Intellectual Ventriloquism | On Semantics in Modern Architecture
Reapplications of Andrew Holder's Method of Analysis in "Notes on More"
This Substack is by David Perrine. I write about architecture, aesthetics, design theory, and philosophy. I share new posts bi-weekly. If you enjoy my work, please consider subscribing.
Intellectual Ventriloquism is the act of discussing one concept through the analysis of another. The intent is not to compare and contrast two ideas, but to use one idea as a mouthpiece, simply to build a better understanding of a seemingly unrelated topic. The first mention I’ve heard of this method of analysis was in Andrew Holder’s “Notes of More” published in Harvard GSD’s “Shelf Life” no. 43 — F/W 2016. In this essay, Holder discusses contemporary notions of “More” in architecture through the formal analysis of Rococo chapels and ornamentation. Holder mentions that the usefulness of this method is, in his opinion… up to interpretation?? — His specific wording was:
“Whether or not this attempt succeeds as something other than vague grandiosity depends on the credulity of the reader”.
This post will be my attempt at the same process, but we will be discussing the conceptual, semantic, and rhetorical qualities of Modern architecture through examples of Gothic architecture. I chose this application of his method because I had written compare and contrast essay on Modernist art museums and Gothic cathedrals while studying for my Bachelors degree in Architecture at The University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. I felt it was time to reexamine this topic under a new mode of analysis. I hope you find something interesting about this experiment beyond its vague grandiosity.
The value of this experiment lies in our collectively flawed interpretation of Modernist architecture. Many understand its large dogmatic following, but don’t understand the extent and which this dogma was defended. Modernist architecture also gets a good wrap in contemporary academia as being ‘human focused’ and attempting to solve societal issues using today’s technology. I think these ideas are simultaneously misleading and distracting, and that framing Modern architecture in terms of its more Gothic characteristics will help us to understand it more accurately. The primary argument made in this post is that modern architecture is first and foremost a rhetorical machine lacking any sense of aesthetic consideration. Speaking of these characteristics through gothic architecture will help the reader understand the weight at which this rhetoric was intended to communicate and should be taken seriously. Modernist architecture is the result of an anti-aesthetic, conceptual, economic, driven society. This is why most design-y architecture programs around the world study works of architecture before 1929 and after 1968 often ignoring what happened in-between.
As you read the following paragraphs about Gothic architecture, let you mind think of each points relation to the International Style and understand that the intent is to discuss the meanings of concepts of Modernist architecture through the Gothic.
Enjoy..
