The Poverty of Contemporary Theory in Architecture.plowright

8/12/2019 The Poverty of Contemporary Theory in Architecture.plowright

1/10


2/10

The Poverty of Contemporary Theory in Architecture

Abstract

This paper a""resses the concerns o$ an active an" relevant approach to theory in architect#re in response to

c#rrent tren"s within the pro$ession. The conte+porary $oc#s in +any areas o$ architect#ral theory is still

"o+inate" /y *ritical Theory /ase" in the 4ast *oast schools o$ the Unite" States. hile a criti5#e o$ this position

is "eveloping slowly, the co#nterresponse also ho#se" in +any o$ the sa+e schools an" i+plies the a/an"on+ent

o$ all philosophical an" theoretical positions in the "iscipline o$ architect#re. *onsi"ering that neither e6tre+e

+ight /e accepta/le, an" the c#rrent operating $ra+ewor within the architect#ral co++#nity is "etri+ental to

s#pporting philosophy an" thining as part o$ an activity o$ practice, an e6ploration o$ how to approach theory in

the $iel" o$ architect#re is "isc#sse". The en5#iry a""resses theory thro#gh #se an" relevance to realworl" e$$ects,

in$l#ence" /y philosophical prag+atics. The core o$ this position is one o$ antiessentialis+ in the approach to tr#th

an" +eaning, two iss#es which theory is /ro#ght to /ear within architect#ral st#"ies. In a""ition, "#alis+ an"

a#tono+y are "isc#sse" as st#+/ling /locs in the "evelop+ent o$ any vali" philosophical position in architect#re

in its relationship to +eaning.

The nat#re o$ the paper is not as an a/sol#te or co#nterposition. It is not e6cl#sionary, nor "e$initive /#te6ploratory o$ a way we thin with architect#re. The proposal is, in or"er to procee" in the relationship /etween

architect#re an" philosophy with any s#ccess, certain c#lt#ral constr#cts have to /e p#t to one si"e as hopelessly

#nsolva/le. Lie *ritical Theory, these are also #lti+ately "etri+ental to any signi$icant growth as they separate the

real+s o$ tho#ght an" activity. The position is one that enco#rages any $ra+ewor which can 7#"ge the 5#ality o$ a

tho#ght, or tho#ght syste+, on the relevance o$ its e$$ect in a se5#ential relationship /etween thining an" "oing.

In this, the nat#re o$ a re$ine" lang#age o$ architect#re is critical as a synta6 which "e$ines e"ges o$ a "iscipline an"

#se" in a critical role o$ "eter+ining signi$icance o$ an i"ea to an e$$ect.

I. Introduction

The role o$ philosophy or theory in architect#re has co+e #n"er greater scr#tiny over the past $ew "eca"es. It can

/e arg#e" that shi$ts $ro+ a $oc#s on e6perience an" +etaphysics to the relative "o+ain o$ lang#age an" social

constr#ction as the site o$ en5#iry occ#rre" in al+ost all intellect#al "isciplines in the twentieth cent#ry. ith this

shi$t, access to tra"itional $or+s o$ +eaning pro"#ction thro#gh +etaphysics an" tr#th /eca+e i+possi/le an"

necessitate" theory as a re5#ire+ent to a""ress +eaning in this new relative conte6t. In architect#re, the

"o+inate position o$ theory has /een co++an"e", $or /etter or worst, /y the 4ast *oast centre" application o$

critical theory, e6tracte" $ro+ 8rench poststr#ct#ralis+. 9owever, the voice which critical theory /rings to

architect#re +ay itsel$ /e pro/le+atic an" "one na#ght /#t hastening the "e+ise o$ any tr#ly intellect#al an"

philosophical process in the "iscipline. The p#rpose o$ this paper is not to provi"e an alternative to co#nter critical

theory, or any other theory /eing p#rs#e" in architect#re. The arg#+ent o#tline" /elow consi"ers this way o$

thining, choosing thisor thatin e6cl#sive ter+s, as a contin#ation o$ the #nhealthy practice o$ "ivi"ing +in" an"

/o"y into separate real+s, an" a""resses +eaning /y the p#rs#it o$ tr#th thro#gh knowing. Instea", what is

provi"e" is a series o$ i"eas a/o#t what happens when tho#ght an" "oing are consi"ere" e6tensions o$ each other.

There is a type o$ lit+#s test, so to spea, o$ when to invest ti+e e6ploring a theory or whether to "iscar" it an"

+ove onto another concept#al tool. The res#lt sho#l" not /e a single "o+inant +o"e o$ p#rs#ing thining inarchitect#re, /#t a $ra+ewor o$ +#ltiplicity which enco#rages critical thining which has a high "egree o$

relevance to architect#re.

As it stan"s, the "o+inant conte+porary notion o$ theory in architect#re, critical theory as "e$ine" thro#gh the

legacy o$ "econstr#ction, is irrelevant to the application o$ architect#re. Thro#gh the in$l#ence o$ !an$re"o Ta$#ri:s

;9istorical Pro7ect< o$ the 1'0s, which in t#rn was in$l#ence" /y !ichel 8o#ca#lt:s criti5#e o$ estern h#+anis+,

Working Paper, Disciplinary Enquiry 09-004 2/10


3/10

there has /een a "irecte" e$$ort to separate :critical theory: $ro+ the practice o$ architect#re an" an intent to

position the "isco#rse o$ critical theory as a separate an" parallel "iscipline. Irreverence to application, it see+s,

was not an #n$ort#nate /ypro"#ct /#t part o$ the +o"e o$ operation as the position is a tool o$ interpretation an"

analysis rather than an act o$ generation. It $ollows that we have two ways which critical theory can /e interprete".

*ase 1, it can /e consi"ere", as inten"e", as a new "iscipline an" there$ore sho#l" /e separate" $ro+ schools o$

architect#re to 7oin "epart+ents o$ h#+anities. =r case 2, critical theory can /e positione" as a representative o$

the conte+porary core o$ philosophy withinarchitect#re. >oth o$ these interpretations raise serio#s iss#es. In the

$irst case, a vac##+ is create" which +#st /e $ille" /y so+ething which operates in the role o$ thining within the

synta6 o$ architect#re. In the secon", the relationship /etween theory an" practice /egs to /e e6a+ine" /ase" on

the critical theory /ias towar"s tho#ght. This is especially i+portant in a perio" when we are 7#st /eginning to

shae o$$ the 4nlighten+ent /ias o$ estern +etaphysics when separate" these two concepts "istinctly. The

5#estion is opene" o$ how to thin a/o#t practice in relation to philosophy an" theory, as well as a""ressing the

estern overpowering $oc#s on the i"ea o$ nowing an" tr#th.

There has /een +#ch energy e6pen"e" in recent years /etween proponents o$ critical theory an" co+peting

visions1. hile the position o$ critical theory has /een attace", "e$en"e", an" a new nontheory o$ :postcriticality:

s#ggeste", the 5#estion really sho#l" /e 7#st how #se$#l is the entire pro7ect as a whole, incl#"ing "etractors an"

propagators? =ne iss#e with critical theory co#l" /e seen to /e its re"#ctionist inclinations, "isco#nting largeportions o$ architect#ral "isco#rse to instea" $oc#s on literary analysis an" interpretation as a way to generate

+eaning, so+ething consi"ere" pro/le+atic /y so+e philosophers even in the $irst trans$er o$ "econstr#ction to

literat#re, let alone architect#re2.The si"e e$$ect o$ "o+inating the intellect#al li$e o$ architect#ral "isco#rse is a

narrow "e$inition o$ theory which #n"er+ines or alienates other possi/ilities atte+pting to create other +ore

relevant theoretical tools $or application into architect#re. In this case, I a+ not speaing a/o#t a separate

re$lective practice e6ternal to the /o"y o$ architect#ral "isco#rse @case 1 a/ove, /#t an integrate" an" operational

"ialog#e which enriches architect#re itsel$. The pro/le+ is once this partic#lar position o$ theory has /een shown

to /e irrelevant to the practice o$ architect#re, the i"ea o$ theory, in general, as a $o#n"ation o$ architect#ral

thining, has also see+e" to /e "isco#nte". This is a $allacy.

Acts o$ thining @o$ /eing critical, o$ $ollowing lines o$ in5#iry are inherent in a "isco#rse s#ch as architect#re, They

are inherent in any"isco#rse as "isco#rses are pre"icate" on e6ploration. The p#rpose o$ a "isco#rse is to "e$ine a

territory, an" e6ten"ing philosophical pre+ises is a pri+ary action in e6ploring the e"ges o$ that territory. As

ol$gang Iser writes ;Bisco#rse +aps a territory an" "eter+ines the $eat#res o$ what it charts, th#s pro7ecting a

"o+ain to /e live" in


4/10

II. Background

*onte+porary theory in architect#re str#ggles with the $#n"a+ental philosophical pro/le+s o$ post+o"ernis+C

the a/ility to now +eaning in a conte6t o$ ar/itrariness, relationship to tr#th, social consens#s to "e$ine history

rather than what is :act#al: as well as the #n"erlying estern /ias o$ "#alis+, which pro"#ces the +in"-/o"y

separation, an" the 4nlighten+ent:s c#lt#ral "eter+inis+. *o+/ine this list with a shi$t in e6ploration $or

philosophy, an" "isciplinary theory, $ro+ experience and the mind, the 1thcent#ry $oc#s le" /y a in$l#ence o$

e+piricis+ an" psychology, to language, 20thcent#ry $oc#s in$l#ence" /y the wor o$ Barwin an" anthropology.

The $oc#s on lang#age is the core o$ practices "e$ine" as post+o"ern an" can also /e #se" to consi"er progress. It

is in this way Banielle !ac/eth consi"ers h#+an progress as ani+al @preenlighten+ent, rational ani+als thro#gh

practical lang#age @4nlighten+ent, then +o"erns thro#gh sy+/olic lang#age %.This Barwinian evol#tionary $oc#s

presents the h#+an as a co++#nicating ani+al as the $oc#s o$ e6istence-+eaning rather than so+e #niversal

e6trah#+an position o$ pre4nlighten+ent spirit#al +ysticis+, or 4nlighten+ent:s Reason.

hile philosophy atte+pte" to shi$t the c#lt#ral "isc#ssion away $ro+ the eternal, there is resi"#al /aggage. In the

"e/ate a/o#t theory in architect#re, there are two pri+ary catalysts. Deither are native to architect#re /#t instea"

are c#lt#ralphilosophical positions which a$$ect +ost o$ the arts an" sciences. These iss#es are "#alis+ an" thenotion o$ a#tono+y.

i. Duai!m

=#r conte+porary view o$ the worl", whether we wish to accept it or not, is a contin#ation o$ Platonis+ an" is

/ase" on +etaphysical "#alis+s. This is a clear separation /etween appearance an" reality, the +in" an" the

senses, an" s#/7ect an" o/7ect. e sho#l" not con$#se these ter+s o$ +etaphysical "#alis+ with general /inary

oppositions. !ost o$ the twentieth cent#ry estern philosophical +ove+ents, incl#"ing "econstr#ctionis+ an"

poststr#ct#ralis+, have /een trying to re+ove the in$l#ences o$ Eree +etaphysics as passe" "own to #s thro#gh

Bescartes an" Fant.

The @now classic con$lict /etween ele+ents o$ +etaphysical "#alis+ can /e seen in the historic "ivision /etween

rationalis+ an" e+piricis+. In "isciplines s#ch as psychology, the +o"ern +ani$estation is la/elle" :nat#re verses

n#rt#re:. hat is 5#estione" is whether we are /orn with innate nowle"ge or i$ we are $#n"a+entally the

constr#ction o$ o#r environ+ent(.The i+portant aspect is the consi"eration o$ /eing on one si"e or the other. e

are $ollowing the in$l#ence o$ "#alis+ to $in" o#rselves in this "isc#ssion at all. B#alis+ "e+an"s that a choice /e

+a"e as only one o$ these positions can /e pri+ary at a ti+e, so either o#r worl" is consi"ere" to /e #n"erstoo"

as inherently concept#al, or it is inherently sens#al-e6periential.

hy is this i+portant? B#alis+ creates an attit#"e which p#ts core concepts o$ e6istence into con$lict with each

other an" is at the root o$ 5#estions pertaining to the relationship /etween :I: an" the :=ther:, the a#thor or the

a#"ience, an" s#/7ect or o/7ect. >ehin" all o$ these "istinctions is the #n"erstan"ing that the ter+s are exclusive

to each other. B#alis+ +eans that yo# have to /e one or the other, not /oth. It also a$$ects whether the concept#al

or the e6periential position is consi"ere" as the way we access reality, an" this governs o#r view o$ tr#th an" o#r

concept o$ progress. The engine that "rives theory, philosophy, science, an" architect#re $or cent#ries has /eentr#th. 4ven in the rise o$ history as a new "iscipline a$ter 9egel in the 1&00s, an" the inception o$ +o"ernity, tr#th

was still a ey $actor. A$ter the loss o$ $aith in the #niversal an" the #topian pro7ects o$ +o"ernis+, the relativis+ o$

post+o"ernity a""resse" tr#th as a c#lt#ral constr#ct, so+ething which change" $ro+ social gro#p to social gro#p

G a $or+ o$ +ass hall#cination.

The $#n"a+ental iss#e $or architect#re, in ter+s o$ "#alis+, +ay /e the "ile++a whether architect#re is



5/10

representational or e6periential. I$ representation, then iss#es o$ signs, signi$iers an", a/ove all, +eaning, is

para+o#nt. This to#ches on the $iel"s o$ anthropology, ling#istics an" the $ine arts. I$ e6periential then architect#re

is "e$ine" as "irect e6perience /etween the /o"y an" an environ+ent. The allie" $iel"s incl#"e psychology,

sociology, +e"icine, an" any $iel" that incl#"es e+otive an" sensory $ee"/ac. 9owever, seeing /oth these

positions as part o$ a longer philosophical tra"ition, architect#re an" "isco#rse s#rro#n"ing architect#re can /e

$ra+e" as part o$ the en"less con$lict /etween rationalis+ an" e+piricis+. Sho#l" tr#th /e "e$ine" as +etaphysics

or perceive" reality?H. This is an en"less an" #nsolva/le @so $ar "isc#ssion. It is also not a #se$#l "isc#ssion, as

there isn't any degree of difference in application if truth is defined as objective rather than perceptive.

ii. Autonomy

A#tono+y e6ists as /oth a philosophical an" an architect#ral iss#e in conte+porary estern c#lt#re. In +o"ern

philosophy, a#tono+y has /een arg#e" to /e thepri+ary 5#estion to /e a""resse"'. The concern /ro#ght $orwar"

is whether the h#+an /eing can attain a position where they are no longer answera/le to so+ething nonh#+an

@Eo". Sel$reliance, which incl#"es sel$re$erentiality, /eco+es a 5#est which is e6plicitly entwine" with the i"ea o$

/eing +o"ern. In architect#re, a#tono+y has a slightly "i$$erent $oc#s an" ass the 5#estion, is it possi/le to

p#rs#e an architect#re while not /eing answera/le to tra"ition? This is very +#ch a contin#ation o$ the nineteenth

cent#ry Eer+an "e/ates on architect#ral style, which arose in the $ace o$ increasing historical nowle"ge.

The awareness o$ history /ro#ght an increase" i+portance o$ the present, which, in t#rn, a$$ecte" an

#n"erstan"ing o$ the concept o$ :+o"ern: or :o$ /eing +o"ern:. Instea" o$ +o"ern /eing "e$ine" in ter+s o$ the

relationship /etween anti5#ity to the present "ay, or a contin#ation o$ tra"ition, to /e +o"ern @+o"ernity is

"e$ine" /y the +i""le o$ the 1 thcent#ry to /e a transient +o+ent separate $ro+ the $low o$ ti+e while still

+aintaining a connection to the past, /#t not repetitive o$ a tra"ition. 8ashion /eca+e the e6a+ple to $ollow,

novelty the recognisa/le sy+/ol o$ progress, an" the avantgar"e was /orn. This attit#"e +aintains a strength in

any representation o$ high c#lt#re, incl#"ing architect#re. A#tono+y is the atte+pt to "isconnect present wor

$ro+ the historical $low in or"er to /e conte+porary. There contin#es to /e a strong vector in post+o"ern

architect#ral theory o$ sel$re$erentiality, with /oth practitioners an" theorists atte+pting a "isconnect $ro+ any

ontological p#rpose @$#nction in or"er to step o#tsi"e o$ tra"ition&while still :+oving $orwar":. S#ccess in this area

wo#l" $or+#late a $#lly :+o"ern: "isco#rse o$ architect#re, in the spirit o$ +o"ernity, an" contain the aesthetic

+e+/ership o$ :high c#lt#re:.

9owever, the search $or a#tono+y has /ro#ght si"e e$$ects. 8irst, the atte+pt pro"#ce" a political +ove+ent in a

1thcent#ry sense. A /elie$ in an avantgar"e position, /eg#n with the noncon$or+ist la+entations o$ *harles

>a#"elaire an" Stphane !allar+ in the 1&00s, an" $ir+ly "e$ine" in the 110s an" 120s, contin#e" to p#sh the

/o#n"aries o$ the "iscipline o$ architect#re thro#gh critical theory. hile the ter+ :avantgar"e: /y "e$inition is

ahistorical an" "oesn:t "e$ine any partic#lar epoch o$ the ra"ical, the pre$i6 :neo: was a""e" in the last co#ple o$

"eca"es as a way to "isting#ish the architectcritic o$ the late 100s $ro+ the architectsociologist o$ the early

100s. There was, an" is, little soli"arity /etween any practitioner a"opting the avantgar"e la/el as i"entity other

than to /e in constant opposition to the nor+ative, co++ercial /ase" society. =therwise, these avantgar"e

gro#ps are largely heterogeneo#s in politics, iss#es, +etho"ologies, philosophies, an", as can /e seen $ro+ the

responses to Sylvia Lavin:s article attacing critical theory10, o$ten lac even internal consistency. The avantgar"e

position, however, narrowly "e$ines architect#re to selecte" aesthetic vectors, /orrowe" $ro+ the art worl"11

an""isco#nting any other practice o$ the /#ilt environ+ent. The "evelop+ent o$ a neoavantgar"e pri+ary goal

see+e" to a/an"on all o$ the tra"ition o$ an architect#ral practice.

The secon" e$$ect o$ a#tono+y has /een to intro"#ce the concept o$ +o"ernity an" the awareness o$ history

/ro#ght a crisis o$ +eaning, which itsel$ was /ase" in +etaphysical i"eas o$ :essences:. I$ the nee" $or novelty an"

the new "rove progress, while, in the post+o"ern, there was an a/an"on+ent o$ the 4nlighten+ent i"ea o$ a



6/10

"eter+inist society, how "o we recognise progress? To 5#ote $ro+ a classic, /#t still relevant, article /y Fenneth

8ra+pton, ;9ow one +ay escape the en"less cyclical chain o$ +eans an" en"s witho#t a"+itting to any telos or

en" in itsel$ G or to p#t it another way, how one +ay "eter+ine any $inal $or+ witho#t having a +o"el o$ so+e

#lti+ate state.#t who says +eaning in any a/sol#te or essential sense is necessary? hat i$ theory isn:t a/o#t #ncovering

+etaphysical +eaning at all, /#t instea" is an act o$ +e"iation ;/etween ol" ways o$ speaing, "evelope" to

acco+plish earlier tass, with new ways o$ speaing, "evelope" in response to new "e+an"soth are less

than they co#l" /e "#e to re"#ctionist attit#"es which i+poverish the a/ility o$ the $irst to apply concept#al

positions in any relevant way to /#ilt space while the secon" li+its the "epth an" re$ine+ent o$ social space /y

eli+inating intellect#al an" critical in5#iry. Instea" o$ these poles, i$ we $ollow the 5#estions ase" in the section



7/10

a/ove, architect#ral practice can /e "e$ine" as the active tho#ght an" pro"#ction o$ architect#ral i"eas "e$ine" /y

nor+s create" /y the physical constraints o$ architect#re @not historical +o"els nor "e$ining the ter+ /y what has

e6iste" in the totality o$ architect#re on a historical +o"el1H. So the "e$inition neither $ollows a stan"ar"

separation /etween the thining or "oing o$ architect#re /#t instea" "e$ines the architect#ral /ase" on the

relevanceof the subject matter involved,or to say it another way, it:s lang#age an" a synta6. *ritical, /ase" on this

"e$inition, can /e "e$ine" as $ollowing a line o$ in5#iry, /#t that in5#iry has to /e relevant to the s#/7ect e6a+ine"

or /e synchrono#s with the lang#age involve". In this case, theory is applie" philosophies which have $irstor"er

e$$ects /y connecting "irectly to realli$e an" real$or+.

The ter+ architecture, then, "enotes a partic#lar type o$ syste+, not si+ply an o/7ect which is a /#il"ing. It is a

syste+ si+ply /eca#se it is i+possi/le to "e$ine it /y a single o/7ect /#t instea" as a relationship /etween o/7ects.

This lang#age is one which involves $or+ an" social space, with allo$ the vario#s layers attri/#te" to this either in

e$$ect or operation. These incl#"e site, occ#pation, societal press#res, co"es, Joning, ta6ation, #r/an circ#lation,

politics, +assing, co+position, typology an" econo+ics, +ateriality, se5#ence, str#ct#re, tectonics, connection,

light, proportion, te6t#re, s#r$ace, occ#pation, rhyth+ an" patterning. The threa" /etween these +e+/ership o$

this list is the "egree o$ relevance to architect#ral i"eas. These all can +aintain /oth a concept#al position as well

as a relationship to realspace.

The +o"ern concept o$ a#tono+y can /e a""resse" in the sa+e way as the "#alistic nat#re o$ architect#re.

A#tono+y, instea" o$ /eing the a#tono+y o$ history, separating it $ro+ the chronological as has /een practise" in

post+o"ernity, can /e $ra+e" as the a#tono+y o$ architectural language or syntax. This +eans that there is the

a/ility to i+port an" translate critical aspects which are representative o$ other "isco#rses /#t those aspects +#st

have a high "egree o$ relevance to the lang#age representative o$ architect#re thining, an" there$ore /eco+e

+ani$este" with a "egree o$ "i$$erence @I.e. they +atter. In this way, the relationship o$ theory to practice, an"

"iscipline to "iscipline, is one o$ prag+atics. The iss#e isn:t $ig#ring o#t which philosophy is :architect#ral: /#t

"e$ining the lang#age an" then #n"erstan"ing that relevant content is $o#n" in +any allie" "isciplines. I$ the

lang#age is one that is architect#ral, then that content is $o#n" within the "iscipline o$ architect#ral practice.

A#tono+y is satis$ie", content is relevant, an" architect#ral theory is contin#o#s with every"ay thining.

I$. Theory and pragmatic!

Architect#ral practice can approach the prag+atic in an intellect#ally rigoro#s way an" not si+ply as the lowest

co++on "eno+inator $or how to ;get so+ething "one


8/10

The philosophical /asis o$ the prag+atic is the $act that the +eaning o$ a thing is $o#n" in what that thing "oes an"

not so+e static, nonh#+an real+. =r to say it another way ;the +eaning o$ any o/7ect consists in the ha/it or

reaction it esta/lishes or in"#ces @"irectly or in"irectly in #s


9/10

1 George Baird addresses the history of the attempted erection of a critical theory in his article Criticality and itsDiscontents (Baird, George. Criticality and its Discontents.In Saunders, illiam S., !ditor. "he #e$ %rchitectural&ragmatism. ('inneapolis )ni*ersity of 'innesota &ress, +-. I am not planning on going o*er the details in thepaper, as Baird/s article co*ers it $ell. "o sum up, ho$e*er, the original attac0 came from Syl*ia a*in in her &rogressi*e

%rchitecture essay, 2"he )ses and %3uses of "heory,2 &rogressi*e %rchitecture -14 (%ugust 155 1167118, 1-5. 9effrey:ipnis, and :. 'ichael ;ayes. :. 'ichael ;ays, responded to that original article in the same media outlet. 2. Ghirardo, ?'anfredo "afuri and %rchitecture "heory in the ).S., 15-7+@, in ?'ining %utonomy@, &erspecta."he >ale %rchitectural 9ournal, no.66 (++, pp.6478-. Since then, or0, #.>&rinceton %rchitectural &ress, 155- 1++7=+.

1 ouis 'artin from the Canadian Centre for %rchitecture, in his unpu3lished thesis, does an ecellent analysis of the*arious positions $ithin critical theory. ouis 'artin, "he Search for a "heory in %rchitecture %nglo7%merican de3ates15=-715-, unpu3lished, a*aila3le through )'I $$$.umi.comJ

11 Scheunemann, Dietrich.'1ant-garde2Neo-'1ant-3arde. %*ant Garde Critical Studies KK 1-. %msterdam or0 &rinceton %rchitectural &ress, 1554 .

16 &ippin,


10/10

or may not 3e directly in*ol*ed in or producti*e of the construction of physical en*ironmental artefacts. In this sense, thepractice of architecture at large is to 3e intended 3eyond the practical contingency of professional practice as a system ofproduction.

1- &ratt, 9ames Bissett. 5hat is pragmatism6(#e$ >or0 "he 'acmillan Company, 155, 1.14 Stout, 9effrey. n ur Interest in Getting "hings

Documents

The Poverty of Contemporary Theory in Architecture.plowright