Architecture or Japanese Pornography

On Rem Koolhaas - Memo From Toyo Ito - Excerpt from S, M, L, XL

Rem Koolhaas is a pitching machine, or at least that is how Ito describes him.  A pitching machine that operates under perfect control without interference from emotion or spirit.  I can only assume, because of the venue of its publication, that Ito is referring to Koolhaas’ architecture.  The lack of emotion in question must be process, focusing only on the architecture itself, allowing emotion to only surface through the final product, the contact of bat and ball.

Koolhaas follows Ito’s brief memo with a series of seemingly unrelated blurbs about his time in Japan.  Ramblings in response to Ito’s ‘soulless’ batting cage metaphor turn into speakings of partying featuring deconstructivist pedicures with Derrida all spilling forth to an ejaculation on censorship, the subject of which is Japanese pornography.  This, however bizarre, is where he inserts his spatial thought process.

#1) Pubic hair and genitals may not be shown
Spatially: Does the exclusion of responsible parts increase the whole?

#2) The Reduction of color scheme
black (hair) yellow (skin) white (panties)

Response: Direct lack of stimulation, in this case visual, opens up other avenues for stimulation. ie: exchange visual for emotional

Methods of  Censorship:
a) Excision: Elimination of Offensive Materials
Spatially: Areas of void are used in relation to zones of high specificity causing heightened speculation.

b)Cover: Everything is implied
Spatially: Through form changes and condition of materiality you can control experience .

c) Burnout
Spatially: Suggestive details create an environment in which the function is apparent but not seen.

d) Digitization: Pixilization (further study required)
Koolhaas’ interpretation: ‘Prototype of possible traffic between real and virtual worlds, and Utopian model, maybe their eventual coexistence.” 

It is interesting to note that in Japan, censorship of ‘resulting product’ is not required in any method.

This process leads me to make the conclusion that the suggestion (details) and product (end experience) are more important than act itself, however giving the later ingredient an architectural relation currently leaves me in a state of deep contemplation.

  1. itinerantcerebrum posted this