Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Eco Sign

    Uploaded by

    CarsonBaker
    34 views12 pages

    Original Title

    eco_sign

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    34 views12 pages

    Eco Sign

    Uploaded by

    CarsonBaker

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 12
    STRUCTURALISM fanres comfortable bjt, and moreove, ti in hs that isa objet her very old analogous, for instance, othe ancient ica) or tty term analagone to cera American instutios sich athe dv in tae, ia which one cas EC ‘simultaneously enjoy the film, the cat, the food and the freshness of the night UMBERTO ECO 2), Fre by allording its vistos whol poiypay of pleasures fos eh nological wonder to haute cuisine, including the panorama, the Tower ultim- a ately reunites with he eet action ofall major man aes stay, ‘The Tower can liven tell one can dictate eat there, abuewe they, understand there, marvel here, shop theres as onan ocean ler (anather smyth objec that ets chlden dreaming) one can fel oneself cua mn he world and yt the owner of word lealiaa semotiian Umberto Ezo (b. 1932) i thinker of great vesatlty, whose ‘areres span ffom the mediaeval word of aesthetic theory vo conterpurant debates about semioiogy, and wiose publistions addres topes x» diverse a tie {esthencs of Thomas Aguinas andthe sociology of dns, He ales well Know fo 1s flcional wring which siformed by his academic work ‘Ar a semiotkian Eco adopts middle ground with regard ty language, aod avoids an understanding of language as ether univocal or detersing to infinite easing. He therefore develope a model ofan ideal reader alert to the politica ‘of language, if not o the infinite possibilities of language. Eoo bases his semi. theory on codes. He draws the distinction between specie and penetal code» where speci codes refer to the language codes of partiular lnguspes llc ener Codes ceferco the structure of language a8 whole. At the sane ime Ps stresses that codes must be viewed within their cltural content Thus he attoduces 4grain Healy ad + wpa nnn to 40 suarwite bevy eta Andertandiog of language In his article ‘Function and Sign: Semiotics of Architecrute’ Fev applic ho ener semiotic theory to he question of architecture and the built coviromsacn, Architecture, Eco notes, presents 4 special cate ts is ofc intended ho he ‘primarily funcional and for to to be communicative. Nuaethelesn,aechiteture oes function asa form of mass communication. Eco draws the distinction betes) {he denotaive andthe connotative. He therefore distinguabes between the primers fencvon~ arches a ucional oct an the secondary funtion © ch tecture as symbolic object. He nots that in both cateyories thete Is potential for se, recoveries and subsututions. Eco concludes that architects must dence structures for variable primary functions and open secondary function ln the extract How an Exposition Expose Ise Eco applies this theory tothe sores oie 90 ie Word Fa Sach epost ohare ps ‘exereme examples, in that che pranary function ofthe pavilions is minim whe their econdaty function is exaggerated. The pavilions serve les ay funcional buildings than as symbols ofthe values ofthe ational culture. co STRUCTURALISM FUNCTION AND SIGN: THE SEMIOTICS OF ARCHITECTURE SEMIOTICS AND ARCHITECTURE U semiotics, beyond being the ence of recognized systems of signs, is realy to bea science studying all cultural phenomena asi they were systems of sige — ‘om the hypothesis chat all cultural phenomena ae, in reality, systems of sgao, ‘or that culture canbe understood as communication ~ then one ofthe feds io which it will undoubtedly find self mos challenged is tat of architecture {should be noted that the term architecture wll be used in a broad sense hete indicating phenomena of industrial design and urban design as well as phenomena of architecture proper. (We will leave aside, howeves, the question ‘of whether our notions on these phenomena would be applicable ta any type of design producing thres-dimensional constructions destined to permit the fulfiment of some function connected with life m society, + detiniion that would embrace the design o clothing, insofar as clothing i culeuralized snd ‘means of participating in society, and even the design of food, not at the Production of something forthe individual's nourishment, but insofar 3 it involves the construction of contexts that have socal functions and symbolic onnotations, such as particular menus, the acessories of a meal ct, a definition thar would be understood to exclude, on the other hand, the Production of three-dimensional objects destined primarily to be contem= plated rather than tilized in society, such as works of art) ‘Why is architecture a parcula challenge to semuotis? Fist ofall because spparendy most architectural objects donot commumicate (and are not designed to communicate), but function. No one can doubt that + roof funda mentaly serves cover, and a glass to hold liquids in such a way that one can ‘hen easly drink ther, Indeed this is 0 obviously and unquestionably the case 3 it might seem perverse to insist upon seeing as an act of communication Something that is so well, and so easly, characterized as a posnbiity of fenction. Une ofthe fist questions for semiotics to face, then if i ams to Provide keys to the cultural phenomena inthis fed, whether iis posible to {interpret functions as having something to do with communication, and the Point of cis chat seting functions from the semiots pont of view might pect ‘one to understand and define them betes, precisely as functions, and thereby to discover other types of functionality, which are just as esenal but which » straight functionalist interpretation Keeps one from perceiving ARCHITECTURE AS COMMUNICATION AA phenomenological consideration of our celationship with architectural ‘objects tellus that we commonly do experience architecture as commun ‘cation, even while rexognzing its functionality. ‘Let us imagine the point of view of the man who started the history of achitecture Sel‘all wonder and ferocity’ (to use Vico'’s phrase), driven by cold and rain and following the example of some animal or obeying an impulse in which instinct and reasoning are mixed in a confused way, this hypothetical FUNCTION AND SIGN _ Some Age man takes shelter in teva im sue ole nthe sie of ‘ma cave, Shelteed iow the wind and cain, he examines the cave that shit him, by daylight or by the light of a fie (we will assume he has ally discovered fie). He notes the amplitude of the vault, and understand thn 36 the limit ofan ouside space, which swith its wind and ain) cut uff. and as he laeginning of am inside space, which is likely to eveke in hin seve nostalgia forthe womb, imbue him with feelings of protestion, and ap imprecise, and ambiguous co hum, sen under splay of shadow and light Once the storm is over, he might leave the cave and reconsider it from the outsides here he would note che entryway as “hole that permits passage tthe bide snd the entrance would recall to his mind the image ofthe inside: nsaunc hole, covering vault, walls (or continuous wall of cock) surrounding a space within, ‘Thus an ‘idea of the cave" cakes shape, which is useful atleast as 4 micawnic device, enabling im co chink of che eave later on as a pussble objective i sae orang but icaso enables him to eesognze in another cave the sam puna, of beter found in thefts one. Atthe second cave he ties, che lea uf thi ave ‘issoon replaced by the idea of ave tout court ~a model. 2 type, wonaething that does nor exist concretely but onthe bass of which he cau recognize a cenain

    You might also like