{"title":"Archives: Building-in Time","authors":"Augustin Ioan","doi":"10.24193/diakrisis.2022.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The zero-moment of an architectural undertaking precedes and the final one postpones the conventional moments of building and demolition. This pre-usage of the material and of the site turn the ‘birth’ of the house into a rather vague moment. In the numerous makings there exist prior makings, and sites often appear to be palimpsests, layer upon layer, erasure upon erasure. This manner of approaching the question of the temporal ‘sponginess’ of architecture recalls the question concerning the beginnings of architecture. In this chain of fertile ‘blackouts’, the ‘origin’ of architecture ceases to be the inaugural moment still sought to this day: in a making there exist prior makings, and in an unmaking there endures the chance of future lives, at least in principle. Moreover, the question ‘when?’ deserves another, probably more fertile for the economy of this text: ‘For how long?’","PeriodicalId":413875,"journal":{"name":"Diakrisis Yearbook of Theology and Philosophy","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diakrisis Yearbook of Theology and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24193/diakrisis.2022.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The zero-moment of an architectural undertaking precedes and the final one postpones the conventional moments of building and demolition. This pre-usage of the material and of the site turn the ‘birth’ of the house into a rather vague moment. In the numerous makings there exist prior makings, and sites often appear to be palimpsests, layer upon layer, erasure upon erasure. This manner of approaching the question of the temporal ‘sponginess’ of architecture recalls the question concerning the beginnings of architecture. In this chain of fertile ‘blackouts’, the ‘origin’ of architecture ceases to be the inaugural moment still sought to this day: in a making there exist prior makings, and in an unmaking there endures the chance of future lives, at least in principle. Moreover, the question ‘when?’ deserves another, probably more fertile for the economy of this text: ‘For how long?’