Architecture and Photography.

A study of the relationship between presentation and representation

Summary

Scope of approach and organisation Is it possible to capture, translate and transmit architectural experience via representations? How do you photograph architecture? How has it been done throughout history and what kinds of (re)constructions are you creating when you photograph or later on read a photograph of architecture? My Ph.D. dissertation: Architecture and Photography. A study of the relationship between presentation and representation uses these questions as its point of departure. It is a general assumption that the architectural experience is bound to the architectural work and to the direct encounter with it. The experience is bound to the subjects immediate association with the work its here and now. For that exact same reason the experience can neither be copied nor reproduced. Yet, despite this assumption we often base our whole understanding and knowledge of architectural works solely on the reading of representations. During the 20th century photography more than any other technique of representation has become a decisive factor for our relationship with and understanding of architecture. Architects have always used representations. They have formed part in the actual design processes as generating tools as well as communicative statements in subsequent situations of propagation. For that same reason the arrival of new techniques of representation throughout history has had a crucial influence on the work of the architect and thereby also on the design of the built architecture. At the same time the propagation and dissemination of architecture via representations have been of importance to the development of the notion of architecture and the architectural

discourse.

The

many

different

applications

of

architectural

photography are put into perspective by this dissertation. This is done with material from the emergence of photography and upwards. The dissertation also examines a photographic genre and a discursive field that has hardly been theorized. Although some architectural theorists have been concerned with the meaning of architectural photography to the development of (our notion of) architecture and the architectural discourse, so far there have been no critical examinations and presentations of architectural photography (per se) its ontology, its development, its changing roles, functions, means, meanings, influences and strategies, its codes and connotations, its senders and recipients, etc. So far there has been no critical examination of the historiography of architectural photography and its construction as a literary concept. Also there has been no critical examination of the architectural photographer and his relationship to architecture and photography respectively. It is this material that the dissertation intends to analyse. The readings of this dissertation, which traverse and reappraise the socalled conventional high-modern history of architectural photography, can be understood as a critical comment to the existing historiography of architectural photography. It can also be read as an indirect critique of the so-called conventional high-modern historiography of architecture. In most conventional histories of architecture there are no considerations for the meaning of various aspects of propagation for architecture and the notion of architecture. In this respect the dissertation can be read as one of more counter-histories that have been written since the 1980s. Understanding that histories are not stable, but on the contrary change and therefore constantly have to be reread, this dissertation can be regarded as a supplement to the existing histories of architectural photography (or attempts to these) and theoretical books on architecture and photography. The dissertation consists of a range of historical and thematic downstrokes, from which I present the relationship between architecture and photography from various angles. Thus, the presentations view architecture, photography and architectural

photography from a rather different perspective (non-linear) than the conventional histories of architectural photography. This gives rise to a number of re-readings of key works, concepts, models or figures from within the historiography of photography and/or the historiography of architecture. In this respect the presentations of the dissertation pose a discursive relationship to the existing discourse(s). It is one of the central tenets of this dissertation and a leitmotif throughout the whole text - that a dynamic relationship exists between architecture and photography, enabling the two media to place each other in perspective in a unique way. Photography that mimes the pointing out and framing of architecture in the same way as architecture mimes the pointing out and framing of photography is the media-specific theme that runs like a main thread or meta-text through the whole dissertation. In that sense photography is a self-reflexive reading tool a lens that is pointed at architecture just like architecture is a self-reflexive tool pointed at photography. The dissertation argues that photography can talk about architecture and that architecture can talk about photography in ways that can lead us to new understandings of both media, their historiography and the collective third which is also architectural photography. Thus, the intention of this dissertation is also to expose and thematize this relationship.

Disposition The dissertation consists of fourteen chapters that have been divided into three sections Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3. The first and prefatory section outlines the theme of the dissertation. At the same time the text offers a literature review and a chapter which looks at some of the mechanisms that organise the printed mass media and its use of imagery. Part 1 examines the conventional function of architectural photography. In light of this, the ruptures, which currently take place within the genre, are identified. Part 2 and Part 3 are reserved the readings of the architectural photography, the architectural photographs management of architecture, and the dynamic relationship which apparently exists between architecture and

photography. With a point of departure in the meaning-forming concepts, codes and connotations of the discourse or discourses Part 2 and Part 3 carry out a retroactive reading of the history/histories of architectural photography and the photo-aesthetic strategies and modes of operation of architectural photography. The reading or the readings which as previously stated perform an incision through early to present-day photography are rooted in analyses of actual cases which act as examples in connection with the presentations of the text. By using the term case is understood that I focus on a particular authorship, project, photograph (work), or a particular series of photos. The dissertation embraces a large number of illustrations. Many photographs are taken and signed by famous photographers whose names are inscribed in the discourse of photography and/or architecture. Some are taken by obscure photographers whose names are anonymous. Every picture is famous or well-known, however. All of the photographs have been exposed repeatedly in the printed media and they have all played an important role in the construction of our notion(s) of what architecture and architectural photography is or can be.

Chapter 1-14 Chapter 1, Cybervisuality and Tourism the opening scene of the dissertation introduces many of the themes of the dissertation. It presents the reader with a current exemplification of the mediation of architecture. Today the architectural experience of a famous building or a prominent destination landmark often includes its own simulation. The chapter asserts that the virtual dimension and the massive mass-mediation of architecture have changed our conception of and expectation to architecture and the perception of architecture. Chapter 2, Visibility or Invisibility in the Media. The Construction of a Notion of Architecture and an Architectural Discourse examines some of the conditions that might be of pivotal significance if an architectural photograph is to be exposed at all in the media. The chapter looks at the power and the strategies of the media. It argues

that disappearance from the editorial horizon effaces a project and its architect from the collective consciousness. Chapter 3, Architectural Photography. An Overlooked Genre within the Conventional Historiography of Photography. (A literature review) focuses on the existing historiography of architectural photography and the construction of architectural photography as a discursive concept in literature. The chapter examines the construction and deconstruction of some of the many myths that exist or have existed about photography. It concludes that architectural photography is a marginalised and overlooked genre in the historiography of photography and that it is normally categorized as so-called documentary photography. Chapter 4, De-contextualization and Cross-overs. OMA and Prada deals with the architectural photography of today. Often it can be found in contexts with which it would not have been associated in previous times. The chapter argues that the emergence of new media and discourses, of which the architectural photography forms part of, has led to a break-down of the contextual framework that traditionally contributed with forming and defining it as a photographical genre. The chapter asks whether new applications and media contexts of architectural photography have expanded or lessened the effect of the genre and how this might have changed the notion of architecture and the architectural discourse. Chapter 5, Documentary Photography as Strategy. An Example: Candida Hfer takes it point of departure in a presentation of the constructed dichotomy between documentary photography and art photography - a context into which architectural photography from the outset on (1830s) was interpreted. The chapter addresses the discursive affiliations of architectural photography, and it falls out with the existing historiography which has traditionally categorized architectural photography as a sub-genre to documentary photography. It identifies photography as construction and it shows how documentary photography can perform as camouflage and strategy for so-called art photography or staged photography.

Chapter 6, Constructions. Diorama and Photography presents the potential affinity between photography and diorama. The chapter argues that photography might originate from an architectural structure, which on its own is an important institution in the extensive modernization and democratization of vision that culminated in the beginning of the 19th century. The presentations in chapter 7, The Optical Unconscious a Modern Vision. A Means of Alienation address the different discourses of truth of photography and architecture. The thematic downstroke of this chapter is on the optical unconscious a key concept in photography. The chapter defines surrealism as a discursive context for the optical unconscious and examines the interaction between surrealism and architecture and surrealism and architectural photography. Also, it argues that surrealism influenced modern architecture and its self-staging as architectural photography. The chapter confronts the so-called conventional high-modern history of architecture which does not discuss surrealism. In chapter 8, Souvenirs. Gnter Frg and the Barcelona Pavilion the presentations are carried on from The Optical Unconscious a Modern Vision. A Means of Alienation. In chapter 8 its focus has shifted, however. This gives rise to new and more (re)readings. The chapter thematizes architecture as always already mediated a sign in circulation and the chapter argues that the photograph is a fetish with no referent. The chapters 9 and 10 Window to the World. Eugne Atget and Paris Passages. The Image Without Qualities- offers a retrospect that draws attention to the genesis of the so-called modern photography. The presentations in these two chapters focus on dis-placement and decontextualization; two key concepts in both photography and architecture. They also investigate the discourses of truth within the two disciplines. The chapters argue that architectural photography is a variable an unstable concept and sign. Depending on its context and function it can change both genre and category.

The presentations in chapter 11 and 12 From Innocence to Seduction. Staged Architectural Photography and Mythologies. Julius Shulman and Case Study House # 22 - display the architectural photography of the post-war period. It found inspiration in pop culture, movies, art and advertising. The chapters address the discursive affiliations of architectural photography and its various discourses of truth. As in chapter 5, Documentary Photography as Strategy. An Example: Candida Hfer the presentations in these chapters wedge themselves into the constructed dichotomy between documentary photography and art photography of the so-called conventional high-modern history of photography. The chapters point out that architectural photography of the post-war period was indeed manipulated and staged. The concluding chapters 13 and 14 Signs in Circulation. The Imagery of OMA and Hectic Pictures. Hans Werlemann and Villa Dall Ava draw a picture of the current architectural photography and its many different but heterogeneous uses and meanings. The presentations focus on the territorialization of architecture and photography. The chapters display photography as strategy and (at times) a point of departure for readings and production of architecture. As previously mentioned, one of the key tenets of this dissertation is the mimetic relationship between architecture and photography: Photography that mimes the pointing out and framing of architecture in the same way as architecture mimes the pointing out and framing of photography. The terms of existence of architecture and photography seem to contrast each other. And yet or maybe exactly for that same reason the two media can place each other in perspective in a unique way. Architectural photography often indicates a number of significant similarities and coincidences between the two media. Both are space-organizing media. And architecture is represented as a mechanism which produces images. Architecture is both presentation and representation and in some architectural photographs the mediation of mediation or the representation of representation shows itself as a motif.

(Appendices embrace interviews with Alberto Prez-Gmez, Phyllis Lambert, Patrick Whitney, Greg Lynn, Form and Ole Scheeren, OMA)

Anne Elisabeth Toft Aarhus School of Architecture, Denmark