 | This articleneeds more completecitations forverification. Please helpadd missing citation information so that sources are clearly identifiable.(November 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
| Deconstructivism | |
|---|---|
 Walt Disney Concert Hall by Frank Gehry,Los Angeles, California | |
| Influences | Constructivist architecture Post-structuralist philosophy |
| Postmodernism |
|---|
| Preceded byModernism |
| Postmodernity |
| Fields |
| Reactions |
Deconstructivism is apostmodern architectural movement which appeared in the 1980s. It gives the impression of the fragmentation of the constructed building, commonly characterised by an absence of obvious harmony, continuity, or symmetry.[1] Its name is aportmanteau ofConstructivism and "Deconstruction", a form ofsemiotic analysis developed by the French philosopherJacques Derrida. Architects whose work is often described as deconstructivist (though in many cases the architects themselves reject the label) includeZaha Hadid,Peter Eisenman,Frank Gehry,Rem Koolhaas,Daniel Libeskind,Bernard Tschumi, andCoop Himmelb(l)au.[1]
The term does not inherently refer to the style'sdeconstructed visuals as the English adjective suggests, but instead derives from the movement's foundations in contrast to the RussianConstructivist movement during theFirst World War that "broke the rules" of classical architecture through the French language.[2]
Besides fragmentation, deconstructivism often manipulates the structure's surface skin and deploys non-rectilinear shapes which appear to distort and dislocateestablished elements of architecture. The finished visual appearance is characterized by unpredictability and controlled chaos.
Deconstructivism came to public notice with the 1982Parc de la Villettearchitectural design competition, in particular the entry fromJacques Derrida andPeter Eisenman[3] and the winning entry byBernard Tschumi, as well as theMuseum of Modern Art’s 1988Deconstructivist Architecture exhibition in New York, organized byPhilip Johnson andMark Wigley. Tschumi stated that calling the work of these architects a "movement" or a new "style" was out of context and showed a lack of understanding of their ideas, and believed that Deconstructivism was simply a move against the practice ofPoMo, which he said involved "making Doric temple forms out of plywood".[4]
Other influential exhibitions include the 1989 opening of theWexner Center for the Arts inColumbus, designed by Peter Eisenman. The New York exhibition has featured works byFrank Gehry,Daniel Libeskind,Rem Koolhaas,Peter Eisenman,Zaha Hadid,Coop Himmelb(l)au, andBernard Tschumi. Since their exhibitions, some architects associated with Deconstructivism have distanced themselves from it; nonetheless, the term has stuck and has come to embrace a general trend withinContemporary architecture.
Early antecedents of the architectural movement could be found inindustrial design, notably inEttore Sottsass' design for the 1969Olivetti Valentine typewriter, a non-conformist design that deconstructed what was typically the typewriter's bodywork, revealing elements normally concealed, using 'floating keys' and a body-colored plastic 'rail' ahead of the spacebar, visually detached from the typewriter's main body.
The termDeconstructivism in contemporary architecture is opposed to the ordered rationality ofModernism andPostmodernism. Though postmodernist and nascent deconstructivist architects both published in the journalOppositions (published between 1973 and 1984), that journal's contents mark a decisive break between the two movements. Deconstructivism took a confrontational stance toarchitectural history, wanting to "disassemble" architecture.[6] While postmodernism returned to embrace the historical references that modernism had shunned, possibly ironically, deconstructivism rejected the postmodern acceptance of such references, as well as the idea of ornament as an after-thought or decoration.[citation needed]
In addition toOppositions, a defining text for both deconstructivism and postmodernism wasRobert Venturi'sComplexity and Contradiction in Architecture (1966). It argues against the purity, clarity and simplicity of modernism. With its publication,functionalism andrationalism, the two main branches of modernism, were overturned as paradigms. The reading of the postmodernist Venturi was that ornament and historical allusion added a richness to architecture that modernism had foregone. Some Postmodern architects endeavored to reapply ornament even to economical and minimal buildings, described by Venturi as "the decorated shed". Rationalism of design was dismissed but the functionalism of the building was still somewhat intact. This is close to the thesis of Venturi's next major work,[7] thatsigns and ornament can be applied to a pragmatic architecture, and instill the philosophic complexities ofsemiology.[citation needed]
The deconstructivist reading ofComplexity and Contradiction is quite different. The basic building was the subject of problematics and intricacies in deconstructivism, with no detachment for ornament. Rather than separating ornament and function, like postmodernists such as Venturi, the functional aspects of buildings were called into question. Geometry was to deconstructivists what ornament was to postmodernists, the subject of complication, and this complication of geometry was in turn, applied to the functional, structural, and spatial aspects of deconstructivist buildings. One example of deconstructivist complexity isFrank Gehry'sVitra Design Museum in Weil-am-Rhein, which takes the typical unadorned white cube of modernistart galleries and deconstructs it, using geometries reminiscent of cubism and abstract expressionism. This subverts the functional aspects of modernist simplicity while taking modernism, particularly the international style, of which its white stucco skin is reminiscent, as a starting point. Another example of the deconstructivist reading ofComplexity and Contradiction isPeter Eisenman'sWexner Center for the Arts. The Wexner Center takes the archetypal form of thecastle, which it then imbues with complexity in a series of cuts and fragmentations. A three-dimensional grid runs somewhat arbitrarily through the building. The grid, as a reference to modernism, of which it is an accoutrement, collides with the medieval antiquity of a castle. Some of the grid's columns intentionally do not reach the ground, hovering over stairways creating a sense of neurotic unease and contradicting the structural purpose of thecolumn. The Wexner Center deconstructs the archetype of the castle and renders its spaces and structure with conflict and difference.[citation needed]
Some deconstructivist architects were influenced by the French philosopherJacques Derrida. Eisenman was a friend of Derrida, but even so his approach to architectural design was developed long before he became a Deconstructivist. For him Deconstructivism should be considered an extension of his interest in radical formalism. Some practitioners of deconstructivism were also influenced by the formal experimentation and geometric imbalances of Russianconstructivism. There are additional references in deconstructivism to 20th-century movements: themodernism/postmodernism interplay,expressionism,cubism,minimalism andcontemporary art. Deconstructivism attempts to move away from the supposedly constricting 'rules' of modernism such as "form follows function", "purity of form", and "truth to materials".[citation needed]
The main channel from deconstructivist philosophy toarchitectural theory was through the philosopherJacques Derrida's influence withPeter Eisenman. Eisenman drew some philosophical bases from the literary movementDeconstruction, and collaborated directly with Derrida on projects including an entry for theParc de la Villette competition, documented inChora l Works. Both Derrida and Eisenman, as well asDaniel Libeskind[8] were concerned with the "metaphysics of presence", and this is the main subject of deconstructivist philosophy in architecture theory. The presupposition is that architecture is a language capable of communicating meaning and of receiving treatments by methods oflinguistic philosophy.[9] The dialectic of presence and absence, or solid and void occurs in much of Eisenman's projects, both built and unbuilt. Both Derrida and Eisenman believe that the locus, or place of presence, is architecture, and the same dialectic of presence and absence is found in construction and deconstructivism.[10]
According to Derrida, readings of texts are best carried out when working with classical narrative structures. Any architectural deconstructivism requires the existence of a particular archetypalconstruction, a strongly-established conventional expectation to play flexibly against.[11] The design ofFrank Gehry’s ownSanta Monica residence, (from 1978), has been cited as a prototypical deconstructivist building. His starting point was a prototypical suburban house embodied with a typical set of intended social meanings. Gehry altered its massing, spatial envelopes, planes and other expectations in a playful subversion, an act of "de"construction"[12]
In addition to Derrida's concepts of the metaphysics of presence and deconstructivism, his notions of trace and erasure, embodied in his philosophy of writing and arche-writing[13] found their way into deconstructivistmemorials. Daniel Libeskind envisioned many of his early projects as a form of writing or discourse on writing and often works with a form ofconcrete poetry. He made architectural sculptures out of books and often coated the models in texts, openly making his architecture refer to writing. The notions of trace and erasure were taken up by Libeskind in essays and in his project for theJewish Museum Berlin. The museum is conceived as a trace of the erasure of theHolocaust, intended to make its subject legible and poignant. Memorials such asMaya Lin'sVietnam Veterans Memorial and Peter Eisenman'sMemorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe are also said to reflect themes of trace and erasure.
Another major current in deconstructivist architecture takes inspiration from theConstructivist andRussian Futurist movements of the early twentieth century, both in their graphics and in their visionary architecture, little of which was actually constructed.
ArtistsNaum Gabo,El Lissitzky,Kazimir Malevich, andAlexander Rodchenko, have influenced the graphic sense of geometric forms of deconstructivist architects such asZaha Hadid andCoop Himmelb(l)au. Both Deconstructivism and Constructivism have been concerned with the tectonics of making an abstract assemblage. Both were concerned with the radical simplicity of geometric forms as the primary artistic content, expressed in graphics, sculpture and architecture. The Constructivist tendency towardpurism, though, is absent in Deconstructivism: form is often deformed when construction is deconstructed. Also lessened or absent is the advocacy ofsocialist andcollectivist causes.
The primary graphic motifs of constructivism were the rectangular bar and the triangular wedge, others were the more basic geometries of the square and the circle. In his seriesProuns, El Lizzitzky assembled collections of geometries at various angles floating free in space. They evoke basic structural units such as bars of steel or sawn lumber loosely attached, piled, or scattered. They were also oftendrafted and share aspects withtechnical drawing andengineering drawing. Similar in composition is the deconstructivist seriesMicromegas by Daniel Libeskind.
The symbolic breakdown of the wall effected by introducing the Constructivist motifs of tilted and crossed bars sets up a subversion of the walls that define the bar itself. ... This apparent chaos actually constructs the walls that define the bar; it is the structure. The internal disorder produces the bar while splitting it even as gashes open up along its length.
— Phillip Johnson and Mark Wigley,Deconstructive Architecture, p. 34
Two strains of modern art,minimalism andcubism, have had an influence on deconstructivism.Analytical cubism had a sure effect on deconstructivism, as forms and content are dissected and viewed from different perspectives simultaneously. A synchronicity of disjoined space is evident in many of the works ofFrank Gehry andBernard Tschumi.Synthetic cubism, with its application offound object art, is not as great an influence on deconstructivism asAnalytical cubism, but is still found in the earlier and more vernacular works of Frank Gehry. Deconstructivism also shares with minimalism a disconnection from cultural references.
With its tendency toward deformation and dislocation, there is also an aspect ofexpressionism andexpressionist architecture associated with deconstructivism. At times deconstructivism mirrors varieties of expressionism,neo-expressionism, andabstract expressionism as well. The angular forms of the Ufa Cinema Center by Coop Himmelb(l)au recall the abstract geometries of the numbered paintings ofFranz Kline, in their unadorned masses. The UFA Cinema Center also would make a likely setting for the angular figures depicted in urban German street scenes byErnst Ludwig Kirchner. The work ofWassily Kandinsky also bears similarities to deconstructivist architecture. His movement into abstract expressionism and away from figurative work,[15] is in the same spirit as the deconstructivist rejection of ornament for geometries.
Several artists in the 1980s and 1990s contributed work that influenced or took part in deconstructivism.Maya Lin andRachel Whiteread are two examples. Lin's 1982 project for theVietnam Veterans Memorial, with its granite slabs severing the ground plane, is one. Its shard-like form and reduction of content to a minimalist text influenced deconstructivism, with its sense of fragmentation and emphasis on reading the monument. Lin also contributed work for Eisenman's Wexner Center. Rachel Whiteread's cast architectural spaces are another instance wherecontemporary art is confluent with architecture.Ghost (1990), an entire living space cast in plaster, solidifying the void, alludes to Derrida's notion of architectural presence.Gordon Matta-Clark'sBuilding cuts were deconstructed sections of buildings exhibited in art galleries.
Mark Wigley andPhilip Johnson curated the 1988Museum of Modern Art exhibitionDeconstructivist architecture, which crystallized the movement, and brought fame and notoriety to its key practitioners. The architects presented at the exhibition werePeter Eisenman,Frank Gehry,Zaha Hadid,Coop Himmelblau,Rem Koolhaas,Daniel Libeskind, andBernard Tschumi. Mark Wigley wrote the accompanying essay and tried to show a common thread among the various architects whose work was usually more noted for their differences.
The projects in this exhibition mark a different sensibility, one in which the dream of pure form has been disturbed.
It is the ability to disturb our thinking about form that makes these projects deconstructive.
The show examines an episode, a point of intersection between several architects where each constructs an unsettling building by exploiting the hidden potential of modernism.
— Phillip Johnson and Mark Wigley, excerpt from the MoMADeconstructivist Architecture catalog
Computer-aided design is now an essential tool in most aspects of contemporary architecture, but the particular nature of deconstructivism makes the use of computers especially pertinent. Three-dimensional modelling and animation (virtual and physical) assists in the conception of very complicated spaces, while the ability to link computer models to manufacturing jigs (CAM—computer-aided manufacturing) allows the mass production of subtly different modular elements to be achieved at affordable costs. Also, Gehry is noted for producing many physical models as well as computer models as part of his design process. Though the computer has made the designing of complex shapes much easier, not everything that looks odd is "deconstructivist".
Since the publication ofKenneth Frampton'sModern Architecture: A Critical History (first edition 1980) there has been awareness of the role of criticism within architectural theory. Whilst referencing Derrida as a philosophical influence, deconstructivism can also be seen as having as much a basis incritical theory as the other major offshoot of postmodernism,critical regionalism. The two aspects of critical theory, urgency and analysis, are found in deconstructivism. There is a tendency to re-examine and critique other works or precedents in deconstructivism, and also a tendency to set aesthetic issues in the foreground.[citation needed]
The difference between criticality in deconstructivism and criticality in critical regionalism is that critical regionalismreduces the overall level of complexity involved and maintains a clearer analysis while attempting to reconcile modernist architecture with local differences. In effect, this leads to a modernist "vernacular". Critical regionalism displays a lack ofself-criticism and autopianism of place. Deconstructivism, meanwhile, maintains a level of self-criticism and adystopianism of place, as well as external criticism and tends towards maintaining a level of complexity. Some architects identified with the movement, notablyFrank Gehry, have actively rejected the classification of their work as deconstructivist.[16]
_Daniel_Navas%2c_Neus_Sol%25C3%25A9._Arquitectos_-3.jpg)
.jpg)
Kenneth Frampton finds deconstructivism "elitist and detached".[17]Nikos Salingaros calls deconstructivism a "viral expression" that invades design thinking in order to build destroyed forms; while curiously similar to both Derrida's and Philip Johnson's descriptions, this is meant as a harsh condemnation of the entire movement.[18] Other criticisms are similar to those of deconstructivist philosophy—that since the act of deconstructivism is not an empirical process, it can result in whatever an architect wishes, and it thus suffers from a lack of consistency. Today there is a sense that the philosophical underpinnings of the beginning of the movement have been lost, and all that is left is the aesthetic of deconstructivism.[19] Other criticisms reject the premise that architecture is a language capable of being the subject of linguistic philosophy, or, if it was a language in the past, critics claim it is no longer.[9] Others question the wisdom and impact on future generations of an architecture that rejects the past and presents no clear values as replacements and which often pursues strategies that are intentionally aggressive to human senses.[9]
Frank Gehry designed the rippling stainless steel tower at 8 Spruce Street, which architecture critics marveled at for its unique "deconstructivism style."
