Manhattan Transcripts Between Idealism and Reality - Essay Example

Manhattan Transcripts between Idealism and Reality The Manhattan Transcripts were the works of Bernard Tschumi who conceived them in the context of live spaces that defined a real space. Their sequential nature suggested the form of a book. During their designing, Tschumi had decided to embark on redefining architecture, which implied the notion of movement which inspired him to develop a notation mode to represent it (Tschumi and Walker 122). According to Tschumi, although the concept he used in developing the Manhattan Transcripts is still valid for the work, they lacked the component of materiality which makes them entirely theoretical.

Tschumi developed the Manhattan Transcripts from 1977 to 1981 as a set of theoretical drawings as he was exploring the use of notation and the effectiveness of disjunction. This was in an effort to come up with new ways of expressing a few of the traditional means of representing architectural forms.Tschumi had the theoretical agenda of describing elements that have roots in the conventional architectural representation shown by the complex relationship between spaces and their uses, objects and events, as well as typology and program, when he developed the Manhattan Transcripts.

His work focused on a set of disjunctions among use, form, and social values. The programs in the transcripts have the most extreme nature as they bring out the plot of the archetype of murder. The transcripts try to introduce a different insight of architecture which shows the independent, yet related aspects of space, movements, and events (Tschumi, “Urban Pleasures” 11).When it comes to classification, the transcripts offer a different perspective to architecture whereby space, events, and movements are ultimately independent, but at the same time, related to one another.

This leads to breaking down of conventional architectural components and rebuilding them along different lines (Tschumi, “Disjunctions” 117).All the four sections of the Manhattan Transcripts use their tentative format to explore unlikely confrontations, therefore, bringing to light the fact that perhaps, all architecture, apart from being about functional standards, is all about love and death. The Manhattan Transcripts are not a random accumulation of events, but rather they display a certain order that makes them not to be self-contained images.

They have a final cumulative meaning that depends on the succession of spaces.The representation of events, movements, and spaces indicate the use of tripartite notation in the Manhattan Transcripts. Movement in the designs depicts real spaces thus giving off the impression literally solidifying actual movement into a vector that is massive and at the same time, permanent. Photographs represented each event and actions in a bid to get closer to objectivity, something that cannot be found in architectural programs.

The Manhattan Transcripts are an orderly collection of events and not random works. They have a sequence featured by a composite succession of frames that confront events, movements, and spaces. All the three features have their own inherent set of rules and combinative structure that ensure a cumulative nature of the transcript. Most works by Tschumi are more of theory than construction. The Manhattan Transcripts are a theoretical essay that disputes the classic ideals (Ghirardo 45). Throughout Tschumi’s career as an architect, his work has reevaluated the role of architecture in the personal and political freedom.

The Manhattan Transcripts were created in an attempt to deconstruct the previously established components of the architectural field. As a result, they were able to lay the foundation for subsequent works that have become a success.Works CitedGhirardo, Diane Y. “Manfredo Tafuri and Architecture Theory in the U.S., 19970-2000.” Perspecta 33. (2002): 38-47. Web. 24 October 2012.Tschumi, Bernard. “Disjunctions.” Perspecta 23. (1987): 108-119. Web. 24 October 2012.Tschumi, Bernard. “Urban Pleasures and the Moral Good.

” Assemblage 25. (1994): 6-13. Web. 24 October 2012.Tschumi, Bernard. and Walker Enrique. “Bernard Tschumi in Conversation with Enrique Walker.” Grey Room 17. (2004): 118-126. Web. 24 October 2012.