The terms ‘Performative’ and ‘Performance’ are more and more emerging in the spatial design discourses, from exhibition, to interiors, arriving to urban scale architecture. But these notions are characterized by a semantic width and multiple applicative possibilities; therefore they are still not clearly defined yet. Between the different interpretations and uses of ‘performance’ and ‘performativity’ in the architectural discourse, this thesis will focus on 6 main dimensions of a particular importance: The first refers to the concepts of the scenic potential and the theatrical qualities in architecture. The second deals with the concepts of the openness, the flexibility, and the reversibility of spaces. The third dimension includes the social considerations, such as the participatory and the contextual considerations in the design process. The forth relates to the ‘event-character’ of spatial interventions, and the relation between the event and architecture. The fifth expresses the concept of the ‘transformative power of the performative’, which indicates to the capacity of architecture to activate and animate processes and spaces. The sixth question relates to the notions of open-ended process, the strategic design, and the mental performativity of the designer. Before architecture, other disciplines had theorized about ‘performance’ and ‘performative’, such as in the philosophy of linguistics, Performance studies, Social sciences, the speech act theory, the phenomenological non-representational theory, and in the dramaturgical studies. Therefore, we suggest that many of their elaborated questions, and theoretical concepts could be imported into architecture. And therefore from these unusual relationships a series of interrogations arise: Is it possible to shape an architectural theory based on the idea of the performativity of the spatial project? Is the semantic width of these two terms an obstacle or an advantage towards a generalization of their relation with architecture? Is it necessary to shape an architectural theory of the performative? Is it more realistic to define a general performative approach to design? Or is it more interesting to invest in the educational and psycho-pedagogical discourse? Answering these questions, the thesis embeds two parallel investigations: The first is terminological and theoretical about the terms ‘Performance’ and ‘Performativity’, while the second is spatial and architectural. Therefore, the applicability of these two terms unfolds from the ability to describe: 1) spatial and architectural qualities 2) practice and design approaches, 3) arriving to the ability to describe mental skills. And so the performative qualities that these notions describe are also reflected within the linguistic and the terminological nature of the two terms themselves: “Performance’ and “performative” are theoretically and semantically performative! Furthermore, and to understand better the meaning of the 2 terms in relation with the spatial design, the theme of the inclusivity, the openness, and the flexibility are indispensable for the architectural practice in a complex contemporaneity. And from this point the mental performativity is suggested as an inclusive mental skill, required from today’s architects and designers, to be able to deal with a performative and complex contemporaneity, and to be able to handle different scales and types of projects. The mental performativity comes here as a skill distinctive from the classical notion of creativity, since it is more inclusive, and somehow means the ability to play different roles, to manage systems and to direct processes. And in this psycho-pedagogical part of the thesis it should be asked how to develop pedagogical models that encourage such skills. Exhibitions, pavilions and installations are all concerned with changing the performance of the existing space, and they are able to illustrate what a ‘performative-oriented architecture’ could be or mean. They are spatial projects that embed big amounts of information, qualities, and a variety of disciplines and expertise. The expression ‘metaphors of performative-oriented architectures’, chosen for the title of this research, is inspired by a title of an essay by the Italian architect and thinker Andrea Branzi, L'Allestimento come metafora di una nuova modernità’, (exhibitions as a metaphor of a new modernity), (Lotus, n.115, December, 2002), in which Branzi invites architecture to learn from the practices of exhibitions and installations (the sub-categories of architecture). Therefore it is in these sub-disciplines of architecture that we can ‘rehearse’ a general ‘performative understanding’ of the spatial project , studying and designing spaces basing on performative criteria and performance perspectives. The repertoire of the performative is large, it includes the concepts of: flexibility, reversibility, strategic design, openness, unpredictable, the unfinished and the un-designed as part of the design, the social considerations, etc. So the aim and the challenge are to try to develop and rehearse a performative analytical tool for the architectural project. The thesis has a triple task: 1) A terminological investigation of the notions of ‘performance’ and ‘performative’ in architecture, displaying the various uses. 2) To illustrate these notions, and detect them through the fields of exhibition design, spatial interventions, and installations. 3) The third task is an open-ended task, which consists on investigating the concepts of ‘performance’ and ‘performative’ in a theoretical and psycho-pedagogical discourse. Therefore, in the thesis, the discourse of 'performativity' starts as an architectural one, and later it arrives to become a psycho-pedagogical one: Architectural performativity means the requested capacity of space to perform a diversity of roles, while the mental performativity of the designer means the mental ability of the designer to perform a variety of roles.
I termini Performance e Performatività sono sempre più utilizzati nella descrizione del progetto di architettura e nella progettazione dello spazio, e questo vale per l’allestimento e per gli interni, così come per l'architettura e la città. Va anche osservato che i due termini, applicati all’architettura, sono caratterizzati da una forte apertura semantica e tutto sommato, visto la quantità di possibilità applicative, non ancora esattamente definiti e perimetrati. A partire dalle diverse interpretazioni e usi che si fanno di questi due termini, la presente ricerca si concentra su sei questioni che ritiene di particolare rilievo. La prima questione si riferisce al concetto di potenziale scenico e alle qualità teatrali dello spazio architettonico. La seconda tratta della forma aperta, della flessibilità e della reversibilità. La terza comprende questioni di carattere sociale come la partecipazione nel processo di progettazione. La quarta riguarda l’evento nelle sue relazioni con l’architettura e lo spazio. La quinta esprime il concetto di capacità trasformativa dell’architettura e la sua capacità di attivare processi di animazione dello spazio. La sesta si riferisce alla nozione di open ended process, al design strategico, e alla performatività mentale. Prima ancora dell’architettura, altre discipline hanno già teorizzato sulle nozioni performance e performatività, come ad esempio la filosofia, la linguistica, le scienze sociali, la drammaturgia nello spettacolo, ecc. Tuttavia, molte delle questioni trattate da queste discipline possono oggi essere importate nell’architettura. Da queste inusitate relazioni, scaturiscono allora una serie di interrogativi. Tra questi ci chiediamo se sia possibile modellare una teoria architettonica basata sull’idea di performatività del progetto. Oppure se la moltitudine di significati dei due termini performance e performatività possa essere un ostacolo o un vantaggio nella chiarificazione del loro rapporto con l’architettura. E ancora, se sia necessario o meno formulare una teoria della performatività. Nel rispondere a questi interrogativi, la ricerca indaga da un lato sul significato generale dei due termini, dall’altro si occupa di descriverne le ricadute sull’architettura e sullo spazio. Di grande importanza per comprendere meglio il significato dei due termini in relazione al progetto di architettura, è il tema della inclusività, intesa come pratica indispensabile della contemporaneità. Ma è proprio il tema della inclusività che pone il progetto nella più interessante condizione di trasformarsi, di fatto, in un processo continuo, secondo il quale sembra essere più significativo il percorso seguito che non il risultato ottenuto. Da ultimo, una puntualizzazione sull'espressione Metaphors of performative-oriented architectures, scelta per il titolo, che assomiglia molto al titolo di un importante saggio di Andrea Branzi: L'Allestimento come una metafora di una nuova modernità', apparso sulla rivista Lotus (n.115, December, 2002). Secondo Branzi l’architettura deve imparare delle mostre e dalle installazioni, caricandosi di significati che vanno ben oltre gli effetti più esteriori di queste due pratiche. A quanto sostenuto da Branzi, gli studi condotti nella ricerca aggiungono i temi della performance e della performatività concludendone il discorso e arricchendolo attraverso un’ulteriore serie di questioni che vanno oltre la semplice disciplina del progetto architettonico. Nella tesi il discorso attorno ‘peformatività' è iniziato progettuale e architettonico , ma poi è diventato psico-pedagogico : Mentre la peformatività architettonica significa la capacità ‘requista’ dello spazio per eseguire (to perform) ruoli diversi , la performatività mentale significa la capacità e la competenza mentale del progettista di "performare" ruoli diversi .
Metaphors of performative-oriented architectures. Exhibitions, installations, interventions
KASSEM, AYMAN
Abstract
The terms ‘Performative’ and ‘Performance’ are more and more emerging in the spatial design discourses, from exhibition, to interiors, arriving to urban scale architecture. But these notions are characterized by a semantic width and multiple applicative possibilities; therefore they are still not clearly defined yet. Between the different interpretations and uses of ‘performance’ and ‘performativity’ in the architectural discourse, this thesis will focus on 6 main dimensions of a particular importance: The first refers to the concepts of the scenic potential and the theatrical qualities in architecture. The second deals with the concepts of the openness, the flexibility, and the reversibility of spaces. The third dimension includes the social considerations, such as the participatory and the contextual considerations in the design process. The forth relates to the ‘event-character’ of spatial interventions, and the relation between the event and architecture. The fifth expresses the concept of the ‘transformative power of the performative’, which indicates to the capacity of architecture to activate and animate processes and spaces. The sixth question relates to the notions of open-ended process, the strategic design, and the mental performativity of the designer. Before architecture, other disciplines had theorized about ‘performance’ and ‘performative’, such as in the philosophy of linguistics, Performance studies, Social sciences, the speech act theory, the phenomenological non-representational theory, and in the dramaturgical studies. Therefore, we suggest that many of their elaborated questions, and theoretical concepts could be imported into architecture. And therefore from these unusual relationships a series of interrogations arise: Is it possible to shape an architectural theory based on the idea of the performativity of the spatial project? Is the semantic width of these two terms an obstacle or an advantage towards a generalization of their relation with architecture? Is it necessary to shape an architectural theory of the performative? Is it more realistic to define a general performative approach to design? Or is it more interesting to invest in the educational and psycho-pedagogical discourse? Answering these questions, the thesis embeds two parallel investigations: The first is terminological and theoretical about the terms ‘Performance’ and ‘Performativity’, while the second is spatial and architectural. Therefore, the applicability of these two terms unfolds from the ability to describe: 1) spatial and architectural qualities 2) practice and design approaches, 3) arriving to the ability to describe mental skills. And so the performative qualities that these notions describe are also reflected within the linguistic and the terminological nature of the two terms themselves: “Performance’ and “performative” are theoretically and semantically performative! Furthermore, and to understand better the meaning of the 2 terms in relation with the spatial design, the theme of the inclusivity, the openness, and the flexibility are indispensable for the architectural practice in a complex contemporaneity. And from this point the mental performativity is suggested as an inclusive mental skill, required from today’s architects and designers, to be able to deal with a performative and complex contemporaneity, and to be able to handle different scales and types of projects. The mental performativity comes here as a skill distinctive from the classical notion of creativity, since it is more inclusive, and somehow means the ability to play different roles, to manage systems and to direct processes. And in this psycho-pedagogical part of the thesis it should be asked how to develop pedagogical models that encourage such skills. Exhibitions, pavilions and installations are all concerned with changing the performance of the existing space, and they are able to illustrate what a ‘performative-oriented architecture’ could be or mean. They are spatial projects that embed big amounts of information, qualities, and a variety of disciplines and expertise. The expression ‘metaphors of performative-oriented architectures’, chosen for the title of this research, is inspired by a title of an essay by the Italian architect and thinker Andrea Branzi, L'Allestimento come metafora di una nuova modernità’, (exhibitions as a metaphor of a new modernity), (Lotus, n.115, December, 2002), in which Branzi invites architecture to learn from the practices of exhibitions and installations (the sub-categories of architecture). Therefore it is in these sub-disciplines of architecture that we can ‘rehearse’ a general ‘performative understanding’ of the spatial project , studying and designing spaces basing on performative criteria and performance perspectives. The repertoire of the performative is large, it includes the concepts of: flexibility, reversibility, strategic design, openness, unpredictable, the unfinished and the un-designed as part of the design, the social considerations, etc. So the aim and the challenge are to try to develop and rehearse a performative analytical tool for the architectural project. The thesis has a triple task: 1) A terminological investigation of the notions of ‘performance’ and ‘performative’ in architecture, displaying the various uses. 2) To illustrate these notions, and detect them through the fields of exhibition design, spatial interventions, and installations. 3) The third task is an open-ended task, which consists on investigating the concepts of ‘performance’ and ‘performative’ in a theoretical and psycho-pedagogical discourse. Therefore, in the thesis, the discourse of 'performativity' starts as an architectural one, and later it arrives to become a psycho-pedagogical one: Architectural performativity means the requested capacity of space to perform a diversity of roles, while the mental performativity of the designer means the mental ability of the designer to perform a variety of roles.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
2017_08_PhD_Kassem.pdf
non accessibile
Descrizione: A.Kassem final thesis text
Dimensione
9.08 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
9.08 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in POLITesi sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/10589/135252