Nihilism for the Money

The Treachery of Images, 1928, Rene Magritte

Until very recently, nihilism was just a cultural stand that made leftists look culturally elegant. Since 1989, nihilism has become the common ground for right and left wing intellectuals, especially in American and European Universities. In fact, John Gray affirms in his The Enlightenment's Wake (1995) that nihilism is Western's "only truly universal inheritance to humankind", and one of the main reasons why non-western cultures will take the lead in the global world.

In my "Arquitecturas virtuales" in Revista de Occidente (2002), I related Koolhaas's architectural approach to a precise political praxis that had more to do with marketing than art.

Some political analysts consider now as postmodernist the right wing strategy of twisting the meaning of language to impose their ideas: "regulation is bailout" is the new one that tries to stop Obama's financial reform. The best example of the deconstruction of language for the money is Frank Luntz's Memo to kill the bill. The thing is that as a media strategy it really works: the lie of mass destruction weapons allowed already the huge business of the Iraq war. That was another initiative to take the money away from tax payers. Paul Krugman calls it the "black is white strategy".

PD (30/04/2010):

On the 28th Obama gave a strait answer to what I have called "Nihilism for the money". After saying that this crisis is not a cyclical one he responded to the "White is Black, and Up is Down" strategy. The three points of Obama's Wall Street Reform are:

1. Protection to consumers
2. End of bailouts
   
3. Financial Transparency

Have a look at the video:

The Roaring Nineties in Architecture

In his book The Roaring Nineties professor Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize of Economy 2001, compares current situation (in 2003) to the time that drove the world into the Great Depression. Those days produced excesses in the economy and in architecture. It is true that at the same time the best modern architecture was built then (for example the Barcelona Pavilion and the Villa Savoye). In our times some virtual architecture is going to be considered an example of an "era of vulgarity and ambition" (read this article in the New York Times). Arup, the company that has built almost everyone of the frivolous and scandalous building of the recent “starchitecture” considers a rectification is on its way because of the financial crisis:

“One thing that has slightly disappointed me in the broad architectural world of late, and I think the difficult financial situation we all find ourselves in is going to improve this, is that I think some architecture became quite frivolous, it was doing things that were slightly crazy, just because we could.”

Philip Dilley, Chairman Arup

Nevertheless, there are some other critics who do defend the Star System leaning on a sort of architectural version of the "Trickle-down" theory of the neoliberal economy: Spectacle-Architecture supposedly benefits everybody as "it has opened up possibilities for the young and lesser known". Isn't that interesting?

Temporary and permanent architecture

French Communist Party Headquaters, Paris, 1972. Oscar Niemeyer

Deconstruction is unbeatable in terms of spectacle.

The video below is on the ZHA 2007 Serpentine Gallery Pavilion in London, and it shows the construction process of such a clever devise. The result could not be more appealing. Koolhaas , Ghery and Liebeskind have done theirs with similar striking results.

For permanent wrap surface buildings, I mean real (not virtual) architecture, Oscar Niemeyer is still the unbeatable one, as his Paris building demonstrates. The picture was taken few weeks ago thanks to Monsieur Benoit kindness.

Plastic, plasticity and architecture

Through Archinet I got the news: Zaha on shoes. From an strict formalistic point of view, the versatility of a form is inversely proportional to its artisticity: in a world of commodities pure form serves specially as a “mute critique” to that state of the art (Adorno). From this point of view, to be really artistic, a shoe-work-of-art should be a commercial failure (uuh?). On the other hand, the incursion of deconstruction in industrial design could be interpreted as a return, as almost all it has produced in architecture are but beautiful objects out of scale, out of the scale of the city, out of the scale of the inhabitants, out of scale of the use.

The venture between Melissa and Zaha Hadid is mixing plasticity and plastic with a very profitable horizon, no doubt. The video is interesting as it shows that in the end it is digital technology what makes this new trend of sculpture possible. As a matter of fact, deconstruction could be re-named as de-scaling. By the way, Patxi Mangado is going to be next Eero Saarinen Visiting Professor at Yale, the position Hadid has just left, and he has said they are opposite as architects (here is the article in Spanish)