Architecture, Theory and Criticism (Brussels & Ghent)
Les 1
0. Introduction
Architecture theory is different from the history of architecture. The fist one is more about
concepts and the second one is more about facts. We can find the theory on social
media, in text, architecture etc, but we need to be careful with that.
We had the treaties in the past, this is the first forms of architecture theory. In the 20
century, they used other forms of this theory. Avant-garde magazines are very useful if
you want to do research.
Some of the terms we are going to discuss are:
• Acceleration
• Commons
• Participation critical regionalism
• Transformation resilience/ memory
• Ecology
• Democracy
• Performativity
• Décolonisation
• Activism
• Care
1. Architecture as a tool
1.1 What is architectuur theory?
"The architect is a mason who learned Latin" by Adolf
Loos
What is architecture theory?
Architecture theory is thinking, discussing and writing
about architecture. Architecture itself does not speak
about its origins, meaning, purpose or use; architecture is
not a 'natural' given; it is a theoretical construction.
Not only the building, but also the architecture itself must
be 'made' and thus 'thought off': there is no architecture
without saying what architecture is.
Why is it interesting to know something about theory or
history?
Architecture theory and history provide us with positions
while conceiving, speaking and writing about architecture.
What will we do?
• Reading and writing about architecture.
• Provide terminology, concepts, schemes to talk about
architecture.
• The slow medium of 'text' will be central.
1
,Towards a multiple definition
Concepts : Architectural theory is the body of ideas and concepts that provides the
architect with a basis for developing a responsible practice.
Architecture theory is concerned with the specific components of architecture, its
constructive, formal and spatial means.
Positioning:
Architecture theory defines what architecture is and provides insight into its essential
characteristics.
Architecture theory reflects on the role of architecture in society and describes its cultural
and social significance.
Quality standards:
Architecture theory also develops quality standards that architecture worthy of its name
must meet. In doing so, it also implies standards by which projects and buildings can be
evaluated.
2
,1.2 The spaces of architecture theory
An anthologies is a book with a lot of small teksten of
different people who are thinking about architecture. In the
past, we had a lot of treaties. For example from Marcus
Vitruvius, Andrea Palladio, Leon Battista Alberti and
Sebastiano Serlio.
“Dat is architectuur” are texts from the 20s century. The
book has texts in Dutch and it has a part where they give an
explanation about the body. They link the ideas to different
texts
The second book is ‘architectural theory’. This are text about
migration, gender, etc.
1.3 Aims and limitations
• Increase your awareness of the history of architecture in the late twentieth century.
• Better understand contemporary practice in the light of recent history.
• Develop critical and analytical skills needed to understand the socio- political context
in which architectural practice operates.
• Develop research, writing and speaking skills, and the ability to write a paper
academically or non-academically, to construct an argument, and to initiate and
support group discussion.
Four theoretical attitudes:
(Kate Nesbitt, Theorizing Architecture Theory 1965-1995, Princeton Architectural Press,
1996)
1. Descriptive attitude : it describes a state of affairs in the present or in the past. It
offers points of view, explanations of phenomena by linking different elements of
history to society.
2. Prescriptive attitude: contains new proposals, proposals for new solutions or
reconsidered answers for a specific problem. The tone is often controversial
3. Proscriptive attitude is controversial. The difference with the prescriptive attitude lies
in the fact that it proclaims: not what should be done, but what should be avoided.
4. Critical attitude or critical architectural theory : evaluates architecture (or the built
environment) in its relationship to society. This form of discourse is
often politically or ethically oriented and is often intended to stimulate change.
3
, Limits of the definition
As the definition indicates, this starting point is by definition normative: what is not made
according to these rules is imperfect or no architecture at all.
1. This vision excludes certain forms of architecture or building or, at least, it is difficult
to find a place for them
- If theory prescribes a certain quality, e.g. solidity for architecture then invariably some
structures are not 'architecture’, minor or 'experimental' architecture, for example, or
festival architecture for example.
- The same applies to design tools: think, for example, of the distinction between
structure and ornament, which is based on a distinction between 'essential' and less
essential aspects of architecture.
- This definition states first and foremost that architecture results from a precise design
method with an author. What about architecture without an author, with multiple
authors, with an unknown author? What about architecture without a plan or method?
2. Conversely, a number of problems or questions about architecture find difficult their
place in this definition :
- How is architecture seen, experienced, interpreted?
- After all, this definition thinks from the author's point of view. This seems to imply that
there is a direct link between the author's intention and the way in which his/her work
is seen or experienced, or given meaning. Is that true?
- This problem is very relevant when historizing architectural theory. For example,
notions such as 'architectural space’ are quite recently. Nevertheless, there is early
modern architecture that is unmistakably driven by the ambition to stage or enhance
spatial experiences. So how can we identify early modern ideas about 'space’?
Conversely, we can state that the discussions about order, character and
representation are no longer relevant today. How should we understand the
contemporary tendency towards spectacle and the importance of the façade in
contemporary architecture?
3. Finally, the close mutual determination of architecture and theory excludes a number
of questions about the statute itself from theory.
- Who is talking and to whom and why ?
- These questions are essential. As we will see, the seemingly homogeneous tradition of
the discipline of architectural theory is also formed by texts with diverse purposes,
authors, agendas. It seems at the very least relevant to take these different possible
positions into account.
- In other words, this multiformity is very well visible in contemporary 'architectural
theory’.
—> Anyone who delves further into the architectural-theoretical discourse must be aware
of the position he/she occupies and the normative character of his undertaking.
—> Just as in criticism, there is a specific judgement, a selection from the available texts
and statements. Each text is a-priori ideologically colored.
4
