ZA?

Work

Play

About

Practice

Research

Teaching

Writing

Yagé and the Tukano

"...after the cleansing was finished, I wandered outside. Dawn was coming. I felt exhaustion mingle with a deeper sensation, an intuition that what I had experienced, a confusion of random visual and auditory hallucinations without form or substance, was only a crude approximation of something indescribably rich and mysterious. No doubt, as Schultes had written, a power lay within this plant.‍" -Wade Davis, One River‍ Ayahuasca and Yagé: Marginalizing Ambiguity To articulate the impact of yagé on a science of the environment requires from the outset a study of its terminology and an analysis its taxonomy. The word yagé or yajé originates from the Tukano family of languages indigenous to northwest Amazon, and refers to the entheogenic brew which is the cornerstone of their shamanic practices. Ayahuasca, often used interchangeably with yagé, is the hispanicized spelling of the word ayawaska from the Quechua and Aymara languages of the Andes. Emerging along the continental divide, in the mountainous region at the western-most edge of the basin’s watershed, ayahuasca presents its etymology as a problematic terrain on the margins of its own ecology. Translated as “vine of the soul,” ayawaska derives from aya “spirit”, and waska “liana,” and refers both to the entheogenic brew and the long-stemmed, woody vines which are its critical ingredient. This conflation suppresses the brew’s actuality as an admixture and fails to underscore the intelligence of the recipe, and the remarkable synergy of its various ingredients. Gerardo Reichel-Dolmatoff (1976) sketches out a didactic ecological scenography in his article “Cosmology as Ecological Analysis: A View from the Rainforest,” drawing attention to the evolutionary paramters of Tukano environment:The Tukano Indians occupy a large area in the central portion of the northwest Amazon, mainly on the Vaupés River, a major affluent of the Rio Negro. Although most of the country is flat and densely forested, a transitional terrain of hilly uplands lies on the western fringe, while towards the north the forest is some- times broken by stretches of grassy, tree-strewn savanna country. Although this rain forest area has often been described as a rather homogeneous region, many environmental differences exist which have considerable bearing upon the range and success of human adaptive responses. Game animals, amphibians and reptiles, edible fruits, nuts and insects, and suitable horticultural lands are not evenly distributed and considerable resource fluctuation can be said to exist within and among subregions (p. 308). The Tukano, having coevolved as part and parcel of the vine’s ecology for more than 5,000 years, identify more than a dozen subtypes, each used by the shaman, or curandero, for different ritualistic purposes (Schultes, 1979, p. 176). The nomenclature of these myriad subtypes is complexified by the conditioning of language resulting from exogamy. There are seven descent groups or “tribes” within the Tukano people, each with their own language: the Bara Tukano; the Barasana; the Cubeo; the Desana; the Macuna; the Wanano; and the Tukano Proper. With the exception of the Cubeo, each requires females to marry outside their language group; to do otherwise would be considered something like incest. Upon marriage, she will relocate to the longhouse of her husband’s household, introduce her language therein, and raise a child into a multilingual environment . There is no discrimination on the basis of language within the various groups; on the contrary, there exists a strong interest in learning new languages--new ways of understanding and interfacing the natural environment (Wardhaugh, 1986, p. 94). It is in this way that the names of the various subtypes of vine used to brew yagé are complexified, yielding in their ambiguity a linguistic richness in plurality. It is sufficient to note that their nomenclature, although variable depending on language group, is universally driven by microclimate and the cosmological conditions of their cultivation (vines planted under a full moon at the edge of a savannah, for example, are said by the Tukano to produce very different effects than those planted in the jungle under a half moon). The subtlety of these variations are undetectable to even the most scrupulous ethnobotanist. Plant taxonomy distinguishes only two varieties of the vine used in yagé: Banisteriopsis caapi and Banisteriopsis inebrians, the former having more common use than the latter.Opportunistic AlkaloidsConsumed alone, B. caapi and B. inebrians produce sensations of euphoria, but are not entheogenic. Although the plant itself will increase levels of serotonin, it does not inherently contain those alkaloids which are key for modulating the neurotransmitter receptor sites where “trips” into spiritual dimensions begin. To discover the entheogenic potential of the “vine of the soul,” its bark must be stripped and cooked down with leaves containing alkaloids from the tryptamine family (e.g. N,N-Dimethyltryptamine , or DMT). As metabolic products of plants, alkaloids abound in nature; they are found in roughly one quarter of all plant life (particularly in the large, vascular sort) and botanically identified by the high levels of nitrogen. What is unique, however, in these fairly common compounds, is the structure of their nitrogenous composition. Richard Schultes (1979) notes in his book Plants of the Gods, that alkaloids generally possess striking similarity “to hormones present in the brain, that is, to physiological agents that play a role in the biochemistry of mental functions” (p. 210).The functioning of all entheogenic alkaloids hinge on the subtleties of this similarity; to access specific neurotransmitter receptor sites under the auspices of a morphological similarity between their chemical structure and those which the brain itself produces for receptor site regulation. LSD was discovered by Albert Hoffman while researching the medicinal potential of ergot--a fungus which most commonly grows on rye--by accidentally absorbing its alkaloid derivatives through his fingertips. LSD’s active compounds, however, while derived from alkaloids, are entirely synthetic and do not exist nature; thus its metaphysical implications are problematized, illustrating the imperative for the term “entheogenic” as an alternative to “psychedelic.” The fact Hoffman’s discovery was made through absorption is also it not a minor one. Alkaloids, to become psychoactive, must enter the body through means other than the gastrointestinal tract, where they are oxidized and thus “deactivated” by monoamine oxidase enzymes before they can be absorbed into the blood. The “power” that “lay within the vine” is its ability to neutralize these enzymes. Monoamine oxidase enzymes-inhibitors (MAOI) within the plant suspend the stomach’s and lower intestine’s ability to metabolize the tryptamine alkaloid compounds, allowing them to pass through the blood-brain barrier and modify neurochemistry. Tryptamine alkaloids are both opportunistic and obscure in this sense, wielding in their distribution and composition a propensity for the alteration of consciousness, seeking to syncopate with the receptor sites that their structure mirrors, yet failing to potentiate themselves as they encounter the regulatory mechanisms of the systems they wish to modify.In this sense, the unpacking of ambiguous nomenclature of yagé and ayahuasca becomes far more than a pedantic exercise, and brings into focus a didactic point which this study takes as its impetus: ayahuasca is not simply a vine which allows one to to access the soul, as the term would suggest, but but one which disables the body’s regulatory system to allow for a temporary reciprocity between the molecular fundamentals of ecology our apparatus for perception. Furthermore, this coupling of monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIS) and tryptamine-containing alkaloids, an admixture that has driven Amazonian cosmology for nearly 5,000 years, is statistically highly unlikely, given the infinitude of plant species in the Amazonian rain forest and the specificity of preparation required to actualize the psychotropic experience. The odds, seemingly insurmountable to the techniques of botany, challenge the rules of modern science, and have remain unresolved since British explorer Richard Spruce “discovered” the plant in 1851 and sent specimens of B. caapi to the Royal Botanic Gardens for analysis. Wade Davis (1996) articulates the issue in his book One River, recalling the question as it occurs to Richard Schultes in the early 1940s during his research conducted in the northwest Amazon:‍How had the Indians learned to identify and combine in this sophisticated manner these morphologically dissimilar plants that possessed such unique and complementary chemical properties? The standard scientific explanation was trial and error--a reasonable term that may well account for certain innovations--but at another level, as Schultes came to realize on spending more time in the forest, it is a euphemism which disguises the fact that ethnobotanists have very little idea how the Indians originally made their discoveries… The Indians naturally had their own explanations that from their perspective were perfectly logical: sacred plants that had journeyed up the Milky River in the belly of anacondas, potions prepared by the jaguars, the drifting souls of curanderos dead from the beginning of time… The Indians, Schultes realized, believed in the power of plants, accepted the existence of magic, and acknowledged the potency of the spirit. Magical and mystical ideas entered the very texture of their thinking. Their botanical knowledge could not be separated from their metaphysics (p.217-218).‍This study is located in the space between botanical knowledge and metaphysics: it attempts to outline and hypothesize the reciprocity between the two--negotiated by yagé--as a model for articulating an ecologically-founded subjectivity. Following closely behind the modalities and sub-modalities of yagé’s mediums of expression, design thinking takes particular note on the role of technology, which for the Tukano is conceptualized as tools for optimizing their ecological adaptation (this, in opposition to the technology of Modernity, which seeks to surmount nature as a measure towards profit or stability). Systems analysis and thermodynamics are posited as effective devices for underscoring yagé’s potential for re-thinking design. This study understands the philosophies of the various branches of science to be myopic ideologies which limit both the scales of their inquiry and the impact of their discoveries (consider for example the incommensurability between quantum mechanics, biology, and astrophysics); an analysis is undertaken which seeks to dissolve the brackets imposed by botany by tracing the consumption of its specimens as the key to discovering a critically founded ecological totality. Reichel-Dolmatoff outlines the ethnological bases of the analysis:Among the Tukano Indians of the Colombian Northwest Amazon, carrying capacity is defined mainly in terms of the conservation of protein resources such as game, fish and certain wild fruits. In order to maintain an equilibrium and to avoid frequent relocation of settlements, the Indians have developed a set of highly adaptive behavioural rules which control population growth, the exploitation of the natural environment, and interpersonal aggression. The belief that the spirits of game animals cause illness restricts overhunting and, similarly, a large body of beliefs that regulate sex and food habits try to adjust the birth-rate and to counterbalance socially disruptive behaviour. Shamanism thus becomes a powerful force in the control and management of natural resources, and hallucinatory visions induced by native narcotic drugs become an important tool of shamanistic power. In many aspects Tukano concepts of cosmology represent a blueprint for ecological adaptation and the Indians’ acute awareness of the need for adaptive norms can be compared with modern systems analysis.This study analyzes the particularities of how “hallucinatory visions” become “powerful tools” for “control and management of natural resources.” The format of the research takes an empirical method--modeled on Schulte’s tendency to understand botany through experiential submersion--as the impetus for investigation: transcribed excerpts from Wade Davis’s first yagé experience are taken from One River (1996), and used as a loose narrative sequence for lines of ecological, cosmological, and entheological pursuit. Programming the Molecular Bit Flip ...the curandero poured the yagé into a wooden bowl, which he set on a short tripod of sticks beside the table. He then sat on a small stool so that his legs flanked the stand and his entire body enveloped the potion. For five minutes he sat perfectly still. No one spoke. Gradually out of his hunched up body came a low, guttural change that ebbed and flowed and then faded like an echo. The rustling of a fan and leaves scraping the air; the sound of water in a distant forest and the chant escalating in pitch… Pablo touched my arm: “the songs release the wilderness, stirring everything up so that with his fan he may sweep away the evil. Now he is asking that the paintings, the visions be strong (Davis, 1996, p. 190).‍The curandero, charged with the responsibility of managing safely the hallucinations, calls forth the spirits at the origins of his universe which are to be encountered on what the Tukano call “the other side.” With his fan he “sweeps away” spirits which for the Tukano originate in one of three categories: as the malevolence of game animals, the ill-intentions of other people, or the vengeance of supernatural beings (Reichel-Dolmatoff, 1979, p. 310). In each case, the presence of evil is understood as reactionary to an act of disequilibrium within the ecology of the rainforest: the role of the curandero is to negotiate the journey and reconcile the ruptures wrought by ill-action. Often in preparation for the drinking of , the Tukano male will fast for weeks in advance, a measure which restricts the amount of energy he “borrows” from the environment, while heightening an awareness of the interior of the body and maximizing the effect of the brew. This behavior should not be understood as ritual, in the sense of a repetitive action without perceivable impact, but rather as the meaningful practice of preparation for a journey into the unknown dimensions of the self:‍can yield very different kinds of journeys, depending on the “set and setting”.... including programming offered by curanderos in the form of ícaros the rhythmic and often whistled songs that accompany and guide the journey. Anxious, even terrifying trips are not uncommon, and unlike the legendary brown acid of Woodstock, it is usually not the psychedelic agent that is the ultimate or even proximate cause of the distress. The problem, the drinker discovers, is the self, which must give way on its attachments if it is to abide the massively parallel consciousness induced by . This parallel consciousness is often presented as a multitude of entities and forms for whom death is a transition but not a destination (Doyle, 2005, p. 8).‍Thus the stakes of the curandero’s sweeping away and calling forth come into focus as the “programming” or the self in preparation for a transition, or what Doyle refers to as the “molecular bit flip” of the experience. This electrochemical rhetoric definition hinges the reflexive action of to increase brain activity--shown in PET scans to be shown as high as 90% above normal--in such a way that the subject’s “reality” turns inward to discovers a more fundamental structure of “the universe” by investigating the topos of his/her self. That is, the universe it revealed to us in its totality as immanent within ourselves.The “molecular” component of the bit flip consists of glutamate and GABA (gamma-aminobutyric acid) as the two major neurotransmitters which regulate the mammalian central nervous system. Like circuitry, the brain functions in response to two basic electrochemical signals: the positive charges of glutamate and the negative charges of GABA. Consciousness can be said to be a balancing of these two components. As such, any disequilibrium of consciousness (e.g. depression, anxiety) can be said to be a disproportionate distribution of (+) glutamate and (-) GABA (this dialectic functionality, whereby consciousness and ontology are driven forward by the negotiation of contradictory elements, has Hegelian underpinnings which although not within the scope of this study, deserves to be noted). Rather what is of interest here, is the pharmacodynamic details, which distinguish the difference between a “hallucinogenic” and “psychedelic” on the one hand, and “entheogenic” on the other.‍Pharmacodynamics of an Entheogen“Entheogen” is a neologism invented in 1979 by Richard Schultes, in collaboration with other ethnobotanists and mythologists, and refers a particular subset of psychoactive substance--including peyote, psilocybin mushrooms--which have particular anthropological interest for their cultural use in religious, shamanic, or spiritual contexts--contemporary and ancient alike (the Temple of the True Inner Light, the Church of the Tree of Life, and the Church of the Toad of Light, for example, are all contemporary religious organizations which take entheogens as the basis of their cosmology). Etymologically derived from the greek entheos as “full of god, inspired, possessed” and genesthai as “to come into being,” the word implies the accessing of divine dimensions or reality. This is in contrast to “psychedelic” or “hallucinogenic” as the augmentation of reality as an exercise in visual perception. That is, the entheogenic assumes a meaningful desire towards the specific outcome of transcendence (as we will see, the curandero comes to play a central role in managing the outcome, and in the case of yagé, mismanagement can become lethal). The difference between “hallucinogenic”and “entheogenic” is the aforementioned difference between simply consuming the vine B. Caapi by itself (producing visual patterning--usually symmetries of red and yellow), and brewing it with other psychoactive, alkaloid-rich plants (commonly, for example, from the plant family Psychotria carthagin). Pharmacologically, when its recipe is prepared properly, the chemical composition of differs from that of other hallucinogens in the number and variety of alkaloids that it contains, and more significantly their distribution.Within the brain, there are many varieties of neurotransmitter receptor sites, and each acts as a gate which is unlocked with the right chemical key--provided by the alkaloid--letting through under the right conditions the sodium necessary to “flip” the cells electrical balance through a reduction of GABA (-) and a surplus of glutamate (+). GABA can be conceptualized as the brake which which limits the neural activity through regulation of various receptor sites. These receptor sites are distributed unevenly across the brain, and typically hallucinogens will only “unlock” one specific subset of receptor sites, leaning either more towards serotonin or dopamine. , on the other hand, due the variability and distribution of “keys” which its alkaloid contain, unlock both: DMT, harmine, harmaline and tetrahydroharmine combine to activate more receptor sites across more territories of the brain. That is, GABA is ubiquitously reduced, allowing for a balanced acceleration of the brains myriad processes, in a way which allows its interrelational functions to maintain their faculty. This is key to understanding the metaphysical implications of this pharmacodynamic “molecular bit flip.” Whereas hallucinogens are the provisional reconfiguration of the brain’s structure--comprising in its action the benefits of its interconnectedness-- “opens” all “gates” in harmonious synchrony, allowing critical communication between various faculties to persist in their heightened state. The degree to which one is able to maintain courage through this entheogenic experience is the measure by which the social structures of the Tukano are built. The deeper one is able to foray into the dimensions of “the other side,” the more knowledge he is able to gain. The repetitive ingestion of is the life-work of one who wishes to become a curandero: in his mental and physical strength to endure the reflexive turbulence of the experience, the Tukano male strives to discover in its depths the event of his own death, and sublimation into transcendental being. Under the supervision of an existing curandero, he is guided towards the predator which reigns supreme as queen of the Amazonian ecology: the Mother Jaguar, as the apex of Tukano cosmology, awaits the novice at the cathartic terminus of his entheology. To arrive at her encounter, he must first navigate the most fearful depths of his unconsciousness, reconciling with the darkest repressions that lie at his core. To matriculate, he must arrive and suck her breast to become her son, relinquishing his ego as he consumes her nectar. Becoming at once innocent and dependent at his re-arrival to infanthood, he is able--only now, after the observation of his own death and rebirth--to wield the privilege for conducting his own ceremonies.Becoming Jaguar: Ecological Brokerage in Hyperbolic Space...a match was struck, and the glow illuminated the curandero’s as he lit a kerosene lamp. A melancholy light infused the room… With a small calabash the size of a cup the curandero dipped the from the bowl and then poured it back, releasing a fecund scent that mingled with and then overwhelmed the sweet smell of the resin that was burning in an iron brazier by the door. He filled the calabash once more and drank the contents, gagging, spitting, groaning, and coughing. “See how he barks,” Pedro said, “like a jaguar. He is born of the jaguar, and when he dies, he will become one again. All the living and dead jaguars come to us from their homes in the sky (Davis, 1996, p. 191).‍As the figure from which the curandero emerges, to which he will return, and through which he exercises his authority as the regulator of cosmological equilibrium--the curandero as jaguar “barks,” announcing his arrival into “the other side,” clearing in his presence a path for the journey of those that he guides. From this space, he is able to observe the imbalances of his cosmology, and instrumentalize his esoteric knowledge. It is only through his vast experience on “the other side” that he is able to navigate its treacherous terrain. Using the depth of his experience to evaluate the parameters of the parallel dimension, the curandero recognizes from “the other side” what must be done to right the wrongs of “this side”:‍“The very large denotative vocabulary of a curandero expresses his great concern with establishing the complete inventory of the ecosystem. In order to be able to administer this great store-house, he has to know, name and categorise all its contents. This knowledge eventually provides him with the criteria for ecological planning and this, of course, is problem-solving by anticipation” (Reichel-Dolmatoff, 1979, p. 316).‍Knowledge, gained through the gift of yagé, is utilized by the Tukano curandero through a set of normative ethics which maintain the ecosystem’s balance. The curandero, having submitted himself as an extension of the Jaguar Mother’s will, must act on “this side” in accordance with the values which she has set on “the other side.” Nature, in this sense, is for the Tukano an interface through which they encounter natural objects as the materializations of supernatural beings. According to Tukano mythology, behind every plant and animal is a spirit-being who protects it. These spirit-beings, created by the Sun-Father at the beginning of time, remain benign unless harm comes to the organisms which they protect. Disease, famine, and misfortune are understood to be acts of spirit-being exacting vengeance, and can only be resolved by the curandero on “the other side.” Moreover, at the moment of creation, the Sun-Father’s masculine energy fertilizes the Earth Mother: a limited totality bounded by immutable landmarks, containing a fixed inventory of organisms, each given its own spirit-being protector in the parallel dimension. In this way, a self-regulating system is set forth, in which any aggregation of surplus within the economy of the Tukano would mark out their extinction at the hands of those spirit-beings whose organisms have been subjected.As a sort of ecological broker, the curandero must maintain the biomass of the jungle if the flows of fertilization from the Sun-Father are to be fully potentiated. That is, the jungle is understood as a system which the curandero must optimize for consumption of the solar exergy. Any loss of ability to absorb the Sun-Father will result in an overall increase in temperature and the acceleration of the system’s demise. Indeed, the Tukano are aware of the the teleological tragedy of the 2nd law of thermodynamics, and this is precisely reflected in their rituals of rebirth and emphasis on returning to their origins. In consuming yagé, and pushing towards a rebirth, the Tukano are resolving the existential crises inherent in their cosmos by seeking to restart its processes: through resetting their subjectivity--pushing their reality back to the moment of its creation--the Tukano refresh both the exergy of the Sun-Father and the jungle’s ability to consume it. The particularities of this process of rebirth, however, seen in the transfer of shamanic knowledge from mentor to apprentice, reveals a process which retains the aggregate knowledge of its successive transitions. Ecologists Eric Schneider and James Kay explain :‍Given that living systems go through a constant cycle of birth/development/regeneration/death, preserving information about what works and what does not, is crucial for the continuation of life. This is the role of the gene and, at a larger scale, biodiversity, to act as information data bases about self-organization strategies that work (Schneider and Kay, 1995).‍Yagé’s gift is its ability to integrate the subjective moment into the totality of this information database, compressing information inwards towards the self and upwards towards the transcendental knowledge of ecology’s recursive processes. From a limited finitude to a limitless transcendence, yagé inverts a spherical space into a hyperbolic space, flipping of the normals of the surface of the self, modifying the parameters of its curvature on the basis on an infinite plane. Doyle calls attention to Mathematician Daina Taimina describing hyperbolic spaces in an interview with science writer Margaret Wertheim:There are many ways of describing the hyperbolic plane. In formal geometric terms it is a simply connected Riemannian manifold with negative Gaussian curvature. In higher-level mathematics courses it is often defined as the geometry that is described by the “upper half-plane model.” One way of understanding it is that it’s the geometric opposite of the sphere. On a sphere, the surface curves in on itself and is closed. A hyperbolic plane is a surface in which the space curves away from itself at every point. Like a Euclidean plane it is open and infinite, but it has a more complex and counterintuitive geometry (Wertheim, 2004).‍To navigate the complex and counterintuitive territories of the frontiers of infinity, as the Tukano and the curandero well know, is a laborious undertaking which becomes exponentially difficult with each step. The hyperbolic model is evident in the stages of becoming curandero--where the only the strongest men are able to transition to infinity through rebirth as the son of the Mother Jaguar. This model is expressed by Taimina through the medium of crochet:I have crocheted a number of these [hyperbolic] models and what I find so interesting is that when you make them you get a very concrete sense of the space expanding exponentially. The first rows take no time but the later rows can take literally hours, they have so many stitches. You get a visceral sense of what “hyperbolic” really means (Wertheim, 2004).‍‍‍Good Vibrations: Tuning into the Totality of Ecology‍I heard a distant humming, which i took for cicadas or tree frogs, until i realized that the sound was vibrating from beneath my skin (Davis, 1996, 191).The initial sensation of absorbing the biotic vibrations of the jungle is commonly experienced, by native and non-native users alike; McKenna (1993) explains in Invisible Landscapes how tryptamine modulates neurotransmitters to function as “an antenna for picking up and amplifying the harmonic ESR tones of all tryptophan-derived compounds of all living organisms within its range. Since the [tryptamine] undergoing metabolism is superconductive, this means that its range of reception is theoretically infinite. The antenna does, to some degree, pick up a signal whose ultimate origin is the totality of living creatures”(p. 99).The rainforest of the Tukano thus becomes an information ecology, nested scales of closed signalling loops, modulated by yagé into a single, pulsing totality. On the scale of the gene: environmental pressures elicit the continual reconfiguration of RNA, whose emergent morphogenetics are charge-transferred via alkaloid action to the perceptive mind of the curandero. At the scale of the curandero: cycles of yagé consumption condition aggregate knowledge as the basis for regulation of the jungle’s resources. At the level of the jungle: the knowledge revealed to the curandero is instrumentalized through measure of adaptation; optimization of the jungle’s biomass for the the consumption of the Sun-Father’s exergy is of principal interest for the Tukano and their technology. At the level of the Sun-Father: the thermodynamic inevitability of entropy between the sun and the earth is overcome through ritual rebirth--with each yagé experience, the Sun-Father and Mother-Earth are looped through their own origins, emerging again from the beginning of time and renewing the exergy of the system. Reichel-Dolmatoff articulates the circuitry of of a system with a recursive functionality; within each cycle of revolution, the system receives user input and reconfigures in response:‍The seminal energy of the sun is thought to constitute a huge circuit in which the entire cosmos participates. This circuit is imagined as having a limited quantity of procreative energy that flows continuously between man and animal, between society and nature. Since the quantity of energy is restricted, man may remove what he needs only under certain conditions and must convert his quantum of ‘borrowed’ energy into an essence than can be reincorporated into the circuit (Reichel-Dolmatoff, 1979, p. 310).‍It is this “reincorporation” into the circuit which is the basis of technology for the Tukano. If the jungle itself is understood as a sort of circuitry of information, any removal of its components is conceptualized as a reduction of information and the eradication of instructions for adaptation. Reichel-Dolmatoff pushes the idea in terms of conforming to biological realities:‍Among the Indians there is usually little interest in new knowledge that might be used for exploiting the environment more effectively and there is little concern for maximising short-term gains or for obtaining more food or raw-materials than are actually needed. But there is always a great deal of interest in accumulating more factual knowledge about biological reality and, above all, about what the physical world requires from man. This knowledge, the Indians believe, is essential for survival because man must bring himself into conformity with nature if he wants to exist as part of nature’s unity, and must fit his demands to nature’s availabilities (Reichel-Dolmatoff, 1979, p. 310).‍To bring one’s self into conformity, of course, one must have a clear picture towards which they conform. This is precisely what yagé provides as a morphogenetic visualization mechanism: a reflexive and ethical image of the origins of the self as an immanent topos for discovering correct ecological functioning.‍Violet Vomit: Purging the Self‍It was as if my stomach, acting as a conscious entity, had sought out and purged every negative thought and fear trapped within the maze of my mind (Davis, 1996, 191).‍It is significant that the success of yagé to suspend these regulatory mechanisms is not perfectly pleasant; users often vomit as alkaloids move through the gut unoxidized. For the Tukano, the infinitive “to purge” is an imperative considered central to the yagé experience. Reichel-Dolmatoff (1979, p. 12) characterized the action of vomiting as a “gift that spawns further giving,” an endeavor beyond the simple “effect of the allegedly nauseating flavor of the (extremely variable) brew,” the imperative to purge is “instead the very action of the mixture on a human drinker”: If the stomach and small intestines are empty the passage of the drug into the lymph-tracts takes place much more rapidly and with greater force. These conditions are realized when caapi is consumed in the usual manner, because certain doses of the substance give rise to vomiting, which is desirable and to a certain degree necessary, as a preparation for the final action on the brain (Schultes, 1979, p. 117). Doyle (2005) calls to attention to motif of vomit in art inspired by yagé:‍This infinitive, “to purge,” often presents itself as an imperative to drinkers. Among the crowd of visual conventions found repeated in the Peruvian Painter Pablo Amaringo’s work are jewelled cities of numinosity, converging rainbows of twisting triple helical anaconda assemblies, green feathered bird men in rapt discussion and wearing belts, Numerous Ladies of the Reptilian Rainbow Feather With Ceramic Pots Balanced Upon Their Noggins, flying saucers, DNA, and men gathered together in a common and thoroughly violet projectile vomit (p. 12).‍Entraining Euphoria: Symmetry/Assymmetry‍I shut my eyes, and the world inside my head began to spin and pulsate with warmth and a sensual glow that ran over a series of euphoric thoughts, words that stretched like shadows across my mind, paused, and then took forms as diamonds and stars, colors rising from the periphery of consciousness (Davis, 1996, 191).‍This emergence and dissipation of lights, sounds, colors, textures, and movements occur in the yagé experience as an oscillation between symmetrical and asymmetrical elements. This phenomena can be analyzed as the coming and going of information within a process of entrainment:Rhythmic entrainment is the formation of regular, predictable patterns in time and/or space through interactions within or between systems that manifest potential symmetries. We contend that this process is a major source of symmetries in specific systems, whether passive physical systems or active adaptive and/ or voluntary/intentional systems, except that active systems have more control over accepting or avoiding rhythmic entrainment. The result of rhythmic entrainment is a simplification of the entrained system, in the sense that the information required to describe it is reduced (Burch and Collier, 1998, p. 165).‍Less significant than moments of symmetry--considered to be a lack of information--it is instead yagé’s breaking up of symmetry that is of interest: the unfolding of information into consciousness, and the hyperbolic action which compresses it; the extension of our perception to the degree which allows us to see within ourselves an ecology that is “capable of transforming itself in suddenly novel ways, forgetting its own premises, breaking symmetry, and suddenly experimenting with an increased capacity to degrade entropy and hence compress information, again, hyperbolic…. By continuing to divine it [yagé], we create novel dissipative structures for dissipation of ever more information, information we can perhaps sustain if we tune into the totality of all living creatures” (Doyle, 2005, p. 30).‍End‍‍Bibliography‍Burch, Mark and Collier, John. “Order from Rhythmic Entrainment and the Origin of Levels Through Dissipation.” Symmetry : Culture and Science Order / Disorder, Proceedings of the Haifa Congress 9.2-4 (1998). 165-172. 19 Dec. 2013. <www.ukzn.ac.za/undphil/collier/papers/order>Browman, David L., and Ronald A. Schwarz. Spirits, Shamans, and Stars: Perspectives from South America. The Hague: Mouton, 1979. Print.Davis, Wade. One River: Explorations and Discoveries in the Amazon Rain Forest. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996. Print.Doyle, Richard. “Hyperbolic: Divining Ayahuasca.” Discourse 27.1 (2005): 6-33. Print.Luna, Luis Eduardo., and Steven F. White. Ayahuasca Reader: Encounters with the Amazon’s Sacred Vine. Santa Fe, NM: Synergetic, 2000. Print.McKenna, Terrence. True Hallucinations : Being an Account of the Author’s Extraordinary Adventures in the Devil’s Paradise. New York: HarperCollins, 1994.“Program.” Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/program>.Reichel-Dolmatoff, Gerardo. “Cosmology as Ecological Analysis: A View from the Rain Forest.” Man 11.3 (1979): 307-318. Print.Schneider, Eric D. and James J. Kay. “Order from Disorder: The Thermodynamics of Complexity in Biology.” 16 Dec 2013. <http://www.red fish.com/research/SchneiderKayl 995_OrderFromDisorder>Schultes, Richard Evans., and Albert Hofmann. Plants of the Gods: Origins of Hallucinogenic Use. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979. Print.Schultes, Richard Evans. “Richard Spruce and the Ethnobotany of the Northwest Amazon.” Rhodora 78.813 (1976): 65-72. Print.Schultes, Richard Evans., and Robert F. Raffauf. The Healing Forest: Medicinal and Toxic Plants of the Northwest Amazonia. Portland, Or.: Dioscorides, 1990. Print.Spruce, Richard. “On Some Remarkable Narcotics of the Amazon Valley and Orinoco.” Ayahuasca Reader: Encounters with Amazon’s Sacred Vine. Ed. Luis Eduardo Luna and Steven F. White. Santa Fe, NM: Synergetic P, 2000. 83-86.Wardhaugh, Ronald. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York, NY, USA: Blackwell, 1986. Print.Wertheim, Margaret. “Crocheting the Hyperbolic Plane: An Interview with David Henderson and Daina Taimina.” Cabinet 16 (Winter 2004). 17 Dec. 2013.. <http:/ /www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/16/crocheting>Images‍26Luna, Luis Eduardo, and Steven F. White. Ayahuasca Reader: Encounters with the Amazon’s Sacred Vine. Santa Fe, NM: Synergetic, 2000. Print.5, 8, 10, 11, 15-17, 19-25, 27, 28Schultes, Richard Evans., and Albert Hofmann. Plants of the Gods: Origins of Hallucinogenic Use. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979. Print.1,3,4,6,7,9,12-14,18Schultes, Richard Evans., and Robert F. Raffauf. The Healing Forest: Medicinal and Toxic Plants of the Northwest Amazonia. Portland, Or.: Dioscorides, 1990. Print.2Zuroweste, Peter. Map of Tukanoan Populations in Northwest Amazon. Cambridge, MA: Harvard GSD, 2013

Writing
by PZ
Dropping Dead

"‍I can tell you, and I tell you now, that I am prepared to veto any bill that has as its purpose a Federal bailout of New York City to prevent default.‍" -Gerald R. Ford This statement, delivered on October 29, 1975 at the National Press Club in Washington DC on the subject of financial assistance to New York City, materializes the following morning into the front page headlines of The Daily News as “Drop Dead,” a message to the city which brings fiscal conflict into focus as a federal abandonment of the municipal body (Loverd 251, Figure 1). Inscribed into New York CIty as an inflection point in its historiography, the headline signifies the cathartic termination of a progressive ideology which began with the New York Statutes 1896. In its place a more conservative fiscal method arrives as the city’s modus operandi, one that adapts its policies with capitalist interests, coordinating itself along the lines of a new, globalizing economy, and optimizing its fiscal functions for budgetary maintenance amidst the ebbs and flows of emerging international trade networks. Manfredo Tafuri, in his 1975 book Architecture and Utopia: Design and Capitalist Development, elicits the role which ideological thinking plays such a shift.‍“For ‘progressive thought,’ on the contrary, every single thing receives its significance only from some other thing that is ahead of it or above it, from a Utopia of the future or from a norm that exists above being. ‘Conservative thought,’ on the other hand, deduces the significance of the particular from something that stands behind it, from the past or from that which already exists at least in embryonic form (Tafuri 53).‍In the case of New York City, the “progressive” or “utopian” policies modeled on the1960s rhetoric of “The Great Society” dissolve in the 1975 budget crisis, giving rise to new conservative attitudes which align themselves with the market behavior of the Late Capitalism: immanent realities “which already exist” within the city as the “embryonic form” of emerging globalization (Brecher 41). The origins of Progressive ideology in New York City governance are traced back to Chapter 488 of the New York Statues of 1896, as the unification of formerly autonomous yet interdependent regional municipalities: “the consolidation act joined New York City, which then constituted Manhattan and the western Bronx, to the cities of Brooklyn and Long Island City, the towns of Newtown, Flushing, Jamaica, and the Rockaway part of the Hempstead in Queens, and the towns of Castleton, Middletown, Northfield, Westfield, and Southfield on Staten Island” (Bruce-Biggs 6). Formerly a set of townships and administrative archipelagos, each with its independent structures of economics and demographics, the new totality of New York City at the turn of the century has its future laid out for it as a single, albeit montaged entity, organized around Manhattan as the gravitational center for capital concentration and administrative action. The scale and figure of the city limit begins--with Chapter 488-- a process of entropic expansion, creating the definition of the metropolis as a regional arena for episodes of crisis in 20th century New York City.As an indicator of the national shift from the laissez-faire economics of 19th century agrarian America towards more the governmentally federally regulated processes of 20th century metropolitan areas, Chapter 488 is read as the nested instance a deeper, national ideology which co-evolves with industrialization and abandons the country’s foundational structure as an “agricultural economy, [defined by] local and regional autonomy as pivots of the democratic system” (Tafuri 26). The liberation from the time-consuming processes of direct subsistence from nature of course allows the American subject to engage in other secondary and tertiary economies--thereby increasing the potential for the worker becoming bourgeois, or at least middle-class-- but in doing so the previously compact reciprocity of the subject and nature is dissolved. If there can be said to be a crises of the subject in 20th century American cities, it is precisely this loss of reciprocity which is its cause, forcing the subject to coordinate its body with the rhythms of an urbanizing and environment unknown to previous generation. Replacing the reciprocity of agrarian self-governance is a commensurability between the subject, centralized administrative structures, and patterns of normalization. The interplay of demographic distribution and boundary play a key role in the functioning of such structures: sufficient revenue from the bourgeois must be gained within the limits, to leverage the working class into a middle class (Currie 15). Or at the very least, the city must keep the working class working through provisional employment. Should it fail to do so, the productiveness of the dialectic of capitalist development ceases, resulting in phenomena of economic malfunction seen in the 1975 budget crisis: as the revenue generating population loses confidence in the functioning of the municipal totality, they relocate outside of its limits and in doing so exit the system and deprive it of the capital which it requires. The dialectic , in these terms, has as its “positive” the property-owning bourgeois as the main beneficiaries of capitalism’s processes, and as its “negative” the laborers which are subjugated to make such processes possible. The role of Progressive ideology is to set forth a set of values within the capitalist system that reconciles its contradictions without resolving them. That is, the dialectic must be maintained--in a sort state of semi-crisis--if production is to continue, balancing between the egalitarianism of the total normalization on the one hand and the state of crisis of total polarization on the other. The totality of the 19th century agri-egalitarian archipelago becomes the totality of the 20th century metropolitan area suspended in productive tensions of semi-crisis, synchronized by the song of technological progress of the bourgeois ideology . The teleological underpinnings of this technocratic incantation, recited by leaders on both the municipal and federal level throughout most of America’s 20th century, promises the abolishment of poverty, but the reality of the persistence of the negative and the shortcomings of ideologies balancing act unfolds into episodic ruptures in the system, expressed as crises in a variety of mediums and degrees of acuteness.As waves of minorities and immigrants flood the urbanized regions of the northeast during the Great Migration, the federalization of capital (e.g. The Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, The Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and The Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914) establishes on the national level economic centralization as the principal apparatus of Progressive political ideology, one which seeks to moderate the divergence of the bourgeois/working-class dialectic. In this sense, legislation as a regulatory device is understood as a technology of Progressive ideology, surmounting the unstable “nature” of a rapidly expanding working class with the tools of legislative procedure. This perspective comes most into focus with the policies of FDR’s New Deal, which sought to surmount the socio-economic catastrophe of the Great Depression by calling into action centralized entities such as the Tennessee Valley Authority: modulating technology and crisis into a productive cycle, the TVA was optimized for the modernization of the region. Through economically stimulating infrastructure projects, the TVA deploys both technology as law in the abstract sense and technology as the subjugation of nature in the common sense as solutions for both ecological and financial crisis (e.g. the crisis of the crisis of the poverty and the crisis of the flood are surmounted with the funding and construction of a dam). This platform strives to standardize the low-income laborer into a middle class citizen by re-distributing the revenue of capitalist production as an investment aimed at stabilizing the system through an abolishment of poverty. This normalizing ideology seeks to avoid crisis through a regulation of the components of the dialectic, limiting the oppositional vectors of the capitalist and the laborer. It requires a vested interest from the purses of the bourgeois into the welfare of the working class, and idea which is problematized by the regions of polarized demographics found in American cities following WWII. The solutionism of ideology in this case suggests the conflation of a dysfunctional municipality with another, in hopes that the combined capacity for capital production floats the cumulative labor force. This is the scalable constitution of Progressive ideology, one which decrees an absolute and pre-figured quality of living set in advance as an immutable standard for all participants. Unification of administrative structure allows for a distribution of capital which minimizes poverty and maintains a critical bottom-line. The quantitative definition of such a standard quality is arbitrary, and set loosely within the interpretation of what is meant by the nationally ubiquitous constitutional mantra “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The ideology contained in this cornerstone phase is a datum through the nested scales of Progressive policies in the years directly leading up to New York’s crisis. The Food Stamp Act of 1964, The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (popularized as “The War of Poverty”), The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and The Social Security Amendments of 1965 (Medicare and Medicaid ) establish an interconnectedness between the city and the federal government. As the various branches of municipal government restructure themselves in conformity with the federal status quo, they are able capitalize on opportunities for subsidizing their budgets. Leaders and politicians align their ideologies with the promise of “The Great Society,” rolling out subsidized programs under the auspices of altruistic democracy, taking the negative component of the capitalist dialectic--the worker--as the foundational feature of society. President Lyndon B. Johnson articulates the collective “courage” and “compassion” immanent in Progressive ideology as he addresses the graduates (i.e. future bourgeois) of Ohio University in Athens in a 1964 commencement speech : “And with your courage and with your compassion and your desire, we will build a Great Society. It is a Society where no child will go unfed, and no youngster will go unschooled.The dangers inherent in the “compassion” of welfare and its associated economic centralization did not go unnoticed in New York, as many analysts who foresaw the crisis arriving suggest that the city adopt policies of decentralization. One such suggestion, outlined in an article by Bruce-Biggs entitled “Abolish New York” proposes simply that Chapter 488 is repealed, thus “abolishing” the centralized structure of the city and its associated ills. Such an appeal, critics argue, will render large portions of the outer boroughs c.1975 bankrupt and without potential for economic recovery. The response, given by Bruce-Biggs and other supporters of decentralization, underscore that if Manhattan’s were permitted to retain all of its capital, which in its concentration could accumulate--over time--an economic inertia large enough to provide the outer boroughs recovery in the long-term. The figurehead of this perspective is Roger Starr, described in his obituary by the New York Times as an “outspoken thinker on urban affairs who blended a lifetime of intellectual analysis with hands-on public service.” Starr proposes a less radical, more politically-involved process of “planned shrinkage.” Circa 1975 however, he is met by accusations of racism and cruelty by the officials carrying on the ideological torch of The Great Society until the moment that it extinguishes (Starr 26).It could be argued that - as privileged property-owners - the bureaucratic leaders which protest Starr and insist on their Progressive policies do so only because they are not subjugated by the markets that they manipulate. They see no impetus for change because they see no crisis from the windows of their Midtown condos. The contemporary terminology of the 99% and the 1% emerges here, illustrating a disproportionate and polarized social structure which will become, at a certain point, irreconcilable (the nature of the Occupy movement is surprisingly passive in this sense). The fiscal policies of Progressive ideology, in this sense, has as its main focus not in the “compassion” to provide welfare, but rather the financially founded wherewithal to realize that the lifting of the lower class to the middle class is a way to ensure the longevity of his/her wealth, otherwise threatened by abject poverty. The blackout of 1977, and the looting that occurred in poverty stricken neighborhoods, register as an index of progressive ideology’s inability to maintain the status quo. Aimed at maintaining wealth and power, the status quo is reveals, through phenomena such “white flight,” the false pretenses of the humanitarian language found in the New Deal, the Great Society, and the “War on Poverty.” Should the bourgeois lose confidence in their ideology to normalize the dialectic, or more to the point--maintain their capital interests--the likelihood that progressive ideology will implode is increased (Chatterjee 1799). It is precisely the realization of this likelihood that is the crisis of New York in the 1970s: not a crisis of ideology, but a crisis of confidence in the ideology. This distinction underscores the constructedness of ideology and its adaptability. This crisis of confidence unfolds as mid-to-high income earners--mostly Manhattanites--lose faith and abandon Progressive ideology which regulates the dialectic, opting instead to take flight to the conservative financial climates of the suburbs. In their absence they create a rapid deprivation of municipal revenue, compounded and explicated by OAPEC’s oil embargo of 1973, leaving the city unable to maintain not only its welfare and employment programs, but the basic necessities of public, health, and safety (Starr 12). In refusing to federalize New York City’s fiscal functions, Ford’s message to “Drop Dead” elevates conflict into crisis, forcing upon the city an accelerated adaptation of a new ideology which necessarily integrates itself into the complex realities of Late Capitalist development. Described here in terms of ideology becoming ethic, this evolution is described by Tafuri as:‍“The integration of the subjective moment with the complex mechanism of rationalization, but at the same time the identification of an "ethic of rationalization" completely directed upon itself. The processes of the concentration of capital, its socialization, and the constant rise of its organic composition make such an ethic necessary. This is no longer presented as an external value; it is removed from the relativity of ideological invention. The ethic of development has to be realized together with development, within development's processes (Tafuri 57).”‍This analytical proposition, to redefine the ideological in terms of the ethical as a coordinated and reflexive machinery within the dialectic, is a means of eradicating the inefficiencies and efforts of ideology, and is only of marginal interest here. The ethical is understood as the ritual repetition of an ideology subjugated to the dialectics mechanisms of rationalisation, its forms nothing more than the beating of its drum on the waves and “constant rise” of capital’s “organic composition.” Taking the destruction immanent in capitalist creation as the basis for a skepticism in any ethical rationalization of its processes, a contrary emphasis is placed on the richness that lies within the limits of ideology--its political functioning, regulatory mechanisms, modalities of engaging crisis--on the one hand, and the limits these ethics--its reflexivity, modes of repetition, shortcomings in criticality--on the other . Aesthetics come to play a privileged role in this search for critical practice, suspended in between the ideological-ethical spectrum, yet capable of polarizing to reinforce one or the other, as a sort of elastic free agent. Investigating the real bases of the interrelationships of these components and articulating their significance is the imperative of the architect: an action that is more elaborated than ethical technique and more articulated within situational particularities than the purely ideological, critical practice motivated by purposeful desire towards meaningful impacts and and outcomes.Honing in on the potential for action and engagement within the mediums of crisis in 1970’s New York CIty, the Museum of Modern Art is posited as an institution which contains in its administrative structures and works of art a negotiation of ideology, aesthetics, and ethics. It is proposed that a critical intervention into the institution necessarily entails the taking apart and putting back together of the conflated and ambiguous mechanisms which underscore its institutional foundations. Two figures, Nelson Rockefeller and Gordon Matta-Clark, are identified as the principal characters through which a process of analysis, disassembly, and reassembly is conducted. Nelson Rockefeller’s legacy as an eminent Progressive Republican, on the national, state, and municipal level, had significant impact on the ideology, aesthetics, and ethics in 20th century America. Some of the most notable vehicles for contribution include: on the national level, the 41st Vice President of the United States (Ford Administration, 1974-1977); and on the state level, the 49th Governor of New York State (1959-1973). In New York City, his emphasis on mass transit and mobility is exercised through the establishment of the State Department of Transportation, through which he absorbed among others the Department of Public Works, and “reformed the governance of New York City's transportation system, creating the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) in 1965.” Under his guidance, “the MTA merged the New York City subway system with the publicly owned Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, the Long Island Rail Road, Staten Island Rapid Transit, and later the Metro North Railroad.” In a controversial use of state funds, the Metro North Railroad was “purchased by the state from private owners in a massive public bailout of bankrupt railroads (Wikipedia).”His role at MoMA includes positions as first Chairman of the Advisory Committee (1932), Trustee (1932-1979), Treasure (1935-1939), and President (1939-1941). The foundational nature of his operations within the institution are transcribed in a press release distributed to the public on May 8, 1939, the day following his election as President:‍On the occasion of the change in officers, the retiring President, Mr. Goodyear, said: The idea is that a museum such as ours can remain truly modern and wholly abreast of the times only by bringing into its board of trustees and to the principal offices of the institution young men and women whose outlook is forward… Now that the Museum at the end of ten years of activity has entered a permanent home, the property of the Corporation, it is particularly appropriate that there should be a change of officers. With the wider service to the public that the new quarters will permit, we are fortunate in having Mr. Stephen Clark as Chairman of the Board and Mr. Nelson Rockefeller as President. They have both been very active in the affairs of the Museum. Mr. Clark became a Trustee within a few months of its founding and Mr. Rockefeller as first Chairman of the Advisory Committee, Trustee and Treasurer - has been for years closely in touch with our plans. Under their leadership of the efficient staff that has been brought together under Mr. Barr and Mr. Mabry, we can look forward to increased activity and greater service to the public.‍Speaking for himself, Rockefeller outlines an ideology of the plan. Formatted as question and answer session with the press, Rockefeller responds with an emphasis on the socialization of art and its role in “modernizing taste”‍"What is your particular Interest in modern art, Mr. Rockefeller?" the interviewer asked."We are all interested in the appearance of this modern era in which we live. We are all concerned in having our present-day surroundings more attractive. And that in the broadest sense is modern art." "How does the Museum of Modern Art help to do this?" "The Museum," he answered, "encourages the development of new ways of art to fit the changing conditions of the contemporary world, and displays the new principles of art to the public, thereby making them available for use and for the modernization of taste...”‍In this record Rockefeller is established as a “forward looking” administrator which drives the ideology of the Plan with the expressed aim of “modernizing taste” to “fit the changing conditions of the contemporary world.” Rockefeller’s ideology reveals an ambition to normalize, a reading which is fortified by Hume’s definition of taste as the “Standard of Taste; a rule, by which the various sentiments of men may be reconciled.” Rockefeller seeks to not only to regulate the dialectic of capitalist development by proffering aesthetics as an instrument for the normalization and modernization of the Standard’s of Taste, he seeks reconcile the “various sentiments of man” along the lines of his individual subjectivity--his Standard of Taste. The rhetoric echoes that of Futurist manifestos, Dadaist mechanicalism, De Stijl elementarism, and international Constructivism: “but what is really striking in this ideology of unconditional consensus is its ingenuous radicalism. These invitations to become a machine, to universal proletarianization, to forced production, in revealing the ideology of the Plan all too explicitly, cannot fail to arouse suspicion as to their real intentions (Tafuri 86).” These real intentions are materialized in the discovery that in 1973, during his last year as Governor of the State of New York, when Rockefeller reverses the decision of state legislature to not allow the construction of Museum Tower over the Museum of Modern Art (see Figure 2, Figure 3). The tower, designed by Pelli Clark Pelli, was built mainly as a financial instrument to generate revenue for support of the museum’s operating expenses, containing 240 apartments which contribute funds in the form tax provisions. The building permit, issued in 1977, indicates that the lot was zoned as C5-2.5 (central commercial district), however the building is governed by R10A regulations, as a standard adaptation of residential zoning law within a commercial district. The significance is that R10A is limited to a Floor Area Ratio of 10.0 and height of 210 ft. Museum Tower--consisting of 55 storeys and 384,000 sq ft--stands at 495 ft tall: that is, 285 ft of its vertical height was built using air rights over the Museum’s galleries. In this sense, Museum Tower’s signifies a twofold extinction of Progressive ideology: first, Rockefeller’s reversal of state legislation; and second, the manipulation of zoning to maximize rent revenue. Together, these episodes compound the revelation that Law--as the magnus opum of ideology's capacity to control development--is an outmoded technology, no longer capable of stabilizing the dialectic of capitalist production. A reconfiguration of the terms of ideology thus becomes imperative if a productive dialectic is to be maintained. The role of the MoMa as an institution, and the ideology of its plan, is complexified into a new territory where capital reigns supreme and breaks ideology’s regulatory chains:‍No longer Hegel but Keynes, not the ineffectual ideology of the New Deal but post-Keynesian economy. Ideology, become concrete and stripped of any trace of utopianism, now descends directly into the fields of endeavor; which is to same as saying that it is suppressed… The plan, on the one hand, tends to be identified with the institution that supports it, and on the other, to be a set forth as a specific institution in itself. The dominion of capital is thus realized strictly in terms of the logic of its own mechanisms, without any extrinsic justification, absolutely independent of any abstract “ethical” end, of any teleology, or any “obligation to be.” (Tafuri 62).‍Contemporaneous to MoMa’s uptown extinction of ideology and Rockefeller’s institutionalisation of capital’s dominion, an alternative institution, or more precisely an an-institution, is founded by Gordon Matta-Clark downtown. The Anarchitecture group, conceived as a conflation of “anarchy,” and “architecture” engages the dialectic of capitalist along different lines, opting out of the instrumentality of ideology and the subjugated repetitions of ethics, Anarchitecture (Gordon Matta-Clark, Laurie Anderson, Tina Girouard, Carol Goodden, Suzanne Harris, Jene Highstein, Bernard Kirschenbaun, Richard Landry, and Richard Nonas). Conceding his ability to solve crises, Matta-Clark (et al.), engages the negative dialectic as it materializes in the city, ceasing upon the collateral damage of ideology’s shortcomings, activating artifacts of the inner-city and the outer boroughs as frames for articulating the excesses and entropies found in various modes of capitalist production. Hinging upon the notion that aesthetics can remain reflexive while being political, Matta-Clark articulates a form of practice for acting in the mediums of crisis which, through processes of deconstruction, constructs critical perspectives:‍The interesting thing about Gordon was that he was full of ideas and in a way highly intellectual. But, just in the same way that he broke context, he broke words and ideas. So he was playing with it, playing with the intellectualising, so this is a perfect ... Gordon thought process right here on the wall ... he did it almost as a form of analysis, you know. That was his theoretical position, that you could deal with ideas in that way.‍In his project Fake Estates, Matta-Clark participates in bourgeois ideology as a critique of its empty promises. Purchasing 15 properties, priced between $25-$75 and decreed as “unusable” by Manhattan zoning law, Matta-Clark buys into the bourgeois ideology of land-ownership as a way of illustrating its contradictions: as undevelopable tracts of land, he was unable to capitalize on his investment into the “estates.” Thus the value of his ownership--within the exchange-values of Modernity--existed only virtually on paper.Having outlined the extinction of ideology at MoMA, and the reflexive aesthetics of Gordon-Matta Clark, the guidelines for intervention present themselves: Matta-Clark is commissioned to perform a “Critical Intersect” at MoMA--or rather, of MoMa. Having observed the Conical Intersect series at the Paris Biennale in 1975, the procedure’s critique of institutionalization is noted (see Figure 4):‍“Matta-Clark’s contribution to the Paris Biennale of 1975, manifested his critique of urban gentrification in the form of a radical incision through two adjacent 17th-century buildings designated for demolition near the much-contested Centre Georges Pompidou, which was then under construction. For this antimonument, or “nonument,” which contemplated the poetics of the civic ruin, Matta-Clark bored a tornado-shaped hole that spiraled back at a 45-degree angle to exit through the roof. Periscope like, the void offered passersby a view of the buildings’ internal skeletons (guggenheim.org).”‍At the precise moment Rockefeller overturns state legislation and sets into the motion the construction of Museum Tower in 1973, the (de)construction of “Critical Intersect” begins, a manifestation of a critique of ideology in the form of radical incisions into galleries of MoMa’s original 1939 building. For this anti-architecture, or “anarchitecture,” which forces progressive ideology to encounter its own extinction, Matta bores a tornado-shaped hole that spirals forward at a 45-degree angle and exits through the roof. Functioning as a lens which focuses the contradictions of its own structures, the void frames for both the passersby and the patron a view of the Museum Tower as the materialization of capitalist (i.e. conservative) forces which drive the plan of the institution. From the perspective of the 53rd street, the pedestrian glimpse is anchored into gaze, as the radicality of the intervention’s redaction orients the fleeting pace of the city towards more contemplative parameters. As a spectacle, Matta-Clark’s intervention along 53rd street participates in the glossy surface of Midtown’s culture of consumption, confirming the city’s systems of representations and the “camp” discourses of the metropolitan bourgeois, registering as an absurd shock to be absorbed with the irony and humour of cocktail conversation at a fundraising gala (held presumably in the undamaged institutional space preserved around the intervention). The real impact hits home, however, as the bourgeois come to occupy the origin point of Critical Intersect’s cone of vision. The project’s full weight in the stakes of ideology’s extinction come crashing down as its deconstruction becomes a reconstruction, framing--from what is considered both a vanishing point and an origin point--the building up of a financial instrument which threatens the stability of value and structural integrity of the very slabs upon which their discourses stand. Hitting home with the same effect of a child’s realization that the towers at the center of Disneyland--indeed the entire basis of their worldview--are fake, the bourgeois stomach turns sick as their reality, formerly transposed by the idealization of progress and the Progressive, finally eats itself through, consuming a path through which we can perceive Museum Tower as the crisis of cultural value. Just as Disneyland is built as imaginary to convince us that the America which surrounds it is real, MoMa is built to prolong the innocence of a fantasy and conceal the negative of the surplus upon which it is built. Having once been the ideology which regulated the dialectic, the original MoMa building becomes the negative of the dialectic, and Museum Tower the positive. Originally built to transpose the contradictory reality of a Progressive capitalist system, the institution becomes the collateral substrate for capitalist action. To “modernize taste” through the “development of new ways of art to fit the changing conditions of the contemporary world” and make the “present day surrounding more attractive” translates for MoMa in the 1970’s as the construction of a institutional project within dominion of capital. This project’s stance--a la Rockefeller--beyond the limits of a law’s normative reconciliation, drives progressive ideology to extinguish itself in recognition of its own failure to regulate development. In an act of aesthetic reflexivity, the institution is partially excavated, carving out a space for reflecting upon the components of crisis, crystallizing itself as a historical artifact and perceiving itself, from and through itself, as an instrument of Late Capital. Critical Intersection, situated between the progressive ideology’s normalization (pre-crisis MoMa) and the ethics of conservative rationalization (post-crisis MoMA), creates in its void the absence of value in the institution and the city. Ideologies in MoMa and New York are left to view the extrusion of Museum Tower as a prophetic trajectory, the striations of its floor slabs an index to the revenue which archives the extinction of its foundations. As both false in its consciousness and tenacious in persistence through crisis, the institution is a conceptual hinge which acts in self-preservation to re-evaluate the dialectic of development precisely at the moment its techniques for thinking snap, signifying crisis and actuating the critical, the aesthetic, and the intellectual in response to tragic opportunity. The institution in crisis, seen at MoMa as the “positive thought” of Progressive ideology becomes the “negative thought” of a conservative coordination with capital. Tafuri draws the contours of an uncertain, ambiguous, and ironic future for thought in terms of post-crisis, Late Capitalist economy:‍“Negative thought" had enunciated its own project for survival in its refutation of the Hegelian dialectic and a recovery of the contradictions this had eliminated. "Positive thought" does nothing but overturn that negativeness on itself. The negative is revealed as such, even in its "ineluctability." Resignation to it is only a first condition for making possible the perpetuation of the intellectual disciplines; for making possible the recovery for intellectual work (at the price of destroying its "aura") of the tradition of its "sacred" extraneousness to the world; for providing a reason, no matter how minimal, for its survival. The downfall of reason is now acclaimed the realization of reason's own historic mission. In its cynicism intellectual work plays its cards to the ambiguous limit of irony (Tafuri 76).”‍Figure 1. October 30, 1975 morning headline in The Daily News. ‍Figure 2. Elevation of Museum Tower, Pelli Clark Pelli‍Figure 3. Photograph of Museum Tower, from 53rd Street.Figure 4. Conical Intersect in Paris.‍BibliographyBrecher, C. and Eichner, A. 1974. The Great Society--A Worms Eye View. New York Affairs, 2 (2), pp. 39-49Bruce-Biggs, B. 1979. Abolish New York. New York Affairs, 5 (3), pp. 5-9.Chatterjee, R. 1975. New York City: A Crisis of Confidence. Economic and Political Weekly, 10 (47), pp.1798-1799.Currie, B. 1963. Conflict, Crisis and Confusion in New York. Duke Law Journal, 1963 (1), pp. 1--55.Loverd, R. 1991. Presidential Decision Making during the 1975 New York City Financial Crisis: A Conceptual Analysis. Presidential Studies Quarterly, pp. 251--267.Museum of Modern Art 1939. Nelson A. Rockefeller Becomes New President of the Museum of Modern Art [press release] May 8, 1939."Nelson Rockefeller." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 12 July 2013. Web. 17 Dec. 2013.Starr, R. 1985. The Rise and Fall of New York City. New York: Basic Books.Tafuri, Manfredo. 1975. Architecture and Utopia: Design and Capitalist Development. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.ImagesFigure 1. Roberts, Sam. "Infamous 'Drop Dead' Was Never Said by Ford." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Dec. 2006. Web. 17 Dec. 2013.Fig. 2. West Wing & Tower Addition. Drawings & Models, Museum of Modern Art, New York, New York, United States. 1984.Fig. 3. Pelli, Cesar. West Wing & Tower Addition. Exteriors, Museum of Modern Art, New York, New York, United States. 1984.Fig.4. "Gordon Matta-Clark." Gordon Matta-Clark. artnet.com Web. 17 Dec. 2013.

Writing
by PZ
Cinematic Reel

How to formulate a theory of perception--on a metropolis defined by a malleability of time, space, and phenomena--in an age inundated by sensory media? Situating New York City within the contemporary discourses surrounding design, its renowned status as the global capital of commerce, intelligence, and wealth settles into history, providing space at center-stage for the emerging urbanisms of the 21st century’s developing nations. Formerly defined by its rude, adolescent health and explosive sense of spectacle, New York now reaches a point of maturation--an archaeological potential--allowing for forensic investigation into the rapid processes that defined its growth. The moment is appropriate to interrogate the city’s architectural and infrastructural components as the sophisticated material substrates of 20th century urbanism par excellence. Critical to the success of this evaluation is the way that is chosen to look at the city--the device used to frame and engage the city’s content. Looking into 20th century visual-aural culture, cinema and locomotion are identified as tools used to construct and idea about landscape--instruments of the mechanical age responsible for restructuring the way we see space. This essay and its accompanying film exist at the intersection of cinema and locomotion. Situated in the present and looking to the past, both the text and the film are positioned along the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE) as the line of inquiry from which the city, and history of seeing the city, is understood. By historicizing the BQE within the sociopolitical context of its conception and construction, and contrasting the cinematic space that it generates with canonical modes of landscape representation, the expressway becomes a heuristic device for building a larger, more expansive theory about the role of urban infrastructure in landscape as moving image. Conceived as a resolution to the congestion of Old Brooklyn, the BQE’s genesis is traced back to 1937 as part of a larger regeneration plan that seeks to improve the conditions of the borough, particularly the neighborhoods directly adjacent to the Manhattan and Brooklyn Bridge. As the automobile gains traction as the dominant medium of transport in the city, the elevated railways extending from the bridges and deep into Brooklyn become insufficient and increasingly irrelevant as a way to distribute metropolitan density. The once affluent suburban neighborhoods of Brooklyn begin to erode under the loads of the urban masses, and a decongestive measure became necessary. Spearheading the realization of this new infrastructure is Robert Moses, a notoriously prodigal figure distinguished by his insensitivity to neighborhood sentiments:For Robert Moses city life was the daily grind, a fundamental fact of modern existence but basically unsympathetic to the good life. City life meant sacrifice, with the individual bending his will to the collective, exemplified by Moses’s oft-repeated phrase about large-scale projects: “you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.” (“New York 1960” 37) This attitude occupies the extreme end of a spectrum that describes mid-century perspectives about urban development, characterizing the trends of Modernist planning that maintain the militant ethos of the movement’s avant-garde roots. Occupying the other end, as the voice of what Moses refers to as “the little people,” is American-Canadian writer and activist Jane Jacobs: For Jane Jacobs the city was a great liberation, the ultimate freedom, an intricate web of individuals, buildings and streets, a mosaic or tapestry that somehow amounted to more than any singular vision and was absolute anathema to the idea of a grand plan. In Jacob’s view, New York, or at least the parts of it that she admired, had the ingredients of a post-industrial age utopia; it was definitely not an ideal to be endured.” (“New York 1960” 37) Standing in direct opposition to Moses on a number of planning episodes—including the Lower-Manhattan Expressway and the Cross-Bronx Expressway—Jacob’s criticisms position her among the most vocal opponents of Moses’ urban renewal policies. But what is most critical about these two contradictory figures is not the specifics of their positions within New York’s planning history, nor the logistics of their achievements, but rather their potential towards signifying two divergent ways of seeing the city that can be traced back to the origins of landscape as a constructed idea. Simultaneously maintaining relevance to the BQE as a theoretical context, Moses’ and Jacob’s perspectives are reverse engineered into performative and narrative modes of landscape representation that can in turn be instrumentalized into filmic techniques for figuring forth a cinematic space about the BQE.

Writing
by PZ
The Archives of Venice:

In an effort to preserve the sanctity of the archive and it’s privileged and profound role in culture, this project seeks alternative ways in which to disseminate the contents of the archive, alternative materials for inscribing into the history of the city of Venice. The premise of the work is: Is it possible to create at this site a building that will allow Venetians to engage the archive through theater typology, thereby expanding upon the sense of performance implicit to all public spaces, and the history of theatricality in Venice. Can the public be used as a tool for inscribing the histories of Venice into an architectural space, where the topos resides in the dramatic act and where the nomos becomes implicit to a city where the performing public is in a continuous act of engaging, editing, and curating it’s archival material? Given the brief to design the archives of Venice upon the current bus depot of island, while maintaining the depot’s functionability as a major transportation node, this project operated within the ambiguity of placing the archive at the precise location where it is most likely to erode -- directly upon the horizontal asphalt territory of the terminal. The banality of the bus depot coupled against the sanctity of the archive yields an architectural problem that can not, and indeed is not meant to be solved. Often times in architecture, problems that are ambiguous can be made definite through the standard set of tools that we use as architects to understand things... formal analysis, historical research, data collection and processing, etc. However our problem here is structured such that it falls apart under the scrutiny of protocols that are typically associated with the early stages of understanding a project. The proliferation of printed material inevitably results in an increase in archived material, such that it’s organization comes into our current understanding of the archive as a sort of database structure with corresponding systems of retrieving useful information. In this scenario, the authoritative nature of the archive begins to weaken, in a sense that people are able to interpret the archives themselves, democratically, and in doing so put together their own story about their culture’s history. The digitization of the archive erodes its topological or nomological value. By entering the realm of the digital, the archive loses it’s status as privileged material with privileged topos: its capacity for disseminating precise knowledge is compromised. It begins to behave as and be treated with an attitude of disposability which characterizes data culture.

Research
at Harvard GSD
Catastrophe and Control

Kantian Foundation The production of architecture in Modernity, understood as the process of translating ideas into material, is a conceptual framework whose origins are found in 18th century metaphysics. It is here that Kant re-centers the subject as the champion of being, equipped with an aesthetic ideology which empowers the self as fundamentally autonomous, yet capable of recognizing the beautiful and sublime in a way that unites him with the similarly free subjects that surround him as a “community of feeling subjects” (Eagleton 75). If on the one hand the rationalization and secularization of the Enlightenment despiritualizes the individual, and the reactionary skepticism of empiricism slips into a solipsism which relativizes ontology into obscurity, then Kant strikes a profound note of reciprocity between subjectivity and objectivity which resounds through the 19th and 20th century, indeed into the present, as the foundational way of thinking. It is the ways in which Modernity appropriates the Kantian imaginary, the particularities of conflicts and crises between the subject and his capital--which drive the materializations of capitalism and the bourgeois which define our current built environment. The spaces between Modernity’s myriad dualities--culture and industry, subject and object, ideology and practice--can be engaged with the Kant’s aesthetic ideology to provide a mode entry into thinking critically and historically about design and architecture as the articulation of encounter between the subject and nature. It comes as no surprise that as Kant affirms these two mutually exclusive yet independent domains, the territorial imperative of the social exalts the role of technology’s capacity for dominion, specifically its ability to control the uncontrollable. From the extolled i-beam of Mies van der Rohe’s Seagram building, to Le Corbusier’s “machine for living,” Modern architecture’s rhetoric focuses overwhelmingly on the conflation of instruments of regulation and building. In challenging the success and productivity of this attitude, we can propose an alternative reading, found by example in the architecture of Adler and Sullivan--the originators of the Modern movement in America--as they integrate technology into turn of the century warehouses and attempt to control nature’s most entropic element: air. ‍ Freezing Value "After an investment of $1,500,000 and a useful life of eleven years, their warehouses were demolished. The cost of progress has seldom been higher.‍" - Carl Condit, The Chicago School of Architecture‍ The Chicago Cold Storage Exchange, built on the Chicago river in 1891 for the emerging cold storage industry, was at the time of its construction “the world’s largest cold storage facility” (Osman 7). An innovation in the new and lucrative market of freezing perishable food items and, more to the point, their associated market value, the building was a triumph for the profiteers that sought to “support speculation through futures contracts analogous to those used for grain at the Board of Trade” (Osman 4). Adler and Sullivan, appropriating the cooling technologies developed by the transport industry, synthesized systems of coiled expansion pipes and compressed ammonia, absorbing the entrails of industrialization into the a civic architecture of “texture and geometric purism” (Condit 135). Hailed as “a company of wizards,” the architects managed to absorb technology completely and realize a building where “no view revealed the mechanics buried in the basements, no gap disclosed the cooling apparatus that rose up through the wall cavities, and all the changes in supply and demand negotiated by the commission merchants at the Cold Storage Exchange were hidden deep inside the warehouse mass.” (Osman 7)If we acknowledge the production and consumption of food as a process of negotiating energy between ourselves and our environment, and recognize the different ways in which these negotiations occur as a reflection of our values , then the cold storage facility typology can be seen to radically revise the nature and limits of our subjectivity insofar as it revolutionizes material culture. Adler and Sullivan’s temples of storage are an early, albeit romanticized instance of a phenomenon that is by now now globally ubiquitous typology whose main characteristic is “an interior environment defined by temperature, humidity, and technical dependability produced spaces in which commodities could retain their identity through time.”(Osman 3). By providing the apparatus to conceptualize the full spectrum of nature’s produce simply as signifiers of value in national trade networks, the architect of the cold storage facility destabilizes the limits between the subject and his environment. Prior to refrigeration, there existed a palpable reciprocity between harvesting and nourishment, a seasonal cycle attenuated by the time scales of growth and perishability. This close relationship between the consuming body and the affordances of its environment is synonymous with a subjectivity whose limits occur at the encounter of the labouring body and the natural environment from which it extracts nutrition. The scale of this agrarian subjectivity stretches as the finiteness of perishability and its material culture are pushed towards the infinity of frozen storage and its isotropic networks of exchange value. The liberation from the time-consuming processes of direct subsistence from nature of course allows the subject to engage in other secondary and tertiary economies, thereby proffering the potential for becoming bourgeois, but in doing so dissolves the previously compact reciprocity of the subject and his environment, expanding it into a more abstract and entropic realm. Architecture in this case does not necessarily act as the actual material interface between the subject and his environment, but rather assimilates technology into the built-environment-at-large in a way that sublimates subjectivity into a more entropic and increasingly volatile realm of determined structures that are “so thoroughly formal and abstract in their operations that they seem to stand at an immense distance from the realm of sensuous immediacy, superbly autonomous of the chance combinations of matter that they throw up” (Eagleton 318).This cleavage between the “superbly autonomous” individual and its surrounding “chance combinations of matter” is the dark side of Kant’s imaginary, as it reveals itself incarnate in Modernity. The aesthetics of the beautiful and the sublime, despite their value as paths to free and sensuous (inter)subjectivity, are marginalized to art as a precious, yet very contained, subset of bourgeois ideology. Mirroring this conceptual space of ideology is the concretized space of bourgeois social practice, within which architecture comes reside. The failure of Adler and Sullivan's Exchange warehouses on the Chicago river can be seen as architecture’s losing battle, as it attempts to materialize its ideologies into a city which remains indifferent to its ambitions and takes instead the tumultuous eruptions of speculation, profit, and economy as its productive principle. “The cost of progress has seldom been higher,” is a statement which refers to the tragic incompatibility between Adler and Sullivan’s refined aesthetics and Chicago’s ruthless speculation market. The Kantian subject, philosophizing behind the proscenium of his subjective judgement, is unable to articulate the contours of his imagination in the objective world, left to toil in the metaphysical, frustrated in recognition that “facts are one thing, and values another -- which is to say that there is a gap, at once troubling and essential, between bourgeois social practice and the ideology of that practice” (Eagleton 82). This gap, reified in Chicago as the demolition of the Cold Storage Exchange and justified as the necessary “cost of progress,” is a phenomenon of catastrophe implicit in the dynamism of capitalist behavior. Erupting always in unison with the triumphs of development, crisis comes to define Modernity as the ugly bourgeois reflection of Kant’s seemingly salvationary metaphysics, an immanent image of destruction in the rearview mirror of progress, an insistent reminder as pervasive and scaleless as the spectered ideology to which it is tethered.‍PARTITION‍In Bourke-White’s images of partition, one characteristic stands out: the juxtaposition of scales, the grand and the immediate, the national and the personal. Distraught faces are set against grand vistas, blank skies, and historical sites. It is as if the partition had opened up a chasm that had swallowed all that mediated between the personal and the national, bringing the former into grating adjacency with the latter without the intervening layers of the social, the common, the familial, and the familiar.‍-Ijlal Muzaffar, “Boundary Games”The partition of the British Indian Empire into the sovereign states of the Dominion of Pakistan and the Union of India was political exercise of division, a territorial delineation of Islam and Hinduism and the materialization of a boundary game which created more than 12 million refugees and left more than 1 million dead. Administering the Indian subcontinent since 1858 through structures of property ownership, class hierarchy, and division of labor, the implications of capitalist imperialism come into focus as the British Raj make their exit. As bourgeois social practice resigns itself from the sociopolitical landscape that it so radically restructured, the collective subjectivities of the Islam and Hinduism reemerge, yet without any of the “intervening layers” of social practice to negotiate their return to solidarity. As the British Raj resigns with the inscription of a line in the sand, it leaves the mark of its propensity for division, materializing schisms previously rooted the economics of labor into the explicit realm of territorial geography. It is as if Raj could not escape without somehow scarring the landscape to signify the division implicit in the structure of bourgeois social practice.Following the displaced refugee out of India and into Pakistan, it is in the housing colony of Korangi, near Karachi, Pakistan, that we can trace the reconstruction of a repressed identity. Here, the postwar planning strategies of Echocard and Doxiadis, the centralized military government of Ayub Kahn’s Pakistan, and the ambiguous identity of the refugee conflate into the ideology of the plan. Commissioned to deploy his “new culturally specific form of modernism” (Muzaffar 153), Ecochard brought to the table an experienced set of planning skills, polished and praised by the CIAM. The scheme he proposed, in collaboration with the centralized powers Ayub Kahn, was in equal parts a political and a design project that consist of phased “spatial frameworks that transform the inhabitants as they traverse the modernization process” (Muzaffar 157). Following the construction of an infrastructural framework, provisionary shelter is initially provided, followed by single-story houses clustered in low-density green, and finally multi-story slab housing. In incremental steps, plot coverage is reduced and floor area ratio increased, pre-figured for the ultimate goal of total modernization: “the scheme outlines a process of evolution whose final form is already vis.ible. The inhabitants are caught simply in the process of filling in the details (Muzaffar 157).” In a process of disassembly, reassembly, and densification within a fixed and limited boundary, the refugees are conceptualized as orphans, adopted and placed into a sort of collective incubator, a controlled mechanism for transformation into fully functioning Modern subjects, eventually capable themselves of extending this pattern of ideological reproduction and the proliferation of Modernity. This sort of identity hack, carried out through the introduction of increasingly modern typologies, reveals a novel relationship between subjectivity, design, and the objective world. In contrast to Adler and Sullivan’s brittle realizations, cast from the realm of their subjectivity and into the external domain of rude and practical economy, the various typologies specified by Ecochard’s Korangi project graft a new subjectivity onto the refugees: in the former architecture emerges out of a subjectivity, whereas in the latter a subjectivity emerges out of architecture. Echohard’s plan short circuits the refugees ability to reconstitute their own identity, depriving them of the chance to experience a phenomenal representation of their self. Instead, he wedges an architecture of the Other between the refugee and his environment, installing around the displaced subject a new aesthetic ideology to be entered, owned, and carried forward. It is ultimately the explicit nature of this wedging and the overt quality of the processes of transformation which prevent the realization of the plan, leaving the project open for a less visible, more nested strategy for developing the modern. In contrast to the prefigured totality outlined by Ecochard’s limits, Doxiadis specifies an alternative dynamic of development, rejecting the explicit nature of the earlier plan that relegated the responsibility of transformation to phased state interventions, Doxiadis suggests that the refugee be his own agent of change, presenting the displaced subject with a path to modernization built on inner growth rather than acquired manner. Urbanistically, the plan rejects any contained centripetal morphology and proposes a settlement that is “to grow linearly over time out of its present site, and direct the growth of the entire city of Karachi” (Muzaffar 162). Through decentralizing the geometry of the urban plan, and imparting it with an organizational principle of continuous, linear, and organic expansion, Doxiadis de-articulates the presence of regulation while maintaining the centralization of power in the social sense, emptying its location in the spatial. The systems of administration are synthesized into the urban structure as a sort of ubiquitous muteness, thus providing a milieu for the refugee to act as the agent of his own change:‍What might appear as a contradiction--the dual focus on centralized authority and disseminated application of power--actually formed the very mode through which power was preserved. Such contradictions didn’t undo power but made its stable exercise possible. The dissemination of state authority is premised on the framing of the refugee as a subject in transition between tradition and modernity. Although seen to be dislocated in the modern national landscape, [he or] she is not simply claimed as a subject in need of rigid control. Rather, [he or] she is presented as subject who possesses the potential of modernization herself. The state simply serves to emancipate this potential. The more the state is able to serve the role from afar, the less it is susceptible to constrain the refugee’s capacity to constitute a seamless link between tradition and modernity (Muzaffar 165).‍Like Ecochard, Doxiadis seeks to produce a new subject with his plan, but unlike his predecessor who designated singular moment of centralized revision, and in doing so projected a ready-made modern subjectivity, Doxiadis extracts the new identity of of his subject by providing him with an environment of affordances, embedding transformative functions into the settlement’s socioeconomic structures while regulating morphology through a homogeneous spatial distribution of centralized yet discrete instruments of control. This model of transformation can be said to be be evolutionary insofar as new forms of life (i.e. new modern subjects) emerge as the pressures of their environments (i.e. the settlement structure) naturally select and bring forth certain characteristics and equip them with an adapted set capacities and power to produce: Like Darwin’s finch whose beak form adapts to extract the seeds of a new island environment, the refugee in Doxiadis’s Korangi emerges into the modern as an adapted subject. Through integrating spatially minor yet socioeconomically significant “seeds” into built environment, Doxiadis teases out behaviors which participate in and contribute to a collective subjectivity of his own design. For example, the main feature of the settlement’s modular housing unit is a courtyard, integrated into the typology as a familiar element appealing to the refugee subject, but shifted slightly from the middle of the house to the edge or back of the house. This sleight of hand planning strategy appropriates the courtyard--an element of tradition and culture used as a shared social space to bridge age and gender--and refigures it into the plan as a potential for expanding the size of the home or providing storage for entrepreneurship. If Ecochard’s architecture produces a new modern subjectivity by wedging itself as a phantasm in between the refugee and his objective reality, then Doxiadis’s architecture can be said to function, in terms of evolutionary biology, as a pressure within the environment, extracting out of the refugee’s genotype and modern phenotype as a subjectivity adapted and attenuated to the objective reality of the settlement.Doxiadis conceptualization of the city as a biological organism, however, produces an unsettling dissonance: If the refugee of traditions evolves into the modern subject in response to the nested ideological pressures of the city (e.g. private/public partnership, property ownership, courtyard as unit of expansion), and the city itself is a biological organism -- what pressures drive the evolution of the city organism? Where precisely is the location and scale of environment and organism, the ecology of evolutionary pressures and the biology adapting subjects? If each element in the chain of forms is an organism adapted to next higher order of scale which supersedes it (subject, city, city to region, region to territory) what ultimately resides as the uber-environment which drives the morphology of the chain of forms? For Doxiadis, it is the “global integration” of a “stable networked world.”(Muzaffar 169) Internationally coordinated bourgeois ideologies ( are the end to which Modernization is the means. This necessarily requires, as we see in Korangi, that the model take as its most fundamental units the capitalist tropes of property ownership and shared public/private investments. This perspective of Doxiadis model -- a totalizing, albeit quasi-heterogenous global economy -- is a violation in the highest order of what constitutes the Kantian imaginary. Kant and Doxiadis both seek to unify the particular and the universal, and assign a special role to the built environment in doing so: the former produces an ideology of the aesthetic -- beauty and the sublime as the saviors of the subject’s freedom--whereas the latter appropriates the logic of biological evolution as the basis of a networked global economy in the most objective sense. Strangely, Doxiadis’s positionïng of the subject as the molecular unit of an infinitely pliable global network economy coincides with Kant’s sense of sublimity, only Doxiadis does not seek the salvation that Kant discovers through confronting this infinity through subjective reasoning, but settles instead on a cybernetic subject-object reciprocity as the basis of his technocratic aesthetics, LEAP-FROGDoxiadis’s ideology lends itself as a useful lens for understanding the relationship of of man and his environment as a co-evolution of intimate inter-connectedness. Looking at the history of hydrology in California as a metaphor for Modernity’s relationship to the environment, we see capitalism's tendency to “center the subject in the sphere of values, only to decentre it in the realm of things” as farmers are driven by the bourgeois ideologies of property ownership and profit, instrumentalizing technology at all costs to regulate the unpredictability of hydrology and moisten their crops (Eagleton 92). The resulting droughts that inevitably followed, as crises and consequence of the subjects’ pursuit of bourgeois ideology, were overcome not through reconciling with the ecology of California or establishing a reciprocity with the affordances therein, but rather pushed towards the upscaling in technology. Design in this context emerges as the subjective prefigurations of aesthetic ideologies colliding with capital and economy as the phenomenal representations of the subject’s self-interests that exist in the objective realm as the negative specters of subjective bourgeois ideology. As culture and industry spiral along the the vector myth of progress, additional organizations and centralizations of resources are required to surmount nature’s instability, coagulating into various forms of democracy and incorporation. Formed in this leap-frog game of ecological catastrophe and technological control, we find ourselves in California amongst the endless crystallizations of hydraulic infrastructures of a continental scale, bearing witness to the escalating stakes in the subject’s encounter with nature and leaving our subjective Kantian imaginations to wonder, as we gaze across the sublime environment of crisis before us: what went wrong?‍“Here we are able to see etched in sharpest detail the interplay between humans and nature and to track the social consequences it has produced--to discover the process by which, in the remaking of nature, we remake ourselves.” (Worster 515)

Writing
by PZ
Desire, Design, Law

"Rather, we can best explore this terrain by using as our guide the concept of diffuse mentalities: metalanguages that obliquely traverse the spaces of architectural language, determining their organization and liberating their potentials."‍ -Manfredo Tafuri, “A Search for Paradigms: Project, Truth, Artifice” If for Marx architecture is the material artefact which confirms the subject’s powers of production, and for Kant it is an object of beauty which unifies our otherwise isolated subjectivities into moments of collective harmony, then Freud’s Eros synchronizes with classical aesthetics insofar as building brings us to sensuous catharsis. At the very moment of coming in to being, however, the serenity achieved in architecture by Kant and Marx is sharpened into a double edged sword, swinging back towards the subject as nothing more than the masochist reification of the superego–walls as the law of the name of the father:“Freud posits in human beings both a primary narcissism and a primary aggressiveness; and the construction of civilization involves a sublimation of both, directing them outwards to higher goals. Part of our primary aggressiveness is thus diverted from the ego and fused with Eros, builder of cities, to dominate Nature and create a culture” (Eagleton 270)‍The source of this narcissism, as the productive principle of city building, is explained by Freud as the cyclical interplay of law and desire, competing for primacy within the subject. Appropriating the father as the symbol of the law, Freud sketches out the curious yet compelling psychology whereby the paternal father comes to represent both the past and the future: the past, in that he is our genetic prehistory, and the future as the figure towards which the child will ultimately shape ourselves (incidentally, as it were, to take the place as our mother’s lover). What is of interest here is not the Oedipal underpinnings of Eagleton’s rhetoric, which are of course necessary to speak of Freud at all, but rather the role which history plays in the construction of law, desire, and subjectivity. Tafuri, in a fortuitous study of Renaissance thought, challenges the immutable nature of Humanism’s value system, drawing attention to a lack of authenticity and revealing the laws which govern its subjects as a simply recycling of components from the past appropriated into the present with new arbitrary meaning. Interpreted as a sort of Benjaminian totality, where dead histories are given new image, the totality of law, in both humanism and Freud, exhibits the peculiar behavior of parading itself as a constitutional framework for conduct based on universal truths, when in fact it is an adaptation of various forms of history, synthesized and stamped by interests of the present: “The super ego thus represents a kind of contradiction between past and present, infantilism and maturity: at the very moment that is shows us the path towards an ideal humanity, it pulls us inexorably back into childhood.” (Eagleton 272)‍Freud treats law, and superego and interchangeable, which–despite the dogmatic nature of its analogic which should be regarded with skepticism–provides an interesting ground for a psychoanalytic critique of architecture. By sketching out the various permutations that architecture takes within and against law and desire and fundamental concepts for forms subjectivity, Freud’s distinctly modern theories is modulated with Tafuri’s rewriting of history to discover various modalities of design. In these terms, the socialized subjectivity of the bourgeois is conditioned through an organic dynamic of development, where a select group of intelligentsia go foraging through the history of antiquity, gathering orders and components of orders, and presenting them to each other for concurrence on their beauty: laws are forged as architecture negotiates the subjective desire with the universality of consensus. Humanist design provides the subject entry into the social sphere by allowing him to participate in the collective and spontaneous judgement of beauty. “I” becomes “we” through a process of intuition, expression, and refinement. This socializing of subjectivity is what Tafuri calls “naturally artificial,” and can in other words be described as an unauthentic sincerity. In recognition of the fact that its trumpeted morality is nothing more than a conscription of fragmented classical language, the refinement of the subject’s choices of desire into orders of beauty and law, nevertheless remains sincere as ardent expressions made in spontaneous sensuous commune. This conflation of desire and law by means of sensual consensus has, however, will have grave implications in Modernity as “the civilizing process presupposes a gradual shift in mental paradigms: as with any historical process, it will not permit itself to be interpreted according to categories of progress and decline. (Tafuri 56)Looking at the operative principles of design in Iran during the second half of the 20th century, Modernity’s propensity for subjective hegemony is observed as “a hybrid mixture of traditional Iranian and Western architecture.” Echoing Tafuri’s reading of humanist multiplicity, the Iranian subject, finding himself amidst the propaganda and programs of American democratic capitalism, “rehearses a modern style of existence. A form of conduct, planned out in advance, and oriented toward precisely defined objectives, provides its foundation” (Tafuri 61). The hegemonic instrumentality of design comes sharply into focus within the political conflicts of the Cold War: The 1959 Moscow “Kitchen Debate” between the USSR premier Nikita Khrushchev and the U.S. President Richard Nixon demonstrated that Cold War animosities functioned on wildly diverse levels and featured not just missiles and sphere of interest but also automobiles, washing machines, and toaster ovens” (Karimi 123)‍It was through the domestic furnishings of industrial design that the subjectivity of the western capitalist bourgeois, founded on principles of “linguistic pluralism” in Tafuri’s humanism, enters into Iranian culture. Through the realm of the kitchen, American sensibilities enter the realm of domesticity, cultivating a consumerism whose demands unfold out of the realm of domesticity and into economic structures, revising ideology into a montage of traditional and modern. The similarities with Tafuri’s humanism are notable, yet different insofar as the laws governing the new Iranian identity were imported as a foreign subjectivity, whereas with Tafuri the law was fashioned by the subjects. Between the difference of acquired manner and inner growth enlies a degree of alienation, palpable in the lamenting of the contemporary Iranian subject: “we are all like strangers to ourselves, in our food and dress, our homes, our manners… and, most dangerous, our culture.” (Karimi 138)“It is not a question of rescuing the subject for a precarious moment from its alienation; to be a subject is to be alienated anyway, rendered eccentric to oneself by the precise movement of desire. And if objects matter at all, they matter precisely in the place where they are absent. The desired object, as Juliet Mitchell has argued in Lacanian vein, comes into existence as an object when it is lost to the baby or infant. It is when that object is removed or prohibited that it lays down the trace of desire, so that its secure possession will always move under the sign of loss, its presence warped and overshadowed by the perpetual possibility of its absence” (Eagleton 267-268).‍At one end of the spectrum, design can be said to reach its fullest potential for the individual subject when it is voraciously and blissfully consumed by sensuous desire, as a pure and unblighted affirmation of the id. At the other end of the spectrum, design is rejected away from the body as unpleasurable limiting desire, where it is picked up by the socialized subjectivity of the superego as a culturally construction, immanent with authority. This sets up a diagram for understanding design’s role as moving away from the body and towards the city as our subjectivity moves away from individual and toward the social. Beginning (or ending) at the cyborg, design is absorbed completely by the body–becomes part of it as something which accelerates the fulfillment of desire. Prosthetics and tools extend the body, assisting libidinal pursuits while remaining subject to social scrutiny. Ergonomics soften the blow at the subject’s point of entry into the civilized domain–engineered to situate the body in Modernity’s cycles of production. Stripped of any somatic sentience, industrial design materializes before the subject as objects and interfaces which restructure the body into its terms of productive economy. Buildings are a hinge, cultivating and containing socialized subjectivities, constituting the basic unit of the city. Isotropic and pervasive, architecture aggregates into the totalizing and alienating endless city.Concerning the centrality given to architecture, Freud positions desire and law as irreconcilable foes which brutalize the subject from opposite ends of a spectrum, a milieu in which architecture is only vaguely ascribed any agency. Tafuri, in opposition to this, features architecture as the privileged protagonist where desire and law conflate. Freud’s architecture, nothing more than the subject’s angst materialized in the external world, is an uncanny artefact of authority that alienates both himself and others. As the happenstance materialization of a demonized individual subjectivity, it masochistically consumes law at all levels of consciousness (id, ego, superego… subjectivity, socialized subjectivity).“Subjects and object, as for Nietzsche, are passing products of the play of the drives; and what opens up the subject/object duality in the first place is the deeper dialectic of pleasure and unpleasure, introjection and expulsion, as the ego separates certain bits of the world from itself and masticates certain others, thus building up those primordial identifications of which it is a kind of storehouse or cemetery.” (Eagleton 267)Architecture can no longer be understood as the materialization of the subject’s encounter with nature, but rather slips with equal propensity into both. No longer does the built environment come to negotiate the internal and external, but is rather sublimated into one or the either depending on the degree to which is fulfills or limits desires. Capable of being absorbed by sensuous desire, or cast out scornfully as something which limits desire, design is no longer an autonomous phenomenon suspended between the subject and object, but rather shatters down to a level of molecular ubiquity, becoming in the Freudian complex integral to both individual and social subjectivities.“What the aesthetic yearns for is an object at once sensuous and rule bound, a body which is also a mind, combining all the delicious plenitude of the senses with the authority of an abstract decree. It is therefore a fantasy of mother and father in one, of love and law commingled, an imaginary space in which pleasure-principle and reality principle fuse under the aegis of the former. “(Eagleton 263)Freud disfigures architecture’s capacity as a fulfilling aesthetic experience in a two-fold manner: first, he problematizes the body as the pure, stable entity which architecture ought to confirm, imparting it with contradictions, complexities, and “perversity,” which deflates the pursuit of aesthetics in general; secondly, he critically suspends this new distasteful body, only to insist that even if the body were worth confirming, architecture as an object in the external realm cannot perform any sensuous task, cannot bridge from objectivity to subjectivity as two irreconcilable domains.Architecture as the synchrony of law and desire brings subject’s together into a cohesive social in humanism, whereas with Freud architecture drives subjects apart as alienating reifications of the the disparate battles between law and desire played out in each of them. Architecture in humanism modulates individual subjectivity into a harmonious social subjectivity, whereas architecture in Freud causes dissonance in the social realm, pushing subjectivity back towards the isolated realm of the tragically tormented individual.By dismantling the immutable idealism and “unadulterated certainty” of Renaissance architectural theory, and sketching out with the Cortegiano an organic fusion of artifice and nature, Tafuri infers two alternate histories with a single stroke of analysis: the Renaissance is absolved from the tyranny wrought by law against desire, and the Modernity is excused from its villainizing role as originating crisis. Tafuri even ventures antagonize the canonical quality of antiquity, suggesting that it is a capricious point of reference. Citing classical models of hybridization, he compounds the deflation of humanisms values already at work in its systems of representations.This devaluation, however, is productive insofar as it allows us to reevaluate the Renaissance on new terms, opening up the possibility for a rewriting history in a more contemporary lens.What are the implications of removing crisis from Modernity, and disseminating it back into history as episodic contingencies? By effectively shifting the location of “loss of meaning” from the end of the Renaissance to its beginning, Tafuri suggests that the systems of representation which it innovates bring with it “the establishment of a code through an infinite series of exceptions” (Tafuri 60). In a sort of referential free for all, Humanism butchers up antiquity into an isotropic cadavre exquis, its values edited and cross-multiplied into various new fashionings. The proliferation of these new forms of knowledge eclipses the symbolic universe of medieval tradition, producing in its place a landscape of fledgling epistemologies, each competing with the other to preserve its autonomy and negotiate the particularities of its “reference to solid foundations and … appeal to subjective choice” (Tafuri 60). If abstraction can be said to be the primary productive principle of Modernity, its muted materializations the symptom of some deeper process at work–then the systems of representation which underpin humanism are its causes. It is a shift from symbol to sign, tonality to atonality.“If the origins of the aforementioned anguish are to be located in the humanist affirmation of the subject, how can one hope for a recovery based on subjective volition.” (Tafuri 48)Humanism's centering of the individual is both its success and its failure. If at first the humanist produces the beauty and truth of the Renaissance from the idealist perspective of its socialized subjectivity , then in the 19th century this perspective is foreshortened and unable to see the values towards which it was oriented, estranging the subject from world, leaving him to reference only himself within his shrinking, myopic worldview. This de-socialization of the subject, itself the terminus of humanism, implies that the architecture it produces is nothing more than an abstruse materialization of its alienated subjectivity. Aggregated ad infinitum, this architectural angst produces an urban environment that is nothing more than a fragmentary landscape of self-involved subjectivities. If Freud describes architecture as an expression of aggression and violence, it is because his subject lacks the appropriate intervening channels of social conditioning, and so out of angst produces architecture and the city.The architect then is someone who knows not what he/she does. He/she contributes to the city as the domain of socialized subjectivity, simply an aggregation of designers’ ill-informed performances of angst: violent events loosely coordinated by culture to fulfill our implicit desire for control. Cold storage facilities and post-war refugee settlements and hydraulic infrastructure and landfills, dredging and damming and diverting–all these elements of Modernity are extracted from the myth of progress and reflected back toward the subject as the unfortunate and ugly mirror image of himself. This mirror however, like the sword, is a duality, which produces on its opposite side the shining image of social idealism.“Perhaps, only after having penetrated to a realm beyond every law that claims to be absolute — to a place where the “spirit of destruction” acquires a constructive vocation — does it become at all possible to examine the meaning of law. Let us recall Mies’s Seagram Building or Le Corbusier’s Chandigarh: are they not, in some sense, interrogations of the very principles of European rationality?” (Tafuri 48)It is as if the law of European rationalism (bourgeois social practice, capitalism) has driven itself into obscurity, disappearing as it gazes upon the landscape of destruction and fragmentation that it has produced. Having pulverized everything in its path, with nothing left to destroy and identify itself against, the law ceases to be because it has eliminated its own context. In Freud’s battle between law and desire, law has ultimately won, extinguishing desire but left with a meaningless victory — nothing is left to applaud and fear it. Like a lethal vapor which has become so diluted, by the forces of its own entropic impetus, that it effectively ceases to exist, there is once again fresh air to breath as the medium for new life.‍Works Cited Eagleton, Terry , The Ideology of the Aesthetic (Blackwell Publishing, 1990): 262-287. Harwood, John, “The Interface: Ergonomics and the Aesthetics of Survival” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 70-92. Karimi, Pamela, “Dwelling, Dispute, and the Space of Modern Iran,” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 119-146. Tafuri, Manfredo, “A Search for Paradigms: Project, Truth, Artifice,” in Interpreting the Renaissance: Princes, Cities, Architects (Yale University Press, 2006): 1-22.‍

Writing
by PZ
The Economic / Aesthetic Bind

"It is the contradictoriness of the aesthetic which only a dialectical thought can adequately encompass."‍ -Terry Eagleton, The Ideology of the Aesthetic‍ Coevolution‍ The relationship between the built environment and money is history of coevolution. As feudalism gives way to capitalism and triggers the emergence of Modernity, architecture and economics unfold, each out of the other, and produce in their wake a dazzling variety of historical tropes. Industrialization, secularization, rationalization, and the nation-state fuel Modernity, while presenting the subject with a new and difficult set of circumstances to reconcile. It is precisely the ways in which the individual conceptualizes his or her self against against the built environment and money that come to define aesthetics. Expanding on the perspective that money produces the built environment during early capitalism, and the built environment produces money during late capitalism, the subject is introduced to enrich and inform the binary, illustrating a multi-dimensional dialectical model for interrogating aesthetics. Noting that Modernity isn’t necessarily a shift from one mode of production to the next, but rather a morphological, elastic set of interrelationships that transform through time, helps us visualize Modernity as constantly evolving field within which singularities erupt and erode, inscribing themselves into historical record as events. Architectural projects, as one of the many forms of events that come to define Modernity, maintain a privileged role in history where the individual, money, and the built environment (i.e. the subject, exchange-value and use-value) all converge. Buildings then, serve as heuristic objects of historical accumulation, whose concepts, contexts, and components can be disentangled and identified as the constituent parts of a complex and contradictory history of aesthetics in Modernity.‍‍‍‍ The American Artifact In the the period directly following World War I in the United States, housing shortages caused by post-war recession were compounded by a lack of housing construction. Faced with a residential landscape characterized by “decentralized, barely regulated, and poorly coordinated” conditions, the federal government (recently consolidated and centralized by the war) sought to reform the nation’s patchwork local mortgage lending patterns that had been established by the Laissez-Faire economics of 19th century agrarian America (Massey 23). Hoover mobilized home building capital through the Federal Reserve Banks, expanding and organizing mortgage lending on national level. Real estate groups formed across the nation and in Washington, capitalizing on the newly established market and coordinating extensive campaigns to promote home construction and ownership. Specifically, these campaigns were devoted to the proliferation of single-family detached dwellings. With the federal government facilitating mortgages to people that formerly could not afford them, and real estate groups such as the United States League of Local Building and Home Association aggressively marketing home ownership as “the safeguard of American liberties,” the American middle class is fortified as an essential feature of the United States in 20th century: the democratic political state par excellence.The attitudes and values of the American middle class worker emerged out of the laborious domain of 19th century agricultural production and into the realm of citizenship with “a sense of dignity in belonging to the social order” (Massey 31). This idealization of home ownership as a road to self-affirmation is in fact a reification of Marxist aesthetic ideology. It is in the early 20th century American home that “the perfection of the idealism of the state [is] at the same time the perfection of the materialism of civil society.” The home, as a shared material interest between the civic individual and the state, collapses use-value and exchange-value into a total subject-affirming object. Through local citizenship, the home and its ownership resist the commodification of the built environment through supplanting the ubiquity of ground rent. Work is conceptualized not as necessary labor for earning rent money, but rather as something that leads to the ownership of the home as an immediately tangible material artifact. It is this artifact which affirms the human’s capacities and powers of production, and leads ultimately to the recovery of sensuous consciousness which is the basis of Marxist aesthetic ideology (Marxist Sublime 197). In this case, aesthetics emerges as a consequence of economics. That is, the liberalized economic impetus in post WWI America–which was initiated to reform agrarian Laissez-Faire economics–produced out of its housing policy an aesthetic ideal built upon the home as an artifact which confirms the laboring body. This phenomenon, whereby economics (money) produces the aesthetic artifact (the home, housing, the built environment), is in fact reversible, and can be illustrated in interwar Britain, where Keynes alternative treatment of the Laissez-Faire state results in a radically unique configuration of money, the built environment, the subject, and aesthetics.‍‍Keynesian AestheticsKeynes–as Britain’s foremost economist and major influencer of late capitalist economics–states in his 1925 "Essays on Persuasion":How can I adopt a creed which, preferring the mud to the fish, exalts the boorish proletariat above the bourgeois and the intelligentsia who, with whatever faults, are the quality in life and surely carry the seeds of all human advancement.‍In direct opposition to Marx’s ideology, Keynes rejects “work” and its associated materiality, arguing instead that “aesthetic refinement essentially requires a life of leisure and contemplation unburdened by the harries of toil” (Dutta 243). The ways in which this aesthetic come to bear upon his economic theory can be most explicitly identified 11 years later in his canonical book The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, in which he identifies “the propensity to consume” as an essential element to maintaining economic output, maintaining that “spontaneous optimism… and prospects of investments” ensure a diverse, healthy and organically oscillating market. This sense of excess, and emphasis on exchange-value, is a consistent cross-section through Keynes career, where he positions “the aesthetic [as] an exceptional and paradigmatic instance of the motivational forces that drive economic behavior” (Dutta 242).Within this inverse milieu of aesthetics producing economics, the built environment seeks to recover the solidarity of the subject through the public arts, but more specifically the architecture that facilitates art as a sort of social savior. He sharpens this position in his 1936 article Art and the State: “Architecture is the most public of the arts, the least private in its manifestations and the best suited to give form and body to civic pride and the sense of social unity.” He later expands on the benefits of foregrounding aesthetics in economic theory:The life in [England] in the realm of the arts flows more strongly than for many a year. Our most significant discovery is the volume of popular demand. . . . But the lack of buildings is disastrous. The theatres, concert galleries, and galleries well suited to our purpose, taking the country as a whole, can be counted in a few minutes. That is where money will be wanted when in due time we turn to construct instead of to destroy. Nor will that expenditure be unproductive in financial terms. But we do have to equip, almost from the beginning, the material frame for the arts of civilization and delight. (Dutta 246)‍‍‍Elastic Aesthetics‍Architecture’s form, its relationship to the body, and the citizenship it promotes are therefore central to the aesthetic ideology of interwar economic policy in both the United States and Britain. However in the former, aesthetics emerge as the consequence of economics, whereas in the latter aesthetics in fact produce economics. This dualism of the aesthetic illustrates the degree to which its value, location, motivation, and consequence will shift in sync with reconfigurations in monetary and environmental parameters. This fickle tendency of the aesthetic–its ability to expand and contract with the ebbs and flow of money and the built environment–is in any case linked to the effort of the subject to recover the self through a conceptual restructuring of his or her positioning to spatio-economic circumstances. That is to say, with relationship to architecture, the amount of elasticity required by aesthetics to salvage the sensuous body is directly proportional to the magnitude of divergence between the use-value and exchange-value in any one building.‍Marx, Kant, and Late CapitalismFollowing the globalization of finance in 70s, the signifier (a building’s use-value) is finally disassociated completely from the signified (its exchange value). As this realm of exchange value becoming increasingly abstract, so too does the role of aesthetics in architecture. Consider, for example, Philip Johnson’s and John Burgee’s Penzoil Place (1976). In terms of Marxist aesthetics, the object which confirms the subject must carry within it the record of the subject’s capacities and power of production (Martin 95). Johnson’s Penzoil Place denies this object-subject affirmation through a process of threefold dematerialization. First, the ground upon is not conceptualized along the material properties of its soil, or any other sensuous quality, but rather as a plot containing an amount of “fictitious capital” within the milieu of speculation and revenue through ground rent. Furthermore, the plot as a unit of fictitious capital is replicated vertically, thereby multiplying its degree of “fictitious-ness” with every floor, as the process of replication marches opportunistically into the sky. Thirdly, this extrusion of floor slabs as commodity is wrapped in the curtain-wall, which with its reflectivity and lightness denies itself recognition as a singular commodity, eroding its own materiality and opting instead to become a symbol of the commodity that it contains: rentable office space. The cleavage between the building’s form and its content is a gross insult to Marx’s sense of aesthetics, but falls into a coincidentally and strangely parallel rhetoric with Kant’s aesthetics, which demand that the judgement of a form’s beauty be separated from its social or political “interests.” It could argued that Kant would in fact find Penzoil Place to be a fulfilling aesthetic experience, given that it acquired a universal acknowledgement of its beauty. However, where this full and valid Kantian aesthetic experience slips, is in the question of whether or not the the building contains any sort of teleological sense of “purposiveness.” This unique and peculiar qualifier put forth by Kant for what can be considered beautiful is polemic in that it asks us to identify something that is by its own nature nondescript (Eagleton 205). It effectively calls into question any statement of beauty, such that it vibrates with uncertainty within the supremely judicial realm of intuition. What is useful about the contradictions and questions contained between Kantian and Marxist aesthetics, is that they precisely outline the different faculties that we as architects use to judge, interpret, and ultimately produce buildings. It boils down to an ethical issue: does the social and political context within which a building sits come to bear upon its beauty? Architects and designers can–and do–oscillate endlessly between these value judgments, however simply being aware of them allows us to operate with greater dexterity and awareness, and understand our contemporary disciplinary landscape and phenomena. ‍Works Cited:Arindam Dutta, “Marginality and Metaengineering: Keynes and Arup” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 237-267.Chapter 8 (“The Marxist Sublime”) in Terry Eagleton, The Ideology of the Aesthetic (Blackwell Publishing, 1990): 196-233.Reinhart Koselleck and Michaela W. Richter, “Crisis,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 67/2 (April 2006): 357-400.Reinhold Martin, “Materiality: Mirrors” in Utopia’s Ghost: Architecture and Postmodernism, Again (University of Minnesota Press: 2010): 93-122.Jonathan Massey, “Risk and Regulation in the Financial Architecture of American Houses,” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 21-46

Writing
by PZ
The Plan or the Riot

From 958 to 1962, the forty-eight acre area of Boston known as the West End bares witness, at the hands of eminent domain, to the destruction of approximately 900 buildings, consisting of 2,000 families. At a rate of nearly 1.5 families per day, the City of Boston excavates this tenement district, razing to the ground a low-income, mixed race, high density neighborhood (112 families per acre) in favor of a “New Plan” which features mixed-use zoning and high-rise typologies attuned to the desires of a post-war middle-class America. The severity of this phenomenon, one of many such instances occurring in mid century American cities, has its origins in the early stages of the 20th century. As the scale and mutability of capital rapidly restructures metropolitan areas into landscapes of exchange-value and financial speculation, federal tax provisions–such as the federal corporate income tax of 1916–converge with the industrialist rhetoric of “progress” to produce the origins of an ethos that carry America through World War II and into the second half of the century on a continuous and tumultuous economic wave. Characterized by Frederic Jameson as “positively and negatively all at once… as catastrophe and progress all together… at one and the same time the best thing… and the worst,” capitalism finds within the paradigm of city planning a protagonist for perpetuating its insatiable thirst for profit: the myth of obsolescence. The planning and legal administrations of the country fortify the myth of obsolescence through totalizing provisions such as the American Public Health Associations Appraisal Method of Measuring the Quality of Housing. This method evaluates urban districts against “quantifiable” public health and sanitation criteria and synthesizes the results into a single omniscient numerical figure, which is then disseminated into the political sphere as a tool for the “busy public official,” allowing him to operate with same speed and ferocity of land-value speculation which drives the dynamic of the city. The reciprocity between the administrative realm of the city and its existing material conditions is obliterated by the capitalist phenomena of obsolescence: “What in effect had been in the 1920s an actuarial and political expedient for capitalist building owners became by midcentury a set of mythic beliefs, that short building lifespans characterized modernity and that the simple process of obsolescence underlay the dynamics of change in the modern built environment.” (Abramson 55)Conceptualizing the West End as a totality, at the moment of of its demolition, we witness a “wasteland of dirt, brick, and ghostly streets,” a whole that is in fact a void, produced by the processes of a myth (Abramson 61). The myth, as unique process for producing totality, is a supremely judicial realm of administration which structures the present only through the forces of its own impetus. It is a nomological structure which does require commensuration with topological actualities in order to crystallize into the present. In the case of the West End, the “New Plan” is a provision for totalization which reifies the myth of obsolescence, multiplying its moments of creative destruction, financial speculation–indeed the entire history of capitalism–with such pervasive explosiveness that any reciprocity between its own internal laws and the the existing condition of the city are obliterated. A caricature of this effect can be seen in Archizoom’s No-Stop City. Here, the Italian collective dissolve the limits of the totality, and releases the administrative city into infinity: “No-Stop City proposes a radicalization per absurdum of the industrial, consumer, and expansionist forces of the capitalist metropolis in the form of a continuous city with no attribute other than its infinite quantity”(Aureli 19).The boundary of the city is finally lifted, resulting in endless repetition of the elements of capitalism, effectively illustrating its demise and deflating its teleological sense of progress. If on the one hand, Archizoom elicits a suspicion of Modernity’s neutrality as a dangerous characteristic, Pedro Martínez Inclán’s adaption of CIAM’s Athens Charter illustrates its capacity for reciprocity. Inclán’s Codigo de urbanismo, simply “added, modified, and excised” the Athens charter to produce a constitution (Hyde 107). Whereas the “New Plan” of Boston’s West End appropriated Modernist planning as a way of perpetuating the myth of obsolescence, Inclán’s Codigo de urbanismo absorbed it as a constitutional decree. While both the myth and the constitution are used a modes of producing totality, the former seeks to validate its origin and historicity, while the latter “consists of a set of presuppositions asserted with a plain regard for their consequence” (Hyde 113). Inclán’s figuration of the city introduces thus sets forth the idea for a city which negotiates the specificity of place (topos) with an ideological definition of law (nomos). This potential for a toponomological totality, or the commensurable city, comes into focus with the Pilot Plan for Havana, which takes as its foundation the Codigo de urbanismo as developed by the firm Town Planning Associates (Sert + Weiner) from 1955-1958. The elements of this masterplan integrate various typologies with varying degrees of autonomy and historicity.Participating in the circulation between these three antecedents–the Law of the Indies, the Athens Charter, and the 1940 constitution–[Inclan’s Codigo de urbanismo] took on the presumption of a discursive binding between constitutions and architecture but absorbed as well the compound of modernism, history, and nationalism that they together represented (Hyde 107).Functioning with the concepts of apriorismo and Quoitismo, the design strategy both projects and extracts onto and from the city fabric. The architects maintained the Havana Vieja street layout established by the grid of the Law of the Indies, while introducing at its core a new slab and tower configurations. This synthesis can be seen to integrate the two canonical forms of urbanism of western civilization as defined by Aureli : the urbs and the polis. The polis as a new autonomous centrality for Havana–the contemporary core which offers density and typology configurations typical of Modernist planning–surrounded by the grid of the Law of the Indies. The maintenance of geometry of the original cuadra, however, is tempered by the introduction of a courtyard, which unfolds into the periphery of the city as a ubiquitous component, coming to structure housing typologies and unit/block/neighborhood hierarchy as an element championed by Sert as a sort of social condenser–as a place for the civic body to act out its collective conscious as a form of reciprocity and commensuration.This tendency of Modernism to deploy modular systems capable of resolving social values arises in 18th century planning as a response to riots which arose out of the revolutionary ethos endemic to European cities at that time. Riots and their relationship to the functioning of the city can be understood as the temporary recovery of an immediate relationship between the sensuous body and the totality within which it functions (i.e the total even of the riot). The division of labour as the essential framework which maintains bourgeois dominance, is for a moment collapsed into an experience of the intense affirmation of the ego, where the subject’s actions have, finally, a scrutable outcome within the larger framework of the city. Le Corbusier’s famous dictum “Architecture, or revolution” has palpable relevance to the relationship between the square and the riot.Within the context of the ideological plan and the riot as two divergent ways of overcoming crises, Benjamin’s theorizations of the 18th century bourgeois city contribute an alternative image of totality. In a field of dead histories, Benjamin purports that contemporary images can be grafted onto ruins, illuminating truths about the present. The grafting of these images is the act of making an idea, a collection of ideas creates a concept, which effectively groups phenomenon together in a critical and distinguishing way thus bringing about “the salvation of phenomena and the representation of ideas”(Eagleton 328). Benjamin’s totality is a network of emerging phenomena, erupting in reference to each other from the broken history of the bourgeois city and into the future. This moment of becoming is the present, a moment in which the phenomenon can’t be envisaged as one whole image, but rather a constellation of many small images, small ideas which must be actively conceptualized with relationship both to their individual histories and their emergent condition within the collective constellation of the present. Benjamin’s totality can’t be understood as a cross-section of the present, but rather as an evaluation of each element of the cross section which must be unpacked, traced back through its processes of permutation. In this way, each element in the constellation has a history that can be archaeologically viewed as it restructures, re-configures, and shifts in deep history. Through an understanding of each phenomenon’s deep structural history, the present can be accurately held in the mind as a constellation–a potential for figuring forth certain specific, yet still speculative futures.The city of the Captive Globe is an architecturalization of Benjamin’s constellation totality, drawing an analogy between the fragment of the constellation, and the archipelago. Koolhaas’s grid of archipelagos, each with a sub-stratum of generic sameness, has grafted upon it a contemporary image, giving the City a unique sense of emergent totality in the contemporary sense.‍‍Works CitedDaniel Abrahamson, “Boston’s West End: Urban Obsolescence in Mid-Twentieth Century America,” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 47-69.Timothy Hyde, “’Mejores Ciudades, Ciudadanos Mejores’: Law and Architecture in the Cuban Republic,” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 95-118.Chapter 12 (“The Marxist Rabbi”) in Terry Eagleton, The Ideology of the Aesthetic (Blackwell Publishing, 1990): 316-340.Pier Vittorio Aureli, “Toward the Archipelago,” in The Possibility of an Absolute Architecture (MIT Press: 2011): 1-46‍

Writing
by PZ
Vertigo as Veracity

"The aesthetic, which was once a kind of resolution, is now a scandalous impossibility."‍ - Terry Eagleton, “Art After Auschwitz”‍‍B Bracketing Modernity‍ Within the boom and bust cycles of affluence and crisis which regulate the phases of industrialization beginning in the 19th century, an object and its objecthood can no longer expect any sort of sanctity: it must choose either to endure the abusive cycles of various provisional meanings which will inevitably be imposed on it, or relinquish its status as an agent within the dynamic of development. It is this former strategy which Adorno reserves for art after Auschwitz, finding no impetus for its participation in a 20th century, post-genocide Europe. In an endless game of ying chasing yang, art for Adorno both resists and defines the realm of bourgeois capital with a tenacious dialectic instinct. Insofar as Adorno shares with Kant a philosophical binary structure mediated by aesthetics, these two philosophers allow for a symmetrical bracketing of the object of Modernity, where the former’s critical theory of society deflates once and for all the latter’s Enlightenment tendentiousness.Although both Kant and Adorno position aesthetics and bourgeois social practice as separate yet coexistent categories, Kant’s object of beauty maintains a privileged autonomy which supersedes in spontaneous commune the phenomenal world, while Adorno’s work of art is an implicitly linked specter which will never escape the reality to which it is tethered, an object which is both “centripetal and centrifugal together, a portrait of its own impossibility, living testimony to the fact that dissonance is the truth of harmony” (Eagleton 353). This tragedy, however, is counteracted by the magnified salvationary quality of its singular moments of redemption. The fact that a Francis Bacon triglyph now sells for $142.4 million dollars isn’t a testament to the degree of its commodification, but rather to the amplitude of its critical capacity, its alarming ability to articulate the absurd delirium of the market by participating with an intensity of disinterestedness that materializes events into blinding reflections.It is this reflexive yet neutral rendition of aesthetics, where “vertigo must serve as the index of veracity,” (Eagleton 358), that disenchants Kant’s state of enlightenment. Converging Kant’s mutually exclusive realms of the subject and the object into a cyclical vortex, authentic meaning reveals itself in art after WWII only in rarefied and unsolicited flashes, constellations of reflections in the smoke and mirrors environs which result when systems of representations which have lost their meaning. Tracing the aesthetic object back from this state of instability to its origins as the keystone of being, we observe how the rupture between subject and object come to define Modernity and the crisis of its objects.Technology of VandalismIt is with the French Revolution, which begins in 1789 (just 1 year after Kant publishes The Critique of Pure Reason), that vandalism emerges as a systematic mechanism for destabilizing objecthood. Following the overthrow of Louis XVI’s monarchy, architect and revolutionary Léon Dufourny explains the space of Paris directly following the Revolution as a sort of iconographic battlefield: “We receive complaints from all sides that the eyes of patriots are offended by the different monuments constructed by the despotism in the time of slavery and which certainly should not exist under the reign of liberty and equality” (Vidler 186). The extremity of this statement attests to the capacity of revolutionary politics to create not only a new way of governing, or behaving, but a new of of perceiving. The Revolution injects the residual material culture of the Ancien Régime with a personification of their monarchistic patrons — it is as if the ghost of Louis XVI lives on through the objects produced under his monarchy, reified by the revolutionaries through the same paranoia and sense of of vindication which sustained the Terror.Vandalism thus emerges as political solution to an aesthetic impasse. Described by Vidler as a “a ‘systematic act,’ one whose ramifications extended beyond the mere breaking or mutilation of a single object,” vandalism functions as a sort of technology: a solution for establishing dominion through a methodological subjugation of perceived threats within the environment. Just as technology in the more general sense can be understood as surmounting of nature and a stabilization of its forces, vandalism sublimates artefacts of the Ancien Régime into new objects, fashioning “didactic signs of the triumph over tyranny” into the steadfast material substrate of the new French Republic (Vidler 186) . Stones carried away in the aftermath of the Bastille’s destruction are sculpted into commemorative scale models of the event of its storming, and monuments are ordered by the Convention to be “constructed out of the fragments of royal tombs and statues… symbolizing the triumph of the French over despotism and superstition” (Vidler 187). It is in this way that the paradox of vandalism reveals itself as a conflation of creation and destruction, problematizing its category of technology as something more than the simple instruments of progression. This symptom of technology can in fact be traced back to cradle of civilization itself, where the agricultural practices overcome the instability of nature, setting the stage for the leap-frog relationship between technology and nature, where the former continuously increasing scale in an effort to overcome the latter’s mounting threat of catastrophe. Prior to the initiation of this cycle, the hunter-gatherer, foraging in the forest and subject to the ebb and flow of seasonal migratory patterns, seeks to stabilize his lifestyle and so cultivates seeds into crops of agriculture which in the surplus of their harvest produce exchange value as the foundation for western civilization. Out of this agricultural foundation various forms of technology proliferate, beginning with the projects such as the terracing of the banks of the Nile and the construction of temples of Nubia, and evolving eventually into the infrastructural jungles and globalized markets of the post-WWII era. Just as in late Modernity we see C>M>C’ become M>C>M’ (M-money, C-commodity), thereby placing money as the ends rather than the means, a similar inversion of causation between technology and nature can be posited. Instead of Nature producing Technology producing new Nature, we can speculate upon the possibility that Technology produces Nature produces new Technology. N>T>N’ becomes T>N>T’.(Re)Locating Value‍This re-positioning of technology as the end of society, rather than the means, will come to play a major role particularly in the 19th and 20th century myth of progress and technocratic obsessions. An example of this can be seen where warfare technology produces landscapes of ruin, which then necessitate the development of machines and infrastructures for reconstruction whose mechanisms are threaded into collective subjectivity and cultural identity: “The most advanced modern techniques, and the experience we have recently gained from the destructions of war, have changed nothing to what remains, fundamentally, a problem of principle… The transfer of any monument, as perfectly executed as it can be with the contemporary techniques, is still an imperfect solution” (Allais 203). This post-war perspective on the preservation of the things, expressed by Pietro Gazzola as one of the foremost international authorities of the subject at that time and lead preservationist for UNESCO’s campaign in Nubia, finds in the ruins of war an experience of gain, developing out of destruction a technical expertise for re-assembling the disassembled.This nature of thought–which breaches Adorno’s insistence that objects of value must resist the reconstruction of their identity following destruction–articulates an alternative but equally compelling reading on the identical/non-identical object dialectic. For Gazzola, the relocation of an object empties it of any authentic identity, emancipating it into a domain of free agency where any number of political or economic parameters (e.g. UNESCO), can pick it up and employ it in its systems of representations. Therefore for Gazzola cultural objects must seek to fortify their identity if they are to remain external to capitalist processes. If Adorno argues that the authentic object must reject an identity, then Allais illustrates how an object must maintain it, thus reintroducing the value of heritage and begging the question: how can an object without an identity maintain authenticity, if authenticity is about a mode of being which is faithful to its foundational origins?If Adorno insists that art remains implicitly dialectic and unrepresentable, it is exactly for this reason, to avoid having an identity and in doing so remain missing in action as systems of representations are manipulated, instrumentalized, and obfuscated by political and market forces: “…our civilization divines a mysterious transcendence in art and one of the still obscure sources of its unity…Your appeal is historic, not because it proposes to save the temples of Nubia, but because through it the first world civilizations publicly proclaims the world’s art as its indivisible heritage” (Allais 188). In Malraux’s description of the “transcendence” of art, he illustrates the ease with which it loses its sovereignty and how through simple appeal the entire contextual history of the Nubian temples is obliviated to proclamations of global value and international jurisdiction. From the outset UNESCO’s rhetoric instrumentalized the temple as “art” into its bureaucratic politics, a subtle distinction which ceases upon a certain “purity” of the ancient temple form. Removed from the circumstantial particularities of dynastic socioeconomics, the temples proffer to the bureaucrat of Modernity the purely formal characteristics of surface, materiality, and texture, qualities which Eagleton recognizes in Modern art as “borrowed from the technical, functional forms of a rationalized social order” (Eagleton 353). This affinity between the instruments of Modernity and and the typological form of the ancient temple in ruin was recognized by Le Corbusier at the Acropolis, and reappears in post-WWII Nubia as the basis for a campaign in international spatial politics. Abstractedness is thus a form of Thing-ness within rationalized social orders which “holds out against domination in its respect for the sensuous particular, but reveals itself again and again as an ideological ally of such oppression” (Eagleton 351). This phenomenon explains Malraux’s choice to categorize the temples as art, and not as architecture. Out of this seemingly minor detail, a role of authenticity can be scrutinized to to reveal a fundamental difference in the objecthood of art and architecture in Modernity. There is an awareness in Malraux’s statement of a relationship between mobility and authenticity, where in his critical suspension of the term architecture he acknowledges that the relocation of the temples as art objects does not necessarily undermine their status as authentic, whereas their relocation as architectural objects does. That is, he is aware of the problematization of authenticity posed by dislodging the temples from their foundational origins of place. By announcing the temples as art, Malraux avoids this issue but figures the temples into false pretenses, combining cultural discourse with political activism at the expense of an authentic objecthood.‍Marginal ValueUnderstanding the dissemination of temples in Nubia as a mode of design, we can configure a relationship where design stands as the axis of symmetry and datum of articulation between capital and art as two polarized and opposing realms. Like the storefront gallery wall, that which exists on the street-side functions along the lines of capital, while that which stands within the gallery functions only as an index of itself. It is in the processes of post-modern urban planning such as the making of a Modern market at Rungi, on the southern outskirts of Paris, where design ceases to act as a container which carves out a space for objects to exist in opposition to the the market forces of the city. Rather architecture succumbs to commodification, and in doing so synchronizes itself and what is contains to the exchange-value market and its systems of representations. Between the field conditions of scattered temples in Nubia, and the networked linkages of the French food industry, technologies of mobility articulate the regional spaces of the post-WWII global community into a myriad proliferation of forms of meaning which in the chaos of their multiplicity elicit polemic outcries from theorists such as Adorno and preservationists such as Gazallo. In Paris, the effort to remain globally competitive through the centralization and optimization of its food distribution industry results in novel forms of consumption frameworks and vast, marginalized distribution centers that “because of their peripheral location… did not need to be invested with the aesthetic qualities of earlier [buildings] that had occupied a place of pride in the center of growing cities” (Tenhoor 223). Through nationalized market optimization, the urban scale of the city of Paris confronts the functioning of regional resource networks, yielding a hinterland of infrastructural entrails as the collateral damage produced in the modernization of concentrically expanding metropolitan area of 12 million inhabitants. In an effort to bring additional value to this new junk space, tourism presents itself as a spin-off industry which promotes both mobility and consumption as the cornerstones of healthy post-modern market activity: “…as they planned the ZHL, the leaders of SAGAMARIS understood that they had to attend to the cultural needs of two primary groups: workers and tourists” (Tenhoor 228). This emphasis on tourism, found both in the development of the ZHL and the relocation in Nubia of “all the temples to an island near a tourist site,” signifies the shift of value in the object from use-value, to age-value, to exchange value. In the case of Les Halles, the original market’s use-value as a center for food distribution is compounded by the rhetoric of age-value, which emerges in response to the proposal of its destruction and elevates the structure to the status of an unintentional monument. This use-value, highest at the moment right before its destruction, is dismantled, reconfigured, and synthesized along the lines of market-driven exchange values and competitive capitalist ambitions. In the case of Nubia, their original use-value as tombs gives way to a inflated age-value in the face of regional flooding and soviet dam construction, driving the preservation campaign which ultimately funds the temples deconstruction and reconstitution as revenue-generating tourist destinations. As such, they simultaneously stand as both intentional and unintentional monuments: intentional in the sense of their original construction as colossal tombs to commemorate the greatness of ancient pharaohs, and unintentional as instruments monumentalized by UNESCO for their potential as symbols of altruistic foreign policy and icons for a new post-WWII concept of global heritage.Within these viscous exchanges of reality, art must crystallize and partially cure in a way that challenges the overall dynamic and prevents it from accelerate into a homogenous solution of textureless grey. Remaining critical, the architect must, in the words of Adorno, take measures to avoid “works that are in constant flux and have no unitary point of reference. For the many become too homogenous, too monotonous. too undifferentiated.” In a sense, negative dialectics manage to do so, as it ”provisionally configures” art as a certain category of thing which survives the horrific catharsis of Auschwitz by refusing to take on an identity in the systems of representations which emerge in its denouement. As destruction gives way once again to creation following WWII, the thing can only maintain value by excusing itself from the processes of rebuilding identity, a righteous self-pardoning in the aftermath of an event whose Final Solution was complete extinguishment. Like a POW who after years of being referred to by a string of arbitrary tattooed integers has forgot his or her name and has no desire to recover it, it is not accurate to say that art can not be, but rather that it can not be integrated.‍‍Works Cited‍Allais, Lucia “The Design of the Nubian Desert: Monuments, Mobility, and the Space of Global Culture” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 179-215.Eagleton, Terry, The Ideology of the Aesthetic (Blackwell Publishing, 1990): 341-365.TenHoor, Meredith. “Decree, Design, Exhibit, Consume: Making Modern Markets in France, 1953-1979” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 216-236.Vidler, Anthony “The Paradoxes of Vandalism,” in The Scenes of the Street and Other Essays (The Monacelli Press, 2011): 183-208.‍

Writing
by PZ
Yagé and the Tukano

"...after the cleansing was finished, I wandered outside. Dawn was coming. I felt exhaustion mingle with a deeper sensation, an intuition that what I had experienced, a confusion of random visual and auditory hallucinations without form or substance, was only a crude approximation of something indescribably rich and mysterious. No doubt, as Schultes had written, a power lay within this plant.‍" -Wade Davis, One River‍ Ayahuasca and Yagé: Marginalizing Ambiguity To articulate the impact of yagé on a science of the environment requires from the outset a study of its terminology and an analysis its taxonomy. The word yagé or yajé originates from the Tukano family of languages indigenous to northwest Amazon, and refers to the entheogenic brew which is the cornerstone of their shamanic practices. Ayahuasca, often used interchangeably with yagé, is the hispanicized spelling of the word ayawaska from the Quechua and Aymara languages of the Andes. Emerging along the continental divide, in the mountainous region at the western-most edge of the basin’s watershed, ayahuasca presents its etymology as a problematic terrain on the margins of its own ecology. Translated as “vine of the soul,” ayawaska derives from aya “spirit”, and waska “liana,” and refers both to the entheogenic brew and the long-stemmed, woody vines which are its critical ingredient. This conflation suppresses the brew’s actuality as an admixture and fails to underscore the intelligence of the recipe, and the remarkable synergy of its various ingredients. Gerardo Reichel-Dolmatoff (1976) sketches out a didactic ecological scenography in his article “Cosmology as Ecological Analysis: A View from the Rainforest,” drawing attention to the evolutionary paramters of Tukano environment:The Tukano Indians occupy a large area in the central portion of the northwest Amazon, mainly on the Vaupés River, a major affluent of the Rio Negro. Although most of the country is flat and densely forested, a transitional terrain of hilly uplands lies on the western fringe, while towards the north the forest is some- times broken by stretches of grassy, tree-strewn savanna country. Although this rain forest area has often been described as a rather homogeneous region, many environmental differences exist which have considerable bearing upon the range and success of human adaptive responses. Game animals, amphibians and reptiles, edible fruits, nuts and insects, and suitable horticultural lands are not evenly distributed and considerable resource fluctuation can be said to exist within and among subregions (p. 308). The Tukano, having coevolved as part and parcel of the vine’s ecology for more than 5,000 years, identify more than a dozen subtypes, each used by the shaman, or curandero, for different ritualistic purposes (Schultes, 1979, p. 176). The nomenclature of these myriad subtypes is complexified by the conditioning of language resulting from exogamy. There are seven descent groups or “tribes” within the Tukano people, each with their own language: the Bara Tukano; the Barasana; the Cubeo; the Desana; the Macuna; the Wanano; and the Tukano Proper. With the exception of the Cubeo, each requires females to marry outside their language group; to do otherwise would be considered something like incest. Upon marriage, she will relocate to the longhouse of her husband’s household, introduce her language therein, and raise a child into a multilingual environment . There is no discrimination on the basis of language within the various groups; on the contrary, there exists a strong interest in learning new languages--new ways of understanding and interfacing the natural environment (Wardhaugh, 1986, p. 94). It is in this way that the names of the various subtypes of vine used to brew yagé are complexified, yielding in their ambiguity a linguistic richness in plurality. It is sufficient to note that their nomenclature, although variable depending on language group, is universally driven by microclimate and the cosmological conditions of their cultivation (vines planted under a full moon at the edge of a savannah, for example, are said by the Tukano to produce very different effects than those planted in the jungle under a half moon). The subtlety of these variations are undetectable to even the most scrupulous ethnobotanist. Plant taxonomy distinguishes only two varieties of the vine used in yagé: Banisteriopsis caapi and Banisteriopsis inebrians, the former having more common use than the latter.Opportunistic AlkaloidsConsumed alone, B. caapi and B. inebrians produce sensations of euphoria, but are not entheogenic. Although the plant itself will increase levels of serotonin, it does not inherently contain those alkaloids which are key for modulating the neurotransmitter receptor sites where “trips” into spiritual dimensions begin. To discover the entheogenic potential of the “vine of the soul,” its bark must be stripped and cooked down with leaves containing alkaloids from the tryptamine family (e.g. N,N-Dimethyltryptamine , or DMT). As metabolic products of plants, alkaloids abound in nature; they are found in roughly one quarter of all plant life (particularly in the large, vascular sort) and botanically identified by the high levels of nitrogen. What is unique, however, in these fairly common compounds, is the structure of their nitrogenous composition. Richard Schultes (1979) notes in his book Plants of the Gods, that alkaloids generally possess striking similarity “to hormones present in the brain, that is, to physiological agents that play a role in the biochemistry of mental functions” (p. 210).The functioning of all entheogenic alkaloids hinge on the subtleties of this similarity; to access specific neurotransmitter receptor sites under the auspices of a morphological similarity between their chemical structure and those which the brain itself produces for receptor site regulation. LSD was discovered by Albert Hoffman while researching the medicinal potential of ergot--a fungus which most commonly grows on rye--by accidentally absorbing its alkaloid derivatives through his fingertips. LSD’s active compounds, however, while derived from alkaloids, are entirely synthetic and do not exist nature; thus its metaphysical implications are problematized, illustrating the imperative for the term “entheogenic” as an alternative to “psychedelic.” The fact Hoffman’s discovery was made through absorption is also it not a minor one. Alkaloids, to become psychoactive, must enter the body through means other than the gastrointestinal tract, where they are oxidized and thus “deactivated” by monoamine oxidase enzymes before they can be absorbed into the blood. The “power” that “lay within the vine” is its ability to neutralize these enzymes. Monoamine oxidase enzymes-inhibitors (MAOI) within the plant suspend the stomach’s and lower intestine’s ability to metabolize the tryptamine alkaloid compounds, allowing them to pass through the blood-brain barrier and modify neurochemistry. Tryptamine alkaloids are both opportunistic and obscure in this sense, wielding in their distribution and composition a propensity for the alteration of consciousness, seeking to syncopate with the receptor sites that their structure mirrors, yet failing to potentiate themselves as they encounter the regulatory mechanisms of the systems they wish to modify.In this sense, the unpacking of ambiguous nomenclature of yagé and ayahuasca becomes far more than a pedantic exercise, and brings into focus a didactic point which this study takes as its impetus: ayahuasca is not simply a vine which allows one to to access the soul, as the term would suggest, but but one which disables the body’s regulatory system to allow for a temporary reciprocity between the molecular fundamentals of ecology our apparatus for perception. Furthermore, this coupling of monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIS) and tryptamine-containing alkaloids, an admixture that has driven Amazonian cosmology for nearly 5,000 years, is statistically highly unlikely, given the infinitude of plant species in the Amazonian rain forest and the specificity of preparation required to actualize the psychotropic experience. The odds, seemingly insurmountable to the techniques of botany, challenge the rules of modern science, and have remain unresolved since British explorer Richard Spruce “discovered” the plant in 1851 and sent specimens of B. caapi to the Royal Botanic Gardens for analysis. Wade Davis (1996) articulates the issue in his book One River, recalling the question as it occurs to Richard Schultes in the early 1940s during his research conducted in the northwest Amazon:‍How had the Indians learned to identify and combine in this sophisticated manner these morphologically dissimilar plants that possessed such unique and complementary chemical properties? The standard scientific explanation was trial and error--a reasonable term that may well account for certain innovations--but at another level, as Schultes came to realize on spending more time in the forest, it is a euphemism which disguises the fact that ethnobotanists have very little idea how the Indians originally made their discoveries… The Indians naturally had their own explanations that from their perspective were perfectly logical: sacred plants that had journeyed up the Milky River in the belly of anacondas, potions prepared by the jaguars, the drifting souls of curanderos dead from the beginning of time… The Indians, Schultes realized, believed in the power of plants, accepted the existence of magic, and acknowledged the potency of the spirit. Magical and mystical ideas entered the very texture of their thinking. Their botanical knowledge could not be separated from their metaphysics (p.217-218).‍This study is located in the space between botanical knowledge and metaphysics: it attempts to outline and hypothesize the reciprocity between the two--negotiated by yagé--as a model for articulating an ecologically-founded subjectivity. Following closely behind the modalities and sub-modalities of yagé’s mediums of expression, design thinking takes particular note on the role of technology, which for the Tukano is conceptualized as tools for optimizing their ecological adaptation (this, in opposition to the technology of Modernity, which seeks to surmount nature as a measure towards profit or stability). Systems analysis and thermodynamics are posited as effective devices for underscoring yagé’s potential for re-thinking design. This study understands the philosophies of the various branches of science to be myopic ideologies which limit both the scales of their inquiry and the impact of their discoveries (consider for example the incommensurability between quantum mechanics, biology, and astrophysics); an analysis is undertaken which seeks to dissolve the brackets imposed by botany by tracing the consumption of its specimens as the key to discovering a critically founded ecological totality. Reichel-Dolmatoff outlines the ethnological bases of the analysis:Among the Tukano Indians of the Colombian Northwest Amazon, carrying capacity is defined mainly in terms of the conservation of protein resources such as game, fish and certain wild fruits. In order to maintain an equilibrium and to avoid frequent relocation of settlements, the Indians have developed a set of highly adaptive behavioural rules which control population growth, the exploitation of the natural environment, and interpersonal aggression. The belief that the spirits of game animals cause illness restricts overhunting and, similarly, a large body of beliefs that regulate sex and food habits try to adjust the birth-rate and to counterbalance socially disruptive behaviour. Shamanism thus becomes a powerful force in the control and management of natural resources, and hallucinatory visions induced by native narcotic drugs become an important tool of shamanistic power. In many aspects Tukano concepts of cosmology represent a blueprint for ecological adaptation and the Indians’ acute awareness of the need for adaptive norms can be compared with modern systems analysis.This study analyzes the particularities of how “hallucinatory visions” become “powerful tools” for “control and management of natural resources.” The format of the research takes an empirical method--modeled on Schulte’s tendency to understand botany through experiential submersion--as the impetus for investigation: transcribed excerpts from Wade Davis’s first yagé experience are taken from One River (1996), and used as a loose narrative sequence for lines of ecological, cosmological, and entheological pursuit. Programming the Molecular Bit Flip ...the curandero poured the yagé into a wooden bowl, which he set on a short tripod of sticks beside the table. He then sat on a small stool so that his legs flanked the stand and his entire body enveloped the potion. For five minutes he sat perfectly still. No one spoke. Gradually out of his hunched up body came a low, guttural change that ebbed and flowed and then faded like an echo. The rustling of a fan and leaves scraping the air; the sound of water in a distant forest and the chant escalating in pitch… Pablo touched my arm: “the songs release the wilderness, stirring everything up so that with his fan he may sweep away the evil. Now he is asking that the paintings, the visions be strong (Davis, 1996, p. 190).‍The curandero, charged with the responsibility of managing safely the hallucinations, calls forth the spirits at the origins of his universe which are to be encountered on what the Tukano call “the other side.” With his fan he “sweeps away” spirits which for the Tukano originate in one of three categories: as the malevolence of game animals, the ill-intentions of other people, or the vengeance of supernatural beings (Reichel-Dolmatoff, 1979, p. 310). In each case, the presence of evil is understood as reactionary to an act of disequilibrium within the ecology of the rainforest: the role of the curandero is to negotiate the journey and reconcile the ruptures wrought by ill-action. Often in preparation for the drinking of , the Tukano male will fast for weeks in advance, a measure which restricts the amount of energy he “borrows” from the environment, while heightening an awareness of the interior of the body and maximizing the effect of the brew. This behavior should not be understood as ritual, in the sense of a repetitive action without perceivable impact, but rather as the meaningful practice of preparation for a journey into the unknown dimensions of the self:‍can yield very different kinds of journeys, depending on the “set and setting”.... including programming offered by curanderos in the form of ícaros the rhythmic and often whistled songs that accompany and guide the journey. Anxious, even terrifying trips are not uncommon, and unlike the legendary brown acid of Woodstock, it is usually not the psychedelic agent that is the ultimate or even proximate cause of the distress. The problem, the drinker discovers, is the self, which must give way on its attachments if it is to abide the massively parallel consciousness induced by . This parallel consciousness is often presented as a multitude of entities and forms for whom death is a transition but not a destination (Doyle, 2005, p. 8).‍Thus the stakes of the curandero’s sweeping away and calling forth come into focus as the “programming” or the self in preparation for a transition, or what Doyle refers to as the “molecular bit flip” of the experience. This electrochemical rhetoric definition hinges the reflexive action of to increase brain activity--shown in PET scans to be shown as high as 90% above normal--in such a way that the subject’s “reality” turns inward to discovers a more fundamental structure of “the universe” by investigating the topos of his/her self. That is, the universe it revealed to us in its totality as immanent within ourselves.The “molecular” component of the bit flip consists of glutamate and GABA (gamma-aminobutyric acid) as the two major neurotransmitters which regulate the mammalian central nervous system. Like circuitry, the brain functions in response to two basic electrochemical signals: the positive charges of glutamate and the negative charges of GABA. Consciousness can be said to be a balancing of these two components. As such, any disequilibrium of consciousness (e.g. depression, anxiety) can be said to be a disproportionate distribution of (+) glutamate and (-) GABA (this dialectic functionality, whereby consciousness and ontology are driven forward by the negotiation of contradictory elements, has Hegelian underpinnings which although not within the scope of this study, deserves to be noted). Rather what is of interest here, is the pharmacodynamic details, which distinguish the difference between a “hallucinogenic” and “psychedelic” on the one hand, and “entheogenic” on the other.‍Pharmacodynamics of an Entheogen“Entheogen” is a neologism invented in 1979 by Richard Schultes, in collaboration with other ethnobotanists and mythologists, and refers a particular subset of psychoactive substance--including peyote, psilocybin mushrooms--which have particular anthropological interest for their cultural use in religious, shamanic, or spiritual contexts--contemporary and ancient alike (the Temple of the True Inner Light, the Church of the Tree of Life, and the Church of the Toad of Light, for example, are all contemporary religious organizations which take entheogens as the basis of their cosmology). Etymologically derived from the greek entheos as “full of god, inspired, possessed” and genesthai as “to come into being,” the word implies the accessing of divine dimensions or reality. This is in contrast to “psychedelic” or “hallucinogenic” as the augmentation of reality as an exercise in visual perception. That is, the entheogenic assumes a meaningful desire towards the specific outcome of transcendence (as we will see, the curandero comes to play a central role in managing the outcome, and in the case of yagé, mismanagement can become lethal). The difference between “hallucinogenic”and “entheogenic” is the aforementioned difference between simply consuming the vine B. Caapi by itself (producing visual patterning--usually symmetries of red and yellow), and brewing it with other psychoactive, alkaloid-rich plants (commonly, for example, from the plant family Psychotria carthagin). Pharmacologically, when its recipe is prepared properly, the chemical composition of differs from that of other hallucinogens in the number and variety of alkaloids that it contains, and more significantly their distribution.Within the brain, there are many varieties of neurotransmitter receptor sites, and each acts as a gate which is unlocked with the right chemical key--provided by the alkaloid--letting through under the right conditions the sodium necessary to “flip” the cells electrical balance through a reduction of GABA (-) and a surplus of glutamate (+). GABA can be conceptualized as the brake which which limits the neural activity through regulation of various receptor sites. These receptor sites are distributed unevenly across the brain, and typically hallucinogens will only “unlock” one specific subset of receptor sites, leaning either more towards serotonin or dopamine. , on the other hand, due the variability and distribution of “keys” which its alkaloid contain, unlock both: DMT, harmine, harmaline and tetrahydroharmine combine to activate more receptor sites across more territories of the brain. That is, GABA is ubiquitously reduced, allowing for a balanced acceleration of the brains myriad processes, in a way which allows its interrelational functions to maintain their faculty. This is key to understanding the metaphysical implications of this pharmacodynamic “molecular bit flip.” Whereas hallucinogens are the provisional reconfiguration of the brain’s structure--comprising in its action the benefits of its interconnectedness-- “opens” all “gates” in harmonious synchrony, allowing critical communication between various faculties to persist in their heightened state. The degree to which one is able to maintain courage through this entheogenic experience is the measure by which the social structures of the Tukano are built. The deeper one is able to foray into the dimensions of “the other side,” the more knowledge he is able to gain. The repetitive ingestion of is the life-work of one who wishes to become a curandero: in his mental and physical strength to endure the reflexive turbulence of the experience, the Tukano male strives to discover in its depths the event of his own death, and sublimation into transcendental being. Under the supervision of an existing curandero, he is guided towards the predator which reigns supreme as queen of the Amazonian ecology: the Mother Jaguar, as the apex of Tukano cosmology, awaits the novice at the cathartic terminus of his entheology. To arrive at her encounter, he must first navigate the most fearful depths of his unconsciousness, reconciling with the darkest repressions that lie at his core. To matriculate, he must arrive and suck her breast to become her son, relinquishing his ego as he consumes her nectar. Becoming at once innocent and dependent at his re-arrival to infanthood, he is able--only now, after the observation of his own death and rebirth--to wield the privilege for conducting his own ceremonies.Becoming Jaguar: Ecological Brokerage in Hyperbolic Space...a match was struck, and the glow illuminated the curandero’s as he lit a kerosene lamp. A melancholy light infused the room… With a small calabash the size of a cup the curandero dipped the from the bowl and then poured it back, releasing a fecund scent that mingled with and then overwhelmed the sweet smell of the resin that was burning in an iron brazier by the door. He filled the calabash once more and drank the contents, gagging, spitting, groaning, and coughing. “See how he barks,” Pedro said, “like a jaguar. He is born of the jaguar, and when he dies, he will become one again. All the living and dead jaguars come to us from their homes in the sky (Davis, 1996, p. 191).‍As the figure from which the curandero emerges, to which he will return, and through which he exercises his authority as the regulator of cosmological equilibrium--the curandero as jaguar “barks,” announcing his arrival into “the other side,” clearing in his presence a path for the journey of those that he guides. From this space, he is able to observe the imbalances of his cosmology, and instrumentalize his esoteric knowledge. It is only through his vast experience on “the other side” that he is able to navigate its treacherous terrain. Using the depth of his experience to evaluate the parameters of the parallel dimension, the curandero recognizes from “the other side” what must be done to right the wrongs of “this side”:‍“The very large denotative vocabulary of a curandero expresses his great concern with establishing the complete inventory of the ecosystem. In order to be able to administer this great store-house, he has to know, name and categorise all its contents. This knowledge eventually provides him with the criteria for ecological planning and this, of course, is problem-solving by anticipation” (Reichel-Dolmatoff, 1979, p. 316).‍Knowledge, gained through the gift of yagé, is utilized by the Tukano curandero through a set of normative ethics which maintain the ecosystem’s balance. The curandero, having submitted himself as an extension of the Jaguar Mother’s will, must act on “this side” in accordance with the values which she has set on “the other side.” Nature, in this sense, is for the Tukano an interface through which they encounter natural objects as the materializations of supernatural beings. According to Tukano mythology, behind every plant and animal is a spirit-being who protects it. These spirit-beings, created by the Sun-Father at the beginning of time, remain benign unless harm comes to the organisms which they protect. Disease, famine, and misfortune are understood to be acts of spirit-being exacting vengeance, and can only be resolved by the curandero on “the other side.” Moreover, at the moment of creation, the Sun-Father’s masculine energy fertilizes the Earth Mother: a limited totality bounded by immutable landmarks, containing a fixed inventory of organisms, each given its own spirit-being protector in the parallel dimension. In this way, a self-regulating system is set forth, in which any aggregation of surplus within the economy of the Tukano would mark out their extinction at the hands of those spirit-beings whose organisms have been subjected.As a sort of ecological broker, the curandero must maintain the biomass of the jungle if the flows of fertilization from the Sun-Father are to be fully potentiated. That is, the jungle is understood as a system which the curandero must optimize for consumption of the solar exergy. Any loss of ability to absorb the Sun-Father will result in an overall increase in temperature and the acceleration of the system’s demise. Indeed, the Tukano are aware of the the teleological tragedy of the 2nd law of thermodynamics, and this is precisely reflected in their rituals of rebirth and emphasis on returning to their origins. In consuming yagé, and pushing towards a rebirth, the Tukano are resolving the existential crises inherent in their cosmos by seeking to restart its processes: through resetting their subjectivity--pushing their reality back to the moment of its creation--the Tukano refresh both the exergy of the Sun-Father and the jungle’s ability to consume it. The particularities of this process of rebirth, however, seen in the transfer of shamanic knowledge from mentor to apprentice, reveals a process which retains the aggregate knowledge of its successive transitions. Ecologists Eric Schneider and James Kay explain :‍Given that living systems go through a constant cycle of birth/development/regeneration/death, preserving information about what works and what does not, is crucial for the continuation of life. This is the role of the gene and, at a larger scale, biodiversity, to act as information data bases about self-organization strategies that work (Schneider and Kay, 1995).‍Yagé’s gift is its ability to integrate the subjective moment into the totality of this information database, compressing information inwards towards the self and upwards towards the transcendental knowledge of ecology’s recursive processes. From a limited finitude to a limitless transcendence, yagé inverts a spherical space into a hyperbolic space, flipping of the normals of the surface of the self, modifying the parameters of its curvature on the basis on an infinite plane. Doyle calls attention to Mathematician Daina Taimina describing hyperbolic spaces in an interview with science writer Margaret Wertheim:There are many ways of describing the hyperbolic plane. In formal geometric terms it is a simply connected Riemannian manifold with negative Gaussian curvature. In higher-level mathematics courses it is often defined as the geometry that is described by the “upper half-plane model.” One way of understanding it is that it’s the geometric opposite of the sphere. On a sphere, the surface curves in on itself and is closed. A hyperbolic plane is a surface in which the space curves away from itself at every point. Like a Euclidean plane it is open and infinite, but it has a more complex and counterintuitive geometry (Wertheim, 2004).‍To navigate the complex and counterintuitive territories of the frontiers of infinity, as the Tukano and the curandero well know, is a laborious undertaking which becomes exponentially difficult with each step. The hyperbolic model is evident in the stages of becoming curandero--where the only the strongest men are able to transition to infinity through rebirth as the son of the Mother Jaguar. This model is expressed by Taimina through the medium of crochet:I have crocheted a number of these [hyperbolic] models and what I find so interesting is that when you make them you get a very concrete sense of the space expanding exponentially. The first rows take no time but the later rows can take literally hours, they have so many stitches. You get a visceral sense of what “hyperbolic” really means (Wertheim, 2004).‍‍‍Good Vibrations: Tuning into the Totality of Ecology‍I heard a distant humming, which i took for cicadas or tree frogs, until i realized that the sound was vibrating from beneath my skin (Davis, 1996, 191).The initial sensation of absorbing the biotic vibrations of the jungle is commonly experienced, by native and non-native users alike; McKenna (1993) explains in Invisible Landscapes how tryptamine modulates neurotransmitters to function as “an antenna for picking up and amplifying the harmonic ESR tones of all tryptophan-derived compounds of all living organisms within its range. Since the [tryptamine] undergoing metabolism is superconductive, this means that its range of reception is theoretically infinite. The antenna does, to some degree, pick up a signal whose ultimate origin is the totality of living creatures”(p. 99).The rainforest of the Tukano thus becomes an information ecology, nested scales of closed signalling loops, modulated by yagé into a single, pulsing totality. On the scale of the gene: environmental pressures elicit the continual reconfiguration of RNA, whose emergent morphogenetics are charge-transferred via alkaloid action to the perceptive mind of the curandero. At the scale of the curandero: cycles of yagé consumption condition aggregate knowledge as the basis for regulation of the jungle’s resources. At the level of the jungle: the knowledge revealed to the curandero is instrumentalized through measure of adaptation; optimization of the jungle’s biomass for the the consumption of the Sun-Father’s exergy is of principal interest for the Tukano and their technology. At the level of the Sun-Father: the thermodynamic inevitability of entropy between the sun and the earth is overcome through ritual rebirth--with each yagé experience, the Sun-Father and Mother-Earth are looped through their own origins, emerging again from the beginning of time and renewing the exergy of the system. Reichel-Dolmatoff articulates the circuitry of of a system with a recursive functionality; within each cycle of revolution, the system receives user input and reconfigures in response:‍The seminal energy of the sun is thought to constitute a huge circuit in which the entire cosmos participates. This circuit is imagined as having a limited quantity of procreative energy that flows continuously between man and animal, between society and nature. Since the quantity of energy is restricted, man may remove what he needs only under certain conditions and must convert his quantum of ‘borrowed’ energy into an essence than can be reincorporated into the circuit (Reichel-Dolmatoff, 1979, p. 310).‍It is this “reincorporation” into the circuit which is the basis of technology for the Tukano. If the jungle itself is understood as a sort of circuitry of information, any removal of its components is conceptualized as a reduction of information and the eradication of instructions for adaptation. Reichel-Dolmatoff pushes the idea in terms of conforming to biological realities:‍Among the Indians there is usually little interest in new knowledge that might be used for exploiting the environment more effectively and there is little concern for maximising short-term gains or for obtaining more food or raw-materials than are actually needed. But there is always a great deal of interest in accumulating more factual knowledge about biological reality and, above all, about what the physical world requires from man. This knowledge, the Indians believe, is essential for survival because man must bring himself into conformity with nature if he wants to exist as part of nature’s unity, and must fit his demands to nature’s availabilities (Reichel-Dolmatoff, 1979, p. 310).‍To bring one’s self into conformity, of course, one must have a clear picture towards which they conform. This is precisely what yagé provides as a morphogenetic visualization mechanism: a reflexive and ethical image of the origins of the self as an immanent topos for discovering correct ecological functioning.‍Violet Vomit: Purging the Self‍It was as if my stomach, acting as a conscious entity, had sought out and purged every negative thought and fear trapped within the maze of my mind (Davis, 1996, 191).‍It is significant that the success of yagé to suspend these regulatory mechanisms is not perfectly pleasant; users often vomit as alkaloids move through the gut unoxidized. For the Tukano, the infinitive “to purge” is an imperative considered central to the yagé experience. Reichel-Dolmatoff (1979, p. 12) characterized the action of vomiting as a “gift that spawns further giving,” an endeavor beyond the simple “effect of the allegedly nauseating flavor of the (extremely variable) brew,” the imperative to purge is “instead the very action of the mixture on a human drinker”: If the stomach and small intestines are empty the passage of the drug into the lymph-tracts takes place much more rapidly and with greater force. These conditions are realized when caapi is consumed in the usual manner, because certain doses of the substance give rise to vomiting, which is desirable and to a certain degree necessary, as a preparation for the final action on the brain (Schultes, 1979, p. 117). Doyle (2005) calls to attention to motif of vomit in art inspired by yagé:‍This infinitive, “to purge,” often presents itself as an imperative to drinkers. Among the crowd of visual conventions found repeated in the Peruvian Painter Pablo Amaringo’s work are jewelled cities of numinosity, converging rainbows of twisting triple helical anaconda assemblies, green feathered bird men in rapt discussion and wearing belts, Numerous Ladies of the Reptilian Rainbow Feather With Ceramic Pots Balanced Upon Their Noggins, flying saucers, DNA, and men gathered together in a common and thoroughly violet projectile vomit (p. 12).‍Entraining Euphoria: Symmetry/Assymmetry‍I shut my eyes, and the world inside my head began to spin and pulsate with warmth and a sensual glow that ran over a series of euphoric thoughts, words that stretched like shadows across my mind, paused, and then took forms as diamonds and stars, colors rising from the periphery of consciousness (Davis, 1996, 191).‍This emergence and dissipation of lights, sounds, colors, textures, and movements occur in the yagé experience as an oscillation between symmetrical and asymmetrical elements. This phenomena can be analyzed as the coming and going of information within a process of entrainment:Rhythmic entrainment is the formation of regular, predictable patterns in time and/or space through interactions within or between systems that manifest potential symmetries. We contend that this process is a major source of symmetries in specific systems, whether passive physical systems or active adaptive and/ or voluntary/intentional systems, except that active systems have more control over accepting or avoiding rhythmic entrainment. The result of rhythmic entrainment is a simplification of the entrained system, in the sense that the information required to describe it is reduced (Burch and Collier, 1998, p. 165).‍Less significant than moments of symmetry--considered to be a lack of information--it is instead yagé’s breaking up of symmetry that is of interest: the unfolding of information into consciousness, and the hyperbolic action which compresses it; the extension of our perception to the degree which allows us to see within ourselves an ecology that is “capable of transforming itself in suddenly novel ways, forgetting its own premises, breaking symmetry, and suddenly experimenting with an increased capacity to degrade entropy and hence compress information, again, hyperbolic…. By continuing to divine it [yagé], we create novel dissipative structures for dissipation of ever more information, information we can perhaps sustain if we tune into the totality of all living creatures” (Doyle, 2005, p. 30).‍End‍‍Bibliography‍Burch, Mark and Collier, John. “Order from Rhythmic Entrainment and the Origin of Levels Through Dissipation.” Symmetry : Culture and Science Order / Disorder, Proceedings of the Haifa Congress 9.2-4 (1998). 165-172. 19 Dec. 2013. <www.ukzn.ac.za/undphil/collier/papers/order>Browman, David L., and Ronald A. Schwarz. Spirits, Shamans, and Stars: Perspectives from South America. The Hague: Mouton, 1979. Print.Davis, Wade. One River: Explorations and Discoveries in the Amazon Rain Forest. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996. Print.Doyle, Richard. “Hyperbolic: Divining Ayahuasca.” Discourse 27.1 (2005): 6-33. Print.Luna, Luis Eduardo., and Steven F. White. Ayahuasca Reader: Encounters with the Amazon’s Sacred Vine. Santa Fe, NM: Synergetic, 2000. Print.McKenna, Terrence. True Hallucinations : Being an Account of the Author’s Extraordinary Adventures in the Devil’s Paradise. New York: HarperCollins, 1994.“Program.” Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/program>.Reichel-Dolmatoff, Gerardo. “Cosmology as Ecological Analysis: A View from the Rain Forest.” Man 11.3 (1979): 307-318. Print.Schneider, Eric D. and James J. Kay. “Order from Disorder: The Thermodynamics of Complexity in Biology.” 16 Dec 2013. <http://www.red fish.com/research/SchneiderKayl 995_OrderFromDisorder>Schultes, Richard Evans., and Albert Hofmann. Plants of the Gods: Origins of Hallucinogenic Use. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979. Print.Schultes, Richard Evans. “Richard Spruce and the Ethnobotany of the Northwest Amazon.” Rhodora 78.813 (1976): 65-72. Print.Schultes, Richard Evans., and Robert F. Raffauf. The Healing Forest: Medicinal and Toxic Plants of the Northwest Amazonia. Portland, Or.: Dioscorides, 1990. Print.Spruce, Richard. “On Some Remarkable Narcotics of the Amazon Valley and Orinoco.” Ayahuasca Reader: Encounters with Amazon’s Sacred Vine. Ed. Luis Eduardo Luna and Steven F. White. Santa Fe, NM: Synergetic P, 2000. 83-86.Wardhaugh, Ronald. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York, NY, USA: Blackwell, 1986. Print.Wertheim, Margaret. “Crocheting the Hyperbolic Plane: An Interview with David Henderson and Daina Taimina.” Cabinet 16 (Winter 2004). 17 Dec. 2013.. <http:/ /www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/16/crocheting>Images‍26Luna, Luis Eduardo, and Steven F. White. Ayahuasca Reader: Encounters with the Amazon’s Sacred Vine. Santa Fe, NM: Synergetic, 2000. Print.5, 8, 10, 11, 15-17, 19-25, 27, 28Schultes, Richard Evans., and Albert Hofmann. Plants of the Gods: Origins of Hallucinogenic Use. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979. Print.1,3,4,6,7,9,12-14,18Schultes, Richard Evans., and Robert F. Raffauf. The Healing Forest: Medicinal and Toxic Plants of the Northwest Amazonia. Portland, Or.: Dioscorides, 1990. Print.2Zuroweste, Peter. Map of Tukanoan Populations in Northwest Amazon. Cambridge, MA: Harvard GSD, 2013

by PZ
Dropping Dead

"‍I can tell you, and I tell you now, that I am prepared to veto any bill that has as its purpose a Federal bailout of New York City to prevent default.‍" -Gerald R. Ford This statement, delivered on October 29, 1975 at the National Press Club in Washington DC on the subject of financial assistance to New York City, materializes the following morning into the front page headlines of The Daily News as “Drop Dead,” a message to the city which brings fiscal conflict into focus as a federal abandonment of the municipal body (Loverd 251, Figure 1). Inscribed into New York CIty as an inflection point in its historiography, the headline signifies the cathartic termination of a progressive ideology which began with the New York Statutes 1896. In its place a more conservative fiscal method arrives as the city’s modus operandi, one that adapts its policies with capitalist interests, coordinating itself along the lines of a new, globalizing economy, and optimizing its fiscal functions for budgetary maintenance amidst the ebbs and flows of emerging international trade networks. Manfredo Tafuri, in his 1975 book Architecture and Utopia: Design and Capitalist Development, elicits the role which ideological thinking plays such a shift.‍“For ‘progressive thought,’ on the contrary, every single thing receives its significance only from some other thing that is ahead of it or above it, from a Utopia of the future or from a norm that exists above being. ‘Conservative thought,’ on the other hand, deduces the significance of the particular from something that stands behind it, from the past or from that which already exists at least in embryonic form (Tafuri 53).‍In the case of New York City, the “progressive” or “utopian” policies modeled on the1960s rhetoric of “The Great Society” dissolve in the 1975 budget crisis, giving rise to new conservative attitudes which align themselves with the market behavior of the Late Capitalism: immanent realities “which already exist” within the city as the “embryonic form” of emerging globalization (Brecher 41). The origins of Progressive ideology in New York City governance are traced back to Chapter 488 of the New York Statues of 1896, as the unification of formerly autonomous yet interdependent regional municipalities: “the consolidation act joined New York City, which then constituted Manhattan and the western Bronx, to the cities of Brooklyn and Long Island City, the towns of Newtown, Flushing, Jamaica, and the Rockaway part of the Hempstead in Queens, and the towns of Castleton, Middletown, Northfield, Westfield, and Southfield on Staten Island” (Bruce-Biggs 6). Formerly a set of townships and administrative archipelagos, each with its independent structures of economics and demographics, the new totality of New York City at the turn of the century has its future laid out for it as a single, albeit montaged entity, organized around Manhattan as the gravitational center for capital concentration and administrative action. The scale and figure of the city limit begins--with Chapter 488-- a process of entropic expansion, creating the definition of the metropolis as a regional arena for episodes of crisis in 20th century New York City.As an indicator of the national shift from the laissez-faire economics of 19th century agrarian America towards more the governmentally federally regulated processes of 20th century metropolitan areas, Chapter 488 is read as the nested instance a deeper, national ideology which co-evolves with industrialization and abandons the country’s foundational structure as an “agricultural economy, [defined by] local and regional autonomy as pivots of the democratic system” (Tafuri 26). The liberation from the time-consuming processes of direct subsistence from nature of course allows the American subject to engage in other secondary and tertiary economies--thereby increasing the potential for the worker becoming bourgeois, or at least middle-class-- but in doing so the previously compact reciprocity of the subject and nature is dissolved. If there can be said to be a crises of the subject in 20th century American cities, it is precisely this loss of reciprocity which is its cause, forcing the subject to coordinate its body with the rhythms of an urbanizing and environment unknown to previous generation. Replacing the reciprocity of agrarian self-governance is a commensurability between the subject, centralized administrative structures, and patterns of normalization. The interplay of demographic distribution and boundary play a key role in the functioning of such structures: sufficient revenue from the bourgeois must be gained within the limits, to leverage the working class into a middle class (Currie 15). Or at the very least, the city must keep the working class working through provisional employment. Should it fail to do so, the productiveness of the dialectic of capitalist development ceases, resulting in phenomena of economic malfunction seen in the 1975 budget crisis: as the revenue generating population loses confidence in the functioning of the municipal totality, they relocate outside of its limits and in doing so exit the system and deprive it of the capital which it requires. The dialectic , in these terms, has as its “positive” the property-owning bourgeois as the main beneficiaries of capitalism’s processes, and as its “negative” the laborers which are subjugated to make such processes possible. The role of Progressive ideology is to set forth a set of values within the capitalist system that reconciles its contradictions without resolving them. That is, the dialectic must be maintained--in a sort state of semi-crisis--if production is to continue, balancing between the egalitarianism of the total normalization on the one hand and the state of crisis of total polarization on the other. The totality of the 19th century agri-egalitarian archipelago becomes the totality of the 20th century metropolitan area suspended in productive tensions of semi-crisis, synchronized by the song of technological progress of the bourgeois ideology . The teleological underpinnings of this technocratic incantation, recited by leaders on both the municipal and federal level throughout most of America’s 20th century, promises the abolishment of poverty, but the reality of the persistence of the negative and the shortcomings of ideologies balancing act unfolds into episodic ruptures in the system, expressed as crises in a variety of mediums and degrees of acuteness.As waves of minorities and immigrants flood the urbanized regions of the northeast during the Great Migration, the federalization of capital (e.g. The Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, The Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and The Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914) establishes on the national level economic centralization as the principal apparatus of Progressive political ideology, one which seeks to moderate the divergence of the bourgeois/working-class dialectic. In this sense, legislation as a regulatory device is understood as a technology of Progressive ideology, surmounting the unstable “nature” of a rapidly expanding working class with the tools of legislative procedure. This perspective comes most into focus with the policies of FDR’s New Deal, which sought to surmount the socio-economic catastrophe of the Great Depression by calling into action centralized entities such as the Tennessee Valley Authority: modulating technology and crisis into a productive cycle, the TVA was optimized for the modernization of the region. Through economically stimulating infrastructure projects, the TVA deploys both technology as law in the abstract sense and technology as the subjugation of nature in the common sense as solutions for both ecological and financial crisis (e.g. the crisis of the crisis of the poverty and the crisis of the flood are surmounted with the funding and construction of a dam). This platform strives to standardize the low-income laborer into a middle class citizen by re-distributing the revenue of capitalist production as an investment aimed at stabilizing the system through an abolishment of poverty. This normalizing ideology seeks to avoid crisis through a regulation of the components of the dialectic, limiting the oppositional vectors of the capitalist and the laborer. It requires a vested interest from the purses of the bourgeois into the welfare of the working class, and idea which is problematized by the regions of polarized demographics found in American cities following WWII. The solutionism of ideology in this case suggests the conflation of a dysfunctional municipality with another, in hopes that the combined capacity for capital production floats the cumulative labor force. This is the scalable constitution of Progressive ideology, one which decrees an absolute and pre-figured quality of living set in advance as an immutable standard for all participants. Unification of administrative structure allows for a distribution of capital which minimizes poverty and maintains a critical bottom-line. The quantitative definition of such a standard quality is arbitrary, and set loosely within the interpretation of what is meant by the nationally ubiquitous constitutional mantra “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The ideology contained in this cornerstone phase is a datum through the nested scales of Progressive policies in the years directly leading up to New York’s crisis. The Food Stamp Act of 1964, The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (popularized as “The War of Poverty”), The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and The Social Security Amendments of 1965 (Medicare and Medicaid ) establish an interconnectedness between the city and the federal government. As the various branches of municipal government restructure themselves in conformity with the federal status quo, they are able capitalize on opportunities for subsidizing their budgets. Leaders and politicians align their ideologies with the promise of “The Great Society,” rolling out subsidized programs under the auspices of altruistic democracy, taking the negative component of the capitalist dialectic--the worker--as the foundational feature of society. President Lyndon B. Johnson articulates the collective “courage” and “compassion” immanent in Progressive ideology as he addresses the graduates (i.e. future bourgeois) of Ohio University in Athens in a 1964 commencement speech : “And with your courage and with your compassion and your desire, we will build a Great Society. It is a Society where no child will go unfed, and no youngster will go unschooled.The dangers inherent in the “compassion” of welfare and its associated economic centralization did not go unnoticed in New York, as many analysts who foresaw the crisis arriving suggest that the city adopt policies of decentralization. One such suggestion, outlined in an article by Bruce-Biggs entitled “Abolish New York” proposes simply that Chapter 488 is repealed, thus “abolishing” the centralized structure of the city and its associated ills. Such an appeal, critics argue, will render large portions of the outer boroughs c.1975 bankrupt and without potential for economic recovery. The response, given by Bruce-Biggs and other supporters of decentralization, underscore that if Manhattan’s were permitted to retain all of its capital, which in its concentration could accumulate--over time--an economic inertia large enough to provide the outer boroughs recovery in the long-term. The figurehead of this perspective is Roger Starr, described in his obituary by the New York Times as an “outspoken thinker on urban affairs who blended a lifetime of intellectual analysis with hands-on public service.” Starr proposes a less radical, more politically-involved process of “planned shrinkage.” Circa 1975 however, he is met by accusations of racism and cruelty by the officials carrying on the ideological torch of The Great Society until the moment that it extinguishes (Starr 26).It could be argued that - as privileged property-owners - the bureaucratic leaders which protest Starr and insist on their Progressive policies do so only because they are not subjugated by the markets that they manipulate. They see no impetus for change because they see no crisis from the windows of their Midtown condos. The contemporary terminology of the 99% and the 1% emerges here, illustrating a disproportionate and polarized social structure which will become, at a certain point, irreconcilable (the nature of the Occupy movement is surprisingly passive in this sense). The fiscal policies of Progressive ideology, in this sense, has as its main focus not in the “compassion” to provide welfare, but rather the financially founded wherewithal to realize that the lifting of the lower class to the middle class is a way to ensure the longevity of his/her wealth, otherwise threatened by abject poverty. The blackout of 1977, and the looting that occurred in poverty stricken neighborhoods, register as an index of progressive ideology’s inability to maintain the status quo. Aimed at maintaining wealth and power, the status quo is reveals, through phenomena such “white flight,” the false pretenses of the humanitarian language found in the New Deal, the Great Society, and the “War on Poverty.” Should the bourgeois lose confidence in their ideology to normalize the dialectic, or more to the point--maintain their capital interests--the likelihood that progressive ideology will implode is increased (Chatterjee 1799). It is precisely the realization of this likelihood that is the crisis of New York in the 1970s: not a crisis of ideology, but a crisis of confidence in the ideology. This distinction underscores the constructedness of ideology and its adaptability. This crisis of confidence unfolds as mid-to-high income earners--mostly Manhattanites--lose faith and abandon Progressive ideology which regulates the dialectic, opting instead to take flight to the conservative financial climates of the suburbs. In their absence they create a rapid deprivation of municipal revenue, compounded and explicated by OAPEC’s oil embargo of 1973, leaving the city unable to maintain not only its welfare and employment programs, but the basic necessities of public, health, and safety (Starr 12). In refusing to federalize New York City’s fiscal functions, Ford’s message to “Drop Dead” elevates conflict into crisis, forcing upon the city an accelerated adaptation of a new ideology which necessarily integrates itself into the complex realities of Late Capitalist development. Described here in terms of ideology becoming ethic, this evolution is described by Tafuri as:‍“The integration of the subjective moment with the complex mechanism of rationalization, but at the same time the identification of an "ethic of rationalization" completely directed upon itself. The processes of the concentration of capital, its socialization, and the constant rise of its organic composition make such an ethic necessary. This is no longer presented as an external value; it is removed from the relativity of ideological invention. The ethic of development has to be realized together with development, within development's processes (Tafuri 57).”‍This analytical proposition, to redefine the ideological in terms of the ethical as a coordinated and reflexive machinery within the dialectic, is a means of eradicating the inefficiencies and efforts of ideology, and is only of marginal interest here. The ethical is understood as the ritual repetition of an ideology subjugated to the dialectics mechanisms of rationalisation, its forms nothing more than the beating of its drum on the waves and “constant rise” of capital’s “organic composition.” Taking the destruction immanent in capitalist creation as the basis for a skepticism in any ethical rationalization of its processes, a contrary emphasis is placed on the richness that lies within the limits of ideology--its political functioning, regulatory mechanisms, modalities of engaging crisis--on the one hand, and the limits these ethics--its reflexivity, modes of repetition, shortcomings in criticality--on the other . Aesthetics come to play a privileged role in this search for critical practice, suspended in between the ideological-ethical spectrum, yet capable of polarizing to reinforce one or the other, as a sort of elastic free agent. Investigating the real bases of the interrelationships of these components and articulating their significance is the imperative of the architect: an action that is more elaborated than ethical technique and more articulated within situational particularities than the purely ideological, critical practice motivated by purposeful desire towards meaningful impacts and and outcomes.Honing in on the potential for action and engagement within the mediums of crisis in 1970’s New York CIty, the Museum of Modern Art is posited as an institution which contains in its administrative structures and works of art a negotiation of ideology, aesthetics, and ethics. It is proposed that a critical intervention into the institution necessarily entails the taking apart and putting back together of the conflated and ambiguous mechanisms which underscore its institutional foundations. Two figures, Nelson Rockefeller and Gordon Matta-Clark, are identified as the principal characters through which a process of analysis, disassembly, and reassembly is conducted. Nelson Rockefeller’s legacy as an eminent Progressive Republican, on the national, state, and municipal level, had significant impact on the ideology, aesthetics, and ethics in 20th century America. Some of the most notable vehicles for contribution include: on the national level, the 41st Vice President of the United States (Ford Administration, 1974-1977); and on the state level, the 49th Governor of New York State (1959-1973). In New York City, his emphasis on mass transit and mobility is exercised through the establishment of the State Department of Transportation, through which he absorbed among others the Department of Public Works, and “reformed the governance of New York City's transportation system, creating the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) in 1965.” Under his guidance, “the MTA merged the New York City subway system with the publicly owned Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, the Long Island Rail Road, Staten Island Rapid Transit, and later the Metro North Railroad.” In a controversial use of state funds, the Metro North Railroad was “purchased by the state from private owners in a massive public bailout of bankrupt railroads (Wikipedia).”His role at MoMA includes positions as first Chairman of the Advisory Committee (1932), Trustee (1932-1979), Treasure (1935-1939), and President (1939-1941). The foundational nature of his operations within the institution are transcribed in a press release distributed to the public on May 8, 1939, the day following his election as President:‍On the occasion of the change in officers, the retiring President, Mr. Goodyear, said: The idea is that a museum such as ours can remain truly modern and wholly abreast of the times only by bringing into its board of trustees and to the principal offices of the institution young men and women whose outlook is forward… Now that the Museum at the end of ten years of activity has entered a permanent home, the property of the Corporation, it is particularly appropriate that there should be a change of officers. With the wider service to the public that the new quarters will permit, we are fortunate in having Mr. Stephen Clark as Chairman of the Board and Mr. Nelson Rockefeller as President. They have both been very active in the affairs of the Museum. Mr. Clark became a Trustee within a few months of its founding and Mr. Rockefeller as first Chairman of the Advisory Committee, Trustee and Treasurer - has been for years closely in touch with our plans. Under their leadership of the efficient staff that has been brought together under Mr. Barr and Mr. Mabry, we can look forward to increased activity and greater service to the public.‍Speaking for himself, Rockefeller outlines an ideology of the plan. Formatted as question and answer session with the press, Rockefeller responds with an emphasis on the socialization of art and its role in “modernizing taste”‍"What is your particular Interest in modern art, Mr. Rockefeller?" the interviewer asked."We are all interested in the appearance of this modern era in which we live. We are all concerned in having our present-day surroundings more attractive. And that in the broadest sense is modern art." "How does the Museum of Modern Art help to do this?" "The Museum," he answered, "encourages the development of new ways of art to fit the changing conditions of the contemporary world, and displays the new principles of art to the public, thereby making them available for use and for the modernization of taste...”‍In this record Rockefeller is established as a “forward looking” administrator which drives the ideology of the Plan with the expressed aim of “modernizing taste” to “fit the changing conditions of the contemporary world.” Rockefeller’s ideology reveals an ambition to normalize, a reading which is fortified by Hume’s definition of taste as the “Standard of Taste; a rule, by which the various sentiments of men may be reconciled.” Rockefeller seeks to not only to regulate the dialectic of capitalist development by proffering aesthetics as an instrument for the normalization and modernization of the Standard’s of Taste, he seeks reconcile the “various sentiments of man” along the lines of his individual subjectivity--his Standard of Taste. The rhetoric echoes that of Futurist manifestos, Dadaist mechanicalism, De Stijl elementarism, and international Constructivism: “but what is really striking in this ideology of unconditional consensus is its ingenuous radicalism. These invitations to become a machine, to universal proletarianization, to forced production, in revealing the ideology of the Plan all too explicitly, cannot fail to arouse suspicion as to their real intentions (Tafuri 86).” These real intentions are materialized in the discovery that in 1973, during his last year as Governor of the State of New York, when Rockefeller reverses the decision of state legislature to not allow the construction of Museum Tower over the Museum of Modern Art (see Figure 2, Figure 3). The tower, designed by Pelli Clark Pelli, was built mainly as a financial instrument to generate revenue for support of the museum’s operating expenses, containing 240 apartments which contribute funds in the form tax provisions. The building permit, issued in 1977, indicates that the lot was zoned as C5-2.5 (central commercial district), however the building is governed by R10A regulations, as a standard adaptation of residential zoning law within a commercial district. The significance is that R10A is limited to a Floor Area Ratio of 10.0 and height of 210 ft. Museum Tower--consisting of 55 storeys and 384,000 sq ft--stands at 495 ft tall: that is, 285 ft of its vertical height was built using air rights over the Museum’s galleries. In this sense, Museum Tower’s signifies a twofold extinction of Progressive ideology: first, Rockefeller’s reversal of state legislation; and second, the manipulation of zoning to maximize rent revenue. Together, these episodes compound the revelation that Law--as the magnus opum of ideology's capacity to control development--is an outmoded technology, no longer capable of stabilizing the dialectic of capitalist production. A reconfiguration of the terms of ideology thus becomes imperative if a productive dialectic is to be maintained. The role of the MoMa as an institution, and the ideology of its plan, is complexified into a new territory where capital reigns supreme and breaks ideology’s regulatory chains:‍No longer Hegel but Keynes, not the ineffectual ideology of the New Deal but post-Keynesian economy. Ideology, become concrete and stripped of any trace of utopianism, now descends directly into the fields of endeavor; which is to same as saying that it is suppressed… The plan, on the one hand, tends to be identified with the institution that supports it, and on the other, to be a set forth as a specific institution in itself. The dominion of capital is thus realized strictly in terms of the logic of its own mechanisms, without any extrinsic justification, absolutely independent of any abstract “ethical” end, of any teleology, or any “obligation to be.” (Tafuri 62).‍Contemporaneous to MoMa’s uptown extinction of ideology and Rockefeller’s institutionalisation of capital’s dominion, an alternative institution, or more precisely an an-institution, is founded by Gordon Matta-Clark downtown. The Anarchitecture group, conceived as a conflation of “anarchy,” and “architecture” engages the dialectic of capitalist along different lines, opting out of the instrumentality of ideology and the subjugated repetitions of ethics, Anarchitecture (Gordon Matta-Clark, Laurie Anderson, Tina Girouard, Carol Goodden, Suzanne Harris, Jene Highstein, Bernard Kirschenbaun, Richard Landry, and Richard Nonas). Conceding his ability to solve crises, Matta-Clark (et al.), engages the negative dialectic as it materializes in the city, ceasing upon the collateral damage of ideology’s shortcomings, activating artifacts of the inner-city and the outer boroughs as frames for articulating the excesses and entropies found in various modes of capitalist production. Hinging upon the notion that aesthetics can remain reflexive while being political, Matta-Clark articulates a form of practice for acting in the mediums of crisis which, through processes of deconstruction, constructs critical perspectives:‍The interesting thing about Gordon was that he was full of ideas and in a way highly intellectual. But, just in the same way that he broke context, he broke words and ideas. So he was playing with it, playing with the intellectualising, so this is a perfect ... Gordon thought process right here on the wall ... he did it almost as a form of analysis, you know. That was his theoretical position, that you could deal with ideas in that way.‍In his project Fake Estates, Matta-Clark participates in bourgeois ideology as a critique of its empty promises. Purchasing 15 properties, priced between $25-$75 and decreed as “unusable” by Manhattan zoning law, Matta-Clark buys into the bourgeois ideology of land-ownership as a way of illustrating its contradictions: as undevelopable tracts of land, he was unable to capitalize on his investment into the “estates.” Thus the value of his ownership--within the exchange-values of Modernity--existed only virtually on paper.Having outlined the extinction of ideology at MoMA, and the reflexive aesthetics of Gordon-Matta Clark, the guidelines for intervention present themselves: Matta-Clark is commissioned to perform a “Critical Intersect” at MoMA--or rather, of MoMa. Having observed the Conical Intersect series at the Paris Biennale in 1975, the procedure’s critique of institutionalization is noted (see Figure 4):‍“Matta-Clark’s contribution to the Paris Biennale of 1975, manifested his critique of urban gentrification in the form of a radical incision through two adjacent 17th-century buildings designated for demolition near the much-contested Centre Georges Pompidou, which was then under construction. For this antimonument, or “nonument,” which contemplated the poetics of the civic ruin, Matta-Clark bored a tornado-shaped hole that spiraled back at a 45-degree angle to exit through the roof. Periscope like, the void offered passersby a view of the buildings’ internal skeletons (guggenheim.org).”‍At the precise moment Rockefeller overturns state legislation and sets into the motion the construction of Museum Tower in 1973, the (de)construction of “Critical Intersect” begins, a manifestation of a critique of ideology in the form of radical incisions into galleries of MoMa’s original 1939 building. For this anti-architecture, or “anarchitecture,” which forces progressive ideology to encounter its own extinction, Matta bores a tornado-shaped hole that spirals forward at a 45-degree angle and exits through the roof. Functioning as a lens which focuses the contradictions of its own structures, the void frames for both the passersby and the patron a view of the Museum Tower as the materialization of capitalist (i.e. conservative) forces which drive the plan of the institution. From the perspective of the 53rd street, the pedestrian glimpse is anchored into gaze, as the radicality of the intervention’s redaction orients the fleeting pace of the city towards more contemplative parameters. As a spectacle, Matta-Clark’s intervention along 53rd street participates in the glossy surface of Midtown’s culture of consumption, confirming the city’s systems of representations and the “camp” discourses of the metropolitan bourgeois, registering as an absurd shock to be absorbed with the irony and humour of cocktail conversation at a fundraising gala (held presumably in the undamaged institutional space preserved around the intervention). The real impact hits home, however, as the bourgeois come to occupy the origin point of Critical Intersect’s cone of vision. The project’s full weight in the stakes of ideology’s extinction come crashing down as its deconstruction becomes a reconstruction, framing--from what is considered both a vanishing point and an origin point--the building up of a financial instrument which threatens the stability of value and structural integrity of the very slabs upon which their discourses stand. Hitting home with the same effect of a child’s realization that the towers at the center of Disneyland--indeed the entire basis of their worldview--are fake, the bourgeois stomach turns sick as their reality, formerly transposed by the idealization of progress and the Progressive, finally eats itself through, consuming a path through which we can perceive Museum Tower as the crisis of cultural value. Just as Disneyland is built as imaginary to convince us that the America which surrounds it is real, MoMa is built to prolong the innocence of a fantasy and conceal the negative of the surplus upon which it is built. Having once been the ideology which regulated the dialectic, the original MoMa building becomes the negative of the dialectic, and Museum Tower the positive. Originally built to transpose the contradictory reality of a Progressive capitalist system, the institution becomes the collateral substrate for capitalist action. To “modernize taste” through the “development of new ways of art to fit the changing conditions of the contemporary world” and make the “present day surrounding more attractive” translates for MoMa in the 1970’s as the construction of a institutional project within dominion of capital. This project’s stance--a la Rockefeller--beyond the limits of a law’s normative reconciliation, drives progressive ideology to extinguish itself in recognition of its own failure to regulate development. In an act of aesthetic reflexivity, the institution is partially excavated, carving out a space for reflecting upon the components of crisis, crystallizing itself as a historical artifact and perceiving itself, from and through itself, as an instrument of Late Capital. Critical Intersection, situated between the progressive ideology’s normalization (pre-crisis MoMa) and the ethics of conservative rationalization (post-crisis MoMA), creates in its void the absence of value in the institution and the city. Ideologies in MoMa and New York are left to view the extrusion of Museum Tower as a prophetic trajectory, the striations of its floor slabs an index to the revenue which archives the extinction of its foundations. As both false in its consciousness and tenacious in persistence through crisis, the institution is a conceptual hinge which acts in self-preservation to re-evaluate the dialectic of development precisely at the moment its techniques for thinking snap, signifying crisis and actuating the critical, the aesthetic, and the intellectual in response to tragic opportunity. The institution in crisis, seen at MoMa as the “positive thought” of Progressive ideology becomes the “negative thought” of a conservative coordination with capital. Tafuri draws the contours of an uncertain, ambiguous, and ironic future for thought in terms of post-crisis, Late Capitalist economy:‍“Negative thought" had enunciated its own project for survival in its refutation of the Hegelian dialectic and a recovery of the contradictions this had eliminated. "Positive thought" does nothing but overturn that negativeness on itself. The negative is revealed as such, even in its "ineluctability." Resignation to it is only a first condition for making possible the perpetuation of the intellectual disciplines; for making possible the recovery for intellectual work (at the price of destroying its "aura") of the tradition of its "sacred" extraneousness to the world; for providing a reason, no matter how minimal, for its survival. The downfall of reason is now acclaimed the realization of reason's own historic mission. In its cynicism intellectual work plays its cards to the ambiguous limit of irony (Tafuri 76).”‍Figure 1. October 30, 1975 morning headline in The Daily News. ‍Figure 2. Elevation of Museum Tower, Pelli Clark Pelli‍Figure 3. Photograph of Museum Tower, from 53rd Street.Figure 4. Conical Intersect in Paris.‍BibliographyBrecher, C. and Eichner, A. 1974. The Great Society--A Worms Eye View. New York Affairs, 2 (2), pp. 39-49Bruce-Biggs, B. 1979. Abolish New York. New York Affairs, 5 (3), pp. 5-9.Chatterjee, R. 1975. New York City: A Crisis of Confidence. Economic and Political Weekly, 10 (47), pp.1798-1799.Currie, B. 1963. Conflict, Crisis and Confusion in New York. Duke Law Journal, 1963 (1), pp. 1--55.Loverd, R. 1991. Presidential Decision Making during the 1975 New York City Financial Crisis: A Conceptual Analysis. Presidential Studies Quarterly, pp. 251--267.Museum of Modern Art 1939. Nelson A. Rockefeller Becomes New President of the Museum of Modern Art [press release] May 8, 1939."Nelson Rockefeller." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 12 July 2013. Web. 17 Dec. 2013.Starr, R. 1985. The Rise and Fall of New York City. New York: Basic Books.Tafuri, Manfredo. 1975. Architecture and Utopia: Design and Capitalist Development. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.ImagesFigure 1. Roberts, Sam. "Infamous 'Drop Dead' Was Never Said by Ford." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Dec. 2006. Web. 17 Dec. 2013.Fig. 2. West Wing & Tower Addition. Drawings & Models, Museum of Modern Art, New York, New York, United States. 1984.Fig. 3. Pelli, Cesar. West Wing & Tower Addition. Exteriors, Museum of Modern Art, New York, New York, United States. 1984.Fig.4. "Gordon Matta-Clark." Gordon Matta-Clark. artnet.com Web. 17 Dec. 2013.

by PZ
Cinematic Reel

How to formulate a theory of perception--on a metropolis defined by a malleability of time, space, and phenomena--in an age inundated by sensory media? Situating New York City within the contemporary discourses surrounding design, its renowned status as the global capital of commerce, intelligence, and wealth settles into history, providing space at center-stage for the emerging urbanisms of the 21st century’s developing nations. Formerly defined by its rude, adolescent health and explosive sense of spectacle, New York now reaches a point of maturation--an archaeological potential--allowing for forensic investigation into the rapid processes that defined its growth. The moment is appropriate to interrogate the city’s architectural and infrastructural components as the sophisticated material substrates of 20th century urbanism par excellence. Critical to the success of this evaluation is the way that is chosen to look at the city--the device used to frame and engage the city’s content. Looking into 20th century visual-aural culture, cinema and locomotion are identified as tools used to construct and idea about landscape--instruments of the mechanical age responsible for restructuring the way we see space. This essay and its accompanying film exist at the intersection of cinema and locomotion. Situated in the present and looking to the past, both the text and the film are positioned along the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE) as the line of inquiry from which the city, and history of seeing the city, is understood. By historicizing the BQE within the sociopolitical context of its conception and construction, and contrasting the cinematic space that it generates with canonical modes of landscape representation, the expressway becomes a heuristic device for building a larger, more expansive theory about the role of urban infrastructure in landscape as moving image. Conceived as a resolution to the congestion of Old Brooklyn, the BQE’s genesis is traced back to 1937 as part of a larger regeneration plan that seeks to improve the conditions of the borough, particularly the neighborhoods directly adjacent to the Manhattan and Brooklyn Bridge. As the automobile gains traction as the dominant medium of transport in the city, the elevated railways extending from the bridges and deep into Brooklyn become insufficient and increasingly irrelevant as a way to distribute metropolitan density. The once affluent suburban neighborhoods of Brooklyn begin to erode under the loads of the urban masses, and a decongestive measure became necessary. Spearheading the realization of this new infrastructure is Robert Moses, a notoriously prodigal figure distinguished by his insensitivity to neighborhood sentiments:For Robert Moses city life was the daily grind, a fundamental fact of modern existence but basically unsympathetic to the good life. City life meant sacrifice, with the individual bending his will to the collective, exemplified by Moses’s oft-repeated phrase about large-scale projects: “you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.” (“New York 1960” 37) This attitude occupies the extreme end of a spectrum that describes mid-century perspectives about urban development, characterizing the trends of Modernist planning that maintain the militant ethos of the movement’s avant-garde roots. Occupying the other end, as the voice of what Moses refers to as “the little people,” is American-Canadian writer and activist Jane Jacobs: For Jane Jacobs the city was a great liberation, the ultimate freedom, an intricate web of individuals, buildings and streets, a mosaic or tapestry that somehow amounted to more than any singular vision and was absolute anathema to the idea of a grand plan. In Jacob’s view, New York, or at least the parts of it that she admired, had the ingredients of a post-industrial age utopia; it was definitely not an ideal to be endured.” (“New York 1960” 37) Standing in direct opposition to Moses on a number of planning episodes—including the Lower-Manhattan Expressway and the Cross-Bronx Expressway—Jacob’s criticisms position her among the most vocal opponents of Moses’ urban renewal policies. But what is most critical about these two contradictory figures is not the specifics of their positions within New York’s planning history, nor the logistics of their achievements, but rather their potential towards signifying two divergent ways of seeing the city that can be traced back to the origins of landscape as a constructed idea. Simultaneously maintaining relevance to the BQE as a theoretical context, Moses’ and Jacob’s perspectives are reverse engineered into performative and narrative modes of landscape representation that can in turn be instrumentalized into filmic techniques for figuring forth a cinematic space about the BQE.

by PZ
Catastrophe and Control

Kantian Foundation The production of architecture in Modernity, understood as the process of translating ideas into material, is a conceptual framework whose origins are found in 18th century metaphysics. It is here that Kant re-centers the subject as the champion of being, equipped with an aesthetic ideology which empowers the self as fundamentally autonomous, yet capable of recognizing the beautiful and sublime in a way that unites him with the similarly free subjects that surround him as a “community of feeling subjects” (Eagleton 75). If on the one hand the rationalization and secularization of the Enlightenment despiritualizes the individual, and the reactionary skepticism of empiricism slips into a solipsism which relativizes ontology into obscurity, then Kant strikes a profound note of reciprocity between subjectivity and objectivity which resounds through the 19th and 20th century, indeed into the present, as the foundational way of thinking. It is the ways in which Modernity appropriates the Kantian imaginary, the particularities of conflicts and crises between the subject and his capital--which drive the materializations of capitalism and the bourgeois which define our current built environment. The spaces between Modernity’s myriad dualities--culture and industry, subject and object, ideology and practice--can be engaged with the Kant’s aesthetic ideology to provide a mode entry into thinking critically and historically about design and architecture as the articulation of encounter between the subject and nature. It comes as no surprise that as Kant affirms these two mutually exclusive yet independent domains, the territorial imperative of the social exalts the role of technology’s capacity for dominion, specifically its ability to control the uncontrollable. From the extolled i-beam of Mies van der Rohe’s Seagram building, to Le Corbusier’s “machine for living,” Modern architecture’s rhetoric focuses overwhelmingly on the conflation of instruments of regulation and building. In challenging the success and productivity of this attitude, we can propose an alternative reading, found by example in the architecture of Adler and Sullivan--the originators of the Modern movement in America--as they integrate technology into turn of the century warehouses and attempt to control nature’s most entropic element: air. ‍ Freezing Value "After an investment of $1,500,000 and a useful life of eleven years, their warehouses were demolished. The cost of progress has seldom been higher.‍" - Carl Condit, The Chicago School of Architecture‍ The Chicago Cold Storage Exchange, built on the Chicago river in 1891 for the emerging cold storage industry, was at the time of its construction “the world’s largest cold storage facility” (Osman 7). An innovation in the new and lucrative market of freezing perishable food items and, more to the point, their associated market value, the building was a triumph for the profiteers that sought to “support speculation through futures contracts analogous to those used for grain at the Board of Trade” (Osman 4). Adler and Sullivan, appropriating the cooling technologies developed by the transport industry, synthesized systems of coiled expansion pipes and compressed ammonia, absorbing the entrails of industrialization into the a civic architecture of “texture and geometric purism” (Condit 135). Hailed as “a company of wizards,” the architects managed to absorb technology completely and realize a building where “no view revealed the mechanics buried in the basements, no gap disclosed the cooling apparatus that rose up through the wall cavities, and all the changes in supply and demand negotiated by the commission merchants at the Cold Storage Exchange were hidden deep inside the warehouse mass.” (Osman 7)If we acknowledge the production and consumption of food as a process of negotiating energy between ourselves and our environment, and recognize the different ways in which these negotiations occur as a reflection of our values , then the cold storage facility typology can be seen to radically revise the nature and limits of our subjectivity insofar as it revolutionizes material culture. Adler and Sullivan’s temples of storage are an early, albeit romanticized instance of a phenomenon that is by now now globally ubiquitous typology whose main characteristic is “an interior environment defined by temperature, humidity, and technical dependability produced spaces in which commodities could retain their identity through time.”(Osman 3). By providing the apparatus to conceptualize the full spectrum of nature’s produce simply as signifiers of value in national trade networks, the architect of the cold storage facility destabilizes the limits between the subject and his environment. Prior to refrigeration, there existed a palpable reciprocity between harvesting and nourishment, a seasonal cycle attenuated by the time scales of growth and perishability. This close relationship between the consuming body and the affordances of its environment is synonymous with a subjectivity whose limits occur at the encounter of the labouring body and the natural environment from which it extracts nutrition. The scale of this agrarian subjectivity stretches as the finiteness of perishability and its material culture are pushed towards the infinity of frozen storage and its isotropic networks of exchange value. The liberation from the time-consuming processes of direct subsistence from nature of course allows the subject to engage in other secondary and tertiary economies, thereby proffering the potential for becoming bourgeois, but in doing so dissolves the previously compact reciprocity of the subject and his environment, expanding it into a more abstract and entropic realm. Architecture in this case does not necessarily act as the actual material interface between the subject and his environment, but rather assimilates technology into the built-environment-at-large in a way that sublimates subjectivity into a more entropic and increasingly volatile realm of determined structures that are “so thoroughly formal and abstract in their operations that they seem to stand at an immense distance from the realm of sensuous immediacy, superbly autonomous of the chance combinations of matter that they throw up” (Eagleton 318).This cleavage between the “superbly autonomous” individual and its surrounding “chance combinations of matter” is the dark side of Kant’s imaginary, as it reveals itself incarnate in Modernity. The aesthetics of the beautiful and the sublime, despite their value as paths to free and sensuous (inter)subjectivity, are marginalized to art as a precious, yet very contained, subset of bourgeois ideology. Mirroring this conceptual space of ideology is the concretized space of bourgeois social practice, within which architecture comes reside. The failure of Adler and Sullivan's Exchange warehouses on the Chicago river can be seen as architecture’s losing battle, as it attempts to materialize its ideologies into a city which remains indifferent to its ambitions and takes instead the tumultuous eruptions of speculation, profit, and economy as its productive principle. “The cost of progress has seldom been higher,” is a statement which refers to the tragic incompatibility between Adler and Sullivan’s refined aesthetics and Chicago’s ruthless speculation market. The Kantian subject, philosophizing behind the proscenium of his subjective judgement, is unable to articulate the contours of his imagination in the objective world, left to toil in the metaphysical, frustrated in recognition that “facts are one thing, and values another -- which is to say that there is a gap, at once troubling and essential, between bourgeois social practice and the ideology of that practice” (Eagleton 82). This gap, reified in Chicago as the demolition of the Cold Storage Exchange and justified as the necessary “cost of progress,” is a phenomenon of catastrophe implicit in the dynamism of capitalist behavior. Erupting always in unison with the triumphs of development, crisis comes to define Modernity as the ugly bourgeois reflection of Kant’s seemingly salvationary metaphysics, an immanent image of destruction in the rearview mirror of progress, an insistent reminder as pervasive and scaleless as the spectered ideology to which it is tethered.‍PARTITION‍In Bourke-White’s images of partition, one characteristic stands out: the juxtaposition of scales, the grand and the immediate, the national and the personal. Distraught faces are set against grand vistas, blank skies, and historical sites. It is as if the partition had opened up a chasm that had swallowed all that mediated between the personal and the national, bringing the former into grating adjacency with the latter without the intervening layers of the social, the common, the familial, and the familiar.‍-Ijlal Muzaffar, “Boundary Games”The partition of the British Indian Empire into the sovereign states of the Dominion of Pakistan and the Union of India was political exercise of division, a territorial delineation of Islam and Hinduism and the materialization of a boundary game which created more than 12 million refugees and left more than 1 million dead. Administering the Indian subcontinent since 1858 through structures of property ownership, class hierarchy, and division of labor, the implications of capitalist imperialism come into focus as the British Raj make their exit. As bourgeois social practice resigns itself from the sociopolitical landscape that it so radically restructured, the collective subjectivities of the Islam and Hinduism reemerge, yet without any of the “intervening layers” of social practice to negotiate their return to solidarity. As the British Raj resigns with the inscription of a line in the sand, it leaves the mark of its propensity for division, materializing schisms previously rooted the economics of labor into the explicit realm of territorial geography. It is as if Raj could not escape without somehow scarring the landscape to signify the division implicit in the structure of bourgeois social practice.Following the displaced refugee out of India and into Pakistan, it is in the housing colony of Korangi, near Karachi, Pakistan, that we can trace the reconstruction of a repressed identity. Here, the postwar planning strategies of Echocard and Doxiadis, the centralized military government of Ayub Kahn’s Pakistan, and the ambiguous identity of the refugee conflate into the ideology of the plan. Commissioned to deploy his “new culturally specific form of modernism” (Muzaffar 153), Ecochard brought to the table an experienced set of planning skills, polished and praised by the CIAM. The scheme he proposed, in collaboration with the centralized powers Ayub Kahn, was in equal parts a political and a design project that consist of phased “spatial frameworks that transform the inhabitants as they traverse the modernization process” (Muzaffar 157). Following the construction of an infrastructural framework, provisionary shelter is initially provided, followed by single-story houses clustered in low-density green, and finally multi-story slab housing. In incremental steps, plot coverage is reduced and floor area ratio increased, pre-figured for the ultimate goal of total modernization: “the scheme outlines a process of evolution whose final form is already vis.ible. The inhabitants are caught simply in the process of filling in the details (Muzaffar 157).” In a process of disassembly, reassembly, and densification within a fixed and limited boundary, the refugees are conceptualized as orphans, adopted and placed into a sort of collective incubator, a controlled mechanism for transformation into fully functioning Modern subjects, eventually capable themselves of extending this pattern of ideological reproduction and the proliferation of Modernity. This sort of identity hack, carried out through the introduction of increasingly modern typologies, reveals a novel relationship between subjectivity, design, and the objective world. In contrast to Adler and Sullivan’s brittle realizations, cast from the realm of their subjectivity and into the external domain of rude and practical economy, the various typologies specified by Ecochard’s Korangi project graft a new subjectivity onto the refugees: in the former architecture emerges out of a subjectivity, whereas in the latter a subjectivity emerges out of architecture. Echohard’s plan short circuits the refugees ability to reconstitute their own identity, depriving them of the chance to experience a phenomenal representation of their self. Instead, he wedges an architecture of the Other between the refugee and his environment, installing around the displaced subject a new aesthetic ideology to be entered, owned, and carried forward. It is ultimately the explicit nature of this wedging and the overt quality of the processes of transformation which prevent the realization of the plan, leaving the project open for a less visible, more nested strategy for developing the modern. In contrast to the prefigured totality outlined by Ecochard’s limits, Doxiadis specifies an alternative dynamic of development, rejecting the explicit nature of the earlier plan that relegated the responsibility of transformation to phased state interventions, Doxiadis suggests that the refugee be his own agent of change, presenting the displaced subject with a path to modernization built on inner growth rather than acquired manner. Urbanistically, the plan rejects any contained centripetal morphology and proposes a settlement that is “to grow linearly over time out of its present site, and direct the growth of the entire city of Karachi” (Muzaffar 162). Through decentralizing the geometry of the urban plan, and imparting it with an organizational principle of continuous, linear, and organic expansion, Doxiadis de-articulates the presence of regulation while maintaining the centralization of power in the social sense, emptying its location in the spatial. The systems of administration are synthesized into the urban structure as a sort of ubiquitous muteness, thus providing a milieu for the refugee to act as the agent of his own change:‍What might appear as a contradiction--the dual focus on centralized authority and disseminated application of power--actually formed the very mode through which power was preserved. Such contradictions didn’t undo power but made its stable exercise possible. The dissemination of state authority is premised on the framing of the refugee as a subject in transition between tradition and modernity. Although seen to be dislocated in the modern national landscape, [he or] she is not simply claimed as a subject in need of rigid control. Rather, [he or] she is presented as subject who possesses the potential of modernization herself. The state simply serves to emancipate this potential. The more the state is able to serve the role from afar, the less it is susceptible to constrain the refugee’s capacity to constitute a seamless link between tradition and modernity (Muzaffar 165).‍Like Ecochard, Doxiadis seeks to produce a new subject with his plan, but unlike his predecessor who designated singular moment of centralized revision, and in doing so projected a ready-made modern subjectivity, Doxiadis extracts the new identity of of his subject by providing him with an environment of affordances, embedding transformative functions into the settlement’s socioeconomic structures while regulating morphology through a homogeneous spatial distribution of centralized yet discrete instruments of control. This model of transformation can be said to be be evolutionary insofar as new forms of life (i.e. new modern subjects) emerge as the pressures of their environments (i.e. the settlement structure) naturally select and bring forth certain characteristics and equip them with an adapted set capacities and power to produce: Like Darwin’s finch whose beak form adapts to extract the seeds of a new island environment, the refugee in Doxiadis’s Korangi emerges into the modern as an adapted subject. Through integrating spatially minor yet socioeconomically significant “seeds” into built environment, Doxiadis teases out behaviors which participate in and contribute to a collective subjectivity of his own design. For example, the main feature of the settlement’s modular housing unit is a courtyard, integrated into the typology as a familiar element appealing to the refugee subject, but shifted slightly from the middle of the house to the edge or back of the house. This sleight of hand planning strategy appropriates the courtyard--an element of tradition and culture used as a shared social space to bridge age and gender--and refigures it into the plan as a potential for expanding the size of the home or providing storage for entrepreneurship. If Ecochard’s architecture produces a new modern subjectivity by wedging itself as a phantasm in between the refugee and his objective reality, then Doxiadis’s architecture can be said to function, in terms of evolutionary biology, as a pressure within the environment, extracting out of the refugee’s genotype and modern phenotype as a subjectivity adapted and attenuated to the objective reality of the settlement.Doxiadis conceptualization of the city as a biological organism, however, produces an unsettling dissonance: If the refugee of traditions evolves into the modern subject in response to the nested ideological pressures of the city (e.g. private/public partnership, property ownership, courtyard as unit of expansion), and the city itself is a biological organism -- what pressures drive the evolution of the city organism? Where precisely is the location and scale of environment and organism, the ecology of evolutionary pressures and the biology adapting subjects? If each element in the chain of forms is an organism adapted to next higher order of scale which supersedes it (subject, city, city to region, region to territory) what ultimately resides as the uber-environment which drives the morphology of the chain of forms? For Doxiadis, it is the “global integration” of a “stable networked world.”(Muzaffar 169) Internationally coordinated bourgeois ideologies ( are the end to which Modernization is the means. This necessarily requires, as we see in Korangi, that the model take as its most fundamental units the capitalist tropes of property ownership and shared public/private investments. This perspective of Doxiadis model -- a totalizing, albeit quasi-heterogenous global economy -- is a violation in the highest order of what constitutes the Kantian imaginary. Kant and Doxiadis both seek to unify the particular and the universal, and assign a special role to the built environment in doing so: the former produces an ideology of the aesthetic -- beauty and the sublime as the saviors of the subject’s freedom--whereas the latter appropriates the logic of biological evolution as the basis of a networked global economy in the most objective sense. Strangely, Doxiadis’s positionïng of the subject as the molecular unit of an infinitely pliable global network economy coincides with Kant’s sense of sublimity, only Doxiadis does not seek the salvation that Kant discovers through confronting this infinity through subjective reasoning, but settles instead on a cybernetic subject-object reciprocity as the basis of his technocratic aesthetics, LEAP-FROGDoxiadis’s ideology lends itself as a useful lens for understanding the relationship of of man and his environment as a co-evolution of intimate inter-connectedness. Looking at the history of hydrology in California as a metaphor for Modernity’s relationship to the environment, we see capitalism's tendency to “center the subject in the sphere of values, only to decentre it in the realm of things” as farmers are driven by the bourgeois ideologies of property ownership and profit, instrumentalizing technology at all costs to regulate the unpredictability of hydrology and moisten their crops (Eagleton 92). The resulting droughts that inevitably followed, as crises and consequence of the subjects’ pursuit of bourgeois ideology, were overcome not through reconciling with the ecology of California or establishing a reciprocity with the affordances therein, but rather pushed towards the upscaling in technology. Design in this context emerges as the subjective prefigurations of aesthetic ideologies colliding with capital and economy as the phenomenal representations of the subject’s self-interests that exist in the objective realm as the negative specters of subjective bourgeois ideology. As culture and industry spiral along the the vector myth of progress, additional organizations and centralizations of resources are required to surmount nature’s instability, coagulating into various forms of democracy and incorporation. Formed in this leap-frog game of ecological catastrophe and technological control, we find ourselves in California amongst the endless crystallizations of hydraulic infrastructures of a continental scale, bearing witness to the escalating stakes in the subject’s encounter with nature and leaving our subjective Kantian imaginations to wonder, as we gaze across the sublime environment of crisis before us: what went wrong?‍“Here we are able to see etched in sharpest detail the interplay between humans and nature and to track the social consequences it has produced--to discover the process by which, in the remaking of nature, we remake ourselves.” (Worster 515)

by PZ
Desire, Design, Law

"Rather, we can best explore this terrain by using as our guide the concept of diffuse mentalities: metalanguages that obliquely traverse the spaces of architectural language, determining their organization and liberating their potentials."‍ -Manfredo Tafuri, “A Search for Paradigms: Project, Truth, Artifice” If for Marx architecture is the material artefact which confirms the subject’s powers of production, and for Kant it is an object of beauty which unifies our otherwise isolated subjectivities into moments of collective harmony, then Freud’s Eros synchronizes with classical aesthetics insofar as building brings us to sensuous catharsis. At the very moment of coming in to being, however, the serenity achieved in architecture by Kant and Marx is sharpened into a double edged sword, swinging back towards the subject as nothing more than the masochist reification of the superego–walls as the law of the name of the father:“Freud posits in human beings both a primary narcissism and a primary aggressiveness; and the construction of civilization involves a sublimation of both, directing them outwards to higher goals. Part of our primary aggressiveness is thus diverted from the ego and fused with Eros, builder of cities, to dominate Nature and create a culture” (Eagleton 270)‍The source of this narcissism, as the productive principle of city building, is explained by Freud as the cyclical interplay of law and desire, competing for primacy within the subject. Appropriating the father as the symbol of the law, Freud sketches out the curious yet compelling psychology whereby the paternal father comes to represent both the past and the future: the past, in that he is our genetic prehistory, and the future as the figure towards which the child will ultimately shape ourselves (incidentally, as it were, to take the place as our mother’s lover). What is of interest here is not the Oedipal underpinnings of Eagleton’s rhetoric, which are of course necessary to speak of Freud at all, but rather the role which history plays in the construction of law, desire, and subjectivity. Tafuri, in a fortuitous study of Renaissance thought, challenges the immutable nature of Humanism’s value system, drawing attention to a lack of authenticity and revealing the laws which govern its subjects as a simply recycling of components from the past appropriated into the present with new arbitrary meaning. Interpreted as a sort of Benjaminian totality, where dead histories are given new image, the totality of law, in both humanism and Freud, exhibits the peculiar behavior of parading itself as a constitutional framework for conduct based on universal truths, when in fact it is an adaptation of various forms of history, synthesized and stamped by interests of the present: “The super ego thus represents a kind of contradiction between past and present, infantilism and maturity: at the very moment that is shows us the path towards an ideal humanity, it pulls us inexorably back into childhood.” (Eagleton 272)‍Freud treats law, and superego and interchangeable, which–despite the dogmatic nature of its analogic which should be regarded with skepticism–provides an interesting ground for a psychoanalytic critique of architecture. By sketching out the various permutations that architecture takes within and against law and desire and fundamental concepts for forms subjectivity, Freud’s distinctly modern theories is modulated with Tafuri’s rewriting of history to discover various modalities of design. In these terms, the socialized subjectivity of the bourgeois is conditioned through an organic dynamic of development, where a select group of intelligentsia go foraging through the history of antiquity, gathering orders and components of orders, and presenting them to each other for concurrence on their beauty: laws are forged as architecture negotiates the subjective desire with the universality of consensus. Humanist design provides the subject entry into the social sphere by allowing him to participate in the collective and spontaneous judgement of beauty. “I” becomes “we” through a process of intuition, expression, and refinement. This socializing of subjectivity is what Tafuri calls “naturally artificial,” and can in other words be described as an unauthentic sincerity. In recognition of the fact that its trumpeted morality is nothing more than a conscription of fragmented classical language, the refinement of the subject’s choices of desire into orders of beauty and law, nevertheless remains sincere as ardent expressions made in spontaneous sensuous commune. This conflation of desire and law by means of sensual consensus has, however, will have grave implications in Modernity as “the civilizing process presupposes a gradual shift in mental paradigms: as with any historical process, it will not permit itself to be interpreted according to categories of progress and decline. (Tafuri 56)Looking at the operative principles of design in Iran during the second half of the 20th century, Modernity’s propensity for subjective hegemony is observed as “a hybrid mixture of traditional Iranian and Western architecture.” Echoing Tafuri’s reading of humanist multiplicity, the Iranian subject, finding himself amidst the propaganda and programs of American democratic capitalism, “rehearses a modern style of existence. A form of conduct, planned out in advance, and oriented toward precisely defined objectives, provides its foundation” (Tafuri 61). The hegemonic instrumentality of design comes sharply into focus within the political conflicts of the Cold War: The 1959 Moscow “Kitchen Debate” between the USSR premier Nikita Khrushchev and the U.S. President Richard Nixon demonstrated that Cold War animosities functioned on wildly diverse levels and featured not just missiles and sphere of interest but also automobiles, washing machines, and toaster ovens” (Karimi 123)‍It was through the domestic furnishings of industrial design that the subjectivity of the western capitalist bourgeois, founded on principles of “linguistic pluralism” in Tafuri’s humanism, enters into Iranian culture. Through the realm of the kitchen, American sensibilities enter the realm of domesticity, cultivating a consumerism whose demands unfold out of the realm of domesticity and into economic structures, revising ideology into a montage of traditional and modern. The similarities with Tafuri’s humanism are notable, yet different insofar as the laws governing the new Iranian identity were imported as a foreign subjectivity, whereas with Tafuri the law was fashioned by the subjects. Between the difference of acquired manner and inner growth enlies a degree of alienation, palpable in the lamenting of the contemporary Iranian subject: “we are all like strangers to ourselves, in our food and dress, our homes, our manners… and, most dangerous, our culture.” (Karimi 138)“It is not a question of rescuing the subject for a precarious moment from its alienation; to be a subject is to be alienated anyway, rendered eccentric to oneself by the precise movement of desire. And if objects matter at all, they matter precisely in the place where they are absent. The desired object, as Juliet Mitchell has argued in Lacanian vein, comes into existence as an object when it is lost to the baby or infant. It is when that object is removed or prohibited that it lays down the trace of desire, so that its secure possession will always move under the sign of loss, its presence warped and overshadowed by the perpetual possibility of its absence” (Eagleton 267-268).‍At one end of the spectrum, design can be said to reach its fullest potential for the individual subject when it is voraciously and blissfully consumed by sensuous desire, as a pure and unblighted affirmation of the id. At the other end of the spectrum, design is rejected away from the body as unpleasurable limiting desire, where it is picked up by the socialized subjectivity of the superego as a culturally construction, immanent with authority. This sets up a diagram for understanding design’s role as moving away from the body and towards the city as our subjectivity moves away from individual and toward the social. Beginning (or ending) at the cyborg, design is absorbed completely by the body–becomes part of it as something which accelerates the fulfillment of desire. Prosthetics and tools extend the body, assisting libidinal pursuits while remaining subject to social scrutiny. Ergonomics soften the blow at the subject’s point of entry into the civilized domain–engineered to situate the body in Modernity’s cycles of production. Stripped of any somatic sentience, industrial design materializes before the subject as objects and interfaces which restructure the body into its terms of productive economy. Buildings are a hinge, cultivating and containing socialized subjectivities, constituting the basic unit of the city. Isotropic and pervasive, architecture aggregates into the totalizing and alienating endless city.Concerning the centrality given to architecture, Freud positions desire and law as irreconcilable foes which brutalize the subject from opposite ends of a spectrum, a milieu in which architecture is only vaguely ascribed any agency. Tafuri, in opposition to this, features architecture as the privileged protagonist where desire and law conflate. Freud’s architecture, nothing more than the subject’s angst materialized in the external world, is an uncanny artefact of authority that alienates both himself and others. As the happenstance materialization of a demonized individual subjectivity, it masochistically consumes law at all levels of consciousness (id, ego, superego… subjectivity, socialized subjectivity).“Subjects and object, as for Nietzsche, are passing products of the play of the drives; and what opens up the subject/object duality in the first place is the deeper dialectic of pleasure and unpleasure, introjection and expulsion, as the ego separates certain bits of the world from itself and masticates certain others, thus building up those primordial identifications of which it is a kind of storehouse or cemetery.” (Eagleton 267)Architecture can no longer be understood as the materialization of the subject’s encounter with nature, but rather slips with equal propensity into both. No longer does the built environment come to negotiate the internal and external, but is rather sublimated into one or the either depending on the degree to which is fulfills or limits desires. Capable of being absorbed by sensuous desire, or cast out scornfully as something which limits desire, design is no longer an autonomous phenomenon suspended between the subject and object, but rather shatters down to a level of molecular ubiquity, becoming in the Freudian complex integral to both individual and social subjectivities.“What the aesthetic yearns for is an object at once sensuous and rule bound, a body which is also a mind, combining all the delicious plenitude of the senses with the authority of an abstract decree. It is therefore a fantasy of mother and father in one, of love and law commingled, an imaginary space in which pleasure-principle and reality principle fuse under the aegis of the former. “(Eagleton 263)Freud disfigures architecture’s capacity as a fulfilling aesthetic experience in a two-fold manner: first, he problematizes the body as the pure, stable entity which architecture ought to confirm, imparting it with contradictions, complexities, and “perversity,” which deflates the pursuit of aesthetics in general; secondly, he critically suspends this new distasteful body, only to insist that even if the body were worth confirming, architecture as an object in the external realm cannot perform any sensuous task, cannot bridge from objectivity to subjectivity as two irreconcilable domains.Architecture as the synchrony of law and desire brings subject’s together into a cohesive social in humanism, whereas with Freud architecture drives subjects apart as alienating reifications of the the disparate battles between law and desire played out in each of them. Architecture in humanism modulates individual subjectivity into a harmonious social subjectivity, whereas architecture in Freud causes dissonance in the social realm, pushing subjectivity back towards the isolated realm of the tragically tormented individual.By dismantling the immutable idealism and “unadulterated certainty” of Renaissance architectural theory, and sketching out with the Cortegiano an organic fusion of artifice and nature, Tafuri infers two alternate histories with a single stroke of analysis: the Renaissance is absolved from the tyranny wrought by law against desire, and the Modernity is excused from its villainizing role as originating crisis. Tafuri even ventures antagonize the canonical quality of antiquity, suggesting that it is a capricious point of reference. Citing classical models of hybridization, he compounds the deflation of humanisms values already at work in its systems of representations.This devaluation, however, is productive insofar as it allows us to reevaluate the Renaissance on new terms, opening up the possibility for a rewriting history in a more contemporary lens.What are the implications of removing crisis from Modernity, and disseminating it back into history as episodic contingencies? By effectively shifting the location of “loss of meaning” from the end of the Renaissance to its beginning, Tafuri suggests that the systems of representation which it innovates bring with it “the establishment of a code through an infinite series of exceptions” (Tafuri 60). In a sort of referential free for all, Humanism butchers up antiquity into an isotropic cadavre exquis, its values edited and cross-multiplied into various new fashionings. The proliferation of these new forms of knowledge eclipses the symbolic universe of medieval tradition, producing in its place a landscape of fledgling epistemologies, each competing with the other to preserve its autonomy and negotiate the particularities of its “reference to solid foundations and … appeal to subjective choice” (Tafuri 60). If abstraction can be said to be the primary productive principle of Modernity, its muted materializations the symptom of some deeper process at work–then the systems of representation which underpin humanism are its causes. It is a shift from symbol to sign, tonality to atonality.“If the origins of the aforementioned anguish are to be located in the humanist affirmation of the subject, how can one hope for a recovery based on subjective volition.” (Tafuri 48)Humanism's centering of the individual is both its success and its failure. If at first the humanist produces the beauty and truth of the Renaissance from the idealist perspective of its socialized subjectivity , then in the 19th century this perspective is foreshortened and unable to see the values towards which it was oriented, estranging the subject from world, leaving him to reference only himself within his shrinking, myopic worldview. This de-socialization of the subject, itself the terminus of humanism, implies that the architecture it produces is nothing more than an abstruse materialization of its alienated subjectivity. Aggregated ad infinitum, this architectural angst produces an urban environment that is nothing more than a fragmentary landscape of self-involved subjectivities. If Freud describes architecture as an expression of aggression and violence, it is because his subject lacks the appropriate intervening channels of social conditioning, and so out of angst produces architecture and the city.The architect then is someone who knows not what he/she does. He/she contributes to the city as the domain of socialized subjectivity, simply an aggregation of designers’ ill-informed performances of angst: violent events loosely coordinated by culture to fulfill our implicit desire for control. Cold storage facilities and post-war refugee settlements and hydraulic infrastructure and landfills, dredging and damming and diverting–all these elements of Modernity are extracted from the myth of progress and reflected back toward the subject as the unfortunate and ugly mirror image of himself. This mirror however, like the sword, is a duality, which produces on its opposite side the shining image of social idealism.“Perhaps, only after having penetrated to a realm beyond every law that claims to be absolute — to a place where the “spirit of destruction” acquires a constructive vocation — does it become at all possible to examine the meaning of law. Let us recall Mies’s Seagram Building or Le Corbusier’s Chandigarh: are they not, in some sense, interrogations of the very principles of European rationality?” (Tafuri 48)It is as if the law of European rationalism (bourgeois social practice, capitalism) has driven itself into obscurity, disappearing as it gazes upon the landscape of destruction and fragmentation that it has produced. Having pulverized everything in its path, with nothing left to destroy and identify itself against, the law ceases to be because it has eliminated its own context. In Freud’s battle between law and desire, law has ultimately won, extinguishing desire but left with a meaningless victory — nothing is left to applaud and fear it. Like a lethal vapor which has become so diluted, by the forces of its own entropic impetus, that it effectively ceases to exist, there is once again fresh air to breath as the medium for new life.‍Works Cited Eagleton, Terry , The Ideology of the Aesthetic (Blackwell Publishing, 1990): 262-287. Harwood, John, “The Interface: Ergonomics and the Aesthetics of Survival” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 70-92. Karimi, Pamela, “Dwelling, Dispute, and the Space of Modern Iran,” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 119-146. Tafuri, Manfredo, “A Search for Paradigms: Project, Truth, Artifice,” in Interpreting the Renaissance: Princes, Cities, Architects (Yale University Press, 2006): 1-22.‍

by PZ
The Economic / Aesthetic Bind

"It is the contradictoriness of the aesthetic which only a dialectical thought can adequately encompass."‍ -Terry Eagleton, The Ideology of the Aesthetic‍ Coevolution‍ The relationship between the built environment and money is history of coevolution. As feudalism gives way to capitalism and triggers the emergence of Modernity, architecture and economics unfold, each out of the other, and produce in their wake a dazzling variety of historical tropes. Industrialization, secularization, rationalization, and the nation-state fuel Modernity, while presenting the subject with a new and difficult set of circumstances to reconcile. It is precisely the ways in which the individual conceptualizes his or her self against against the built environment and money that come to define aesthetics. Expanding on the perspective that money produces the built environment during early capitalism, and the built environment produces money during late capitalism, the subject is introduced to enrich and inform the binary, illustrating a multi-dimensional dialectical model for interrogating aesthetics. Noting that Modernity isn’t necessarily a shift from one mode of production to the next, but rather a morphological, elastic set of interrelationships that transform through time, helps us visualize Modernity as constantly evolving field within which singularities erupt and erode, inscribing themselves into historical record as events. Architectural projects, as one of the many forms of events that come to define Modernity, maintain a privileged role in history where the individual, money, and the built environment (i.e. the subject, exchange-value and use-value) all converge. Buildings then, serve as heuristic objects of historical accumulation, whose concepts, contexts, and components can be disentangled and identified as the constituent parts of a complex and contradictory history of aesthetics in Modernity.‍‍‍‍ The American Artifact In the the period directly following World War I in the United States, housing shortages caused by post-war recession were compounded by a lack of housing construction. Faced with a residential landscape characterized by “decentralized, barely regulated, and poorly coordinated” conditions, the federal government (recently consolidated and centralized by the war) sought to reform the nation’s patchwork local mortgage lending patterns that had been established by the Laissez-Faire economics of 19th century agrarian America (Massey 23). Hoover mobilized home building capital through the Federal Reserve Banks, expanding and organizing mortgage lending on national level. Real estate groups formed across the nation and in Washington, capitalizing on the newly established market and coordinating extensive campaigns to promote home construction and ownership. Specifically, these campaigns were devoted to the proliferation of single-family detached dwellings. With the federal government facilitating mortgages to people that formerly could not afford them, and real estate groups such as the United States League of Local Building and Home Association aggressively marketing home ownership as “the safeguard of American liberties,” the American middle class is fortified as an essential feature of the United States in 20th century: the democratic political state par excellence.The attitudes and values of the American middle class worker emerged out of the laborious domain of 19th century agricultural production and into the realm of citizenship with “a sense of dignity in belonging to the social order” (Massey 31). This idealization of home ownership as a road to self-affirmation is in fact a reification of Marxist aesthetic ideology. It is in the early 20th century American home that “the perfection of the idealism of the state [is] at the same time the perfection of the materialism of civil society.” The home, as a shared material interest between the civic individual and the state, collapses use-value and exchange-value into a total subject-affirming object. Through local citizenship, the home and its ownership resist the commodification of the built environment through supplanting the ubiquity of ground rent. Work is conceptualized not as necessary labor for earning rent money, but rather as something that leads to the ownership of the home as an immediately tangible material artifact. It is this artifact which affirms the human’s capacities and powers of production, and leads ultimately to the recovery of sensuous consciousness which is the basis of Marxist aesthetic ideology (Marxist Sublime 197). In this case, aesthetics emerges as a consequence of economics. That is, the liberalized economic impetus in post WWI America–which was initiated to reform agrarian Laissez-Faire economics–produced out of its housing policy an aesthetic ideal built upon the home as an artifact which confirms the laboring body. This phenomenon, whereby economics (money) produces the aesthetic artifact (the home, housing, the built environment), is in fact reversible, and can be illustrated in interwar Britain, where Keynes alternative treatment of the Laissez-Faire state results in a radically unique configuration of money, the built environment, the subject, and aesthetics.‍‍Keynesian AestheticsKeynes–as Britain’s foremost economist and major influencer of late capitalist economics–states in his 1925 "Essays on Persuasion":How can I adopt a creed which, preferring the mud to the fish, exalts the boorish proletariat above the bourgeois and the intelligentsia who, with whatever faults, are the quality in life and surely carry the seeds of all human advancement.‍In direct opposition to Marx’s ideology, Keynes rejects “work” and its associated materiality, arguing instead that “aesthetic refinement essentially requires a life of leisure and contemplation unburdened by the harries of toil” (Dutta 243). The ways in which this aesthetic come to bear upon his economic theory can be most explicitly identified 11 years later in his canonical book The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, in which he identifies “the propensity to consume” as an essential element to maintaining economic output, maintaining that “spontaneous optimism… and prospects of investments” ensure a diverse, healthy and organically oscillating market. This sense of excess, and emphasis on exchange-value, is a consistent cross-section through Keynes career, where he positions “the aesthetic [as] an exceptional and paradigmatic instance of the motivational forces that drive economic behavior” (Dutta 242).Within this inverse milieu of aesthetics producing economics, the built environment seeks to recover the solidarity of the subject through the public arts, but more specifically the architecture that facilitates art as a sort of social savior. He sharpens this position in his 1936 article Art and the State: “Architecture is the most public of the arts, the least private in its manifestations and the best suited to give form and body to civic pride and the sense of social unity.” He later expands on the benefits of foregrounding aesthetics in economic theory:The life in [England] in the realm of the arts flows more strongly than for many a year. Our most significant discovery is the volume of popular demand. . . . But the lack of buildings is disastrous. The theatres, concert galleries, and galleries well suited to our purpose, taking the country as a whole, can be counted in a few minutes. That is where money will be wanted when in due time we turn to construct instead of to destroy. Nor will that expenditure be unproductive in financial terms. But we do have to equip, almost from the beginning, the material frame for the arts of civilization and delight. (Dutta 246)‍‍‍Elastic Aesthetics‍Architecture’s form, its relationship to the body, and the citizenship it promotes are therefore central to the aesthetic ideology of interwar economic policy in both the United States and Britain. However in the former, aesthetics emerge as the consequence of economics, whereas in the latter aesthetics in fact produce economics. This dualism of the aesthetic illustrates the degree to which its value, location, motivation, and consequence will shift in sync with reconfigurations in monetary and environmental parameters. This fickle tendency of the aesthetic–its ability to expand and contract with the ebbs and flow of money and the built environment–is in any case linked to the effort of the subject to recover the self through a conceptual restructuring of his or her positioning to spatio-economic circumstances. That is to say, with relationship to architecture, the amount of elasticity required by aesthetics to salvage the sensuous body is directly proportional to the magnitude of divergence between the use-value and exchange-value in any one building.‍Marx, Kant, and Late CapitalismFollowing the globalization of finance in 70s, the signifier (a building’s use-value) is finally disassociated completely from the signified (its exchange value). As this realm of exchange value becoming increasingly abstract, so too does the role of aesthetics in architecture. Consider, for example, Philip Johnson’s and John Burgee’s Penzoil Place (1976). In terms of Marxist aesthetics, the object which confirms the subject must carry within it the record of the subject’s capacities and power of production (Martin 95). Johnson’s Penzoil Place denies this object-subject affirmation through a process of threefold dematerialization. First, the ground upon is not conceptualized along the material properties of its soil, or any other sensuous quality, but rather as a plot containing an amount of “fictitious capital” within the milieu of speculation and revenue through ground rent. Furthermore, the plot as a unit of fictitious capital is replicated vertically, thereby multiplying its degree of “fictitious-ness” with every floor, as the process of replication marches opportunistically into the sky. Thirdly, this extrusion of floor slabs as commodity is wrapped in the curtain-wall, which with its reflectivity and lightness denies itself recognition as a singular commodity, eroding its own materiality and opting instead to become a symbol of the commodity that it contains: rentable office space. The cleavage between the building’s form and its content is a gross insult to Marx’s sense of aesthetics, but falls into a coincidentally and strangely parallel rhetoric with Kant’s aesthetics, which demand that the judgement of a form’s beauty be separated from its social or political “interests.” It could argued that Kant would in fact find Penzoil Place to be a fulfilling aesthetic experience, given that it acquired a universal acknowledgement of its beauty. However, where this full and valid Kantian aesthetic experience slips, is in the question of whether or not the the building contains any sort of teleological sense of “purposiveness.” This unique and peculiar qualifier put forth by Kant for what can be considered beautiful is polemic in that it asks us to identify something that is by its own nature nondescript (Eagleton 205). It effectively calls into question any statement of beauty, such that it vibrates with uncertainty within the supremely judicial realm of intuition. What is useful about the contradictions and questions contained between Kantian and Marxist aesthetics, is that they precisely outline the different faculties that we as architects use to judge, interpret, and ultimately produce buildings. It boils down to an ethical issue: does the social and political context within which a building sits come to bear upon its beauty? Architects and designers can–and do–oscillate endlessly between these value judgments, however simply being aware of them allows us to operate with greater dexterity and awareness, and understand our contemporary disciplinary landscape and phenomena. ‍Works Cited:Arindam Dutta, “Marginality and Metaengineering: Keynes and Arup” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 237-267.Chapter 8 (“The Marxist Sublime”) in Terry Eagleton, The Ideology of the Aesthetic (Blackwell Publishing, 1990): 196-233.Reinhart Koselleck and Michaela W. Richter, “Crisis,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 67/2 (April 2006): 357-400.Reinhold Martin, “Materiality: Mirrors” in Utopia’s Ghost: Architecture and Postmodernism, Again (University of Minnesota Press: 2010): 93-122.Jonathan Massey, “Risk and Regulation in the Financial Architecture of American Houses,” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 21-46

by PZ
The Plan or the Riot

From 958 to 1962, the forty-eight acre area of Boston known as the West End bares witness, at the hands of eminent domain, to the destruction of approximately 900 buildings, consisting of 2,000 families. At a rate of nearly 1.5 families per day, the City of Boston excavates this tenement district, razing to the ground a low-income, mixed race, high density neighborhood (112 families per acre) in favor of a “New Plan” which features mixed-use zoning and high-rise typologies attuned to the desires of a post-war middle-class America. The severity of this phenomenon, one of many such instances occurring in mid century American cities, has its origins in the early stages of the 20th century. As the scale and mutability of capital rapidly restructures metropolitan areas into landscapes of exchange-value and financial speculation, federal tax provisions–such as the federal corporate income tax of 1916–converge with the industrialist rhetoric of “progress” to produce the origins of an ethos that carry America through World War II and into the second half of the century on a continuous and tumultuous economic wave. Characterized by Frederic Jameson as “positively and negatively all at once… as catastrophe and progress all together… at one and the same time the best thing… and the worst,” capitalism finds within the paradigm of city planning a protagonist for perpetuating its insatiable thirst for profit: the myth of obsolescence. The planning and legal administrations of the country fortify the myth of obsolescence through totalizing provisions such as the American Public Health Associations Appraisal Method of Measuring the Quality of Housing. This method evaluates urban districts against “quantifiable” public health and sanitation criteria and synthesizes the results into a single omniscient numerical figure, which is then disseminated into the political sphere as a tool for the “busy public official,” allowing him to operate with same speed and ferocity of land-value speculation which drives the dynamic of the city. The reciprocity between the administrative realm of the city and its existing material conditions is obliterated by the capitalist phenomena of obsolescence: “What in effect had been in the 1920s an actuarial and political expedient for capitalist building owners became by midcentury a set of mythic beliefs, that short building lifespans characterized modernity and that the simple process of obsolescence underlay the dynamics of change in the modern built environment.” (Abramson 55)Conceptualizing the West End as a totality, at the moment of of its demolition, we witness a “wasteland of dirt, brick, and ghostly streets,” a whole that is in fact a void, produced by the processes of a myth (Abramson 61). The myth, as unique process for producing totality, is a supremely judicial realm of administration which structures the present only through the forces of its own impetus. It is a nomological structure which does require commensuration with topological actualities in order to crystallize into the present. In the case of the West End, the “New Plan” is a provision for totalization which reifies the myth of obsolescence, multiplying its moments of creative destruction, financial speculation–indeed the entire history of capitalism–with such pervasive explosiveness that any reciprocity between its own internal laws and the the existing condition of the city are obliterated. A caricature of this effect can be seen in Archizoom’s No-Stop City. Here, the Italian collective dissolve the limits of the totality, and releases the administrative city into infinity: “No-Stop City proposes a radicalization per absurdum of the industrial, consumer, and expansionist forces of the capitalist metropolis in the form of a continuous city with no attribute other than its infinite quantity”(Aureli 19).The boundary of the city is finally lifted, resulting in endless repetition of the elements of capitalism, effectively illustrating its demise and deflating its teleological sense of progress. If on the one hand, Archizoom elicits a suspicion of Modernity’s neutrality as a dangerous characteristic, Pedro Martínez Inclán’s adaption of CIAM’s Athens Charter illustrates its capacity for reciprocity. Inclán’s Codigo de urbanismo, simply “added, modified, and excised” the Athens charter to produce a constitution (Hyde 107). Whereas the “New Plan” of Boston’s West End appropriated Modernist planning as a way of perpetuating the myth of obsolescence, Inclán’s Codigo de urbanismo absorbed it as a constitutional decree. While both the myth and the constitution are used a modes of producing totality, the former seeks to validate its origin and historicity, while the latter “consists of a set of presuppositions asserted with a plain regard for their consequence” (Hyde 113). Inclán’s figuration of the city introduces thus sets forth the idea for a city which negotiates the specificity of place (topos) with an ideological definition of law (nomos). This potential for a toponomological totality, or the commensurable city, comes into focus with the Pilot Plan for Havana, which takes as its foundation the Codigo de urbanismo as developed by the firm Town Planning Associates (Sert + Weiner) from 1955-1958. The elements of this masterplan integrate various typologies with varying degrees of autonomy and historicity.Participating in the circulation between these three antecedents–the Law of the Indies, the Athens Charter, and the 1940 constitution–[Inclan’s Codigo de urbanismo] took on the presumption of a discursive binding between constitutions and architecture but absorbed as well the compound of modernism, history, and nationalism that they together represented (Hyde 107).Functioning with the concepts of apriorismo and Quoitismo, the design strategy both projects and extracts onto and from the city fabric. The architects maintained the Havana Vieja street layout established by the grid of the Law of the Indies, while introducing at its core a new slab and tower configurations. This synthesis can be seen to integrate the two canonical forms of urbanism of western civilization as defined by Aureli : the urbs and the polis. The polis as a new autonomous centrality for Havana–the contemporary core which offers density and typology configurations typical of Modernist planning–surrounded by the grid of the Law of the Indies. The maintenance of geometry of the original cuadra, however, is tempered by the introduction of a courtyard, which unfolds into the periphery of the city as a ubiquitous component, coming to structure housing typologies and unit/block/neighborhood hierarchy as an element championed by Sert as a sort of social condenser–as a place for the civic body to act out its collective conscious as a form of reciprocity and commensuration.This tendency of Modernism to deploy modular systems capable of resolving social values arises in 18th century planning as a response to riots which arose out of the revolutionary ethos endemic to European cities at that time. Riots and their relationship to the functioning of the city can be understood as the temporary recovery of an immediate relationship between the sensuous body and the totality within which it functions (i.e the total even of the riot). The division of labour as the essential framework which maintains bourgeois dominance, is for a moment collapsed into an experience of the intense affirmation of the ego, where the subject’s actions have, finally, a scrutable outcome within the larger framework of the city. Le Corbusier’s famous dictum “Architecture, or revolution” has palpable relevance to the relationship between the square and the riot.Within the context of the ideological plan and the riot as two divergent ways of overcoming crises, Benjamin’s theorizations of the 18th century bourgeois city contribute an alternative image of totality. In a field of dead histories, Benjamin purports that contemporary images can be grafted onto ruins, illuminating truths about the present. The grafting of these images is the act of making an idea, a collection of ideas creates a concept, which effectively groups phenomenon together in a critical and distinguishing way thus bringing about “the salvation of phenomena and the representation of ideas”(Eagleton 328). Benjamin’s totality is a network of emerging phenomena, erupting in reference to each other from the broken history of the bourgeois city and into the future. This moment of becoming is the present, a moment in which the phenomenon can’t be envisaged as one whole image, but rather a constellation of many small images, small ideas which must be actively conceptualized with relationship both to their individual histories and their emergent condition within the collective constellation of the present. Benjamin’s totality can’t be understood as a cross-section of the present, but rather as an evaluation of each element of the cross section which must be unpacked, traced back through its processes of permutation. In this way, each element in the constellation has a history that can be archaeologically viewed as it restructures, re-configures, and shifts in deep history. Through an understanding of each phenomenon’s deep structural history, the present can be accurately held in the mind as a constellation–a potential for figuring forth certain specific, yet still speculative futures.The city of the Captive Globe is an architecturalization of Benjamin’s constellation totality, drawing an analogy between the fragment of the constellation, and the archipelago. Koolhaas’s grid of archipelagos, each with a sub-stratum of generic sameness, has grafted upon it a contemporary image, giving the City a unique sense of emergent totality in the contemporary sense.‍‍Works CitedDaniel Abrahamson, “Boston’s West End: Urban Obsolescence in Mid-Twentieth Century America,” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 47-69.Timothy Hyde, “’Mejores Ciudades, Ciudadanos Mejores’: Law and Architecture in the Cuban Republic,” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 95-118.Chapter 12 (“The Marxist Rabbi”) in Terry Eagleton, The Ideology of the Aesthetic (Blackwell Publishing, 1990): 316-340.Pier Vittorio Aureli, “Toward the Archipelago,” in The Possibility of an Absolute Architecture (MIT Press: 2011): 1-46‍

by PZ
Vertigo as Veracity

"The aesthetic, which was once a kind of resolution, is now a scandalous impossibility."‍ - Terry Eagleton, “Art After Auschwitz”‍‍B Bracketing Modernity‍ Within the boom and bust cycles of affluence and crisis which regulate the phases of industrialization beginning in the 19th century, an object and its objecthood can no longer expect any sort of sanctity: it must choose either to endure the abusive cycles of various provisional meanings which will inevitably be imposed on it, or relinquish its status as an agent within the dynamic of development. It is this former strategy which Adorno reserves for art after Auschwitz, finding no impetus for its participation in a 20th century, post-genocide Europe. In an endless game of ying chasing yang, art for Adorno both resists and defines the realm of bourgeois capital with a tenacious dialectic instinct. Insofar as Adorno shares with Kant a philosophical binary structure mediated by aesthetics, these two philosophers allow for a symmetrical bracketing of the object of Modernity, where the former’s critical theory of society deflates once and for all the latter’s Enlightenment tendentiousness.Although both Kant and Adorno position aesthetics and bourgeois social practice as separate yet coexistent categories, Kant’s object of beauty maintains a privileged autonomy which supersedes in spontaneous commune the phenomenal world, while Adorno’s work of art is an implicitly linked specter which will never escape the reality to which it is tethered, an object which is both “centripetal and centrifugal together, a portrait of its own impossibility, living testimony to the fact that dissonance is the truth of harmony” (Eagleton 353). This tragedy, however, is counteracted by the magnified salvationary quality of its singular moments of redemption. The fact that a Francis Bacon triglyph now sells for $142.4 million dollars isn’t a testament to the degree of its commodification, but rather to the amplitude of its critical capacity, its alarming ability to articulate the absurd delirium of the market by participating with an intensity of disinterestedness that materializes events into blinding reflections.It is this reflexive yet neutral rendition of aesthetics, where “vertigo must serve as the index of veracity,” (Eagleton 358), that disenchants Kant’s state of enlightenment. Converging Kant’s mutually exclusive realms of the subject and the object into a cyclical vortex, authentic meaning reveals itself in art after WWII only in rarefied and unsolicited flashes, constellations of reflections in the smoke and mirrors environs which result when systems of representations which have lost their meaning. Tracing the aesthetic object back from this state of instability to its origins as the keystone of being, we observe how the rupture between subject and object come to define Modernity and the crisis of its objects.Technology of VandalismIt is with the French Revolution, which begins in 1789 (just 1 year after Kant publishes The Critique of Pure Reason), that vandalism emerges as a systematic mechanism for destabilizing objecthood. Following the overthrow of Louis XVI’s monarchy, architect and revolutionary Léon Dufourny explains the space of Paris directly following the Revolution as a sort of iconographic battlefield: “We receive complaints from all sides that the eyes of patriots are offended by the different monuments constructed by the despotism in the time of slavery and which certainly should not exist under the reign of liberty and equality” (Vidler 186). The extremity of this statement attests to the capacity of revolutionary politics to create not only a new way of governing, or behaving, but a new of of perceiving. The Revolution injects the residual material culture of the Ancien Régime with a personification of their monarchistic patrons — it is as if the ghost of Louis XVI lives on through the objects produced under his monarchy, reified by the revolutionaries through the same paranoia and sense of of vindication which sustained the Terror.Vandalism thus emerges as political solution to an aesthetic impasse. Described by Vidler as a “a ‘systematic act,’ one whose ramifications extended beyond the mere breaking or mutilation of a single object,” vandalism functions as a sort of technology: a solution for establishing dominion through a methodological subjugation of perceived threats within the environment. Just as technology in the more general sense can be understood as surmounting of nature and a stabilization of its forces, vandalism sublimates artefacts of the Ancien Régime into new objects, fashioning “didactic signs of the triumph over tyranny” into the steadfast material substrate of the new French Republic (Vidler 186) . Stones carried away in the aftermath of the Bastille’s destruction are sculpted into commemorative scale models of the event of its storming, and monuments are ordered by the Convention to be “constructed out of the fragments of royal tombs and statues… symbolizing the triumph of the French over despotism and superstition” (Vidler 187). It is in this way that the paradox of vandalism reveals itself as a conflation of creation and destruction, problematizing its category of technology as something more than the simple instruments of progression. This symptom of technology can in fact be traced back to cradle of civilization itself, where the agricultural practices overcome the instability of nature, setting the stage for the leap-frog relationship between technology and nature, where the former continuously increasing scale in an effort to overcome the latter’s mounting threat of catastrophe. Prior to the initiation of this cycle, the hunter-gatherer, foraging in the forest and subject to the ebb and flow of seasonal migratory patterns, seeks to stabilize his lifestyle and so cultivates seeds into crops of agriculture which in the surplus of their harvest produce exchange value as the foundation for western civilization. Out of this agricultural foundation various forms of technology proliferate, beginning with the projects such as the terracing of the banks of the Nile and the construction of temples of Nubia, and evolving eventually into the infrastructural jungles and globalized markets of the post-WWII era. Just as in late Modernity we see C>M>C’ become M>C>M’ (M-money, C-commodity), thereby placing money as the ends rather than the means, a similar inversion of causation between technology and nature can be posited. Instead of Nature producing Technology producing new Nature, we can speculate upon the possibility that Technology produces Nature produces new Technology. N>T>N’ becomes T>N>T’.(Re)Locating Value‍This re-positioning of technology as the end of society, rather than the means, will come to play a major role particularly in the 19th and 20th century myth of progress and technocratic obsessions. An example of this can be seen where warfare technology produces landscapes of ruin, which then necessitate the development of machines and infrastructures for reconstruction whose mechanisms are threaded into collective subjectivity and cultural identity: “The most advanced modern techniques, and the experience we have recently gained from the destructions of war, have changed nothing to what remains, fundamentally, a problem of principle… The transfer of any monument, as perfectly executed as it can be with the contemporary techniques, is still an imperfect solution” (Allais 203). This post-war perspective on the preservation of the things, expressed by Pietro Gazzola as one of the foremost international authorities of the subject at that time and lead preservationist for UNESCO’s campaign in Nubia, finds in the ruins of war an experience of gain, developing out of destruction a technical expertise for re-assembling the disassembled.This nature of thought–which breaches Adorno’s insistence that objects of value must resist the reconstruction of their identity following destruction–articulates an alternative but equally compelling reading on the identical/non-identical object dialectic. For Gazzola, the relocation of an object empties it of any authentic identity, emancipating it into a domain of free agency where any number of political or economic parameters (e.g. UNESCO), can pick it up and employ it in its systems of representations. Therefore for Gazzola cultural objects must seek to fortify their identity if they are to remain external to capitalist processes. If Adorno argues that the authentic object must reject an identity, then Allais illustrates how an object must maintain it, thus reintroducing the value of heritage and begging the question: how can an object without an identity maintain authenticity, if authenticity is about a mode of being which is faithful to its foundational origins?If Adorno insists that art remains implicitly dialectic and unrepresentable, it is exactly for this reason, to avoid having an identity and in doing so remain missing in action as systems of representations are manipulated, instrumentalized, and obfuscated by political and market forces: “…our civilization divines a mysterious transcendence in art and one of the still obscure sources of its unity…Your appeal is historic, not because it proposes to save the temples of Nubia, but because through it the first world civilizations publicly proclaims the world’s art as its indivisible heritage” (Allais 188). In Malraux’s description of the “transcendence” of art, he illustrates the ease with which it loses its sovereignty and how through simple appeal the entire contextual history of the Nubian temples is obliviated to proclamations of global value and international jurisdiction. From the outset UNESCO’s rhetoric instrumentalized the temple as “art” into its bureaucratic politics, a subtle distinction which ceases upon a certain “purity” of the ancient temple form. Removed from the circumstantial particularities of dynastic socioeconomics, the temples proffer to the bureaucrat of Modernity the purely formal characteristics of surface, materiality, and texture, qualities which Eagleton recognizes in Modern art as “borrowed from the technical, functional forms of a rationalized social order” (Eagleton 353). This affinity between the instruments of Modernity and and the typological form of the ancient temple in ruin was recognized by Le Corbusier at the Acropolis, and reappears in post-WWII Nubia as the basis for a campaign in international spatial politics. Abstractedness is thus a form of Thing-ness within rationalized social orders which “holds out against domination in its respect for the sensuous particular, but reveals itself again and again as an ideological ally of such oppression” (Eagleton 351). This phenomenon explains Malraux’s choice to categorize the temples as art, and not as architecture. Out of this seemingly minor detail, a role of authenticity can be scrutinized to to reveal a fundamental difference in the objecthood of art and architecture in Modernity. There is an awareness in Malraux’s statement of a relationship between mobility and authenticity, where in his critical suspension of the term architecture he acknowledges that the relocation of the temples as art objects does not necessarily undermine their status as authentic, whereas their relocation as architectural objects does. That is, he is aware of the problematization of authenticity posed by dislodging the temples from their foundational origins of place. By announcing the temples as art, Malraux avoids this issue but figures the temples into false pretenses, combining cultural discourse with political activism at the expense of an authentic objecthood.‍Marginal ValueUnderstanding the dissemination of temples in Nubia as a mode of design, we can configure a relationship where design stands as the axis of symmetry and datum of articulation between capital and art as two polarized and opposing realms. Like the storefront gallery wall, that which exists on the street-side functions along the lines of capital, while that which stands within the gallery functions only as an index of itself. It is in the processes of post-modern urban planning such as the making of a Modern market at Rungi, on the southern outskirts of Paris, where design ceases to act as a container which carves out a space for objects to exist in opposition to the the market forces of the city. Rather architecture succumbs to commodification, and in doing so synchronizes itself and what is contains to the exchange-value market and its systems of representations. Between the field conditions of scattered temples in Nubia, and the networked linkages of the French food industry, technologies of mobility articulate the regional spaces of the post-WWII global community into a myriad proliferation of forms of meaning which in the chaos of their multiplicity elicit polemic outcries from theorists such as Adorno and preservationists such as Gazallo. In Paris, the effort to remain globally competitive through the centralization and optimization of its food distribution industry results in novel forms of consumption frameworks and vast, marginalized distribution centers that “because of their peripheral location… did not need to be invested with the aesthetic qualities of earlier [buildings] that had occupied a place of pride in the center of growing cities” (Tenhoor 223). Through nationalized market optimization, the urban scale of the city of Paris confronts the functioning of regional resource networks, yielding a hinterland of infrastructural entrails as the collateral damage produced in the modernization of concentrically expanding metropolitan area of 12 million inhabitants. In an effort to bring additional value to this new junk space, tourism presents itself as a spin-off industry which promotes both mobility and consumption as the cornerstones of healthy post-modern market activity: “…as they planned the ZHL, the leaders of SAGAMARIS understood that they had to attend to the cultural needs of two primary groups: workers and tourists” (Tenhoor 228). This emphasis on tourism, found both in the development of the ZHL and the relocation in Nubia of “all the temples to an island near a tourist site,” signifies the shift of value in the object from use-value, to age-value, to exchange value. In the case of Les Halles, the original market’s use-value as a center for food distribution is compounded by the rhetoric of age-value, which emerges in response to the proposal of its destruction and elevates the structure to the status of an unintentional monument. This use-value, highest at the moment right before its destruction, is dismantled, reconfigured, and synthesized along the lines of market-driven exchange values and competitive capitalist ambitions. In the case of Nubia, their original use-value as tombs gives way to a inflated age-value in the face of regional flooding and soviet dam construction, driving the preservation campaign which ultimately funds the temples deconstruction and reconstitution as revenue-generating tourist destinations. As such, they simultaneously stand as both intentional and unintentional monuments: intentional in the sense of their original construction as colossal tombs to commemorate the greatness of ancient pharaohs, and unintentional as instruments monumentalized by UNESCO for their potential as symbols of altruistic foreign policy and icons for a new post-WWII concept of global heritage.Within these viscous exchanges of reality, art must crystallize and partially cure in a way that challenges the overall dynamic and prevents it from accelerate into a homogenous solution of textureless grey. Remaining critical, the architect must, in the words of Adorno, take measures to avoid “works that are in constant flux and have no unitary point of reference. For the many become too homogenous, too monotonous. too undifferentiated.” In a sense, negative dialectics manage to do so, as it ”provisionally configures” art as a certain category of thing which survives the horrific catharsis of Auschwitz by refusing to take on an identity in the systems of representations which emerge in its denouement. As destruction gives way once again to creation following WWII, the thing can only maintain value by excusing itself from the processes of rebuilding identity, a righteous self-pardoning in the aftermath of an event whose Final Solution was complete extinguishment. Like a POW who after years of being referred to by a string of arbitrary tattooed integers has forgot his or her name and has no desire to recover it, it is not accurate to say that art can not be, but rather that it can not be integrated.‍‍Works Cited‍Allais, Lucia “The Design of the Nubian Desert: Monuments, Mobility, and the Space of Global Culture” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 179-215.Eagleton, Terry, The Ideology of the Aesthetic (Blackwell Publishing, 1990): 341-365.TenHoor, Meredith. “Decree, Design, Exhibit, Consume: Making Modern Markets in France, 1953-1979” in Governing by Design: Architecture, Economy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century, by Aggregate (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012): 216-236.Vidler, Anthony “The Paradoxes of Vandalism,” in The Scenes of the Street and Other Essays (The Monacelli Press, 2011): 183-208.‍

by PZ