Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
background”—aspacedesignedorcoordinated
bysomeonevisuallyandtechnicallyspecialized
todoso.10Therelationshipbetweentheforegroundand
theabsorptivebackgroundcouldberepresented
bymeansofasculpturesquetopologicalmodelthat
Hansencalledan“activenegative,”ananalyticaland
pedagogicaltoolintendedtoregistersubjective
perceptionsofthegivenenvironment.[FIG.1]
TheContextoftheContext
LikeSartre’sexistentialism,Hansen’sOpenForm
needstobeunderstoodinalargercontext:asareflection
on,andcritiqueof,aspecifichistoricalandexistential
situation.ThebackgroundagainstwhichHansen’s
thoughtandworkdevelopedfunctionedveryliterally
asan“activenegative”(tousethisterminaslightly
differentwayfromHansenhimself).TheColdWardivide
betweenEastandWest,thebadfaithtowhichitgave
riseonbothsides,wastheantithesisofanyidea
ofopenness.ForHansenitobstructedthepathway
toanemancipatorylife-space.Itwasimperativetoreject
binarylogic;thismeanttranscendingnotonlythe
corrosivematerialismofWesterncapitalismbutalsothe
corruptingauthoritarianismandbureaucraticmindset
ofexistingcommunism.
WhatHansenultimatelyaspiredtoconstructwas
a“newimaginary”11—autopianspatialvisionofhow
peoplecouldlivetogetherpeaceablyinasocietythat
wascollectiveandegalitarianinorganization,ecological
initsrelationshiptonature,andcontemporaryinform
andtechnology.Thisradicallyhumanisticaspiration
remainedexceptionalinthecultureofpostwar
architectureforbothitsmissionarysenseofconviction
anditsdegreeofformalelaboration.Bythetimehewas
abletoarticulateitatthefinalmeetingofthe
InternationalCongressesforModernArchitecture(CIAM),
ithadbecomehispreoccupyingconcern,alitmustestfor
allspatialproduction.Fortherestofhislife,hisbelief
initsrevolutionarypotentialneverwavered,even
ifhewasstymiedrepeatedlyinhiseffortstorealize
