Pub Date : 2016-04-01DOI: 10.5040/9781474286992.ch-012
Rachel Kent
In this paper we address the idea of ‘legal but corrupt’ through a discussion of two cases: abuse scandals in the Irish Catholic Church and the financial services industry in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis. We identify two important dynamics that generated the scandals: that they were driven by strong and stable groups existing within a peculiar kind of ‘accountability space’ that we describe as ‘monastic’ and that those groups persisted with tacit or explicit support from the state. ‘Legal but corrupt’ is, we argue, a matter of insider incomprehension sustained by the ceding of sovereingty over some aspect of social or economic life.
{"title":"Getting away with it","authors":"Rachel Kent","doi":"10.5040/9781474286992.ch-012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474286992.ch-012","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we address the idea of ‘legal but corrupt’ through a discussion of two cases: abuse scandals in the Irish Catholic Church and the financial services industry in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis. We identify two important dynamics that generated the scandals: that they were driven by strong and stable groups existing within a peculiar kind of ‘accountability space’ that we describe as ‘monastic’ and that those groups persisted with tacit or explicit support from the state. ‘Legal but corrupt’ is, we argue, a matter of insider incomprehension sustained by the ceding of sovereingty over some aspect of social or economic life.","PeriodicalId":52044,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Art History","volume":"1 1","pages":"56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70529467","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2012-01-01DOI: 10.26686/wgtn.16985149.v1
Nichola Roberts
Historically, there have been two ways of perceiving space that have been considered opposed to one another and that have significant implications for the way in which architecture is understood. The first is real space, which relates to the direct, sensory and embodied perceptions of architecture as built. This space generates the symbolic meanings of architecture and is understood as our primary way of understanding space. The Second is the analytical, measured space of representation - the drawings and models architects make, which have historically been called the instrumental as they are instruments in the description of architecture. This work challenges that these are independent and oppositional ways of understanding space. I argue that this perceived separation perpetuates the notion of the instrumental and symbolic meanings of architecture to be held in a dichotomous relationship. The aim of this research is to reorient the instrumental and symbolic meanings of architecture toward a reciprocal relationship by examining their presence within both real and representational space. The research first explores the distinct characteristics of real and representational space that have perpetuated the notion they are distinct entities. Once these characteristics are identified, two central case studies explore ways in which they are translated through real and representational space in order to engender a more meaningful reciprocity. Referencing Michael Webb’s Temple Island (1966 - ongoing) and Guarino Guarini’s Santissima Sindone in Turin (1667-1694) as revealing examples, this thesis argues that the qualities of real and representational space are constantly permeating the assumed boundaries of each other, and that consequently, an architectural space exists between them. Indeed, this thesis aims to examine the existence of a metaphorical interval between a physical building, and its representation in drawings and modeling. This research proposes that pure instrumentality is an illusion, maintaining its legitimacy through a self-imposed autonomy. The research concludes in a design project that suggests a more complex form of inhabiting architecture may challenge the gap between real and representational space, and by extension the separation of the instrumental and symbolic meanings of architecture. It sets out to achieve this through an allegorical investigation exploring a more complex way to occupy architecture - where both real space and the space of representation can be occupied simultaneously. The design research seeks to dissolve the distinctions between how architecture is designed and represented, and how it is understood experientially as built. The thesis concludes that by collapsing the sensory, embodied complexities of real space, with the abstract, analytical characteristics of representational space, the instrumental and symbolic meanings of architecture can be understood in a reciprocal relationship, where one gives structure
从历史上看，有两种感知空间的方式被认为是相互对立的，这对理解建筑的方式有着重要的影响。第一个是真实的空间，它与建筑的直接、感官和具体化的感知有关。这个空间产生了建筑的象征意义，并被理解为我们理解空间的主要方式。第二种是分析性的、可测量的表征空间——建筑师制作的图纸和模型，它们在历史上被称为工具，因为它们是描述建筑的工具。这项工作挑战了这些理解空间的独立和对立的方式。我认为，这种可感知的分离使建筑的工具和象征意义的概念保持在一种二分关系中。本研究的目的是通过检查它们在真实空间和表征空间中的存在，将建筑的工具和象征意义重新定位为相互关系。该研究首先探讨了真实空间和表征空间的不同特征，这些特征使它们是不同实体的概念永久化。一旦确定了这些特征，两个中心案例研究探索了通过真实和表征空间转换这些特征的方式，以产生更有意义的互惠。引用Michael Webb的Temple Island(1966 -至今)和Guarino Guarini的Santissima Sindone in Turin(1667-1694)作为揭示性的例子，本文认为真实空间和表征空间的品质不断渗透到彼此的假设边界中，因此，建筑空间存在于它们之间。事实上，这篇论文旨在研究物理建筑之间的隐喻间隔的存在，以及它在图纸和模型中的表现。本研究提出，纯粹的工具性是一种幻觉，通过自我强加的自主性来维持其合法性。该研究在一个设计项目中得出结论，该项目表明，一种更复杂的居住建筑形式可能会挑战真实空间和具象空间之间的差距，并通过扩展将建筑的工具意义和象征意义分离开来。为了实现这一目标，建筑师进行了讽喻性的调查，探索了一种更复杂的方式来占领建筑——在这种方式下，真实空间和表征空间可以同时被占领。设计研究试图消除建筑设计和表现方式之间的差异，以及如何在经验上理解建筑。本文的结论是，通过将真实空间的感官、体现的复杂性与具象空间的抽象、分析特征相结合，建筑的工具性和象征性意义可以在一种相互关系中被理解，其中一方赋予另一方结构和意义。
{"title":"A Projective Site: Inhabiting the Metaphorical Interval between the Instrumental and Symbolic Meanings of Architecture","authors":"Nichola Roberts","doi":"10.26686/wgtn.16985149.v1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26686/wgtn.16985149.v1","url":null,"abstract":"Historically, there have been two ways of perceiving space that have been considered opposed to one another and that have significant implications for the way in which architecture is understood. The first is real space, which relates to the direct, sensory and embodied perceptions of architecture as built. This space generates the symbolic meanings of architecture and is understood as our primary way of understanding space. The Second is the analytical, measured space of representation - the drawings and models architects make, which have historically been called the instrumental as they are instruments in the description of architecture. This work challenges that these are independent and oppositional ways of understanding space. I argue that this perceived separation perpetuates the notion of the instrumental and symbolic meanings of architecture to be held in a dichotomous relationship. The aim of this research is to reorient the instrumental and symbolic meanings of architecture toward a reciprocal relationship by examining their presence within both real and representational space. The research first explores the distinct characteristics of real and representational space that have perpetuated the notion they are distinct entities. Once these characteristics are identified, two central case studies explore ways in which they are translated through real and representational space in order to engender a more meaningful reciprocity. Referencing Michael Webb’s Temple Island (1966 - ongoing) and Guarino Guarini’s Santissima Sindone in Turin (1667-1694) as revealing examples, this thesis argues that the qualities of real and representational space are constantly permeating the assumed boundaries of each other, and that consequently, an architectural space exists between them. Indeed, this thesis aims to examine the existence of a metaphorical interval between a physical building, and its representation in drawings and modeling. This research proposes that pure instrumentality is an illusion, maintaining its legitimacy through a self-imposed autonomy. The research concludes in a design project that suggests a more complex form of inhabiting architecture may challenge the gap between real and representational space, and by extension the separation of the instrumental and symbolic meanings of architecture. It sets out to achieve this through an allegorical investigation exploring a more complex way to occupy architecture - where both real space and the space of representation can be occupied simultaneously. The design research seeks to dissolve the distinctions between how architecture is designed and represented, and how it is understood experientially as built. The thesis concludes that by collapsing the sensory, embodied complexities of real space, with the abstract, analytical characteristics of representational space, the instrumental and symbolic meanings of architecture can be understood in a reciprocal relationship, where one gives structure","PeriodicalId":52044,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Art History","volume":"27 1","pages":"68-81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69071413","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：