255Seasoned Modernism. Prudent Perspectives on an Unwary Past

Non-Referential Architecture: ideated by Valerio Olgiati, written by Markus Breitschmid Basel: Simonett & Baer, 2018, 128 pages, including 1 illustration, ISBN 978-3-906313-19-1

Andra IonelJunior Architect, SO-IL Office, New York, USA

andra.ionel1@gmail.com

Almost 100 years after the manifesto of Le Corbusier for a new architecture,1 the book Non-Referential Architecture, ideated by the architect Valerio Olgiati and written by the architectural theoretician Markus Breitschmid, opens up an important debate for our time, making a significant theoretical contribution to the field of architecture. The book was anticipated: Valerio Olgiati previously familiarized us with the idea of non-referentiality through his architectural work and also in preliminary interviews and theoretical papers.2

The authors understand the notion of non-referentiality both as a diagnosis of our current world and as a therapeutical method for contemporary architecture.The basic idea of the book is that we live today in a non-referential world characterized by a lack of universal meanings or beliefs, and that we therefore need to create the foundation for an architecture capable of responding to this challenge. The format of the book is itself an example of non-referentiality, having been written, on the one hand, without any references or footnotes, and being characterized, on the other hand, by the ambiguity of the authorship. But despite this intriguing ambiguity, there is a proper synergy between the theoretician and the architect at work in the book. Seeking to articulate a theoretical understanding of how architecture is possible in our contemporary world while avoiding a fixed set of rules, the authors unfold their approach in a proper balance between theoretical considerations and architectural examples.The book is divided logically into three main parts. The first part articulates the need for moving towards a new way of conceiving architecture. “We live in a non-referential world,” is the first sentence of the introduction, already setting the premise of this novel theory. The view that the world we live in is non-referential rests on the observation that contemporary society has no universal norms, fixed points, or social constraints that used to be valid in the past, and is instead, in a profound sense, a non-ideological world. Although non-referential architecture appears to be in historical continuity with the modernist and postmodernist tradition (which still has a lasting effect on the architectural profession today), the architecture proposed by Olgiati and Breitschmid has a different condition from the previous practices. The current impossibility of conceiving a program dictating a general style creates the need for non-referential architecture. Although the expression “non-referential” next to “architecture” appears to encourage thinking architecture ex nihilo, the authors offer a new way of looking to the past to inform the future. In this light, the chapter “Genealogy of Architectonic Ordering Systems” outlines a new method of analyzing architectural projects which limits itself to an architectonic and aesthetic approach without taking into consideration the social and historical context of a building.

1 Le Corbusier, Vers une Architecture (Paris: G. Crès et Cie, 1923).2 Valerio Olgiati, Markus Breitschmid, “Sulla non referenzialità,” Domus 974 (November 2013): 45-47.

256 studies in History & Theory of Architecture

The second part of the book outlines an architectural perspective in consonance with the non-referential world by formulating seven principles: “Experience of Space,” “Oneness,” “Newness,” “Construction,” “Contradiction,” “Order,” and “Sensemaking.” Although the appeal to principles reminds us again of the five points Le Corbusier framed in his manifesto in 1923,3 the authors do not claim to provide an architectural recipe but to map out a possible framework for the present architecture. It is questionable as to whether the usage of principles does not impose an architectural method, which would run contrary to the claim of liberating architecture from any sort of program. In what way are the principles of non-referential architecture not a rigid frame which obliterates the familiar, unexceptional and natural gestures? The seven principles question, however, the most common architectural discourses and practices in place today, responding to them with a new paradigm. The first principle, “Experience of Space,” proposes an innovative approach to the way we should conceive the inner space of a construction. An essential point introduced by the authors is the universality of the experience of space, which contrasts with the phenomenological idea that space is perceived subjectively depending on the capacity of the viewer. Instead, according to Olgiati and Breitschmid, the experience of space should guide the cognitive power of the beholder. The second principle, “Oneness,” expresses the need for a guiding idea in architectural design. This principle should simultaneously acknowledge and enable a metaphysical horizon for the inhabitant. This means that human beings do not merely dwell, but that they have an understanding of habitation and relate it to a broader horizon of meanings and purposes. In this sense, the architectural design should embrace the task of creating sense, just as the last principle formulated by Olgiati and Breitschmid suggests. In the same chapter, the authors distinguish between the architecture of dividing and the architecture of adding, arguing that only the former follows the principle of “oneness.” While the architecture of dividing first understands space as a consistent entity and then divides it, the architecture of adding conceives a building by composing parts, thus lacking a unifying vision of space. The third principle, “Newness,” is not an appeal to progressive architecture but advocates that a building should embody a possible world, provoking and inviting the beholder to experience it in the light of something that has not been present before and opens up a horizon of possibilities. The fourth principle, “Construction,” exposes the importance of choosing one building material in order to reinforce the guiding idea of a design. In other words, the choice of the material should result from the initial concept of the building. Olgiati and Breitschmid do not understand “Contradiction,” their fifth principle, as contrast or duality, as Robert Venturi presented it 40 years ago in the book Complexity and Contradiction. Contradiction does not represent, for them, an architectural artifice that surprises the beholder, but rather characterizes architectural elements that should trigger a mental dialog of the viewer with the building. The authors believe that “the best contradictions are those that can never be fully conceptualized.”4

The sixth principle, “Order,” lays out how the idea of a building should come to a form. The authors distinguish between two ways of achieving order; namely, the inductive and deductive methods. While the first method enables an order deriving from specific observations, the deductive approach should articulate the order of a building as a result of an original thesis. The authors mention that only the deductive logic corresponds to the non-referential architecture. The seventh principle, “Sensemaking,” subordinates all the other principles, aiming to create significance in a world emptied of given meanings. Olgiati and Breitschmid suggest that sense-making should be conceptualized differently in every case because of the lack of universal meanings.

3 Corbusier, Vers une Architecture.4 Valerio Olgiati, Markus Breitschmid, Non-Referential Architecture: ideated by Valerio Olgiati, written by

Markus Breitschmid (Basel: Simonett & Baer, 2018), 106.

257Seasoned Modernism. Prudent Perspectives on an Unwary Past

258 studies in History & Theory of Architecture

The third part of the book is a plea for understanding the role of the architect as an author of a work of art, thus rejecting the common view of the architect as part of a team. The authors argue that architectural work needs authorship, mainly because an idea with true value can be assumed by one author and not by more authorsFrom a theoretical point of view, most of the principles presented in this book are very much indebted to Kant’s aesthetic theory. In his book Critique of Judgement, Kant distinguishes between the experience of an object charged with symbols and the experience of an object perceived purely in its abstract form. Kant thus differentiates between an experience of knowledge or of interpretation and an aesthetic experience. In the first case, we can conceptually define and interpret the perceived object, whereas in the second case, the beholder is not able to explain the harmonius order of the object by appealing to concepts, purposes or meanings. In this spirit, “Experience of Space,” “Oneness,” “Newness,” and “Contradiction” are notions consistently trying to describe the aesthetic experience formulated by Kant many centuries ago. The understanding of a building is informed by the experience the beholder has of it—by her free play of imagination in the search for a conceptual explanation, by the dialog that pure contemplation has with the contemplated space. The groundbreaking ideas of Olgiati and Breitschmid challenge the common view that architecture is merely a service provider by claiming that it should always be a work of art. This means that architecture nourishes itself by articulating its understanding of space; i.e., from a confrontation with itself. In this conversation with itself, architecture should not appeal to any authorities, be they ideological or historical, other than the pure experience of space that human beings universally have. The appeal to the universality and self-sufficiency of aesthetic experience is the main thought behind non-referential architecture. The main source of inspiration for architecture is the problematization of what it means to create space. The novelty and, also, the burden of non-referential architecture is the necessity to offer and build significance out of nothing. How can an author make sense in a world without universal meanings? This challenging question does not have a precise answer in the book. The authors allow the reader to further develop this thought. In my opinion, sense-making is about finding a referencetial point that could provide non-referential architecture with a guiding idea. The reference is therefore a deciding factor for non-referential architecture, and it takes over the role of creating sense depending on each particular situation. In this respect, the particular has the potential to reach the universal, but only insofar as the latter is understood as a guiding idea and not as social conventions or as dominant ideologies. In some sense, the seven principles proposed by Olgiati and Breitschmid are universal in nature, but they must be actualized with each work in a particular way. In the end, the reader of this book might raise the question of whether we really live in a non-referential world as the authors describe it. We have to underline the difference between the fact that each individual has values which they hold as universal and the fact that these values may or may not be universal on a social scale. The authors are right to point out that our contemporary world is characterized by the fact that we do not share the same worldviews, but this should not mean that we live in a time in which we individually have lost all our coordinates, may they be historical or transcendental. We draw inspiration from our past and from timeless principles, even if we do not consider them to be binding rules. This is the sense in which non-referential architecture is ultimately referential: the task of architecture is to deal with our past in order to draw inspiration from it and to confront the eternal challenges and limitations of human dwelling. From this point of view, one can only agree with the proposal of Olgiati and Breitschmid.