Deconstruction is first developed by the French philosopher Jacques Derrida. The definition for deconstruction is not easy to understand, and Derrida and his interpreters actually intend it to be difficult. It was first meant a method of interpretation and analysis of a text or a speech. He introduced the concept of deconstruction in connection with his linguistic philosophy and grammatology. When deconstruct a text or a speech, it is to draw out conflicting logics of sense and implication, with the object of showing that the text never exactly means what it ways or says what it means . Though, it has been applied not only to text but also to the visual arts and architecture.
The approach of deconstruction in architecture is to get architects to think of things in a new way, to view architecture in bits and pieces. Also to develop buildings which show how differently from traditional architectural conventions buildings can be built without losing their utility and still complying with the fundamental laws of physics. Especially in 1988, when deconstruction was first promoted in architecture. Different architects of different places seemed to be placing buildings and bits of buildings at odd angles so that they clashed and even penetrated each other. The geometry in these architectures had been set up, but has at least one overlaid and clashed with the other. Also, there are many different kinds of clashes such as: clashes in historic and modern, clashes in plan, clashes in section or elevation, clashes in three dimensions, clashes in grids and clashes in angles.
Deconstructionist architecture must start from deconstruct the construction at first, with a name indicates its schemes, its intuition and its concepts, or its rhetoric. Deconstruction also contains an insight of fundamental importance for the historian¡¦s conception of what he or she is doing. It uses theory to understand history, and history to understand the theory to construct a more perceptive view of the cultural and social. As deconstructs a structure, it strictly meets the terms of architectural construction and the philosophical construction of the concept of architecture. Therefore, deconstruction is understood to be un-problematically architectural, as it combines with the idea of the system in philosophy, and theory, also the practice and logic in architecture. Moreover, deconstruction can show that representations of architecture are not and cannot be adequate to the task of representation, but have nothing to say about the social work that representation can and does do.
Deconstruction can become the basis for a new construction. It is when the architects think that the design of societies¡¦ buildings should resemble societies present stated. For example today¡¦s society is chaotic, so the architecture should be chaotic too. Deconstruction is a kind of the postmodern design, deconstruction and postmodern design seems to relate to each other. However, there is always a twist in the structure and the deconstructionist architectures can be crazy like. Although modern architecture had not allowed the expression of conflicts of function between different spaces, but in deconstruction, it allows intersecting angled beams and clash of different functionless spaces. When different spaces intersecting one another in an irregular way, it is an attempt to reveal the character of each and every space and the occasional conflict and coincidence in the relationship between them.
Derrida insisted that despite appearances of the architecture, deconstruction is not an architectural metaphor or any type of metaphor; as it takes place within a specific philosophical practice and philosophical thinking. Although deconstruction is a new movement in the 1980s, it is not a style but theory based. Also, architectural thinking can only be deconstructive when it is an attempt to visualize, which established the authority of the architectural concatenation in...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document