Théorie de l'architecture

Résumé

. La théorie de l'architecture est l'acte de penser, de discuter et d'écrire sur l'architecture. La théorie de l'architecture est enseignée dans toutes les écoles d'architecture et est pratiquée par les plus grands architectes du monde. La théorie de l'architecture peut prendre différentes formes : conférence ou dialogue, traité ou livre, projet ou concours. La théorie de l'architecture est souvent didactique, et les théoriciens ont tendance à rester proches des écoles ou à travailler au sein de celles-ci. Elle existe sous une forme ou une autre depuis l'Antiquité et, avec la généralisation de l'édition, la théorie de l'architecture s'est enrichie. Au , les livres, les magazines et les revues ont publié un nombre sans précédent d'ouvrages d'architectes et de critiques. Par conséquent, les styles et les mouvements se sont formés et dissous beaucoup plus rapidement que les modes relativement durables de l'histoire antérieure. . vignette|200x200px|Marco Vitruvio Pollione, architecte et é

Source officielle

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%A9orie_de_l'architecture

À propos de ce résultat

Cette page est générée automatiquement et peut contenir des informations qui ne sont pas correctes, complètes, à jour ou pertinentes par rapport à votre recherche. Il en va de même pour toutes les autres pages de ce site. Veillez à vérifier les informations auprès des sources officielles de l'EPFL.

Publications associées (18)

Publications associées

Chargement

Personnes associées

Chargement

Unités associées

Chargement

Concepts associés (12)

Concepts associés

Chargement

Cours associés (9)

Cours associés

Chargement

Séances de cours associées (6)

Séances de cours associées

Chargement

There is an abundance of cases – architectural and philosophical, and especially post-modern; by academics, practitioners, and critics – in which a relation between architecture and philosophy is at work, with one engaging the other directly, or simply in a marginal or implicit manner. Philosophy has avidly been sought by architecture to discover, question, understand, and express the deeper dimensions of its works, the world upon which they intervene, and the discipline itself. Architecture, in turn, has grown from a footnote, example, or metaphor in some greater discussion, into a topic in its own right within philosophy. Despite the mutually influential relation between the two, one scarcely finds reflections about the relation itself and its implications. Why does architecture resort to philosophy? Why does philosophy refer to architecture? How? What comes about? What does this say about architecture? What can it say about philosophy? What are the recurring problems, what are the appealing promises, what are the unexplored potentials? The following presentation poses these questions to a case-study of the relation, one in which an architect efficiently resorts to a philosopher’s work in order to produce an architectural design. The philosopher is Michel Foucault, popularly invoked in a variety of discussions within architectural theory and practice – though he himself never dedicated a single piece of literature exclusively nor even primarily to architecture. Foucault’s conception of architecture and his contribution to it appear playfully suggested in Of Other Spaces (1967) and explicitly discussed in Space, Knowledge, and Power (1982), but best exemplified by Discipline and Punish (1975). In the chapter Panopticism, he speaks of architecture as a potential institutional mechanism of power, used and defined not by the architect but by others. As principal metaphor and study object of this notion, he chose the panopticon. The architect is Rem Koolhaas, not only amongst the most illustrious practitioners of today – know to the general public for projects such as the Kunstal (Rotterdam, 1993), the Seattle Central Library (Seattle, 2004), the CCTV Headquarters (Beijing, 2012), and the Museo di Fondazione Prada (Milan, 2015) – but also renowned for his writings about architecture and contemporary culture, which in fact first brought him fame – particularly Delirious New York (1978) and S,M,L,XL (1995). Early in Koolhaas’ career, in 1979, his architectural office OMA was commissioned to assess the possibility of transforming and thus extending the lifetime of the Koepelgevangenis, a panoptical prison in Arnhem. The proposal and its explicative text especially – Revision (1981), later published in S,M,L,XL – subtly reveal that the interpretation of the panopticon upon which OMA worked and reacted to in their design was that described in Discipline and Punish by Foucault – the philosopher whom Koolhaas had curiously met just a few years before. The result was a theoretical critique that conversed with the philosophical issues underlying Foucault’s description of the panopticon and, indirectly, with his views on architecture, through the necessarily prescriptive act of architectural design. The critique’s value lies not only in its textual expression, but in the design too. The panoptical architectural typology meant to embody and enforce the political, social, and legal ideals of the philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who devised it. Therefore, the formal act upon the panopticon qua formalization of philosophical positions also generates a philosophically relevant discussion with these positions. Most importantly, though, the actors involved ensured that the critique did not occur at the expense of architecture. On the one hand, rather than a philosopher imposing excessively strict yet unsuitable norms upon architecture, Foucault’s thinking intentionally offers itself to multidisciplinary appropriation, adaptation, and use – very much what architects generally seek. On the other hand, rather than an architect obsessively translating philosophical concepts into architectural form, Koolhaas appropriates, adapts, and uses a sufficiently accurate understanding of Foucault just at the right moments of the design process and in just the right measure – with an instrumental approach very much like Foucault’s application of architecture in his own work. OMA developed first and foremost an architectural project, but with the belief that architecture should also perform a philosophical role. Hence how the Arnhem proposal, though ultimately not built, nevertheless constitutes a remarkably successful contemporary outcome of an interaction between architecture and philosophy.

2018

Chargement

Architecture / Philosophy: how, why, and what the questions seek in three case-studies from the late 20th century

André Patrão Neves De Frias Martins

Architecture and philosophy are no strangers to one another. In philosophical writings, architecture appears referred to, spoken of, described, defined, categorized, and figuratively used. In architectural discourse, by theoreticians and practitioners alike, philosophy appears in syllabi, bibliographies, in the formulation of design concepts, or their critique, or broader theory, through quotes or references to philosopher’s names, works, and terminology, not to mention in the commonplace expression “a philosophy”. Architecture and philosophy, in their multiple conceptions and formulations, across authors, movements, styles, schools of thought, and epochs up to the present day, have and continue to engage one another. The very fact of this engagement, however, rarely appears as an issue in itself. Why does architecture reach out to philosophy? Why does philosophy address architecture? How does or ought this contact occur, if it ought to at all? What are the promises, potentials, and problems contained in their intersections? And what is meant by this notion that has yet to be pinned down with approximate but unsatisfactory words like “engage”, “reach out”, “address”, “intersect”, or rather by a categorical slash, both splitting and joining, affirming difference while gathering it, as “architecture/philosophy”? Grounded on a broad historical overview of both disciplines’ relation, and of their increasing but still scarce thematization in recent scholarship, this thesis analyzes three case-studies of architecture and philosophy’s direct consequential interaction in the late 20th century – a particularly intense moment of exchange, when architects’ self-critique sought out contributions from philosophical insights, while philosophers’ own self-questioning led them to tinker with architectural discussions. First, the overlaps between Martin Heidegger’s philosophical project and vital architectural issues, in Being and Time (1927), “The Origin of the Work of Art” (1935/6), but principally “Building Dwelling Thinking” (1951); which historian and theoretician Kenneth Frampton carefully integrated as inalienable components of his own thinking, in the editorial “On Reading Heidegger” (1974) and subsequent texts like “Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of Resistance” (1983), “Prospects for a Critical Regionalism” (1983), and “Rappel à l’Ordre: the Case for the Tectonic” (1990). Second, Michel Foucault’s incidental thoughts on architecture, coherently reassembled from “Of Other Spaces” (1967), “Space, Knowledge, and Power” (1982), and Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (1975); and the latter’s effects, perceptible yet difficult to grasp, upon aspects of Rem Koolhaas’ renovation design for the Koepel Panopticon Prison (1979-1981), described in the text “Revisions” (1981). Third, the collaboration between Jacques Derrida, challenging and letting himself be challenged by architectural practice, and Peter Eisenman, extracting productive stimulus from deliberate misreadings of philosophy, in the design of a garden for Parc de la Villette (1985-1987), expanded upon in their book Chora L Works (1997). The unprecedented reading of each case-study brings to light heterogeneous manifestations of a consistent mutual need of architecture and philosophy to support, transform, and enrich the specific tasks of one another, while bearing witness to the necessity, pertinence, and even urgency of reflecting upon it.

EPFL2020

Chargement

Modern Schools in Angola, 1961-1975: Design with Climate and Heritage

Maria Margarida Gonçalves Quintã

The architectural production of Angola between 1961 and 1975 forms the basis of the current study. Taking into consideration that buildings' environmental performance is, at one time, one of the most central aspects of the Modern Movement legacy and a pressing topic in Angolan contemporary renovations, this study will test climate-responsiveness as a design-tool for the re-use of modern buildings. Looking at the environmental performance of modern schools, this research aims to provide critical insight into the Angolan architectural output during the last years of Portuguese colonial rule. In that period, within a changing society, locally-designed buildings attempted to respond to site-specific concerns. Focusing on passive environmental solutions for educational buildings, the central objective of this research is to identify suitable strategies for these building's contemporary re-use, matching heritage conservation with Angola's pressing demands for development. Such guidelines, conceived under the current standards of comfort and energy efficiency, should span the distinct steps of the preservation project, from strategic design to construction details.

EPFL2020

Chargement

Architecture / Philosophy: how, why, and what the questions seek in three case-studies from the late 20th century

André Patrão Neves De Frias Martins

EPFL2020

2018