Architecture as Critical Framework A Review of Manfredo Tafuri's Architecture and Utopia Josh Conrad 2007 As a professor of architectural theory

and history at the University of Venice Manfredo Tafuri pu!lished Architecture and Utopia (Progetto e Utopia) in "#7$% it was translated into &n'lish in "#7() *e !ased the thesis on a "#+# essay written for the ,talian -ournal Contropiano. ,n the preface Tafuri descri!es the te.t as a rereadin' of /the history of 0odern architecture in the li'ht of 0ethods offered !y an ideolo'ical criticis0 understood in the strictest Mar.ist acceptance of the ter0)/ 1vii2) 3ut not only does he offer a historical account of socialist ideolo'ies fro0 the &nli'hten0ent to the neo4avant4'arde of his ti0e% 0ore i0portantly he pursues a criti5ue of the ways that architects have used and continue to use the 0ethods of ideolo'y and utopia to theori6e and practice in the city) Tafuri's central thesis traces the current of socialist ideolo'y fro0 literature and art into the concrete reality of architecture and ur!an plannin' analy6in' how and why this -u0p into liva!le space lost early 0odern art7s essential focus on a dyna0ic 8dise5uili!riu09:that is a shiftin' !alance !etween two ideolo'ical trends central to 0odernist thou'ht:a dise5uili!riu0 that the early twentieth century avant4'arde 0ove0ents presented as the focus of the socialist pro-ect) This pro-ect soon lost in the ur!an chaos of twentieth century capitalist develop0ent posited the death of the o!-ect 1or !uildin'2 as a !earer of static 0eanin' insistin' instead on the a!ility of adaptive and dyna0ic syste0s of production that en'a'e the pu!lic% e0powerin' the people !y allowin' the0 to consu0e and produce their own o!-ects and spaces) Tafuri traces the relationship of the individual to the city !ac; to the &nli'hten0ent which saw the city as a forest) <au'ier description of the city as nature led to:accordin' to Tafuri: =iranesi's depictions of the city as 8colossal piece of bricolage convey>in'? nothin' !ut a self4 evident truth@ irrational and rational are no lon'er 0utually e.clusive) ) ) ) &ssentially it is the stru''le !etween architecture and the city !etween the de0and for order and the will to for0lessness the '&nli'hten0ent dialectic' ) ) ) order and chaos re'ularity and irre'ularity or'anic structure and the lac; of or'anic structure)9 1"+ 2"2 Aro0 these polarities Tafuri identifies two resultin' paths which later helped for0 the 0a-or currents of the twentieth century 0odern art 0ove0ents@ /those who search into the very !owels of reality in order to ;now and assi0ilate its values and wretchedness% and those who desire to 'o !eyond reality who want to construct ex novo new realities new values and new pu!lic sy0!ols)9 12B2 The for0er would evolve in Cada and Durrealis0 to descri!e the city !y 8enunciat>in'? apocalyptically its i00anent a!surdity9 and the latter would develop throu'h Ce Dti-l as 8a 0ethod of for0al control of the technolo'ical universe) 8 1#24#$2 Ene e0!raced chaos while the other espoused order !ut as Tafuri further e.plains !oth 8ended !y !eco0in')))0eans of control for plannin' 9 that is an orderin' and control of for0lessness and chaos) 1#$2 Aor Tafuri these a'itative avant4'arde 0ove0ents of the early 20th century includin' !ut not li0ited to Cu!is0 Auturis0 Constructivis0 Ce Dti-l Cada Durrealis0 and their 0any offshoots sou'ht a solution to the passivity of 3en-a0in7s flaneur and the !lasF attitude present in the alienation of the 0odern capitalist city) 1#22 ,n other words they sou'ht to sociali6e the &nli'hten0ent dialectic@ 8for0 is not sou'ht outside of chaos% it is sou'ht within it) ,t is order that confers si'nificance upon chaos and transfor0s it into value into 'li!erty)'/ 1#+2 Aor Tafuri the dialectic of order and chaos 0irrored the socialist dialectic of individual and collective) Aor the avant4'arde the solution was that in order to e0power and en'a'e the pu!lic art 0ust act 8as a 0odel of action)/ 1G#2 ,t had to e0!ody a new ideolo'y of wor; of production of process) 1(72 This ideolo'y was utopic !ut for Tafuri /to turn ideolo'y into utopia)))ideolo'y had to ne'ate itself as such !rea; its own crystalli6ed for0s and throw itself entirely into the 'construction of the future)'/ 1(02 And so for the avant4'arde this process of wor; was se0iolo'ical it forced the acceptance of 0eanin' as processual and dyna0ic rather than fi.ed) 1"(+2 Tafuri e.plains@ /the co0plete independence of the si'n and its 0anipulation are at the !ase not only of se0iolo'y and !ehavioral analysis !ut also of the passa'e of avant4'arde art into the real0s of production and pu!licity ) ) ) an ideolo'y of per0anent and pro'ra00ed

innovation/ 1"(+2 Their wor; was a!out chan'e a!out 0a;in' and doin' as !ein' and a!out the deconstruction of inherently outdated static values) The new ideolo'y thus ne'ated the o!-ect@ life was now not a!out 8o!-ects that were offered to -ud'0ent !ut a process to !e lived and used as such ) ) ) for0s were no lon'er 0eant to !e a!solute values !ut instead proposals for the or'ani6ation of collective life ) ) ) architecture su00oned the pu!lic to participate in its wor; of desi'n)/ 1"0"2 This was the ideolo'y of the 3auhaus which Tafuri e.plains reached into the pool of the avant4'arde and selected and co0!ined those approaches which were !est applica!le to the pro-ect of architecture and ur!anis0) The 3auhaus dedicated itself to the 8pro'ra00in' and planned reor'ani6ation of !uildin' production and of the city as a productive or'anis0)/ 1"002 Aor Tafuri the cul0ination of this 0ove0ent into ur!anis0 was <e Cor!usier's =lan for Al'iers in which 8the old Cas!ah the hills of Aort4l'&0pereur and the indentation of the coastline are ta;en up as 0aterial to !e reutili6ed actual ready-made objects on a 'i'antic scale)9 1"272 The new order of these o!-ects loo;s past their ori'inal si'nificance and creates a new unity a 8heroic co0position of violent tensions)9 1"2#2 And with this unity /<e Cor!usier's Al'iers i0poses a total involve0ent upon the pu!lic ) ) ) a critical reflective and intellectual participation)/ 1"2+ "$"2 3ut the reali6ation of the 0odern socialist pro-ect in the city did not ta;e hold) <e Cor!usier's plan was left for his archive and when ur!an desi'ners in Her0any and the Ietherlands actually had the proper connections with local and state authorities to e.peri0ent at that scale with settle0ent pro-ects a scale the avant4'arde theorists could only drea0 of wor;in' with the unity with the city that they e.pected did not for0) 8The city re0ained an a''re'ate of parts only 0ini0ally unified in its functionin') And even within the sin'le 'piece'44the wor;0an's settle0ent44the unification of 0ethods was 5uic;ly revealed to !e a 0eans to uncertain ends)/1""+2 ,n Tafuri's analysis of the reasons for this failure he notes that the lesson learned here should !e the understandin' that 8contradictions i0!alances and chaos typical of the conte0porary city are inevita!le 9 and that the 'reat ur!an dialectic of chaos and order that he descri!es throu'hout the !oo; refused to e.ist within the static e5uili!riu0s proposed !y the architectural 0anifestations of the 0odern avant4'arde 0ove0ent) 1"$#2 />T?he city of develop0ent does not accept 'e5uili!riu0s' within it/ 1"202 Architectural 0odernis0 failed here !ecause it tried to order chaos as a static value rather than allowin' it e.ist as a dyna0ic value) To e.plain this further Tafuri 0a;es reference to the plannin' efforts in A0erican cities at the ti0e of Jefferson's influence) As opposed to the duelin' currents of 0odern art that he descri!es earlier the A0erican trend in plannin' at the ti0e discovered that the chaos4order dialectic can !e addressed with the 8use of a re'ular networ; of arteries as a si0ple fle.i!le support for an ur!an structure to !e safe'uarded in its continual transfor0ation9 1$G2 *e calls this the ideolo'y of 8radical A0erica or rather the a0!i'uous conscience of A0erican intellectuals who ac;nowled'e the foundations of the de0ocratic syste0 while opposin' its concrete 0anifestations)/ 12+2 ,n this syste0 there is a reco'nition that there can !e a static order of principles !ut only when it allows the values of the individual within the structure to chan'e and interpret the structure as it wishes) This is what Tafuri understands as a syste0 of dyna0ic 8dise5uili!riu0 9 of which the architect is or'ani6er 0aintainer and critic) *e descri!es this throu'h the Russian theorist =reo!ra6ens;y who proposed a plan 8!ased e.plicitly on dyna0ic develop0ent on or'ani6ed dise5uili!riu0 on interventions that presuppose a continual revolution of 0ass production)/ 1"7$2 Tafuri e.plains further@ /,t is clear that the pro!le0 is here no lon'er purely that of the criteria of value) The 5uestion to which an advanced level of pro'ra00in' 0ust respond is /Jhat syste0s of values are 'enerally coherent and 'uarantee the possi!ility of adaptation and therefore of survivalK/ 1"7(2 The central pro!le0 that Tafuri reco'ni6es as inherent in the failures of 0odern socialist ur!anis0 is that 8there cannot !e founded a class aesthetic art or architecture !ut only a class criticis0 of the aesthetic of art of architecture and of the city itself)9 1"7#2 ,t is especially true of architecture and ur!anis0 whose lo'istical ti0elines can span years or 0ore that without a constantly updated critical fra0ewor; 0anifestations of value into the reality of cities will inherently always !e outdated as well as co0pletely and 8su!li0inally useless 9 if not har0ful and re'ressive) /The reco'nition of the

uselessness of outworn instru0ents is only a first necessary step)/ 1"7"2 ,n the end Tafuri reco'ni6es that it was the intention of the avant4'arde all alon' to perpetually provo;e the pu!lic into a 0ore active and en'a'ed role in society throu'h this lesson@ that with the reco'nition of the essential a0!i'uity of value as e0powerin' i0a'ination% that is the a!ility of the pu!lic to deter0ine the trends 'a0es and values of a society) 1"$#2 To 0e it is this revelation that is 0ost useful today especially in understandin' the nature of our own dyna0ic and a'itative technolo'y4art 0ove0ents li;e Iew Media 1the 0oni;er of current di'ital and internet culture2 and its stru''le with the perils of solidification as a static discipline within cultural studies) The currents that would !eco0e Iew Media which followed the develop0ent of co0putin' in the latter half of the twentieth century used this vir'in technolo'y as a sand!o. for cultural e.peri0entation) The intention of the 0ove0ent was always this dyna0ic chaos of 0essy creativity and individual en'a'e0ent so as the technolo'y 0atures and as political4 econo0ic structures solidify the 8chaos 9 the avant4'arde within the 0ove0ent is forced to declare the field 8dead 9 0ovin' on to new 'round) Tafuri calls fro0 the "#70s for his thesis to !e received as a 8fra0ewor; of a hypothesis9 1.i2 for us to adapt to the realities of the avant4'arde 0ove0ents in our own ti0e and to their 0anifestations within the city) =erhaps we can use Tafuri's fra0ewor; concept to !e'in to understand the i0portance of the avant4'arde today and how we can set up syste0s of architecture and ur!anis0 to satisfy its incessant need for dyna0ic access to new technolo'ies)