The Ship of Theseus Identity and the Barcelona Pavilion(s) Lance Hosey NewSchool of Architecture & Design Built in 1929 and demolished in 1930, the Figure 1. Opposite page, top: Barcelona Pavilion, 1929 and 1986 (photographed 2009). Viewed from Barcelona Pavilion was rebuilt on the original the northeast. The German tricolor flag flew over the 1929 pavilion; the flag of Barcelona flies over the site in 1986. Is it the “same” building? Many current structure. (Left: Photograph by Berliner Bild Bericht. Opposite page, right: Photograph by Pepo architects and critics question the reconstruction’s Segura. Courtesy of Fundació Mies van der Rohe.) authenticity, dismissing it as a “fake.” Why the Figure 2. Opposite page, middle: Barcelona Pavilion, 1929 and 1986 (photographed 2009). pavilion has inspired such doubt is an important North courtyard with George Kolbe sculpture, Alba (“Dawn”). The original cast was plaster; the WRSLFEHFDXVHLWUHODWHVWRWKHYHU\GH¿QLWLRQV current cast is bronze. (Left: Photograph by Berliner Bild Bericht. Right: Photograph by Pepo Segura. of architecture. What determines a building’s Courtesy of Fundació Mies van der Rohe.) identity—form, function, context, material, or Figure 3. Opposite page, bottom: Barcelona Pavilion, 1929 and 1986 (photographed 2009). something else? As a historically important View across the podium reflecting pool from the southeast. (Left: Photograph by Berliner work that has existed in more than one instance, Bild Bericht. Right: Photograph by Pepo Segura. Courtesy of Fundació Mies van der Rohe.) the Barcelona Pavilion offers an extraordinary opportunity to consider this question. Examining Goldberger.¡ The architects of the reconstruction—Ignasi Solà-Morales, the distinctions between the two structures Cristian Cirici, and Fernando highlights conventional standards of critical Ramos—admitted their own “tremor of doubt,” writing that rebuilding such evaluation, exposing architecture’s core values a familiar landmark was a “traumatic and interrogating the very concept of preservation. undertaking.”¤ During the planning stage, Philip Johnson pondered, “The problem before us is should a But if I’m not the same, the next how much can a thing vary before it dream be realized or not? We have question is, who in the world am I? becomes an altogether dierent thing? made such a myth of that building. What characteristics of an object are Shouldn’t it be le¦ in the sacred vault —Lewis Carroll, Alice’s Adventures in indispensable to its definition? of the memory bank?”§ Wonderland () Modern architecture’s ship of The apprehension is not easily Theseus is the Barcelona Pavilion. explained. The similarities between One of the most confounding puzzles Built in and demolished in , the two pavilions far outnumber of philosophy concerns the ship of the pavilion was rebuilt with exacting the dierences, and the construc- Theseus. During its long voyages, the quality and detail on the original site tion quality of the reconstruction legendary Greek hero’s vessel requires in (Figures -, -). Is it the is far superior to the hastily erected extensive repairs, and eventually “same” building? original. Yet, without much elabora- every board and plank is replaced When the second pavilion tion, many critics have rejected so that not a scrap of the original appeared, architects, historians, and the second pavilion as inauthentic, material remains. With its constitu- critics were deeply ambivalent. Some even while lauding its meticulous tion completely changed, is it the hailed it as a revived masterpiece, execution. A review in Progressive same ship? Answering this question some condemned it as an impostor, Architecture concluded, “Any faithful depends on what is meant by “same,” and others confessed to be reproduction remains just that: a surprisingly elusive term. This topic dumbfounded. “[T]his building is a copy, a facsimile.”© Routinely is central to the philosophy of identity: not supposed to exist,” asserted Paul referred to as a “replica,” even by Lance Hosey, “The Ship of Theseus: Identity and the Barcelona Pavilion(s),” 230 Journal of Architectural Education, October, 2018, 72:2, 230-247 the architects themselves,7 the 1986 described it as “a replica so faithful identity—form, function, context, pavilion is widely considered not quite to the original that it is often difficult material, technique, or something legitimate but not quite illegitimate, to remember its true nature.”9 More else? The Barcelona Pavilion offers either. Martin Filler wrote that “we than one recent source has dismissed an extraordinary opportunity to study must regard this admirable effort as it as a “fake.”10 this question because it is a histori- something other than the real thing.”8 Why the pavilion has inspired cally important work that has existed Questioning the pavilion’s authentic- such doubt is an important in more than one instance. Examining ity continues to this day. In 2017, Anna question because it relates to the the distinctions between the two and Eugeni Bach, commissioned to very definitions of architecture. pavilions highlights conventional create an installation at the pavilion, What determines a building’s standards of critical evaluation, Hosey JAE 72:2 231 exposing architecture’s core values Barcelona’s Montjuïc hill has been Filler protests the differences in color and interrogating the very concept restored to a state similar to that of between the old and new stones, of preservation. What is being the 1929 fair.15 especially the onyx, but there are no preserved—the material artifact, an According to Plato, Aristotle’s color photographs of the original image, an idea, or a legacy—and are teacher, the essence of a thing (Figure 5). He complains about there aspects of a building that simply ultimately consists of form apart from the specific material selections, yet cannot be preserved at all? According matter.16 Philosopher Peter Pesic he admits they were necessary for to the Oxford Dictionaries, to describes the second ship of Theseus longevity and that the quality of preserve is to “maintain (something) with the same language Martin Filler construction is better.24 Twisted logic in its original or existing state.”11 Has uses to dismiss the second pavilion: reflects a deeper insecurity—not about the Barcelona Pavilion maintained its “We recognize the ship... by comparing the pavilion’s materials, but about original state or not? it with the form we already know, its its very existence. The reconstruc- original archetype, as the real thing.”17 tion allowed viewers to experience The Identity of Identity What Filler refers to as “the real thing” for themselves, unmediated, a broad How to determine the identity would be the pavilion’s form, and in range of space, time, light, and color of a thing has been a subject of fact, like many observers, he specifi- for the first time in half a century considerable philosophical inquiry cally applies the term “Platonic.”18 (Figures 7–8). But by bringing form throughout history. Aristotle, often In the reconstruction, writes one and matter together again, it spoiled acknowledged to have originated the historian, the pavilion “is now as close the fantasy. A ghost with a body is no philosophy of identity, noted that to its original form” as possible.19 In longer a ghost. while all things have a potentially Platonic terms, then, essence survives. According to identity theory, infinite number of properties, some Aristotle, however, insisted on the material changes do not necessarily are of greater consequence than unity of form and matter, and in this jeopardize an object’s authenticity. others. He distinguished between sense the reconstruction returns the While Aristotle renounced Platonism properties that may vary without pavilion to Aristotelian reality. The by emphasizing both form and affecting identity (“accidents”) and structure is said to have “reacquired matter in the recognition of objects those that may not (“essence”): “The [its] material presence” in 1986.20 (“Is there . a house apart from essence of each thing is what it is Yet, physical presence may be the bricks?”), he nevertheless felt said to be in virtue of itself.”12 This exactly what troubles some critics. The that form was an essential quality and distinction is fundamental to the prevalent view of the original pavilion matter accidental.25 An oak table could Barcelona Pavilion(s). While there are was that it was “purely spatial,” as be refitted with maple wood and still clear differences between the 1929 Vincent Scully described it in 1961.21 be considered the same table.26 In and 1986 structures, there are also Its walls are commonly called “planes,” any building that is renovated, parts clear differences in any single building geometry separated from substance.22 are replaced without endangering the at different points in time, since Published floor plans often have no overall identity of the place. Unless materials weather, finishes dull, parts context or orientation—space without an arbitrary restriction is made on get replaced, and context changes. place. In 1936, George Howe praised the number of parts that may be The important question is which the pavilion as the apex of “abstract exchanged, theoretically the entire variations might threaten identity. design.” Claiming that it had been structure may change materially In other words, what comprises the “liberated of all the purely material without losing its essence. Le essence of the Barcelona Pavilion, restrictions which usually govern