revised on 2010.10.16

III. Reorientation

Chapter III III- 1

6. Post-modernism

(1) The resurgence of sensibility and mannerist hedonism

The movement to reject modern rationalism started in , which had been under the shadow of the imperial culture of the House of Habsburg. In 1962, Walter Pichler and Hans Hollein used the term “ absolute architecture ” to describe the existence of a kind of architecture that transcended the previous analytical forms. “ Architecture Is not an integument for the primitive instincts of the masses. Architecture is an embodiment of the power and longings of a few men. (Pichler)(*1).” Mass society, which was a theme of the 20th century, was based on the principle of sharing with everyone, and arrived at the view point that science and functional rationality were the foundation of everything. However this held nothing more than aesthetics that embodied vast yet shallow values like pop art, which is easily understandable for everybody. The meaning of Pichler‟s words was that in order to find depth in aesthetics, we should avoid situations like a mobocracy and rely on the talents of a few. If we take his words at face value then they mean that we should discard modernism and return to the Renaissance in the early modern ages. The House of Medici in Florence and the House of Habsburg in Vienna were patrons of architects who were supremely talented and left behind artistic buildings that have shone throughout history. On the other hand, Hollein said, “A building is itself. Architecture is purposeless (*2).” He posited that architecture must have an absoluteness that does not conform to anything. Architecture also does not play a subordinate role like serving some kind of purpose. The theory of usefulness and appropriateness to a purpose that began to be supported by Otto Wagner at the turn of the century in Vienna began to be overturned in this very Vienna. Furthermore, the systematic thinking of purpose-rationality that should have been organized in the functionalism of the 1920s was discarded. During the move toward functionalism and structural theory, architecture was in the position of being analyzed, theorized, and reformulated as a servant of man. With the relationship between purpose and means always in mind, Hollein released architecture from the shackles of this kind of purpose-rationality and attempted to return to an absolute viewpoint. This meant completely ignoring the process of trial and error of modern rationalism. If this was the case, how would architecture evolve? The left brain alone, which is responsible for intellectual judgment, cannot produce thoughts. The idea that architecture would follow the instincts of itself was that the architect would create by following his intuition. However, of course, buildings were not to be formed only on the basis of visions drawn from the right brain. What he had advocated was the unlocking of sensibility that had been suppressed by reason, where reason was made subordinate to sensibility.

In 1964, Hollein drew a shocking collage that features a large aircraft carrier placed against a

Chapter III III- 2

gently undulating idyllic background (Fig. III-1). Depending on one‟s point of view, this could be seen as a variation of the “Working City” of Ron Herron, depicted as if residential machines were already moving around the Earth as they pleased. However, the aircraft carrier is stranded, and the completely different values of the background and structure are in conflict with each other. Of course, a battleship in this location would be unable to execute any of its original purposes. This surrealistic image of Hollein‟s surpassed the logic of purpose-rationality and the aircraft carrier was self-sustaining as an independent entity. In other words, architecture as a high-level technique was not buried under a slew of purposes as per structural theory but was considered as fulfilling its own vitality. Hollein designed the library building in the Museum Abteiberg (1972-1981) with one corner of a square prism melted by solvent (Fig. III-2). This square prism, which was coated with mirror glass and appeared only as a grid outwardly, surely symbolized the cubic systematic rationality of the early half of the 20th century, while the melted area symbolized artistic intuition that completely ignored artificial systems. This also represented the phenomenon of competition between and the dissolution of two value systems, which can also be seen in “The Urban Mark ” by Peter Cook. Thus, the autocracy of reason was already being undermined. Even so, systematic rationality could not be completely ejected from architecture, and there could only be proposed a continuation of the dualistic competition between formal order and free amorphism. Although the architectural forms at the early 20th century exhibited a variety of trends, the geometrical silhouettes and white coatings that were aggregated in the International Style were precipitated as common items. There was a trend of compressing information, which was nothing but the work of the reason. With the rise of post-modernism, the sensibility began to create artistic possibilities, and having a lot of information was seen as good on the contrary. Therefore, diverse colors and raw materials became acceptable, and there was also no need to follow precise geometry. In the colorful interior of the Museum Abteiberg, where there are bright white walls flooded with light, there are also walls dark like a cellar‟s that are inlayed with erotic reds and blacks. The walls also feature a mixture of various shape elements, from geometrical forms such as rectangular volumes and grids to the amorphous shapes of a saw-roof and twisting retaining walls. All possibility of expression were attempted and one-dimensional rigidity was intentionally avoided. Critical composition that the systematic rationality was destroyed and the free sensibility were fomented, was an essential mechanism for prompting the shift to post-modernism. “ Critical” implies both “urgency” and “to critique and to review,” and attempts were made to exaggerate and express this urgency. This did not result in a period of naïve sensibility but somehow destroyed the initiative of reason and prompted a move to the initiative of sensibility. Back in the late renaissance period, that is, the period of mannerism, there were architects who stood on this kind of borderline. One was Giulio Romano, who was active in Mantua in

Chapter III III- 3

Northern Italy. He thought that it was futile to compete head-on with the heroic style of the order of the high renaissance as epitomized by Bramante and he instead assumed judgmental and critical yet ironic styles that had an oblique approach. In the Palazzo del Te, the entablature that should run horizontally are cut and broken. Holes open out here and there in the walls. The keystones of the arches form abnormally large wedged shapes. Parts of the circular columns were not planed and seem incomplete. Furthermore, the interior walls have been painted to as if the classical structures were falling down giving an eerie atomosphere. From Italian word “ maniera, ” which means “ manner, ” the word “ Mannerism (Manierismo)” was coined. Compared to the ages of the brain, this was the age of the hands. In other words, there was a change from a period of ideas to a period of sensibility that were free from reason. The high renaissance was a period of idealism, that is, popular ideas such as the ideal of the divine proportions of human body. This was a period marked by the perfect order that was virtually imprinted on the brain of people, and then the passion for idealism eventually cooled and people began to demand the restoration of humanistic things. The hands began to act freely in order to get away from the dominance of reason. criticized the initiative of the reason at the early half of the 20th century and plotted its demise by borrowing the methods of mannerism. He studied the works of the surrealist Marcel Duchamp and intentionally broke functional rationality and systematic completeness such as by embedding doors that did not open, designing seat backs based on the curves of Marilyn Monroe, and presenting incomplete structural images cutting off abruptly the beams that should be extend further. This was very similar to the irony of Giulio Romano. The Tsukuba Center Building (1983) designed by Isozaki incorporated motifs of the Piazza del Campidoglio of Michelangelo and the columns of C. N. Ledoux, which exhibited the method of “ quotation ” intentionally destroying the myth of originality, and it satirized the myth of completeness with a design that appeared as if part of the building had been destroyed (Fig. III- 3). For a naïve, ordinary person who carries around a common image of the completeness of a building, this broken building and the parrying design is incomprehensible, and they want to blame the architect for betrayal. However, this type of mannerism was actually attempted in Japanese “Sukiya” style of architecture in 16th and 17th centuries, that is, the tea houses design which enjoyed intentionally parrying the architectural rules and myths of the high-quality. Mannerism is an intellectual game, and the raison d'être for its existence is to break the perfect order of reason. Although this was a critique against the initiative of reason, it differed from the romanticism of the 1930s in that it did not aim to completely resolve and discard reason. It was sufficient to free the right brain that had been suppressed and to release one‟s sensibility. To establish the communication based on sensibility between the creator and the viewer visualizing the falling down of a rational object formed the art. The intention of Hollein who created an object as if a pure geometric prism was melting down was also the same.

(2) The semantics of the consumer society

Chapter III III- 4

Although modernism departed in search of new forms and spaces suitable for the mass society of the 20th century and initially exhibited a trend toward utopian socialism that sought the reawakening of free exchange between people, the capitalist economic system immediately commoditized the structures of modernism. In the America of the 1920s where it can be said that brute economic force was emphasized as the reason for living even more than artistic will, the motifs of the form of modernism were borrowed for the decorations of skyscrapers (Fig. III-4). Passionate artistic intentions were chopped up and fragmented by unemotional economics. There is also another aspect in that, thanks to this, the motifs of the form of modernism dotted the scenery of the city and were therefore actually able to be seen by the public. Thus, while capitalism was giving birth to millionaires on the one hand, on the other it was promoting an age of popular art of mass society. The patrons of architects of the 20th century were no longer kings and nobles. In the 19th century, the patrons were joined by industrial capitalists and in the 20th century they were joined by the communal rights of mass society. Although in the East Bloc the socialist governments formed only from the public become the new patrons, in the West the invisible faceless mob of the countless masses of consumers became the new patrons. In any case, an architectural culture wherein the social system itself became the patron was established, and the architectural styles also reflected this characteristic. In the 1970s, an American architect suddenly revived post-modern historicism who was once mentored by Mies. Among the skyscrapers in New York where the style of modernism had become standard starting with the Seagram Building by Mies, he introduced the AT&T high-rise building with a Romanesque entrance hall and a crown of a Chippendale chair decoration (Fig. III-5). In addition, high-rise buildings in a variety of historicist styles were created one after another, such as high-rise buildings crowned with minarets with a gothic-style motif and coated with mirrored glass. Although much of intellectual followers of modernism frowned at his betrayal, the general public applauded the high-rise buildings that became landmarks of the urban landscape and were not merely square boxes. Johnson departed from the ascetic design ethics of Mies and insisted on reviving the pleasurable aspects that was originally inherence in architecture. However, reviving historicism meant only focusing on a small aspect of the aesthetics of architecture. Because the original nature of post-modernism was to revitalize all possibilities of architectural beauty that had been suppressed by reason, the post-modernism of Johnson was only one of many styles. In particular, the historicist styles of post-modernism in the of America were notably remarkable compared to Europe, and this can be understood as America, having only a brief history, might have had an inferiority complex against the historical styles of Europe. Michael Graves also attempted to modernize historicism in the same way by using classical styles as a motif using vibrant colors, and it could be said that he was attempting to modernize the decorative architecture of the Art Deco style. This direction of polychromy was also the antithesis of the International Style that exhibited abstemious forms in the neutral colors of

Chapter III III- 5

white and black. The tendency toward classicism meant to revive the formalism of, for example, columns arranged and displayed regularly, and also to discard the successes of functionalism. Johnson‟s style emphasized sometimes the appearance of gothic forms modified by Expressionism even more than 19th century historicism and had the will to restore everything relating to the pleasure of shape. The fact that the revival of Art Deco occurred alongside post- modernism demonstrates the trend toward the commodification of artistic shapes in post- modernism. This commodification was not merely the simple desire for imitations sold at a store but was related to the deeper principles of the system of capitalism. Karl Marx had already shown that capitalism itself was based on simple and clear principles and was a clever system for recreating the value in the relationship between products and money, and Baudrillard focused on the fact that the economic system of capitalism created a gap between the true value of a product and its symbolic value, and he explained the start of the spontaneous movement of symbols or signs alone (*3). Artistic works give rise to imitations, and the world of simulations called “simulacra” is created by the process of simulation. The set of objects left by the first wave of historicism within post-modernism can be understood using this concept of simulacra. The Chippendale-style form as used by Johnson in the high-rise building did not necessarily have logical consistency. Even in the gothic style, although there was certainly an expression of the perpendicular intent, the gothic styles of the Middle Ages bear absolutely no relation to the structure of modern high-rise buildings. This kind of image that uses historical forms was created in another dimension, and this image was not only preferred by Johnson but it was also desired by the general public. The image was separated from reality to create an isolated world within the common vision of the public. Through his book “Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture,” (*4) argued against the academic thesis of modernism that architectural designs must have a uniform systemization, and in “Learning from Las Vegas,” (*5) he positively approved of the raison d'etre of huge billboards and placed value on the representational aspect even more than on the architectural body itself. That meant that the items that had captured vulgar interest were understood as the reality of simulacra in a capitalist society and then the genre called “ pop architecture”became independent (Fig. III-6). On the one hand, the independence and consistency of architecture and the ethics to preserve these were completed based on the necessity theory of modernism starting at the end of the 19th century. On the other hand, there is the principle of capitalism that functions on the principle of increasing money. And there is a tug-of-war between the two extremes. Post modernism proceeded to follow a path of giving priority to the latter, dissecting architecture into pieces and transforming it into an aggregation of simulacra. The billboard architectural style of Venturi and the figurine architectural style of Johnson have developed the vulgar interests of capitalism into a firm architectural art genre. As its extension, architecture as a set of simulacra was realized, which is a mixture of a classical column, ruins, and hi-tech style as in “M2” by Kengo Kuma (Fig. III-7). The modernism that idealized the architectural image as a one-dimensional rational system

Chapter III III- 6

starting from a cube stood helpless facing the condition of the individual parts being fragments of scattered simulacra. The fact that consistency in architectural design was merely one ideology became known at this time. However, this was certainly considered to be necessary for starting a new age in the early half of the 20th century, and this was a time when ideology was useful. After the problems significant for the human history in the early half of the 20th century had already been resolved, the usefulness of ideology in society was lost. The difference between Mies and Johnson was the symbolization of this changing of the times. What modernist architects aimed for was that mass society, in other words, even those with the lowest levels of income, enjoy the architectural qualities, as is seen in the proposals of the Siedlung and existence-minimum housing. This was a global theme of the 20th century, from socialism to social democracy that surpassed the conflict between the East and West Blocs. Even the mass of people became soon no longer find their ideals in the ordered space created by the communal apartment blocks and those housing estates. People began to prefer private ownership of “ differentiated ” houses with some kind of decoration, no matter how minimal, and advocated individualism over communalism. The age was dominated no more by the socialist utopia of the early 20th century but by the pseudo-utopia of capitalism where the simulacra flitted about. The thing that monolithic socialism could not withstand is best described as the political forms of the post-modern phenomenon. Socialism called for the abolition of classes and attempted to reconstruct society based on one scientific principle in order to remove all of the historical and traditional evil practices. Society was re-started from zero, everything was decided by reason, and a consistent public system was constructed. This was symbolized by the system of geometrical shapes that Russian Constructivism attempted to build. While fractures appeared in the system constructed by reason, the architectural image was dissolved by the change to an aggregate of autonomous parts and finally became a mixture of pluralist values. In the same way as that, in the 1980s, the system of socialism also suddenly collapsed due to the actions of the young people acting freely guided by their own sensibility. This must not be seen as merely a simple collapse but as representing a process of reorientation from the initiative of reason to that of sensibility of the tide of the 20th century.

(*1) Walter Pichler, Hans Hollein, „Absolute architecture‟(1962), in: Urlich Conrads (ed.), “ Programs and Manifestoes on 20th-Century Architecture”, English translation: Lund H umphries, Londn & MIT, Cambridge, 1970, p.181. (*2) Ibid, p.182. (*3) Jean Baudrillard, "Le Système des objets", 1968 (Japanese translation by Akira Un ami, Hosei Univesity Publishing, 1980). (*4) Robert Venturi, "Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture", The Museum of Mo dern Art Press, New York 1966. (Japanese translation by Kobun Itoh, Kajima Shuppan kai, Tokyo, 1982). (*5) Robert Venturi, "Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture", MIT Press, Cambri

Chapter III III- 7

dge MA, 1972, (Japanese translation by Kobun Itoh, Kajima Shuppankai, Tokyo, 1978).

Chapter III III- 8

7. Typological classicism

(1) Cubic typology

The fortress of unitary dominance of modern rationalism was attacked from various directions. Concerning the idea of the absolute architecture of Hollein et al. there emerged another kind of absolute architecture. While Hollein followed a direction of dissolving form, there was a reverse way to liberate humans from the yoke of modern rationalism through strengthening formalism that made form even more firm. Louis Kahn created a unique world with a mysterious sense of form using simple geometric shapes while at the same time searching for the logic of spatial structure theory. In the Dhaka capital plan that he started in 1962, this was given a large-scale form (Fig. III-8). The national assembly building had an strong order with central plan integrating simple shapes such as squares, circles, semicircles, octagons, and triangles. Although these simple solid shapes, plain wall surfaces and openings are missing detailed functional considerations and the structure does not appear very comfortable, it is unparalleled concerning monumentality as a national assembly building. In the meaning of absoluteness that exceeds function, another kind of absolute structure is displayed here in the form of bloated formalism. This was the aesthetics of transcendence expressed in altars and temple buildings such as ziggurats and pyramids in a period when society was dominated by ancient myths. It was, as it were, the rejuvenation of the ancient in a modern society. The parliament is believed to be a place of openness and transparency in a democracy and there was a trend to design parliament buildings without too much dignity. Thus, Kahn‟s method represented a revival of ancient mysticism that modernism should have completely discarded. As the systems of modern rationalism become more complete, the designs of Kahn that transcended this were viewed as heroic. Architectural theory which is believed to have started with Vitruvius in ancient Rome was divided under the establishment of the modern teaching system into architectural science as a scientific system on the one hand, and an essay on architecture as the poetic and philosophy of poiesis on the other hand. And the design style of Kahn was indeed the one that rejected scientific architecture and simply embodied essay on architectural as the poetic philosophy of geometry. The spatial structure theory that stood on the an extension of modern reason was also transformed into something poetic by his words. Although James Stirling from England presented a unique intellectual design method starting from the functional rationalism in the 1960s, like the faculty of engineering of Leicester University, the history faculty library at Cambridge University, and the Queen‟s College in Oxford, he turned in the 1970s to formalism which arranges geometrical units. In Runcorn New Town (since 1967), a simple structural form can be seen of a structure with a horizontal volume running on space supported by pillars that appear to have been inspired by the colonnades of fascist architecture (Fig. III-9).

Chapter III III- 9

Architects Kahn and Stirling who followed completely different systems formed a single movement based on this point of aspiring to form that transcends function. This was converging on another kind of rationalism of the “typology.” This rationalism was distinguished from the scientific spirit build by the modern reason, and paradoxically to be said irrational rationalism in some ways. The “ typology ” of the 1970s mentioned here turned the future-aspiring psyche of modernism on its head and was born from the idea of reconstructing the log of architecture by returning to its point of origin. During this, in the middle of the 18th century, Laugier reevaluated the theory of primitive huts mentioned in the “Essai sur l‟architecture,” and the interest on the neoclassicism of Ledoux and Boullee during the French Revolution grew significantly. The essence of neoclassicism, known as “typology”based on the return to the primitive and simple geometry, was reconstructed as a 20th century theory. This theory was carried forward in particular by the brothers Leon Krier and Rob Krier as well as by . Laugier‟s theory that columns should stand independently is said to have influenced on Le Corbusier who used columns standing separate from the walls. The preference for geometrical solids found in the architects during the French Revolution is also the roots of the purism of Le Corbusier. It seems as if Le Corbusier‟s cube that had been exhibited as a representation of purism was revived at this time, but in fact the pure geometry of this typology had always something mystical and had an aura. Here solids were self-asserting as objects and came into conflict with each other. Rossi remembered his own discomfort in the architectural education that was an extension of modernism and created designs emphasizing forms that had monumentality beyond function. In the Modena Cemetery, he focused on the expression of monumentality with the use of platonic solids by giving pure geometrical shapes like cubes and cones to traditional Italian grave facilities (Fig. III-10). At the elementary school in Fagnano Olona, he expressed by means of abstracting geometrical shapes the authoritarian image of a large wall and a clock which children use to have in mind for school building. Here was used, as it were, a method of extracting architectural typology from the archetypal image since his own childhood, which was the design principle of giving shape to memory. On the other hand, Leon Krier attempted to use pure geometric shapes in order to reconstruct the urban space. He was active as an architect who was particularly good at clear conception and sharp theory. His proposal to install huge cubic frameworks at strategic locations in the city center matched the appetite for monumentality of the age. The idea of hollow cubes as a symbol of the city landscape was realized by Johann Otto von Spreckelsen in the “Grande Arche” in Paris(1989) and by Hiroshi Hara in the “Umeda Sky Building”in Osaka (1993) (Fig. III-11, 12). In the genealogy of 20th century architecture that was related to the cube, the cube here was turned from a purist object into a colossal cube with monumentality. There was an intention to profile and symbolize the urban squares as solid spaces that had a social meaning as a result. Leon Krier had an understanding that the exceeded freedom held by capitalist economies brought about a confusion to the urban landscape, and his giant cube was

Chapter III III- 10

an embodiment of publicness and was so to speak an urban temple of the 20th century. While it could be supposed that this transcendental form was affected by the typology method of Stirling, and he found also a model in Albert Speer who developed the architectural style of the Nazis as a close aide architect of Hitler, and dared to publish a works of him. In the post- modernist period that came into its own in the 1970s, there was a trend to search for various wellsprings as alternatives to modernism, and Nazi architecture was also one of them. This was related to somewhat complex political nature and aesthetic theory and was prone to misinterpretations. Particularly in Germany, where sweeping away items related to the Nazis was a national issue, there was nervousness about this type of action which might lead to the return of Nazism. On the other hand, in other countries, the Nazi architecture that had been taboo seemed to become paradoxically an easy target of superficial journalism and could be reevaluated relatively easily. Leon Krier focused on fascism as a way to rescue the splitting and the chaos of the urban landscape marked by liberal capitalist economics. This architectural style came to be seen as being able to provide the symbolism that should be common to mass society. Although the form of the “rationalism” of pure geometry had previously been used for the public manipulation of mad political collectives, it was thought that the form alone could be utilized as an effective social design method if the mad parts were taken away. Aldo Rossi can be otherwise called a new type of post-modernist socialist architectural theoretician. He also tried to draw inspiration from the socialist realism of the Stalin period (*1). Even in practice, he revived partially the classical ornaments that had been rejected during the 20th century and should have been swept away, and took such a method as to put cubic forms that occupied locations like foreign bodies in the urban space and to decorate them with cornices. This method was even exhibited in the Italian palazzo architectural style of the “Il Palazzo” hotel built in Japan (Fig. III-13). The architectural style that Adolf Loos had obtained through a method of simplification of classicism during the initial stages of modernism returned in this period. With this trend, the neoclassical architecture around the 1800s such as Schinkel of suddenly grabbed the spotlight in addition to Ledoux from Paris, but in terms of to what degree this “ rationalism ” of the 1970s was similar to the original neoclassicism needs to be examined carefully. The reason is that the original neoclassicism that emphasized rules and standards, and had, similar to Constructivism, attempted to begin from the most abstract spheres and cubes against the background of a new world view, would be supposed to form an beginning stage of a new paradigm, and that this therefore resembled the character of the period of modernism from the 1910s to the 1930s. In fact, in the Krier brothers and Rossi is acknowledged the trend to recreate neoclassicism based on sensibility rather than reason and the attempt to find an intuitive sympathy for platonic solids and pure geometrical shapes. This was equivalent rather to the mental structure of the neo-renaissance and differed from the original neoclassicism under the initiative of reason. The “rationalism” of the 1970s resembled the “Movimento Italiano per l'Architettura Razionale” (MIAR) that had supported Italian fascism and utilized the form of the order of

Chapter III III- 11

rationalism by irrational impulses and was incompatible with the original scientific modern rationalism. The 1970s‟ architectural theory of typology that replaced the 1960s‟ spatial structure theory was understood for the first time in terms of this meaning and became a part of rationalism in the 20th century.

(2) Palladian classicism

As a method of creating spatial systems, rationalism is best symbolized by a grid. The arrangement of columns is determined by the intersection of checker-patterned lines arranged equidistantly along the beam and digit directions. When the orderly arrangement of the columns is broken by a deviation, manual intervention is required to change the shapes of the beams. On the other hand, if it is considered as a freely distortable and bendable space then a lot of manual intervention is required. This was attempted by the form of organicism during the 1930s, where it required a sophisticated yet flexible spirituality. When Oswald Mathias Ungers consistently used the grid, it was with a different intention from this kind of utilitarian rationality. He also applied grids to areas where free design was possible and covered everything in monistic spatial ordering. He even used stereo-grids by doing the same not only for horizontal planes but also for elevations. This was not merely a problem of the arrangement of columns and beams there but became a curtain wall with smaller scale square grids. Even when Constructivist design from the 1910s to the 1930s was applied in the form of orthogonal three-dimensional coordinate systems, this was an expression of the aspiration to reduce the degree of freedom. There was born the Constructivist method to decompose volumes into shape elements and to expand and reconstruct them. Compared to this, Ungers' grids had the characteristic of simply reducing the degree of freedom and tying up the building (Fig. III- 14). The rigidity itself had meaning. If the rationalism at the beginning of 20th century searched for the new system as a norm longing for new freedom, then on the other hand this grid rationalism asserted its own existence as an isolated object for own purpose. The installation of an unmoving object is the principal of monuments. They were occasionally made of stone like an Egyptian pyramid and became eternal existence. Although the spatial grid was nothing more than a virtual form drawn in space, it made a deep impression and was also a kind of monument that became rooted in one‟s consciousness. Just as the pyramids were simple, monuments retained in the memory must be simple yet pure, and the spatial grid also needs to have the most simple logic based on squares and cubes. The grids that were extended up to losing functional rationality and exceeded utilitarian comprehension could be even called manneristic. Ungers‟ grid style of this kind was the complete opposite of functionalism. If this formal rationalism were to be compared to the moralistic efforts made toward the functional rationality of the early 20th century, it would be rather irrationalism. The fact that “rationalism” was advocated even by Aldo Rossi and the Krier brothers in the 1970s is not something that should

Chapter III III- 12

be understood supeficially (*2). In architecture, formal rationalism has without doubt created a variety of cultures throughout history. That is the architectural culture of classicism that can be seen throughout the history of Europe since the time of ancient Rome. The abstracted form of a grid is an important indicator for understanding the classicism of the 20th century. Even among the modernist architects, Mies van der Rohe in particular frequently used grids that adopted transcendental, absolute forms. This can be seen in particular on the external walls of high-rise buildings and the grid ceilings incorporating a steel skeleton of horizontal roofs covering large spaces. However, this is the result of purpose-rationality under the guise of structural form, and the grids of post-modernism as own goal had a fundamentally different character. While post-modernism intended to revive an action of linguistic signification by criticizing and breaking the neutral yet transparent rationality of modernism on the one hand, the grids displayed an autonomy which refuses such action on the other hand. The grids expanded infinitely before the eye without any meaning. In the Museum of Modern Art in Gunma by Arata Isozaki, a spatial grid is used that includes slight variations from the rigid grid of Ungers and that exhibits the transcendental feeling of the temple style (Fig. III-15). Although it is packed with slightly manneristic elements, the silhouette of the spatial grid itself forms a manneristic expression of a modern rationalist temple. The words, coexistence of mannerism and classicism, were actually used for Andrea Palladio who was active around Venice in the 16th century. Palladio was not an ironic mannerist like Giulio Romano. He applied a wide variety of techniques of naïve classical ornaments and introduced an order as a way of arranging them. The Villa Rotonda was an incredibly famous work of formal rationalism that had the form of central-plan with a circular hall in square plan and had four splendid templar facades attached to its four facades. The glorious accumulation of ornamental motifs of Palladio should have ended with a collection of simple elements without the geometrical order of the plan, the column axes in the elevations and a proportional system based on a three-layered composition of classicism. The play of mannerism seems to pull in always classicism. The freedom of the parts get balance only after the systematic order of the whole is obtained. As is unexpected, post- modernism stood on the balance between the development of mannerism with rich sensibility on the one hand and the classicism of formal rationalism on the other. If we try taking away manneristic irony and critical methods, we can see the world of formal beauty with Palladian grammar. In the series of architectural works of such as “Tepia”in Tokyo, items that directly use a grid, items that do not use a grid but adhere to an orderly orthogonal three-dimensional coordinate system and form an open system based on the methods of Le Corbusier can be observed (Fig. III-16). There can be found a dimmension of aesthetic taste resembling Japanese “Sukiya” architecture of tea house composed of the formal grammar and its free performance. This resembled the classicism of Palladio which adopted as its theme creating a formal syntax that was easy for anyone to apply and promoting the individualization of works. Maki again modernized the classical templar form in the National

Chapter III III- 13

Museum of Modern Art in Kyoto and displayed outright classicism while using modern metal materials. At the very start of the 20th century, there was the neoclassicism of Behrens and Loos, and this was inherited by Gropius and Mies. Then there was the classicism of the fascism of the 1930s, and in a roundabout way, post-modernism also exhibits classicism. Although all of these are classicism with cubes and formal systems as their theme, each has a different meaning and background and is not the same at all. Classicism exists as the axis of architecture. There could be seen the broad-mindedness of classicism that it appears and disappears in time on the surface and back following the fluctuation of axis, and displays the flexibility to reflect the psyche of each age. If we consider the classicism of the early modern times was the employment of the styles of ancient Rome in renaissance age, then the classicism of the 20th century is found in the more profound tradition of abstract geometry. The beginnings are highlights in the Suprematism of Malevich and the purism of Le Corbusier. Although Le Corbusier and Mies were harshly criticized within the stream of post-modernism, a Le Corbusier revival occurred in the architects of so-called New York Five, etc., and the shadow of Mies was seen in the trends of minimalism. While modernism was criticized on the one hand, on the other it was on the road to becoming the classics. The fundamental requirement of becoming the classics was the original presence of the elements of classicism. The assertion that there is actually a deep classicist spirit within modernism which expanded freely and vigorously in a diverse way could invite misinterpretation at the current stage where the 20th century is not yet the distant past. However, the time will come when the modernist movements of the early 20th century will be considered as yet another form of classicism, in the same ways as the return to the classics during the early renaissance of Brunelleschi and others was a movement toward freedom from the scholarly academic system of gothic cathedrals. The manneristic classicism from the 1970s to the 1980s made this subconscious modernist classicism the visible classicism which became the subject of the design operations of formalism. Of course, 20th century classicism is not something that recreates the ornamental system of classical order but is a return to a more deep and original formal spirit. And therefore it derived a system of forms by abstraction while drawing inspiration from sources such as the simple stacked forms of the early romanesque and the vernacular architecture around the area of the Mediterranean Sea including Africa as well as the wooden architecture of Japan. The idea of grids can also be considered a response to the demands of turning to classicism as a most original means of space design.

(3) Hybrid system and picturesque

The post-structuralist philosopher Jacques Derrida conceived of the profoundly fascinating concept of “deconstruction.” This had a particularly strong effect on architectural design.

Chapter III III- 14

This concept was originally an attempt to highlight the new systematic image in the process itself of dissecting and destructing the existing system of modern rationalism, and it swept the world as a fashionable style that was exhibited in the complex forms of buildings as if the view of decomposing architecture itself had become fixed. While critically inheriting from structuralism, he clarified the dualistic structure of language culture created by humans, for example, he contrasted the ideography called “écriture” against the dominance of logical and transparent phonograms. While structuralism highlighted the structure and theory even within casual scenery and considered that there could be found the subconscious order at the depths of reality observed vague, Derrida criticized this kind of aspiration toward structural order and attempted to restore humanity through the blood that appeared by dissecting this like a terrorist. The architects read into this message the means of destroying monistic structures. First the structure of the grid was dissected diagonally, and this was displayed symbolically using a method of operating on the grid system by duplicating and overlapping offset axes. Peter Eisenman sought the motif of the manipulation of shape in the concept of deconstruction in particular by taking theoretical architectural design as the theme. His method of combining squares and cubes that had their roots in Dutch Constructivism finally resulted in the composition of grids with offset axes and exhibited a display of the process of shifting the logic of shape (Fig. III-17). had indeed also used grids with offset and duplicated axes, but he was more focused on their poetic expression than conceptual logical evolution like Eisenman, and this was a manneristic game that aimed to create an unexpected feeling of liberation at the divide between two inconsistent systems (Fig. III-18). Modern rationalism generally offered clear idea and made ideology in order to create new society of 20th century, and built a posture to go forward to the active reformation on all aspects to realize them. However, this kind of rational reform had the unfortunate side effect of wiping out indistinct cultural phenomena. In architectural expression, the theme of universality was applied too much, and individual poetic expression in particular was viewed as redundant and discarded. The role of post-modernism was to revive anew the diversity and depth of poetic expression as something indistinct. This was consistent with the semantics seen, for example, in the expression “generating meaning” within a homogeneous space. The orderly grid axes pursued by Mies were a product of sound modern rationality, but a kind of autocracy of reason occurred in order to build a consistent system and rejected indistinctness as a result. Although Mies himself limited the job of architects with the use of the words “less is more” and in particular attempted to leave a diversity of possibility to the user and resident, the business-like architects of the industrial society that was the epigonen of Mies often made effort to exaggerate the existence of products of simple skeletal structures or to give an aura, and the resident who was originally to have been given freedom was sidelined. It is therefore believed that it is unavoidable for reviving humanity to destruct the overly strong monistic systems.

Chapter III III- 15

On the other hand, attempts to destroy the order created by reason can be undertaken by introducing foreign matter that is repulsed by monistic order. It is sufficient to place objects that deny being understood as part of the order within a neat grid. The typology of Rossi that used platonic solids also had meaning with regard to this point. The independent solids of cones, pyramids, cubes, spheres, and cylinders produce a strong centricity when placed in the center of a grid and often used for this purpose, and if they are placed off-center then this instead produces a force that rejects systemization (Fig. III-19). If a foreign object that cannot be understood within a system is to be introduced, it does not necessarily have to have a geometric shape. It could be a symbolic shape that has meaning within itself as a historical monument or even a freely designed shape, as long as the placement has an unpredictability and suddenness that ignores the context. Furthermore, it is probably also good if the person who provides it is someone other than the architect that provided the overall space system. This is because the mind that creates an element that is mismatched with a system should think of creation in a different context. The large golden fireball-shaped object that Philippe Starck placed along the Sumidagawa River of Tokyo had the characteristic of a foreign object with such a meaning (Fig. III-20). This shape rejected existing rational interpretation and did not match the context of the city and can be viewed as the existence of some kind of meaning or history. These objects held meaning only as occupying spaces as the most opaque objects within a modern city which continues getting transparency and systematization. This is able to function as a source to generate meaning only by giving the feeling of a foreign object to the viewer and makes the ordinary city scenery that has lost the ability to generate meaning more inspiring. Although it seems that the environment and the object are in conflict just like Hollein‟s aircraft carrier floating in the desert, in this case, the shape of the object floats between abstract and concrete and defies any attempt to read a meaning into it. When monistic order is dismantled, spatial systems themselves are diversified, and the values of each of the groups of abstract, concrete, and semi-concrete objects are reconfirmed, it is not necessarily true that only one of the methods is valid, and it is also applicable to take a mixture of all of the methods. This is best called “eclecticism” or the appropriate selection and application of mixing. From the middle of the 19th century, although probably due to the evolution of historicism into eclecticism, the gothic and renaissance and other historical styles were catalogued and selected as appropriate for the building type and purpose, and in some cases different interior styles were even applied to different rooms of a single building. In comparison to this, the range of eclecticism in the 20th century was the group of geometric and concrete shapes that had been typologized, and the paradigms of architectural design of the 20th century were reconfirmed as being relatively abstract, formal concepts. James Stirling was an architect who certainly grasped the new eclectic principles that should be called “typological eclecticism.” In his “Derby Civic Centre Proposal” (1970) he had already typologized historical architecture such as by building a historical guild hall in a courtyard surrounded by a horseshoe-shaped arcade exhibiting modern-style shapes and placing

Chapter III III- 16

an assembly hall facade standing at an angle like a foundering ship (Fig. III-21). Here, the post- modern historicism became the design of elements floating in a contemporary urban space. This became a more abstracted method in the “Research Center” in Berlin, where in addition to preserving the existing brick building, adding an arcade like an ancient Greek store, a restaurant building with Latin cross shape like a church, a lecture building like an amphitheater, and a medieval castle-style building, it became a composition with abstracted plans of various historical architectural types (Fig. III-22). This kind of method was overall presented like a parody of historical architecture that was viewed as no different from a fantastic medieval castle in the middle of Disneyland, and it seems also as if it were a personal joke of the architect. However, this actually built the basics of the logic of typology in the 1970s, and if it can be understood that this was the result of the contributions of historicism and eclecticism, then it is clear that this was an ideology created through the process of transformation of 20th century architectural theory. This set of randomly scattered independent objects created an overall scene rich in variations that delighted its beholders and was reminiscent of the methods of picturesque. In the 18th century, in a landscape garden with an artificial lake, ancient temples, ruins of gothic chapels, grottos and a variety of follies included gazebos were arranged, and viewing points and observation decks, and a site was created to enjoy various elements and calm scenery. Something like that revived against the background of the 20th century values. In the “Neue Staatsgalerie” in Stuttgart, Starling was based on the Berlin neoclassical museum of Schinkel with a variety of historical elements inlaid at unexpected locations to create a motif like a Le Corbusier‟s work and was worked on such that the scenery smoothly melted into a hillside of the urban district (Fig. III-23). This resulted in a clever overall structure exceeding a group of simple objects, with typological eclecticism fused with landscape design. Such method was tied to the unique mannerist aesthetics in the Museum Abteiberg by Hollein who mixed a group of geometrical solids with the surrounding historical buildings and landscape, implemented complex interior design utilizing the hillside contours, and summarized these into a spatial picturesque that contained all kind of changes. On the other hand, in the “Parc de la Villette” contributed by Bernard Tschumi et al., a method was created of mixing diverse elements such geometrical distributions of the site, axial designs, a group of structures like follies arranged on the grid intersections, a large spherical object like a memorial hall, a large structure exposing its superstructure like a fragment of civil engineering, and a 19th century style steel skeletal structure that was preserved and renovated (Fig. III-24). The urban garden that only opens out into a horizontal plane of the past was transformed into three dimensional space and conversely the structures were integrated with the gardening of post-modern design feeling into the unique form of a “park.” This new park concept that cemented the modern architectural design and landscaping method also became a type of theme park that incorporated the new technology known as the “ media park ” such as that demonstratied in the design competition in Cologne.

Chapter III III- 17

The meaning of the new picturesque of the 1970s and 1980s was a continuing rejection of the perfect order of the early half of the 20th century, but instead of returning to the 19th century, and instead of creating an anarchist state completely lacking in order, a new dimension was created that lay somewhere between order and chaos. Even while the rational ordering of overall space was utilized as one method, rather than being absorbed by order, objects and devices that created a diversity of meanings were inlaid without losing the diversion. If the creation of a park that displays this kind of modern picturesque is turned into a single facade as is, it creates a new type of decorative urban structure such as the “Spiral”in Tokyo by Fumihiko Maki. Here, the group of typological objects of grids, cones, and staggered forms is attached with superb balance to an asymmetrical wall with a slight fold (Fig. III-25). Although this could also be referred to as a facade with a Japanese “Sukiya” feeling, it also has a global universal common feeling of a two-dimensional picturesque. This kind of eclectic and picturesque phenomenon has an aesthetic that shares diverse values and well reflected the process of advancing designs since post-modernism. This therefore is thought to be comparable with the fundamental tones of European eclecticism that featured mixtures of diverse styles developed from the 1860s to the 1870s and the picturesque asymmetrical residential buildings that started to become generally widespread from then.

(*1) Aldo Rossi, “Architettura della Citta”, Clup, Milano, 1987 (Japanese translation by T etsuzo Ohshima & Seiken Fukuda, Tairyudo, Kyoto, 1991) (*2) "Architecture rationnelle = Rational architecture", Archives d'Architecture Moderne, Bruxelles , 1978.

Chapter III III- 18

Figures of Chapter III

Fig.III-1 Hans Hollein, Fig.III-2 Hans Hollein, Fig.III-3 Arata Isozaki, Fig.III-4 W. van Allen, Fig.III-5 Philip Johnson, Collage, 1964. “Abteiberg Museum”, “Tsukuba Center”, “Chrysler Building”, New “AT & T Building”, New library wing, Ibaraki, 1983. York, 1930. York, 1980-3. Mönchengladbach, 1971-81.

Fig.III-6 Robert Venturi, Fig.III-7 Kengo Kuma, Fig.III-8 Louis Kahn, Fig.III-9 James Fig.III-10 Aldo Rossi, “Guild House”, “M2”, Tokyo, 1991. “The national assembly Stiling ， ”Runcorn New “San Cataldo Cemetery”, Philadelphia, 1965. building” ， Dhaka, Town”, since 1967. Modena, 1971-84. 1961-74.

Fig.III-11 Johann Otto Fig.III-12 Hiroshi Hara, Fig.III-13 Aldo Rossi, Fig.III-14 Oswald Fig.III-15 Arata Isozaki, von Spreckelsen, “Umeda Sky Building”, “Hotel Il Palazzo”, Mathias Ungers, “Gunma Prefectural “Grande Arche”, Paris, Osaka, 1993. Fukuoka, 1989. “Messe-Torhaus”, Museum”, 1974. 1989. a.M., 1984.

Fig.III-16 Fumihiko Fig.III-17 Peter Fig.III-18 Richard Meier, Fig.III-19 Aldo Rossi, Fig.III-20 Philippe Maki, “Tepia”, Tokyo, Eisenman, “Apartments “Handcraft Museum”, “Apartment Building”, Starck, “Asahi Beer 1989. at Checkpoint Charlie”, Frankfurt a.M., 1984. Berlin, 1987. Azumabashi Hall”, Berlin, 1986. Tokyo, 1989.

Fig.III-21 James Stirling, Fig.III-22 James Stirling, Fig.III-23 James Stirling, Fig.III-24 Bernard Fig.III-25 Fumihiko “Derby Civic Centre” “Academic Center”, “Neue Staatsgalerie Tschumi , “Parc de la Maki, “Spiral”, Tokyo, Proposal, 1970. Berlin, 1988. (New State‟s Gallery)”, Villette”, Paris, 1989. 1985. Stuttgart, 1984.

Chapter III III- 19