Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
(1985)
All this is on slippery, spongey grounds, as Derrida himself says he has 'no simple and formalisable response' to the question, 'what is deconstruction?'; see Jacques Derrida
V. Shklovsky, Alexandra Berlina (2015)
Art, as DevicePoetics Today, 36
J. Flach, F. Voorhorst (2019)
Deep Structure?A Meaning Processing Approach to Cognition
N. Spiller (2019)
Feverish Delirium: Surrealism, Deconstruction and Numinous PresencesArchitectural Design
This, then, might be considered a response to Derrida's question, 'what does architecture […] have to do and say about experience
(2020)
Architectural Archaeology: Install House', Architecture Australia
(1992)
See the 'Deconstruction in Architecture' special issue of AD
(1999)
This is an intentional diversion from the likes of Elizabeth Grosz
(1972)
The presence of him and his story through his name is mythological in the Barthesian sense; see Roland Barthes, Mythologies, trans. by Annette
(2019)
Stuart King suggest 'architecture may no longer [lead] heritage debates and in fact, is possibly being left behind'; see Harriet Edquist and Stuart King
It is only fair to note that Wigley has quite convincingly rejected claims that he naively appropriated the concept in, for example, Mark Wigley
Michael Benedikt (1991)
Deconstructing the Kimbell: An Essay on Meaning and Architecture
This paper avoids dwelling on these texts, as well as primary texts by Derrida, to reach some solid grounds and ready tools
E. Rozmarin (2017)
The Task of the TranslatorPsychoanalytic Dialogues, 27
K. Burns (2010)
Ex libris: Archaeologies of Feminism, Architecture and DeconstructionArchitectural Theory Review, 15
(2020)
UnDoing Buildings: Adaptive Reuse and Cultural Memory (New York, NY: Routledge, 2020)
J. Derrida, Hilary Hanel (1990)
A Letter to Peter EisenmanAssemblage
(1993)
Relation can be found here to Derrida's 'benches for people to sit on' exchange with Eisenman in 'A Letter to Peter Eisenman', discussed in John Macarthur
Stuart King (2019)
Agency of Architecture
(2004)
Note here the capitalisation: in addition to note 1, above, it is worth explaining that the antagonistic opposition must also be recognised
T. Patin (1993)
From Deep Structure to an Architecture in Suspense: Peter Eisenman, Structuralism, and DeconstructionJournal of Architectural Education, 47
Du Ming (2007)
Criticality and Its Discontents
For historical-critical accounts of the work, see Stuart King
The paper offers its argument and its controlled form as contributions to the discipline
(1970)
Ghirardo calls the Architecture Discourse
The literary-philosophical practice of deconstruction has suffered abuse in architectural discourse for decades. Popularised interpretations of metaphor-heavy and art-referencing iconic architecture have undermined the potential of an exercise that holds potential for much insight. This paper looks to recover some of that potential burnt out in flagrant forms and beaten down in opaque missives of discursive deliria. Deconstruction is not, however, the object under consideration, but rather the device through which it operates. The object of this paper is Architecture built onto and into existing Heritage fabric. The Architecture — Captain Kelly’s Cottage (2018) by John Wardle Architects; Bozen’s Cottage (2019) by Taylor and Hinds; and Install House (2019) by Partners Hill — is all found on the small island of Tasmania. These powerful works are celebrated for their object status and their adroit condensations of peoples and contexts, as well as the historical and the contemporary. They are given gravity by a weight of facts and accounts of history, highlighted by age-value remnants and exquisitely crafted interventions. Captain Kelly’s Cottage, Bozen’s Cottage, and Install House are positioned in this paper as manifesting deconstruction. This paper does not claim that their architects designed with deconstruction in mind, rather that the intrinsic parameters of their architectural complexes implicate aporia, and that the interventions can be read to develop the potentials these aporia offer. Further, this paper suggests the practice of Heritage-related Architecture as translation and conversions that inherently affords potential for deconstruction in design and interpretation. This paper, thus, reframes deconstruction in Architecture, establishing a more appropriate and pertinent location in discourse on Heritage-related work. At the same time, it offers its readers a translation of deconstruction into Architecture theory-criticism as material construction.
The Journal of Architecture – Taylor & Francis
Published: Apr 3, 2023
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.