The topological space of ornamental monsters and prosthetic skins ! ! ! ! !"#$%&'#&("')*+)&$'),-".%/01) )*%!+(,(-(&'./-!0,/.%!(1!(2#/3%#+/-!3(#0+%20!/#4!,2(0+*%+'.!0$'#0! ! ! ! "#$%!"&&'(! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! iii ! ! ! ! A Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of ! Doctor of Philosophy ! University of Canberra ! July 2018 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! v Abstract ‘Monsters’ and ‘prostheses’ emerge graphically and metaphorically from the margins and gaps in discourse. This is significant, for ancient charts and texts harnessed graphic forms to make meaningful comment on related content. The placement of these borderline figures signaled difference but also, and more profoundly, marked out sites of transformation. Although monstrous and prosthetic figures have touched, intersected, and even become synonymous with one another over the course of history, for the most part they have remained split and embedded within contested disciplines. Nevertheless, the prosthetic trope, like the monstrous metaphor, stands for a problematic hybrid interface that has been heavily exploited within diverse disciplines, often reductively. Still, as with its monstrous counterpart, there remains a sense in which the prosthetic figure is also constitutive. This thesis draws on the ancient figure of the monster and its sensual inscription of the communicative space of architecture in order to re-frame the contemporary figure of the prosthesis. The aim is to open the space of architecture to the possibility of a shared reading that holds relevance for a plural and fragmented world. The process of re-reading and re-framing monsters and prostheses aligns with the way meaning and knowing is enacted by the figures themselves, as they disclose new understanding through shifts in perceptual orientation. The points of reference that constitute the three-part form of this dissertation derive from structures shared by both figurations, namely ornament, skin and prosthesis. Monsters and prostheses first coincide in rhetorical ornament where they were harnessed to ‘speak’ and persuade an audience through a dynamic process of revealing and concealing. These inventive mixtures challenged unified, natural orders, and so were not only invested with the power to arouse, but also the power to confuse. The characteristic ambivalence of the rhetorical monster was formally transferred to the space of architectural ornament with Vitruvius’ treatise De architectura (circa) 25 BCE. In architecture, the ambiguous spatium inscribed by this figure is revealed to be an enigmatic structure imbued with revelatory potential—qualities shared by the rhetorical prosthesis. Both monsters and prostheses instantiate a spatial topology and way of thinking and understanding that is inscribed by means of skin and touch. This space is not the abstract topological space of mathematics, but is a primal, embodied space that Maurice Merleau-Ponty associates with ‘brute’ or ‘wild’ Being.1 Here, meaning is realised through the dynamic interrelation of proximity and distance, a relation that is sustained obliquely through a slow encroachment. The sensual means by which monsters and prostheses give shape to the complex ground that exists between body and world is revealed through a series of pre-modern studies that constitute the second part, Skin. Connecting rhetorical language with the topological domain of ‘skin’, the third part, Prosthesis, explicates the way in which monsters and prostheses fold together to inscribe a space that can be harnessed for its transformative power, and thus make a place for the contemporary body to relate to the built form. This research demonstrates how, an architectural inquiry that braids the corporeal moments in which monsters and prosthesis touch, overlap, and fold one into the other, might scaffold meaningful, embodied architectural experience. This corporeal frame permits a form of shared 1 Maurice Merleau-Ponty, ‘Eye and Mind’, in The Primacy of Perception: And Other Essays on Phenomenological Psychology, ed. James Edie (Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press, 1964), 178-188. vii reading, which is notable for, without meaningful, mediating structures individuals remain detached from others and ultimately their worlds. Frontispiece: ‘Fragment’ extracted from Piranesi, Carcere XIV: The Gothic Arch–second state (1945) viii Certificate of Authorship of Thesis Except where clearly acknowledged in footnotes, quotations and the bibliography, I certify that I am the sole author of the thesis submitted today entitled—Architecture of the Margins: The topological space of ornamental monsters and prosthetic skins. I further certify that to the best of my knowledge the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text of the thesis. The material in the thesis has not been the basis of an award of any other degree or diploma except where due reference is made in the text of the thesis. The thesis complies with University requirements for a thesis as set out in the Examination of Higher Degree by Research Theses Policy. Refer to http://www.canberra.edu.au/current- students/current-research-students/hdr-policy-and-procedures ______________________________________ _______/________/____________ Candidate’s Signature Date ________________________________________ _______/________/____________ Primary Supervisor’s Signature Date ix ! ! ! To my grande famiglia, for keeping me grounded, fed, and at all times surrounded ! with love and support. ! ! ! ! xi Acknowledgements A project such as this is never undertaken in isolation; it relies on the support and goodwill of many. However, special thanks must be extended to my supervisor Professor Stephen Frith, whose scholarly counsel, incisive guidance, and unerring faith and encouragement has not only made this thesis possible, but also gifted me the opportunity to pursue and find my own voice. I also thank academic staff at the University of Canberra’s Faculty of Arts and Design, in particular Associate Professor Stephen Barrass and Professor Gevork Hartoonian, for their insightful observations and critique throughout the development of this thesis. I also extend my heartfelt thanks to the University of Canberra’s library staff for their tireless, professional, and at all times enthusiastic support. A final thank you must be extended to Beth Barber and Dr. Les Rymer for their valuable assistance in proofreading and commenting on this thesis. xiii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures xvii Introduction xxi Ornament 1 A Beginning: Vitruvius 3 Conceiving a body 3 Myth 5 The Perfect Body 10 Speaking bodies 21 Monsters 28 Milieu 35 Metaphor 43 Ornamental metaphors 43 Vico’s epistemology and ontology 54 Theories of metaphor 60 Ricoeur 65 The ornament of Leon Battista Alberti 73 Skin 103 ‘Topological space as a model of Being’ 113 Depth 116 Serres 119 Monstrous skins 127 Similarity and difference 128 Subversion of the natural order 130 Imagined skins 132 Ornamental skins 139 Metamorphoses 141 Sebastiano Serlio 154 Sympathetic touch 165 Tactile Vision 167 Plural touch 172 Eros 175 Hypnerotomachia Poliphili 175 The space of dreams 176 Moral love 180 Masterful touch 187 Disfigured knowledge 195 The skins of Giovanni Battista Piranesi 199 The restorative fragment 212 Prosthesis 215 A plural world: the monster yields to the post-human 217 Topological space and time 222 Smooth space 226 The persistence of the subject 237 Third space 243 Folds 244 xv An approach 251 Resistance, depth, and journeying 257 Ornamental Prostheses 264 Prosthetic ornament 269 An entanglement of tropes 276 Resonance beyond structure 283 Deferral and the desire for wholeness 284 Metonymy as prosthesis 298 Prosthetic ornament and the space of architecture 300 Summa 319 Bibliography 339 xvi List of Figures Figure 1. Robert Fludd: Man as a microcosmos of the greater macrocosmos. Title page from 'Utriusque cosmi maioris scilicet et minoris metaphysica, physica atque technica historia' (1624) ............. 12 Figure 2. Albrecht Dürer: Illustration of the female body in 'Della simmetria de i corpi humani, libri quattro' (1591) .............................................................................................................................. 13 Figure 3. Reconstructed image of Camillo's Memory Theatre .................................................................... 53 Figure 4. Carlo Scarpa: The entrance gate to the Tolentini building of the Instituto Universitario d’Architettura di Venezia (1985) ................................................................................................. 57 Figure 5. Mies van der Rohe: Lake Shore Drive apartments (1949–1951) Chicago, first floor mullions .. 68 Figure 6. Benito Montano: 'The Ark' (1593). The image combines the idea of the Ark based on the proportions of man with the story of the Flood as an allegory of Man's redemption. Hence, the Ark is depicted as the coffin of Christ. ......................................................................................... 79 Figure 7. Piero della Francesca: 'The Flagellation of Christ' (circa 1455) Oil on canvas ........................... 80 Figure 8. Leon Battista Alberti: Tempio Malatestiano (circa 1450) Rimini, front and side views ............. 97 Figure 9. Leon Battista Alberti: Palazzo Rucellai (1446–1451) ................................................................ 100 Figure 10. Leon Battista Alberti: Palazzo Rucellai (1446–1451) Incomplete