Deconstruction in Architecture

Deconstruction in Architecture

Deconstruction is first developed by the French philosopher Jacques Derrida. The definition for deconstruction is not easy to understand, and Derrida and his interpreters actually intend it to be difficult. It was first meant a method of interpretation and analysis of a text or a speech. He introduced the concept of deconstruction in connection with his linguistic philosophy and grammatology. When deconstruct a text or a speech, it is to draw out conflicting logics of sense and implication, with the object of showing that the text never exactly means what it ways or says what it means . Though, it has been applied not only to text but also to the visual arts and architecture.

The approach of deconstruction in architecture is to get architects to think of things in a new way, to view architecture in bits and pieces. Also to develop buildings which show how differently from traditional architectural conventions buildings can be built without loosing their utility and still complying with the fundamental laws of physics. Especially in 1988, when deconstruction was first promoted in architecture. Different architects of different places seemed to be placing buildings and bits of buildings at odd angles so that they clashed and even penetrated each other. The geometry in these architectures had been set up, but has at least one overlaid and clashed with the other. Also, there are many different kinds of clashes such as: clashes in historic and modern, clashes in plan, clashes in section or elevation, clashes in three dimensions, clashes in grids and clashes in angles.

Deconstructionist architecture must start from deconstruct the construction at first, with a name indicates its schemes, its intuition and its concepts, or its rhetoric. Deconstruction also contains an insight of fundamental importance for the historian¡¦s conception of what he or she is doing. It uses theory to understand history, and history to understand the theory to construct a more perceptive view of the cultural and social. As deconstructs a structure, it strictly meets the terms of architectural construction and the philosophical construction of the concept of architecture. Therefore, deconstruction is understood to be un-problematically architectural, as it combines with the idea of the system in philosophy, and theory, also the practice and logic ...

... middle of paper ...

...re of architecture. The fundamental idea of architecture consists of primary forms such as cubes, cones, cylinders, and cetera. Although, deconstructionist architecture made clear to the observer that the architecture is an art and not just an engineering discipline, and it is a representation of a material that represent of abstract data. Although deconstructionist architecture does not succeed in the nature of architecture, however, deconstruction is philosophical in the sense that it deploys a distinctive mode of argument in raising certain problem about knowledge, meaning and representation. My opinion on deconstruction is that some of the architecture can be really beautiful but others can be strange.

Bibliography

¡P C. Andreas, Reconstruction Deconstruction, Academy Group LTD, 1989, USA

¡P H. Kevin, Trespass of the sign: deconstruction, theology and philosophy,

¡P N. Christopher & B. Andrew, What is Deconstruction, Academy Editions LTD, 1996, USA

¡P S. Bronwyn, Contemporary Discourse in Interior Architecture and Design ¡V Unit Reader 2002, Monash University, 2002, Melbourne

¡P W. Mark, The Architecture of Deconstruction, MIT Press, 1993, USA