Architecture as Borderline Condition: The logos of form beyond tectonic boundaries
The logos of form beyond tectonic boundaries | first thoughts
BY BEA MARTIN
In the architectural scenario, there is always an assumption of thresholds and limits.
Based on the hypothesis that limit is what sets the frontier of something that outside of itself will cease to exist and for that matter, allowing that something new start; my interest lies in the union of the space that ends with the one that begins — a no-man’s land of space and suspended time.
These in-between spaces and times are openings to information, transformation, and deformation which unlocks the limits creating an interconnection with what lies outside. This type of opening of the limit is explored by Spanish philosopher Eugenio Trías as a metaphor for being, by pondering the reality of limits — what he calls the borderline — and of being a limit and in relation to a limit. In the same line of though, the interaction between those spaces — outside, limits, inside — becomes key to an understanding of the architectural construct as borderline condition and the limit as a place in between. The concept of inhabiting the limit, on one side, questions the idea of architecture’s immovability, on the other, liberate us from restrictions, leading to the consequences of a limitless, unrestrained architecture. This would mean a re-definition of the dialogue between space, time and substance; how would an architecture that is no longer affected by its inherent constraints be perceived?
These set of articles considers what is before and after the limit and probes what may rest inside this threshold. To approach this borderline condition, the essay makes use of a longstanding philosophical issue: the subject-object problem; which is concerned with the analysis of human experience, and of what within experience is “subjective” and what is “objective”. Meaning, it will pursue a physical understanding of the limit as ‘object’, and it will explore how the concept of limit is applied to or used in as a ‘subject’. Consequently, the writings are organized under a twofold approach to limit: ‘physical-material’ and ‘perceived-nonmaterial’. Physical limit deals with the beginning and ending of materiality in architecture and attributes that foster the architectural device: morphé. The perceived limit refers to the idea of linkage, the connection of the two spaces, before and after, and the transforming into something: logos. It is with the methodological passage from what it is to what it becomes, that we can work a new discourse (logos) of the form (morphé) in architecture.
more later. . .