Modern movement and postmodernism

Deconstructivism plays, in modern architecture, a role opposed to the ordered rationality of the modern movement and postmodernism. Although both postmodernists and deconstructivists presented their theories together in the magazine Oppositions") (published in the period 1973-84), these articles also opened a decisive gap between both movements. The deconstructivists adopted a confrontational stance against established architecture and the history of architecture, showing their desire to disassemble architecture.[3]​ While the postmodernists re-embraced—often astutely or ironically—the historical references that the modern movement rejected. Deconstructivism rejects the postmodern acceptance of these references. It also rejects the idea of ornament as decoration. These principles make the deconstructivist align itself with the ideas of modernist antihistoricism.

In addition to Oppositions, another text that has separated deconstructivism from the fraying of the modern movement and postmodernism was the publication of Complexity and Contradiction in architecture (1966) by Robert Venturi. This work, definitive for both postmodernism and deconstructivism, attacks the purity, clarity and simplicity of the modern movement. After its publication, functionalism and rationalism, the two main branches of the modern movement, were overthrown as paradigms in accordance with postmodernism and deconstructivism, but in different ways. Venturi's postmodern reading was that ornamentation and historical allusion added a richness to architecture. Some postmodern architects attempted to reapply ornamentation even to economic buildings, an effort illustrated by Venturi's concept of “the decorated barrack.” Rationalism in design was rejected, but the principle of functionalism remained intact. This is close to the thesis of Venturi's next major work:[4] signs and ornaments can be applied to pragmatic architecture and inculcated with the philosophical complexities of semiology.

The deconstructivist reading of Complexity and Contradiction is quite different. The basic building was the subject of the problems and the intricacies of deconstructivism, without detaching itself from the ornamentation. Instead of separating ornament and function, like the postmodernists, the functional aspects of buildings were questioned. Geometry was to the deconstructivist what ornament was to postmodernists like Venturi, the subject of complication, and this complication of geometry was eventually applied to the functional, structural, and spatial aspects of deconstructivist buildings. An example of deconstructivist complexity is Frank Gehry's Vitra Design Museum in Weil am Rhein, which takes the typical unadorned white cube of the art galleries of the modern movement and deconstructs it, using geometries reminiscent of cubism and abstract expressionism. This subverts the functional aspects of the modern movement's simplicity while taking an aspect of its evolution towards the International Style, of which the white stucco surface is reminiscent, as a starting point. Another example of the deconstructivist reading of Complexity and Contradiction is Peter Eisenman's Center for the Arts. The Wexner Center takes the archetypal form of the castle and imbues it with complexity in a series of cuts and fragmentations. A three-dimensional grid arbitrarily runs through the building. The grille, a reference to the modern movement, collides with the medieval antiquity of the castle. Some of the columns of the grid do not reach the ground, but are intentionally suspended above the stairs creating a feeling of neurotic discomfort and contradicting the structural principle of the column "Column (architecture)"). The Wexner Center deconstructs the castle archetype and represents its spaces and structures as conflicts and differences.

Deconstructivist philosophy

The main path from deconstructivist philosophy to architectural theory runs through the influence of the philosopher Jacques Derrida on Peter Eisenman. Eisenman traced the philosophical foundations of the literary movement of deconstruction, and collaborated directly with Derrida on some projects, such as participation in the Parc de la Villette competition.[2] Both Derrida and Eisenman, as well as Libeskind[5]​ were concerned with the "metaphysics of presence", and this is the main subject of deconstructivist philosophy in architectural theory. The assumption made is that architecture is a language capable of communicating meaning and being treated by the methods of the philosophy of language.[6] The dialectic of presence and absence, or solid and empty, appears in many of Eisenman's projects. Both Derrida and Eisenman believed that the locus, or place of presence, is architecture, and the same dialectic of presence and absence is found in construction and deconstruction.[2]​.

According to Derrida, reading performs better when faced with classical narrative structures. Any architectural deconstruction necessitates the existence of a particular constructionarchetype, a strongly established conventional expectation on which to play with the flexibility of norms.[7]​ The design of Frank Gehry's own residence in Santa Monica, "Santa Monica (California)") (from 1978), has been cited as a prototypical variation around a standard theme: starting with an ordinary house in an ordinary neighborhood, Gehry altered its mass, its envelope space and its plans in a playful subversion. The result is an example of deconstruction[8]​.

In addition to Derrida's metaphysical conception of the metaphysics of presence and deconstruction, his notions of trace and erasure, embodied in his philosophy of writing and archi-writing[7] found their way into deconstructivist memoirs. Daniel Libeskind conceived many of his early projects as a form of writing or a treatise on writing and often worked with calligrams. He made architectural sculpture from books and often covered the models with texts, openly referring his architecture to writing. Libeskind put the notions of trace and erasure into practice in his project for the Jewish Museum in Berlin. The museum is conceived as the trace of the erasure of the Holocaust, and attempts to make its subject legible and moving. Maya Lin's monuments to Vietnam veterans and Eisenman's to Jews murdered in Europe also reflect the themes of trace and erasure.

Constructivism and Russian futurism

Another major current of deconstructivist architecture is inspired by constructivism "Constructivism (art)") and Russian futurism at the beginning of the century, and both in its graphic arts and in its visionary architecture, of which few buildings were built.

Artists Naum Gabo, El Lissitzky, Kasimir Malevich and Alexander Rodchenko influenced the use of geometric forms in the deconstructivist architecture of Zaha Hadid and Coop Himmelb(l)au. Both deconstructivism and constructivism show a concern with the tectonics of abstract assemblages. Both considered the radical simplicity of geometric forms the primary artistic motif, expressed in graphic arts, sculpture, and architecture. However, the constructivist tendency towards purism is absent in deconstructivism: the form often undergoes deformation when the construction is deconstructed. Also notable by its absence is the defense of socialist and collectivist causes, essential in Russian constructivism.

The primary graphic motifs of constructivism were the rectangular bar and the triangular wedge, the square and the circle. Lizzitsky, in his Prouns series, assembled groups of geometries with different orientations floating freely in space. These figures evoke basic structural joints such as metal bars or sawn wood stacked or scattered. He also made sketches that shared aspects with technical drawing. The deconstructivist series Micromegas by Daniel Libeskind are also similar.

The naked structuralism of the architects Ivan Leonidov"), Konstantin Melnikov, Alexander Vesnin") and Vladimir Tatlin also had its impact on deconstructivist architects, especially Rem Koolhaas. His latest works seem to embody the process of construction. They complete the temporary and transitional aspects of buildings, scaffolding and cranes "Crane (machine)") necessary in large buildings. Das Wolkernbügel, by El Lissitzky, similar to cranes connected and made habitable, is a precedent for the China Central Television tower, in which Koolhaas creates an architecture that seems perpetually under construction.

Contenido

Dos corrientes del arte moderno, el minimalismo y el cubismo han ejercido una gran influencia en el deconstructivismo. El cubismo analítico tuvo un gran efecto en el deconstructivismo, pues las formas y el contenido se diseccionan y son vistas desde diferentes perspectivas simultáneamente. La sincronía del espacio disjunto es evidente en muchas obras de Frank Gehry y Bernard Tschumi. Sin embargo, el cubismo sintético, con su aplicación en el arte encontrado, no ejerció una influencia tan grande en el deconstructivismo como el cubismo analítico, aunque también se encuentra en las primeras obras de Frank Gehry. El deconstructivismo también comparte con el minimalismo una ausencia de referencias culturales. También recibe a menudo la influencia de las nociones minimalistas de arte conceptual.

Partiendo de su tendencia hacia la deformación y la dislocación se pueden encontrar aspectos del expresionismo y de la arquitectura expresionista asociados al deconstructivismo. A veces el deconstructivismo refleja variedades del expresionismo, como el neoexpresionismo y el expresionismo abstracto. Las formas angulares del UFA-Palast de Dresde, de Coop Himmelb(l)au, recuerdan la geometría abstracta de las pinturas numeradas de Franz Kline y a las figuras angulares representadas en las escenas urbanas de Ernst Ludwig Kirchner. La obra de Vasili Kandinski también guarda similitudes con la arquitectura deconstructivista. Su movimiento hacia el expresionismo abstracto apartándose del trabajo figurativo,[9]​ tiene el mismo espíritu que el rechazo deconstructivista del ornamento para la geometría.

Muchos artistas de las décadas de 1980 y 1990 realizaron obras que influyeron o tomaron parte en el movimiento deconstructivista. Maya Lin y Rachel Whiteread son dos de estos casos. El proyecto de Lin de 1982 del Monumento a los Veteranos del Vietnam, con sus bloques de hormigón es uno. Su forma fragmentada y la reducción del contenido a un texto minimalista influyó en el deconstructivismo, en su sentido de la fragmentación y el énfasis en la lectura del monumento. Lin también realizó obras para el Centro Wexner de Eisenman. Los espacios arquitectónicos de Rachel Whiteread son otro ejemplo en el que el arte contemporáneo confluye con la arquitectura. Ghost (1990), un espacio entero de escayola que solifidica el vacío, alude a la noción de presencia arquitectónica de Derrida. Building cuts, de Gordon Matta-Clark eran secciones deconstruidas de edificios exhibidas en las galerías de arte.

1988 MOMA exhibition

Philip Johnson, architect and former director of the Department of Architecture and Design, the Museum of Modern Art, in association with Mark Wigley, architect and professor at Princeton University, coordinated by Frederieke Taylor organized the 1988 MOMA exhibition entitled Deconstructivist architecture, which crystallized the movement and gave fame and notoriety to its members. This is the third of five architecture exhibitions in the Museum's Gerald D. Hines Interests architecture program. Designed to examine the current state of architecture, the program includes the publication of catalogs to accompany the exhibitions, as well as conferences and symposiums. The exhibition included drawings, models and site plans for the latest projects. His works were preceded by an introductory section of constructivist paintings and sculptures from the Museum's collection. The architects who presented works in the exhibition were Peter Eisenman, Frank Gehry, Zaha Hadid, Coop Himmelb(l)au, Rem Koolhaas, Daniel Libeskind and Bernard Tschumi. Mark Wigley wrote an essay in which he tried to show the common aspects of different architects.

List of the architects and major projects in the Exhibition.

• - Coop Himmelblau") from Vienna, Wolf D. Prix") (b. 1942, Vienna) and Helmut Swiczinksy") (b. 1944, Poznan, Poland): Rooftop Remodeling"), Vienna, 1985 Hamburg Skyline"), 1985 Apartment Building"), Vienna, 1986.

• - Peter Eisenman: Biology Center for the University of Frankfurt"), competition, 1987.

• - Frank Gehry: Gehry House"), Santa Monica, 1977-87 and Familian Residence"), Santa Monica, 1978.

• - Zaha Hadid: The Peak"), competition, Hong Kong, 1983.

• - Rem Koolhaas: Rotterdam Building and Tower"), commission, 1981.

• - Daniel Libeskind: City Edge Competition"), Berlin, 1987.

• - Bernard Tschumi: Park de la Villette"), competition, Paris, 1982.

The deconstructivist movement has several common characteristics, among them we can find the attempt to free architecture from modern rules, or more than that, from the rules in their entirety; Theorists believe that there is no single mold to create good architecture so it should not be regulated. Another point, they oppose the rationalism of language, is that things have more than one meaning, each one interprets it in their own way. The same thing happens with the concept of aesthetics, why is beautiful what is classic? Or modern? The conception of beauty changes, the root of pleasure or meaning comes from different places, from culture, from history, from politics, from everyday life, making systematization complicated. This new architectural theory comes with the intention of creating a review of all the concepts, which until now, were seen as absolute truth.

Four points, which are connected, are very important for movement: the distortion of elementary principles and non-linear processes, make a change in the Cartesian plane. The ideas of fragmentation, the break with immediate understanding and non-Euclidean geometry transform the previously clear point of perspective into an image of inquiry breaking with the main focus.

Deconstructivist principles aim to show that architecture is a human art, it is not logical, natural or immutable, and if full of contradictions, an unpredictable architecture that forces the public to create their own idea about what is being perceived and with controlled chaos make the perception different in each point of view. Finally, the last characteristic is the subversion of the architectural logic of addition, that is, architecture is a totality, the whole must take into account the parts.

El movimiento deconstructivista, como explicado anteriormente, fue basado en distintas influencias, como el filósofo Jaques Derrida, las vanguardias y el constructivismo Ruso. Con eso, es posible percibir, al estudiar las obras de los principales arquitectos del movimiento, que el desconstrutivismo fue abordado de distintas formas diferenciando sus obras. Algunos de los arquitectos que se destacaran son: Peter Eisenman, Zaha Hadid, Frank Gehry, Rem Koolhaas, Daniel Libeskind, y Bernard Tschumi.

Bernard Tschumi

Bernard Tschumi is one of the architects who best works with Derrida's deconstructivist philosophy, he interprets it:

Currently, this multiple program strategy is constantly used. Form no longer follows function, mainly because function is no longer unique: A single space can be used for different activities.

With strategies such as cross programming (space used for a particular program, which was not built for it), transprogramming (combination, in the same space, of two programs, in principle incompatible) and deprogramming (combination of programs with a contamination of program A in B), the architect creates spaces of multiple programs, thus breaking with the basic oppositions of architecture in which a direct relationship between cause and resolution occurs, as form and function, creating another analogy to the philosopher Derida who tried to break with the language.

Tshumi understands that meaning comes from personal interpretations and this changes from person to person. When planning, in his opinion, one must think about the social, political and cultural circumstances. An example of deconstruction in architectural practice is the Parc de la Villette (1982-1983).

The Parc de la Villette is a project that has an area of ​​more than a kilometer in length and seven hundred meters in width, and a complex program (workshops, gyms, museums, theaters and among others) that is considered deconstructivist from its conception. The architect rejected the idea of ​​“complementing” the voids of the pre-existing and the idea of ​​palimpsest, that is, expressing the previous in new constructions, creating a new memory for the space.

The main concept was improvisation, creating the possibility of a program that can constantly change as needed. It consists of three systems: the surfaces (open green spaces), the lines (the park paths) and the points (the project constructions, red structures that differ from each other). The latter do not have a defined program, they were designed to host events according to the needs of the park. The points are the organizer of the space and are the iconic feature of the plan.

The deconstruction in the project is primarily in the creation of a space that does not have a single meaning, making it possible for the pedestrian to create their own interpretation of what is experienced and understood. The next point is the architect's search for the creation of an incoherent, contradictory space, as well as the human experience.

The superposition of systems is also deconstructivist, it creates a collision and interaction between the site, its paths and its constructions, there is no clear rhythm or order, it is a structured non-structuring. And finally, the rejection of the architectural addition. The project does not need any other complement, the unpredictability of the park's needs was already foreseen in the constructions without defined use.

Peter Eisenmann

Just like Bernard Tschumi, Peter Eisenman is also directly influenced by Derrida's philosophy, even working personally with the philosopher.

In his project the architect creates different geometric plans in a way that the understanding is not immediate, it is only possible to understand the entirety of his intention when the explanatory texts are read. All modernist concepts are confronted, Eisenman follows the theory and not the form. Apart from that, it also projects with psychology, creating spaces that generate feelings, as in the Wexner Modern Art Center.

Daniel Libeskind

Daniel Libeskind is an American architect of Jewish origin. He was born in Lodz, in post-war Poland.

It is possible to understand how the architect works on deconstruction by studying his work at the Jewish Museum in Berlin. The architect, who before the Museum only had one work built, was until then a great theorist, and his project was based on his own vision of architecture, understanding of the context, the present and history.

The architect understands architectural creation as the composition of a book, music or poetry. His project is not related to those of some other deconstructivist architects. Each element of his deconstruction has a very clear and defined reason, it is the meaning that shapes his entire project. Only those who know the code and intentions that will generate the work will understand its message correctly.

Libeskind explains that “architecture should not be limited to communicating to a human being the existence of a mere object. Architecture is a perception, and also something that has an intellectual dimension. It is a way of communicating something beyond the physical reality with which it is built."[10]​.

Its design was originated from the relationship between the history of Berlin and the contribution of the Jews, their lack and the significance of the Holocaust in the consciousness and memory of the city.[11] Libeskind's proposal is based on the theme "The void and the absence" showing the disappearance of the Jews of Berlin.

The floor plan of the building starts from a disjointed line that resembles a lightning bolt, it is a unfolded Star of David, and represents the tortuous history of the Jews in Germany.

The building has one underground floor and four above ground level. The facades are made of concrete with an exterior covering of metal sheet. This layer is made up of panels placed diagonally that give the impression that the facades are inclined. It has a series of narrow windows like cracks, cuts that run through it in different directions like scars from what has happened. It makes sense if you put it in a Jewish context: rupture, fragmentation, tearing. Inside you can see how the light filters through these "cuts" and there is an effect that calls for meditation.

Its façade does not have any main door, the entrance to the complex is through the adjacent historic building and occurs through the basement floor, connecting it to its extension. Regarding the underground entrance, Libeskind refers to how the Jews had to live during times of war. After there, three underground lines intersect, corridors called "axes", which define the general concept of the work and symbolize three aspects of the Jewish experience in Germany: continuity: the museum, exile: the outer garden remembering those who had to leave Berlin, and death: which leads to the Holocaust tower, the dead end for the majority of Jews.

Zaha Hadid

With influences from Russian constructivism and avant-garde movements, Hadid uses three-dimensionality and its more intense superposition of forms. It takes sociology and history into account, and the project is conceived in a deconstructivist way with transposition of strata and cinematography.

Rem Koolhaas

Like Hadid, Koolhaas is influenced by Russian constructivism and avant-garde movements. It makes use of the lace and collage method, invented by the Dadaists, using different concepts from different periods to create a new architecture, articulating history, typology and style in a single work.

In the case of the Seattle Central Library, from the OMA studio, we observe a rethinking of the concept of a library and a revolution against its traditional conception. The study aimed, according to the proposal report, to reformulate the traditional concept of the library, adapting it to the new requirements of this type of facilities. The library would no longer be an institution dedicated exclusively to books, but rather an "information warehouse." This new nomenclature refers to the growing importance of alternative audiovisual media to books in modern libraries, and to the progressive change in user interaction with these media thanks to technology.

This is reflected in a program that gives equal importance to the organization of the physical space of the library and the organization of its virtual spaces, conceived in parallel as part of the same architecture. The library's website is organized in the same way as the building. A program that aims to compress storage space by taking full advantage of new virtual storage technologies and that seeks duality of use between new and traditional media, presented equally and in a legible manner.

The project involves a hyper-rational design process, in which rational ideas acquire an independent logic and result in images that seem irrational (at first glance the library seems the product of a whim rather than the designer's analysis).

An important aspect of it is that it confronts the traditional vision of flexibility in modern architecture which, according to Joshua Prince-Ramus, co-author of the project, creates generic spaces where almost any activity can take place but in practice they are occupied by the most immediate need, which ends up taking precedence over other activities. Instead, it proposes so-called "compartmentalized flexibility." The library is organized into different sections dedicated to specific tasks. Flexibility occurs within each section, thus allowing the possibility of changing entire sections of the building to suit other uses, if necessary, but without impeding the others.

Likewise, it contributes to the concept of social life as the Study conceives the modern library not only as a place to read, but as an organism where various activities are carried out. The new building had to be sensitive to the incipient social role of libraries, generating a space open to the public and avoiding the "fortress" character that this type of construction has traditionally had. These are broadly the main points of development of the OMA proposal.

To put these points into practice, the Dutch study created five platforms, five clusters with specific programs and equipment for the activities to be carried out in each of them. These platforms would materialize in five volumes placed one on top of the other, leaving interstitial spaces between them that would be dedicated to reading, work and rest. The stacked volumes would be randomly displaced with respect to the vertical, due to better use of natural light and views of the city. It is a clear example of the study of "form" followed by "function."

Frank Gehry

Of all the avant-garde movements, Cubism is what Gehry most influenced, the architect came up with his own decostructivism with the experimentation of construction with cheap materials. Just like Hadid, it is geometry and its superposition that is the constant attempt that turns the architect into a deconstructivist.

Comparison

After studying the works of each architect and what part of the movement influenced them, the understanding of the criticism regarding the classification of Frank Gehry's works as deconstructivist becomes clearer. In a different way than designers Peter Eisenman, Bernard Tschumi and Daniel Libeskind, architects Zaha Hadid, Frank Gehry and Rem Koolhaas use the principles of deconstructivism in a very literal way, with very twisted forms and chaotic organization.

«The origin of deconstructivism derives from the term used by the Algerian-French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930-2004) who, in turn, takes it from the term destruktion of the German philosopher Martin Heidegger (1889-1976). Derrida considers this translation more precise than the classical translation of since deconstruction refers to the disarticulation of a thought, rather than its destruction.

The movement comes to break with the architectural rules imposed until now and instigate the viewer. But when everything is very literal and the architects make a destruction instead of a deconstruction, it can be considered that the principles were lost in the development of the project, making aesthetics more important and not the thoughts that were used in the conception. The use of principles literally turns the theory into a model, a set of rules, and that is one of the main points that the philosopher Jacques Derida rejected.

Computer-aided design (CAD) is an essential tool today in many aspects of contemporary architecture, but the particular nature of deconstructivism makes the use of computers especially pertinent. Three-dimensional modeling and animations (virtual and physical) aid in the conception of complex spaces, while the ability to link computer models with computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) makes mass production of slightly different modular elements affordable. In retrospect, many of the earliest deconstructivist works—Zaha Hadid's sketches, for example—appear to have been conceived with the help of a computer, but in fact this was not the case. Gehry is known for making many physical and virtual models during the design process. Gehry uses a sophisticated CATIA aeronautical design program in his studio. Although the computer has made the design of complex shapes much easier, not everything that looks strange is “deconstructivist.”

Since the publication of Modern Architecture: A Critical History, by Kenneth Frampton[14]​ there has been awareness of the role of criticism in architectural theory. As While points to Derrida as a philosophical influence, deconstructivism can be considered to be as rooted in critical theory as the other offshoot of postmodernism, critical regionalism. The two aspects of critical theory, urgency and analysis, meet in deconstructivism. There is a tendency to re-examine and criticize other works or precedents of deconstructivism, and also to place aesthetic issues in the foreground. An example could be the Wexner Center. Critical theory, however, had at its heart a critique of capitalism and its excesses, and in this aspect many works of deconstructionists do not follow these principles, as they are carried out by an elite and are extremely expensive.

The Wexner Center deals with fundamental architectural issues such as function and precedence, and shows their urgency in architectural discourse in an analytical and critical way. The difference between the critical in deconstructivism and the critical in critical regionalism is that critical regionalism reduces the level of complexity involved and makes a clearer analysis while attempting to reconcile modern architecture with local cultural, physical and natural differences; thus, an integration architecture. This leads to “vernacular” modern architecture. Critical regionalism shows a lack of aesthetic self-criticism and a utopian vision of the place, however, the trends of green architecture have manifested themselves as a critical attitude or response and a cry of conscience. On the contrary, deconstructivism criticizes itself and receives external criticism more intensely, in addition to tending to maintain a high level of compositional complexity, which can make its execution difficult, making it dependent on the financial and technological possibilities available; This could be compared: the workforce with empirical knowledge of the local or rural environment versus the highly technical and urban workforce. Some architects identified with the deconstructivist movement, especially Frank Gehry, who often espouse anti-philosophical views[15]

They have vehemently rejected their work being classified as deconstructivist. Others are as critical of their own work as they are of precedent and contemporary work.

Critics of deconstructivism see it as a purely formal exercise, with little social content. Kenneth Frampton finds it “elitist and detached.”[16] Other criticisms are similar to those of deconstructivist philosophy—that, since the act of deconstruction is not an empirical process it can result in anything the architect desires and therefore suffers from a lack of consistency. In recent times, some have the feeling that the philosophical foundations of the beginnings of the movement have been lost.[17] Other critics reject the premise that architecture is a language capable of being the subject of linguistic philosophy or, if they consider that it was a language in the past, they criticize that it is no longer one.[a]​.

Literature

Vicente Esteban Medina (2003) Form and composition in deconstructivist Architecture.

Modern movement and postmodernism

Deconstructivism plays, in modern architecture, a role opposed to the ordered rationality of the modern movement and postmodernism. Although both postmodernists and deconstructivists presented their theories together in the magazine Oppositions") (published in the period 1973-84), these articles also opened a decisive gap between both movements. The deconstructivists adopted a confrontational stance against established architecture and the history of architecture, showing their desire to disassemble architecture.[3]​ While the postmodernists re-embraced—often astutely or ironically—the historical references that the modern movement rejected. Deconstructivism rejects the postmodern acceptance of these references. It also rejects the idea of ornament as decoration. These principles make the deconstructivist align itself with the ideas of modernist antihistoricism.

In addition to Oppositions, another text that has separated deconstructivism from the fraying of the modern movement and postmodernism was the publication of Complexity and Contradiction in architecture (1966) by Robert Venturi. This work, definitive for both postmodernism and deconstructivism, attacks the purity, clarity and simplicity of the modern movement. After its publication, functionalism and rationalism, the two main branches of the modern movement, were overthrown as paradigms in accordance with postmodernism and deconstructivism, but in different ways. Venturi's postmodern reading was that ornamentation and historical allusion added a richness to architecture. Some postmodern architects attempted to reapply ornamentation even to economic buildings, an effort illustrated by Venturi's concept of “the decorated barrack.” Rationalism in design was rejected, but the principle of functionalism remained intact. This is close to the thesis of Venturi's next major work:[4] signs and ornaments can be applied to pragmatic architecture and inculcated with the philosophical complexities of semiology.

The deconstructivist reading of Complexity and Contradiction is quite different. The basic building was the subject of the problems and the intricacies of deconstructivism, without detaching itself from the ornamentation. Instead of separating ornament and function, like the postmodernists, the functional aspects of buildings were questioned. Geometry was to the deconstructivist what ornament was to postmodernists like Venturi, the subject of complication, and this complication of geometry was eventually applied to the functional, structural, and spatial aspects of deconstructivist buildings. An example of deconstructivist complexity is Frank Gehry's Vitra Design Museum in Weil am Rhein, which takes the typical unadorned white cube of the art galleries of the modern movement and deconstructs it, using geometries reminiscent of cubism and abstract expressionism. This subverts the functional aspects of the modern movement's simplicity while taking an aspect of its evolution towards the International Style, of which the white stucco surface is reminiscent, as a starting point. Another example of the deconstructivist reading of Complexity and Contradiction is Peter Eisenman's Center for the Arts. The Wexner Center takes the archetypal form of the castle and imbues it with complexity in a series of cuts and fragmentations. A three-dimensional grid arbitrarily runs through the building. The grille, a reference to the modern movement, collides with the medieval antiquity of the castle. Some of the columns of the grid do not reach the ground, but are intentionally suspended above the stairs creating a feeling of neurotic discomfort and contradicting the structural principle of the column "Column (architecture)"). The Wexner Center deconstructs the castle archetype and represents its spaces and structures as conflicts and differences.

Deconstructivist philosophy

The main path from deconstructivist philosophy to architectural theory runs through the influence of the philosopher Jacques Derrida on Peter Eisenman. Eisenman traced the philosophical foundations of the literary movement of deconstruction, and collaborated directly with Derrida on some projects, such as participation in the Parc de la Villette competition.[2] Both Derrida and Eisenman, as well as Libeskind[5]​ were concerned with the "metaphysics of presence", and this is the main subject of deconstructivist philosophy in architectural theory. The assumption made is that architecture is a language capable of communicating meaning and being treated by the methods of the philosophy of language.[6] The dialectic of presence and absence, or solid and empty, appears in many of Eisenman's projects. Both Derrida and Eisenman believed that the locus, or place of presence, is architecture, and the same dialectic of presence and absence is found in construction and deconstruction.[2]​.

According to Derrida, reading performs better when faced with classical narrative structures. Any architectural deconstruction necessitates the existence of a particular constructionarchetype, a strongly established conventional expectation on which to play with the flexibility of norms.[7]​ The design of Frank Gehry's own residence in Santa Monica, "Santa Monica (California)") (from 1978), has been cited as a prototypical variation around a standard theme: starting with an ordinary house in an ordinary neighborhood, Gehry altered its mass, its envelope space and its plans in a playful subversion. The result is an example of deconstruction[8]​.

In addition to Derrida's metaphysical conception of the metaphysics of presence and deconstruction, his notions of trace and erasure, embodied in his philosophy of writing and archi-writing[7] found their way into deconstructivist memoirs. Daniel Libeskind conceived many of his early projects as a form of writing or a treatise on writing and often worked with calligrams. He made architectural sculpture from books and often covered the models with texts, openly referring his architecture to writing. Libeskind put the notions of trace and erasure into practice in his project for the Jewish Museum in Berlin. The museum is conceived as the trace of the erasure of the Holocaust, and attempts to make its subject legible and moving. Maya Lin's monuments to Vietnam veterans and Eisenman's to Jews murdered in Europe also reflect the themes of trace and erasure.

Constructivism and Russian futurism

Another major current of deconstructivist architecture is inspired by constructivism "Constructivism (art)") and Russian futurism at the beginning of the century, and both in its graphic arts and in its visionary architecture, of which few buildings were built.

Artists Naum Gabo, El Lissitzky, Kasimir Malevich and Alexander Rodchenko influenced the use of geometric forms in the deconstructivist architecture of Zaha Hadid and Coop Himmelb(l)au. Both deconstructivism and constructivism show a concern with the tectonics of abstract assemblages. Both considered the radical simplicity of geometric forms the primary artistic motif, expressed in graphic arts, sculpture, and architecture. However, the constructivist tendency towards purism is absent in deconstructivism: the form often undergoes deformation when the construction is deconstructed. Also notable by its absence is the defense of socialist and collectivist causes, essential in Russian constructivism.

The primary graphic motifs of constructivism were the rectangular bar and the triangular wedge, the square and the circle. Lizzitsky, in his Prouns series, assembled groups of geometries with different orientations floating freely in space. These figures evoke basic structural joints such as metal bars or sawn wood stacked or scattered. He also made sketches that shared aspects with technical drawing. The deconstructivist series Micromegas by Daniel Libeskind are also similar.

The naked structuralism of the architects Ivan Leonidov"), Konstantin Melnikov, Alexander Vesnin") and Vladimir Tatlin also had its impact on deconstructivist architects, especially Rem Koolhaas. His latest works seem to embody the process of construction. They complete the temporary and transitional aspects of buildings, scaffolding and cranes "Crane (machine)") necessary in large buildings. Das Wolkernbügel, by El Lissitzky, similar to cranes connected and made habitable, is a precedent for the China Central Television tower, in which Koolhaas creates an architecture that seems perpetually under construction.

Contenido

Dos corrientes del arte moderno, el minimalismo y el cubismo han ejercido una gran influencia en el deconstructivismo. El cubismo analítico tuvo un gran efecto en el deconstructivismo, pues las formas y el contenido se diseccionan y son vistas desde diferentes perspectivas simultáneamente. La sincronía del espacio disjunto es evidente en muchas obras de Frank Gehry y Bernard Tschumi. Sin embargo, el cubismo sintético, con su aplicación en el arte encontrado, no ejerció una influencia tan grande en el deconstructivismo como el cubismo analítico, aunque también se encuentra en las primeras obras de Frank Gehry. El deconstructivismo también comparte con el minimalismo una ausencia de referencias culturales. También recibe a menudo la influencia de las nociones minimalistas de arte conceptual.

Partiendo de su tendencia hacia la deformación y la dislocación se pueden encontrar aspectos del expresionismo y de la arquitectura expresionista asociados al deconstructivismo. A veces el deconstructivismo refleja variedades del expresionismo, como el neoexpresionismo y el expresionismo abstracto. Las formas angulares del UFA-Palast de Dresde, de Coop Himmelb(l)au, recuerdan la geometría abstracta de las pinturas numeradas de Franz Kline y a las figuras angulares representadas en las escenas urbanas de Ernst Ludwig Kirchner. La obra de Vasili Kandinski también guarda similitudes con la arquitectura deconstructivista. Su movimiento hacia el expresionismo abstracto apartándose del trabajo figurativo,[9]​ tiene el mismo espíritu que el rechazo deconstructivista del ornamento para la geometría.

Muchos artistas de las décadas de 1980 y 1990 realizaron obras que influyeron o tomaron parte en el movimiento deconstructivista. Maya Lin y Rachel Whiteread son dos de estos casos. El proyecto de Lin de 1982 del Monumento a los Veteranos del Vietnam, con sus bloques de hormigón es uno. Su forma fragmentada y la reducción del contenido a un texto minimalista influyó en el deconstructivismo, en su sentido de la fragmentación y el énfasis en la lectura del monumento. Lin también realizó obras para el Centro Wexner de Eisenman. Los espacios arquitectónicos de Rachel Whiteread son otro ejemplo en el que el arte contemporáneo confluye con la arquitectura. Ghost (1990), un espacio entero de escayola que solifidica el vacío, alude a la noción de presencia arquitectónica de Derrida. Building cuts, de Gordon Matta-Clark eran secciones deconstruidas de edificios exhibidas en las galerías de arte.

1988 MOMA exhibition

Philip Johnson, architect and former director of the Department of Architecture and Design, the Museum of Modern Art, in association with Mark Wigley, architect and professor at Princeton University, coordinated by Frederieke Taylor organized the 1988 MOMA exhibition entitled Deconstructivist architecture, which crystallized the movement and gave fame and notoriety to its members. This is the third of five architecture exhibitions in the Museum's Gerald D. Hines Interests architecture program. Designed to examine the current state of architecture, the program includes the publication of catalogs to accompany the exhibitions, as well as conferences and symposiums. The exhibition included drawings, models and site plans for the latest projects. His works were preceded by an introductory section of constructivist paintings and sculptures from the Museum's collection. The architects who presented works in the exhibition were Peter Eisenman, Frank Gehry, Zaha Hadid, Coop Himmelb(l)au, Rem Koolhaas, Daniel Libeskind and Bernard Tschumi. Mark Wigley wrote an essay in which he tried to show the common aspects of different architects.

List of the architects and major projects in the Exhibition.

• - Coop Himmelblau") from Vienna, Wolf D. Prix") (b. 1942, Vienna) and Helmut Swiczinksy") (b. 1944, Poznan, Poland): Rooftop Remodeling"), Vienna, 1985 Hamburg Skyline"), 1985 Apartment Building"), Vienna, 1986.

• - Peter Eisenman: Biology Center for the University of Frankfurt"), competition, 1987.

• - Frank Gehry: Gehry House"), Santa Monica, 1977-87 and Familian Residence"), Santa Monica, 1978.

• - Zaha Hadid: The Peak"), competition, Hong Kong, 1983.

• - Rem Koolhaas: Rotterdam Building and Tower"), commission, 1981.

• - Daniel Libeskind: City Edge Competition"), Berlin, 1987.

• - Bernard Tschumi: Park de la Villette"), competition, Paris, 1982.

The deconstructivist movement has several common characteristics, among them we can find the attempt to free architecture from modern rules, or more than that, from the rules in their entirety; Theorists believe that there is no single mold to create good architecture so it should not be regulated. Another point, they oppose the rationalism of language, is that things have more than one meaning, each one interprets it in their own way. The same thing happens with the concept of aesthetics, why is beautiful what is classic? Or modern? The conception of beauty changes, the root of pleasure or meaning comes from different places, from culture, from history, from politics, from everyday life, making systematization complicated. This new architectural theory comes with the intention of creating a review of all the concepts, which until now, were seen as absolute truth.

Four points, which are connected, are very important for movement: the distortion of elementary principles and non-linear processes, make a change in the Cartesian plane. The ideas of fragmentation, the break with immediate understanding and non-Euclidean geometry transform the previously clear point of perspective into an image of inquiry breaking with the main focus.

Deconstructivist principles aim to show that architecture is a human art, it is not logical, natural or immutable, and if full of contradictions, an unpredictable architecture that forces the public to create their own idea about what is being perceived and with controlled chaos make the perception different in each point of view. Finally, the last characteristic is the subversion of the architectural logic of addition, that is, architecture is a totality, the whole must take into account the parts.

El movimiento deconstructivista, como explicado anteriormente, fue basado en distintas influencias, como el filósofo Jaques Derrida, las vanguardias y el constructivismo Ruso. Con eso, es posible percibir, al estudiar las obras de los principales arquitectos del movimiento, que el desconstrutivismo fue abordado de distintas formas diferenciando sus obras. Algunos de los arquitectos que se destacaran son: Peter Eisenman, Zaha Hadid, Frank Gehry, Rem Koolhaas, Daniel Libeskind, y Bernard Tschumi.

Bernard Tschumi

Bernard Tschumi is one of the architects who best works with Derrida's deconstructivist philosophy, he interprets it:

Currently, this multiple program strategy is constantly used. Form no longer follows function, mainly because function is no longer unique: A single space can be used for different activities.

With strategies such as cross programming (space used for a particular program, which was not built for it), transprogramming (combination, in the same space, of two programs, in principle incompatible) and deprogramming (combination of programs with a contamination of program A in B), the architect creates spaces of multiple programs, thus breaking with the basic oppositions of architecture in which a direct relationship between cause and resolution occurs, as form and function, creating another analogy to the philosopher Derida who tried to break with the language.

Tshumi understands that meaning comes from personal interpretations and this changes from person to person. When planning, in his opinion, one must think about the social, political and cultural circumstances. An example of deconstruction in architectural practice is the Parc de la Villette (1982-1983).

The Parc de la Villette is a project that has an area of ​​more than a kilometer in length and seven hundred meters in width, and a complex program (workshops, gyms, museums, theaters and among others) that is considered deconstructivist from its conception. The architect rejected the idea of ​​“complementing” the voids of the pre-existing and the idea of ​​palimpsest, that is, expressing the previous in new constructions, creating a new memory for the space.

The main concept was improvisation, creating the possibility of a program that can constantly change as needed. It consists of three systems: the surfaces (open green spaces), the lines (the park paths) and the points (the project constructions, red structures that differ from each other). The latter do not have a defined program, they were designed to host events according to the needs of the park. The points are the organizer of the space and are the iconic feature of the plan.

The deconstruction in the project is primarily in the creation of a space that does not have a single meaning, making it possible for the pedestrian to create their own interpretation of what is experienced and understood. The next point is the architect's search for the creation of an incoherent, contradictory space, as well as the human experience.

The superposition of systems is also deconstructivist, it creates a collision and interaction between the site, its paths and its constructions, there is no clear rhythm or order, it is a structured non-structuring. And finally, the rejection of the architectural addition. The project does not need any other complement, the unpredictability of the park's needs was already foreseen in the constructions without defined use.

Peter Eisenmann

Just like Bernard Tschumi, Peter Eisenman is also directly influenced by Derrida's philosophy, even working personally with the philosopher.

In his project the architect creates different geometric plans in a way that the understanding is not immediate, it is only possible to understand the entirety of his intention when the explanatory texts are read. All modernist concepts are confronted, Eisenman follows the theory and not the form. Apart from that, it also projects with psychology, creating spaces that generate feelings, as in the Wexner Modern Art Center.

Daniel Libeskind

Daniel Libeskind is an American architect of Jewish origin. He was born in Lodz, in post-war Poland.

It is possible to understand how the architect works on deconstruction by studying his work at the Jewish Museum in Berlin. The architect, who before the Museum only had one work built, was until then a great theorist, and his project was based on his own vision of architecture, understanding of the context, the present and history.

The architect understands architectural creation as the composition of a book, music or poetry. His project is not related to those of some other deconstructivist architects. Each element of his deconstruction has a very clear and defined reason, it is the meaning that shapes his entire project. Only those who know the code and intentions that will generate the work will understand its message correctly.

Libeskind explains that “architecture should not be limited to communicating to a human being the existence of a mere object. Architecture is a perception, and also something that has an intellectual dimension. It is a way of communicating something beyond the physical reality with which it is built."[10]​.

Its design was originated from the relationship between the history of Berlin and the contribution of the Jews, their lack and the significance of the Holocaust in the consciousness and memory of the city.[11] Libeskind's proposal is based on the theme "The void and the absence" showing the disappearance of the Jews of Berlin.

The floor plan of the building starts from a disjointed line that resembles a lightning bolt, it is a unfolded Star of David, and represents the tortuous history of the Jews in Germany.

The building has one underground floor and four above ground level. The facades are made of concrete with an exterior covering of metal sheet. This layer is made up of panels placed diagonally that give the impression that the facades are inclined. It has a series of narrow windows like cracks, cuts that run through it in different directions like scars from what has happened. It makes sense if you put it in a Jewish context: rupture, fragmentation, tearing. Inside you can see how the light filters through these "cuts" and there is an effect that calls for meditation.

Its façade does not have any main door, the entrance to the complex is through the adjacent historic building and occurs through the basement floor, connecting it to its extension. Regarding the underground entrance, Libeskind refers to how the Jews had to live during times of war. After there, three underground lines intersect, corridors called "axes", which define the general concept of the work and symbolize three aspects of the Jewish experience in Germany: continuity: the museum, exile: the outer garden remembering those who had to leave Berlin, and death: which leads to the Holocaust tower, the dead end for the majority of Jews.

Zaha Hadid

With influences from Russian constructivism and avant-garde movements, Hadid uses three-dimensionality and its more intense superposition of forms. It takes sociology and history into account, and the project is conceived in a deconstructivist way with transposition of strata and cinematography.

Rem Koolhaas

Like Hadid, Koolhaas is influenced by Russian constructivism and avant-garde movements. It makes use of the lace and collage method, invented by the Dadaists, using different concepts from different periods to create a new architecture, articulating history, typology and style in a single work.

In the case of the Seattle Central Library, from the OMA studio, we observe a rethinking of the concept of a library and a revolution against its traditional conception. The study aimed, according to the proposal report, to reformulate the traditional concept of the library, adapting it to the new requirements of this type of facilities. The library would no longer be an institution dedicated exclusively to books, but rather an "information warehouse." This new nomenclature refers to the growing importance of alternative audiovisual media to books in modern libraries, and to the progressive change in user interaction with these media thanks to technology.

This is reflected in a program that gives equal importance to the organization of the physical space of the library and the organization of its virtual spaces, conceived in parallel as part of the same architecture. The library's website is organized in the same way as the building. A program that aims to compress storage space by taking full advantage of new virtual storage technologies and that seeks duality of use between new and traditional media, presented equally and in a legible manner.

The project involves a hyper-rational design process, in which rational ideas acquire an independent logic and result in images that seem irrational (at first glance the library seems the product of a whim rather than the designer's analysis).

An important aspect of it is that it confronts the traditional vision of flexibility in modern architecture which, according to Joshua Prince-Ramus, co-author of the project, creates generic spaces where almost any activity can take place but in practice they are occupied by the most immediate need, which ends up taking precedence over other activities. Instead, it proposes so-called "compartmentalized flexibility." The library is organized into different sections dedicated to specific tasks. Flexibility occurs within each section, thus allowing the possibility of changing entire sections of the building to suit other uses, if necessary, but without impeding the others.

Likewise, it contributes to the concept of social life as the Study conceives the modern library not only as a place to read, but as an organism where various activities are carried out. The new building had to be sensitive to the incipient social role of libraries, generating a space open to the public and avoiding the "fortress" character that this type of construction has traditionally had. These are broadly the main points of development of the OMA proposal.

To put these points into practice, the Dutch study created five platforms, five clusters with specific programs and equipment for the activities to be carried out in each of them. These platforms would materialize in five volumes placed one on top of the other, leaving interstitial spaces between them that would be dedicated to reading, work and rest. The stacked volumes would be randomly displaced with respect to the vertical, due to better use of natural light and views of the city. It is a clear example of the study of "form" followed by "function."

Frank Gehry

Of all the avant-garde movements, Cubism is what Gehry most influenced, the architect came up with his own decostructivism with the experimentation of construction with cheap materials. Just like Hadid, it is geometry and its superposition that is the constant attempt that turns the architect into a deconstructivist.

Comparison

After studying the works of each architect and what part of the movement influenced them, the understanding of the criticism regarding the classification of Frank Gehry's works as deconstructivist becomes clearer. In a different way than designers Peter Eisenman, Bernard Tschumi and Daniel Libeskind, architects Zaha Hadid, Frank Gehry and Rem Koolhaas use the principles of deconstructivism in a very literal way, with very twisted forms and chaotic organization.

«The origin of deconstructivism derives from the term used by the Algerian-French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930-2004) who, in turn, takes it from the term destruktion of the German philosopher Martin Heidegger (1889-1976). Derrida considers this translation more precise than the classical translation of since deconstruction refers to the disarticulation of a thought, rather than its destruction.

The movement comes to break with the architectural rules imposed until now and instigate the viewer. But when everything is very literal and the architects make a destruction instead of a deconstruction, it can be considered that the principles were lost in the development of the project, making aesthetics more important and not the thoughts that were used in the conception. The use of principles literally turns the theory into a model, a set of rules, and that is one of the main points that the philosopher Jacques Derida rejected.

Computer-aided design (CAD) is an essential tool today in many aspects of contemporary architecture, but the particular nature of deconstructivism makes the use of computers especially pertinent. Three-dimensional modeling and animations (virtual and physical) aid in the conception of complex spaces, while the ability to link computer models with computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) makes mass production of slightly different modular elements affordable. In retrospect, many of the earliest deconstructivist works—Zaha Hadid's sketches, for example—appear to have been conceived with the help of a computer, but in fact this was not the case. Gehry is known for making many physical and virtual models during the design process. Gehry uses a sophisticated CATIA aeronautical design program in his studio. Although the computer has made the design of complex shapes much easier, not everything that looks strange is “deconstructivist.”

Since the publication of Modern Architecture: A Critical History, by Kenneth Frampton[14]​ there has been awareness of the role of criticism in architectural theory. As While points to Derrida as a philosophical influence, deconstructivism can be considered to be as rooted in critical theory as the other offshoot of postmodernism, critical regionalism. The two aspects of critical theory, urgency and analysis, meet in deconstructivism. There is a tendency to re-examine and criticize other works or precedents of deconstructivism, and also to place aesthetic issues in the foreground. An example could be the Wexner Center. Critical theory, however, had at its heart a critique of capitalism and its excesses, and in this aspect many works of deconstructionists do not follow these principles, as they are carried out by an elite and are extremely expensive.

The Wexner Center deals with fundamental architectural issues such as function and precedence, and shows their urgency in architectural discourse in an analytical and critical way. The difference between the critical in deconstructivism and the critical in critical regionalism is that critical regionalism reduces the level of complexity involved and makes a clearer analysis while attempting to reconcile modern architecture with local cultural, physical and natural differences; thus, an integration architecture. This leads to “vernacular” modern architecture. Critical regionalism shows a lack of aesthetic self-criticism and a utopian vision of the place, however, the trends of green architecture have manifested themselves as a critical attitude or response and a cry of conscience. On the contrary, deconstructivism criticizes itself and receives external criticism more intensely, in addition to tending to maintain a high level of compositional complexity, which can make its execution difficult, making it dependent on the financial and technological possibilities available; This could be compared: the workforce with empirical knowledge of the local or rural environment versus the highly technical and urban workforce. Some architects identified with the deconstructivist movement, especially Frank Gehry, who often espouse anti-philosophical views[15]

They have vehemently rejected their work being classified as deconstructivist. Others are as critical of their own work as they are of precedent and contemporary work.

Critics of deconstructivism see it as a purely formal exercise, with little social content. Kenneth Frampton finds it “elitist and detached.”[16] Other criticisms are similar to those of deconstructivist philosophy—that, since the act of deconstruction is not an empirical process it can result in anything the architect desires and therefore suffers from a lack of consistency. In recent times, some have the feeling that the philosophical foundations of the beginnings of the movement have been lost.[17] Other critics reject the premise that architecture is a language capable of being the subject of linguistic philosophy or, if they consider that it was a language in the past, they criticize that it is no longer one.[a]​.

Literature

Vicente Esteban Medina (2003) Form and composition in deconstructivist Architecture.