• Summary of Benedikt’s theory on Deconstructivist architecture (excerpt from Deconstructing the Kimbell, An Essay on Meaning and Architecture, Michael Benedikt, pp 1-8)
Benedikt states that Deconstructivist theory is ever present in architecture and will continue to be present. The ideas of Derrida and the name “deconstruction” may disappear but some of the philosophy and ideas will continue to be be used by architects now and into the future.
Benedikt believes that Derrida’s ideas are significant to Deconstructive Architecture and vice versa. He describes Derrida’s mission as exposing literary and metaphysical works and how they work. “The creation of presences” as he describes reveals the substance and truth of a text. He relates this to architecture saying the truths will be learned and revealed through construction. In architecture, Deconstruction helps reveal strategies for design and critical thought in architecture.
Benedict points out that Derrida did not study deconstructivist literature, he studied classical pieces and from there he formed his critiques and theories. This should be the same with architecture, we should not study what existing deconstructivists like Zaha Hadid, or Eisenmen analyzed but should take existing classical works or vernacular architecture and derive our own theories from it.
Benedikt poses the question that if Deconstructivist buildings are themselves the actual critiques of other buildings – that they were text before they were buildings – why should we build if it compromises our rhetorical freedom? The entire history, meaning, method, process, grid, geometrical relationships that went into the design of a project is no longer evident in the built work of a non Deconstructivist project. This entire process is also no longer evident in the built work of a Deconstructivist project so therefore, the critical power lays in the first speaking and drawing of the ideas, the “textuality”. Benedikt describes this as the relationship between the text and the built work.
When reading Derrida’s work, Benedikt points out that his language has a rich spatial quality, naturally relating to architecture and the way the mind processes and analyzes a space.
• Compare Wigley’s and Benedikt’s approach/understanding of Deconstructivist architecture.
Wigley clearly states that he believes Deconstructivist architecture has no relation or should not be related to the philosophy of Derrida. He searches for a sort of experiential quality and evoking some type of reaction. Deconstruction is violent, clashing, angry, unsettling but the result is revealing, pure and stable. Benedikt strongly believes the philosophy of Derrida and Deconstructivist architecture go hand in hand. He sees it more as a learning tool or process, through his idea of the “creation of presences” in helping us understand better design strategies in architecture or to critique it. Both authors agree that it starts with an existing particular archetypical construction or expectation which is then analyzed and critiqued to reveal its form.
What is the relationship of deconstructivist architecture to your work? What is the relationship of deconstructivist architecture to sustainable design?
In a way I agree with Benedikt that deconstruction in architecture will continue to exist, as it has existed in the past as he explains through Louis Kahn’s work. That whole process of taking an existing way of construction, an idea, a preconceived notion and analyzing it to improve upon what it was before will always be a part of architecture. There is no more -isms in architecture today, that is agreed upon, so there are no more rules or styles to follow. What we can do is take what we already know and learned and improve upon it, and deconstruction is a way to allow us to do that. I am still learning about deconstructivist architecture and just starting to get a grasp on the ideas. Honestly, I am not quite sure how to relate the two other than the literal deconstruction of a building for the materials to be reused(that’s all that google can tell me) I am eager to see and learn how the relationship of deconstructive theory relates to sustainable design theory.