http://www.astro.umd.edu/~avondale/extra/Humor/MiscellaneousHumor/TandemStory.html

A semester later and I now have a proper thesis proposal with a clear direction.  I’ve decided to study San Giovanni in Fonte  (aka. the Lateran Baptistery).  There has been a lot of speculative, non-invasive archeological research on the building subject.  However, the research has not left such realms. My proposal outlines a way of analyzing the building’s use, or perhaps reuse, of architectural elements through memory, thus tying this building an my thesis back into the discussion on Roman regulation of memory, spolia, and on the theological evolution of the rite of baptism.  2011 should be an interesting year.

Here is a link to my proposal if you feel inclined to read it: The Use of Memory in San Giovanni in Fonte. If you do, post your thoughts and feed back. I welcome it all.

[Re]oriented Design – tylerthayer.com – © 2010

Architect: I don’t get it. Why do you guys make so much money?

Doctor: We go to school for years longer than most people.

A: So do we.

D: We have to intern for years, working long hours and at low wages.

A: So do we.

D: We have to study long hours and pass these ridiculous exams to get licensed.

A: So do we.

D: Well, when we make mistakes people die.

A: Well yeah ONE AT A TIME!

**Side note: the video contains a little bit of profanity, not much but a bit.**

Lefebvre calls to the attention of the reader the contradictions of architectural actions solely of a capitalistic driven society; however, it seems that these should be more rightly considered paradoxes, or the implications of a path chosen rather than contradictions. His assumption that space contains the same value within the eyes of all people is misguided. Nonetheless, Lefebvre properly argues that “spatial practice destroys social practice; social practice destroys itself by means of spatial practice.” The point is proper in that it illuminates the implications of adopting an existing spatial practice; that the existence of former “property and production relations erase” and “shatter” global, thoughtful ideals of spatial prospect conceptions found in the dreams of the new society.

An abstract space loses its meaning outside of its own social constructs. This begins to fragment space, which is the degradation of the global space, the overall conception of a grand space. In the case of the typical urban space, the capitalist fragments the space in order to produce, to buy and sell. The space is altered within many different paradigms and many different global conceptions, thus the production of this space is reduced to a mere function of economics. Its meaning is found within the economic transfers, not within the social ideals.  Social green spaces are reduced and fragmented and given to capitalistic dreams of productivity. Lefebvre calls this a contradiction, but it is not necessarily that. It is an implication or a consequence. Capitalism seeks to produce value, generally at all costs, and this value should always produce, yet, as Lefebvre mentions, this decreases that which produces only enjoyment and is “unproductive.”  However, bureaucracy is conscious of this, making decisions based on a production economy, not in a social economy mindset.  Therefore, this is a conscious path of social destruction, not a contradiction; it is an implication of slicing up space, one that precedes and leads to the other.

Though I disagree with Lefebvre on his classification of the problem, his nuance of space between the global and the fragmentary argues a strong case for the enlightenment of societal changers.  A new society naturally requires and demands a new thought and typology of space.  This new spatial typology must, though, remove the old. This reveals the problem, which is practical in nature.  How can one create a new spatial identity that defines the social if that which was once consumer and production related still exists?  There are two basic options, adapt to what exists or start fresh from a blank slate. Since the later is not easily done, one must adapt, but this directly degrades the ideal found in the new social movement, and in many scenarios could destroy that movement. To become social, a place must sustain social space. Where it is fragmented, it must be healed and reunited. Here lies the problem, and the need.

[Re]oriented Design – tylerthayer.com – © 2010

The Arcades Project. Photo of Arcades in Paris.

Walter Benjamin was, in himself, the embodiment of the ‘flâneur’ as described in Part II of Baudelaire, or the Streets of Paris. Benjamin seems to argue that the things that one perceives are a ‘historically transient truth’ being ‘expressed concretely.’  Benjamin believes in concrete truth that reveals society’s ‘internal position,’ and further still the deepest parts of one’s soul and very being.  His argument, especially after his literary shift from 1934-35, finds its grounding in ‘Marxist terms.’  This seems, though, to put him at odds with capitalism, which always flavors his observations.  Nonetheless, Benjamin seems to have an affinity with the arcade, perceiving it as a socialite’s dream reality, a natural progression of society.

The advancements of construction technology (i.e. Iron construction) have created the arcade, a world within a world, a place of exuberant mercantile systems.  The arcades, to Benjamin, ‘were the precise material replica of the internal consciousness, or rather, the unconscious of the dreaming collective.’ To say this is to say that this is utterly a manifestation of the will of society, allowed by the advancements in technology. Furthermore, the typology of the arcade has been seen before, it is a street.  Within the culture of Paris and the invention of glass and iron, the natural progression of the street, for the merchants, was to create a place for the urbanite to inhabit at all times no matter the weather.  The street becomes a place about and for the pedestrian.

The idea of the ‘flâneur,’ the urban observer, and the arcade ushers in a new dimension to urban architecture, creating a sense of place oriented around the pedestrian observer.  From a Marxist viewpoint, this is the evolution of the domination of western society in Europe, but it also marks a progression in urban architecture.  The arcade is a mindful shift from an orientation to buildings and automobiles, to that of the pedestrian. The arcade brings about a new paradigm where the experience of the pedestrian is considered valuable.  This is important for the continuation of urban planning so as not to alienate the human scale in our own architectural creations.  The oddity is the fact that the arcade has become history, and modern society has left that typology and orientation in favor of the automobile in urban space.

This brings up a point of contention. The arcade was a concrete expression for the need of the urban pedestrian, a need of the market place in the urban environment.  If we see history as a concrete truth of a need, has this need diminished? With suburban sprawl the urban community did diminish and perhaps the need for such pedestrian minded urban planning with it.  In contemporary society, however, we see a shift back to an emphasis on the urban environment. This begs the question whether or not the absolute truth expressed in the arcade is transcendent through time to be truth with the increasing push towards a repopulation the urban place.

[Re]oriented Design – tylerthayer.com – © 2010

A week ago my pastor encouraged us [a group of crazy college kids] to really feast on the Word, and to develop a habit of getting in to it every day until our soul is happy in the Lord. He referenced several letters written by George Muller, all of which challenged the very right to call ourselves well read in the Word of God. Within this context, my pastor mentioned the typical college student’s tendency to latch on to practices while failing to truly embrace the principals over the practices they quickly grow to love. He then explained that as quickly as college students love one practice they essentially see the problem of legalism, and quickly over embrace a sense of hyper-grace and slip into a state of antinomianism.

Truly, the average college student is quite erratic in belief and behavior. Unfortunately, it only gets worse when in a large group, where the populous can indirectly create a false sense of what is moral and amoral. Though rooted in a message, book, or sermon the practice of embracing practices over principals is simply wrong and dangerous. At its very core it neglects the gospel.  Likewise, the one who abuses the theology of grace and despises all practice and indulges in lawlessness is also venturing off the road.

My pastor’s correction was quite wise and, I hope, a beneficial warning. Our goal should be to steer ourselves back to the center of the road by clinging to the cross of Christ and coming back, day after day, to scripture. It is only through scripture that we can possibly hope to know God and pursue righteous deeds. In light of this, I was inspired to write a blog-book of sorts, College Road.  It should be relatively short, about 18-25 posts throughout my final semester of my 5 year college career. I want to get to the core of the collegiate problem, reveal all its different guises, and most importantly help direct our gaze to the cross. I hope by the end we will be encouraged to live as Paul explained when he wrote the Corinthians, simply, “For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.”

by Tyler Thayer
Bound2Christ – boundtochrist.com – © 2010

[Re]oriented Design – tylerthayer.com – © 2009

[Re]oriented Design – tylerthayer.com – © 2009