"Koolhaas' revision of Foucault's panopticon; or, how architecture and philosophy just met"

in Architecture Philosophy, Number 5 Issue 1 (2020), pp. 59-76

?? https://www.isparchitecture.com/

?? researchgate.net/profile/Andre_Patrao

?? @a__patrao

"The particularly acute multiplication and radicalization of interactions between philosophy and architecture throughout the 20th century produced a number of notable cases in which an author, work, school, movement, or approach from one discipline had direct decisive effect upon the other. Famously, Norberg-Schulz relied heavily on Martin Heidegger’s philosophical writings to elaborate his own distinctive architectural phenomenological theories. Kenneth Frampton, also well-read in the German philosopher’s writings, has repeatedly acknowledge the effect Hannah Arendt exerted on him. At times philosophers and architects collaborated, such as in 1985 when Bernard Tschumi invited Jacques Derrida and Peter Eisenman to design one of the gardens at Parc de la Villette (1982-1998), or when discussions between Jean Baudrillard and Jean Nouvel were published as the book The Singular Objects of Architecture (2002). Preceding them all is of course the philosopher who also briefly became an architect, Ludwig Wittgenstein in the design and construction of House Wittgenstein (1928).

These celebrated examples represent the epitomes of a still widespread tendency which, in diverse ways and to different degrees, shapes both philosophical and architectural works. And yet, seldom does either discipline take a step back to reflect upon the motives and methods of these interactions as a topic in itself. How does architecture make use of philosophy? How does philosophy speak of architecture? Why does either one turn towards the other? What comes about in their doing so? We shall engage these questions by analyzing one particular case-study of such interactions: the potential influence of philosopher Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish (1975) on architect Rem Koolhaas’ Koepel Panopticon Prison renovation project (1981). This connection is far less well-known than the previously mentioned examples, as it is far more low-key. In fact, it is difficult to point out or even discern its existence. However, as shall be seen, this discreteness does not mean that there is no case-study, but rather that discreteness is one of its principal traits, and one which distinguishes it uniquely from the cannon of architecture and philosophy’s interactions."