"Space is the architectural manifestation of guilt."
"In Western architecture, there has been a human assumption that it is desirable to establish a moral relationship between the interior and the exterior of a building, where the exterior reveals something about the interior, which in turn affirms this relationship." (Rem Koolhaas, Delirious New York - A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan)
To understand the moral relationship that Rem Koolhaas is referring to, we first need to understand ethics. Generally, ethics refers to the value norms regarding what is good or bad, right or wrong (Son Ki-tae, Silent Storm, Spinoza, p. 86). Moral norms primarily appear as principles that encourage ethical behavior. A moral person feels guilt if they fail to comply with these principles. Therefore, they engage in ethical behavior either to relieve existing guilt or to prevent potential guilt. Guilt is the internal motivation for ethical behavior. Guilt arises when actions go against a person's conscience. Whether the standard for conscience is divine command or rational judgment, conscience is an entity or mechanism that perceives transcendental commands. In summary, conscience is the internalization of the transcendent, and guilt is the psychological manifestation of conscience.
In the personal internalization of the transcendent, ethics is humanistic. Therefore, Rem Koolhaas' assertion that there is a human-centered characteristic in establishing a moral relationship is valid. This contemplation of personal ethics can also be applied to architecture. The characteristics of Western architecture that Rem Koolhaas mentions are well demonstrated in modern rationalistic architecture. The modern architecture principle that "the facade is the translation of the plan" represents well the idea that the exterior of a building reveals or should reveal the interior. This is similar to the notion that an individual's ethical behavior effectively reflects their conscience. From this perspective, the exterior of a building corresponds to an individual's ethical behavior, while the interior corresponds to their conscience. Somewhere between the two, there must be an architectural manifestation of guilt.
It is worth noting that when we say "ethical behavior is the manifestation of conscience," it conceals the negative emotion of guilt. Instead, a sense of accomplishment arises from the manifested conscience. Similarly, when the building exterior reveals the interior, it conceals what is "affirmed by the interior." Instead, the expressed interior, in other words, the exterior, acquires a certain purity or transparency. The important point here is that this "affirmed by the interior" is precisely the architectural manifestation of guilt. Then, what corresponds to the architecture's interior, which represents conscience in ethics? It varies depending on the era and region. In ancient Roman architecture, it might be the genius loci, the spirit of place; in medieval European architecture, it might be divine grace; and in modern rationalistic architecture, it might be reason or rationality. The exterior of rationalistic architecture has become a white architectural surface (Le Corbusier) or a transparent envelope (Mies van der Rohe) to reveal this rationality. The rational interior is reproduced in the plan, and the rational exterior is reproduced in the facade. And the connection between the two must be made in the inherently three-dimensional nature of architecture. Therefore, functional rationality finds its place through this space. Furthermore, through space, architecture projects functional rationality vividly and transparently onto the facade. In this regard, it can be understood that what Rem Koolhaas refers to as "the exterior affirms the interior" is essentially space. Finally, it can also be understood that this space corresponds to guilt, creating the architectural manifestation of guilt.
Komentarze