Spectacularism of contemporary architecture within the context of the late 20th – early 21st century visual culture
https://doi.org/10.29235/2524-2369-2025-70-2-120-130
Abstract
The article examines the development of spectacularism in contemporary architecture (1990s–2020s) in the context of the visual orientation of culture of the late 20th – early 21st century. Spectacularism manifests in three major visually-orientated trends in contemporary architecture: 1) the presentation of architecture as entertainment; 2) the super- ficial reproduction of current visual design trends; 3) the prioritisation of perception via the medium of photography or rendering over a direct and engaged real life interaction between a human and the built environment. These trends impact digital architectural visualization, graphic design of architecture theory works, the creation of iconic landmark buildings and photogenic spaces (the so-called “Instagrammable space”, “AirSpace”, and others), development projects for generic residential and administrative buildings. The study of the spectacularism phenomenon through the lens of Guy Debord’s and J. Baudrillard’s philosophy allowed to conclude that the visually-oriented trends in contemporary architecture are the result of the decline in the direct and active interactions between humans and the physical world.
About the Author
I. I. Balunenka
Center for the Belarusian Culture, Language and Literature researches of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus
Belarus
Belarus
Iryna I. Balunenka – Ph. D. (Art and Architecture), Associate Professor, Senior Researcher
1 Surhanov Str., Bldg 2, Minsk 220072
References
1. Number of internet users as of July 2024. Statista. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/617136/digitalpopulationworldwide/ (accessed 05.02.2024).
2. Debord G. Society of the spectacle. Guy Debord Archive, 1931–1994. Available at: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/debord/society.htm (accessed 28.08.2024).
3. Baudrillard J. Simulacra and simulation. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1995. 164 p. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9904
4. Žižek S. Welcome to the desert of the real: five essays on 11 September and related dates. London, Verso, 2002. 154 p.
5. Fromm E. To have or to be? Reprint ed. London etc., Bloomsbury, 2013. 216 p.
6. Vidler A. (ed.). Architecture between spectacle and use. Williamstown, Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institut; New Haven, Yale University Press, 2008. XIII, 184 p.
7. Foster H. Design and crime: and other diatribes. London, Verso, 2003. 176 p.
8. Venturi R., Brown D. S., Izenour S. Learning from Las Vegas: the forgotten symbolism of architectural form. Cambridge, MIT Press, 1977. 192 p.
9. Eisenman P. Manifesto # 20. ICON Magazine: International Design, Architecture and Culture, 2007, no. 50. Available at: http://www.iconeye.com/news/manifestos/manifesto20petereisenman%7Carchitect (accessed 28.11.2022).
10. Guano E. Spectacles of modernity: transnational imagination and local hegemonies in neoliberal Buenos Aires. Cultural Anthropology, 2002, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 181–209. https://doi.org/10.1525/can.2002.17.2.181
11. Ruggiero L. Neoliberal urban policies and archistar system: landscape regeneration or production of alien scenarios? Sustainable regional growth and development in the creative knowledge economy (ERSA 2010): 50th congress of the European Regional Science Association, 19–23 August 2010, Jönköping, Sweden. LouvainlaNeuve, 2010. Available at: https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/119175 (accessed 12.12.2023).
12. Thani S., Heenan T. F. Sport and the “Disneyfication” of UAE. The playing field: making sense of spaces and places in sporting culture. Oxford, 2016, pp. 15–26.
13. Pearman H. High contrast: books from John Tuomey and Thomas Heatherwick. The RIBA Journal. Available at: https://www.ribaj.com/culture/reviewbooksthomasheatherwickhumanisejohntuomeyfirstquarter (accessed 12.12.2023).
14. Jennings W. “Should architects design provocatively ugly architecture that does not conform to Instagram’s aesthetic conventions?” Dezeen. Available at: https://www.dezeen.com/2019/09/05/antiinstagramarchitecturewilljennings/ (accessed 20.09.2022).
15. Fairs M. Instagram design guide shows architects how to create “a visual sense of amazement”. Dezeen. Available at: https://www.dezeen.com/2018/06/12/instagramdesignguidearchitectsdesignhotel/ (accessed 20.09.2022).
16. Kolpinets E. “I like everything, although I have never been here …”. Proekt Rossiya = Project Russia, 2020, no. 92, pp. 249–255 (in Russian).
17. Maas W., Van Rijs J. (ed.) KM3: excursions on capacities. Barcelona, Actar, 2005. 1415 p.
18. Mead R. The Airbnb invasion of Barcelona. The New Yorker. Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/04/29/theairbnbinvasionofbarcelona (accessed 14.10.2022).
19. Koolhaas R. Junkspace. Content: triumph of realization. Köln, 2004, pp. 162–171.
20. Minkjan M. What this MVRDV rendering says about architecture and the media. Failed Architecture. Available at: https://failedarchitecture.com/whatthismvrdvrenderingsaysaboutarchitectureandmedia/ (accessed 17.10.2022).
21. Jacob S. Architecture enters the age of postdigital drawing. Metropolis. Available at: https://metropolismag.com/projects/architecture-enters-age-post-digital-drawing/ (accessed 17.05.2022).
Review
Views:
271
Email this article 