Genres of Situated Architectural Theory: Autotheory, Dialogue, and Site-Theory

This dissertation aims to identity, describe, and define three genres of architectural theory that are situated; they are autotheory, the dialogical dialogue, and site-theory. As opposed to architectural theory that aims for objectivity or universal applicability, situated genres are written in a way to expose the circumstances of their creation and the contingency of their relevance upon those circumstances. Those circumstances, or situation, include the life of the author, the discourse surrounding the author, and the place where the theory was developed. The argument is that such situated theory—though by definition neither perfect nor ultimate—allows for ways of studying architecture, its discourse, and theory-making itself that are unavailable with other genres. The dissertation first makes this case generally, explaining the advantageous qualities of all situated genres, such as being clear about their limits, heuristic, and revealing of their inner dynamics. Then, in each of the three chapters, more specific value arguments are made in relation to individual genres. This is done using short and long case studies, where single texts or entire oeuvres are closely read and analyzed for their content and form. The longer case studies focus on the following architects: Rifat Chadirji, Peter Eisenman, Suad Amiry, and Rem Koolhaas. After these isolated studies, I argue in the conclusion that genres of situated architectural theory are closely related to each other in that they all aim to reveal aspects of the situation surrounding a theory, and therefore often coexist in the same texts. The dissertation ends with a speculative section about the possibility of a situated universal theory of architecture.