The multi-faceted phenomena of ELECTRICITY can be examined from many different perspectives; including those of physics, medicine, history, economics, sociology, geography, engineering, cultural studies, meteorology, computer science, biology, religion, and media studies, to name but a few. Yet, it is the premise of this thesis that one discipline of study, ARCHITECTURE, is unique in its ability to examine the vital role of ELECTRICITY from both a multi-faceted and holistic perspective.
Using ARCHITECTURE and its language as a meta-disciplinary framework we can analyze and integrate the scientific and humanistic qualities of ELECTRICITY in relation to our everyday experience of REALITY in the BUILT ENVIRONMENT. (0.2n)
ARCHITECTURE, as both a practical and theoretical field of study, thus enables us to construct a generalized yet specific foundation for ELECTRICAL knowledge. (0.21n)
This unified model of ARCHITECTURAL knowledge can in turn be further developed in other ARCHITECTURAL sub-disciplines, such as art, engineering, design, politics, psychology, archaeology, etcetera. (0.22n)
By using ARCHITECTURAL language to explore ELECTRICITY we will eventually unearth a contradiction in our story, as Michel Foucault states: (0.221n) "A discursive formation is... a space of multiple dimensions; a set of different oppositions whose levels and roles must be described... [It] erects the primacy of a contradiction that has its model in the simultaneous affirmation and negation of a single proposition." (0.23) Thus, we need to simultaneously negate and affirm the statement: This will enable us, as Foucault states, "...to map, in a particular discursive practice, the point at which they are constituted, to define the form they assume, the relations that they have with each other, and the domain that they govern." (0.24) To begin, then, we need to address the existential negation: There is a deep and muddy incongruity in any attempt to bridge the gap between the two as being synonyms of one another. Instead there exists a fundamental separation which negates the possibility of direct equivalence between the two fields of study: an ARCHITECT is neither an ELECTRICAL ENGINEER nor ELECTRICIAN. Thus, they are different disciplines of study. On the whole, this is "common sense" knowledge and seemingly correct. Yet there are traces within the field of ARCHITECTURE which contradict this notion. A subtle trace is found in an Illustrated Dictionary of Historic Architecture edited by a professor of both architecture and electrical engineering. (0.25) A literal trace is found within the ARCHITECTURAL work of "cyberarchitects" such as Stephen Perrella, Marcus Novak, and Michael Benedikt whom use ELECTRICAL TECHNOLOGIES in their theoretical practices. Ironically, although no rationale exists for connecting the studies of ARCHITECTURE and ELECTRICITY, this has not stopped the two fields from coming together in a synchronous everyday practice, such as is found in the building of 3-dimensional ARCHITECTURAL SPACEs online COMPUTER NETWORKs sustained by the ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEM. (0.3n) This paradox unfolds in an equally truthful, yet opposite proposition that ARCHITECTURE is ELECTRICITY, which is the focus of the remainder of this thesis. Although ELECTRICITY can be considered ARCHITECTURE- in the sense that it is the glue holding the universe of MATTER together, it is the structure along which LIFEFORMs evolve, and is that which constitutes the ELECTRICAL STATE of our species HOMO ELECTRUS- we will initially delimit our exploration to examples from an everyday ARCHITECTURAL practice. (0.4n) While ARCHITECTURAL practice and ELECTRICAL practice seem to be mutually exclusive, they often connect in a procedural relationship between an ARCHITECT's design of a building and the review of heating, cooling, and wiring plans by ELECTRICAL ENGINEERs and their implementation by ELECTRICIANs. For example, within the design and implementation of the ELECTRICAL wiring of a building, the necessary connection between the building and the ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEM and ELECTRONIC MEDIA SYSTEMs is achieved. The building no longer stands as an isolated piece of property but now becomes an interconnected local node in CYBERSPACE for the production and consumption of global INFORMATION and POWER in both the PUBLIC and PRIVATE realms. When we examine this situation further we will see that the traditional order of building meets and engages with the new ELECTRICAL ORDER of building in a vitally important relationship. In fact, we will find that it is at this point in the building process that one can go about proving that ARCHITECTURE is ELECTRICITY... We will do this by considering the ELECTRICAL ORDER as a particular ARCHITECTURAL ORDER, which will enable us to consider the ELECTRICAL INFRASTRUCTURE as ARCHITECTURE, and subsequently, to posit the ELECTRICIAN as the CARPENTER of the new ELECTRICAL ORDER. First, though, we need to understand the ways in which ELECTRICAL phenomenon are ARCHITECTURAL phenomenon. We need to challenge and interrogate definitions, unearth precedents, and define critical issues that equate the realms of ARCHITECTURE and ELECTRICITY. In doing such an examination will we will be able to effectively win a debate over the authoritarian and cavil negation "That's Not Architecture..." by utilizing a common sense proof that most anyone can use as a reasoning tool. (0.5n) |
