| المستخلص: |
This paper argues that architectural interpretation is experiencing from abuse use of architectural key terms. Notions like: criticism, history and theory; concepts like: beginning and approach; and labels like: style, school and movement were used indiscriminately in architectural interpretation. \ For instance, Banham (1966:10) indicated that he interpreted New Brutalism as a movement before the conditions of forming a movement were existed. Jencks writings are another example for the abuse use of the former notions, concepts and labels. In his two books: The Language Of Post-Modern Architecture and Late Modern Architecture, he described Post-Modern Architecture: first as a movement, second as a style, third as a school and fourth as an approach. \ Banham and Jencks were attempting to formulate verbal equivalent to the design of some architects before it was tested and proved to deserve a theoretical coverage, organized in an intellectual discipline as an approach, school or movement. This attempt perhaps, caused this abuse use of the former key terms in architectural interpretation. \ Commercial architectural press was another source for the abuse use of the previous architectural key terms. As a case in point, the magazine of Architectural Design (AD) was a major source of the misinterpretation of those notions, concepts and labels, over the past four decades. \ It seems that no considerations were made to the specific definitions of those key terms, nor to the scope of their conceptual meaning, limits and context of their theme. \ Thus this paper endeavors to clear the abuse use of those notions, concepts and labels in architectural interpretation via defining them, refining their conceptual meanings. And exploring their themes, outlining their role, scope and place within architectural interpretation in order to employ them appropriately within architectural interpretation, as they constitute basic themes of the conceptual world of architecture. \ In so doing an attempt will be made to investigate the origin, structure, meaning and definitions of the said key terms as indicated in key literary, philosophical and architectural sources. Another attempt will be made to highlight the process and emphasize the conditions of forming and establishing architectural approaches, schools and movements via the concept beginning - as a moment in time and as a project underway - as interpreted in architectural sources. \ It is important to indicate that investigations in this paper are limited only to the notions: criticism, history and theory; concepts: beginning and approach; and labels: style, school and movement; though investigations will include concepts like precedence, generality and creativity, but within the previous architectural key terms. \
|
