Thursday, November 10, 2005

Space and motion

Jormakka K., Flying Dutchmen: Motion in Architecture, Basel: Birkhauser, 2002, 75-87

Space and motion
Nietzsche : « we want to have ourselves translated into stone and plant, we want to go for a walk in ourselves when we wander in these halls and gardens ». By means of empathetic projection, Nietzsche connected architecture to events in the body.

Schmarsow : the beholder’s body is essential to our experience of space (close to the idea of Nietzsche and Henri Poincare : the body being an instrument of measurement). But Schmarsow adds the notion of movement of the body in space as an essential element of architecture.

Husserl : all spatiality is constituted through movement. The speed of the observer affects the experience of space and like for Kant, the body is the source of our notion of space. For Kant there is the Nullpunkt : « thanks to the body, I am the center of things », Husserl adds a distinction between a lived body and a physical body « In walking my organism constitutes itself (…) the kinaesthetic activities and the spatial movements stay in union by means of association » For Husserl the body is the center of space.

Merleau-Ponty : our body is not primarily in space. What we understand as the axis of up and down does not change when we lie in a bed instead of standing up. In the abstract up and down has no meaning, it only is possible through other experience e.g. gravity

Deleuze : the idea of smooth space that can only be explored by the body (resemble Husserl’s notion of Nahspharen)

Deleuze and Gattari : A nomad is distended in the region. The absolute has become local because place is not delimited. The absolute is not at a particular place but become a non-limited locality.

Post-constructivist designs based on this idea of smoothness : they spa-tialize time (related to musical notation + rhythm of flow of things as in Bergson)
Lars Spuybroek says that space must be conceived from the perspective of the moving body « Bodies try to transgress themsleves in time… connected to other bodies, other rhythms, other actions. In this sense, you can really only talk about space as a result of an experimental body timing its actions. Space is never a given ».

Motion also implies disclocation relative to a frame of reference or an outside and motion is not contained within an object in movement but in a continuous differentiating co-constitution of the frame and the mobile, e.g. the sky annalogy of Deleuze where the flash of lightening is distinguished from the balc sky but must carry the sky with it. Things with different properties must be different things, so that a hand as a detached member is not the same thing as a hand connected to the body. Then for Hegel, parts of an organic whole are inconceivable except as parts of that whole which is self contradcitory according to Moore as it assumes that the part is logically distinguishable from the whole.

Derrida radical organicism, where in the actual workd everything is bound to and conditioned by everythign else (resemble Nietzsche). Boundaries of art for instance are marked by somthing that exists beyond the work. The outside constitutes the inside, e.g. a frame in a painting. Hence the very concept of an organic unity is self-contradictory.

Jormakka, author of the paper « Instead of desinging objects with a spectacular inside but no connection to exterior systems, one needs to consider the ways the building taps into other fields of forces that are all in motion and have no clear spatial boundaries. (…) A decentered and polyvalent architectural practice will concentrate not on aesthetic totalities but on infrastructural interventions, organizational re arrangments, and a discontinuous dispersion of strategic architectural moves in the existing fabric in cooperation with other professions and interest groups »

By Cati in kinetic architecture

No comments: