The main theme in which this reading, Violence of Architecture by Bernard Tschumi, is placed is Communication in Architecture. This reading specifically refers to the authors perspective on the intensities of interactions between humans, program, spaces and the symmetrical or asymmetrical relationships therein [pg. Violence or the intensity of a relationship between individuals and their surrounding spaces [pg. Whether we like it or not, violence, in this context, is bound to happen with varying levels of degree.
|Published (Last):||11 May 2015|
|PDF File Size:||7.85 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.3 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
He concedes that architecture cannot directly control the event that will happen within, but he said the relationship between program and architecture is very similar to that of hunter and hunted.
Hunter and hunted enjoy these needs independent of the fact they are engaged in a deadly game. They are respectively self-sufficient. The same happens with architecture and the way buildings relate to their users, or spaces relate to events or programs. For any organized repetition of events, once announced in advance, becomes a program, a descriptive notice of a formal series of proceedings.
This analogy is very useful to architects because it means we have some sway over behavior. This can also be very convincing because it is tough to argue that when a person is restricted to a confined, narrow space, that they will not try to flee, and so on. Claustrophobia is not prevalent in all humans, but there is a distinct relationship between the human body and its surroundings and the body will feel more or less uncomfortable depending on its surroundings.
You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account. You are commenting using your Twitter account.
You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. Share this: Twitter Facebook. Like this: Like Loading Leave a Reply Cancel reply Enter your comment here Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:. Email required Address never made public. Name required. Conclusion questionnaire…. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
# ARCHITECTURAL THEORIES /// Space violating bodies by Bernard Tschumi
He concedes that architecture cannot directly control the event that will happen within, but he said the relationship between program and architecture is very similar to that of hunter and hunted. Hunter and hunted enjoy these needs independent of the fact they are engaged in a deadly game. They are respectively self-sufficient. The same happens with architecture and the way buildings relate to their users, or spaces relate to events or programs.
Bernard Tschumi – Violence of Architecture
The chapter S pace violating bodies establishes the basis of such a postulate. However Tschumi does not elaborate on the political implications of such a control but rather attempts to distinguish a Dionysian dimension of architecture out of it. But if bodies violate the purity of architectural spaces, one might rightly wonder about the reverse: the violence inflicted by narrow corridors on large crowds, the symbolic or physical violence of buildings on users. A word of warning: I do not wish to resurrect recent behaviorist architectural approaches. Instead, I wish simply to underline the mere existence of a physical presence and the fact that it begins quite innocently, in an imaginary sort of way.
Tschumi Violence of Architecture Review
This entire reading was clear and concise. I appreciate that Tschumi does not feel the need to dress things up with fancy terms and big words. What Tschumi is really getting at is that violence in architecture is the relationship of people to spaces. He talks about people violating buildings and the reverse. He continues by asking if there is a shared violence between architecture and humans; can the violence be reversed?
Lecture 2: Bernard Tschumi, “Architecture of Violence”
There is no architecture without action, no architecture without events, no architecture without program. By extension, there is no architecture without violence. The second statement argues that although the logic of objects and the logic of man are independent in their relations to the world, they inevitably face one another in an intense confrontation. Any relationship between a building and its users is one of violence, for any use means the intrusion of a human body into a given space, the intrusion of one order into another.