Читать книгу Architecture. Dialectic. Synthesis - - Страница 7

The developed understanding of architecture as second physicality is insufficient since the a man is irreducible to the body. Architecture fulfills the human desire for the fullness of being. After all, man is not only a body, but a conscious and self-conscious body, a spiritual being no less than a material one. As a thinking person, it is typical for a person to build a worldview, philosophy as a complete system of knowledge, beliefs and values. As a material being, man is characterized by the desire to realize and materialize his worldview and his philosophy, to translate it from the realm of meaning into the realm of being. Philosophy does not want to remain a pure mental construct, even if it is expressed on paper or in a painting, but it longs to be embodied, expressed in matter, materialized. Moreover, the worldview embodied and realized "in stone" turns out to be the shell, a kind of castle in which a person lives, and through the prism of which he perceives existence. In this regard, architecture turns out to be a model of the universe, a microcosm in which a person places himself not just as a place of protection from precipitation, but as a philosophical concept clothed in material forms and structures. And vice versa, philosophy can be viewed as the architecture of the mental world, and each philosophical concept can be viewed as a house in which its creator or admirer lives with his mind. Each piece of architecture can be considered as a worldview of the epoch expressed "in stone". The building of a great architect is similar to the philosophical work of an outstanding thinker. In connection with this mutual understanding of architecture in philosophy, and philosophy in architecture, Plato's thought is interesting. "When Plato builds his cosmology,– observes A. Losev, – he considers the material elements, together with their inherent design, as "building materials" for space (Tim. 69 a), which, obviously, is thought of here as a huge work of architectural art. Plato also tends to represent his Good, among other symbolic interpretations, in the form of a huge architectural work…"14. In their turn, on the basis of comparing the cosmos with an architectural work, some Christian saints showed the absurdity of atheism. So, St. John Chrysostom argues as follows: "There is no God. But if there is no foundation, how did the building appear? There is no creator of the house: how is the house built? There is no architect: who built the city?… There is no Creator: where does the world come from and how does it exist?" The same argument was formulated in an aphorism by D. S. Likhachev: "Consciousness precedes the materialization of ideas. God is a great Architect."

The importance of approaching architecture as a "worldview in stone" is confirmed by both ancient and modern architectural history. Architects of the twentieth century began their creative activity by putting forward concepts and manifestos, the ideas of which sometimes consciously and unconsciously turned out to be a resurrection of the old ideas of classical philosophers of Antiquity, the Middle Ages, and Modern times. So, functionalism was a kind of resurrection (albeit in a significantly distorted form) of Socrates' old idea of beauty as usefulness. L. Mies van der Rohe followed the principles of Descartes' rational method in his design15. This suggests that it is impossible to understand architecture without understanding its philosophical roots, and it is philosophical ideas that become the formative paradigms of architectural creativity.

This idea sounds even more vivid against the background of historical evidence of people's unwillingness to save on architecture. In ancient times, huge funds were allocated for architectural works, even if the state was not rich. Thus, the construction of magnificent pyramids and temples in Egypt, for which the pharaohs spared no expense, was one of the reasons for the depletion of the Egyptian state; Pericles devoted 80% of the state budget to the restoration of the Athenian Acropolis; in Rome, huge funds were spent on amphitheaters and the spectacles staged in them. "The stingy Vespasian built the world's greatest amphitheater… Except, perhaps, Tiberius, all the emperors, one might say, only competed in luxury, in splendor, in the size and variety of the spectacles they staged.… All these spectacles are a wonderful example of how it is impossible to explain any art form", including architectural one, in a vulgar economic way. 16 To this set of examples, we can add the phenomenon of skyscrapers, which, starting from 30-50 floors, are economically unprofitable17, which does not stop countries and companies from competing in physical highness.

Thus, the main role in explaining the architectural form is played by a person's worldview and world perception, and architecture can be defined as the materialization of a mentality. It should be noted that the materialization of ideology does not necessarily occur directly and im mediately as an implementation of the task set by the architect to express certain ideological principles, but it can be carried out indirectly. The "ideology in stone" can be fairly seen where, it would seem, everything is due to purely economic reasons. An illustrative example is the so-called "sleeping districts", serial houses that are built up on the outskirts of large Russian cities. On the one hand, their monotony is due to the haste in solving the housing problem caused by the influx of rural population into the cities. And at the same time, these "monotonous cells" express the Soviet ideology of "one comb" and the principle of "keep your head down."

Another common attempt to determine the architectural form is to explain it in terms of climatic conditions. The simplest definition of architecture says that it is a set of structures designed to protect humans from atmospheric phenomena. The need to take shelter in bad weather sometimes explains the very origin of architecture. Without denying the essential role of weather and climatic conditions in form generation, it should nevertheless be emphasized that it is not decisive either in the origin or in the development of architecture. Architecture would undoubtedly have arisen in such a hypothetical case if the climate and weather were favorable everywhere. After all, there are many buildings and structures (for example, religious ones), the appearance of which is in no way due to these factors. There is a well-known idea that if the Greeks had built a temple on Olympus, where it never rained, it would still have had a pediment. Rain causes only the sloping nature of the roof, but there are many specific options for sloping roofs. This means that when completing the temple with a roof with two symmetrical slopes, the Greek architect was guided not by meteorological knowledge, but by the principles of his worldview. The form-generating action of the architect becomes an act of expressing a worldview that is not constrained by either climatic conditions or economic opportunities.

Summarizing, it should be said that architecture is the material correlate of philosophy. Architecture and philosophy are correlative, like matter and idea. Just as philosophy performs an integrating function in the worldview sphere, architecture performs an integrating function in the sphere of material and bodily life. Just as philosophy synthesizes the knowledge of all sciences into one whole, architecture synthesizes different aspects of human bodily life in one indecomposable synthesis of items of determining positions of material works.

Let us conclude our discussion with a general definition of architecture: it is the construction, aesthetic and technical designing of the material structure of the natural space as a housing and economic environment.