Consciousness, Literature and the Arts
Archive
Volume 4 Number 1, April 2003
_______________________________________________________________
The
Symbolic Order of Architecture in the Information Age
By
Abstract
The
contemporary European culture embodied in continental architecture is a
manifestation
of change from the established foundations of modernity of the 20th
century
to the formative states of virtuality in the new millennium. The European
pertaining
to the symbolic order of architecture.
Keywords: Architecture;
symbolic order; virtuality; new language; nationalism; globalism.
Introduction
The will to politics pertaining to European regional culture is yielding the power to control policies regarding the Global Village. This scenario is mitigated by disruptive high-tech and destructive economic practices on the world markets. The Grand Narrative of multinationals is creating grand demands for their symbolic visibility on the global landscape. The struggle for globalization of ideas -- to spread ethical behavior in knowledge dissemination and enact a code of conduct for global business practices -- is not necessarily seeking a consensus on a universally shared value system, but rather attempting to devalue the existing regional one. The common denominator of “novelty” advanced by global “visionaries” is manifestly insignificant and projections of change for the global betterment of human quality of life is factually irrelevant. Indeed, the proponents of globalisation transpire to creating lifelong dependency on products and services multinationals wish to provide and manage. If the Invisible Hand is still at work in building wealth for Western Europeans and North Americans, it is not overtly extending a helping hand to the world at large.
Preamble
The
symbolic order of architecture in the European modernity of the 20th century was
primarily predicated on the pursuit of purity of forms in an attempt to ensure
functionality of spaces. It incorporated the use of reinforced concrete as the
newly found building material for the reconstruction of the devastated cities of
the European continent during World Wars I & II. Its spatial layout
reflected the invention of new programs sensitive to the basic and social needs
of inhabitants. Architecture of the era appropriated the cuboid and the grid as
ordering devices and for the ease of building subdivision and orientation; it
accentuated the idea of datum for referenciality. It searched for a balance on
the overall building scale to harmonize its horizontal and vertical dimensions.
It manifestly acted against styles and ornamentation. Economy of means,
efficiency of technology and expediency of the situation assumed normative
values which dictated the design solution. Through the exploration of novel
ideas in design and the embodiment of programmatic narratives in spatial
settings, modernity articulated a new identity of architecture in built form and
urban layout and advanced a new presence on the city landscape. It enhanced a
new character in dwelling and inspired a new spatial ownership in citizenship.
Indeed, modernity had its multi-faceted agenda in rebuilding -- urgently – the
European cities; it adopted goals to accommodate the homeless, manifested
objectives to create the new family structure, purposely devised plans to
integrate the larger whole for political aspirations, and pursued higher ideals
in establishing societal values. It elevated the average citizen to be the
primary focus for its design intentions. It had sovereignty and legitimacy to
claim. It had a mandate for the new cultural, political and social functions to
carry. Modernity had a shared vision for Europe to construct and a unifying
identity to dwell in the symbolic order of architecture.
Hyper-Reality of
Architecture
At
the gates of the new millennium, architecture is challenged by the information
technologies. The symbolic order of architecture in this new age is in the
formative state of development. It is definitively in search of global identity,
aspiring for regional independence and questing for local legitimacy. It is
advancing “novel” yet “universal” principles of dwelling. It is
attempting to construct new ideas in the immutable domain of the digital, in
direct opposition to modernity. Presently digital architects are borrowing
concepts from the art of film production. They are utilizing camera articulation
crafts and light manipulation techniques in space design, aspiring to create a
hyper-reality. They are attempting to achieve this by “accidentally”
clashing objects, “aimlessly” collaging fragments, and “casually”
montaging artifacts. Then, they are applying advanced texture mapping techniques
to amorphous surfaces, intentionally collapsing multi-light sources and
eventually rollaging spaces in virtuality. Hence the bits in the black box of
the computer are becoming the knowledge base for the modeling of the virtual
spaces and the pixels of the monitor screen are embodying the expressive pallets
for this new hyper-reality architecture. At times, the new digital media evolves
to become the only test ground for experimentation of new ideas; inherently, it
becomes not only the concept site for scenario simulation, but also the end
product itself. The digital environment, programmatically being loose and
contextually floaty, provides the ultimate material flexibility and
gravitational freedom for the unrestricted and untried manipulation of geometry
and form. When color-texture and multi-lighting is added to the potential making
of the built form, with translucency and transparency augmenting, the digital
design in the virtual environment acquires the potential for re-inventing
architecture from the pure experiential viewpoint. It certainly holds the
capacity of promoting a new spatial layout that can embody the product of pure
imagination.
Principle Ideas
In
the present playful transformations of concave shells and convex panels
articulated by morphing and characterized with extreme fragmentation and
fluidity, the digital architecture may indeed yield a higher degree of
complexity. It may in itself be an interesting spatial scene, representing an
architectural idea in creation. It does not, however, necessarily legitimize its
undefined forms and layouts to become an architectural proposition, based on the
assumption that futuristic events will be devoid of any requisite functionality.
The challenge now for the digital architect is to claim an ability to decipher
the digital idea, exercise a possibility thinking of conversion, and exert a
necessary transposition in the gravitational and material realms of production.
The new architecture in the information age is at a crossroads of flux and
fiction. It seeks a new symbolic order for dwelling without appropriating the
grid and the box. It aspires to adhere to a new story-line without explicitly
narrating it. The evolving tectonics of its artifacts is experimentally
manufactured and constructed. The spatial setting suspends the conventional
norms of circulation, abandons the idea of referential datum and forfeits the
notion of orientation. It purposely advances an imbalance of scale by
appropriating diagonal dimensions in spatial setting. It is manifestly seeking a
new formal language of communication identified by curved surfaces and
articulating a novel style in expression by projected ornamentation. This
setting is promoting interior delight full of color-textures, but devoid of any
natural lighting. The new architecture attempts to undermine the solidity of
structures by playing “gymnastics” with the gravitational forces. It juggles
with floaty platforms and overarching ramps; it bends walls and clutters
ceilings. It messes up with the architectural program denying any hierarchy of
spatial relationships. The ordering and rhythmic changes of its curved
vocabulary elements, however, are dynamic in their 3D transformations. Even
though it may seem utterly confusing at times, it aspires to impress the
visitor. Hence the issue of dwelling becomes very pressing since the art of the
architecture is reduced to artifact making.
Indeed, just showcasing certain spatial elements to capture the attention
of the viewing audience, albeit momentarily, is short-sighted. The new
architecture has transiency in its structural setting, as opposed to permanency,
and espouses redundancy of vocabulary jargon in lieu of sequential progression
of an idea. Implicit in it is the development of gestural situations to create
continuous excitement. Hence, it opposes the ritualized processions that
highlight the celebrated spaces that in turn accentuate the climatic
experiences. Constantly inducing stimulus for immediate visitor engagement and
with anticipation of instantaneous responses may be entertaining and even
gratifying for a while, but eventually will be exhausting. There are limits to
tolerating hype in visual, auditory or haptic sensations. There is a fallacy of
genuine material reality in the new architecture since the surfaces it
manipulates are projectile; they are modeled on borrowed ideas from the plasma
screen panel technology. In manufacturing artifacts in the information age,
economy of means, efficiency of production and expediency of novelty necessarily
dictate the design solutions. Hence, info-architects are in the confused realm
of converting digitally generated spaces into manufacturing architecture.
Attempts are made to analyze languages of form-free curved surfaces. To identify
constituent curved vocabulary elements, specify their shape grammars, and
comprehend composition rules to develop useful software architecture are
difficult tasks in their own right. However, to translate morphed objects into
constructible artifacts or components of buildings has proved to be much too
complex for practical purposes. Many opted for an architectural design made out
of digitally manipulated spatial relationships, rather than articulating
physical forms. A few suggested that synchronous, dynamic, and prosthetic
electronics must be incorporated into the domain of new architecture for digital
interaction.
If
form follows flow, and flow is fun, and fun is the function of the architecture
of the information age, then communication through a process is meant to become
the new architecture. Digital communication indeed could articulate emotions; it
could induce fearsome fun, suspend disbelief, and compartmentalize exposures. To
enhance the stage set for this, it presumes a parametric software design within
the built form constructs and systems functionality to conduct communication
with the digital community within and without. Parameters of fluidity,
hybridization, complexity, and morphogenesis are used as the metaphors for the
new digital architecture. The
contemporary global practice of information architecture indeed is producing
many “blobs” and “blahs” in the inescapable realm of universal
homogeneity. Even though “novel” ideas which it attempts to globally
propagate failed to promote any new distinctive and appreciative identity of
architecture in its immediate setting, in its spatial dwelling, however, it
promises to advance a distinct individual experience for digital dwellers. Hence
digital lifestyles, global economies and their distributed means of production
– mitigated by information networking and management -- are changing the
ideas, concepts and concerns inherent to architecture. They raise issues of
content, container and context beyond the limits of the city, region or country.
They articulate new character in dwellings and inspire new global ownership.
Indeed, information age architecture is driven by information control and
knowledge acquisition, advanced by high-tech utilization and high-think
verification, and eventually guided by high-temptation in investments expecting
high returns. Hence, info-rchitecture is a commodified product geared towards
“selling” the idea whether entertainment, sports, or celebration of sorts --
all based on global communication. Its agenda seems to be short-sighted, goals
are temporary, objectives are immediate, purpose is making profit and meaning is
the pursuit of advantage over competitors. It has no sovereignty and legitimacy
to claim. It has no mandated cultural, political and social function to carry.
From agility to adaptation, versatility to immediacy, and immersiveness to
interactivity – all refer to its digitization and virtuality. Indeed
in this scenario of information age, the destiny of international symbols and
the fate of national signs dwindle. The mogenization of design with new virtual
artifacts and the adaptive harmonization of existing buildings with digitech in
networking create a tension between universalism and localism. Upgrades in
globalization of architecture as digital image-making in essence and catching-up
mondialization of regional built-forms as articulation of hi-tech in new designs
-- all attempt to cancel out each other. Current intents to mixing the new
romanticism of communications technologies with the traditional regional
built-form constructs are advancing a new expression of architecture of odd
belongingness: from nowhereness to anywhereness. Hence, metaphors of virtuality
are in flux, defying physicality of the building’s spatial setting. They
advance the new language of new architecture. Virtuality challenges traditional
life and enforces digital livability. It defines the human condition in
contemporary architecture. It transforms the modernist architecture from
symbolic order for dwelling into symbol ordering for manipulation.
Concluding
Remarks
Designing new artifacts and spaces for virtual and real environments in composite settings will eventually mandate the establishment of new cultural landmarks and require the promotion of meaningful, albeit novel, rituals for communities to dwell in the information age. This will be the new task of the new reality pursuing digital architects at the threshold of this new millennium. The architecture of this era will not only be incorporating hi-tech hardware and software in built-form, but embody in design overlapping cultural identities. It will invite to deal with conflicting values in shared rituals in and around the artifacts and challenge to define the place for a variety of contemporary lifestyles.
De
Rosnay, Joel. 2000. The Symbiotic Man. McGraw-Hill.
Kelly,
Kevin. 1999. New Rules for the New Economy: Ten Radical Strategies for a
Connected World. New York, Penguin.
Koolhaas,
Rem. 1995. “Generic City” in Rem Koolhaas, S,M,L,XL.Rotterdam/New York.
McLuhan,
Eric and Frank Singrone. 1995. Essential McLuhan. Anansi.
Mitchell,
William J. 1995. City of Bits. The MIT Press.
Migayrou,
Frederic and Marie-Ange Brayer. 2001. ArchiLab: Radical Experiments in Global
Architecture. Thames & Hudson.
Negroponte,
Nocholas. 1995. Being Digital.
Alfred A. Knopf.