Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Neil Leach
To cite this article: Neil Leach (2005) The limits of poetics, Building Research & Information, 33:4,
382-385, DOI: 10.1080/09613210500042788
Article views: 63
development of perspective into an illusionistic mode figures are cited only on occasions, but remain ever
of representation, notes Vesely, is the main source present. The book is dominated by a strain of phenom-
of modern relativism, beginning the process that enological thinking, and an interest, in particular, in
led to the emergence of divided representation (p.173). the role of hermeneutics, but it is never reduced to
the simplified version of phenomenology that might
This division is further enhanced during the Baroque be found in the work of Christian Norberg-Schulz,
and the advent of modern scientific thinking, where for example. If Norberg-Schulz (whose name is con-
the divide between the Arts and the Sciences begins spicuously absent from Veselys bibliography) provides
really to take hold. It is the very abstraction, for a primer for architects in phenomenological thinking,
example, of the world of the French philosopher Vesely supplies the master class. As such, Architecture
Rene Descartes, a world of Cartesian coordinates, in the Age of Divided Representation will come across
that the lack of any real grounding becomes evident, not only as a somewhat conservative book, but also as
and the subject/object divide of an alienated world a deeply intellectual one.
begins to take charge. This process is consolidated, so
that by the time of Claude Perrault, architecture has How is one to appraise such a work? Should it be
become a symptom of modern scientific knowledge, regarded as a piece of historical research? Or should
until eventually one reaches the crisis of Postmodern- it be viewed as a retroactive manifesto for over 30
ism where years of teaching architectural design? This reviewer
Downloaded by [Tongji University] at 01:03 12 September 2017
It can be seen that the role of contemporary scientific As such, this book may appeal to a limited constitu-
knowledge is central to Veselys concept of an age of ency. The content and language of the book might
divided representation. It is important to note that appear obscure to some readers. Only the initiated
Veselys campaign is not against science per se, but will know what Vesely means precisely by terms such
rather against the split that allowed the Sciences to as representation, situation, meaning and
become divorced from the Arts. Consequently, the symbol terms that are common enough in everyday
Arts themselves have suffered especially through the language, but which take on a different resonance in
introduction of the field of aesthetics, and the Sciences Veselys discourse. Furthermore, Vesely often resorts
have become increasingly remote from ontological to hazy and imprecise words such as deep and pro-
thinking. Veselys solution for a reconciliation blematic that leave the text looking like a linguistic
between these two realms is to reintroduce poetic version of the smudged drawings that illustrate it.
thinking to provide a form of synthesis, since poetry Throughout, this reviewer was left with the feeling
is the concept of truth restored to its artistic that many of the words are mantras, not fully under-
dimensions. stood (even by many of the initiates), that serve to
reinforce the somewhat mystical tone of the text.
Veselys work is an overview of the history of Western
intellectual thought and its impact on the domain of The book is illustrated throughout with examples of
architecture, but it is an overview constrained by a student work from the University of Cambridges
certain conservative tradition of thinking. Throughout School of Architecture to such an extent that the
the book, there lurk the shadows of the intellectual thesis itself cannot be separated from a certain aes-
figures that have inspired Vesely, especially the philo- thetic. This is not only an architectural aesthetic, in
sophers Martin Heidegger, Hans-Georg Gadamer, terms of what the eventual buildings will actually
Paul Ricoeur and Maurice Merleau-Ponty. These look like, but also an aesthetic of representation, in
383
Review
terms of how they are presented in drawings. The into account is the very chameleon-like capacity of
drawings are all very stylized. Both the architectural people to absorb and appropriate the new and unfami-
aesthetic and the mode of representation appear to be liar, and to incorporate it within their own symbolic
indulgences. What is it that necessarily associates this horizons. Nothing remains alienating forever.
architectural aesthetic with Veselys philosophical
sources? By contrast, one could point to an architect The criticism of contemporary culture is reinforced by
such as Nigel Coates, who has read and digested the overarching references to history throughout the
Merleau-Pontys philosophy and incorporated it into text. If Vesely is to be believed, one might as well
his own architectural sensibility, and yet seems to admit defeat, in that we now live in a thoroughly alie-
adopt a very different approach towards architectural nated culture. We ought really to be living in the Age of
design. One is left wondering whether Heidegger, the Baroque. Meanwhile, Vesely claims throughout
Gadamer, Merleau-Ponty et al. would have been just that he is dealing with concrete reality. Yet by
as mystified by the architecture produced under the failing to engage with the actual concrete realities of
aegis of their work had they ever seen it as todays existence a world of advanced capitalism,
Derrida was by so-called Deconstructivist Architec- digital technologies and globalization Vesely is con-
ture. There is, in short, nothing to connect a certain structing a very seductive, but ultimately escapist,
philosophical outlook with this particular aesthetic, historical cocoon. This cocooning threatens to
still less to connect it with a particular style of undermine the very project that Vesely wishes to
Downloaded by [Tongji University] at 01:03 12 September 2017
ideas. For example, he refers to virtual reality as a hal- and technological issues from sustainable development
lucinatory world and dismisses the contemporary to digitized production. Every intellectual epoch has its
obsession with digital production as a fantasy. Aside time, and one has the sense of the twilight of one such
from the fact that any Lacanian theorist would insist epoch, as the theories of Heidegger, Gadamer and
that fantasy is actually constitutive of how one sees Merleau-Ponty are on the wane, and the philosophy
reality, one is left wondering where the real fantasy of Gilles Deleuze and new scientific thinking are
resides. In an age where the capacity to use digital tech- increasingly catching the imagination of the powerful
nologies has become a prerequisite to employment in young minds in architectural culture, now that technol-
an office, Veselys project has become increasingly ogy occupies such a dominant position in the contem-
remote from the real world. The irony about this porary psyche. Yet, it is precisely for this reason that
book is that its long gestation and delayed publication Veselys book remains so significant. Architecture in
has meant that the world to which it was addressed has the Age of Divided Representation is an important his-
somehow changed so that its message no longer seems torical record of a sensibility that held considerable
quite so relevant. sway and potency in architectural education. It will
continue to attract a limited following.
In short, there is a real richness and historical charm to
Veselys work, and this book is obviously an example Neil Leach
of a powerful mind at work. Vesely takes the reader Architectural Association, UK
Downloaded by [Tongji University] at 01:03 12 September 2017
385