Contemporaneity

Spatial turn. Transcultural and transdisciplinar spaces in the architecture

Tomasz Stępień

Abstract

Intellectual discourse within the framework of social sciences at the end of the 20th century and at the beginning of the 21st century was dominated by theoretical analyses of a threefold turn which formulated and at the same time determined the reality of the contemporary societies: 1) cultural turn commenced by M. Foucault, continued adequately to the technological development of the contemporary cultures and civilizations based on the interpretation of history by F. Fukuyama and S.P. Huntington1; 2) technological turn with analyses of social changes caused by the new media technologies (M. McLuhan) and information technologies (M. Castells); 3) spatial turn, the forerunner of which is H. Lefebvre with a new concept of space in the social dimension.

The very term of spatial turn appeared for the first time in the study by the geographer Edward W. Soja entitled Postmodern geographies published in 19892 . [3, 18] However, in the social dimension, the forerunner of the new meaning, understanding and interpretation of space is Henri Lefebvre. In his study entitled La production de l’espace published in 1974 (Production of space) he presented an interdisciplinary concept of space at the same time introducing anew the notion of space as a motif of the intellectual discourse within the framework of social sciences. The paradigm of the term itself is often referred to in the context of the controversies and disputes on modernism and postmodernism. From the postmodernist viewpoint, Fredric Jameson states that the spatial turn paradigm, or even more a whole series of turns as its variations, enables us to unambiguously define differences existing between modernism and postmodernism and at the same time it functions as one of the main motifs of the postmodernist criticism of modernism3 .

Full article view is only available on bigger screens.

Full article

2010

Nr 2(28)

Intellectual discourse within the framework of so-

cial sciences at the end of the 20

century and at the

beginning of the 21

century was dominated by theo-

retical analyses of a threefold turn which formulated

and at the same time determined the reality of the con-

temporary societies: 1) cultural turn commenced by

M. Foucault, continued adequately to the technological

development of the contemporary cultures and civiliza-

tions based on the interpretation of history by F. Fuku-

yama and S.P. Huntington

; 2) technological turn with

analyses of social changes caused by the new media tech-

nologies (M. McLuhan) and information technologies

(M. Castells); 3) spatial turn, the forerunner of which is

H. Lefebvre with a new concept of space in the social

dimension.

The very term of spatial turn appeared for the rst

time in the study by the geographer Edward W. Soja

entitled Postmodern geographies published in 1989

[3, 18] However, in the social dimension, the forerun-

Wrocław University of Technology, Department of Humanistic

Sciences.

Cf. Foucault M., Von anderen Räumen, [in:] Dünne, J. / Günzel, S.,

Raumtheorie. Grundlagentexte aus Philosophie und Kulturwissenschaf-

ten, p. 317–329, Frankfurt a. M. 2006; Fukuyama, F., Koniec historii,

Znak, Kraków 2009; Huntington, S.P., Zderzenie cywilizacji i nowy kształt

ładu światowego, Muza, Warszawa 2003.

Edward W. Soja, Postmodern Geographies. The Reassertion of

Space in Critical Social Theory, London/NY 1989. In the recent years two

comprehensive studies of the whole issue of the spatial turn in the modern

science were published: Döring, Jörg/Thielmann, Tristan (Hrsg.), Spatial

turn. Das Raumparadigma in den Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften,

transcript Verlag, Bielefeld 2008; Warf, Barney/Arias, Santa (eds.), The

Spatial Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Routledge Studies in Human

Geography, London 2009.

ner of the new meaning, understanding and interpreta-

tion of space is Henri Lefebvre. In his study entitled

La production de l’espace published in 1974 (Produc-

tion of space) he presented an interdisciplinary concept

of space at the same time introducing anew the notion

of space as a motif of the intellectual discourse within

the framework of social sciences. The paradigm of the

term itself is often referred to in the context of the con-

troversies and disputes on modernism and postmodern-

ism. From the postmodernist viewpoint, Fredric Jameson

states that the spatial turn paradigm, or even more a whole

series of turns as its variations, enables us to unambigu-

ously dene differences existing between modernism

and postmodernism and at the same time it functions as

one of the main motifs of the postmodernist criticism of

modernism

According to Jameson, modernism emphasizes the

meaning of time and history whereas postmodernism led

to spatialization of the temporal. The notion of spatiali-

zation of the temporal means a simultaneous trend away

from the 19

century obsession of history towards a new

era of space (M. Foucault). E.W. Soja in his later works

such as Thirdspace published in 1996 refers to this mean-

ing of spatial turn where he denes it as a type of master

turn, therefore, we arrive at the main paradigm of science

of the end of the 20

century – paradigm of transdiscipli-

(...) A certain spatial turn has often seemed to offer one of the

more productive ways of distinguishing postmodernism from modernism

proper (...), F. Jameson, Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late

Capitalism, p. 154, Durham 1991; (quoted after:) Döring J., Thielmann T.

(Hrsg.), Spatial turn. Das Raumparadigma in den Kultur- und Sozial-

wissenschaften, p. 8.

Tomasz Stępień*

Spatial turn.

Transcultural and transdisciplinar spaces

in the architecture

Preliminaries.

Spatial turn as a social science paradigm

204 Tomasz Stępień

nar character as such

. In this way, ‘space’ becomes the

main component of the critical social theory [3].

Nowadays, the emphasis is put on the multidimen-

sionality of the meaning of ‘spatial turn’, which expresses

both its transdisciplinar character, i.e. may refer to every

discipline of knowledge or science as such as well as its

transcultural character, i.e. may occur and be valid inde-

pendently of place and time in the impingement sphere of

a given culture-civilization. In this context, spatial turn

is strongly connected with the technological develop-

ment of the second part of the 20

century. It refers to the

new information technologies which are interpreted as an

omen, expression and at the same time the main tool of

the globalization process. Spatial and technological turns

mean a new perception of the human reality, either in

form of a global village (M. McLuhan) and a web society

(M. Castells), or mobility as the main phenomenon of the

modern society (J. Urry). The leading motif of spatial turn

itself involves the far-reaching changes brought about by

the media and communication technologies.

The phenomenon of spatial turn itself is not explicitly

dened – we can say that it refers to the disputes which take

place within the particular domains by making reference

to space. We can observe a sort of prosperity for ‘space’

as each discipline (eld of study) of broadly understood

humanities undertakes a different ‘spatial turn’ by shift-

ing research emphasis, by change of perspective or by an

(...) Contemporary critical studies have experienced a signicant

spatial turn. In what may be seen as one of the most important intellectual

and political developments in the late twentieth century, scholars have

begun to interpret space and the spatiality of human life with the same

critical insight and emphasis that has traditionally been given to time

and history on the one hand, and to social relations and society on the

other (...), E.W. Soja, Thirdspace. Journeys to Los Angeles and other

Real-and-Imagined Places, London/NY 1996, (quoted after:) Döring J.,

Thielmann T. (Hrsg.), Spatial turn. Das Raumparadigma in den Kultur-

und Sozialwissenschaften, p. 9.

attempt to dene a new phenomenon which appears in

a given eld of research. Thus, we deal with the particu-

lar metaphors of spatial turn. This multitude of metaphors

allows us to assume a hypothesis about transdisciplinar

character of the contemporary science and its particular

disciplines. Apart from the notion of spatial turn, we can

also distinguish the following expressions: 1) topological

turn, which refers to mathematical terminology and phe-

nomenology within philosophy; 2) topographical turn,

in theory of literature and culture, an expression based

on discovering space as a text with its roots in cartog-

raphy, i.e. map and map reading as transforming space

into a text and also as an expression of human control

over space

. – A characteristic form of space rehabilita-

tion is assumed by spatial turn in historical sciences –

this process was initiated by a German author named

Karl Schlögel. The starting point here is the question

about possibilities of existing the so called great narra-

tions after their proper end caused by the postmodernism

postulate of F. Lyotard. Spatial turn signies a symbolic

return of space to the historical discourse in form of lo-

cating and spacing historiographical representations and

analyses within the impingement sphere of the particu-

lar cultural and social space, and consequently, historical

space

Cf. program text of topographical turn, also as a response of Eu-

ropean humanities to Anglo-Saxon cultural studies: Sigrid Weigel, Zum

topographical turn, Kultur-Poetik 2002, [in:] Döring J., Thielmann T.,

Spatial turn..., pp. 15–18.

(…) Erneuerung der geschichtlichen Erzählung selbst (…) die

Frage nach der Möglichkeit einer großen Erzählung nach dem Ende der

Großen Erzählung (...). History takes place, deshalb sei jede historiogra-

phische Darstellung dezitär, die nicht auch die je historisch-konkrete

Ortsverhaftung des zu rekonstruierenden Geschehens mitexpliziere (...),

Döring J., Thielmann T., Spatial turn..., pp. 20–22; cf. Karl Schlögel, Im

Raume lesen wir die Zeit. Über Zivilisationsgeschichte und Geopolitik,

München 2003.

Compression of time and space

Compression of time and space (D. Harvey) constitutes

a particular background for rediscovering space in the last

decade of the 20

century; this term refers to the process

of condensing horizons of cognition connected with time

and space which at the same time led to an implosion of

space. Equally, in McLuhan’s global village, in Urry’s mo-

bile society as well as in Castells’ web society, it is in the

space that lines of ows, loops, centres and peripheries

are designated. According to the postulated postmodern-

ist theory of media, the process of overcoming time and

space, to paraphrase McLuhan, takes place exactly in the

space as medium and message in one. In other words, the

postulated deterritorialization of cyberspace is suspended

on the coordinates of this space

[2, 12, 17, 18].

The phenomenon of compression of time and space is analysed by

David Harvey in the study The Condition of Postmodernity. An Enquiry

into the Origins of Cultural Change, Oxford/Cambridge 1989. The rst

Therefore, a technologically plausible compression of

time and space requires social location and spacing. Deter-

ritorialization refers to the technology, not to man and soci-

ety. Communication technologies do not liquidate spaces,

however, they do change them

[3]. This phenomenon is

interpretation of changes occurring in the world of media was presented

by H.M. McLuhan, cf. his study: Wybór tekstów, Zysk i s-ka, Poznań

2001. As for model of information society with the concept of space as

a cultural function, cf. Castells, M., Społeczeństwo sieci, PWN, Warszawa

2007. The concept of society based on the phenomenon of mobility is

presented in the work of J. Urry, Socjologia mobilności, PWN, Warszawa

2009. As for issues of new cyber-culture and technological determinants

of the modern society, cf. Zawojski, P., Cyberkultura. Syntopia sztuki,

nauki i technologii, Poltext, Warszawa 2010.

(…) ganz so als sei die technisch ermöglichte time-space compres-

sion nur vermittels einer Standortversicherung (...) sozial zu ertragen.

Auch in der Netzwerkgesellschaft bleibt Territorialität als eines der orga-

nisierenden Prinzipien sozialer Beziehungen elementar von Bedeutung.

Spatial turn. Transcultural and transdisciplinar spaces in the architecture 205

characteristic of the globalization process in which new vari-

eties of space appear in the context of technological carriers

of communication as global, transcultural and transnational

ones. Therefore, the postulates of McLuhan to overcome

and consequently get rid of spaces in the meantime serve

the purpose of locating ourselves, as it is the case with the

GPS technology (Global Positioning System). At the same

time, the development of new communication technologies

changed the form of impingement of cultures and civiliza-

tions, which not only impinge within their orbits and spaces,

(...) Die Orte der Lebenswelt bleiben, aber sie sind nurmehr als media-

lisierte zu denken (...) diese fachübergreifende spatial-turn-Perspektive

als notwendige Korrektur einer postmodernen Raumignoranz, Döring J.,

Thielmann T., Spatial turn..., p. 15.

but were also located either in space or in orbit. Media tech-

nologies (satellite transmission) represent a given culture

in orbit, but not the orbit of a given culture

. In this sense,

there is a growing tendency for materialization in the cur-

rent discourse on culture and civilization which are more

and more dominated by the technological development. As

a consequence, along with spatial and technological turns,

we can observe the return of materialistic concepts of cul-

ture and its materialistic determinants

[4].

As an example of technological spacing of cultures and civilizations,

cf. Parks, Lisa, Cultures in Orbit. Sattelites and the Televisual, Durham,

London 2005.

Cf. Eibl, K., Kultur als Zwischenwelt. Eine evolutionsbiologische

Perspektive, Edition Unseld, Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt a. M. 2009.

Transdisciplinar character of space

We can nd a direct example of spatial turn at the

point of contact of architecture / town-planning and social

sciences in form of transdisciplinar sociology of archi-

tecture (B. Schäfers) and sociology of space (M. Löw).

This change in perspective in social sciences was initi-

ated, inter alia, in the works of P. Bourdieu and A. Gid-

dens along with the introduction of dynamic paradigms

of change in analyses and interpretations of the social life

reality as well as a general process of becoming a society

(P. Sztompka)

[13, 16].

On the other hand, the trandisciplinar approach to this

issue dates back to G. Simmel and his space concept in

which he emphasized spatial connections and conditions

of behaviours and social actions, the expression of which

we can nd in his sociology of town and space

[15]. This

concept of spatial conditions of social actions refers to

a relational concept of space based on the so called spac-

ing whose author is M. Löw. These concepts emphasize

a dynamic reality and understanding of space in the social

life. They reject the static concept of space as a Euclidian

container for the benet of active production of space as

the space of various relations and references, as spacing,

i.e. creating syntheses in the reality of conicts and inter-

nal tensions of the modern mass society. This formula-

Cf. Schäfers B., Architektursoziologie. Grundlagen – Epochen –

Themen, Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden 2006; Giddens,

A., Stanowienie społeczeństwa, p. 154–206, Zysk i S-ka, Poznań 2003;

Sztompka, P., Socjologia. Analiza Społeczeństwa, pp. 437–553, Znak,

Kraków 2009.

Simmel G., Socjologia przestrzeni (1903), [in:] Pisma socjologicz-

ne, pp. 365–385, Ocyna Naukowa, Warszawa 2008.

tion emphasizes the ambiguity of space as a social life

category which is produced and shaped and at the same

time produces and shapes human relations, actions and

behaviours in the social dimension

[10, 11]. As a conse-

quence, the contemporary concept of society is based on

the process of constant uctuations and congurations

[5] on the one hand, however, on the other hand, ‘the so-

ciety’ is interpreted as an equally important process of

producing space

[9].

Therefore, spatial turn signies a new understanding

of space not in the sense of a territory, but rather as a so-

cial production of space by means of various, sometimes

contrasting social processes, actions and aspirations. On

the other hand, the expression of a postmodernist turn to-

wards space and a simultaneous turn away from history

and time as coordinates of modernism is the multiplica-

tion of the so called no-places which are in a state sus-

pension as regards their historical and cultural meanings,

which is the main feature of massing the societies, media

and consumption. No-places express homogenization and

standardization of the global dimension – space becomes

as if a massed product

[1].

Cf. Löw M., Raumsoziologie, pp. 69–129, Suhrkamp Verlag,

Frankfurt am Main 2009; Löw, M., Steets, S., Stoetzer, S., Einführung

in die Stadt- und Raumsoziologie, pp. 51–92, Budrich/UTB, Opladen &

Farmington Hills 2008.

Elias N., Czym jest socjologia?, pp. 89–233, Aletheia, Warszawa

2010.

Jałowiecki B., Społeczne wytwarzanie przestrzeni, Scholar, War-

szawa 2010.

Augé M., Nie-miejsca. Wprowadzenie do antropologii hipernowo-

czesności, PWN, Warszawa 2010.

Spatialization in architecture and town-planning

The contemporary accumulation of technological de-

velopment has led to a fusion of society and technology

on the ground of esthetics, namely new technologies of

communication and visualization. At the same time, the

meaning of technologies themselves has been extended as

regards their role as special rhetoric tools in the discourse

206 Tomasz Stępień

on culture and architecture. As a result, space and technol-

ogies have become an esthetic expression of transforma-

tion of the modern society in all of its dimensions

[8].

By analogy with the change of space perception in so-

cial sciences, also in architecture we can distinguish the

two concepts of space which condition each other. On the

one hand, it results from the understanding of architecture

and its functions in the social reality as a social action and

fact, i.e. a special process of ‘notching’ space in which we

encode our culture of actions and behaviours

[3]. On the

other hand, in the architecture proper we can nd esthetic

interpretations of philosophical concepts of technology and

space and their inuence on the society structure and its

changes. This results from the fact that architectonic / urban

space has two faces as it is at the same time produced and

producing and from its signicance in culture. Thus, one of

the main issues is the denition of the role and meaning of

technology in the current dispute on architecture and its spa-

tial impingements upon society and culture. The history of

architecture, the very motive of building and residing can be

understood in the perspective of technology as special rhet-

oric tools of discourse on culture, space and architecture.

A good example here is the static architectural formu-

la/paradigm by Le Corbusier based on the Plato idealistic

concept of technology dened as a process of producing

according to a determined formula/paradigm which is

supposed to express an aspiration for perfection and en-

able existence in the historical dimension. It is contrasted

Multidimensionality of esthetic and technological society transfor-

mation process along with its transdisciplinar and transcultural character

were presented in the study: Heil R., Kaminski A., Stippak M., Unger

A., Ziegler M. (eds.), Tensions and Convergences. Technological and

Aesthetic Transformations of Society, transcript Verlag, Bielefeld 2007.

„Architektur als überaus beständige, kulturell verbindliche ‘Ker-

bung’ des Raumes, durch die Handlungspotentialitäten codiert werden“,

[in:] Döring J., Thielmann T., Spatial turn..., p. 18.

with the futurism which places emphasis on the dyna-

mism of the technologies proper and is based on Hera-

clitus and his variabilism where history is rejected for the

benet of a post-historical permanent process of changes.

Architecture as a phenomenon which is dynamic, chang-

ing, constantly reviving and renewing corresponds to the

paradigm of incessant change and movement in Heracli-

tus philosophy and at the same time rejects the idea of

eternal, invariable lasting adequate to the concept of the

world by Plato. These two ontological concepts clash and

this can be observed in the contemporary interpretations

of the phenomenon of technology and in divergent ten-

dencies within the architecture proper. – This contrast is

presented against the background of ideological dispute

within politics with architecture as a reection of the state

of the modern society

[7]. A similar contrast can be seen

in the architectural interpretations of place and space in

functionalism (pragmatism and statism) and structural-

ism (variability and openness of space). Along with the

discovery of interculturality and transdisciplinarity in the

second part of the 20

century, these contrasts led to the

so called spatial turn in social sciences, which from then

on have been based on the multidimensional concept of

space expressed in the dispute of modernism/postmod-

ernism. This dispute, which focused of interpretations of

form and space, at the same time, became the axis of the

development of the modern architecture

[6]. In this way,

architecture appears to be reected in philosophy and

technology as an integral element of culture

[8].

Cf. Habermas J., Moderne und postmoderne Architektur, [in:]

Welsch W. (ed.), Wege aus der Moderne, Acta humaniora, Weinheim

1988, pp. 110–120.

Ghirardo D., Architektura po modernizmie, Via, Wrocław 1999,

Cf. Timmermann P., Architecture in the Mirror of Technology. [in:]

Heil R., Kaminski A., Stippak M., Unger A., Ziegler M. (eds.), Tensions

and Convergences..., pp. 47–57.

element and a challenge at the same time, for example, in

the project Ark (Kyoto 1983). Takamatsu’s creative work is

inspired by metaphors of light and shade which occur in the

architecture of East and West with reference to one of the

oldest Shinto temples Izumo

. His architecture represents

an interpretation of this tradition as a radical entry into the

As is emphasized by Takamatsu: (…) In Bezug auf Licht kann ich

wohl sagen, daß ich unter dem Einuß von Izumo stehe. Das izumoische

Licht ist eine leuchtende Finsternis, wie ich es gerne nennen möchte.

Das heißt, die Finsternis ist hier kein Gegensatz zum Licht, sondern sie

ist eine leuchtende Finsternis. Die Finsternis von Izumo bestimmt und

deniert das Licht. Jede Existenz tritt in Erscheinung, nicht weil sie im

Licht steht, sondern weil sie einen inneren Schein in sich trägt. Dieser

Gedanke über Izumo spielt für mich eine wichtige Rolle, wenn ich mich

mit Architektur befasse. Meine Vorstellung ist es immer gewesen, alles,

wie Orte, Material, Gestalt und Architektur zu kristalisieren, als etwas,

das vom eigenen Licht durchtränkt ist (...), [in:] Shin Takamatsu, ein

Architekt aus Kyoto, p. 20.

Notching space – Shin Takamatsu’s architecture

These internal connections of modern architecture, phi-

losophy, social transformations and new technologies with-

in the framework of multidimensional tensions between

modernism and postmodernism found their expression in

the projects executed by a Japanese architect Shin Taka-

matsu

. His architectural designs understand architecture

as an integral element of culture and at the same time they

go beyond the general scheme of controversies between

modernism and postmodernism. Takamatsu has his own

unique way of interpreting space in the context of tradition

and history of the Japanese culture. It manifests itself as

a radical process of ‘notching’ this historical and cultural

space in form of ‘architectonic machines’

as its integral

Shin Takamatsu, ein Architekt aus Kyoto, mit Beiträgen von

F. Guattari, P. Virilio, S. Takamatsu, Merve Verlag, Berlin 1995.

Cf. Guattari F., Die Architektur-Maschinen von Shin Takamatsu, [in:]

Shin Takamatsu, ein Architekt aus Kyoto, Merve, Berlin 1995, pp. 56–83.

Spatial turn. Transcultural and transdisciplinar spaces in the architecture 207

the other in relation to the triad of history, tradition and

culture – we can observe duplicity of architecture. The ar-

chitect may remain faithful to the so called genius loci to

which he subordinates an act of creation and architecture

in the perspective of historical long lasting (F. Braudel) or

he can reject history and horizontality for the benet of

moment, transfer and ow (M. Castells, J. Urry) by intro-

ducing a vertical bend in form of moment-place, in which

architecture becomes a challenge for the existing place and

space. One of the examples of such domination of place in

the process of simultaneous producing and bending space

is the design by Takamatsu Kirin Plaza Osaka. In order to

express this dependency between architecture and space,

Takamatsu uses the metaphor of ether (Ether Planning)

This concept was supposed to enable the denition of eet-

ingness, change, temporariness in space, which at the same

time remains specied. In this sense, the metaphorical

character of architecture connects its development start-

ing from the aesthetics of space and glass at the beginning

of the 20

century contained in the studies of Mies van

der Rohe and the metaphors of light and shade at the end

of the 20

century in Takamatsu’s projects. Concurrently,

Takamatsu’s designs express new technologies at the turn

of millenniums, for example, Yokohama Urban Ring as an

attempt to express electronic space.

As emphasized by P. Virilio, Takamatsu treats space as

the subject of criticism and also as a peculiar subversive act

of abolishing rules. However, it does not occur in the sense

of postmodernist deconstruction but it rather means the ques-

tion of what and when to build. It resulted from the specic

transformation of the Japanese society after World War II.

Takamatsu’s structures explicitly enter space; it is a particu-

lar process of notching space as an expression and objectivity

of the whole issue of spatial turn exactly by Zuspitzung (P.

Virilio) – sharpening, overstatement in form, confrontation

with the existing principles of the static and widely accepted

scheme. This confrontation resulted from the unique situa-

tion in the history of Japanese culture and society, which was

suspended between the past and tradition as well as progress

and future, from the permanent state of tension between ide-

as and condensing of metropolis space

Äther ist für mich eine Metapher für einen Raum: Ein veränderlicher,

ätherischer Raum durch die ungleichmäßige Dichte der Luft, in dem jedes

Teilchen sich frei bewegt und die Entstehung der neuen Raumstruktur be-

einußt. Ein Raum, in dem die Inkohärenz der Kohärenz und die Kohärenz

der Inkohärenz ein exibles, dichtes, dynamisches Feld darstellen. (...) Ich

kam zu der Überzeugung, daß die Räume, die demnächst in Betracht kom-

men sollen, gekennzeichnet sind durch diese unbestimmte Bestimmtheit,

[in:] Shin Takamatsu, ein Architekt aus Kyoto, p. 37.

In this context P. Virilio emphasizes: Das heutige Nippon, das

zwischen Vergangenheit und Zukunft, zwischen Gedächtnis und Erndung

vereinsamt ist, kommt auf den Augenblick zurück, auf die kurze Zeitspanne

einer photographischen Momentaufnahme. (...) Shin Takamatsu Werk

entspringt aus Spannungen, die hier, in Tokio, in Kyoto und anderswo

wirksam sind, aus Spannungen, die der Dichte des Verkehrs und der

Überdichte der städtischen Bevölkerung geschuldet sind: Es erscheint

wie das Bild einer unvermeidlichen Zusammenballung von rückwärtsge-

wandten und vorausblickenden Ideen, als Sinnbehälter, als Panzerschrank

von architekturalen Werten, die dabei sind, zu verschwinden, P. Virilio,

Zuspitzung am Beispiel von Shin Takamatsu, [in:] Shin Takamatsu, ein

Architekt aus Kyoto, pp. 50–51.

space of this place, i.e. in this case the city space of Kyoto –

generally modern space of the Japanese culture [14].

The starting point in the analysis of Takamatsu’s crea-

tive work is the denition of architecture as a tool and

at the same time method of expression of the moment in

which the architect’s initiation occurs in a creative act by

virtue of an internal need for expression or an act of shap-

ing the form. In Takamatsu’s case this is achieved thanks

to the metaphors of light and shade and the permanent

process of repeating movement as designing-drawing the

form and its search which in architecture means creating

and at the same time researching by analogy with captur-

ing space and architecture as produced and producing. In

this way, a direct analogy is drawn between designing-

drawing and writing as a metaphor of the power of light

contained in the tip of the pen / rapidograph (i.e. technical

pen) (Leuchtkraft, die aus der Spitze des schriftsteller-

ischen Stiftes hervorgeht, ibidem, p. 13).

However, the very act of creation involves an insepa-

rable bond between the subject and the work itself, almost

a biological relation, which is emphasized by Takamatsu

(Ich kann sogar sagen, daß meine Architektur mein Körper

selbst ist, ibidem, p. 18). By analogy with this biological

relation with the work, Takamatsu presents architecture on

the model of mechanism, aggregate which introduces light

into our shade, into man’s interior where light and shade,

similarly to Izumo temple, do not constitute opposites but

mutually complement each other

. This inspiration with

Izumo temple in Kyoto also expresses differences in un-

derstanding the metaphor of light between the cultures of

East and West. In the western world, the metaphor of light

dates back to the Plato interpretation of light as a kind of

revelation or completion of a cognition act. On the other

hand, the eastern culture, among other things, the Japanese

culture is characterized by dimmer light which comes out

of shade and it is not explicit because it is burdened with

subtle, sophisticated taboo of reticence. This light serves

the purpose of expressing and simultaneously refuting ta-

boo. In the context of architecture, this means an aspiration

for shaping this internal light hidden in shade – extracting

light from the form, material and nally from the existing

urban space. According to Takamatsu, the act of creation

perceived in this way is something sacral and the architect

himself/herself becomes a priest and alchemist

In the case of relation between place and space, this

means that place is always dened anew by architecture in

the process of producing space. Such redening of places

is an act of spacing (spacing, M. Löw). Simultaneously,

in the context of place and space on the one hand, and on

(…) der das Licht in die Finsternis unseres Inneren dringen läßt.

Licht und Dunkel stehen zueinander nicht in Opposition (...), [in:] Shin

Takamatsu, ein Architekt aus Kyoto, p. 18.

Ich glaube auch, daß sich ein Architekt als eine Art Priester der

Images darstellt. Er versucht nicht die Kräfte visuell zu rationalisieren.

Formen sind schon da. In dem Moment, wenn eine Form hervorgeht,

übertrifft sie sich selbst, geladen mit unerhörten Kräften, als eine Existenz.

Die Architektur ist eine paradoxe Maschine, wie ich es mir vorstellte, die

dieses ursprüngliche Begehren von Formen hervorruft und klärt. Ich habe

geglaubt, daß Architektur als ein Filter, als eine Kristallisationsapparatur,

denkbar ist, [in:] Shin Takamatsu, ein Architekt aus Kyoto, p. 22.

208 Tomasz Stępień

Takamatsu refers to the concept of open, dynamic

space of structuralism by Kenzo Tange as a reaction to

the functionalism which was dominant in international

architecture. At the same time, the modern Japanese ar-

chitecture (trend of the so called metabolism) intends to

adapt buildings to the requirements of contemporary man.

F. Guattari denes this trend as processualism, i.e. not

surrendering to the formulas and schemes accepted in the

schools and trends of architecture so far

[14]. First of

all, it is a form of provoking and challenging the existing

space which also results from the tradition of form. In the

context of space, Guattari distinguishes two contrasting

concepts: 1) Le Corbusier with his postulate to maintain

the integrated relation between form and space, 2) Mies

Wenn man jede systematische Etikettierung dieser Architekten

ablehnt, kann man bei ihnen Prozesse evolutiven Werdens ausmachen,

die ganz natürlich darauf abzielen, ihre Werke aus den funktionalen

Rahmenbedingungen, aus den Erfordernissen des Kontextes, ja sogar

aus jedem kulturellen Bezug humanistischer Art heraustreten zu lassen,

F. Guattari, Die Architektur-Maschinen von Shin Takamatsu, [in:] Shin

Takamatsu, ein Architekt aus Kyoto, pp. 57–58.

van der Rohe with his postulate of separating the work,

i.e. a structure and its form from the environment. The

dilemma between those two concepts means the choice

between maintaining and rejecting the context in relation

to the surroundings. According to Guattari, Takamatsu’s

architecture is the third option – an aesthetic structure in

a way perfect in its form is at the same time open to the

spatial context

. Some of the expressions of this third

option are, among other things, the aforementioned no-

places (M. Augé) which become individualized in an act

of creation according to Takamatsu’s idea. These three

options determine the place of architecture in the modern

culture and space [14].

Vielleicht genügt aber auch der Hinweis, daß wir jeden Tag solche

Objekte aufsuchen, die intrinsisch strukturiert sind und zugleich mit der

äußeren Umwelt arbeiten: Diese Objekte sind die unterschiedlichen und

vielfältigen Maschinen, durch die unsere moderne Existenz von allen

Seiten her versorgt wird. Ein Merkmal dieser Objekte ist, daß sie sich

im Lauf der Zeit entwickeln und sich gegenseitig in einer Phylogenese

ersetzen, die an die der Lebewesen erinnert, F. Guattari, Die Architektur-

Maschinen von Shin Takamatsu, [in:] Shin Takamatsu, ein Architekt aus

Kyoto, pp. 62–63.

References

[1] Augé M., Nie-miejsca. Wprowadzenie do antropologii hiper no wo-

czesności, PWN, Warszawa 2010.

[2] Castells M., Społeczeństwo sieci, PWN, Warszawa 2007.

[3] Döring J., Thielmann T. (Hrsg.), Spatial turn. Das Raumparadigma

in den Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften, transcript Verlag, Bielefeld

2008.

[4] Eibl K., Kultur als Zwischenwelt. Eine evolutionsbiologische Per-

spektive, Edition Unseld, Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt a. M. 2009.

[5] Elias N., Czym jest socjologia?, Aletheia, Warszawa 2010, pp. 89–

233.

[6] Ghirardo D., Architektura po modernizmie, Via, Wrocław 1999.

[7] Habermas J., Moderne und postmoderne Architektur, [in:]

Welsch W. (eds.), Wege aus der Moderne, Acta humaniora, Weinheim

1988, pp. 110–120.

[8] Heil R., Kaminski A., Stippak M., Unger A., Ziegler M. (eds.), Ten-

sions and Convergences. Technological and Aesthetic Transforma-

tions of Society, transcript Verlag, Bielefeld 2007.

[9] Jałowiecki B., Społeczne wytwarzanie przestrzeni, Scholar, Warszawa

2010.

[10] Löw M., Raumsoziologie, Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt am Main

2009, p. 69–129.

[11] Löw M., Steets S., Stoetzer S., Einführung in die Stadt- und Raum-

soziologie, Budrich/UTB, Opladen & Farmington Hills 2008,

pp. 51–92.

[12] McLuhan H.M., Wybór tekstów, Zysk i S-ka, Poznań 2001.

[13] Schäfers B., Architektursoziologie. Grundlagen – Epochen – The-

men, Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden 2006.

[14] Shin Takamatsu, ein Architekt aus Kyoto, mit Beiträgen von

F. Guattari, P. Virilio, S. Takamatsu, Merve Verlag, Berlin 1995.

[15] Simmel G., Socjologia przestrzeni (1903), [in:] Pisma socjologiczne,

Ocyna Naukowa, Warszawa 2008, pp. 365–385.

[16] Sztompka P., Socjologia. Analiza Społeczeństwa, Znak, Kraków

2009, pp. 437–553.

[17] Urry J., Socjologia mobilności, PWN, Warszawa 2009.

[18] Warf B., Arias S. (eds.), The Spatial Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspec-

tives, Routledge Studies in Human Geography, London 2009.

[19] Zawojski P., Cyberkultura. Syntopia sztuki, nauki i technologii,

Poltext, Warszawa 2010.

Spatial turn. Przestrzenie międzykulturowe i transdyscyplinarne w architekturze

Współczesna akumulacja rozwoju technologii doprowadziła do fuzji

społeczeństwa i technologii na fundamencie estetyki, dokładnie nowych

technologii wizualizacji. Jednocześnie poszerzyło się znaczenie samych

technologii jako swoistych retorycznych narzędzi dyskursu toczonego

wokół kultury oraz architektury. Jako przykład może tutaj posłużyć

statyczny wzór/paradygmat architektoniczny Le Corbusiera oparty na

platońskiej idealistycznej koncepcji technologii (wytwarzania). Jego

przeciwieństwem jest futuryzm z podkreśleniem dynamizmu samych tech-

nologii, a oparty na heraklitejskim wariabilizmie. Podobne przeciwieństwo

odnajdujemy w architektonicznych interpretacjach miejsca i przestrzeni

funkcjonalizmu (pragmatyzm i statyzm) oraz strukturalizmu (zmienność

i otwarcie przestrzeni). Wraz z odkryciem międzykulturowości i transdy-

scyplinarności w drugiej połowie 20. wieku przeciwieństwa te doprowa-

dziły do tzw. zwrotu przestrzennego w naukach społecznych, opartych

od tego momentu na wielowymiarowej koncepcji przestrzeni i wyrażonej

w sporze modernizm/postmodernizm. Spór ten stał się jednocześnie osią

rozwoju współczesnej architektury, czego wyrazem są projekty Shin

Takamatsu. W ten sposób architektura ukazuje się w zwierciadle lozoi

i technologii jako integralny element kultury.

Key words: spatial turn, space in architecture Słowa kluczowe: spatial turn, przestrzeń w architekturze