Main authors
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.