1. Continuum With The Landscape VS. Estrangement ( p. 21-23)

 Modern architecture faced a crisis in the 1950's where the objects were seen as inconsistent.
This brought about the desire to build continuously with the landscape.

Now we see deterritorialization. - This term was used by Deleuze in reference to capitalism. Deleuze and Guattari argued that since capitalism is interested only in the individual and his profit, it must deterritorialize all territorial groupings (ie. church, family...) (1).

Architecture is no longer connected to a place.  This has been facilitated by technologies which make it possible to see the exterior of a building in a vacuum.

Whereas in the 1950's, there was a sacred fusion between the architecture and the surroundings,
de Sola-Morales describes the present attitude as an "isolated stupor of the object"(!).  He believes that neither attitude creates a healthy relationship (the first compromises the architecture for the sake of the landscape, the second disconnects itself entirely).

2. Redefinition of Art ( p. 23)

There were some forces present during the post-war period which led to a redefinition of art.

*Gestalt Psychologism: "Holistic analysis of the psychological phenomena asserting that the whole rather than being determined by its parts, determines the meaning of its parts."

*Phenomenology: Philosophical movement of the 20th Century. It involves the "direct investigation and description of phenomena as consciously experienced, without theories about their explanation and as free as possible from unexamined preconceptions and presupposition" (2).

With these approaches, suddenly importance was given to all senses. The experience of a building became important; there were spatio-temporal, sexual, mobile and expressive considerations.

Whereas in the past, art and architecture were thought to be appreciated only be the educated few, now suddenly they could be experienced by everyone.  Formal aesthetic was on equal footing to "primitive" art.

3. Estrangement ( p. 24)

The reality we live in now denies all approaches, even phenomenological. Our position is constantly changing, and this affects our perception.  We live in isolation.

The disconnected world breeds fragmented architecture.  There is no cohesiveness to our approach to work.  Architecture is built without calling.

There are no more ideals to aspire to.

As was discussed earlier in the chapter, architecture is being built which only makes sense at the instant it was designed.  It does not transcend time (brings to mind "cardboard architecture").

4. Void ( p. 24-26)

In modern architecture, we see for the first time the incorporation of movement (movement - time = fourth dimension: Einstein)

Architecture became a container for mobility.
Space was considered over form.
Open plans created an "atmosphere of possibilities".
Partitions came down together with some social barriers.
During those times of changes, there was great hope for a radically new and improved lifestyle.

Now the void is a constant reminder that life did no come to fill it.

Architecture which had initially been inspired by and represented the promise of new beginnings (after the war) is now being copied and reiterated without the meaning.  There are no new stimuli.

 In a world without passion, gods or hopes, there is no collective voice.  Every expression is an individual one, and so it is impossible to judge.

De Solà-Morales makes a comparison to the useless knowledge of the moon's topography - there is nothing to be gleaned from the void.

5. Conclusion ( p. 26)

Since there is no collective voice with which to judge, we are all equally qualified (or unqualified) to be critics.  Contemporary architecture will speak to each of us differently. De Sola-Morales invites each of us to become a critic.

1. http://130.179.92.25/Arnason_DE/Deleuze.html
2. http://britanica.com/bcom/eb/article/printable/5/0%2C5722%2C115435%2C00.html