Anyone Corporation

Diagrams Matter
Author(s): Stan Allen
Source: ANY: Architecture New York, No. 23, Diagram Work: ATA MECHANICS FOR A
TOPOLOGICAL AGE (1998), pp. 16-19
Published by: Anyone Corporation
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41856094
Accessed: 29-10-2015 01:09 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Anyone Corporation is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ANY: Architecture New York.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 165.95.226.100 on Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:09:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 stealth diagrams transcoding

DIAGRAMS MATTER timewhen the dynamismof imagesand information domi-

StanAllen nateseveryday life,the traditional association of architecture
with permanenceand durabilityhas become suspect.Some
practitioners haveproposeda retreat, suggesting thatarchitec-
turemustonce again defineitselfas stableand groundedin
Anabstractmachinein itself is notphysical or corporeal, any contrastto the fluidityof information. Othershaveproposed
morethanitis semiotic; itis diagrammatic. ... It operates by thatarchitecture's soliditycould (or should) be dissolvedinto
notbysubstance;
matter, by function, not by form. . . .The dia- these streams of information.
grammatic orabstract machine doesnotfunction torepresent, This is, in myview,a falsedilemmatriggered by a dimin-
evensomething real,butrather constructs is
a realthat yetto ished - or misdirected - conception of architecture's capaci-
come,a newtypeofreality. ties.Ifone ofthethingschallengedbynewmediatechnologies
- GillesDeleuze andFlix Guattari,AThousandPlateaus (141-42) is architecture's materialpresence,it is simplyreactionary to
reassertarchitecture's materialcondition.On theotherhand,
Although diagrams can servean explanatory function, clarifying the more "radical"strategies(which have consisted,alterna-
form,structure, or programto thedesignerand to others,and tively,in representingnew technologiesin metaphorical
notations mapprogramin timeand space,theprimary utilityof terms,or in grafting multimediaimagesonto a conventional
thediagramis as an abstract meansof thinking aboutorganization. architectural scaffold)have been no more productive.The
The variablesin an organizational diagramincludebothformal emergenceof new information-based technologieshas pro-
and programmatic configurations: space and event,forceand vokedan understandable desirefora lighterand morerespon-
resistance,density, distribution, anddirection. In an architecturalsivearchitecture. Thepracticeofarchitecture todayis measured
context, organization implies both program and its distribution its
by performative effects as much as its
by durablepresence.
in space,bypassing conventional dichotomies offunction in
versus It mustnegotiatea field which the actualand the virtual
formor formversuscontent. Multiplefunctions and actionover assume evermore complexconfigurations: a fieldin which
timeare implicitin thediagram. The configurations it develops diagramsmatter.
are momentary clustersof matterin space,subjectto continual A diagrammatic practicebegins with the assumptionthat
23.16
E? modification. A diagramis therefore not a thingin itselfbut a simplyto opposethemateriality ofbuildingto theimmateriality
description of potentialrelationships amongelements, notonly of information is to ignorearchitecture's own richhistoryas a
o 5 an abstract modelof thewaythingsbehavein theworldbut a techniquefor actualizingthe virtual.Architecture is already
of
map possible worlds. implicated in a number of media, and the architect is out of
> Unlikeclassicaltheoriesbasedon imitation, diagramsdo not necessityconstantly movingfromone medium to another,
mapor represent alreadyexistingobjectsor systems butantici- transcoding fromvirtualto actualand viceversa.To movefrom
patenew organizations and specifyyetto be realizedrelation- drawingor writingto building(and back again) is onlyone
ships. The diagram is not simplya reductionfroman existing exampleof this;architecture's constanttransactions withand
order.Itsabstraction is instrumental, notan end in itself.Con- actualizations of social,technical,and urbanisticvariablesare
tentis notembeddedor embodiedbutoutlinedandmultiplied. perhapsmoresignificant. Historically, architecture hasdeployed
c/> Simplified and highlygraphic,diagramssupportmultiple a limited of to
catalogue techniques negotiate the actual andvir-
interpretations. Diagrams are not schmas,types, formal para- tual: techniques projection,calculation, notation,for
of or
0> digms,or otherregulatingdevices,but simplyplace-holders, example.In recentpractice,thiscataloguehas been incremen-
instructions foraction,or contingent descriptions of possible tallyexpandedby the appropriation of techniquesfromfilm,
formalconfigurations. They work as abstract machines and do video, or performance, by and the simulation and visualization
O notresemblewhattheyproduce. capacities of the computer. the
Nevertheless, conceptualappara-
tusof conversion(transcoding, translation, or transposition, as
O STEALTH DIAGRAMS proposedbelow) is leftunexamined.
A diagrammatic practice,on the otherhand, locatesitself
d Youwon'tseeusbutyouwillseewhatwedo. betweentheactualandthevirtual, andforegrounds architecture's
- IBMadvertising copyfor1998 Nagano Winter Olympics transactional character. It worksin themidstof architecture's
00 constantinterfacewith humanactivity, and its own internal
IBM'sannouncement of itsown invisibility, appearingperi- negotiations of actual and virtual. A diagrammatic practiceis
odically out of the image saturated fieldof the Olympic broad- relatively indifferent to the specifics of individual media. It
cast,sendsa curioussignal.Curious,becausea complexgame privilegesneitherthe durabilityof architecture's material
ofpower,and itsvisibleand invisibleworkings, is beingplayed effects northefluidity ofitsinformational effects. Inasmuchas
out in public.To pointout thatpowerno longerresidesexclu- it does not insist on historicallysanctioneddefinitionsof
sivelyin therealmof thevisibleis, of course,no longernews. architecture s disciplinary integrity, it is, in principle,open to
What does seem new here is the forthright mannerof this information fromarchitecture's outside.Inasmuchas itis skep-
advertising strategy, which locates publicity value in the fugi- tical about the promise of new technologies, it remainsfreeto
tivecharacter ofinformation The
technologies. suggestion here take full advantage of architecture's traditional techniquesto
is thathardware- includingall oftheweightyapparatusofthe organizematterand space.A diagrammatic practiceextendsthe
multinational -
corporation could be profitably dissolvedinto horizontal, affiliativecharacter of thediagramdirectly intothe
invisiblecodesofinformation andfluidmediaeffects. Forarchi- field of constructionitself,engenderingan architecture of
tecture, whichstillbelongsto appearance(ifno longerentirely minimalmeansand maximaleffects. You won'tsee us, butyou
to presence), thispossibility triggers profounduneasiness. Ata will see whatwe do.

Allen

This content downloaded from 165.95.226.100 on Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:09:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
transposition diagram architecture

TRANSPOSITIONS: TRANSACTIONS pointsout,themechanism ofinterpretationheredoesnotconsist in

WITHARCHITECTURE'S OUTSIDE constructinga seriesofsymbolic equivalents (shield= city;satyr=
A diagramis a graphicassemblagethatspecifiesrelation- desire, .
etc.) Aristander
Instead, has performed a material operation
shipsbetweenactivity and form,organizingthestructure and (cutting,separating) on theactuallinguisticstuffofthedream. The
distributionof functions.As such,diagramsare architecture s result
isimmediate, andthesenseclear, a wayoutoftheabyssofasso-
bestmeansto engagethecomplexity of thereal.The diagram ciativemeaning. Further,inasmuch astheseoperations cannotbeper-
does notpointtowardarchitecture's internalhistoryas a disci- formed intranslation,no overriding,
universal senseis claimed,only
pline,butratherturnsoutward,signalingpossiblerelationsof thelocal and specific of manipulation.
possibilities In thissense,
matterand information. Butsincenothingcan enterarchitec- wordsaremadeto behavelikearchitecture rather thanarchitecture
turewithouthavingbeenfirstconverted intographicform,the beingmadetobehavelikediscourse.
actualmechanismof graphicconversionis fundamental. The
diagrammay be the channel through which any communica- o
tion with architecture'soutsidemusttravel,but the flow of o
a
<
information along thesechannelswill neverbe smoothand
faultless.
The resistanceof each medium- in theliteral,physi-
o
cal sense- needs to be takenintoaccount.Staticand interfer- <3
o
enceareneverabsent.In thisregard,theformulations ofmedia O
O
theoristFriedrichKittlerare particularly "A o
suggestive. medi- >
um is a mediumis a medium,"writesKittler, "therefore itcan- cu
Z)
O
notbe translated."Againsttheinevitablelinguisticovertones of
"translation,"Kittler
elaboratesan alternative
model,a concept
of"transposition" relevanceto thefunction-
thathas particular
ingofthediagram:

In a discoursenetwork . . . transposition
necessarily takesthe
of Whereas
translation. translation
excludes all 23.17
place particu-
larsinfavorofa general equivalent,thetransposition ofmedia
is accomplished serially, at discretepoints.. . . Becausethe
number ofelements . . . andtherulesofassociation arehardly
everidentical,everytransposition is to a degreearbitrary, a
manipulation. It can to
appeal nothing universal and must
thereforeleavegaps.*

In operationsoftransposition,conversionsfromonesignsystem
to another areperformed mechanically, basisofpart-to-part
on the
relationships without regardforthewhole.In thesameway,dia-
g
gramsarenot"decoded"according touniversalconventions,rather $ i
theinternal are moved from the ^
relationships transposed, partbypart 5 5
graphic tothematerial or thespatial,
by means of operations are
that 1
and Theimpersonal characterof 1
always partial,
arbitrary, incomplete.
Sendai structural j<y i^ Os
thesetranspositions shiftsattentionawayfromtheambiguous, per- Toyo Ito, Mdiathque
(1995); diagrams. M Os
sonalpoeticsof translation and itsassociationswiththeweighty 1 s i
DIAGRAM ARCHITECTURE
institutionsofliterature,
language, and hermeneutics. I 2A Iv
Thetermdiagram architecture
comesfrom ToyoIto.He writesabout 0
u g Uh
O
A diagram in thissenseis likea rebus.
TociteKitder again:"Inter- ^ 'o a
thattreattextsas charadesor dreamsas pictures
theworkofKazuyoSejima,butthepassagehastheforceofa gener- rt
w > 4
pretive techniques 1 5
al statement.His critiqueof theassumptions underlying conven-
havenothing to do withhermeneutics, becausetheydo nottrans- 1 -O aU
tionaldesignprocedures isworthcitingatlength: TJ
late."Thediagram brings thelogicofmatter andinstrumentalityinto 9 3
therealmofmeaning andrepresentation andnotviceversa:"Rebus i- Ijf S
Mostarchitects findthisa complicated process:theconversion "11
lil S o
is theinstrumental caseofres:things canbe usedlikewords,words i- S
ofa diagram, onewhichdescribes howa multitude offunction-
likethings."2 SlavojZizekprovidesanotherexample:"Remember * 'I
al conditionsmustbereadinspatialterms, intoanactualstruc-
Aristander's famousinterpretation of thedreamof Alexander of Z
ture.A spatialscheme istransformed intoarchitectural
symbols < Sg Ia
Macedn, reportedbyArtemidorus? Alexander'hadsurrounded Tyre z 3 o
by the customary planning method, and fromthisa three-
andwasbesieging itbutwasfeeling uneasyanddisturbed becauseof
dimensional changeis brought intoeffect, onewhichdepends g
thelengthoftimethesiegewas taking. Alexander dreamt he sawa 2 IU 1c-
on theindividuals In this
self-expression. process, a greatdeal Z U
satyr dancingon hisshield. Aristander happened tobe in theneigh- Ul 3 -S
borhoodofTyre Bydividing depends on the psychological of
weight preconceived ideas -1 i *0
* tsM
thewordforsatyr intosaandtyroshe
attached to thesocialinstitution knownas 'architecture.'... < 5
encouraged thekingtopresshomethesiegeso thathe becamethe i
Therefore,toposition architecture
s placeinoursocietywould z
master ofthecity.'
Aswecansee,Aristander wasquiteuninterested in 1
be to describe it on theonehandas an individualized artistic 2
thepossible'symbolic of a
meaning' dancingsatyr(ardent desire? Ui
intent basedonself-willed expression,oron theotherhand,to
joviality?);insteadhe focusedon thewordand dividedit, thus
place itwithin the framework ofpublicorderwerecognize asa
obtaining themessage ofthedream:saTyros =Tyreisthine."3AsZizek
socialsystem, thelatter basedonmerecommonplace habitsthat
A.Kittler,
1Friedrich Discourse
Networks,
1800/1900,Michael
trans. Metteerand
Chris
Cullens
(Stanford:
Stanford
University
Press, 265.
1992),
2Ibid.,
274.
3Slavoj
Zizek,
Looking An
Awry:Introduction
toJacques
Lacan
throughCulture
Popular Massachusetts:
(Cambridge, MIT
Press, 51-52.
1991),

Allen

This content downloaded from 165.95.226.100 on Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:09:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 index abstract machine

havebecometheestablishedarchetype. Whenyoustoptothink surein theimmediacyand directness of proceduresthatoften

aboutit,thefactthatalmostall architecturehasemergedfrom short-circuit conventional designschmas.It is an architecture
theconfines of thesetwo antagonistic, completelyopposite thatfrankly and openlydisplaysitsconstraints and is comfort-
polesis virtually
incomprehensible.It is almostincredible
to ablewiththelimitations imposedby forces of market economy,
thinkthatmostarchitectshaveno seriousdoubtswhenfaced codes,or theshifting fieldof thecontemporary city.The com-
withthiscontradictionthatarchitecture hasnurturedwithin plexityof thesereal worldconstraints is neitherheld at arms
itself.4 nor
length literally incorporated, but reformed as architectural
materialthrough thevehicleofthediagram.Itis an architecture
The architect's conventional meansof working- the "cus- thattravelslight,leavingtheheavystuffbehind.At one level,
tomaryplanning method" thatIto describes- can be classified nothingmore (or less) is claimedforthediagramthanthis:a
accordingto thewell-knowncategoriesof signestablished by diagramarchitecture is partof a new sensibility characterized
C.S. Peirceat thebeginningof thiscentury.5 Plansand eleva- bya disinterest in thealliedprojectsof critiqueor theproduc-
tionsfunctionlike icons (accordingto similitude),while the tion of meaning,preferring insteadimmediacy, dryness,and
notationsthataccompanythemare symbols(based on therule thepleasuresoftheliteral.
of convention). In recentpractice,theconceptof theindexhas A diagramarchitecture is notnecessarily an architecture pro-
been broughtinto play as a means of encodinginformation ducedthrough diagrams. Althoughdiagramsfigurein thework
about the site or its history("site forces")throughprocess- of thearchitects mentioned,theidea thattheworkingproce-
basedoperationsoftracingor geometric transformation (conti- duresofthearchitect imprintthemselves on therealizedbuild-
guity).Interpretation and translation figuredeeplyin all of ing is foreignto thelogic of the diagram.Instead,a diagram
theseprocedures. By contrast, themoveawayfromtranslation architecture is an architecture thatbehaves likea diagram,indif-
to a diagrammatic practice based on transposition, and the ferent to the specific means of its realization. It is an architec-
resultingbypassof the interpretive mechanism,is consistent turethatestablishes a loose fitofprogramand form,a directed
withDeleuze and Guattari s descriptionof the functioning of fieldwithinwhichmultipleactivities unfold,channeledbutnot
the diagram,which also evades conventionalsemioticcate- constrained by the architectural envelope.Itis an architecture of
gories:"Diagrams must be distinguished from indexes, which are maximum performative effects with minimal architectural
23.18 territorial signs,butalso fromicons, whichpertaintoreterritori-means,characterized at timesbyindifference (MVRDV)and at
alization,and fromsymbols, whichpertainto relativeor negative timesby exquisiterestraint (Sejima), but alwaysby deference
deterritorialization."^ A diagram architecture doesnotjustify itself on thepartofitsauthorto theimpersonalforceofthediagram.
on thebasisof embeddedcontent, butby itsabilityto multiply Animportant pointofreference in tracing a genealogy ofcon-
effects and scenarios.Diagramsfunction throughmatter/matter temporary diagramarchitecture is K. MichaelHays'sdescription
relationships, not matter/ contentrelationships. Theyturnaway of Hannes Meyer'sPetersschule projectas an abstractmachine.
fromquestionsof meaningand interpretation, and reassert Working fromthe1927 presentation ofMeyer'sprojectas a sin-
function as a legitimate problem, without the dogmas of func- gle-pagelayout dominated by diagramsand calculations, Hays
tionalism. The shiftfromtranslation to transposition does not notesthattheformand substanceof thedepictedbuilding"is
so much functionto shut down meaningas to collapse the only one componentof the totalarchitectural apparatusthat
of
process interpretation. Meaning is located on the surface of includes these diagrams." In this way, he is able to extricate
things and in the materiality of discourse. What is lostin depth Meyer from the conventions of functionalist logic. Insteadof
is gainedin immediacy. Diagramarchitecture looksforeffects seeingtheindividualbuildingas theresultof genericcalcula-
on thesurface, butbylayering surfaceon surface, a newkindof tions(theapplicationoftechnicalnorms), Hayssuggeststhatit
depth-effect is created. is possibleto see thePetersschule as onlyone of manypossible
The diagramarchitecture describedbyIto is criticalbothof instancesof thediagramspresented, "partof a largermachine
the social institutionsof architectureand of exaggerated fortheproductionof desiredeffects of light,occupation,and
mythologies ofpersonalexpression. sensuousexperience."7 The abstract machineatworkhereis an
o rechnerischer naehwel
Herder
schirtrlume
beteucMungsstlrite Ito imagines an architecturein assemblageof social and technicalforcesthatare actualizedin
o MI WD MMwhiMM whichtheprocessof conversionis multipleformsby multipleagents,among themthe specific
<
minimized;consequently, architec- instanceof Meyer'sproject.In therealizedproject,theseforces

5
o hwiwttw. et.
o**: tures traditional claimto transformin turnwould couple with othersto activatethe life of the
<od lAflf*tfflrttt* T "
O " tirriHIrtr
fefttttrft
frtSHtTda b100,0 its material (the last vestige of buildingand to keepitin playovertime.As opposedto a func-
O Cp. - '
[< - ~ ] <**..architecture's connectionto magic tionalistlogic thatwould describea fixedset of actionsto be
O> ep'-50 H -iMb.
Jtg ^ - M
> (l 'I'
MMr-hH k
ImnHHnMittr f-tf-lf' 41.0 and alchemy) is underminedas completedwithina fixedarchitectural
putMt
IiaotowwHa^ envelope(and riskobso-
Z) well. No complex mysteriesto lescenceif thosefunctions change), the notionof an abstract
o aMMtt* dwO.B..MHiMtMiMrlwwiaKlMwMwMtiMnHaw
tTaim untangle, no hidden messages to machine sees the building as a componentin a largerassem-
translate, no elaborate transforma- blage that can be recontextualized accordingto theprogressive
aU
Climi aHlnMlim in
jadar tional process to decode. On the rearrangements of theothercomponentsin thissocial/techni-
frfcimT.aiitt'A!"
(<t.. ,.)!! **"" basis of this and other examples, it cal/ur banistic machine.
mightbe possibleto identify a dia- In functionalist discourse,anyformalelaboration thatcannot
A, - -0.7. o,*. -
A, -1,70. exemplified be accounted for or technical criteria is an
A/- ---2,15. A,_ -ite, V-I-JA grammaticsensibility, by programmatic
in contemporaryarchitectureby embarrassment. Bycontrast, in Hays'sreading,theprecisefor-
(among others)theworkof OMA, malcharacter ofthebuildingis keytoitsfunctioning. Thespare,
tiiiuch
>* r_tj_8_ X1
- *_-e,
e,
. or MVRDV. This would
S-
. f.In*.- >
xw -h Ito, Sejima, linearcharacter of the architecture itself creates a kind ofdirect-
bwi
i^tiriictiM a
: : --
_! 1,+6,e,-a.. be an architecture thattakesplea- ed scaffold, a sharplydefinedgroundformultipleactivities. It
4Toyo "Diagram
Ito, inElCroquis
Architecture," 77(1) 19.
1996),
(Madrid,
mnu
<>i Ia*'*
tamto*!
!<* <- 5"Asigniseither
anicon,
and An
orasymbol.
index, icon
isasignwhich
would the
possesscharacter
whichrenders
itsignificant,
even its
though had
object no suchasa
existence;
streak
lead-pencil asrepresenting line.
ageometrical An isasign
index which atonce,
would, lose
that
character
which itasign
makes ifits were
object but
removed, would lose
not
that ifthere
character were
nointerprtant.for
Such, isapiece
instance, mould
of with initasthe
abullet-hole of
signashot;
for without
the
shot
therewouldhave no
been but
hole;
" " .MMM.there isahole whether
anybody has
thesense ittoashot
toattribute ornot.
Asymbol
isasign
whichwould
lose
thecharacter
which itasign
renders ifthere
were
nointerprtant.
1. ..mtl.
weh
1.111)111,11, ir**
Mtrtar^n^ there,
WWHMI<*Hi|y>ll>lHll<. -
l.Ul>l
M!. isany
Such utterance
of which
speech what
signifieditdoes
onlybyvirtue
ofits tohave
understood
being that Charles
signification."Sanders ofPeirce,
Writings
Philosophical
Peirce,
***"anm>
Mr
2*m a :rm,
I
f I.
ninnimi!
tonnai
tu
auHMwart). ed.
Justus
Buchler, York:
(New DoverPublications, 104.
1955),
I
lipu
mn tat/' TrrrtrTn
aatoato
artabau). i- s:
( 6Gilles
Deleuze
and Flix AThousand
Guattari, Brian
trans.
Plateaus, Massumi ofMinnesota
University
(Minneapolis, Press,
1987),142.
ZTTBiiL -
tei
1I.
taaaaNbatowMMf 7K.MichaelHays,Modernism
andthePosthumanist
Subject
(Cambridge, MIT
Massachusetts:
Press, 111.
1992),
-> -MMk
.Un.*
iiinhpl.mil. -
-I.HnHiirH.aMMrrMMM
mttm
(a arta
4a
ata). WM-M
und
ttmtm
maiiiMiiai wat
m*
(oa< -110
m
ylMHilW)
Hannes Petersschule
Meyer, (1927).

Allen

This content downloaded from 165.95.226.100 on Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:09:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
materiality after-theory

performsmuch information, which would quicklyexhaust andtheparticularly 20th-century dilemmaofconfronting a real-

itself. of theclassroomblock (empha- itythatis itselfincreasingly
The assertiveverticality characterized by the arbitrary and
sized by a structural expression that has littleto do with the the incomplete,by false dead
starts, ends, indifference, and
actualstacking ofclassrooms within)establishes a strongformal uncertainty. (As Kittlerconcludes,"Theelementary, unavoidable
tensionto thelayered, cantileveredplaydecks,whicharethem- actofEXHAUSTION is an encounter withthelimitsofmedia."9)
selvesa startlingand slightlydisorienting dis- A diagramarchitecture does not
placement of thehorizontal groundplane. This pretend to be able to standout-
formaltensionis onlypartially softened bythe side of thisrealityto offercri-
elaborateseries of circulationelements,the tiqueor correction, nordoes it
walkways, stairs,and platforms that weave hold out for some impossible
throughand aroundthebuildingparts.These notionof coherence.Instead,it
multipleroutesand unexpectedconnections acceptsarchitecture's place in
laced througha genericfunctionaldiagram thisflawedreality,notcynically,
(horizontaldecks and verticalclassrooms) but with cautious optimism,
producecomplexperformative effects. Unlike inasmuchas these contingent
Le Corbusier, Meyeris indifferentas to theori- diagramsof mattercan some-
gin (semiotic,social, or technical)of these timesbe reconfigured.
effects.The displacedgroundplanebracedback Van
Berkel Architectuur
&Bos Arnhem
bureau, project.
Volumetric
offlows,
study view.
side
to thebuildingbyelegantcablestrutsdoes notcallforthassoci-
ationswithaircraft technology or memoriesof thegarden;nor
is he interestedin transforming thismaterialintoa new whole.
Rather, theforceof theabstract machineas deployedhereis to DIAGRAMS-
addresspreciseproblemswithprecisesolutions,while main- INTERACTIVE INSTRUMENTS IN OPERATION
tainingfluidity amongthe parts- a disjointedness thatkeeps BenvanBerkelandCarolineBos
theelementsin playand allowsfortheirconstantrecontextual-
izationwithchangingexternalforces. 23.19
This reading,firstelaboratedin the late 1980s and early
1990s, workedagainstthe grainof theDerridian/deconstruc- Architecture stillarticulates its concepts,designdecisions,and
tivisttheorydominantat thattime,whichsoughtto reinscribe processesalmostexclusively bymeansof a posteriori rationaliza-
architecture withinan abstract logic of discourse and representa- tions.The compulsive force of legitimizing arguments stilldomi-
tion.Offering a wayout of thefacileoppositionof thesemiotic natescontemporary even it
debate, though onlyrepresents a limited
to thematerial, Haysidentifies a radicalmaterialism in Meyers interpretation ofthecomplexwebofconsiderations thatsurrounds
architecture. Butthereference tomateriality hereis notin service eachproject. Yetforthemostpartwe cannotbearto analyzeour
of therecovery of tectonics or an ontologyof materials, as was owninternal discourse forfearofdisrupting thenotionoftheemi-
typical of other critiques of deconstructivism. Instead,it draws nentutility ofourprojectsandthusprecipitating theirdisappear-
on certainaspectsoftheDerridianprogramto describepotential ance.The dependenceof architects on beingselectedforwork
social and politicaleffectsresultingfromthe disruptionand shouldnotbe underestimated. Inevitably, ourstrategies, ourfor-
renewalofperception inMeyersarchitecture: "[Meyer's] materi- mulations, and theways in which our interests evolve are related
alism emphasizesthe heterogeneous propertiesof thingsand to this -
dependence.Since architecture at least in the open,
theireffects in realspaceandrealtime,andinducesa playofsen- democratic, Westernsocietyin whichwe work- now results
suousenergiesin theviewer, a compulsivepleasuretakenin the froma highlyinstitutionalized, cooperativeprocessin which
of
quiddity buildingparts, but also in the contradictions,the dis- clients,investors, users, and technicalconsultants all takepart,it
ruptions, the gaps and silences, all of which explodes the is naturalandrightthatarchitects striveto be reasonable, respon-
receivedsocialmeaningsof things."8 Hencetheradicalforceof siblepartners in thisprocess,and conditionthemselves to think
Hays'sreadinglies in thefactthatthemateriality he refers to is and to presentthemselves in a waythatwillpersuadeothersthat
nota primitive or "natural"materiality thatlooksbackto archi- largeinvestments canbe safelyentrusted to them.Thefrustrating
tecture'sorigins(as, forexample,in the architecture of Louis resultis thatthereis hardlyanyrealarchitectural theoryto be
Kahn).It is insteada physicalreality thatis itselfentirelyperme- found,despitethe diversityof practicesat work today,and
atedbyall theartificiality and abstraction of 20th-century urban despitea hugelyexpandedvolumeof architectural publications.
life:a reality thatis alreadydiagrammatic. Bycollapsing mate- Thereis onlyafter-theory.
the
rialand theabstract in thisway,he locatesarchitecture between The pressureof rationality is suchthatarchitectural theoryis
therealand thevirtual, capableof intervening in both,yetfully streamlined towarda momentofcompelling logic,in whichfac-
committed toneither. torsof location,program,routing,construction, and anything
My motivation for examining in some depth thisone example else thatplays a role in the origination designare directed
of a
froma potentialgenealogyof a diagramarchitecture is not so towardthe triumphant conclusionthatthe particulardesign
muchto legitimate thepresentbymeansofreference to thepast under discussionis the only objectivelyjustifiableone. The
as itis to suggestthattheworkings ofthediagrambelongprop- demandto presentthe"right"solution,evenwhenthecontents
erly to architecture's history and itsown understanding of itself ofthatconcepthavebecomeveryuncertain, propagates architec-
as a discipline.It wouldnotbe difficult to outlinea morecom- tures dualclaimsofobjectivity andrationality. Likea doorslam-
pletegenealogyofthediagramin architecture. Thathavingbeen mingshut,the barricadeof retrospective justificationroughly
said,theradicalforceof thediagrambelongsto itsrecentpast, blockstheviewofwhatwenton behindit.
8Ibid.,
111-13.
9Kittler,
265.
For
the
title
(agloss
on"The ofMatter,"
Diagrams the
title
ofthe
last of
his
chapter doctoral
thesis)
and
other
that
borrowingsno
doubt their
foundway this
into Iam
text, indebted
toBob
Somol.

van Berkel & Bos

This content downloaded from 165.95.226.100 on Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:09:39 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions