non-negotiables
non-negotiables
LANDSCHAP EERST
LANDSCHAP EERST
wilde natuur
wilde natuur
reconversie / restauratie
reconversie / restauratie
sociaal inclusief
sociaal inclusief
verdichting
stapeling
minimale footprint
verdichting stapeling minimale footprint
professionele output
professionele output
strategische partnerships
strategische partnerships
The Pink-Fingered Dawn
A conversation about ‘beauty in architecture’ is required. The lack of a description or vocabulary can be felt both in the day-to-day work of an architectural firm as in cross-border conferences about high-quality Baukultur. Architecture intervenes in a very tangible way in the world of human experience and is therefore fundamentally subject to a dialogue. This dialogue is taking place even more acutely now and, in the future, because we can no longer afford to build in open free space. The fabric in which the architect sets to work is dense, often conflicting, confusing, diverse, but above all rich and fascinating. The role of the architect is tilted towards rethinking, adjusting, reallocating, and interweaving within the built heritage. This means that friction in the encounter between an existing and a new intervention is inevitable and even decisive. After all, both artefacts are also an outflow of the value of beauty at the era they are created. Moreover, the 'beauty' of the built is subject to an appreciation that is cyclical. If, at the moment of realisation, it is too innovative, there will be resistance and rejection. Gradually, the momentum shifts and recognition of the 'beauty' grows, only to fall back into disinterest or repugnance with the generation that is again too close to it. Once this cycle is over, a more stable appreciation, a kind of ingrained consensus of beauty, emerges in later generations. The writer Stendhal (1783- 1842) captures this: “[I]t takes the one hundred men in ten million who understand beauty, which isn't imitation or an improvement on the beautiful as already understood by the common herd, twenty or thirty years to convince the twenty thousand next most sensitive souls after their own that this new beauty is truly beautiful.”
1 Once the 'old building' has achieved this status of acknowledged 'beauty', the problem arises of wanting to fix this heritage too rigidly under an inviolable 'bell jar', whereby any adaptation is sacrilege. When acting within the existing (heritage) patrimony, the conversation takes place in the design - new and existing react to each other - and between all the relevant actors (inhabitants, administrations, client, architects...). The design conversation is intense and complex, but it is carried by the architect's own language and sensibility because this part of the process is a very introvert conversation. The haze and polemic arise when we talk about an actual 'speaking about beauty in architecture' between different dialogue partners. This conversation becomes rigid because the interpretation of ‘beauty’ does not adhere to the same meaning. Everything that a person slides under the word ‘beauty’ turns out to be different and fluid, depending on the moment, the place, the culture..."Rose is a rose is a rose is a rose" wrote Gertrude Stein (1874-1946) as part of the poem "Sacred Emily". This is often misinterpreted as meaning "things are what they are", but Stein's vision here was that simply using the name of a thing already invokes the imagery and emotions associated with it. There she touches upon a difficult truth about words: the mechanism by which everyone feels and interprets ‘beauty in architecture’ differently is adamant. The pinpointing of the singularity and status of ‘beauty’ is a dilemma that is repeated throughout history but has no end. The interpretation of ‘beauty’ has a stretch that reaches into contradictions: from the mathematical proportion to the free and uncontrolled, from the application of ornament to the purification of additions, from the usefulness that is achieved to the evocation of an experience without further utility. How, then, can we arrive at a kind of basis for discussion or assessment?
What we define and therefore judge in 'beauty in architecture' is not clear-cut, so that its purpose also becomes obscure. Therefore, why should we 1 ‘Life of Henry Brulard’, Stendhal or Marie-Henri Beyle, 2001, NYRB Classics Dhooge Meganck 2 aspire to ‘beauty in architecture’ if a dialogue about it is inherently impossible? The Scottish philosopher Thomas Reid (1710-1796) defines this impasse as follows: “There is no greater impediment to the advancement of knowledge than the ambiguity of words.”2 With 'beauty in architecture', we are dealing with a term that evokes an enfilade of 'blurring': what is the meaning, what lies in judgment, and what is the purpose? The necessary attempts to work or speak related to this ‘beauty’ either stagnate or crumble in conflicts for this reason. Nevertheless, the urgency remains. The continued search for a conversation within this stalemate, through various approaches and methodologies, is of essential value. Perhaps every attempt, whether in impetuous enthusiasm or cautious trying, will end as an exhausted drowning effort on the shores of impossibility. However, just out of respect for the mental effort that has been made within the centuries-long discourse on this subject, it is not permissible to throw in the towel. When we look for an approach to tackle the issue of 'beauty in architecture', we must be aware of what is at stake and which ambition that we can 'touch'. Within the topic of 'beauty', one cannot aspire to capture it in a definition, nor that the conclusion of a conversation is an 'analogous assent to the meaning of beauty' by all parties. To aspire to such a thing would be hubris and would immediately destroy the possibility of conversation. At most, it can only be a shared nuance or a sharpening of the concept of ‘beauty’. It is the ambiguity and fluidity of the word 'beauty' within architecture that prevents us from arriving at a more clear and constructive exchange of ideas. Is there a possibility to attempt a strongly linguistic approach to this challenge? Recognising the problem is situated in language, but at the same time using the power of language to answer this vacuum.
When we look at 'Le Système des objets' by philosopher Jean Baudrillard (1929-2007), we read, entirely within the soul of the semiotic school, that the meaning of words can only be understood in their interconnectedness. Each concept has its place in relation to the other and cannot be defined without. A 'column' is a 'column' because it is not a 'window' or a 'door'. One way of thinking about this would be to clarify the word 'beauty' for all interlocutors by placing it in relation and in antithesis to other concepts. For an intangible term such as 'beauty', the composition of this 'web' is not straightforward and the problem actually shifts immediately to making other words such as ugly, inconvenient or unconsidered mutually understandable. This creation of a framework of words seems to take us further from the intended goal. It does, however, give us a start in the direction that ‘placing words together’ can bring about a perceptiveness that cannot be achieved with one single word. Is there a chance, in reference to the Greek poets Homer (800 B.C.-750 B.C.) and even Stesichoros (640 B.C.- 555 B.C.), to rediscover the importance of the adjective or epithet? They spoke in their time of 'brighthelmeted' Hector, 'pink-fingered' dawn, 'hollow-hoofed' horses and ‘bruise-free' children. This may seem very poetic, but there is no denying that when reading merely 'Hector, dawn, horse and child', one is deprived of all the sounds, smells, atmospheres and clarifications that lie within the adjective. Canadian poet, essayist and Professor Anne Carson masterfully characterises the strength of the 'epithet': "What is an adjective? Nouns name the world. Verbs activate what is named. Adjectives are of different origin. The Latin word adjectivus (in Greek epithet) is in itself an adjective and means 'placed on top', 'added', 'appended', 'imported' and 'foreign'. Adjectives seem like fairly harmless additions but keep an eye on them. 2 ‘Thomas Reid's Inquiry and Essays’, Thomas Reid, Ronald E. Beanblossom, Keith Lehrer, 1983, Hackett Publishing Dhooge Meganck
3 These little imported mechanisms have the job of pinning everything in the world to its specific place. They are the locking pins of existence. One way of existence is not the other. Thus, in the world of Homeric epic, existence is stable, and specificity is anchored in tradition. When Homer speaks of blood, blood is black. When women appear in it, they are elegantly-ankled or sideways-looking. (...) Homer's adjectives are a fixed mode of expression by which he connects all that is material in the world with the most appropriate adjective and holds it in place for epic consumption. He does it with passion, but which? Consumption is not a passion for the essence, but a passion for the rule,' says Baudrillard. Thus, Stesichoros was born into the still surface of this rule. And studied it without ceasing. The surface receded from him. Stesichoros came closer. It remained as it was. ‘Passion for the essence' seems a good description for that moment. Stesichoros pulled out, no one can say why, the locking pins of the adjective. Stesichoros liberated existence. All the essence in the world came to light. There was suddenly nothing that stood in the way of horses being 'hollow-hoofed'. Or a 'root-silver' river. Or a child that is 'bruisefree'." 3 Beauty seems an exquisite concept to be thoughtfully clarified through the epithet or, in poetic license, even the epithet ornans. After all, we cannot talk about 'beauty' an sich because the confusion of terms is too great due to the broad scope of interpretations per person, period and object discussed. However, a conversation can arise when we do not use the term tout court but take 'beauty' as a starting point and reflect on it within a rich spectrum of adjectives in order to grasp the interpretation and sharpness. In this way, beauty is not to be seen as the subject, but as the central 'emotion' that is the driving force, with the epithet each time as a nuance and clarification. The choice of adjectives that we bring alongside the word ‘beauty’ is of course decisive in the success or failure of the debate. In order to interpret this approach, we will move on from poetic considerations to a very specific case. In our architectural office, we are currently working on a project for a pavilion building near a historical monument, the Gravensteen in Ghent. We have clearly experienced in the past two years of discussions that the sensitivities regarding 'touching and intervening closely' to a monument rise high.
On the one hand, we are incredibly grateful for this. It shows that many people value built heritage and set the bar high in this task, as we do ourselves. On the other hand, we are disappointed, because discussions often show that the other party does not enter into a fascinating complex discussion about content, but remains stuck in a rigid conviction that often only focuses on one aspect. The top layer of this conviction may be facets such as identity, participation, ecology ... but once you engage in further discussion, an underlayer often emerges that is grafted onto beauty. For example, there are convictions that placing a pavilion 'detached from the monument in a green zone next to the building' is vindictive towards ecology and respect for the monument, but the same people see the solution in taking up the same amount of green space in or against the monument itself on a side that is not visible from their homes. ‘Ecology’ and ‘respect for the monument’ thus sugar-coats an underlying feeling of violation of their convictions regarding beauty, hence the resistance. The lack of a vocabulary within these conversations was keenly felt. There was a lack of focus or consensus on what was being judged or reasoned. Convictions remained like immiscible fluids on top of each other, despite our extensive efforts to argue, listen and debate. A very different type of conversation might emerge if we were to dive into 'beauty in architecture' within this project, but take the epithet as support. After all, discussing the 'beauty' of the intervention remains hollow, vague and contradictory. On the other hand, there is a fascinating and instructive dialogue to be developed around, for example, 'image-sharpening' beauty (how does the 3 Autobiography of Red', Carson Anne, 2000, Meulenhoff Publishers Dhooge Meganck 4 intervention speak to the existing: is it disruptive or inattentive in form, proportion, materiality and position, or does it sharpen the power of both artefacts in their image value), or 'movement-sensitive' beauty (how does the intervention form itself around the movements of the visitor: does it, in spatiality and position, support flows, views, resting points, etc. of the visitor and bystander), 'fabric-resonant' beauty (in which way does the context/build fabric resound in the intervention? Are fragments from the surroundings considered and through transcription (including/diverting) translated in the design into a fascinating new answer), 'visionreceptive' beauty (to what extent does the design process carry an attentive visionary consideration: does the design consciously form itself from the processing (implementing or substantiated rejection) of a broad set of visions) ...
The epithet focuses the lens on a fragment so that the debate is less turbid for all parties. Arguments can be more extensive and considered. It also allows for a search process between all participants whereby 'beauty' is not centralised as an invincible and all-encompassing obstacle. After all, it can be discussed in parts and characteristics where some 'types' of beauty within the project may find consensus and others not. We prevent the discussion from being avoided by opening up a wider kaleidoscope of characteristics. The nuance appears as a quintessence in the conversation. And as the Dutch writer Louis Couperus (1863-1923) said: "In life and also in language, nuances are everything.”
non-negotiables
LANDSCHAP EERST
LANDSCHAP EERST
wilde natuur
wilde natuur
reconversie / restauratie
reconversie / restauratie
sociaal inclusief
sociaal inclusief
verdichting
stapeling
minimale footprint
verdichting stapeling minimale footprint
professionele output
professionele output
strategische partnerships
strategische partnerships
non-negotiables
Enkele punten op een rij die we als vertrekpuntjdncjqskdncjksncjdcjndc cdcd
geinspireerd op the Bear