Overcoming Limits Stephanie Riker

Lehigh University Lehigh Preserve Volume 21 - 2013 Lehigh Review 2013 Overcoming Limits Stephanie Riker Follow this and additional works at: http://preserve.lehigh.edu/cas-lehighreview-vol-21 Recommended Citation Riker, Stephanie, "Overcoming Limits" (2013). Volume 21 - 2013. Paper 8. http://preserve.lehigh.edu/cas-lehighreview-vol-21/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Lehigh Review at Lehigh Preserve. It has been accepted for inclusion in Volume 21 - 2013 by an authorized administrator of Lehigh Preserve. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OVERCOMING LIMITS This paper examines the philosophy and work of Bernard Tschumi, a contemporary French architect. Tschumi believes that people should reengage with their environment and that meaning should be infused STEPHANIE into architecture through human interaction with the environment. In RIKER recognition of these beliefs, this paper articulates how Tschumi builds with the intention to redefine the notion of architecture and overturn the limitations imposed by society. Dravo Jason Wang t all began in 1968; or, at least for Bernard Ts- society whose sole value was work: in essence, a society void of life. chumi it did. On the streets of Paris, Tschumi Although Tschumi cites the ’68 riots as the moment charnière, the stood fast amongst the thousands of students seeds of this social revolution had been scattered throughout France and workers in riotous protests—reveling for several years. The Situationist International (SI) had formed ten amidst the violence, the arrests, and the blocks years prior to the uprisings in Paris, and the SI’s sentiments of capi- of barricades. At the time, Tschumi was living talist oppression were influential and inspiring to the liberal move- in the capital city; he had come to work under ment, directly quoted and indirectly invoked by the protestors. The GeorgesI Candilis, a member of Team X,1 and the 20-year-old most germane of the SI’s ideologies was the desire for a reawakening Tschumi was willingly swept up into the liberal frenzy which of the population. A reengagement of the people should be forged. begun in early summer. Les grandes grèves et manifestations For some, this reawakening was thought to be best accomplished were an outcry for a radical change of society; a change that through art; for others, through literature; for Tschumi, the best would hopefully lead to a renewed sense of life. The well- medium was architecture. Tschumi decided to take the ideas of the known slogan of the strike: Métro, boulot, dodo (Ride the SI—concentrating on the role of the built environment—and materi- subway, go to work, sleep). A breaking point had arrived. alize them. Tschumi’s success derives from his ability and choice to The monotony and the dehumanization needed to end. The translate the philosophical concepts of the SI into the physical realm. cycle, dictated by the capitalist machine, needed to be broken. To begin to understand Tschumi, we must first consider how he The hordes of protesters were no longer going to stand for a defines architecture. Convention describes architecture in terms of 11 “structure,” of “form,” and most commonly subject matters into a wealth of knowl- of “buildings.” But, Tschumi does not let edge. “Architecture is a form of knowledge, convention dictate any aspect of his work. not knowledge of form,” Tschumi writes; When asked for his definition of architec- in other words, architecture is only pos- ture, Tschumi responds simply, “the ma- sible after applying what one knows and terialization of concept.”2 There is no dis- communicating those ideas to the public.3 cussion of structure because, at its essence, What Tschumi recognizes here is the im- architecture for Tschumi is determined by portance of developing a powerful sense the philosophy and ideologieshow he de- of purpose to a building, and his opinions fines architecture. Convention describes on the state and manifestations of modern architecture in terms of “structure,” of architecture support his views. Tschumi The Manhatten Transcripts, 1976-1981 by Bernard “form,” and most commonly of “buildings.” believes that the European camp anchors Tschumi © Bernard Tschumi Architects But, Tschumi does not let convention dic- architecture in societal and cultural ideas, Used with permission of Bernard Tschumi Architects tate any aspect of his work. When asked for whereas the American version is frivolous his definition of architecture, Tschumi re- in comparison, as it lacks substantial foun- Tschumi’s projects abolish is the emphasis sponds simply, “the materialization of con- dations and instead resorts to “style, tech- on structure, but there are others. Stem- cept.” There is no discussion of structure nique, etc.” as its main bolsters.4 In this ming from his experiences in the ‘60s, Ts- because, at its essence, architecture for Ts- comparison, Tschumi claims that imitating chumi came to realize that society had de- chumi is determined by the philosophy and a building style completely misses the mark fined parameters that were restricting and ideologies behind what was physically con- of architecture. He avoids this perceived oppressive, limits that were accepted as structed. Tschumi’s buildings, although oft farce by stringently practicing with sus- self-evident truths. He claims that we are critiqued from an aesthetic approach, can tained conviction to a concept, one rooted constantly bombarded with articulations only genuinely be assessed by the degree in the philosophy of the SI. His devotion of what society should be, but “the ques- to which he successfully realizes and com- and loyalty to his beliefs and view of life tion of who constructs the ‘common good’ municates an ideology. It would seem to fol- allow for his work to be deemed beyond and who represents the community, is not low, then, that the profundity of the thought building: to instead be deemed architecture. a s ke d .” 5 These “natural” limits are not le- and the concepts behind the building would Tschumi expounds upon this “material- gitimately natural, so therefore why do we continue to see them as such? Acceptance and acquiescence are deplorable, Tschumi implores, because both are increasingly Tschumi’s buildings although oft detrimental to the health of the overall society, acting only as a reinforcement and critiqued from an aesthetic approach, promotion of a cyclical controlling system. can only genuinely assessed by the Tschumi’s projects, therefore, work “against our institutionally prescribed no- degree to which he successfully tions of what architecture can and should b e .” 6 The limitation of architecture as “ob- realizes and communicates an ject” is continuously challenged by Tschumi. ideology No project is meant to be seen as an ob- ject. In order to challenge this constructed confine, Tschumi turns to the ideas of the dérive. To the SI, this integral element of correlate with the quality of the architec- ization of concepts” to include the discus- architecture and urbanism was theorized to ture—not the building, but the architecture. sion of limits. In several articles published be the way in which we can recreate a rela- These concepts, Tschumi asserts, come in Artform, Tschumi explores how draw- tionship with our environment. The dérive from other areas of knowledge—literature, ing upon exterior concepts will breach is explained as guided—through the layout philosophy, cinema—and he sees archi- the limits of architecture. As seen in his of the built environment and the elements tecture as the aftermath of these colliding definition of architecture, one limit that included—movement through space, a 12 THE LEHIGH REVIEW movement of which we are conscious and manence, it has ornate decorative interior leads us to the experience of spontaneous and exterior features, and it stands out as event. The Métro, bolout, dodo lifestyle had grandiose and separate from its environs. trapped society into a demoralizing and de- Yet, despite these truths, Tschumi interprets basing daily ritual. As the theorists of the Grand Central as a “living monument to SI looked out upon society, they saw only event.”11 There are countless encounters oc- a repeated, rigid, mindlessly-traced triangle curring at every moment within the frame- in the urban fabric as the entirety of an in- work of the building. The importance lies dividual’s life, “a small triangle with no de- with what goes on here, the dérive of the in- viations.”7 The population had acquiesced dividual as he voyages through the bustling to each further implementation of absolute station. Although this building is a structure, control by a capitalist society to such a de- Tschumi looks beyond that to focus on the gree, the SI theorized, that the most funda- collision of people and events; the constant mental human experience—that of space— movement of diverse group of people de- had been ravaged. Movement through parting and arriving, trains constantly pen- space had been drained of all meaning and etrating the belly of the building, people The Manhatten Transcripts, 1976-1981 by Bernard life, leaving behind a constant numbness. shopping or eating, a never-ending stream Tschumi © Bernard Tschumi Architects Tschumi engrossed himself in this of flow. As Tschumi states in Architecture Used with permission of Bernard Tschumi Architects idea, understanding that the objectifica- and Disjuncture, in order to comprehend tion—that is to say, the process of erecting a building, “Rather than manipulating the Although not dictated by the architect or objects—of architectural projects could be formal properties of architecture, we might by form, the visitors to the park would feel challenged by implementing the principles look into what really happens inside build- inspired to create an event in one folly but of the dérive, thereby emphasizing interac- ings and cities: the function, the program.”12 not in another because the location of the tion with space rather than passive absorp- Moreover, this profound level of en- other would more naturally engender other tion of monument.

Load more