Architecture and Revolution? Situating the Theory of Architecture on the Left

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F67985955%3A_____%2F25%3A00643224" target="_blank" >RIV/67985955:_____/25:00643224 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

—

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Architecture and Revolution? Situating the Theory of Architecture on the Left

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

In the post-war period, facing the crisis of modern architecture embodied in the sterility and failings of social housing, the routinized corporate modernism, and the commodification of design, various architects turned to philosophy and social sciences in order to rethink the premises of their field. Since that moment, architectural theory constituted itself in close dialogue with streams of thought as diverse as the thinking of European Marxism and the Frankfurt school, phenomenology and hermeneutics, as well as French structuralist and post-structuralist philosophy and theory. In the late 1950s and in the 1960s, theory of architecture has been, especially in the Italian and French contexts, strongly influenced by different forms of Marxist thinking. For instance, Aldo Rossi, who later became known mostly for his melancholic formal architectural experiments, frequently referred in his still largely untranslated 1950s articles in Casabella Continuità to thinking of György Lukács and Antonio Gramsci. Likewise, Manfredo Tafuri first developed his thought by referring to the theoretical legacy of operaismo and to writings of Walter Benjamin. In France, Henri Lefebvre’s denunciation of the post-war urban planning schemes intersected with the radical criticism formulated by the members of the Groupe Utopie. The increasing interest in French structuralism and post-structuralism in the 1960s and 1970s helped many thinkers to formulate an effective criticism of functionalism and of modernist urban planning, notions such as “structure,” “meaning,” “event” circulated between theory of architecture and philosophy. However, the following 1980s rise of post-modernism and emphasis on linguistic paradigms contributed to the foreclosure of the left-wing thinking on architecture and urban planning, some of the initial European leftist context has been “lost in translation” when “French theory” entered the academic curricula of the North-American universities. The goal of this workshop is to think about the left corpus of theoretical thinking on architecture. What would indeed fit into such a corpus and what are the theoretical texts that could help us to think about the situation of architecture and urban planning in the present moment of crisis? What impact had the work of the thinkers of the Frankfurt School on theoretical thinking on architecture? What are the links between the situationism of Guy Debord, the Marxism of Henri Lefebvre, and the French critiques of urban planning in the 1960s and 1970s? What role did Marxist theory and the thinking of the Frankfurt School play in the writings of the thinkers linked to the Istitutto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia (IUAV), who, in the 1960s and 1970s, produced some of the major contributions to the methodology of architectural history, theory, and criticism? To what extent has Manfredo Tafuri’s “project of history” been linked to the writings of Walter Benjamin or to Theodor Adorno’s negative dialectics? And, more recently, what impact had Fredric Jameson’s writings on the architectural discourse?

Název v anglickém jazyce

Architecture and Revolution? Situating the Theory of Architecture on the Left

Popis výsledku anglicky

In the post-war period, facing the crisis of modern architecture embodied in the sterility and failings of social housing, the routinized corporate modernism, and the commodification of design, various architects turned to philosophy and social sciences in order to rethink the premises of their field. Since that moment, architectural theory constituted itself in close dialogue with streams of thought as diverse as the thinking of European Marxism and the Frankfurt school, phenomenology and hermeneutics, as well as French structuralist and post-structuralist philosophy and theory. In the late 1950s and in the 1960s, theory of architecture has been, especially in the Italian and French contexts, strongly influenced by different forms of Marxist thinking. For instance, Aldo Rossi, who later became known mostly for his melancholic formal architectural experiments, frequently referred in his still largely untranslated 1950s articles in Casabella Continuità to thinking of György Lukács and Antonio Gramsci. Likewise, Manfredo Tafuri first developed his thought by referring to the theoretical legacy of operaismo and to writings of Walter Benjamin. In France, Henri Lefebvre’s denunciation of the post-war urban planning schemes intersected with the radical criticism formulated by the members of the Groupe Utopie. The increasing interest in French structuralism and post-structuralism in the 1960s and 1970s helped many thinkers to formulate an effective criticism of functionalism and of modernist urban planning, notions such as “structure,” “meaning,” “event” circulated between theory of architecture and philosophy. However, the following 1980s rise of post-modernism and emphasis on linguistic paradigms contributed to the foreclosure of the left-wing thinking on architecture and urban planning, some of the initial European leftist context has been “lost in translation” when “French theory” entered the academic curricula of the North-American universities. The goal of this workshop is to think about the left corpus of theoretical thinking on architecture. What would indeed fit into such a corpus and what are the theoretical texts that could help us to think about the situation of architecture and urban planning in the present moment of crisis? What impact had the work of the thinkers of the Frankfurt School on theoretical thinking on architecture? What are the links between the situationism of Guy Debord, the Marxism of Henri Lefebvre, and the French critiques of urban planning in the 1960s and 1970s? What role did Marxist theory and the thinking of the Frankfurt School play in the writings of the thinkers linked to the Istitutto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia (IUAV), who, in the 1960s and 1970s, produced some of the major contributions to the methodology of architectural history, theory, and criticism? To what extent has Manfredo Tafuri’s “project of history” been linked to the writings of Walter Benjamin or to Theodor Adorno’s negative dialectics? And, more recently, what impact had Fredric Jameson’s writings on the architectural discourse?

Druh

W - Uspořádání workshopu

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60301 - Philosophy, History and Philosophy of science and technology

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/EH22_010%2F0008600" target="_blank" >EH22_010/0008600: ArchConcepts</a><br>

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2025

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Místo konání akce

Prague

Stát konání akce

CZ - Česká republika

Datum zahájení akce

—

Datum ukončení akce

—

Celkový počet účastníků

75

Počet zahraničních účastníků

20

Typ akce podle státní přísl. účastníků

WRD - Celosvětová akce