Module Overview

Course Background:

The word ‘contemporary’ refers to the present or the recent. Yet at the same time, ‘contemporary’ also refers to the concurrent and the unfolding. To understand contemporary theories then is not only to engage with the present but also to struggle with the unfolding. Contemporary (architectural) theories therefore is an assemblage of ideas that positions architectural design and production within the challenges of present crises and before the unknowability of the unfolding. In other words, the architect who engages with contemporary (architectural) theories will attempt to at least attain a certain clarity on new and unfolding issues associated with the making of architecture. 

In recent years, ‘theory’ in architecture has however fallen into disrepair and disrepute. The illusory economic boom prior to the catastrophic meltdown of global finance in 2008 compelled the bypassing of (critical) theory for exuberant building, where ubiquitous stararchitcture became prominent symbols of neoliberal capital as well as the public face of the profession. At the same time, advances in design computation and digital fabrication have opened up new avenues for architectural theorization and production. In tandem, sustainability discourse has reached a new level of fervor amid perceived climatic crises--prompting architects and theorists alike to search for the most sustainable built form. However the simultaneous meeting of these three developments have coalesced usually and uncritically into the following mandate: the architect must continue to engage with the deteriorating system of global capital in order to produce the most innovative form that is also at the same time the most recognizable and sustainable. 

Yet persisting with this mandate is shown to be increasingly precarious amid the many crises occurring and unfolding in the world today--the fiscal crises affecting entire clusters of nation-states; the environmental problems arising from over-development; new contestation of space and the loss of the public realms; and the many social revolts from an increasingly uneven and unethical distribution of wealth--all inadvertently also translate into a call to rethink and renew the most prominent of all social arts--architecture. Indeed, who or what does the architect serve? What is architecture in all these? And ultimately, what or for whom is architecture for? 

To answer these questions, the contemporary architect must once again engage with theory in order to first understand the structures constraining architecture today, and subsequently, to project new directions or alternatives for architectural thinking and production. 

Course Description: 

Then, what does such theorization entail? Theorization entails the critical act of questioning, clarifying, explaining, formulating and constructing productive approaches for architecture. Theorization must begin with the act of questioning and understanding. Inadvertently, theorization ought to end with either an explanation, a question or a new formulation--or all three--for understanding architecture. 

In this course, we will take various contemporary problems and issues related and relevant for architects and the discipline of architecture as our point of departure for theorizing. Through this concrete point of departure, the course attempts to respond to the critique that architectural theory has become irrelevant and marginalized as a productive field for human concerns and social/public interests. The vehicle for thinking about the various problems and issues is by understanding, internalizing and then critiquing a collection of contemporary (i.e., very new or contemporaneous) readings in architectural theory and other related content. 

This course advances the concept that theory can be productively activated as a tool for architectural thinking, design and decision-making. In this sense, this course departs from the various ways in which theory has been used as an applique or even post-rationalized for legitimizing an architectural design. Instead, architectural theory presented in this course focuses on the activity of critical clarification, explanation and formulation: the architect must know that theory is a world-building activity no less than the activity of building houses. 

Course Grade Distribution and Evaluation

Deliverables Percentage Aggregate Percentage of Overall Grade

Reading responses x 2 10% each 20%

Group In-Class presentation & discussion of weekly questions x 9 5% each 45%

Final research paper 35% 35%

TOTAL                                               100%

- Reading Responses

Each student is expected to write a total of 2 (two) reading responses, each comprising of a critical analysis on one or more of the readings. 

Late responses will not be accepted. 

- Group In-class presentation and discussion

Students are to form study and discussion groups for class discussion (to be organized during the beginning of the semester). Each week, the lecturer will provide a cluster of three questions for that week’s reading, of which the group will then seek to answer one cluster of questions during the next class while other groups will then respond to these answers, vice versa. 

The group must bring their answers for discussion during the following week, and the group must also hand in their discussion reports on A4 print-outs and to post them online for mutual sharing and grading. The discussion report for each group is not expected to exceed beyond 500 words or 2 A4 pages. The answers to the question can be a summary on a lengthier or more elaborate response to be shared verbally and argumentatively during the class. 

Absentees or non-participants within the group will not receive the grade given to the group work. Active individual participation will be noted and graded accordingly. 

- Final research paper

Each student is expected to submit a final research paper consisting of 15 pages (no more than 3500 words inclusive of bibliography) discussing a subject related to this course with special emphasis on definitiveness of subject, depth of analysis and the application of theoretical discussions covered in class. Importantly, the student is expected to correctly cite key research materials used in this paper. 

The final research paper is due, by 5pm, 23 April, 2012, Monday. Late papers will not be accepted. 

- Class participation

Each student is expected to participate actively in the on-going discussions in the class. Perfect attendance is a necessary but not sufficient criterion for active participation; the student will have to think about the on-going dialogues in the class, and make his or her own voice heard in a clear and concise manner at all times. Furthermore, the student is expected to argue on behalf of his or her classmate by either building on the other’s ideas, or clarifying them, or arguing against them in a constructive manner for the purpose of fostering mutual learning. 

- Other Factors for Evaluations

(1) Students must come to each class having read the readings assigned each week with intelligent questions that can help everyone to go deeper into thinking about the topics at hand. Unprepared ignorance will not be tolerated in the class. 

(2) There are optional readings every week. By ‘optional’, such readings have been offered to students who enjoy challenges and therefore demand a broader intellectual horizon to the topics at hand. 

(3) Late assignments will not be accepted except for reasons of (1) validated medical leave (2) valid emergencies. 

(4) Unexplained and persistent absenteeism from class will not be tolerated. 

Important Notice:

Due to the class size this semester, the class will be divided into two groups. Both groups will participate in the short lecture given each week; one group will then stay in LR 421 for the subsequent seminar while the other group will attend the seminar in Seminar Room 10. 

READINGS LIST AND SCHEDULE BY WEEK

Updated: 6 January, 2012

Week 1, (Introduction), Monday 9 January: Setting the Stage for Contemporary Architectural Theories

Introductory short lecture: ‘What is theory?’ and introduction to the course. 

Lecture by Jeffrey Chan

No separate group discussions. 

(1) Speaks, M. (2005). After Theory. Architectural Record, June 2005, pp.72-75. 

(2) Hight, C. (2009). Meeting the New Boss: After the Death of Theory. Architectural Design, Vol.79, No.1, pp.40-45. 

Optional:

(1) Baird, G. (2009). Thoughts on the Current State of Criticism in Architecture. Journal of Architectural Education, Vol.62, No.3, pp.5.

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 2 (Theme: Impacts of Capitalism on Public Space 1), Monday 16 January: Global Capital and Spaces of Neoliberalism 

Lecture by Jeffrey Chan 

Discussion of Week 1 Readings

No separate group discussions.

(1) Harvey, D. (2010). The Enigma of Capitalism and the Crises of Capitalism. UK: Profile Books. {Excerpts: Chapter 4: Capital Goes to Market, and Chapter 6: The Geography of It All}

(2) van Schaik, L. (1992). Signature Cities. Journal of the Half Time Club, Vol.1, March 1992, pp.77-79. 

Optional:

(1) Lefebvre, H. (2009). Space: Social Product and Use Value. In N. Brenner & S. EIden (eds), State, Space, World: Selected Essays. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp.185-195.

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 3, Monday 23 January: Chinese New Year Public Holiday *No Class*

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 4 (Theme: Impacts of Capitalism on Contemporary Practice 1), Monday 30 January: Star-Architecture and the Global Architect

Lecture by Jeffrey Chan

Discussion of Week 2 Readings

Group Discussion Report 1 Due in Class

(1) Fraser, M. (2007). Beyond Koolhaas. In J.Rendell, J.Hill, M.Fraser & M.Dorrian (eds.), Critical Architecture. UK: Routledge, pp.332-339. 

(2) Lampugnani, V.M. (2011). Meaningless Gestures: About the Destruction of the City through Contemporary Architectural Sculptures. Neue Zurcher Zeitung, November 5, 2011. {original article, ‘Gesten ohne Sinngehalt’, translated by Professor Jean-Pierre Protzen, Professor of the Graduate School, University of California, Berkeley.}

(3) Baird, G. (2011). Architecture in the New Wide World: What Lies Ahead. In S.Frausto (ed), The Berlage Survey of the Culture, Education, and Practice of Architecture and Urbanism. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, pp.479-485. 

Optional:

(1) McNeill, D. (2008). The Global Architect: Firms, Fame and Urban Form. NY: Routledge. {Introduction and Chapter 4 on the Bilbao Effect}

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 5 (Theme: Capitalism in Architectural Theory), Monday 6 February: Late Capitalism and The Culture of Consumption  

Lecture by A/P Bobby Wong

Discussion of Week 4 Readings

Group Discussion Report 2 Due in Class

(1) Jameson, F. (1985). Architecture and the Critique of Ideology. In J. Ockman (ed.), Architecture, Criticism, Ideology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Architectural Press, pp.51-87. 

Optional: Jameson, F. (1991). Demographies of the Anonymous. Anyone, May 1991.

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 6 (Theme: Impacts of Capitalism on Public Space 2), Monday 13 February: Habermas and the Transformation of the Public Sphere

Lecture by A/P Bobby Wong

Discussion of Week 5 Readings

Group Discussion Report 3 Due in Class

(1) Habermas, J. (1993). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. {Excerpts: Chapter 1 and Chapter 2}

(2) Berg, N. (2011). The Occupy Movement and the New Public Space. The Atlantic, Nov 22, 2011. Link: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2011/11/occupy-and-new-public-space/554/

____________________________________________________________________________

RECESS WEEK 18 FEBRUARY - 26 FEBRUARY: NO CLASS

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 7 (Theme: Impacts of Capitalism on Contemporary Practice 2), Monday 27 February: Spatial Justice and Uneven Development

Lecture by Jeffrey Chan

Discussion of Week 6 Readings

Group Discussion Report 4 Due in Class

First Individual Reading Response Due in Class

(1) Harvey, D. (2009). Social Justice and the City, Revised Edition. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press. {Excerpt: The Right to the City, pp.315-332.}

(2) Lim, W.S.W. (2005). Asian Ethical Urbanism: A Radical Postmodern Perspective. Singapore: World Scientific. {Excerpt: pp.27-37 on spatial justice}

Optional:

(1) Harvey, D. (2006). Spaces of Global Capitalism. NY: Verso. {Chapter: Notes towards a theory of uneven geographical development, pp.69-116}

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 8 (Topical Issue I), Monday 5 March: Architecture of Fear and The Militarization of Everyday Spaces

Lecture by Jeffrey Chan

Discussion of Week 7 Readings

Group Discussion Report 5 Due in Class

(1) Bauman, Z. (2007). Liquid Times: Living in an Age of Uncertainty. UK: Polity. {Chapter 4: Out of Touch Together}

(2) Sorkin, M. (2008). Introduction: The Fear Factor. In M. Sorkin (ed), Indefensible Space: The Architecture of the National Insecurity State. NY: Routledge, pp.vii-xvii.

Optional:

(1) Coaffee, J. (2009). Terrorism, Risk and the Global City: Towards Urban Resilience. USA: Ashgate. {Chapter 1: Introduction: Terrorism, Risk and the Global City, pp.3-12}

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 9 (Topical Issue II), Monday 12 March: Biopolitics

Lecture by A/P Bobby Wong

Discussion of Week 8 Readings

Group Discussion Report 6 Due in Class

(1) Negri, A. (2008). The Porcelain Workshop: for a new grammar of politics. Los Angeles, CA: Semiotext(e). {Excerpts: Chapter 1, 2 and 3}

Optional: Lazzarato, M. From Biopower to Biopolitics [http://www.generation-online.org/c/fcbiopolitics.htm]

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 10 (Topical Issue III), Monday 19 March: (High Risk) Technology, Computation and Issues of Digital Fabrication

Lecture by Jeffrey Chan

Discussion of Week 9 Readings

Group Discussion Report 7 Due in Class

(1) Heidegger, M. (2004). Question Concerning Technology. In D.M.Kaplan (ed.), Readings in the Philosophy of Technology. UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., pp.35-51. 

(2) Celento, D. (2010). Innovate or Perish: New Technologies and Architecture’s Future. In R. Corser (ed), Fabricating Architecture: Selected Readings In Digital Design and Manufacturing. NY: Princeton Architectural Press, pp.56-83.

Optional:

(1) Jonas, H. (1984). The Imperative of Responsibility: In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. {Chapter 1: The Altered Nature of Human Action, pp.1-24}

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 11 (Topical Issue IV), Monday 26 March: Architectural Ethics

Lecture by Jeffrey Chan

Discussion of Week 10 Readings

Group Discussion Report 8 Due in Class

(1) Lagueux, M. (2004). Ethics versus Aesthetics in Architecture. The Philosophical Forum, Vol.XXXV, No.2, Summer 2004, pp.117-133. 

(2) Till, J. (2009). Architecture Depends. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. {Excerpt: Chapter 10: Imperfect Ethics}

Optional:

(1) Varnelis, K. (2009). Ethics after the avant-garde: the critical, the post-critical, and beyond. In G. Owen (ed), Architecture, ethics and globalization. NY: Routledge, pp.148-157.   

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 12 (Topical Issue V), Monday 2 April: Educating the Architect  

Lecture by Jeffrey Chan

Discussion of Week 11 Readings 

Group Discussion Report 9 Due in Class

Second Reading Response Due in Class

(1) Zaera-Polo, A. (2011). Architectural Education in a Global World. In S.Frausto (ed.), The Berlage Survey of the Culture, Education, and Practice of Architecture and Urbanism. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, pp.177-183. 

(2) Mallgrave, H.F. (2011). The Architect’s Brain: Neuroscience, Creativity and Architecture. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. {Excerpt: Epilogue, pp.207-220}. 

Optional:

(1) Fisher, T.R. (2000). In the Scheme of Things: Alternative Thinking on the Practice of Architecture. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. {Chapter on Bridging Education and Practice}

____________________________________________________________________________

Week 13, (Course Conclusion) Monday 9 April: The Promise of Theory and its Variegated Trajectories

Short Lecture by Jeffrey Chan to be followed by joint discussion with A/P Bobby Wong

Discussion of Week 12 Readings

No separate group discussions. 

(1) Awan, N., Schneider, T., & Till, J. (2011). Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture. NY, NY: Routledge. {Excerpts: Introduction and The Motivations of Spatial Agency}

(2) Gage, M.F. (2011). Aesthetic Theory: Essential Texts for Architecture and Design. NY, NY: W.W.Norton & Company. {Excerpt: Introduction, pp.15-25}

____________________________________________________________________________

READING WEEK 14 APRIL - 20 APRIL: NO CLASS

FINAL PAPER DUE 23 APRIL, MONDAY, BY 5PM in the Department’s Office. A box will be placed there for your papers. 

Course Format:

Weekly 45min-1hr lecture for the entire class (maximum class enrollment: 80 students) to be followed by 1.5hr of group discussions in individual seminar (group 1 and 2) of 40 students each. 

Location:

LR421 and subsequently Seminar Room 10 (for seminar group 2).