of the physical model. This
process yielded very accurate results, but do to the current limits
of processing power, could not be utilized at a larger, airport
72/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
scale. Thus,
the digital models were analysed to extract the basic behavioural
qualities. These qualities
were coupled with a new knowledge base of MEL scripting which
allowed it to be converted to a geometric expression. This new
knowledge base also gave the ability to create a new form of
input to the behaviour through sound. This was created by linking
Maya to an interface in Flash which was calculating the pitch of
the voice on a microphone in real-time. This new input was able
to be joined with the auxetic behaviour of the walls to test the
possible outcomes at a large scale. This voice activation
represents a real possibility with respect to making the
architectural systems responsive (positive feedback) to the level
of communication density in contradistinction to the mere density
of bodies.
Our methods of digital production are evolving away from the
traditional mode of producing digital models. We are moving from
drawing to scripting. This of course was in direct relationship to
the evolving requirements of the research agenda. Scripted
production takes a level of abstraction which produces a machine
to make the result rather than the result itself, thus affording the
ability to exponential increase output for our experimental series.
End.
Harvard Design Magazine
Patrik Schumacher 2004
Ten Questions for Thinkers about the Present and Future of
Design
Published in: Harvard Design Magazine, No.20, Massachusetts
Being as specific and detailed as possible, please answer the
following questions in 500 to 1000 words for each. f you need to
slightly alter any questions to make them more fitting for your
thinking, please do so overtly. You are invited to answer one
additional question that you invent. Feel free not to answer up to
four questions.

Answers provided by Zaha Hadid & Patrik Schumacher


1.) What do you think are in your country the most important
current issues or challenges for architects, landscape architects,
and/or urban designers (hereafter called "designers"), and why?
There are no nationally specific challenges for architecture today.
Our divers cultural backgrounds really fade into the background
as we cope with the challenge to creatively interpret the next
stage of our internationalized post-industrial civilization. We work
globally however only within the most advanced metropolitan
centers. We are true cosmopolitans who would like to refrain from
speculating about the influence of local national experiences. Any
such speculation can only serve to distract from the issues of the
current metropolitan condition.
The key challenge which we perceive for our own work concerns
the architectural contribution to a multi-valent, layered, and
dynamic urban society. We have to deal with social diagrams that
are exponentially complex when compared with the social
programs of the early modern period. The apparent chaos of
cities like Tokyo acts as paradigmatic condition. We perceive here
the challenge to develop a rich and nuanced language of
architecture that can serve to register and order this apparent
chaos in a legible way. nstead of relishing in chaos or going for a
rearguard minimalist reduction of complexity the attempt is made
to process and articulate more information into a more complex
order facilitating swift orientation despite the higher
informational burden.
Thus our work is focussed on the attempt to develop a new
language of architecture that is able to organise and articulate an
increased level of social complexity. This includes the attempt to
organise and express dynamic processes within a spatial and
tectonic construct. This ambition operates on many scales: from
the organisation of whole urban quarters, via various building
scales, down to the interior furnishings. The challenge is to
increase architecture's capacity to spatialize and articulate the
complexities of contemporary life processes with its multiple
interpenetrating agendas.


2) What recent architecture, landscape architecture, and/or
urban design projects or kinds of projects do you consider best
and/or most important, and why?
We are accepting the distinction between avant-garde and
mainstream architecture. This distinction is important in order to
evaluate a project. Different (but related) criteria have to be
applied. The mainstream project has to be judged with respect to
the application of best practice standards to a given concrete
task. The significance of the avant-garde project can not be
reduced to the contribution it makes to a given concrete life
process. Rather it is pointing beyond any concrete problem
towards the potential for new generic resources
(formal/organizational repertoires) for the future problem solving
capacity of the discipline. ts value resides in its manifesto
character. Originality and innovative potential is more important
than the actuality of its performance. Such projects are
investments that might be redeemed in future mainstream
practice.
We are working in the avant-garde segment of the discipline and
profession. The discourse of architecture with its apparatus of
publications is doing a good enough job at identifying original and
forward looking projects. There is not much to be gained by
picking a specific example here. The usual suspects are really the
only examples around. No surprise discoveries should be
expected. mportant work is identified even if the outspoken
reasons for its evaluation are often somewhat mystified and
fetishistic. This fetishism is a function of the fact that actually
realized value is sacrificed for the mere potential of future use-
values.


3) What recent design projects or kinds of projects do you
consider overrated, and why?
No comment.
4) Do you think the social and cultural influence and power of
designers are increasing, decreasing, or steady? How would you
describe the level and kind of that power and influence? How far
apart are the realities and the ideal?

t is difficult to generalize here. n fact we make quite different
experiences with different projects. The power of the architect
very much depends on how the client is constituted/organized
and on the tightness of the regulatory environment. n the US and
Britain the architect usually is called into a very tightly structured
process with clear objectives and leadership already in place from
the side of the client. On the European continent the architect is
73/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
expected to take on more of a leadership role both in terms of
conceptualizing the project and in terms of leading the process of
the project development. However, there are still differences
between France, Germany and taly. n taly we have had the
most free and satisfying relationship in developing the project in a
productive collaboration with the public client (ministry of culture).
n China we are facing a most interesting client keen to import our
expertise however not without strong opinions. Here it seems
the field is wide open for far-reaching, large scale experiments
as long as the project can be coupled with an effective marketing
strategy.
5) To what extent can and does design (all others factors being
equal) affect the quality of life of individuals, small groups, and/or
large groups (such as the residents of a city)?

As designers we have to operate with the working hypothesis that
design matters immensely. This is the only viable heuristics for
architecture. The difference that design makes manifests itself
most strongly in an arena of rapid, massive development like
China. Here the market is expanding and differentiating with a
breathtaking speed. Three years ago a system of morgages was
introduced. This unleashed a huge wave of buying residential
property. There seems to be an enormous need and desire that is
fuelling a construction boom in residential estates. Shopping for
houses is becoming a new national sport. The aspirations of
peoples lifes seems to center upon the character of their homes
and its environment. Buying a house is a major event in the
biography of those young couples who are the main demographic
group of buyers. This massive market pressure coupled with the
ability to appropriate land and invent large urban or semi-urban
environments brings design to the forefront. This does not only
concern the individual units but also the collective spaces and the
whole ambience of a newly designed pieces of the city. The
succeeding marketing strategies are verified by way of drawing
the hard won resources of the buyers representing a hugely
important aspect of those people's aspirations. t is quite exciting
to be asked to compete in such an alert and excited market.
6) Do you think designers can and should play an important
role in preventing and/or reversing degradation of the natural
environment? f so, what role? f not, why not?
We do not think that the discipline of architecture can really take
on this agenda of the preservation of nature. Architecture is about
the creation of artificial , social habitats mostly urban.
Architecture might exploit and co-opt the natural environment for
the purposes of creating effective environments for the various
societal processes that need to be given room to flourish. The
natural environment becomes a domain of architecture only to the
extent that it is drawn in to play a role in the overall construct of
society's habitat not to the extent that it wants to be left alone.
Certain aspects of environmental sustainability can be
represented within the design-process by bringing in respective
specialist engineering disciplines. For architecture with its focus
on performance with respect to the facilitation of (specific
segments and institutions of) social life environmental
sustainability is just one more constrain (like the budget, or
constrains of available construction methods etc.) that might be
imposed as a limitation. This does not exclude that some
architectural researchers might take on these constrains as
primary concerns to develop models of environmentally
sustainable buildings. Such attempts are useful experiments. For
us however, this to foreground this agenda would be a distraction
from our primary investigation into the possibilities of retooling the
discipline to cope with more societal complexity.
7) What seem like promising new roles, activities, and
territories for architecture, landscape architecture, and/or urban
design in the next decade?
There are two ways of locating the most interesting and rewarding
arenas for avant-garde architectural work. nnovation is always
suspended between two poles: the investigation of the domain of
problems on one side and the expansion of the domain of
potential solutions (and techniques of elaborating solutions) on
the other side.
On the side of techniques and solutions there is still a lot of work
to be done in exploring the expanding domain of digitally based
design and manufacturing tools. On the side of problems and
challenges for architecture one of the most exciting domains
might be corporate re-organisation where new concepts (matrix
organization, network-organisation, self-organisation) and new
complex and dynamic patterns of collaboration are still begging
for a congenial translation into spatial systems.
At the same time as a restless society pushes architecture by
posing a new set of characteristic problems, the new digital
design media and the micro-electronic revolution pulls
architecture into an uncharted territory of opportunity. The key
question here is whether the exploration of the new creative
opportunities can be directed towards offering new architectural
resources that can help to answer the problems thrown at
architects today. Within the discipline of architecture this polarity
of innovation has often been an occasion for a productive division
of labour between the analysis of new societal/programmatic
demands on the one side and the proliferation of new spatial
repertoires on the other side. Embodied by Dutch avant-garde
and the US avant-garde respectively, both aspects have been
pursuit semi-independent from each other, with considerable
success. This however, lead to two opposing ideologies, perhaps
equally one-sided. The independent elaboration of the two
domains begs the question of their synthesis. The synthesis
requires a broad-minded as well as light-footed oscillation
between the two domains. This is no trivial matter, but itself an act
of creative intelligence. There are no one-to-one correspondences
between "problems" and "solutions". No obvious matches
anounce themselves. Solutions can go in search of problems as
well as problems in search of solutions. What we call design
research is the attempt to systematise this oscillation within a well
circumscribed frame that narrows down both the realm of
problems and the realm of solutions.
However, this demand of synthesis should not be misunderstood
as a demand to abolish the initial or parallel bifurcation of the
research agendas. This bifurcation is a necessity in the attempt to
cope with and process the challenges posed by a rapidly evolving
society.

8) What do you consider the strengths and weaknesses of
design education? How might it be improved?
Although we are both teaching we are perhaps not the best
placed to comment the requirements of education. Teaching - for
us - is research rather than education. We are using the various
graduate programs which are teaching as semi-detached
research departments. Obviously in the process young architects
are also developing their skills and architectural intelligence in
ways that make them attractive collaborators after their tenure as
students has been completed.
The teaching of architecture has traditionally been operating on
the model of apprenticeship. To a certain extent this still
continues, inevitably, as architecture is a profession as much as a
discursive discipline. Since the Renaissance this practise of
apprenticeship has been combined with the dissemination of
theoretical treatises. On this basis a formal education was first
institutionalised in France with the founding of the "Academie de
l'architecture" in 1671. Academic teaching was adopted in
England and America at the end of the 19th Century and is now
everywhere the primary mode of professional training. However,
there is as yet no institutionalised form of research in architecture.
nstead the task of innovation within architecture is left to the
"avant-garde" segment of architectural practise on the one hand,
and to post-graduate architectural education on the other hand.
Each of these two surrogate processes has its peculiar
74/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
limitations. Avant-garde practise, as professional practise, is
struggeling to turn any particular commission into a vehicle for the
investigation of new architectural principles that might be
abstracted and generalised. This in turn demands the
renunciation of full attention to all aspects of the concrete project
at hand. Also, the establishment of a coherent research agenda
across a random string of commissions is rather difficult. An
academic institution is unconstraint with respect to the
establishment of a coherent research agenda, but a special effort
is required to steer a course that remains relevant to the concerns
of society. A severe limitation for research in educational
institutions resides in the short-term tenure of the student-
researchers and the attendant burden of taking on a whole new
generation of students/researchers every year. However, the
institutions of post-professional education seem to offer the most
promising opportunities to construct a systematic research
practice within architecture.
9) Do you think that design is any more subordinate to profit-
driven business than it was thirty years ago? f so, what, for you,
are the implications?
Everything in the contemporary world is more subordinate to
profit-driven business than thirty years ago. The causes of this
fact operate at a very deep level of contemporary civilization
both in terms of the patterns of material reproduction as well as
on the level of fundamental social relations associated with these
patterns. The era dominated by a largely state-planned welfare
economy is over also with respect to the construction of the built
environment. Commodification continues. However, not all
segments of the architectural market are subjected to this logic in
the same way. The avant-garde segment we are working within is
given quite a bit more space to manoever than the mainstream
commercial work. This is because our work is considered as a
kind of multiplier. Economically our buildings operate as
investments into a marketing agenda - e.g. city branding - with a
value that might at times considerably exceed the budget
allocated to the project itself. Of course we still have budgets to
work within occasionally with some room for re-budgeting.
However, our projects are usually not measured in terms of
industry standards of cost-effectiveness. Our work is payed for by
funds which have been extracted from the cycle of profit-driven
investment either as public tax money or as sponsorship money
administered by a board of trustees attached to a cultural
institution. Obviously such funds too are indirectly contributing to
an overall business rationale. But as designers we can enjoy and
utilize the relative distance from concerns of immediate
profitability to further our experimental agenda.
We understand that this position is peculiar to a rarefied segment
of the profession.
10) What do you think about the gap between popular and
highbrow taste in design and how do you think designers should
respond to it?
This distinction has been pronounced dead so many times, and
yet it does not give up its imposing presence and effectiveness.
The distinction is a tangle of inevitable as well as questionable
components. There is the inevitable distinction between avant-
garde and mainstream overdetermined by an unfortunate social
logic based upon class-differentiation which can only serve as a
barrier towards communication. The tangled and contradictory
nature of the distinction makes a principled stance difficult,
perhaps impossible. The celebration of populism seems as
fallacious as the withdrawal into an exclusive elite
communication. Yet the discourse (and practice) within and
around architecture has to be layered and requires a series of
interlinked and interpenetrating arenas of communication. nstead
of assuming a divide one might think of a series of concentric
circles, or rather a multitude intersecting series. Within each
series one might assume a tendency to move towards
popularization, however without dissolving the tighter circles
focusing on more sustained pursuits requiring a more elaborate,
specialist discourse and practice. The distinction between avant-
garde and mainstream is made productive in the continuous
transference and selection of ideas from avant-garde into the
mainstream. This does not exclude the reverse track from
mainstream into an avant-garde based reflection of phenomena
emerging spontaneously within the mainstream (retro-active
manifesto). Thus the distinction serves a certain purpose in
structuring cultural practice/communication.
End.
A Collaboration in the Spatialization
of Knowledge
Patrik Schumacher 2004
Published in: Herbert Lachmayer et al, Editors, Salieri Sulle
Tracce di Mozart, Baerenreiter-Verlag, Kassel 2004
Salieri sulle Tracce di Mozart is the third collaboration between
the curator Herbert Lachmayer and the architects Zaha Hadid &
Patrik Schumacher. Previous collaborations included
Wishmachine-Worldinvention for the Vienna Kunsthalle in 1996
and Alles Schmuck for the Museum of Design, Zuerich in 2000.
These collaborations share the same fundamental ambition - the
attempt to demonstrate new approaches to the spatialization of
knowledge. The underlying premise is that spatial ordering
systems have always already played a fundamental role in the
registration and elaboration of conceptual schemata and
information structures. .
Logic as Abstracted Architecture
Logic is abstracted architecture. Architecture lends its figures to
abstract thinking: it distinguishes, classifies, relates. These
supposedly mental activities first gain shape and regularity on the
basis of architectural operations. Architecture operates by means
of boundaries and connections. Walls pre-figure the logical
operation of distinction. The logic of subsumption is based upon
successive enclosures within enclosures, pre-figuring
classification. The structure of a path (or of a system of paths) is
the analogical source of thinking in terms of sequences such as
chronological sequences of events, means-ends relationships,
causal chains, flow diagrammes, and branching diagrammes like
decision trees or genealogical trees. Architecture is at the root of
most of the conceptual schemata we still rely upon today:
sequences, grids, concentric nesting.
The symmetry natural to simple balanced structures has been
made the norm in classical architecture. t also informs many
classical conceptual formalisms within science and philosophy:
for instance the Kantian table of categories is marked by an
insistence upon symmetric order signifying completeness.
There are many parallels to patterns within musical composition.
Music too offers schemata and formal ordering systems - mostly
to tell a structured story - offering notions like theme and variation,
cyclical closure or development.
An architecture that today is self-conscious of its formative role
should be able to challenge deeply ingrained patterns of thought
by effective spatial intervention.
Exhibition design is thus an ideal arena to explore the power of
architecture as spatio-conceptual ordering system.
Traditional Exhibition Design

75/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Traditionally exhibitions and museums are operating with a hand
full of very simple ordering devices - suggested by the palace
architectures appropriated or imitated for the installation of a
museum collection. n most classical Museums the central
symmetry axis is enlisted to establish a basic dichotomy within
the Museum: A Natural History Museum typically bifurcates into
the animal Kingdom on the left and Human Ethnography on the
right. An Art Historical Museum might bifurcate into Ancients vs
Moderns. Usually rooms are taken to establish groupings or
classes of objects. Each wing of the building might represent a
larger grouping encompassing the rooms as so many subsumed
subgroups. The en suite sequence of rooms - offering a linear
path - is utilized as the basis of ordering such groupings into a
chronological sequence. Klenzes Munich Glyptothek can serve
as the paradigmatic example here, articulating the sequence:
archaic, classic, helllenistic. (t is of interest here that the spaces
utilized here at the Palazzo Reale also offer such a simple en
suite sequence of spaces.)
Expanding the Repertoire of Spatial Ordering

This small set of ordering devices - dichotomous distinction,
grouping/subgrouping, and linear sequence - is in fact all there is
and has been within the traditional repertoire of spatial ordering of
knowledge in Museums and exhibitions. t is no accident that the
primary organization of books - as summarized by the list of
contents - follows exactly the same logic: A sequence of chapters
and subchapters sometimes organized by a primary dichotomy
like theory vs case-studies.
The obvious task here is the expansion of this limited repertoire
with the aim to articulate more complexity within the
informationstructures at hand. This expanded repertoire of
spatialization would include anticipation and crossreferencing
instead of mere linear sequence. t would further allow for overlap
and gradient transitions within the calculus of grouping. nstead of
the primacy of rigid dichotomies we would like to work with a
simultaneity of multiple distinctions as well as multiple affiliations.
n the case of Wishmachine-Worldinvention we generated an
unusual degree of spatial complexity with a simple spatial
generator that would insure that the complex result remained
legible and retrievable for the visitors. The overall space was
pervaded by three large, continuous walls each with its own
recognizable character: zig-zag wall, s-curve, and boomerang.
Each of these walls transported a major theme or story-line within
the exhibition. However, as these walls pervade the space they
cut across each other at multiple points, thus creating a series of
quite different spaces. Each of these spaces brings together items
of two or three of those walls/storylines into a muli-theme
constellation. The result is the simultaneity of two interpenetrating
reference systems: lines of development and constellations.
Salieri and Mozart in Context

The concept of the exhibition itself plays on the fact that Salieris
career brought him to the same places where the younger Mozart
had already been before him. The ambition of the exhibition is to
place these two iconic and seemingly timeless musical characters
in the changing contexts of their times and places. As hinted at
earlier the Palazzo Reale offers the typical sequence of en suite
spaces separate vaulted spaces connected with small
doorways on the central axis. t proved irresistible to take this
structure as the base structure to clearly lay out the sequence of
contexts through which the two characters move: Milan under the
Austrians, the Vienna of Marie-Therese, the Vienna of Joseph ,
pre-revolutionary Paris, and finally back in Vienna.
The two protagonists are represented as two ribbons moving from
space to space, variously confronting each other. These ribbons
are of recognisably different character: The ribbon collecting all
the exhibits belonging to Salieri is larger, calmer and more
continuous, whereas Mozarts ribbon is fragmented and formally
much more S'>agitated and multi-faceted. The contextual
information is placed as a backdrop to the protagonists story-line.
The textual commentary printed in large letters serves as a
further semi-independent layer of information in its own right. The
ribbons squeeze through the doorways trying to indicate
continuity. Various narrow cuts in the walls create links and
shortcuts allowing for anticipatory as well as retrospective cross-
references. Thus there remains an interesting overall tension
between the rigidly segmented sequence of spaces and the
rhythmic and continuous space captured between the folded,
twisting ribbons.
Spatializing the complexities of
contemporary business organization
Patrik Schumacher, London 2005
Corporate Fields- New Office Environments by the AA_DRL;
AA_DRL Documents 1Edited by Brett Steele, AAPublications

Corporate Fields summarises the results of a 3 year design
research effort focussed on the architectural response to
emergent forms of corporate organisation. This general agenda
was specified in 7 project briefs which became manifest in 24
experimental design projects elaborated by 56 architects working
in teams of 2-5. Each project team was collaborating with one of
the following corporate quasi-clients: BDP, DEGW, M&C Saatschi,
Ove Arup, Microsoft U.K., Razorfish. These companies and their
organisational strategies served as a concrete point of departure
for the development of experimental spatial scenarios. On a more
general level these scenarios respond to the innovative work
patterns of the 'post-industrial' economy and attempt to translate
key concepts and stratagems proposed within recent
management theory.
The 'architecture' of business-organisation is liquefying. The
classical modern strategies of rationalisation based on the rigid
segmentation and routinised specialisation of work within clear-
cut functional hierarchies is failing today in respect to the
complexity and dynamism of the overall socio-economic process.
New ways of organising the labour-process are emerging in
organisation- and management theory.
To set the task of elaborating adequate architectural responses to
the new organisational patterns emerging in the contemporary
corporate world hardly requires a longwinded justification. The
topicality of corporate restructuring is manifest in the exponential
growth of management literature. A superficial glance at the
expanding sections of business and management literature in any
high street bookshop will suffice to capture the ongoing frenzy of
restructuring: Titles as the following abound: "Welcome to the
Revolution", "The new Paradigm for Business", "Liberation
Management - Disorganisation for Nanosecond Nineties", "The
Postmodern Organisation", "Deconstructing Organisations",
"Catching the wave", "The One Minute Manager", "Thriving on
Chaos", The Complexity Advantage, Competing on the Edge
Strategy as Structured Chaos, etc.(1) The implied paradigm
change in organization- and management theory is gathering
pace since the late 70s and is now transforming corporate
practise on an ever increasing scale. Beneath the hype a real,
momentous socio-economic transformation is unfolding and next
to the guru slogans one finds sustained theoretical efforts trying to
offer orientation. The business of management consultancy is
thriving while the discipline of architecture with few exceptions
(2) has yet to recognise that it could play a part in this process.
76/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
. Motivations
The topicality of the task combined with the lack of systematic
study within architecture certainly justifies our choice of agenda.
However, there are other reasons why the AA DRL chose the field
of corporate restructuring as its first research agenda. t is indeed
necessary to understand these further motivations in order to
make sense of the particular way the agenda has been pursued
within the DRL.
1. Resourcing the discipline: the centrality of organisation
On the most general level the DRL's mission statement might be
posed as the re-skilling of the discipline of architecture with
respect to its participation in the overall progress of society. The
question of social progress and the relevance of the emerging
labour processes in this respect will be elaborated below. The re-
skilling of the discipline via a systematic design research
programme demanded first of all a sufficiently complex task as
vehicle to challenge all the resources of analysis and synthesis
architecture has at its disposal. The engagement with the arena of
corporate restructuring does indeed stretch the discipline's
conceptual and compositional repertoires.
Moreover the centrality of questions of organisation/composition
for the discipline of architecture promised that the organisational
problems, concepts and systems formulated by organisational
theory and management science would contribute to a general
enhancement of the discipline's repertoire of spatial organisation.
ndeed we did experience a kind of 'technology transfer' with
respect to concepts of organisation.
The possibility to compare and exchange the conceptual tools of
architecture and organisation theory resides in the mediating
language of configurational analysis and is facilitated by the
shared practise of diagramming. n organisation theory - as much
as in architecture - the diagramme plays an important role in
enabling (as well as limiting) conceptualisation. The
"organigramme" is a standard tool of management consultancy.
Both - architecture and management theory - encounter the limits
of the line (as boundary or connection) and started to experiment
with graphic tools beyond traditional hard edge delineations. We
went further and moved from static organigrammes to animated
time-figures to capture the dynamic of shifting organisational
relations.
The diversity of complex organisational relations to be conceived,
operationalised and articulated offered a fertile field for the
exploration of the general question concerning the possibility and
limits of the spatialization of 'abstract' relations. n turn it
transpired that at the root of such abstract relations
centre/periphery, realms of competency, position, opposition,
subordination, interpenetration etc. there lies an inescapable
series of spatial metaphors which in turn could be advanced or
challenged effectively through architectural intervention (3). This
fact points to the close historical co-evolution of patterns of social
and spatial organisation. Historically architecture has indeed been
the most fundamental source realm for concepts of order and
organisation. This semi-conscious process of concept formation
on the basis of spatial analogy continues as long as society exists
in and through built space. But once this dialectic of spatial, social
and conceptual order is raised to the level of conscious reflection
it allows architecture both to 'translate' organisational concepts
into new effective spatial tropes while in turn launching new
organisational concepts by manipulating space. The disciplinary
transfer goes both ways. n this respect the specific arena of
corporate restructuring and the task to reorganise the social
relations at work - through the design of corporate headquarters -
promised (and proved) to be a fertile field.
2. New formal tropes for new social tropes: The pre-adaptive
advances of the avant-garde
The spatial repertoires elaborated by 'deconstructivism' in the late
eighties/nineties and the latest trends towards a "new architecture
of folding"(4) turn out to be congenial to the new ideas in
organisation- and management-theory. ndeed the noticeable but
hitherto unexplored coincidence of tropes between new
management theory and recent avant-garde architecture
(deconstructivism/folding) was one of the key motivations to take
on the problem of corporate organisation. Architectural notions
like 'superposition', 'multiple affiliation' and 'smoothness'
correspond to organisational tropes like 'matrix', 'network' and
'blur'.
Beyond these specific, striking parallels there is a more general
shared field of references:
n recent years organisation- and management theory has
ventured beyond its disciplinary boundaries, starting to recuperate
the philosophical and cultural discourses of postmodernism, post-
structuralism, deconstruction, chaos theory etc. Management
theory has thus developed from a dry specialism to an
intellectually engaging discourse, which is discovering now
precisely those discourses that the recent avant-garde
architecture has already assimilated and laboured upon for more
than ten years. Thus we approach our agenda with a well-
elaborated conceptual and formal apparatus.
This convergence of recent architectural and managerial
vocabularies offered the opportunity to prove that the fascinating
new graphic spaces we were exploring could be more than
fashion fads and indeed have a degree of profundity. Our ability to
further forge this convergence would be the criterion for the
vitality and relevance of the new architecture, i.e. its ability to
contribute to the ongoing socio-economic restructuring. The task
posed was to identify those progressive realities in the world of
business (de-hierarchization, matrix- and network-organisation,
flexible specialisation, loose and multiple coupling etc.) in which
the proposed new formal patterns and spatial concepts could fulfil
their architectural effects and performative promises.
3. Questions of meaning: Reckoning with the social charge of
architecture
The modern corporation constitutes a highly formalised and
complex social structure. To facilitate the intricate social life of a
corporation, architecture has to express and differentiate a web of
nuanced social relations. With respect to the articulation of team
identities, status groups, hierarchical relations, subtle
demarcations of competency etc. the sensitivity of architecture is
vital.
The general tendency of current restructuring implies a
dynamisation of the corporate structure, concerning its external
boundaries as well as its internal definitions. This further
increases the social charge of space and the sensitivity required
of architecture.
Beyond the mere physical organisation of relations emerges the
task of coherent articulation - spatially as well as morphologically.
Here resides the differentia specifica that distinguishes
architecture from engineering, i.e. the fact that architecture is not
merely concerned with the provision of physical functions
(stability, climatic control, adjacencies, efficient circulation etc.)
but institutes social functions which operate via subjective
orientation and which involve architecture as a medium of
communication.
This in effect prevents the reduction of architecture to a positivist
science. Every architecture involves a phenomenological and
semantic dimension. Architecture as language is recursively self-
creating and self-constraining and thus indeterminable. The
recent emphasis on 'operativity' and 'data-scapes' does not take
account of this crucial distinction between architecture and
engineering. Consequently the initially legitimate concern for
performance versus aesthetics and the ambition to determine
rather than intuitively 'invent' form gravitates towards those
problems that tend to be determinable. Hence the prevailing
emphasis on infrastructure and circulation projects which can be
treated technically. Such objective operations are always involved
in solving architectural problems, but the specific task of
architecture goes beyond this to include the articulation of space
with respect to codes, attached meanings and expectations. This
does not necessarily imply the utilisation of well-established
references. Articulation might involve negation, decoding or
77/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
subversion of known references and within sufficiently large
structures new semantic systems can be forged from the universe
of abstract configurations.
The human use of buildings functions through the intersubjective
orientation of socialised subjects. 'Users' indeed define and orient
themselves socially in and through architecture. The 'construction'
of social identities always already involves architecture. The more
complex the social system the more resourceful must be the
articulatory and 'conceptual' repertoire of any architectural
language (5). Articulation overdetermines and even institutes
organisation where demarcation no longer equals physical
separation and instead relies on the 'reading' of space.
Orientation within a sufficiently complex social space indeed
requires active conceptualisation rather than mere passive
perception.
All this becomes most crucially relevant in case of the definition of
workplaces and their relationships within corporations. Thus our
agenda serves to rebalance the one-sidedness of 'operativity' and
challenges architecture with respect to its phenomenological (i.e.
perceptual/conceptual) dimension.
4. Material constructs: the making of social space
The design of corporate headquarters offered a rich opportunity to
make the new spatial concepts tangible and elaborate them - with
respect to their specific organisational and articulatory function -
in terms of structure, envelope and interior furnishings. n
particular with respect to the latter corporate headquarters are a
very fruitful and demanding domain of exploration. There is hardly
another realm of life that depends so heavily on interior
furnishings. Both in terms of the diversity and in terms of the inter-
relatedness of the various typologies and uses the corporate
realm is a unique challenge. Furniture here exists as a series of
layered systems that co-produce a complex space. The world of
corporate furniture is subject to a complex matrix of
differentiations: formal informal, fixed flexible, individual
collective, demarcating connecting etc. The elaboration of this
universe became one of our most sustained preoccupations. One
of our ambitions was to transcend the dichotomy of shell versus
fit-out. Furniture systems become a crucial organising and space-
making substance rather than mere objects placed within space.
The ambition was an overall integration of material constructs
from load-bearing tructure and external skin to internal partitioning
and furnishing.
There is an immediate configurational as well as material
engagement with the human body and its close range activities,
both individually and with respect to the formation of patterns of
collaboration. These concerns were further augmented by kinetic
capabilities and embedded electronic intelligence leading to
experiments in architectural self-organisation.
5. dentifying an emancipatory project: participatory and self-
organising work patterns
We live in a period of political inertia and reaction. The eighties
suffered the 'neo-liberal' erosion of earlier social reform
programmes which continued in the nineties combined with a
resurgence of nationalism/militarism, the co-optation of the
environmentalist movement and the near-disintegration of left
activism. n this situation a continued commitment to social
progress and emancipation can no longer identify an
unambiguously progressive cause to hook onto. (The recent anti-
globalisation movement is a protest movement, i.e. defensive in
orientation and without a coherent constructive outlook that could
fill the ideological vacuum left behind since the disappearance of
the project of international socialism.)
But while politics proper stagnates and even regresses (6), one
can identify profoundly emancipatory tendencies within the
developmental logic of productive relations. Although the word
'democratisation' is not among the slogans circulating around the
management 'revolution', democratisation seems the repressed
logic of recent (and future) productivity gains, a necessity for the
corporation to be able to cope with permanent re-orientation and
innovation. Discursive co-operation, rather than command and
control, is forced upon the capitalist enterprise by the new degree
of complexity and flexibility of the total production process within
which it has to function. The more information-based, the more
dependent upon research & development production becomes,
the less can it proceed autocratically. These hard facts of
production - more than ever seem to confirm left intuitions about
the effectiveness of democratic relations.
The left wing organisational paradigms (e.g. the rhizome), which
Deleuze & Guattari elaborated in the late seventies, in dialogue
with the new left forms of revolutionary struggle and organisation
(7), seem to become the very paradigms of corporate
restructuring (8): Deleuzian deterritorialisation is dissolving the
rigid departmentalisation (=territorialisation) of competencies and
the aborescent pyramid of classical corporatism is mutating
towards the rhysomatic plateau upon which the leadership is
distributed in a permanently shifting multiplicity where every point
bears the latency of becoming a temporary centre.
However the corporate realm remains locked within the
contradiction of participatory production and divisive distribution.
Thus, while management gurus proclaim the revolution and talk
about liberation management etc., in reality these tendencies
remain compromised and limited by the strictures of class-society,
maintaining hierarchy and hinging authority upon property.
Nevertheless, today there is no better site for a progressive and
forward-looking project than the most competitive contemporary
business.
. Theoretical Premises:
1. Philosophical premise: Historical Materialism
A certain mode of production, or industrial stage, is always
combined with a certain mode of co-operation, or social stage,
and this mode of co-operation is itself a productive force.
Marx/Engels (9)
The approach defended here is based on a materialist conception
of history and the respective framing of the architectural/spatial
problematic. Materialism - in opposition to idealism - identifies in
the development of productivity the primary dynamic of social
change. The social life-process is first of all a competitively
measured production process. Space is historically efficient
space. This spells the central task of architectural theory: to
analyse and anticipate how architectural space engages and
organises productive social relations.
The realm of work, i.e. the evolving labour process with its
dialectic of technological progress, organisational structure and
patterns of collaboration, is the root process with respect to the
overall development of society. (10) All sustained cultural
development co-evolves with the advancing labour process. Work
relations are thus the most fundamental of social relations in the
sense that all other social relations and patterns of social life -
due to the competitive race for productivity - are bound to the
facilitation of productive work. Those social relations, cultural
institutions and architectures that facilitate efficient and effective
work will draw resources and proliferate. The secret behind the
pervasive world wide proliferation of the 'American way of life' in
the post war era lies in the enormous advances in productivity
achieved by the Fordist scheme of socio-economic development.
Our current 'condition of postmodernity' is shaped by the dynamic
of post-fordist restructuring.
78/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
Productivity remains the key selection criterion placed upon any
social experiment. Any emancipatory ambition has to reckon with
this inescapable fact.
Rather than a priori shunning commercial pressures as alien to
the culture of architecture our attitude is that business success is
a potential indicator of progress, reflecting historical needs that at
least deserve critical examination(11). This leads us to the
investigation of the social and spatial patterns of the most
proliferous business activities in the advanced economies.
2. Historical premise: From Fordism to Postfordism
'Post-fordism' as a category of socio-economic periodisation is of
Marxist provenance and has been the central term of a wide and
fruitful debate. (12) Consistent with the premises of Historical
Materialism, Post-fordism identifies the root-cause of the 'culture
of postmodernity' in a series of related transformations within the
techno-economic structure of the advanced industrial world. (13)
The premise here is that after the end of the long post-war
economic boom and the crisis ridden 1970s, the period since the
early eighties represents a transition to a new, distinct phase of
socio-economic development.
The underlying notion of "Fordism", originally put forward by
Gramsci (14), characterises the epoch of Corporate- and State
capitalism since World War (and decisively after World War ) in
reference to its production system: the new paradigm of the
assembly line as pioneered by Henry Ford. Fordism implies the
mass production of complex commodities marked by long term
fixed investments into rigid single purpose technology.
These investments were administered through the organisational
regime of the Fordist corporation: An extensive system of labour-
division allocates to everybody a specialised and repetitive task
within the overall machinery. The intelligence of this bureaucratic
system lies in its overall top down design. The precondition of its
efficiency is the stability of its environment, i.e. the opportunity to
be based upon routine operations.
Since the late seventies the foundation of the Fordist mode of
operation, the stability and predictability of its environment, was
fractured. After a decade of crisis and stagnation features of a
new dynamic started to emerge:
Flexible Specialisation: The chain of events that brought the
Fordist system into crisis at the same time stirred the search for
manufacturing strategies that could respond to the new volatility
of markets. A solution was emerging in the possibility to apply the
evolving information technology within the manufacturing process
and thus establishing the technological underpinning of Post-
fordism. The new computer-based production technologies
developed the ability to offer product diversity (small runs) without
the enormous relative cost of handicraft production that had
previously limited deviations from the mass-product to the realm
of luxury. This is the crucial material factor in the whole process:
the micro-electronic revolution offering a productivity leap in the
production of the desired economies of scope (rather than
economies of scale). nstead of mass production using
specialised machinery and narrowly trained labour, flexible
specialisation allows the manufacture of a whole range
specialised goods for particular and changing markets using
flexible general-purpose machinery, requiring more broadly
educated workforce with initiative to contribute to permanent
innovation.
These transformations and new possibilities in the realm of the
immediate material production impact the whole administrative
superstructure which is called upon to manage the new dynamic
flow of production (and consumption). Functions like marketing,
research & development, and all sorts of further consultancy
services (T, financial, legal, managerial) proliferate. n this 'third'
or 'service sector' - or rather 'knowledge economy' - we find the
most decisively Post-fordist experiments with non-linear and fluid
forms of organisation. (Within this sector we sought out our quasi-
clients). Generally more and more work takes the form of
intellectual rather than physical production. Thus the structure and
pattern of economic activity in general is assimilated to the
processes of research and artistic creation. This is the hallmark of
the new knowledge economy. ncreasingly the most decisive
corporate value resides in the 'human' or rather 'social capital',
i.e. in the corporate organisational architectures, collaborative
processes and patterns of communication, rather than in its
physical capital assets. Those patterns constitute the collective
intelligence that transforms information into vital operative
knowledge.
As an organisation shifts from being straightforward manufacturer
or provider of a standard service to become a creative innovator,
it no longer just utilizes a given knowledge, but needs to operate
as original producer of knowledge. The new discipline of
knowledge management takes account of this situation.
Management theory offers concepts like the learning
organisation(15) or the intelligent enterprise(16). Here learning,
knowledge and intelligence are attributed to organisations rather
than individuals. For us this is just the first step towards the
further expansion of the notion of organisational intelligence to
include the various spatial systems that structure and facilitate the
vital communication processes within the business.
Knowledge becomes the most precious resource within the
organisation. But this resource can not be bought in from outside
like energy or labour. t can not be acquired readymade.
Knowledge involves much more than information, it is the right
information employed at the right time and place, evaluated and
adapted within a complex praxis. Organisational knowledge,
again goes beyond individual knowledge. Organisational
knowledge resides within the organisational pattern itself, in the
corporate system of communication and collaboration, i.e. in the
distribution and dynamic integration of competencies, in the
mechanisms, forms and modes of interaction between the various
knowledge workers. The spatial distribution and the nuanced
articulation of territories, boundaries and spatial interfaces has an
important role to play here. Those architectural patterns contribute
to the constitution of the collective intelligence that transforms
information into vital operative knowledge.
Current socio-economic restructuring proceeds through the
contradictory interaction of technological, organisational and
political processes. t is crucial to distinguish those aspects that
pertain to productive progress from those that pertain to the
simultaneously evolving political conditions that frame and
overdetermine or 'distort' productive restructuring. Post-fordism as
a new paradigm of production attaining new levels of productivity
needs to be distinguished from the simultaneous neo-liberal
offensive that utilises the unsettled relations of production for a
decisive shift to the right in the underlying political relations.
n my analysis the three main progressive and productive factors
of Postfordist restructuring are:
- Globalisation, i.e. a new level of international integration of
production
- Flexible specialisation - fast cycles of innovation and new
economies of scope made possible by the micro-electronic
revolution.
- The organisational revolution - i.e. the relative de-hierarchisation
and de-beaurocratisation of work relations towards participatory
structures and collaborative self-organisation.
Currently these features are tied to neo-liberalism and are thus
largely experienced as problems rather than advantages.
Globalisation takes the form of a neo-liberal deregulation of trade
and investment flows extenuating wealth differentials and leading
to a world-wide intensification of conflict. The attendant break up
79/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
of national welfare systems result in a fierce downward
competition of 'labour-costs' (=incomes) even in the most
advanced economies. The new flexibility and potential richness of
work is experienced as existential insecurity. On the product side
the new economies of scope are instrumentalised for stratification
and status consumption rather than non-exclusive diversity. They
become barriers to communication rather than a means of social
communication.
Organisational progress within the capitalist business remains
compromised by the problems of a system that mediates all its
transactions via the category of private property: security-
measures, the protection of intellectual property, divisive income
disparities, 'territorial' attitudes, monopolisation of information,
secret decision making,careerism etc.(17)
n the face of these contradictions it was our methodological
premise to make the genuinely progressive features (participatory
decision making, lateral communication, ongoing self-
determination of all productive contributors etc.) decisive for our
design speculation. This implied the hypothetical bracketing of
those aspects that currently compromise the thrust of
development.
Notes & references:
1. Cannon, T.: Welcome to the Revolution - Managing Paradox in
the 21st Century, London 1996
Ray, M. & Rinzler,A.:The new Paradigm for Business, L.A. 1993
Peters,T. : Liberation Management - Necessary Disorganisation
for Nanosecond Nineties, N.Y. 1993
Peters, T.: Thriving on Chaos, N.Y. 1987
Bergquist,W.: The Postmodern Organisation - mastering the art of
irreversable change, New York 1993
Kilduff,m.: Deconstructing Organisations, Academy of
Management review 18
Blanchard,K.& Johnson,S.: The One Minute Manager, New York
1982
Bower,J.L.: Disruptive Technologies - Catching the Wave, Harvard
Business Review, Jan./Feb.1995
Kelly, S. & Allison M.A.: The Complexity Advantage, New York
1998
Brown, S.L.& Eisenhardt, K.M.: Competing on the Edge
Strategy as Structured Chaos, Boston 1998
2. Two London based examples for a new type of hybrid practise
that offers a research based service in the field of corporate
space planning: DEGW (Duffy, Eley, Giffone, Worthington); Bill
Hillier's Space Syntax Laboratory.
3.This is in effect the programme of deconstructivism in
architecture.
4.Greg Lynn's 'Curvelinearity' and Jeff Kipnis 'Towards a New
Architecture' have been seminal.
5.One the most striking innovations of architecture's repertoire of
spatial articulation is given with Colin Rowe's concept of
Phenomenal Transparency.
6. The political arena has been eroded by the increasing futility of
national policies in a globalised world.
7.Deleuze and Guattari's philosophy relates to the radical talian
"autonomia" movement.
See: taly: Autonomia - Post-political Politics, Semio-text(e),
N.Y.C.1980
This discourse entered architecture in the form of the
philosophical abstractions propagated by Deleuze and Guattari's
'Thousand Plateaus', the main source of inspiration for the formal
strategies of "Folding". Departmentalisation and sub-
departmentalisation - the perfect examples of Deleuzian
"territorialization" - are the structural principles of the bureaucratic
mode of organisation.
8. see: Patrik Schumacher, Arbeit, Spiel und Anarchie
in: Work & Culture - Bro.nszenierung von Arbeit
Herausgeber: Herbert Lachmayer und Eleonora Luis, Ritterverlag,
Klagenfurt
9. Karl Marx & Frederick Engels, The German deology, Page 69,
ElecBook, London 1998
10. The mode of production of material life conditions the general
process of social,
political and intellectual life. Karl Marx, Preface to A Contribution
to the Critique of Political Economy,
Page 7, ElecBook, London 1998
Also: What they are, therefore, coincides with their production,
both with what they produce and with how they produce. Karl
Marx & Frederick Engels, The German deology, Page 69,
ElecBook, London 1998
11. This can be maintained even if one has to concede that
money flows in the direction of effective (rather than absolute)
demand.
12. See:
Ash Amin, p.1, ntroduction to "Post-Fordism - A Reader", Oxford /
Cambridge MA.
Robin Murray, Fordism and Postfordism, in S. Hall & M.Jacques,
New Times, London 1989
W. Ruigrok & R. van Tulder, The Logic of nternational
Restructuring, London, New York 1995
Hirst,P. & Zeitlin,J., Flexible Specialization versus post-Fordism,
London 1991
David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity, Oxford /
Cambridge MA. 1989
13.One of the catalysts of the debate (in Britain) was the search
for a socio-economic explanation of Thatcherism and the effort to
situate the necessary reformulation of left political strategies. The
result was an overly optimistic assessments of the progressive
and emancipatory potential of the New Times of post-fordist
transformation.
See: Stuart Hall, The meaning of New Times, in: S. Hall &
M.Jacques, New Times, London 1989
14. Antonio Gramsci, Americanism and Fordism, in A Gramsci
Reader, Ed. David Forgacs, London 1988, p.279
15. Senge, Peter, The Fifth Discipline, New York 1990
16. Quinn, James, ntelligent enterprise. A knowledge and service
based paradigm for industry. New York 1992
17. Under Capitalism all contributions to the socially integrated
production are overshadowed by the requirement to serve as a
means to individual appropriation. This structural coupling of
production and distribution has turned from an engine of progress
and innovation into a liability.
Arguing for Elegance
Patrik Schumacher, London 2006,
Published in: Elegance, AD (Architectural Design),
January/February 2007
Editor: Helen Castle, Guest-edited by Ali Rahim & Hina Jamelle
Elegance speaks for itself. n everyday life elegance suggests
sophistication, taste and refinement. t is an unquestioned value
of immediate appeal and in no need for argument.
However, as a new explicit watch-word claiming to guide the next
stage of avant-garde architecture it constitutes a provocation. t is
precisely this mainstream appeal of elegance that runs counter to
the very self-conception of any avant-gardism. n fact the pursuit
of elegance is most probably incompatible with radical newness.
On the count of radicalism the pursuit of strangeness and the
construction of abstract machines(1) is more productive than
anything one might expect from the pursuit of elegance. However,
80/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
innovation involves more than radical newness. Mutation is to be
followed by selection, recombination, and refinement before the
avant-garde can release its results to mainstream reproduction.
(2) The time is ripe. We have reached the final stages of the
current cycle of avant-gardist innovation: Folds and blobs are
heading mainstream. The escape from the rarefied realm of
academia and art the twin feeding grounds for potential
innovations in architecture and design should not be denigrated.
What else should be the destiny and purpose of the avant-garde?
ts function is to advance the development of the discipline. Avant-
garde and mainstream are two complementing sides of a single
evolution: architectural progress. Like any evolutionary process
this process has differentiated specific evolutionary mechanisms
for mutation (avant-garde), selection (critics & early adopters) and
reproduction (mainstream profession).
Ali Rahim is rightly arguing that the scene is set for a phase of
refinement rather than a phase of further radical newness.
Elegance is perhaps the most pertinent slogan for this phase.
Other candidates and contenders might step forward but there
can be no doubt about the need for effective slogans to direct and
cohere our creative energies into an effective collective effort.
The immediate appeal of elegance is certainly an asset in the
push towards the mainstream. would like to argue that the
current theoretical emptiness of elegance is also an asset rather
than a liability. Elegance is certainly a much more clever choice
than the traditional theoretical heavy-weight beauty. While
beauty is so loaded and contested that it will stir up a
burdensome deadload of theoreticians wasting our time with
irrelevant quarrels about the essence of beauty, elegance is lite,
a theoretical virgin territory, giving plenty of space to maneuver,
allowing us to elaborate all the specific semantic connections,
connotations and nuanced demarcations we require to define this
concept for our purposes and harness its positive energy to push
the particular trajectory of avant-garde architecture at this current
juncture. What follows is the attempt to help in the forging of such
a particular notion of elegance.
Elegance is a mainstream value with a wide-spread application in
many arenas. There is nothing new or original about using this
term in the architectural arena. What is original and provocative is
the attempt to push this term into the forefront of the current
avant-garde architectural trend and to do this by giving this term a
well defined thrust and theoretical underpinning.

Theory of Elegance
The elegance we are talking about is not the elegance of
minimalism. Minimalist elegance thrives on simplicity. The
elegance we are promoting here instead thrives on complexity.
Elegance in our terms achieves a visual reduction of an
underlying complexity that is thereby sublated rather than
eliminated. This is my fundamental thesis: Elegance articulates
complexity.
This new theory of elegance in contemporary architecture has two
distinct components:
descriptive: the elaboration of a descriptive language that
provides the resources to distinguish and characterize the style in
question and the particular agenda of its refinement
argumentative: the stipulation of form-function relationships and
the formulation of hypotheses about the social efficacy and
pertinence of elegant architecture in the context of
contemporary societal challenges.(3)
Attributed to a person elegance suggests the effortless display of
sophistication. We also talk about an elegant solution to a
complex problem. n fact only if the problem is complex and
difficult does the solution deserve the attribute elegant. While
simplistic solutions are pseudo-solutions, the elegant solution is
marked by an economy of means by which it conquers complexity
and resolves (unnecessary) complications.
t is this kind of connotation that we would like to harness. An
elegant building or urban design should therefore be able to
manage considerable complexity without descending into
disorder.
We might adopt the language of system theory and speak of more
or less complex systems. We can distinguish two types of items
that might differentiate/compose a system: elements and sub-
systems (collections of related/connected elements). With respect
to the measure of (ordered) complexity we might distinguish
several dimensions:
1-the number and diversity of distinguishable items within the
comple
2-the density and diversity of relationships between
distinguishable items
3-relations between ordered sets of elements (correlations)
4-relations between relations (systems of relations)
An elegant composition displays a high level of complexity in all
dimensions, including the higher dimensions 3 & 4, which imply a
move from complexity to ordered complexity. As ordered
complexity the elegant composition is highly differentiated, yet this
differentiation is rule-governed. t is based on a systematic set of
lawful correlations that are defined between the differentiated
elements and subsystems. These correlations integrate and
(re-)establish a visible coherence and unity across the
differentiated system.(4)

Elegance and Organisation
We need to distinguish two parallel applications of the concept of
complexity in our domain of reference: The underlying complexity
of the institutional arrangements and life-processes on the one
hand needs to be distinguished from the complexity of the spatial
arrangements and architectural forms that help to organize and
articulate those life-processes on the other hand. The underlying
social complexity has to be somehow translated into the spatial
complexity of an architectural complex. The concept of
organisation operates at a level of abstraction that encompasses
both domains. t is possible to elaborate types, patterns, systems
and dimensions of organization that can guide both the analysis
of the (complex) social processes as well as the synthesis of the
appropriate (complex) spatial forms. Complex social organization
is to be registered, facilitated and expressed by elegant spatial
formations.
The primary argument here is that elegance understood in this
way facilitates orientation within a spatial complex arrangement
and thus ensures the legibility of a complex social formation.
Again: Elegance articulates complexity. And: The articulation of
complexity prevents perplexity.

Elegance as second nature
t is the sense of law-governed complexity that assimilates this
work to the forms and spaces we perceive in organic as well as in
inorganic natural systems, where all forms are the result of
lawfully interacting forces. Just like natural systems, elegant
compositions are so highly integrated that they cannot be easily
decomposed into independent subsystems a major point of
difference in comparison with the modern design paradigm of
clear separation of functional subsystems. n fact the exploitation
of natural forms like landscape formations or organic
morphologies as a source domain for analogical transference into
architecture makes a constructive contribution to the development
of this new paradigm and language of architecture.
Frei Otto went a step further and literally harnessed the
lawfulness of physical systems as form-finding procedure to
generate his design-morphology. The results have been striking.
Lars Spuybroek has described these processes as material
computing(5). Such analog form-finding processes can
complement the new digital design tools that might in fact be
81/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
described as quasi-physical form-finding processes.
Elegant compositions or complexes are highly integrated
formal/spatial systems that look like those highly integrated
natural systems where all forms are the result of the lawful
interaction of physical forces or like organic system where the
forms result from a similar play of forces selected and integrated
in adaptation to performance requirements. Such elegant
compositions resist decomposition, just like their natural models.
A specific aspect of this overall lawful and integrated nature of
elegance is the capacity of elegant compositions to adapt to
complex urban contexts. Adaptive capacity or adaptation is
another key ambition of the contemporary avant-garde trend that
might suggest comparison with natural organic systems. An
architectural system that has an enhanced capacity to adapt to its
environment will result in an intricate artifact-context ensemble
that has sublated initial contradictions into a new complex
synthesis that further enhances the overall sense of sophisticated
elegance.

Designing Elegance
This effect, which in nature emerges through self-organisation,
has to be elaborately constructed in sustained design efforts,
guided by appropriate recipes and principles.
Robert Venturi made an early contribution by formulating a
compositional principle that is useful here. His notion of the
difficult whole is concerned with the compositional integration of
diversity. t is the difficult unity through inclusion rather than the
easy unity through exclusion.(6) One of the specific techniques
he has identified is the technique he has termed inflection. By
inflecting towards something outside themselves, the parts
contain their own linkage.(7) He identified this technique and its
integrative effect in baroque architecture, in comparison with the
more additive structure of Renaissance compositions where each
subsystem rests complete within itself. n contrast, baroque
inflection achieves the integration of parts (subsystems) by
means of imposing an overarching curvature which leaves the
part asymmetrical/incomplete requiring the other complementary
parts to continue and complete the curvature.
The concept of inflection can be generalized, so that we can
propose:
Elegance requires that the layers and subsystems of a complex
composition are mutually inflected. Every new element or new
layer that enters the complex will both inflect the overall
composition and will in turn be inflected. Elegance can never
result from a merely additive complication.(8)

Computing Elegance
Current digital modeling tools are able to facilitate integrative
effects: lofting, spline-networks, soft-bodies, working with force-
fields ect. Morphing the ultimate effect of animation movie
technology - has been an often emulated paradigm for achieving
the continuity of the differentiated.
There is an inevitable, powerful relationship between the new
digital tools (like animation software), compositional tropes and
stylistic characteristics. ntensive coherence (Kipnis), pliancy,
multiple affiliations (Lynn), intricacy (Lynn) etc. are the concepts
coined to describe the compositional ambitions that emerged
early in the wake of the new modeling tools. n fact it has become
increasingly easy to achieve abstract sketch-designs (surfaces)
that satisfy these terms and thereby achieving a measure of
elegance as defined here. However, surface compositions are
only the first sketchy step in the design of an elegant architecture.
Only in limit cases such as the installation ice-storm (Zaha
Hadid & Patrik Schumacher, Vienna 2003) does the modeled
surface translate directly into a built reality in this case an
extensive experiment in morphing.

Constructing Elegance
The next obvious challenge was to go beyond pure surfaces and
to elaborate structural systems that are compatible with this
ambition for continuous differentiation, perhaps even enhancing
the overall effect of integrated complexity. One of the most
convincing contributions was Jesse Reiser's notion of a space-
frame exemplified in his competition entry for Manhattan's West
Side (9) in 1999. n the work of Reiser + Umemoto the space-
frame becomes a space-filling medium that could receive
continuous deformations that inform the system by allowing
disturbances (squeezes, clearances, inserted objects) to radiate
through the space-frame.
The next step was the focus on the envelope: how to tessellate or
panelize continuously changing double-curved surfaces and
further, how to integrate (rather than merely impose) openings.
Naturally, on the way to the elaboration of fully functional, fully
detailed designs, whereby evermore systems or layers need to be
integrated, the principle of inflection (organic inter-articulation)
becomes evermore difficult to maintain. Also the visual field is in
danger of being overcrowded, compromising legibility and
orientation.
t is at this moment of mounting difficulty - in the face of bringing
the new paradigm into large scale realization - that elegance
becomes an explicit priority, not least because the built results
have all too often been disappointing in this respect. Already on
the level of detailed digital modeling, every new layer of function
or detailing requires a new, increasing ingenuity to be
(seamlessly) incorporated. With view to execution further
demands of geometric lawfulness, precision and high order
surface continuity become paramount concerns. Contemporary
car design affords a challenging benchmark both in terms of the
tight inflective nesting of multiple functional features and in terms
of surface continuity. The obvious progress of the last few years is
equally reliant upon digital design and manufacturing. For
instance, observe the way the headlights of the latest Mercedes
sport-cars are massaged into the subtle surface of the chassis.

Criteria and Postulates of Elegance
The notion of elegance promoted here still gives a certain
relevance to Alberti's criterion of beauty: you can neither add, nor
subtract without destroying the harmony achieved. Except in the
case of contemporary elegance the overall composition lacks this
sense of perfect closure that is implied in Alberti's conception.
Alberti focused on key ordering principles, like symmetry and
proportion. These principles were seen as integrating the various
parts into a whole by means of setting those parts into definite
relations of relative position and proportion in analogy to the
human figure. Perhaps the best example of this ideal is the
Palladian villa. n contrast contemporary projects remain
incomplete compositions, more akin to the Deleuzian notion of
assemblage than to the classical conception of the organism. Our
current idea of organic integration does not rely on fixed ideal
types. Neither does it presuppose any proportional system, nor
does it privilege symmetry. nstead the parts or subsystems
mutually inflect and adapt to each other achieving integration by
various modes of spatial interlocking, soft transitions at the
boundaries between parts, and morphological affiliation etc.
The principle of elegance postulates: do not add or subtract
without elaborate inflections, mediations or interarticulations.
While the classical concept of preordained perfection has thus
been abandoned, there still remains a strong sense of increasing
tightness and stringency, approaching even a sense of internal
necessity, as the network of compositional relations is elaborated
and tightened. guess every designer knows this from his/her
own design experience. The more the compositional cross-
referencing, inflection and organic inter-articulation within the
design has been advanced, the harder it becomes to add or
subtract elements. This kind of design trajectory - although wide
open at the beginning - beyond a certain point becomes heavily
self-constraining. One might be inclined to talk about the
increasing self-determination of a composition: an emergent
(rather than preordained) perfection.
The systems theorist Niklas Luhmann has emphasized this
phenomenon - which he has termed the self-
programming(10)of the individual artwork - that might be
observed within all artistic work that is concerned with the
82/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
elaboration of complex artifacts, whether they might be elaborate
paintings, musical compositions, or literary works. Luhmann takes
account of the necessity that manifests itself in the artwork. He
elaborates: n this sense, creating a work of art . generates the
freedom to make decisions on the basis of which one can
continue one's work. The freedoms and necessities one
encounters are entirely . consequences of decisions made
within the work. The necessity of certain consequences one
experiences in one's work . is not imposed . but results from
the fact that one began, and how. This entails the risk of running
into insoluble problems ..(11)
guess every designer knows how a design-trajectory can lead
into a dead end, can fail to work, or remain unresolved. The
elegance we mean - elegance on top of complexity - is a tall
order, and can not be secured in advance. Although we can
provide certain recipes - e.g. the employment global distortions to
cohere a field of fragments etc.- the result can not be
guaranteed.
With increasing complexity the maintenance of elegance
becomes increasingly demanding.
Complexity and elegance stand in a relation of precarious mutual
amplification: a relation of increasingly impropable mutual
enhancement, i.e. mutual amplification with increasing propability
of collapse.

Arguing for Elegance
Why should we bother to strife for this increasingly difficult
elegance? Does this elegance serve a purpose beyond itself?
The overriding headline here is: Orientation within complex
organizations.
Contemporary architectural briefs are marked by a demand for
evermore complex and simultaneous programmatic provisions to
be organized within evermore complex urban contexts. Elegance
allows for an increased programmatic complexity to coincide with
a relative reduction of visual complication by means of integrating
multiple elements into a coherent and continuous formal and
spatial system. The general challenge is to find modes of
composition that can articulate complex arrangements and
relationships without losing legibility and the capacity to orient
users.
Elegance as defined here signifies this capacity to articulate
complex life processes in a way that can maintain overall
comprehension, legibility and continuous orientation within the
composition.
n this vein, for instance, Zaha Hadid Architects have been
promoting an architecture without corners because corners
pollute the visual field usually without signifying anything (unless
they are specifically made to signify something).
Complex organizational relations of overlapping, or
interpenetrating domains can be articulated and made legible, so
that a complex order is perceived rather than allowing the
complexity to appear as disorder. The user might, for instance, be
able to perceive his position as a position where several domains
intersect, or (more ambitious) where multiple perspectives unravel
the spatial interpenetration of multiple simultaneous use-patterns
relating to the multiple audiences which tend to coincide in
contemporary institutions. How can this be achieved?
Traditionally spatial orientation has been operating primarily on
the basis of relations of inclusion or containment - the Russian
doll principle of nesting domains. Spatial position is defined as
series of relations of containments: continent, country, region, city,
district, neighborhood, estate, building, floor, apartment, room.
Each domain has a clear boundary and is fully contained within a
larger domain with an equally crisp boundary. This is how you
know where you are at any time. A change of position implies the
crossing of a boundary. Orientation is traditionally further
supported if the domains can be identified with easily
recognizable platonic/geometric figures like circles, squares or
rectangles. Domains and figures are ideally kept separate. t
should be obvious that the scope of this system of ordering is
limited. A sense of order can only be maintained on the basis of a
radical reductionism that is antithetical to the realities of
contemporary life. On the one hand this predicament leads to the
fallacy of minimalism craving for an artificial simplicity and on the
other hand to the fetishistic embrace of disorder as in the
celebration of Tokyo's visual chaos.
A radically different, alternative mode of ordering and orientation
is afforded by the principles of elegance discussed above. Here
figures and domains need not sustain platonic simplicity because
their deformation does no longer spell the break down of order
but the lawful inscription of information. Figures/domains do not
have to remain neatly separated because we have developed
lawful rules of mutual inflection, and lawful rules of gradual
transformation.
Orientation in a complex, lawfully differentiated field affords
navigation along vectors of transformation for instance a
morphing trajectory - rather than snapping from position to
position via boundary crossings. n the extreme case of a pure
field condition both bounded domains and identifiable figures
have in fact disappeared and orientation along reference objects
and bounded/nested domains has been fully replaced by the
navigation of lawfully modulated field qualities like density,
directionality, agitation in the field etc., affording inferences and
anticipations. Projects like the Master-plan for One North, an
urban science and business park in Singapore, or the design for a
new national talian museum of 21st Century art and architecture
(MAXX) in Rome project are pursuing this thesis.

Striving for Elegance - Zaha Hadid Architects
t is an undisputable fact of life at Zaha Hadid Architects that 90%
the time and energy is spent on the achievement of elegance,
after the concept has been long been clarified and all functional
arrangements are fully resolved. The real hard work is the elegant
formal resolution of the intended complex assemblage.
As first example might serve the design for a new Guggenheim
Museum in Taichung, Taiwan. Here, the two gallery wings are
mediated by allowing both to meld into the central communication
space, which itself is continuous with the surrounding park-scape.
All transitions are made smooth. Changes in surface material
never coincide with or reinforce changes in geometry. There are
no add-on parts that could be easily separated out of the overall
composition. The ramps and paths are cuts and folds molded into
the ground surface, as well as into the envelope of the building,
thus mediating the two domains. The lattice of the roof bridging
the central public space is not a neutral grid but an irregular
triangulation that is adapted to the wedge-shaped gap between
the two gallery wings. The structural beams are formally affiliated
with the pedestrian bridges that cross this canyon space below.
The glass mullions of the roof glazing continue this game of
triangulation on a smaller scale. The openings within the building
envelope are not punched out as arbitrary shapes; instead the
surface is spliced along its lines of least curvature to create
louvered openings, akin to gills, which respect the integrity of the
surface.
The recently completed Science Museum in Wolfsburg (Phaeno)
is the virtuoso masterpiece in the articulation of complex
continuities that can be followed all the way through the building.
The whole building is inscribed within a rigid trapezoid whose
angles are adapted to the site-condition. Within this sharp-edged
trapezoid everything flows and melds without corners. The
ground-surface is molded into an artificial topography that
registers and receives the cones that carry the building. These
cones each with its own variation of angles and radii - blend
seamlessly into the waffle-slab above. Those cones also
reemerge within the interior either as craters or as cones that
continue to carry the space-frame above. There is an essential
symbiosis in the spatial and structural conception of the building,
and a close inter-articulation of the waffle concrete structure of the
raised floor and the steel space-frame that carries the roof. The
lateral openings are of two kinds: the large openings are conic
sections that produce the characteristic paraboloidal form, and
the smaller openings come in swarms that are articulated as
variations of the swarm of voids that make up the waffle slab.
83/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
These regulations structure a repertoire of operations that allow
for the adaptable handling of all sorts of functional and contextual
contingencies without loosing formal consistency. Such a
regulated repertoire of design moves is the precondition (not the
guarantee) of elegance. More universal rules like balancing within
an asymmetric, dynamic equilibrium, and a certain (new,
stretched) range of plausible proportions are still to be observed.
Both concerns (dynamic equilibrium and proportion) also pertain
to the rhythmic flow of the interior spaces.
Perhaps the most significant example is the Central Building for
the new BMW plant in Leipzig. ts significance resides in the fact
that elegance is here put to effective work with respect to the
articulation of a very dense, complex and multi-layered productive
life process. Here the fertile and pliant formalism of flow lines has
been pursuit obsessively. Every system was forced (structure,
partitions, circulation, lighting, conveyors etc.) to contribute to the
intricate play of bundling, diverging and converging trajectories.
The design for a new monumental Performing Arts Complex on
an artificial island in Dubai's artificial creek represents the so far
unsurpassed apotheosis of architectural fluidity within the work of
Zaha Hadid Architects. The compelling elegance results from the
dune-like handling of the great masses in quasi-dynamic, quasi-
natural sweeps. Again, the embedding of the buildings within an
artificial topography produces the sensation of overall
seamlessness within the complex. A further factor is the
consistency of the morphological repertoire across scales, all the
way to balconies and staircase details.
The arrangement of three towers within a dynamic equilibrium
composition is aiming at grace and elegance with a monumental
mass of 55, 65 and 75 storeys respectively. The suggestion of
dancing towers once more borrows from the realm of dynamics
to acquire a heightened sense of compositional rule and logic with
respect to the primary massing. Elegance further requires the
handling of variations within a framework of strict morphological
regulation: All lines meet tangentially. Secondary articulations like
the facade support and extend the play of the overall massing.
The competition entry (1st Prize) for a new Centre for slamic Art
within the Louvre in Paris is a recent example within the work of
Zaha Hadid Architects where a play of oppositions is
choreographed by means of seamless transitions and affiliations
between those diametrically opposed elements. Thus what might
otherwise be construed as a contradiction transfigures into a
symbiotic relationship. n the case of the slamic Centre the
historical courtyard, as figural void, seamlessly involutes and
transitions into a highly contemporary figural object. The surface
transition is emphasized not only by fillets and material affiliations,
but it is further emphasized by a twist that distorts the cubic figure
and drags the ground surface along as it blends into the object.
This move also opens a rift that functions as entrance. The
ornamental texture is another tenuous, affiliative measure that
contributes to the overall sense that there operates a hidden
logic.
This sense of hidden logic, that can be perceived but not always
explicitly spelled out by the observer, is at the heart of what we
mean by an elegance that articulates an underlying complexity of
relations.
Notes:
1. The concept of Abstract Machine has been imported from
Deleuze & Guattarri's A Thousand Plateaus. Within architectural
discourse the concept denotes open-ended design-processes
that submit to runaway graphic or computational processes, thus
suspending purpose and rational control. Eisenman's formal
transformational series have been a seminal precursor.
2.At this juncture the protagonists involved typically bifurcate into
two distinct groups with two quite different career trajectories:
those who go mainstream together with the innovations they
contributed to, and those who stay within the domain of the avant-
garde to move on into further unknown territory.
3. The elaboration of a descriptive language is a precondition for
any theory and an extremely important mechanism for directed
architectural creativity however, it is this second argumentative
component that can sustain the claim for the pertinence of the
trend pushed here.
4. The avoidance of the loaded concept of beauty and its
attendant disputes does not exclude the recognition that there are
certain (perhaps inevitable) continuities with certain prior
reflections around the concept of beauty: n fact this emphasis on
establishing coherence within the differentiated - unity in
difference is reminiscent of Francis Hutcheson's notion of
beauty as compound ratio of uniformity and variety. pp.38,
Francis Hutcheson, nquiry into the Original of Our deas of
Beauty and Virtue, 1725, critical ed. The Hague, 1973. Also see
Hogarth's notion of composed variety, p.28, William Hogarth,
The Analysis of Beauty, Yale University Press, New Haven &
London 1997. My emphasis on ordered complexity might be
understood as a radicalization of William Hogarth's notion of
composed variety. Hogarth, theorizing the aesthetics of the
Rococo, is promoting variety against sameness, but insists on
composed variety, for variety uncomposed, and without design, is
confusion and deformity.(p.28)
5. What Frei Otto called Formfinding, Lars Spuybroek refers to
as Material Computing in order to emphasise the similarity of
those physical processes with the by now familiar and ubiquitous
digital modelling techniques offered by animation software like
Maya.
6. p.88, Robert Venturi, Complexity and Contradiction in
Architecture, second edition, New York 1977

7. p.89, Robert Venturi, Complexity and Contradiction in
Architecture, second edition, New York 1977
8. For instance, Tschumi'sParc de la villette, in contrast, still
operates with layers that remain indifferent to each other. The
introduction of inflection marks the shift from deconstructivism to
folding.
9. p.128, West Side Convergence Competition Entry, New York
1999, in:Reiser + Umemoto, Atlas of Novel Tectonics, New York
2006
10. p.204, Niklas Luhmann, Art as Social System, Stanford
California 2000
11. p.203/204, Niklas Luhmann, Art as Social System, Stanford
California 2000
Style as Research Programme
Patrik Schumacher, London 2008
Published in: DRL TEN, AADRL Documents 2, AA Publications,
Architectural Association, London
Looking back over 10 years of DRL work the most striking feature
is the great sense of continuity across the years. This continuity
bears witness to Mies' famous dictum that you cannot invent a
new architecture every Monday morning.
The totality of nearly one hundred projects - authored by about
350 students working in teams - gives the impression of a single
oeuvre. At the same time there is a cumulative build up of
virtuosity, resolution and refinement. This is not only due to
improving tools and techniques. t is a function of the consistency
of agendas, ambitions and values that allow each generation of
students to build upon the achievements of their predecessors.
This continuity also reflects the DRL's active participation in a
closely knit discourse within the contemporary architectural avant-
garde. This discourse encompasses other units at the AA, other
schools like Columbia, Yale, U-Penn, UCLA, Vienna Applied Arts
etc., as well as a whole series of innovative architectural practices
that all have been linked in one way or another with the academic
hubs mentioned.
84/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
The shared concepts, programmatic biases, computational
techniques, formal repertoires, and tectonic logics that
characterize the work under the auspices of this discourse are
crystallizing into a solid new paradigm for architecture,
engendering the formation of a new style: Parametricism.[1]
Avant-garde styles might be interpreted and evaluated in analogy
to new scientific paradigms, affording a new conceptual
framework, and formulating new aims, methods and values. Thus
a new direction for concerted research work is established.[2] My
thesis is therefore: Styles are design research programmes.
t is important to distinguish between research programmes in the
literal sense of institutional research plans from the meta-scientific
conception of research programmes that has been introduced into
the philosophy of science[3]: whole new research traditions that
are directed by a new fundamental theoretical framework. t is this
latter concept that is utilized here for the reinterpretation of the
concept of style.
With respect to research programmes in the literal sense we must
note their total absence from the domain of architecture.[4] This
absence of dedicated research institutions places the burden of
innovation upon the shoulders of certain avant-garde schools and
firms. Both have to divert their resources away from their
supposed core task - training students in the case of the schools
and servicing clients in the case of the firms - to pursue design
research. There is no other mechanism of innovation in
architecture.
nnovation in architecture proceeds via the progression of styles.
This implies the alternation between periods of cumulative
advancement within a style and revolutionary periods of transition
between styles. A similar rhythm structures scientific progress.
This rhythm has been captured in Thomas Kuhn's famous
distinction of two very different patterns of scientific
communication: Normal scienceproceeding within a dominant
scientific paradigm and revolutionary science engendering
paradigm shift[5]. Accordingly we can distinguish cumulative
design research from revolutionary design research. During
cumulative periods the avant-garde designers are eager to solve
problem after problem posed by the style/research programme
shared within the hegemonic avant-garde movement.
Revolutionary periods ensue when the dominant research
programme looses its fertility. The search for alternative routes
forward produces schisms and isms and the philosophers trump
the designers, until a new vital paradigm gains ground and
ascends to hegemony once more focusing a new cycle of
innovations under the auspices of a new style. The DRL was born
at such a new take off point that was made possible by the
preceeding revolutionary period and its decisive resolution.[6]
Styles represent cycles of innovation, gathering the design
research efforts into a collective endeavor. Stable self-identity is
here as much a necessary precondition of evolution as it is in the
case of organic life. Avant-garde design projects are best
understood as speculative hypotheses, formulated within a
certain style. The style serves as a cohering research programme
that allows for the construction of a systematic series of design
experiments.
With respect to the critical evaluation of avant-garde work, it is
important to emphasize that the status of the avant-garde project
as original, speculative hypothesis is its very raison d'tre. The
avant-garde is not aiming at the delivery of state of the art
solutions, or fully corroborated improvements. mprovements that
can compete with the state of the art bench-mark of performance
cannot be expected from those who set out to push the
boundaries.
This initial task-inadequacy of avant-garde styles is mirrored in
the initial inadequacy of new paradigms in science. New scientific
research programmes often start with idealized, knowingly
unrealistic assumptions, without yet expecting empirical
corroboration. The theoretical edifice that can eventually stand full
empirical testing will be constructed via a series of interim stages
that can only cover partial aspects of reality, remaining enveloped
by preliminary assumptions. The research programme is thus a
rough roadmap for a future that is based on radically new
principles.[7]
To hold on to the new principles - the hard core - in the face of
difficulties is crucial[8] for the chance of eventual success. This
tenacity - abundantly evident in the 10 years of DRL projects -
might at times appear as dogmatic obstinacy. The obstinate
insistence of solving everything with a folding single surface -
project upon project, slowly wrenching the plausible from the
implausible might be loosely! compared to the Newtonian
insistence to explain everything from planets to bullets to atoms in
terms of the same principles.
Newton's theory of gravitation, Einstein's relativity theory,
quantum mechanics, Marxism, Freudianism, are all research
programmes, each with a characteristic hard core stubbornly
defended, . each with its elaborate problem solving machinery.
Each of them, at any stage of its development, has unsolved
problems and undigested anomalies. All theories, in this sense,
are born refuted and die refuted.[9]
The same can be said of styles: Each style has its hard core of
principles and a characteristic way of tackling design
problems/tasks. Avant-garde architecture produces manifestos:
paradigmatic expositions of a new style's unique potential, not
buildings that are balanced to function in all respects. There can
be neither verification, nor final refutation merely on the basis of
its built results.[10]
The programme/style consists of methodological rules: some tell
us what paths of research to avoid (negative heuristics), and
others what paths to pursue (positive heuristics). The negative
heuristics formulates strictures that prevent the relapse into
explanatory patterns that are not fully consistent with the core,
and the positive heuristics offers guiding principles and preferred
techniques that allow the work to fast-forward in one direction.
The defining heuristics of parametricism are fully reflected in the
taboos and dogmas of the DRL design culture:
Negative heuristics: avoid familiar typologies, avoid
platonic/hermetic objects, avoid clear-cut zones/territories, avoid
repetition, avoid straight lines, avoid right angles, avoid corners,
.
Positive heuristics: hyberdize, morph, deterritorialize, deform,
iterate, use splines, nurbs, generative components, script rather
than model, .
The most profound new scientific research programmes are
preoccupied with working through their own internal logic and
implications rather than focusing first on empirical verification. n
the context of developing architectural research
programmes/styles this prevalence of mathematical over
empirical problems transposes into the prevalence of formal over
functional problems, especially in the early productive surge of an
emerging new style. This phenomenon of a formalist emphasis
can be observed in all emergent styles of the 20th Century:
Modernism, Post-Modernism, Deconstructivism, and
Parametricism. n this context the charge of formalism that has
been leveled against the DRL becomes a badge of honor.
However, the DRL has always complemented its formal
preoccupation with a systematic programme agenda.
nnovation is always suspended between two poles: the
investigation of a domain of problems (analysis of new
societal/programmatic demands) and the expansion of the
domain of potential solutions (proliferation of new spatial
repertoires). Embodied by the Dutch avant-garde and the US
avant-garde respectively, both aspects have been pursuit
independent from each other. The independent elaboration of the
two domains makes sense, as a division of labour or
specialization. However, this led to two opposing ideologies,
programme versus form, both equally one-sided. The necessary
synthesis requires the oscillation between the two domains and is
itself an act of creative intelligence. What we call design research
is the attempt to systematise this oscillation within a focal frame
that narrows down both the realm of problems and the realm of
solutions.
The final question is which social/programmatic arena would best
allow us to explore the architectural opportunities afforded by the
new concepts, and strategies of parametricism? So far the DRL
answered this question via its three successive research
85/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
agendas: Corporate Fields, Responsive Environments,
Parametric Urbanism.
What will we do in the next ten years? expect parametricism to
consolidate its hegemony in architecture. Both its scope and
depth will increase. This suggests that there will be many new
agendas that can serve as vehicles to push the parametricist
paradigm forward. prefer to frame the forthcoming agendas
more tightly, to go deeper, pushing technical precision, to attain
the next level of virtuosity, resolution and refinement. Cumulative
research is to continue until the paradigm's ability to produce
fruitful design problems recedes, either internally due to inherent
exhaustion or externally due to unexpected societal evolution.
When this might be is utterly unpredictable. Unlike art,
architecture does not allow for revolutionary periods to be
engendered wilfully. There is only the will to power, the desire to
stay close to the central axis of progress. The power of the DRL
shows up in the contributions that ex-DRL students have been
making to the key projects of the last decade. The next decade
we simply have to stay on target.
End.
[1] There is neither space nor need here to characterize the
central features of this style.
[2] This interpretation of styles is valid only with respect to the
avant-garde phase of any style.
[3] mre Lakatos, The Methodology of Scientific Research
Programmes, Cambridge 1978
[4] Despite its name, the DRL (Design Research Lab) is no real
exception it remains a teaching unit with its inherent limitations:
students with limited tenure instead of permanent professional
research staff.
[5] Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,
nternational Encyclopedia of Unified Science, University of
Chicago Press, 1962, Second enlarged edition, 1970
[6] This preceding revolutionary period was the long period of
debate and gestation since the crisis of modernism in the 1970s.
t produced conflicting, transitory phenomena like post-modernism
and deconstructivism.
[7] The individual design hypothesis, together with the style it is
embedded within, is being empirically tested through its detailed
elaboration, construction and social use much later.
[8] The history of science testifies to this.
[9] Lakatos, mre, The Methodology of Scientific Research
Programmes, Cambridge 1978, p.5
[10] The final reckoning takes place later, in the arena of the
mainstream adoption which only indirectly feeds back into the
central, discursive arena of the discipline.
Autopoeitic Elegance
Patrik Schumacher
Published in: MRGD Morphe, c/o REA (Research nstitute of
Experimental Architecture), General Editor: Lebbeus Woods
Morphe is one of those rare design research projects where a
radically process driven design research culminates in an
extraordinary elegance.The elegance instantiated here thrives on
complexity rather than simplicity. The sense of elegance indicates
that an intricate problem has been beautifully resolved. Elegance
articulates complexity.
The complexity is initially produced from within a closed
computational system, the maya hair dynamic system. Here
arrays of lines are manipulated by means of mutual attraction
(cling) forces while simultaneously responding to quasi-
gravitational forces. The system is able to dynamically resolve
any initial geometry together with any configuration of forces by
producing resultant configurations that display both the rich
differentiation and the lawful coherency that we would expect in
complex natural systems. This internal regime of producing
ordered complexity can be utilized to absorb, process and
articulate external complexity as long as we are able to represent
this complexity within the system. For instance, the multiple
directions by which paths hit or dissect a site might be taken as
the initial set up for the dynamical system.
The project does indeed initially proceed from a planar path-
systems. t then moves on to explore three-dimensional webs,
and then tries to look for coincidences between paths-ways and
structural logics. The quasi-physics of the hair-system is being
paralleled by the exploration of the real physics and material logic
of webs made from curving steel wires. Then surfaces are
introduced to generate platforms for accommodation as well as
producing a tight fitting enclosing envelope. This envelope surface
which filters the internal complexity without obliterating it - is
then populated by generative components that are sensitive and
responsive to the subtle differentiations that are embedded within
these surfaces. The components translate the differences in
orientation and curvature into a differential component
morphology. The ability to set up such chains of lawful correlation
turns the designer from a form-giver into a law-maker. n the case
of Morpohe path-systems are traced by structural logics, which in
turn are filtered by a surface-curvature logic, which in turn is
finally accentuated by a responsive component morphology. Then
light plays upon this deep relief as yet another layer of parametric
translation.
The way these various systems feed into each other follows the
paradigm of autopoeisis rather than the paradigm of mechanical
translation. The difference is perhaps best exemplified by the
difference between kicking a ball and kicking a dog. The first case
is a rigid cause and effect connection, the second is a stimulus
response mechanism whereby the response is highly mediated
via selective cognition and internal processing of the stimulus.
nstead of simply being pervaded and fully determined by an
exterior impulse, autopoeitic systems maintain an arsenal of
response options that can be selected and combined according to
internal logics that evolve on the basis of experiences. nstead of
a cause-and-effect model we might use a stimulus-response
model, or even better a cognition-information-processing model.
The cognition and information processing of autopoeitic systems
depends as much on its internal state as on its external
environment. The way the various computational subsystems of
the associative parametric model are sensitive to each other is
best analysed in analogy to autopoeitic systems. Just like a series
of structurally coupled autopeitic systems the different layers of
the associative-parametric model each encompass a whole range
of response options that the designer can calibrate. Each layer is
an autopeitic system and simultaneously a subsystem in an
encompassing autopeitic system. No linear point to point
correlations need to be assumed from layer to layer. The designer
can script associative functions that entail inverse relations,
thresholds and turning points. The system's overall operating laws
can be made sensitive to the urban context. Contextual nuances
can then ripple through the system in a generative cascade that
can be invented and calibrated by the designer.
t is this sense of autopoeitic complexity that assimilates this work
to organic natural systems, where all forms are the result of
intricately interacting selections. Just like natural systems, elegant
compositions are so highly integrated that they cannot be neatly
decomposed a major point of difference in comparison with the
modern design paradigm of clear separation of functional
subsystems. nstead of the separation of subsystems we
emphasize the structural coupling or organic inter-articulation of
subsystems.
The exploitation of natural morphologies as a source domain for
analogical transference into architecture made a substantial
contribution to the development of a new fluid language of
architecture. This new architectural language is marked by a new
level of intricate coherency in the deployment of curvelinear
86/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
geometry that can articulate complex arrangements and
relationships without loosing out on legibility and the capacity to
orient users.
With Morphe we go further: from imitating nature to the creation of
a second nature with an enormous gain in freedom of creation.
We are moving from a new architectural language to a whole new
paradigm for architecture.
t was Frei Otto who most systematically harnessed the
lawfulness of physical systems as form-finding procedure to
generate his design-morphology. The results have been striking.
Morphe is taking Frei Otto's work as one of its major sources of
inspiration. Lars Spuybroek has described these form-finding
processes as material computing. Such analog form-finding
processes can complement the new digital design tools. The new
digital tools might in fact be best described as quasi-physical
form-finding processes. The most advanced tools like
Generative Components - offer associative logics that allow the
designer to set up complex systems of parametric interaction. Any
parameter of any object might be dynamically correlated with any
parameter of any other object within the model. This means that
the designer might craft an artificial universe, with its own
peculiar ontology and laws of nature.The formal/spatial
systems that can be generated now start to look more and more
like natural systems where all modulations are the result of the
complex interaction of physical forces or like organic system
where the forms result from a similar play of forces selected from
a much wider range and integrated in adaptation to divers
performance requirements.
A specific aspect of this overall lawful and integrated nature of
elegance is the capacity of elegant compositions to adapt to
complex urban contexts. Adaptive capacity or adaptation is
another key ambition of the contemporary avant-garde trend that
might suggest comparison with natural organic systems. An
architectural system that has an enhanced capacity to adapt to its
environment will result in an intricate artifact-context ensemble
that has sublated initial contradictions into a new complex
synthesis that further enhances the overall sense of sophisticated
elegance. The model for adaptation here is again based on the
concept of autopoeisis - with a principally unlimited range of
possible contextual affiliations rather than assuming
straightforward assimilation. Autopoeitic affiliation is inherently
unpredictable. But you recognize it when you see it. There is a
strong sense of fitness and correspondence without always
being able to realize how this is being achieved.
This capacity for unexpected, magical forms of contextual
adaptation has been powerfully demonstrated by Morphe. The
way this new multi-layered construct affiliates and symbiotically
fuses with Centre Point tower is rather striking. The talented eye
remains a crucial arbiter in the steering of the associative set up
towards a visually effective articulation of complexity. n
architecture we ultimately care only about those intricacies that
can be experienced.
Morphe is demonstrating how the strategic harnessing of the new
computational power can lead to a new style in the best sense of
the word. A new style in this sense has two critical aspects: A new
style coheres a research programme that proceeds from a unique
paradigm determining the paradigmatic problems, preferred
methods and evaluative criteria of avant-garde design research.
A new style is also unique with respect to its phenomenology, i.e.
its visual appearance and articulatory power to orient the relevant
life processes; unique in what it demands from us in terms of
attentional focus and perceptive comprehension. Morphe
participates in the formation of a new style in this sense. The
paradigmatic problematic of this new style is the design of
associative logics and its phenomenological agenda is autopeitic
elegance. This style is well under way and is building up towards
a hegemonic position within the avant-garde of architecture. But it
has not been christened yet. My proposal is to call it
Parametricism. For me Morphe gives us a compelling instance of
this new style.
Engineering Elegance
Patrik Schumacher, London 2007
Published in: Hanif Kara (editor), Design Engineering AKT,
London 2008
Elegance has been promoted as a new watchword to guide the
next step within the current cycle of architectural innovation.1
The elegance we mean is not the elegance of minimalism.
Minimalist elegance thrives on simplicity. The elegance am
promoting here thrives on complexity. t relies on powerful
ordering principles that can establish lawful and legible
continuities within a given manifold. Elegance in our terms
achieves a reduction of visual complexity, thereby preserving an
underlying organizational complexity. n short: Elegance
articulates complexity. This is my fundamental thesis, and would
like to argue here that a congenial structural engineering
approach is absolutely central to this ambition.
Attributed to a person elegance suggests the effortless display of
sophistication. We also talk about an elegant solution to a
complex problem. n fact only if the problem is complex and
difficult does the solution deserve the attribute elegant. While
simplistic solutions are pseudo-solutions, the elegant solution is
marked by an economy of means by which it conquers complexity
and resolves complications.
t is this kind of connotation that would like to harness for a
contemporary notion of elegance in architecture and engineering.
An elegant building should entail an elegant structure and both
together should be able to spatialize considerable organisational
complexity without descending into visual disorder.
t is the sense of law-governed complexity that assimilates this
work to the forms and spaces we perceive in natural systems,
where all forms are the result of lawfully interacting forces. Just
like natural systems, elegant compositions are so highly
integrated that they cannot be easily decomposed into
independent subsystems a major point of difference in
comparison with the modern design paradigm of clear separation
of functional subsystems. n fact the exploitation of natural forms
like landscape formations or organic morphologies as a source
domain for analogical transference into architecture makes a
constructive contribution to the development of this new paradigm
and language of architecture.
Structural engineering had its own significant share of inspiration
from nature. Frei Otto went a step further and literally harnessed
the lawfulness of physical systems as form-finding procedure to
generate his design-morphology. The results have been striking.
These processes might be referred to as material computing2.
Such analog form-finding processes can complement the new
digital design tools that might in fact be described as quasi-
physical form-finding processes.
Elegant compositions or complexes are highly integrated
formal/spatial systems that look like those highly integrated
natural systems where all forms are the result of the lawful
interaction of physical forces or like organic system where the
forms result from a similar play of forces selected and integrated
in adaptation to performance requirements. Such elegant
compositions resist decomposition, just like their natural models.

Computing Elegance The Digital Revolution in Architecture and
Engineering
Current digital modeling tools are able to facilitate integrative
effects: lofting, spline-networks, soft-bodies, force-fields etc.
Morphing the ultimate effect of animation movie technology -
has been an often emulated paradigm for achieving the continuity
of the differentiated.
There is an inevitable, powerful relationship between the new
digital tools on the one hand and the new organizational patterns,
compositional tropes, stylistic characteristics and aesthetic values
on the other hand. At Zaha Hadid Architects we are currently
87/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
promoting the slogan: Total Fluidity across all Scales.3 n fact it
has become increasingly easy to achieve abstract sketch-designs
(surfaces) that satisfy this slogan and thereby achieve a measure
of elegance as defined here. However, pure geometry (surface)
models are only the first sketchy step in the design of an elegant
architecture. Only in limit cases such as the installation ice-
storm4 - an extensive experiment in morphing - does the
modeled surface translate directly into a built reality. (The whole
environment was executed as a CNC-milled poly-styrene body
with a hardened poly-urethane skin.)
t is quite a different challenge to maintain a high degree of fluidity
and coherence with respect to the design of a fully functional
building where multiple functional and technical requirements
impose the handling of multiple material sub-systems: the (multi-
layered) envelope system, the system of internal spatial divisions,
the system of circulation/navigation, the various service systems,
and the structural system. The necessity of distinct subsystems
poses the crucial task of organic inter-articulation as the battle-
field where elegance is won or lost. The structural system often
plays a domineering role in this concert of subsystem. Organic
inter-articulation might be achieved by mutual geometric
affiliation, inflection or by means of establishing lawful correlations
between the various patterns of differentiation that are specific to
each subsystem. The contemporary desire for smooth transitions
and gradient transformations between conditions might be
correlated with gradient structural modulations that translate the
continuously differentiated distribution of forces that operate in
any structural system.
Structural Fluidity
The digital revolution that brought a series of powerful new design
tools into architecture has also provided structural engineering
with new tools to analyse and calculate structures in the manner
that is congenial to the architectural ambitions towards total
fluidity that have been unleashed by the new design tools.
Traditional architecture was a game of assembling simple platonic
forms like cubes, planes, grids, domes, and pyramids. The key
characteristic of contemporary architecture that challenges
engineering is the pursuit of complex three-dimensional geometry
and continuously changing forms. Such forms can no longer be
analysed by means of decomposing them into discreet systems.
This is significant because it challenges structural engineering
with respect to its most basic concepts.
Traditional structural engineering relies on the ability to
decompose any structure into clear and independent structural
sub-systems. Each sub-system adheres to standard concepts like
column, beam, portal frame, arch, slab, vault, framework etc.
Each of these concepts is characterised by a clearly typified
geometric schema with its attendant distribution of forces. Within
each simple subsystem the active forces can be easily
ascertained, and great care is taken to control the transference of
forces from subsystem to subsystem by the precise articulation of
the joints. The overall arrangement of forces can then be traced
step by step. This strategy of clear and distinct decomposition
sacrifices efficiency and redundancy for analytical clarity and
tractability. t is a strategy for the reduction of complexity that
recognises the narrow computational capacity of the pre-digital
era. n contrast contemporary architecture creates spaces which
are morphing different spatial sections into a seamlessly
differentiated continuum that resists such decomposition. n all
these traditional systems the ability to analyse and calculate the
behaviour of the structure is premised upon the purity of structural
type and the severing of all redundant connections.
t is precisely the underlying typology the thinking in clearly
defined types that is disappearing from contemporary
architecture. n fact, From Typology to Topology is one of the
key slogans of contemporary architecture. This implies that
contemporary architecture escapes all traditional engineering
procedures. Within a contemporary avant-garde building like the
Phaeno Science Museum in Wolfsburg5, the structural systems
morph as much as the architectural forms.
With new engineering tools like finite element analysis, which
break the structures into particles rather than into parts, the
engineer is able to capture the ever shifting arrangement of
forces. The universe of potential force patterns becomes
boundless.
From Parts to Particles is another key slogan of contemporary
architecture.
Structural engineers can now analyse mixed, hybrid systems. A
tool like Finite Element Analysis can also cope with dense,
redundant interrelations of the parts of a structure. We no longer
need to sever and isolate the structural components or
subsystems. This means that we can harness the structural
efficiency of an interconnected network, where parts work
together rather than remaining independent from each other. The
re-tooled engineer allows the structural forces to flow freely
through the surfaces provided by the architect. This is the era of
structural fluidity.
n the case of the Phaeno Science Museum (to be described
below) we can observe a mixture of spanning, cantilevering and
vaulting within a waffle slab whereby spans and cantilevering
dimensions are continuously changing. The cones flare into
waffle-slab rather than remaining discreet props that pick up their
load at distinct points of contact. The space frame above is
continuously differentiated whereby each member within the
space frame has a different angle (the grid fans in two directions)
so that each cell of the space frame has a different size. n a
complimentary move each member has a different thickness and
weight. Obviously, this nuanced optimisation can only be coped
with by means of computers, both with respect to the calculation
of forces as well as with respect to the handling of the geometry
and manufacturing schedules.

Emergent Perfection
The notion of elegance promoted here still gives a certain
relevance to Alberti's criterion of beauty: you can neither add, nor
subtract without destroying the harmony achieved. Except in the
case of contemporary elegance the overall composition lacks this
sense of perfect closure that is implied in Alberti's conception.
Alberti focused on key ordering principles, like symmetry and
proportion. These principles were seen as integrating the various
parts into a whole by means of setting those parts into definite
relations of relative position and proportion in analogy to the
human figure. Perhaps the best example of this ideal is the
Palladian villa. n contrast contemporary projects remain
incomplete compositions, more akin to the Deleuzian notion of
assemblage than to the classical conception of the organism. Our
current idea of organic integration does not rely on fixed ideal
types. Neither does it presuppose any proportional system, nor
does it privilege symmetry. nstead the parts or subsystems
mutually inflect and adapt to each other achieving integration by
various modes of spatial interlocking, soft transitions at the
boundaries between parts, morphological affiliation, and lawful
correlation between parallel patterns of differentiation etc.
Naturally, on the way to the elaboration of fully functional, fully
detailed designs, whereby evermore systems or layers need to be
integrated, the principle of inflection (organic inter-articulation)
becomes evermore difficult to maintain. Also the visual field is in
danger of being overcrowded, compromising legibility and
orientation.
t is at this moment of mounting difficulty - in the face of bringing
the new paradigm into large scale realization - that elegance
becomes an explicit priority, not least because the built results
have all too often been disappointing in this respect.
The principle of elegance postulates: do not add or subtract
without elaborate inflections, mediations or interarticulations.
While the classical concept of preordained perfection has thus
been abandoned, there still remains a strong sense of increasing
tightness and stringency, approaching even a sense of internal
necessity, as the network of compositional relations is elaborated
and tightened. This network of compositional relations includes
the arrangement and morphology of the structure.6 guess every
designer knows this from his/her own design experience. The
more the compositional cross-referencing, inflection and organic
inter-articulation within the design has been advanced, the harder
it becomes to add or subtract elements. This kind of design
trajectory - although wide open at the beginning - beyond a
88/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
certain point becomes heavily self-constraining. One might be
inclined to talk about the increasing self-determination of a
composition: an emergent (rather than preordained) perfection.
guess every designer knows how a design-trajectory can lead
into a dead end, can fail to work, or remain unresolved. The
elegance we mean - elegance on top of complexity - is a tall
order, and can not be secured in advance.
With increasing complexity the maintenance of elegance
becomes increasingly demanding.
Complexity and elegance stand in a relation of precarious mutual
amplification: a relation of increasingly impropable mutual
enhancement, i.e. mutual amplification with increasing probability
of failure.
The recently completed Science Museum in Wolfsburg (Phaeno)
is the virtuoso masterpiece in the articulation of complex
continuities that can be followed all the way through the building.
The whole building is inscribed within a rigid trapezoid whose
angles are adapted to the site-condition. Within this sharp-edged
trapezoid everything flows and melds without corners. The
ground-surface is molded into an artificial topography that
registers and receives the cones that carry the building. These
cones executed in insitu reinforced concrete - constitute the
primary structure of the building. Each cone has its own variation
of angles and radii. The cones blend seamlessly into the waffle-
slab above. Some of those cones also reemerge within the
interior either as craters or as cones that continue to carry the
space-frame above. There is an essential symbiosis in the spatial
and structural conception of the building, and a close inter-
articulation of the waffle concrete structure of the raised floor and
the steel space-frame that carries the roof. To a large extent the
architectural expression is dominated by the structure. n fact, the
structure constitutes the architecture, and therefore the demand
for tight collaboration was extraordinary.
The lateral openings are of two kinds: the large openings are
conic sections that produce the characteristic parabula form, and
the smaller openings come in swarms that are articulated as
variations of the swarm of voids that make up the waffle slab. n
both cases the openings closely relate to the respective structural
logic of the surfaces penetrated. These openings in turn
contribute and relate to the rhythmic flow of the interior spaces.
The large, continuous expanse of space on the interior is
captured between the crater-scape produced by the cones
pushing through the floorslab and the continuous space-frame.
These two layers are correlated via mutually echoing shifts in
section. t is this resonance between the various layers and sub-
systems that gives this space its exhilarating sense of complex
order that we perceive as elegance. The fact that this stimulating
spatial experience is delivered by the structure itself rather that by
some less substantial and more lightweight layer adds
enormously to the power of the effect.
NOTES:
1 See: Schumacher, Patrik, Arguing for Elegance, in: Castle, H.,
Rahim, A. & Jamelle, H., (eds), Elegance, Architectural Design,
January/February 2007, Vol.77, No.1, Wiley Academy, London
2007
2 What Frei Otto called Formfinding, Lars Spuybroek refers to
as Material Computing in order to emphasise the similarity of
those physical processes with the by now familiar and ubiquitous
digital modelling techniques offered by animation software like
Maya.
3 Schumacher, Patrik, Digital Hadid - Landscapes in Motion,
Publisher: Birkhaeuser 2004
4 Zaha Hadid & Patrik Schumacher, MAK (Museum for Applied
Arts), Vienna 2003
5 The Phaeno Science Centre in Wolfsburg - completed in 2006 -
was designed by Zaha Hadid Architects and engineered by AKT.
6 n fact we have to admit that for us architects the structure
enters our considerations as just another set of compositional
elements.
Experimentation within a Long Wave
of nnovation
Patrik Schumacher, London 2008
Published in: Out There Architecture Beyond Building, Volume
3: Experimental Architecture,
Catalog of the 11th Architecture Biennale, Venice 2008
Architecture is often associated with longevity, primordial arche-
types, eternal values etc. This is the view from outside of the
discipline. From within originality is the fundamental criterion of
architectural self-evaluation. Originality is a conditio sine qua non
of being recognized as important architect. How can the values
of longevity and originality be negotiated?
The positive valuation of originality does not signify the
celebration of personality it signifies the necessity of permanent
adaptive innovation. Architecture is the societal function system
that takes responsibility for the continuous, progressive-adaptive
development of the built environment of society. Experimentation
must not be arbitrary experimentalism. t makes sense only if it is
framed within a style, i.e. within a paradigm that gives guidance to
a collective design research effort.
Looking back over 30 years of work the most striking feature is
the strong sense of continuity bearing witness to Mies' famous
dictum that you cannot invent a new architecture every Monday
morning. However, architecture must be reinvented each time the
discipline is confronted either with a radical transformation of
society or with a radical shift in its means of production. The last
30 years brought us both: societal challenges and technological
opportunities.
Zaha Hadid Architects has grown into a collective force of 300
architects. Several hundred projects - authored over a period of
30 years - partake in a unified effort: the quest for architecture to
take on the dynamic complexity of contemporary society. At the
same time there is a cumulative build up of virtuosity, resolution
and refinement. This is a function of the consistency of agenda,
ambition and values that allow us to build achievement upon
achievement.
This continuity of the work also reflects our participation in a
collective discourse. This discourse encompasses avant-garde
practices as well as various key schools like the AA in London,
Vienna Applied Arts, Columbia, Yale etc.
There is an unmistakable new style manifest within avant-garde
architecture today. ts most striking characteristic is its complex
and dynamic curve-linearity. Beyond this obvious surface feature
one can identify a series of new concepts and methods that are
so different from the repertoire of both traditional and modern
architecture that one might speak of the emergence of a new
paradigm for architecture. The shared concepts, formal
repertoires, tectonic logics and computational techniques, that
characterize this work are engendering the formation of a new
hegemonic style: Parametricism.1
Parametricism is the great new style after modernism.
Postmodernism and Deconstructivism have been transitional
episodes that ushered in this new, long wave of research and
innovation.
Modernism was founded on the concept of space. Parametricism
differentiates fields. Fields are full, as if filled with a fluid medium.
From compositions of parts we proceed to dynamic fields of
particles2. This sensibility has been both radicalized and refined
over the course of 30 years of work. New modes of
representation played a crucial part in making this possible.
Avant-garde styles might be interpreted and evaluated in analogy
to new scientific paradigms, sponsoring a new conceptual
framework, and formulating new aims and methods. Styles are
design research programmes3.
nnovation in architecture proceeds via the progression of styles.
This implies the alternation between periods of cumulative
advancement within a style and revolutionary periods of transition
89/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
between styles. A similar rhythm structures scientific progress.
This rhythm has been captured in Thomas Kuhn's famous
distinction of two very different patterns of scientific
communication: Normal scienceproceeding within a dominant
scientific paradigm and revolutionary science engendering
paradigm shift4. Accordingly, we can distinguish cumulative
design research from revolutionary design research. During
cumulative periods the avant-garde designers are eager to solve
problem after problem posed by the shared style/research
programme. Revolutionary periods ensue when the dominant
research programme looses its fertility. The search for alternative
routes forward produces schisms and isms and soon
philosophers trump the designers, until a new vital paradigm
gains ground and ascends to hegemony engendering a new style
setting the agenda for a new long wave of work.
Styles represent cycles of innovation, gathering the design
research efforts into a collective endeavor. Avant-garde design
projects are best understood as speculative hypotheses,
formulated within a certain style. The style serves as a cohering
research programme that allows for the construction of a
systematic series of design experiments. Stable self-identity is
here a necessary precondition of directed evolution.
With respect to the critical evaluation of avant-garde work, it is
important to emphasize that the status of the avant-garde project
as original, speculative hypothesis is its very raison d'tre.
mprovements that can compete with the state of the art bench-
mark of performance cannot be expected from those who set out
to push the boundaries. Avant-garde architecture produces
manifestos: paradigmatic expositions of a new style's unique
potential, not buildings that are balanced to function in all
respects.
This initial task-inadequacy of avant-garde styles is mirrored in
the initial inadequacy of new paradigms in science. New scientific
research programmes often start with idealized, knowingly
unrealistic assumptions, without yet expecting empirical
corroboration. The theoretical edifice that can eventually stand full
empirical testing will be constructed via a series of interim stages
that can only cover partial aspects of reality, remaining enveloped
by preliminary assumptions. The research programme is thus a
rough roadmap for a future that is based on radically new
principles.5
To hold on to the new principles - the hard core - in the face of
difficulties is crucial6 for the chance of eventual success. This
tenacity - abundantly evident in the spectrum of our projects -
might at times appear as dogmatic obstinacy. Each style has its
hard core of principles and a characteristic way of tackling design
problems. There can be neither verification, nor final refutation
merely on the basis of its built results.7
The programme/style consists of methodological rules: some tell
us what paths of research to avoid (negative heuristics), and
others what paths to pursue (positive heuristics). The defining
heuristics of parametricism are fully reflected in the taboos and
dogmas of our design culture:
Negative heuristics: avoid familiar typologies, avoid
platonic/hermetic objects, avoid clear-cut zones/territories, avoid
repetition, avoid straight lines, avoid right angles, avoid corners,
.
Positive heuristics: hyberdize, morph, deterritorialize, deform,
iterate, use splines, nurbs, generative components, script rather
than model, .
The most profound new scientific research programmes are
preoccupied with working through their own internal logic and
implications rather than focusing first on empirical verification. n
the context of developing architectural research
programmes/styles this prevalence of mathematical over
empirical problems transposes into the prevalence of formal over
functional problems, especially in the early productive surge of a
new style. This phenomenon of a formalist emphasis can be
observed in all emergent styles of the 20th Century: Modernism,
Post-Modernism, Deconstructivism, and Parametricism. n this
context the charge of formalism that has been leveled against the
Zaha Hadid Architects becomes a badge of honor.
Patrik Schumacher, London 2008
NOTES:
1 There is neither space nor need here to characterize the central
features of this style.
2 We might think of liquids in motion, structured by radiating
waves, laminal flows, and spiraling eddies.
3 t is important to distinguish between research programmes in
the literal sense of institutional research plans from the meta-
scientific conception of research programmes that has been
introduced into the philosophy of science, i.e. whole new research
traditions that are directed by a new fundamental theoretical
framework. t is this latter concept that is utilized here for the
reinterpretation of the concept of style.emre Lakatos, The
Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, Cambridge
1978
4 Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,
nternational Encyclopedia of Unified Science, University of
Chicago Press, 1962, Second enlarged edition, 1970
5 The individual design hypothesis, together with the style it is
embedded within, is being empirically tested through its detailed
elaboration, construction and social use much later.
6 The history of science testifies to this.
7 The final reckoning takes place later, in the arena of the
mainstream adoption which only indirectly feeds back into the
central, discursive arena of the discipline.
Parametricism as Style -
Parametricist Manifesto
Patrik Schumacher, London 2008
Presented and discussed at the Dark Side Club1 , 11th
Architecture Biennale, Venice 2008
We pursue the parametric design paradigm all the way,
penetrating into all corners of the discipline. Systematic, adaptive
variation, continuous differentiation (rather than mere variety), and
dynamic, parametric figuration concerns all design tasks from
urbanism to the level of tectonic detail, interior furnishings and the
world of products.
Architecture finds itself at the mid-point of an ongoing cycle of
innovative adaptation retooling the discipline and adapting the
architectural and urban environment to the socio-economic era of
post-fordism. The mass society that was characterized by a
single, nearly universal consumption standard has evolved into
the heterogenous society of the multitude.
The key issues that avant-garde architecture and urbanism
should be addressing can be summarized in the slogan:
organising and articulating the increased complexity of post-
fordist society. The task is to develop an architectural and urban
repertoire that is geared up to create complex, polycentric urban
and architectural fields which are densely layered and
continuously differentiated.
Contemporary avant-garde architecture is addressing the demand
for an increased level of articulated complexity by means of
retooling its methods on the basis of parametric design systems.
The contemporary architectural style that has achieved pervasive
hegemony within the contemporary architectural avant-garde can
be best understood as a research programme based upon the
parametric paradigma. We propose to call this style:
Parametricism.
Parametricism is the great new style after modernism.
Postmodernism and Deconstructivism have been transitional
episodes that ushered in this new, long wave of research and
innovation.
Avant-garde styles might be interpreted and evaluated in analogy
90/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
to new scientific paradigms, affording a new conceptual
framework, and formulating new aims, methods and values. Thus
a new direction for concerted research work is established.2 My
thesis is therefore: Styles are design research programmes.3
nnovation in architecture proceeds via the progression of styles
so understood. This implies the alternation between periods of
cumulative advancement within a style and revolutionary periods
of transition between styles. Styles represent cycles of innovation,
gathering the design research efforts into a collective endeavor.
Stable self-identity is here as much a necessary precondition of
evolution as it is in the case of organic life. To hold on to the new
principles in the face of difficulties is crucial for the chance of
eventual success. This tenacity - abundantly evident within the
contemporary avant-garde - might at times appear as dogmatic
obstinacy. For instance, the obstinate insistence of solving
everything with a folding single surface - project upon project,
slowly wrenching the plausible from the implausible might be
compared to the Newtonian insistence to explain everything from
planets to bullets to atoms in terms of the same principles.
Newton's theory of gravitation, Einstein's relativity theory,
quantum mechanics, Marxism, Freudianism, are all research
programmes, each with a characteristic hard core stubbornly
defended, . each with its elaborate problem solving machinery.
Each of them, at any stage of its development, has unsolved
problems and undigested anomalies. All theories, in this sense,
are born refuted and die refuted.4 The same can be said of
styles: Each style has its hard core of principles and a
characteristic way of tackling design problems/tasks. Avant-garde
architecture produces manifestos: paradigmatic expositions of a
new style's unique potential, not buildings that are balanced to
function in all respects. There can be neither verification, nor final
refutation merely on the basis of its built results.5
The programme/style consists of methodological rules: some tell
us what paths of research to avoid (negative heuristics), and
others what paths to pursue (positive heuristics). The negative
heuristics formulates strictures that prevent the relapse into old
patterns that are not fully consistent with the core, and the
positive heuristics offers guiding principles and preferred
techniques that allow the work to fast-forward in one direction.
The defining heuristics of parametricism are fully reflected in the
taboos and dogmas of contemporary avant-gared design culture:
Negative heuristics: avoid familiar typologies, avoid
platonic/hermetic objects, avoid clear-cut zones/territories, avoid
repetition, avoid straight lines, avoid right angles, avoid corners,
., and most importantly: do not add or subtract without elaborate
interarticulations.
Positive heuristics: interarticulate, hyberdize, morph,
deterritorialize, deform, iterate, use splines, nurbs, generative
components, script rather than model, .
Parametricism is a mature style. That the parametric paradigm is
becoming pervasive in contemporary architecture and design is
evident for quite some time. There has been talk about
versioning, iteration and mass customization etc. for quite a while
within the architectural avant-garde discourse.
The fundamental desire that has come to the fore in this tendency
had already been formulated at the beginning of the 1990s with
the key slogan of continuous differentiation6. Since then there
has been both a widespread, even hegemonic dissemination of
this tendency as well as a cumulative build up of virtuosity,
resolution and refinement within it. This development was
facilitated by the attendant development of parametric design
tools and scripts that allow the precise formulation and execution
of intricate correlations between elements and subsystems. The
shared concepts, computational techniques, formal repertoires,
and tectonic logics that characterize this work are crystallizing into
a solid new hegemonic paradigm for architecture. One of the
most pervasive current techniques involves populating modulated
surfaces with adaptive components.Components might be
constructed from multiple elements constrained/cohered by
associative relations so that the overall component might sensibly
adapt to various local conditions. As they populate a differentiated
surface their adaptation should accentuate and amplify this
differentiation. This relationship between the base component and
its various instantiations at different points of insertion in the
environment is analogous to the way a single geno-type might
produce a differentiated population of pheno-types in response to
divers environmental conditions.
The current stage of advancement within parametricism relates
as much to the continuous advancement of the attendant
computational dresign technologies as it is due to the designer's
realization of the unique formal and organizational opportunities
that are afforded. Parametricism can only exist via sophisticated
parametric techniques. Finally, computationally advanced design
techniques like scripting (in Mel-script or Rhino-script) and
parametric modeling (with tools like GC or DP) are becoming a
pervasive reality. Today it is impossible to compete within the
contemporary avant-garde scene without mastering these
techniques.
Parametricism emerges from the creative exploitation of
parametric design systems in view of articulating increasingly
complex social processes and institutions. The parametric design
tools by themselves cannot account for this drastic stylistic shift
from modernism to parametricism. This is evidenced by the fact
that late modernist architects are employing parametric tools in
ways which result in the maintenance of a modernist aesthetics,
i.e. using parametric modelling to inconspicuously absorb
complexity. Our parametricist sensibility pushes in the opposite
direction and aims for a maximal emphasis on conspicuous
differentiation.
t is the sense of organized (law-governed) complexity that
assimilates parametricist works to natural systems, where all
forms are the result of lawfully interacting forces. Just like natural
systems, parametricist compositions are so highly integrated that
they cannot be easily decomposed into independent subsystems
a major point of difference in comparison with the modern
design paradigm of clear separation of functional subsystems.
The following 5 agendas might be proposed here to inject new
aspects into the parametric paradigm and to push the
development of parametricism further:
1.nter-articulation of sub-systems:
The ambition is to move from single system differentiation e.g. a
swarm of faade components - to the scripted association of
multiple subsystems envelope, structure, internal subdivision,
navigation void. The differentiation in any one systems is
correlated with differentions in the other systems.
2. Parametric Accentuation:
The ambition is to enhance the overall sense of organic
integration through intricate correlations that favour deviation
amplification rather than compensatory or ameliorating
adaptations. For instance, when generative components populate
a surface with a subtle curvature modulation the lawful
component correlation should accentuate and amplify the initial
differentiation. This might include the deliberate setting of
accentuating thresholds or singularities. Thus a far richer
articulation can be achieved and thus more orienting visual
information can be made available.
3. Parametric Figuration7:
We propose that complex configurations that are latent with
multiple readings can be constructed as a parametric model. The
parametric model might be set up so that the variables are
extremely Gestalt-sensitive. Parametric variations trigger gestalt-
catastrophes, i.e. the quantitative modification of these
parameters trigger qualitative shifts in the perceived order of the
configuration. This notion of parametric figuration implies an
expansion in the types of parameters considered within
parametric design. Beyond the usual geometric object
parameters, ambient parameters (variable lights) and observer
parameters (variable cameras) have to considered and integrated
into the parametric system.
4. Parametric Responsiveness8:
We propose that urban and architectural (interior) environments
can be designed with an inbuilt kinetic capacity that allows those
environments to reconfigure and adapt themselves in response to
the prevalent patterns of use and occupation. The real time
registration of use-patterns produces the parameters that drive
the real time kinetic adaptation process. Cumulative registration
of use patterns result in semi-permanent morphological
transformations. The built environment acquires responsive
agency at different time scales.
91/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
5. Parametric Urbanism9:
The assumption is that the urban massing describes a swarm-
formation of many buildings. These buildings form a continuously
changing field, whereby lawful continuities cohere this manifold of
buildings. Parametric urbanism implies that the systematic
modulation of the buildings' morphologies produces powerful
urban effects and facilitates field orientation. Parametric Urbanism
might involve parametric accentuation, parametric figuration, and
parametric responsivess.
Modernism was founded on the concept of space. Parametricism
differentiates fields. Fields are full, as if filled with a fluid medium.
We might think of liquids in motion, structured by radiating waves,
laminal flows, and spiraling eddies. Swarms have also served as
paradigmatic analogues for the field-concept. We would like to
think of swarms of buildings that drift across the landscape. Or we
might think of large continuous interiors like open office
landscapes or big exhibition halls of the kind used for trade fairs.
Such interiors are visually infinitely deep and contain various
swarms of furniture coalescing with the dynamic swarms of
human bodies. There are no platonic, discrete figures with sharp
outlines. Within fields only the global and regional field qualities
matter: biases, drifts, gradients, and perhaps even conspicuous
singularities like radiating centres. Deformation does no longer
spell the breakdown of order but the lawful inscription of
information. Orientation in a complex, lawfully differentiated field
affords navigation along vectors of transformation .The
contemporary condition of arriving in a metropolis for the first
time, without prior hotel arrangements, without a map, might
instigate this kind of field-navigation. magine there are no more
landmarks to hold on, no axis to follow and no more boundaries to
cross. Contemporary architecture aims to construct new logics
the logic of fields that gear up to organize and articulate the new
level of dynamism and complexity of contemporary society.
Furniture and product design fully participates in the parametricist
agenda we are pursuing. We consider furniture not in terms of
isolated objects but as a pre-eminent space-making substance.
Our design efforts need to encompass the domains of interior
design, furniture design, and even product design. We can
orchestrate all those registers to advance the design of
integrated, immersive worlds. Our handling of interior furnishings
as dynamic swarm formations, or sometimes as a continuous
surface/fluid mass, is geared towards the detailed elaboration of
the continuously differentiated fields described above.
NOTES:
1 The Dark Side Club is a critical salon initiated and organized by
Robert White to coincide with the Architecture Biennale. Three
successive events were onceived as a critical salon to debate
some of the themes Aaron Betsky had set for this year's Biennale.
Three curators have been invited to each put forward a
proposition for debate: Patrik Schumacher, Greg Lynn, and
Gregor Eichinger. Each invited young architects and thinkers to
debate the direction architecture is taking.
The first session curated and introduced by Patrik Schumacher
was titled: Parametricism as New Style. The following 8
architectural studios were presenting: MAD, f-u-r, UFO, Plasma
Studio, Minimaforms, Aranda/Lasch, AltN Research+Design,
MOH. Jeff Kipnis acted as moderator.
2 This interpretation of styles is valid only with respect to the
avant-garde phase of any style.
3 t is important to distinguish between research programmes in
the literal sense of institutional research plans from the meta-
scientific conception of research programmes that has been
introduced into the philosophy of science: whole new research
traditions that are directed by a new fundamental theoretical
framework. t is this latter concept that is utilized here for the
reinterpretation of the concept of style. See: mre Lakatos, The
Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, Cambridge
1978
4 Lakatos, mre, The Methodology of Scientific Research
Programmes, Cambridge 1978, p.5
5 The final reckoning takes place later, in the arena of the
mainstream adoption which only indirectly feeds back into the
central, discursive arena of the discipline.
6 The credit for coining this key slogan goes to Greg Lynn and
Jeff Kipnis.
7 Parametric Figuration featured in our teachings at Yale and at
the University of Applied Arts, Vienna. t also featured in my studio
at the AADRL.
8 Parametric Responsiveness was at the heart of our 3 year
design research agenda Responsive Environments at the
AADRL in London from 2001-2004.
9 Parametric Urbanism is the title of our recently completed
design research cycle at the AADRL, from 2005 2008.
nterview: Patrik Schumacher,
Questions presented by Feng Xu,
Published in: WA (World Architecture), Parametric Design issue,
Beijing 2009


What's the main progress or difference from Modernism to
Parametricism?
Patrik Schumacher:
Modernism is based on standardization and repetition while
Parametricism produces continuous variation. Modernism and
Parametricism differ with respect to the basic elements or
primitives that underlie the design: Modernism, like classicism,
works with simple geometric figures like rectangles, squares,
triangles, and circles. These figures are both rigid and hermetic,
incapable of adaptation. n contrast, the primitives of
Parametricism are inherently malleable and adaptive: blobs, nurb-
surfaces and parametric components. The best way to clarify the
essential characteristics of Parametricism is to define it in terms
of its heuristic principles. This definition clarifies the difference
between Modernism and Parametricism. distinguish negative
heuristic principles (taboos) from positive heuristic principles
(dogmas).
Negative heuristics (taboos): avoid rigid geometric primitives
such as squares, triangles and circles; avoid simple repetition of
elements, avoid juxtaposition of unrelated elements or systems.
Positive heuristics (dogmas): consider all forms to be
parametrically malleable; differentiate gradually (at varying rates),
inflect and correlate systematically.
The key point is that Parametricism demands that any element or
subsystem that enters the evolving composition is engaging in
intensive, adaptive relations with what is there already. Nothing
remains pure. Everything is responsive. The density of visible
internal and external relations is a key criterion of a successful
Parametricist composition.
The raison d'etre for these differences lies in the transformation of
advanced societies from societies of fordist mass production to
post-fordist network societies.
2.As both teacher and professional architect, how do you see
Parametricism in research and practise? There's a ZHA
Computational Design Research Group, how does ZHA combine
research and practice in a real project?
Patrik Schumacher:
t has become evident that the next wave of innovations and
refinements can only be achieved via scripted parametric
92/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories
systems. That is, by specifically programming design tools to deal
with a number of design parameters to create a design that is
sensitive to formal, functional and environmental parameters. To
pursue this we formed a dedicated research group called CODE
(Computational Design). This group is a genuine research group
rather than a specialist service group. Our initial design research
started with general scripts for surface tessellations, and for
populating modulated surfaces with differentiated component
arrays. The ambition is to enhance the overall sense of organic
integration through intricate correlations that favour deviation
amplification that make the different conditions conspicuous
rather than aiming for inconspicuous compensation of different
conditions. For instance, when generative components populate a
surface with a subtle curvature modulation the lawful component
correlation should accentuate and amplify the initial differentiation.
This might include the deliberate setting of accentuating
thresholds or singularities. Thus a far richer articulation can be
achieved and thus more orienting visual information can be made
available.
CODE is doing research independent of specific projects -
sourcing computational ideas from the scientific literature - and
develops scripts that are then distributed and applied to various
design projects. The feedback from the design application then
poses new problems for further research.
3.There's always a rationalizing process to solve the complex
geometry problems in most of avant-garde architecture offices.
Do you think it's inevitably being part of the parametric design
processes? Or is there any way to think the design parametrically
from the very beginning?
Patrik Schumacher:
Both ways of working are possible. At the current relatively early
stage of parametric design it is more fertile to start sketching in
maya or rhino including mel-script, rhino-script and grasshopper
to explore the radical design ambitions of Parametricism. This
way of working requires a later remodeling/rationalization in more
precise parametric design systems - like Digital Projects - that
are better capable to take fabrication constraints into account.
However, am convinced that with the maturation of the style, as
we further clarify our preferential design repertoire, the more
immediate establishment of precise, pre-constrained parametric
set ups will become the preferred way of working for many.
4.The advantages of the parametric design are quite apparent,
but what's the limitation of Parametricism currently, and what's the
future?
Patrik Schumacher:
The formal possibilities to establish continuous differentiation via
scripted correlations are without inherent limit: in principle any
parameter of any contextual object, or of any object within the
composition, might drive any parameter of any other element or
system within the composition, in any way imaginable. n this
respect, beyond the receding limitations of the given
computational capacity, our imagination remains the prime
limitation.
However, concerning the full-blown real-world implementation of
the far-reaching ambitions of Parametricism, we have to
distinguish two specific limitations:
On the one hand we need to move from the formal exploration of
the possibilities of scripted correlations to the careful
consideration of its programmatic and performative application.
have no doubt that the principles of Parametricism are
appropriate and in fact the only viable path to high performance
design within the contemporary world. However, this general
intuition needs to be made concrete and specific in each design
project, from parametric urbanism to the design of convincing
interiors. What is required here is that the formal imagination is
stimulating a parallel social imagination and vice versa.
On the other hand there is the issue of the construction industry. A
lot of progress has been made here with many small specialist
companies mediating between design consultants and
contractors, helping to translate the ambitions of Parametricism
for final construction. hope that the current crisis does not halt
this progress.
93/93 - Patrik Schumacher - Theories