Our understanding of an architectural phenomenon is interrelated with political, economic, cultural, scientific or technological developments. As F. Jameson would put it, architecture, ideology, politics, economics, culture, technology, science, etc., are structurally connected instances (Jameson, 1991). In this context, we will focus on the relation of architecture – as ideology – and (techno-)science, in order to analyze and understand the ideological operation of architecture, through its formal, technical and aesthetical modalities. The paper is a theoretical elaboration of architecture’s ideological and (techno-)scientific contexts, following the theories of Althusser, Marx and Tafuri. It presents an intersection of the history of architecture and history of science, interpreted through Tafuri’s ‘Ideology of the Plan’ and the National Library of Kosovo, in Prishtina. The aim is to interpret how architectural space – i.e., its form, and its technical and aesthetical aspects – impacted by the developments in (techno-) science, (re)creates and determines the social, political and cultural events occurring there. We are to deal with the ideological character of architecture (architecture as a representation of reality) and the fact that the techno-aesthetic and techno-artistic modalities of architecture typically hide this character (Šuvakovic, 2014). By re-thinking the practice of ‘hiding’ (in principle, an ideological practice), we will understand architecture as a language between ideology, morphology, aesthetics and technology. Furthermore, this paper will interpret the practice of ‘hiding’ in the context of architecture’s relation with (techno-)science; their political and economic as- sociation with capitalism, and cultural association with postmodernism. Differently put, how architecture – as ideology – positions itself in relation to (techno-)science? The present work will discuss the architectural and urban form as a product of the combination of architecture and (techno-)science, within a (post-)modern condition, by interpreting what this form represents. By arguing that architectural form – the building and the plan for the city – operates ideologically, this paper will question how architecture, by using its technical and aesthetic qualities, through the practice of ‘hiding’, returns to an essential character – that of enclosing.
The Ideological Function of (Post-)Modern Architecture in the Context of (Techno-)Science
Dasara Pula
2020
Abstract
Our understanding of an architectural phenomenon is interrelated with political, economic, cultural, scientific or technological developments. As F. Jameson would put it, architecture, ideology, politics, economics, culture, technology, science, etc., are structurally connected instances (Jameson, 1991). In this context, we will focus on the relation of architecture – as ideology – and (techno-)science, in order to analyze and understand the ideological operation of architecture, through its formal, technical and aesthetical modalities. The paper is a theoretical elaboration of architecture’s ideological and (techno-)scientific contexts, following the theories of Althusser, Marx and Tafuri. It presents an intersection of the history of architecture and history of science, interpreted through Tafuri’s ‘Ideology of the Plan’ and the National Library of Kosovo, in Prishtina. The aim is to interpret how architectural space – i.e., its form, and its technical and aesthetical aspects – impacted by the developments in (techno-) science, (re)creates and determines the social, political and cultural events occurring there. We are to deal with the ideological character of architecture (architecture as a representation of reality) and the fact that the techno-aesthetic and techno-artistic modalities of architecture typically hide this character (Šuvakovic, 2014). By re-thinking the practice of ‘hiding’ (in principle, an ideological practice), we will understand architecture as a language between ideology, morphology, aesthetics and technology. Furthermore, this paper will interpret the practice of ‘hiding’ in the context of architecture’s relation with (techno-)science; their political and economic as- sociation with capitalism, and cultural association with postmodernism. Differently put, how architecture – as ideology – positions itself in relation to (techno-)science? The present work will discuss the architectural and urban form as a product of the combination of architecture and (techno-)science, within a (post-)modern condition, by interpreting what this form represents. By arguing that architectural form – the building and the plan for the city – operates ideologically, this paper will question how architecture, by using its technical and aesthetic qualities, through the practice of ‘hiding’, returns to an essential character – that of enclosing.I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
