Foucault's The Order of Things and its Relation to Architecture

1.0 Interpretation of Foucault’s the Order of Things

Screenshot (924).png

2.0 Knowledge and Knowledge Type

2.1.1 Comparing following subjects: theology vs. study of gods, mathematics vs. study of mathematics (quantity/structure/space/change), architecture vs. study of architecture

2.1.2 Discourse

2.2.1 deconstructivism and building typology

2.3.1 思想或教育並不會使壹個人變得獨立自由,它既不能解放他的身體,也無法覺醒他自發的意識,相反,只會囚禁他於既存的體系牢籠之中。正如20世紀前期興起的達達主義所代表的革命精神早在幾百年前就時刻發生著壹樣,後現代主義建築沒有在任何壹方面逃離了現代主義的陰影。

2.3.2 因此,現代權力是規訓式的。無論是Dadaism還是DE-constructivism都是話語(discourse)隱藏權力系統的手法。Duchamp和Venturi都是叫喊著“皇帝沒有穿衣服”的小孩,但是穿衣服與否並不影響皇帝及其象征的權力。

3.0 The Body and Power

3.1.1 Comparing following items: body vs. mind, sex vs. gender, a brick in the wall vs. a brick in the Berlin Wall…

3.2.1 Form and Function are independent from each other.

3.2.2 Form使建築主體的存在的必然、客觀結果,而function是可脫離建築主體的不必然、不客觀因素。因此對form和function的討論,其實就是另壹種形式的對body和power的討論。

4.0 The Elimination of the Body

4.1.1 The Berlin Wall = the total bricks that construct the wall?

4.1.2 The fall of the Berlin Wall = the elimination of every brick in the wall ?

4.2.1 the totality of architecture - power

4.2.2 every architecture + power

4.3.1 權力是否可以脫離主體而存在? 進而使建築脫離presentation/representation獨立成為壹個知識類型或完全依附於presentation/representation成為權力的完美象征?

5.0 Narrative from Lies

5.1.1

他意識到他本人配不上自己的最高理想,那種思想折磨著他的心。

Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment