A part from the Renaissance theory, four other kinds o f theories can been identified in terms o f their picture o f com position: Theories of figurative wholes suggesting that the designer chooses from a pre structured vocabulary o f wholes, (Arnheim). Theories suggesting that the designer chooses from possible com binatorial relations, (Hillier). Theories seeing composition as a set o f limitations on com binatorial
O r as o ften im p lied by C o lq u h o u n as a system o f so cial p u rp o ses. R o b in E v a n s . Ibid., p. 359.
Literature Review 1 0 5
possibilities, (M itchell^^^, Stiny, Steadman). Theories o f transform ation suggesting that the designer articulates relationships between higher and lower levels o f structure, through invariants and variants along a transformation, (Baker, Eisenman, Piaget).
A rnheim ’s, wholes are ‘compositional schem ata’ the designer starts his work with^^^. They are concepts o f hierarchical significance, selected from a vocabulary o f instances and manipulated to form complex patterns. They are m anufactured facts rather than facts constructed during a process. His description seems, thus, a description of wholes without a composition.
As H illier has suggested composition is characterised by ‘configurational intent’ This means that it deals w ith intentional interrelationships o f elem ents invoking a creative subject. A rchitecture is distinguished from buildings when there is evidence of a deliberate ‘abstract comparative thought’ applied to the organisation, construction and arrangem ent o f space aim ing at innovation rather than cultural reproduction^^
Thus, com position is not m ere com binatorial possibility. It is about the intentional application of ‘intellectual choice exercised in a field o f possibility’ and based on ‘general comparative knowledge of architectural forms and functions’. Architecture creates tensions between the different levels o f form as opposed to the vernacular buildings that create a correspondence between these levels. This tension generates am biguity that releases complex possibilities for m eaning ‘in m uch the sam e way as good poetry creates fields o f possibility m eaning rather than sim ple precise m eanings in the m anner o f everyday language’^^^.
Thus, M itchell’s, S tin y ’s and Steadm an’s em phasis on com binatorial possibility that derives layouts from a local level o f properties leaves composition with an aggregation of ‘graphic tokens’ and no human agency controlling their combinations.
This agency for H illier manipulates comparative knowledge of relations and creates a tension am ongst the different levels o f relations w ith an em phasis on the release o f possibility o f m eaning. H ow ever, although Hillier recognises a human agency at work, he sees com position in a state o f arrest. Thus, he looks at architecture as an end product when choice is exercised and rules are crystallised in the form o f a
M itc h e ll’s id e a a b o u t d e sig n p rim itiv e s o r d e sig n to k e n s se e m s a ls o in flu e n c e d by th e n o tio n o f fig u ra tiv e e n ti t ie s .
R u d o lf A rn h e im . ‘T o w a rd s a P sv ch o lo g v o f P e rc e p tio n ’. U n iv e rsity o f C a lifo rn ia P ress, 1966 p. 116. 2 3 0 Bill H i l li e r . ibid.
2 3 1 Bill H illie r. ‘S p e c ific a llv A rc h ite ctu ra l T h e o rv ’. H arvard A rc h ite ctu re R e v ie w , V ol. 9, 1993, p. 10. 2 3 2 Bill H illie r. ‘S eein g B u ild in g s: o r Is A rch itectu ral F orm M e a n in g le s s ? ’, u n p u b lis h ed p a p er, 1995.
Literature Review 1 0 6
known result. Nevertheless, fro m the point o f view o f composition the ways this end product is fo rm e d during the internal operations o f design is as much interesting as the product itself
C om position is not an activity w ith a known predeterm ined result. In H illier’s words it aim s at innovation rather than reproduction. Thus, the com posing architect does not have the result o f his creation as an arrested im age in his mind prior to its generation. If it was so there w ould be no innovation providing that what one knows prior to construction is an existing field o f realities, the field o f comparable knowledge, rather than the field of potentiality and architectural freedom.
An architect m ight have a general pre-intention of what he wants to achieve which m ight range from an arrangem ent o f configurations, to a process route uniting certain spatial events or a com bination of certain m aterials expressing certain abstract concepts. However, the realisation o f these intentions is processed through the developm ent o f systems of forms not known in advance and discovered during a construction process. This process takes these systems from one state to another, as Baker and M itchell show, revealing the field o f possibilities in which the designer exercises his choices. Thus, possibility, potentiality and freedom are activated and released through construction.
A sim ple concept like a square, for example, is not about structural relations only but also about the transform ations that leave these relations intact. A rotation or reflection will sustain a square. A stretch, though, will affect its angles and change it to another category of shape. The new shape has reflective symmetry only on the diagonal axes and rotational symmetry only on a 360° turn, (figure 1.3).
It is essential to understand the mechanism of transformation in order to understand what possibilities exist in the manipulation o f form and how certain changes affect form and meaning. A designer, thus, exercises choices not simply over combinations but over transformations that take rules from one state to another. The field o f possibility is a field of transform ations and not simply a field o f geom etrical relations. As the designer prefers one possibility over a set o f others the set o f possibilities gradually closes down bringing him closer to the final product.
In this the way, he clarifies the object o f his creation obtaining gradual knowledge o f its geom etrical rules. Thus, composition seems to be an intentional act in which the com posing mind gradually obtains know ledge about the object o f his creation. This know ledge is aided by transform ations th at are intentionally applied and represented on two or three dimensions through flat projection and modelling.
Besides, since projection is an incom plete medium o f a com position it is incom plete in transm itting inform ation not only about the final state o f the building as a whole but also about the building during its process o f genesis. Thus, it could be argued that even at the latest stages of design the knowledge a designer has o f a building he designs is based on properties constructed and represented on drawings.
Literature Review 1 0 7
A lthough at this stage the designer’s know ledge is closer to the actual event than an observ er’s knowledge, he has an incomplete knowledge of this event.
Considering the observer’s comprehension of a building as depending on the properties o f its genesis and this genesis as depending on a process o f transformation there seems to be an intrinsic relation between design and experience. If a building becom es know able by an observer through its rules o f transform ation, it becomes knowable by a designer through the same rules. Thus, an analysis based on transformation becomes an analysis that ties up composition and experience.
Therefore, analysis o f the ways the geometrical properties relate to the spatial properties has to offer access to the process o f genesis o f this relationship. The examination o f theories at this section seems to reaffirm that analysis should approach these issues fro m the p o in t o f view o f invariants along a transformation.
C O M P O S IT IO N , G E O M E T R Y A ND S P A C E
This discussion suggested also that com position is a creative act that arranges relations betw een the synchronous plane of geometry and the sequential plane o f space, (Rowe, Baker, Frankl, A rnheim ). Arnheim drawing an analogy with a play suggests that similalry to Shakespeare who uses a roundabout way to introduce the audience to the core o f the plot, the composing architect uses architectural vistas to introduce the observer to a geometrical core.
‘W hen a work based on linear succession narrates a story, it actually contains two sequences, that o f the event to be portrayed and the path o f disclosure. In a simple fairy tale the two coincide. The account duplicates the order o f the events. In more complex works the journey that the author prescribes for the spectator or reader may differ considerably from the objective sequence of the plot’^^^.
In architectural composition, the event to be portrayed is the building itself with its sequences o f spatial events encountered gradually as the viewer moves in space. The path o f disclosure is the order o f these events at the synchronous plane o f geometry. Composition, therefore, is not sim ply concerned with relations in the synchronous plane o f geometry as the classical theories implied. It is also concerned with the spatial sequences in which geometry is viewed in space. The analysis o f buildings by Le C orbusier and Botta is hoped to test this hypothesis.
‘F o r e x a m p le , in H a m le t th e in h ere n t se q u e n ce lead s fro m the m u rd e r o f th e k in g th ro u g h th e w e d d in g o f his q u e en an d b ro th e r to H a m le t’s d isc o v ery o f th e crim e, and so to th e end. T h e path o f d isc lo su re starts so m e w h e re in th e m id d le o f th e seq u en ce, and m o v es first b ack w ard and then fo rw ard . It p ro ceed s fro m th e p e rip h e ry o f th e p ro b le m to w a rd s its c en ter, in tro d u c in g first th e w atch m en , th en H a m le t’s frien d , then th e m y ste rio u s g h o s t’, R u d o lf A rn h e im . ‘A rt and V isual P e rc e p tio n ’. U niv ersity C a lifo rn ia P ress, 1974.p. 337.
Literature Review 1 0 8
G EOM ETRICAL UNITY AND INTELLIGIBILITY - (G eom etrical shapes, structure and representation)
For A rnheim the synchronous and the sequential plane can either coincide or they can have a more com plex relationship being different from each other. Rowe also pointed out that in Le Corbusier there is a tension between shallow and deep space. Nicolin, Zardini and T revisiol showed that in B otta the geom etrical relations are clearly portrayed in space allowing the unity of the volume to be visible in the interior. The hypothesis put forward at the end o f part one was that the tension between the two levels o f properties in Le C orbusier seems to be generated by a sim ultaneous em ploym ent and negation o f geom etrical rules. On the other hand, the correspondence between these properties in Botta is due to a geometrical unity characterising the building as a whole.
The notion o f geometrical unity and its effects in intelligibility seems to pervade alm ost all theories. For the R enaissance theory, unity identifies with a system which co-ordinates all elem ents under a single geom etrical axis or a com m ensurable ratio. For W ittkower, Sartoris, Colquhoun and von M oos it identifies with a simple geometrical shape. For Arnheim it refers to a geometrically sim ple whole. For Frankl and W offlin it refers to simple geometrical relations am ongst clearly identifiable components. For Eisenman and Baker it identifies with an archetypal solid that becomes distorted during construction. For H illier it refers to highly ordered patterns that establish sim ilar relations am ongst every elem ent in a configuration.
It seem s, thus, that geometrical unity is associated with an econom y that integrates the elem ents in a com position into a single system and makes it easily understood. This system leads usually to the perceptual isolation o f a simple symmetrical shape and its axis o f symmetry. As Evans pointed out this kind o f economy in architecture was not simply a device to integrate the components o f a building but a device to facilitate the drawing and visualisation of a building.
According to Phill Tabor symmetry was seen as the key to com position containing this inform ation- econom y argum ent in its favour^^^. From Durand and V iollet-Le-D uc to the G estalt theory and G ombrich, Tabor says, ‘symmetry implies redundancy of information: to look at one side tells us all we need to know about both sid es’. This confidence perm its us to focus on detail w ithout fear o f
‘W h en a g iv en area is b o u n d e d by ...sq u are, th ere is less p e rim ete r th an w h en by p a ralle lo g ram , and still less by ... a c irc le . ...It w ill be e v id e n t th a t a b u ild in g w ill be p ro p o rtio n a te ly less e x p e n s iv e , th e m o re s y m m e tric , re g u la r and sim p le it is ’. Jean N ich o las L u is D urand . P ecis des L eço n s d ’ A rc h ite ctu re D o n n e s a 1’ E co le R o v a le P o lv te c h n iq u e . P aris 1819, vol. 1, p. 7-8 , from Phill T ab o r . ‘F e a rfu l s v m m e trv ’. A rc h ite c tu ra l R e v ie w , M ay
Literature Review 1 0 9
m isunderstanding the w hole (w hich partly explains the devaluation o f detail in the sym m etric com positions of the Modern Movement)
The significance o f the perceptual isolation o f a sim ple configuration is discussed by Piaget in his distinction between perceptual and operational structures. He suggested that although both structures are im portant, the form er are subordinate to the latter. Hagen on the other hand proposed that there is no distinction between perceptual schem ata and invariants which form inform ative structures in the light. Stew art and Baker Golubitsky also pointed out that a simple shape is a group o f transformation and not a single image.
N evertheless, the persistence by which an arrested figure dominates ideas about intelligibility seem s to dem and a clarification of the relationship between this image and a structural pattern. H agen’s suggestion that geom etric shapes identify with the transform ation rules seems to offer a solution to the inherent dilem m as between structural and figurative concepts. ‘In geometry, the m appings, the transform ations them selves, are the elements o f the group. Do not be led to believe otherw ise by the classic whole- num ber system exam ple of group’
If a geometric shape like a circle is a group o f symmetries or transformations that leave it invariant, then it captures both structural and figurative aspects of its nature through its physical presence. If the rule is the set o f abstract properties then the physical aspect o f the circle carried through its contour, is both the em bodim ent and the representation of these properties.
Thus, a circle is a system based on rules that are represented on its physical contour. It is its nature of being both abstract and real, incorporeal and real, operational and representational that seems to be the cause of all confusion regarding the relationship between these extremes.
Evans has suggested that ‘in geometry geometrical figures are not the media, but in architectural design they are, since their task is to convey shape from one state to the another. In this sense they are ju st surely m edia as the inks with which they are draw n’. Evans seems to point exactly at the property of geom etrical shapes in composition to constitute and m ediate their structure. However, in both geometry