The Point of View of Measurement in Architectural Conception: From the Question of Scale to Scale as Question Philippe Boudon eflecting on the width of my bathroom I end up chen, as imposed by the latter’s proximity. Although finding myself in a state of great perplexity as I try this correspondence did not come about as a result R to know why (I’ll be damned!) it had to have of a necessary choice initially because my bathroom twice the wave length in the void of the radiation cor- could just as well have found itself next to a stair. More- responding to the transition between the levels 2p10 over, the aforementioned width was also equal to the and 5d5 of the krypton -86 atom; or, to put it more length of my daughter’s bedroom wall, subject to sub- simply yet more grossly (a passage from the simple to stracting the width of a closet, itself corresponding to the gross whose consequences should be measured), the possibility consistent with the installation of a bed. why did the bathroom’s dimension have to be (2/10)7 A bed, a closet, a bathtub: all are things which everyone of the quarter of the earth’s meridian. can imagine more or less and there is no need for me to For my bathroom measures 2 meters, and that is in- give the reader the dimensions of those objects. deed what we are talking about to the extent that the meter is defined by the above mentioned elements. From the outset, the pre- It then made more sense for me to consider ceding thoughts raised a number of problems that the width of my bathroom corresponded to the To begin with there is the question of the project. Alt- bathtub’s length, however paradoxical it might appear hough the user is going to choose his bathtub in terms to measure the former by the latter whereas I had taken of his bathroom, the architect is going to layout the great care to choose the latter in terms of the former. bathroom in terms of the bathtub. The situation is then More satisfied to use my bathroom as an instrument quite the opposite and, from an epistemological point of measurement relevant to the size of my bathroom, of view, it cannot be taken for granted to think of archi- I then realized that things were not so simple. For the tecture in this manner since it is basically contrary to width of my bathroom was also equal to that of my kit- the way in which we deal with it on a daily basis.1 Boudon: The Point of View of Measurement in Architectural Conception 7 Then comes the question of the relevance of the mensions of my bathroom unthinkingly. The length measurement: what interest is there in establishing a perhaps has something to do with technical problems relation between the length of a quarter of the meri- of span and the height with a concern for optimiza- dian and the length of kitchen? None whatsoever will tion relative to the building. I can also imagine that be the reply, even though we remain objectively scien- in the architect’s mind these constraints may be as- tific, if one accepts that that there can be science only sociated with different values and are part of an over- of the measurable. But regardless of the exactness of all view of an entire set of constraints arising from the the length of my bathroom thus measured, we feel the measurements he has taken to carry out his project. I inanity of the formula just the same. Let us note that imagine also that, consequently, he judges these mea- the question raised is not the same as that shown by surements on given levels which are different from the Bachelard on the excesses of precision.2 It is of a dif- one that holds my attention:the one concerning my ferent nature since it involves choosing the measure- bathtub. But who is to say that he was not merely sa- ment that is of interest to us. A remark by an art historian tisfied with the “compatibility” between the length of mentioning the fact that the length of the city of Henri- my bathroom and the possibility of placing a bathtub chemont is equal to the diagonal of the city of Richelieu there? Whereas his initial concern was for the length to will be of no interest, regardless of the mode of measu- fit in as a full division of the width of the building itself. rement and its degree of precision, unless we are given Here, it seems to me, that basically he does not think the relevance of the statement.3 out problems in the same space as I do. I am in a space Next we are faced with the question of the dimen- of usage, of perception, he is in a space of conception. sion. With the legitimate concern of tearing down my The different measurements – including the length of bathtub I worry more about the length of my bath- my bathroom – are part of a set of other measurements room than its height. The latter is of little interest to me which, once connected to each other, give form in the (in my capacity as the user, although I recognize that architect’s eyes to a system. The relations between the the architect must have made some kind of decision measurements can be of different orders; these can in that respect). The width of the bathroom interests be designated through graphs of varying complexity me little also since I cannot use it to place my bathtub, including the tree4 or, at the other end – an extreme whereas the sink and other washroom accessories will case –they can remain independent of each other.5 have no difficulty finding their spot. The relevance And I am suddenly frightened at such complexity, to that I have mentioned will apply to such and such phy- which is added the fact that the length of my bath- sical support whose measurement I shall take into con- room is equivalent to the width of my kitchen. And yet sideration. Thus, I shall call dimension that which I mea- in the long run a bathroom is a simple thing for which sure. When Le Corbusier attributes 7 meters to the dia- numerous models come to mind. We have before us, gonal of the maison des artisans over which he installs then, a doubly determined length. The latter is even a mezzanine, the diagonal constitutes a dimension of overdetermined since my kitchen’s width is itself equal this architectural object. The height of the Eiffeltower to the width of the elevator shaft, the landing, and the is certainly a priviledged dimension but its weight is stairway added together... not less important since the lightness of its structural Relevance of measurement, dimension, levels, sys- idea is essential to the tower (its weight corresponds tem, overdetermination, and model indicate some of to that of of the prism of air of the same height and the the major interrogations on questions of measurement same base). It is another way to take the measurement in architecture. The term scale is ever ready to refer to of the tower. Another scale. them through a system of polysemy that seems inhe- Though I might give priority to my concern with rent to it and that is destined to express through words, the installation of my bathtub lengthwise, but the as a shortcut, facts of measurement which are highly architect, in turn, must not have chosen the other di- complex.6 The first of these facts is that of the project 8 Nordisk Arkitekturforskning 1999:1 which must, as such, shift onto reality. It is an issue of or the pernicious effects of the so-called “crane-route” scale. How is the project to be articulated through rea- architecture – and whatever need both geographer lity, through real space: the question of shifting. and physicist might have to set up theoretical models without which they would be unable to take measure- Question of project: scale as shifting ments and with which they can confront reality in or- So we are then concerned with the question of measure- der to test the model’s validity, they are all dealing with ment.7 But, right from the start, we run into an impor- a given, whose measurements they will then proceed tant epistemological problem. The term measurement to take. The architect however, is going to have to give must be understood in a different manner whenever measurements to the building. Nothing will affect it comes down to thinking it out in the field of architec- this process even if the surveyor, the aesthete, the ture. Taking the measurements of a building does not art historian and the critic proceed to take measure- differ in any way from everyday measurements as we ments with respective aesthetic or metric gauges.11 know them (why not in our bathroom before buying There are cases, however, when an architect may be the bathtub), but the measurement in which the archi- called upon to inscribe his design into an architectural tect becomes involved in of necessity 8 for his work has given: The Gare d’Orsay is one such case whereby the the particular characteristic that the object measured architect had to change the given station into a mu- is not given at all a priori. Instead, he must give mea- seum (the question concerning the thermometer surements to an object that as yet has none.