Reflective text: Bernard Tschumi

Project report: Architectural Theory: S. Y. B. Arch.

Roll no’s: 14- 26

No Architecture is without action, events, program

No Architecture is without violence

A relationship between a man and a structure remains the same no matter the style. Since
programs, actions and events remain constant.

Violence does not mean destruction here, simply a metaphor that the relationship between
a man and a structure, i.e. a building or a space. Is so intense that it is unavoidable and
fundamental.

No such Architecture that is less or more violent, relationships remain as they would be for
any kind of Architecture, be it modern or classical.

Thus, spaces qualify actions and actions qualify spaces. The question to be taken into
consideration is which of the one: actions (people) or spaces play a more dominant role.

Thus, the matter of interest for this discussion.

When spaces and events are independent one space is not accommodated for one
particular activity so the scope of that space is active and number of events can b performed
in it
At other times, architectural spaces and events can totally be interdependent and fully
condition each other's existence. The space is designed as per architect's view of user's
needs. this also reflects user's attitude by its design. in this the space is allotted to that
particular activity only.
The two relations of independence and interdependence of spaces n events- They exist
regardless of the prescriptive ideologies of modernism versus humanism and formalism and
functionalism.

About shifts happening in architecture. A space is designed for a specific function. Then the
function is shifted by changing the events happening there. If the changed events don't go
Reflective text: Bernard Tschumi
Project report: Architectural Theory: S. Y. B. Arch.

Roll no’s: 14- 26

with the architectural ambiance, then the disturbance starts. Some shifts are meaningless.
The vague use causes conflicts based on the experience one is going to go through. The
meaningless shifts have impacts on the quality of events happening in that space. Events
and space do not merge but affect each other. The type of event also gets affected by the
space. Architectural spaces and events have own rules. One depends on another, and both
shape each other's experience. The experience one gets through space is depended on the
type of events happening. Similarly, the experience one gets through an event is based on
how well the space is designed. If they don't abide the rules, architectural violence starts.
The shifts which are consciously done, enhance each other's experience.
The first type of violence is form versus form, which is to be called as formal violence, which
is a conflict between 2 objects.
The over exaggerated forms also are responsible for the differences happening.
The second one is programmatic violence which deals with the events, conflicts, happening
due to design and object workability.

If writers could manipulate the structure of stories in the same way as they twist vocabulary
and grammar, couldn't architects do the same, organizing the program in a similarly
objective, detached or imaginative way.
Conventional organization of spaces could be matched to the most surrealistically absurd
sets of activities or vice versa - the most intricate organization of spaces could accommodate
the everyday life of an average family.
"Far more important was understanding that the relation between program and building
could be either highly sympathetic and artificial.
As an exploration of the disjunction between expected form and expected use, they began a
series of projects opposing specific programs with particular, after conflict spaces.
Programmatic context versus urban typology, urban typology versus spatial experience,
spatial experience versus procedure and so on.

All in all, we understand how space and form, when dependent on one another, make a
bigger impact when actions, events and programs, and space are not independent on one
another.

END