The Figures of Charles Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture” Mr. Andrew Peter Steen B.A., B.B.Env., B.Arch., M.Phil. A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2015 School of Architecture Abstract This thesis addresses English-language architectural theory discourse. It is an interrogation of the intellectual history of architectural theory language. While explicitly a contribution towards understanding a discrete discursive territory in existence in 1969, the study’s significance extends to the broader fields of architectural writing and design. The thesis investigates one text: Charles Jencks’s “Semiology and Architecture”, chapter one of Meaning in Architecture, an anthology edited by Jencks and George Baird. This single text is taken as a case study: it is used to assess the significance and functioning of the language and structure of address of so-called architectural theory. The thesis focuses in particular on the diagrammatic figures within “Semiology and Architecture”. Highly formal extensions of Jencks’s written body, the figures concentrate attention on the message as matter, and encourage an analysis directed towards the text’s paradigmatic axis. The figures’ conspicuous in-text presence helps denaturalize names and reify concepts, modifying the communicative role of each of these linguistic units. This thesis argues that the figures and names, thus understood, change the fundamental nature of “Semiology and Architecture”. Under their influence, the referential function of the text — that aspect supporting the argument — is repeatedly usurped by the poetic function. This pattern acts to disrupt commonsense assumptions regarding authorship. In place of a distinct Jencks, the thesis extracts authorial constructs or personas. This thesis uses the poetic function of Jencks’s text, and its authorial constructs, to characterize the underlying discursive formation. Each of the thesis’s five body chapters performs the same set of operations. One or two figures are isolated; Jencks’s argument as determined by referential function is traced, and the paradigmatic selections demonstrative of the poetic function analyzed; the relevant textual constructs are exposed; and the discursive functioning is characterized, significance thus articulated. Through close textual analyses, this thesis contributes novel understandings of Charles Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture”, and the ongoing practice of architectural writing. It advances historical and theoretical arguments: it addresses the function of the author and the process of writing within architecture’s discursive formation, and advocates for the significance of formal textuality in studies of architectural theory. 2 Declaration by author This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my thesis. I have clearly stated the contribution of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional editorial advice, and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of my research higher degree candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award. I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis. 3 Publications during candidature Peer reviewed papers: Andrew P. Steen, “Guerrilla in the midst: The Universitas Project and a new type of institution.” In Architecture, Institutions and Change: 32nd Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, edited by Paul Hogben and Judith O’Callaghan (Sydney AU: SAHANZ, 2015): 640-651. ——————, “Radical Eclecticism and Post-Modern Architecture.” In Fabrications 25:1 (2015): 130-145. ——————, “Operation Marginalia: Translations of Semiology and Architecture.” In Translations: 31st Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, edited by Christoph Schnoor (Auckland NZ: SAHANZ, 2014): 345-354. ——————, “Jencks’s Semiological History: ‘Pop – Non Pop’.” In Open: 30th Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand, edited by Alexandra Brown and Andrew Leach (Gold Coast AU: SAHANZ, 2013): 3-15. ——————, “Epigraphs, Poetics, Architectural History.” In Fabulation: Myth, Nature, Heritage: 29th Annual Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians Australia and New Zealand, edited by Stuart King, Anuradha Chatterjee and Stephen Loo (Launceston AU: SAHANZ, 2012): 1035-1051. Chapter in edited book: ——————, “Kurilpa Bridge.” In Semi-Detached: Writing, Representation and Criticism in Architecture, edited by Naomi Stead. 80-83. Melbourne, AU: URO Media, 2012. Online journal article: ——————, “Station to Station.” In Australian Design Review, 2013. australiandesignreview.com/opinion/36564-station-to-station 4 Publications included in this thesis No publications included. Contributions by others to the thesis None. Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree None. 5 Acknowledgements This work would not have been possible without the invaluable contributions of my generous, enthusiastic, and thought-provoking primary supervisor Prof John Macarthur; my secondary supervisors, the meticulous and judicious Assoc Prof Naomi Stead, and the incisive Dr Silvia Micheli; my ATCH research centre friends and colleagues Mr Jared Bird, Dr Alexandra Brown, Dr Amy Clarke, Prof Andrew Leach, Dr Gill Matthewson, Dr Antony Moulis, Dr Ashley Paine, and Dr Andrew Wilson; my milestone advisors Dr Rex Butler, Prof Sandra Kaji-O’Grady, and Prof Paul Walker; my yoga gurus Dan Adler and Ally Goodwin; all my friends, particularly Martin Bignell, Keith Hudson, James Pierre du Plessis, and Clair Keleher; and my family, especially my Mum and Dad. My sincere and eternal thanks go to all of these people. 6 Keywords charles jencks, semiology and architecture, meaning in architecture, architectural semiotics, architecture theory and intellectual history, historiography of architecture, history of theory, linguistic turn, theory moment Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classifications (ANZSRC) ANZSRC code: 120103, Architectural History and Theory, 80% ANZSRC code: 220313, Philosophy of Language, 10% ANZSRC code: 220317, Poststructuralism, 10% Fields of Research (FoR) Classification FoR code: 1201, Architecture, 100% 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures……………………………………………………………………….. 9 Chapter 0. Charles Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture”………………………. 11 Chapter 1. Meaning, Semiology, Jencks…………………………………………… 16 Chapter 2. Bicycle Saddles…………………………………………………………. 53 Chapter 3. The Semiological Situation…..………………………………………… 86 Chapter 4. Duck–Rabbit–Thingummybob.………………………………………… 116 Chapter 5. Opposition and Association.…………………………………………… 150 Chapter 6. Language Uses, Language Abuses…………………………………….. 182 References..………………………………………………………………………….. 209 Appendix. ‘Charles Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture”’.……………………. 219 8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 0a. Charles Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture,” in Meaning in Architecture, edited by Charles Jencks and George Baird (London UK: Barrie & Jenkins, 1969), 10-25. Figure 0b. Details from Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture,” 10-25. Figure 1a. Title page of Charles Jencks and George Baird eds, Meaning in Architecture (London UK: Barrie & Jenkins, 1969), 3 (left); title page of Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture,” 10. Figure 2a. Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture,” 12-13. Figure 2b. Jencks, “Three Uses of a Bicycle Seat,” “Semiology and Architecture,” 12-13. Figure 2c. Detail from Jencks, “Three Uses of a Bicycle Seat,” “Semiology and Architecture,” 12. Figure 3a. Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture,” 14-15. Figure 3b. Jencks, “The Sign Situation,” “Semiology and Architecture,” 15. Figure 3c. Jencks, “The Semiological Triangle,” “Semiology and Architecture,” 14. Figure 4a. Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture,” 18-19. Figure 4b. Jencks, “Duck–Rabbit – etc.?,” “Semiology and Architecture,” 18. Figure 4c. Jencks, “Archigram Robot II, 1968,” “Semiology and Architecture,” 18-19. Figure 4d. Detail from Jencks, “Archigram Robot II, 1968,” “Semiology and Architecture,” 19. Figure 5a. Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture,” 22-23. Figure 5b. Jencks, “Degree of Surprise,” “Semiology and Architecture,” 22. Figure 5c. Jencks, “Semantic Space of Current Architects,” “Semiology and Architecture,” 23. Figure 6a. Detail from Jencks, “Semiology and Architecture,” 14. 9 Nothing is more