99_12-03

LECORBUSIER AND GNOSTICISM


Date:         Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:38:47 -0600
From: mcbride3 <mcbride3@AIRMAIL.NET>
Subject:      Corbusian World Order
Comments: To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
          <DESIGN-L@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>
To: DESIGN-L@lists1.cac.psu.edu
Status:

Sometime ago Brian asked what I meant by this term, and it recently
occurred to me that I should be more precise about it.

Phase I
The Corbusian World Order would have little to do with Clinton's vision
of it, but Plato would probably recognize Corb's ambitions. But none of
this trio were too modest to want to see their name in lights as king
(one wonders if Clinton will make his move behind the curtain of some
Y2K FEMA emergency act?); one difference: While both Plato's and Corbu's
version of World Order were Organic and religious, Clinton's would
presumably be Mechanistic and profane.

Thus, in Corbu's cosmos there was this a little known allegiance to a
god. This god would be the controller of Corbu's universe, and perhaps
Corbu might be at his right hand; I not certain, but such would fit his
ego.
It is very nearly fact now, that Corbu's scheme of things would fit into
a cosmological plan, and the World was a primary part of this scheme.

The Cosmological Scheme
I came to this conclusion by accident while researching Sumarian and
Mesopotamian texts at the British Museum Library, in 1985. A connection
sprang up from a mental note out of Corbu's "Journey to the Orient",
wherein he remarked upon six winged genii. I guess this comment stuck
because I had only seen the four winged variety portrayed. In the BM
though, I saw my first depiction of a six-winger. And then Corbu's many
comments re: the Temple of Man came to mind (before this I had
associated the phrase only with Jesus' phrase, the Son of Man). But as I
came across an obscure Persian god, Man (not to be confused with Mani),
and his potential relationship to Manicheism, other peculiar but
persistent comments of Corbu's came to mind. (Cf specifically p.118-19
of Oeuvre Complete 1910-1929.) It began to emerge that many of Corbu's
comments were solid Manicheistic theology, and at the same time, they
were compatible with much Gnostic commentary. Perhaps he knew that these
two notions -- Manicheism and Gnosticism -- were a continuous line of
thinking, and not merely the Christian heretical pigeon hole normally
assigned to Gnosticism. Thus, Corbu's interest in the subject is based
upon a set of dogma going back at least to 400BC.
Also, at some point (I cannot remember whether it was before or after
1985) I found out that Corbu's mother was Gnostic. That being the case,
it became highly likely that Corbu's family left France in 17thC (which
he mentions) because they were driven out. They were from the infamous
town of Albi, and to this day, the term, "Albigensian", refers to those
Gnostics run off by virtue of the religious persecutions at the time.

As a Gnostic, Corbu would reverence knowledge and light. His theology
would believe in a malignant god (probably, Yahweh) who had been tossed
out of the rings of heaven for his obstreperous actions up there. This
god was given the Earth as his special plaything to keep him out of
problems above.
As a result, Earth is the evil plaything of this god, and this god's
purpose is to entrap all the souls on Earth for his own purposes. Each
soul is represented by a splinter of light broken off from the higher
heavens and fractured over and over among the procreations on Earth.
Given this scenario, there are two primary motives for a good Gnostic to
follow. First, one must be a teacher of the light, and thus convert as
many souls as possible to the higher heavens. Second, one must not
splinter the already diffused splinters of light any further.
In other words, if it were followed, Gnosticism, like many Quaker sects,
could not thrive because they do not believe in procreation. Le
Corbusier married a couple of times, but he never had children.

The Earthly Scheme
Among Corbu's Gnostic beliefs lay the source for his piloti schemes. I
once asked Bernhard Hoesli (about whom Corbu said, "He is the only
person who ever worked for me who has some of the same talent that I
myself possess.") what was the basis for piloti models, and especially
why did Corb persist in the massive Unite schemes (Bernhard had done
much designing on the first Unite at Marsailles, while he was also
compiling the first Modulor for Corb). Hoesli did agree that the Unite
had proved to be a disaster, but he claimed not to know why their form
persisted, nor what was behind the piloti form.
Well, I now know that this is what was behind it! Corbu hated the Earth
because it was evil. One must have as little contact with it as
possible. Instead, one must seek a spot closer to the heavens, in "These
translucent prisms that seem to float in the air without anchorage to he
ground -- flashing in the summer sunshine, softly gleaming under the
grey winter skies, magically glittering at nightfall...etc" Of course,
the "prisms"  were his "widely spaced crystal towers which soar higher
than any pinnacle on earth." Pinnacle here refers to Christian steeples.
As for the people far below, in the gloomy clefts of streets which
disgrace our towns, there are appalling conditions which only reveal
their full horror on Sunday, for then they are empty. Otherwise, one may
be amused during the dismal hours as people elbow their way along, by
looking into "this sea of lusts and faces."

Indeed, these pages 118-119 are truly a confession of Le Corbusier's
religious beliefs. They example much of what he did, and his purposes
for it all. This is only the foundation for his sense of World Order.
If any of that is of interest to the list, I may expand on it, up to the
point of his confession to suicide, at another time. But then, Corb is
so far from today's examples, I should not be surprised if only history
minded types cared.

Richard McBride, Assoc. Prof.
School of Architecture
University of Texas at Arlington


Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:59:24 -0600
From: mcbride3 <mcbide3@airmail.net>
To: Nold Egenter <negenter@WORLDCOM.CH>
Subject: LC's Ontology (re:CWO)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 1815
Status:

Greetings Nold:

[I sent this post yesterday evening to Des-L, but it hasn't been posted,
so this copy directly to you.]

Your reply to an earlier message of mine was very thoughtful and
provocative -- indeed, your reply was on a higher plane than my message
probably deserves.
But no matter how quickly done was mine, I would like to take your
points and reply/amplify on some of them. And also, I should like to add
one more message on certain small issues relating to Corb, and then
close them off with his death.

But first, would you send your WEB Pate ADDRESS. I could not find it in
the previous message.

Also, do you know of some way to make jpg attachments handier? I would
be good to illustrate some of Corb's thinking with his graphics, because
this work is more interesting, I think, than his words. But just using
the normal "Attachment" button on my Navigator takes quite a long time.
If there is no better way, I suppose I could break up my illustrated
comments into individual messages, one or two graphics plus text with
each message?

Again, thanks for your well read response. I has made me more aware of
certain issues than previously I had been.

Rick McBride

PS
I agree with your hesitation over the CWO thing. It is not at all
appropriate, and I used it only because someone else had planted the
term. It seemed convenient at the time.
Your choice of "ontology" is far more appropriate, and cannot be at all
in error.
I think that "cosmology" is more to the point, however, esp. concerning
LC's vision.
And yet, that too lacks reception as a  widely used aesthetic term. The
aesthetic term which fits better your meaning for an Ontological
Aesthetic would S. C. Pepper's term, Organic (being one of four
extremely large World Hypotheses). Perhaps, we may get into this
discussion as well.


Date:         Thu, 6 Jan 2000 02:40:49 -0600
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: mcbride3 <mcbride3@AIRMAIL.NET>
Subject:      previous LC message
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
Status:

OR DID IT?
Did I get the correct address on the long LC message?

I'm so sleepy I can hardly tell.

rick


Date:         Thu, 6 Jan 2000 02:30:34 -0600
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: mcbride3 <mcbride3@AIRMAIL.NET>
Subject:      Blessings for this New Year
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
 

Happy New Year
to all on the D-L list!

After having recovered my PC from the hospital (it crashed immediately
after John Young got me back on line at Christmas), and after having
survived the peaceful turn into the next century (thanks be to God), and
now that all's right with the World again,

I wish to tell the list how much I have missed receiving its thoughts.
Indeed, there are more erudite lists, but then there are also ample
examples of boring lists (some of which has been of my own creation);
but thanks to a thoughtful moderator and to many thoughtful
contributors, this one raises the thinking on design to a level which is
far more provocative than I should have imagined possible.

I hope that the year goes as well as it has started (unless you happen
to be long in the market at the moment).

Rick McBride



From ???@??? Mon Dec 20 19:17:58 1999
To: mcbride3 <mcbide3@airmail.net>
From: negenter@worldcom.ch (Nold Egenter)
Subject: Re: LC's Ontology (re:CWO)
Cc:
Bcc:
X-Attachments:
Message-Id: <v01530500b482d0c021f6@[212.74.155.101]>
 
 

Dear Richard

thank you for your message. To say it frankly, your previous text was really a discovery for me. I had always wondered where LC's extreme  convictions came from. They can not be explained by conventionally discussed backgrounds. Your suggestions gave me important hints, positively - that LC had some deeper rooted convictions - but also in the problematic sense: that modern 'architectural theory' - even in the prorammes of a most progressive modernist figure like Le Corbusier - has retained elements of a basically mythical structure.

As mentioned before, Gnosticism was very vital in the important theological and philosophical discussions of the rather syncretistic periods before Nicaea (325), particularly the important dispute between Athanasius and Arius about the relation of the AT's God father and the NT's Christ as God's son. Athanasius was logistically absolute (Identidy), whereas Arius was still more relational (difference), the process reflecting a development from 'polar logos' (Arius) to 'dualistic logos' (Athanasius).

There are other interesting Gnostic discussions, its Pneuma-Theory related to which we find also presocratic sources and its dualistic opposition to the term hyle (materia). Pneuma as 'breeze', 'breath of air', 'breath', 'movement' and its relation to 'the spiritual', 'the sacred' (the second letter of Clemens called the church 'pneumatic'!) is an interesting problem.

In short, what would be striking in a study about LeCorbusier and his relation to Gnosis and Manicheism (Parsism?) is the fact that with a modern architect - and a famous one - we come into a domain of religion, myth, archaic philosophy where things were not yet so clear as they pretend to be today. We touch a wide transitional field of thought, in which,  the deeper we go, there is an increasing empirical component which we might decode by using spatial and architectural parameters. This might provide another point in regard to LC.
 

>WEB Pate ADDRESS (Web Page Address?)

It is: http://home.worldcom.ch/~negenter
Most recent and most complete is the file: 'Research Series Online'

>Also, do you know of some way to make jpg attachments handier?

Maybe they can be compressed? But, maybe jpg is already a compressed format, e.g. compared with PICT.

______________________
>Greetings Nold:
>
>[I sent this post yesterday evening to Des-L, but it hasn't been posted,
>so this copy directly to you.]
>
>Your reply to an earlier message of mine was very thoughtful and
>provocative -- indeed, your reply was on a higher plane than my message
>probably deserves.
>But no matter how quickly done was mine, I would like to take your
>points and reply/amplify on some of them. And also, I should like to add
>one more message on certain small issues relating to Corb, and then
>close them off with his death.
>
>But first, would you send your WEB Pate ADDRESS. I could not find it in
>the previous message.
>
>Also, do you know of some way to make jpg attachments handier? I would
>be good to illustrate some of Corb's thinking with his graphics, because
>this work is more interesting, I think, than his words. But just using
>the normal "Attachment" button on my Navigator takes quite a long time.
>If there is no better way, I suppose I could break up my illustrated
>comments into individual messages, one or two graphics plus text with
>each message?
>
>Again, thanks for your well read response. I has made me more aware of
>certain issues than previously I had been.
>
>Rick McBride
>
>PS
>I agree with your hesitation over the CWO thing. It is not at all
>appropriate, and I used it only because someone else had planted the
>term. It seemed convenient at the time.
>Your choice of "ontology" is far more appropriate, and cannot be at all
>in error.
>I think that "cosmology" is more to the point, however, esp. concerning
>LC's vision.
>And yet, that too lacks reception as a  widely used aesthetic term. The
>aesthetic term which fits better your meaning for an Ontological
>Aesthetic would S. C. Pepper's term, Organic (being one of four
>extremely large World Hypotheses). Perhaps, we may get into this
>discussion as well.


Date:         Thu, 6 Jan 2000 07:34:29 -0500
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: John Young <jya@PIPELINE.COM>
Subject:      Le Corbusier (finally)
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 11194
Status:

[Forwarded for Rick McBride]

Belated reply (in part) to Nold Egenter's remarks :

Subject: Re: LC's ontology (Corbusian World Order)
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:12:19 +0100

Dear Richard,

your hypothesis that Le Corbusier had a gnostic/manicheistic component
in his worldview sounds very interesting. It would be worth to be further
developed, I think. It might provide new hints for understanding  the
tremendous energies of this epochal architectural figure and its
problematical role in our soon to end century.
........................

McB on 6 Jan says:

Looking over some of these messages, it might seem that I am promoting
myself as a Corbusian expert. Perhaps I should be, considering the
inordinate impact his design has had on my work. But truly, my interests
have been either marginal or due to a confluence of circumstances.
Indeed, I have tried to remove myself from the historical study of Le
Corbusier. Yet, it seems that at so many turns, there he was, standing
before or beside some attempted design goal, big hand raised up over his
head to catch a fly ball.

It is more a matter of fate than intention that I come by these tidbits
of Corbusian lore. And it seems necessary to say this, in light of the
opposite type of regimen displayed by Steve Lauf, who has so
energetically mined his field of Mars (and other interests); not to
loose sight of John Youngís extremely wide ranging and quick witted
knowledge of the contemporary scene. Then along comes Nold Egenter,
peering out from his deep and dark Alpine valleys, who seems to equal
both Lauf and Young in spread and enthusiasm.

Considering as much, I should say, what this scenario does NOT need is
yet another purely hypothetical and personal (i.e.: unresearched)
rendition on the subject. But that is about all I can offer, without
going to a great deal of trouble -- but perish that thought!

Perhaps, Nold Egenter may appreciate better than he realizes, the
primary trait I found in Le Corbusierís personality. It was that dour,
gray, almost sullen and certainly waspish view of the mountains which
contains and restricts the souls of the Swiss. All winter long they peer
at a craggy gray horizon above their heads. Even Swiss National Defense
contributes to the problem -- all those tunnels and caves, deep into the
rock, way down under countless tons of mountain. It is to wonder what
the change in magnetic and gravitational waves does to a person
traveling them. And when one is not spending national service time down
below, there is all that business of sealed doors into everything above
ground. Its like living in a submarine, with windows -- looking at gray
mountains swimming by in the mist. Beautiful as early Summer may be in
Switzerland, it seems winter is so long and summer so short, that even
the period of blue skies isnít enough to raise the Swiss spirits.

Its not until the Swiss escape beyond the Alpine rim that they become
imbued with a new soul -- a soul of sunlight and fresh breezes.
Unhappily, some of them are too fixed to the old valleys to be able to

engage the new soul. Le Corbusier, I think, realized as much. Yet, the
duality of which Nold so poetically spoke was there. Corb was constantly
seeking the sun, and just as often he seemed to find the downpour.

Once I had become fairly certain of Le Corbusierís secrete Gnosticism (I
say secret because no one at the time spoke of it, yet, it was known
that his mother was Cathar), I asked Jullian dela Fuente about it. He
said most assuredly that that was the case. In fact, Jullian accompanied
Corb on a trip into the Pyrenees to visit a Gnostic convent. I believe
they stayed only a short while, not over night. Still, the visit cannot
but reinforce the strong belief in his curious religious ways. It must
have been a very deep belief (deep like those Alpine tunnels) to have
carried on for centuries in the family. (I believe I mentioned earlier
that the family had been forced out of the town of Albi, as I recall,
during the latter stages of the Huguenot persecutions; and since being
Albigensian is tantamount to being Gnostic, it seems that this last
attempt to rid the country of Gnostics [the previous purge had been
around 1200AD] was lumped in with the general purge of Protestants.)

As for the later history of the Gnosticism, it is only speculation on
how far back its roots in Manicheism may go. What increases speculation
is the extensiveness of the writings of Mani. Fragments of his work have
been recovered in more than the Persian language, in Coptic, in
Uigur-Turkish and in Chinese. But Mani himself was born about 215 AD.
Indeed, Maniís intention was to fulfill the role of the paraclete
successor to Jesus.

This later history of Manicheism entwines with Gnosticism after Maniís
time, erupting dramatically in the person of Augustine of Tagaste, later
to become the Blessed Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo. It arose in
several other heresies, often with powerful consequences, not the least
of its defendants having been Origin. And it continues to this day,
capturing the imaginations of many, usually theologically naive,
converts. Perhaps, Ayn Randís followers are not even an outstanding
version of contemporary Gnosticism, so prolific has it become.
Generally, it may be detected as the underpinning to most New Age
thinking, when that form of thinking becomes specific enough to be tied
down. However, Gnosticism never becomes organized enough to substantiate
a solid theology. Its argument always falls into a logically
indefensible dualism -- justifying itself, somehow, by the very fact of
its contradictory basis. The Churchís position is that had not Satan
been chained for the past two thousand years (leaving a fairly clear
road for Christianity to travel), Gnosticism could well be the religion
of choice today. This belief suggests that what Gnosticism lacks in
Christian revelatory authenticity is made up for in its covert
association with creative witchcraft and demonology. Since it is such a
large presence in US high schools, I can understand the Churchís
antipathy toward it.

Prior to Maniís time, the prevailing Gnostic currents were encapsuled in
Zoroastrianism and Buddhism. It of course supported some sort of

salvation, and as Nold has said, it was founded upon a primeval conflict
between the kingdom of darkness, evil, chaos, cupidity and all manner of
iniquitous stuff, and a kingdom of light, life, orderly peace, and many
other good things. The good kingdom became dominant when it managed to
devise a combination of that mixed up crazy world for the sake of
salvation -- a purification of the rotten oleo, used to restore what was
presumed to have been a preexistent separation between goodness and
evil. etc. etc.

I suppose the point for our story is that Gnosticism possesses neither a
well structured theology nor a sophisticated logic. It could appeal, one
must imagine, only to the naive and the lazy -- with an important
exception. Gnosticism has also appealed to brilliant defenders of that
subfaith as a vehicle for obtaining power. Origin and Blessed Augustine,
to my mind, fall into this latter group. Presumably, so does Le
Corbusier.

Having said that, it must be added that even though DUALISM is at the
heart of the Gnostic heresy, dualism itself does not always limit itself
to such ad homonym arguments. For dualism is also at the heart of
Ontology, as that study which refers to the knowledge of being. Ontology
parallels the rise of Modernism in Western thinking. Modernism issued
forth with the pronouncements against the Church by John Locke, circa
1700, and thus the inception of the English Enlightenment and modern
Science. Ontology as a term came into general use by that time as well,
having been initiated by Goclenius and developed by Clauberg, about 50
years earlier. Ontology has had at least two avenues of thinking. The
(later) Scholastic version has rendered it more applicable to
metaphysics, while the more abstract version has followed the line of
mathematical logic. Quine has become the modern advocate of the latter
version. I donít know who might champion the other -- perhaps, Le
Corbusier? No, I think not.

I mention all this because Nold has opted for the Ontological theme for
LC, which is a necessary improvement over my misspoken use of "WO". But
considering the extent of his interests, it may also be suggested that
Le Corbusierís ultimate ambitions are more in line with the seven rings
of Gnostic heaven, than with either metaphysics or mathematical logic.
Thus, it would seem that "cosmology" better describes the range of his
interest than "ontology". Certainly, his thinking was broad enough to
support the Cosmological thesis.

For Gnostics there are traditionally three levels of existence. At the
bottom there are the grunts, the Workers -- as I said earlier, ìfar
below in the gloomy clefts of streets which disgrace our towns...î (from
pp. 118-119 Oeuvre Complete 1910-1929). Over the Workers are the
Soldiers who are capable of carrying out the orders of the highest, the
teachers, or the Elect. It was Corbusierís mission to teach as many as
would harken, of the way to heaven. If one learned oneís lessons
properly, one was instilled with the urgent need to return oneís own
splinter of light to its source in the seven layers of heaven, without
having splintered it further through procreation. But one also needs the

key for getting there. The malignant god is always trying to thwart that
sacred passage back to the higher heavens, so it is not an easy task.
Again, it was LCís mission to teach of the way.

The final statement of Le Corbusier begins, "I am 77 years old, and my
moral philosophy can be reduced to this: In life it is necessary above
all to act, and by that I mean, to act in a spirit of modesty, with
exactitude, with precision." There was, however, a great distance
between his ambitions and reality, for this last letter is also a sad
recognition of failure, for "A large number of excellent projects...were
torpedoed by the bureaucrats."

This almost bitter recognition of his exclusion from power elite shows
up often in LCís remarks. It may be this bitterness which lead him to
sympathize with the Vichy Government during the war. Yet,
"In Chandigarh, one evening, I said to Pierre Jeanneret: 'Only those who
play are serious types!...The mountain climbers, the rugby players and
the card players, and the gamblers, are all frauds, for they do not
play...A reason for existing: to play the game, To participate, but as a
human being, that is to say, within a system of order, within a pure
order.' "

Then, "I have been endowed with occult powers, higher mathematics, the wisdom
of numbers, etc. I am a stupid ass, but one who has an eye that sees...I
am and I remain an impenitent visionary...the Modulor is always right,
but you are the ones who feel nothing."

Le Corbusier said, "Consider also the entire world rounded by the azure
sky replete with the good that men will have achieved...for, after all,
everything returns to the sea."
For Gnostics, the sea is a vision of heaven.

On August 27, 1969, Le Corbusier waded out into the sea to begin his
journey among the stars.



From ???@??? Fri Dec 17 16:10:35 1999
To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"  <DESIGN-L@lists1.cac.psu.edu>
From: negenter@worldcom.ch (Nold Egenter)
Subject: Re: LC's ontology (Corbusian World Order)
Cc:
Bcc:
X-Attachments:
Message-Id: <v01530501b471a9b89ef2@[212.74.155.39]>
 

Dear Richard,

your hypothesis that Le Corbusier had a gnostic/manicheistic component in his worldview sounds very interesting. It would be worth to be further developed, I think. It might provide new hints for understanding  the tremendous energies of this epochal architectural figure and its problematical role in our soon to end century.

You write:
>Perhaps he knew that these
>two notions -- Manicheism and Gnosticism -- were a continuous line of
>thinking, and not merely the Christian heretical pigeon hole normally
>assigned to Gnosticism. Thus, Corbu's interest in the subject is based
>upon a set of dogma going back at least to 400BC.

This is the most important, but probably also the most critical point. First, to make this *continuous line of thinking* plausible and second, to provide sources showing that LC had a sufficiently strong interface with such concepts. Some remarks in the following:

As you suggest, Gnosis and Manicheism would have to be dealt with structurally, stressing the drama along this 'axis mundi' of an absolute dualism. Two vertically aligned spatial empires, one of lightness, the other of darkness. Nota bene: occupied by kings (a common mythical trait: the inaccessible domain is socially structured).

Important: the moral concepts it suggests, a kind of light-mysticism. The son of the light king, temporally primordial man. He heroically enters into conflict with the powers of darkness. Its outcome decides who ends in light, who ends in the dark. Plausible for LC's outlooks!

And, as you indicate, convincing presentation of LC's Gnostic/Manicheistic backgrounds could clarify his  uncompromising dualistic rationalism, his emphasis on form, neglecting the factual humane conditions (e.g. the gigantomanic horror of the Paris plan!).

His egocentric quasi fanatic self conviction would gain a plausible background. Le Corbusier's world view could be of interest also to those who search for mythical (or pseudo-theological) survivals in modern architectural theory.

Definitely Gnosticism would also imply eternity. But, very likely, in this respect,  LC would turn in his grave today, could he see that, what was based on very ancient convictions and what was built to survive him, is already dead to a great part, at least theoretically, if we refer to Jenck's dictum 'Modernism is dead'.

Regarding Gnosis and Manicheism:  both had probably much deeper roots than 400BC. If one sees them structurally in a wider transitional field between preurban village cultures and their developments into urban monumental civilisations with beginnings of written history, concepts like heaven and earth, light and darkness, destruction of the world by fire, etc.  can be recognised as part of a preurban village stratum, but such structural concepts were later conceived in spatially expanded ways due to the extension of early city states (see 'Urban Rural Dichotomy' in our website). New, more extended concepts had to be handled with care as Akhenaton's case shows. His misjudgment of the conventional territorially bound cult system as a constitutional factor is unique in the Ancient World: all his 'imperial' sun-disk cult sites were destroyed after his death! Further, the Ancient Testament can be seen as a synthesis of the high culture of Egypt's New Empire and Hebraic agrarian, resp. cattle breeder populations. Platon too belongs into this transitional field between pre-urban village cultures and early urban empires experimenting speculatively with greater axial systems (Ancient Egypt/Mesopotamia -> Heraclitus -> Parmenides -> Platon and the 'Aristotelic reaction'). Gnostic traditions played also an important role in the second century AD, before  Nicaea (325) and later when European outlooks were programmed as an action / reaction scheme by absolute analytical postulates of  empirical versus idealistic 'realities'.

Plausible also in view of the 'redemption' element of Gnosis and Manicheism: Le Corbusier, a Redeemer who was prepared to play the role of a heretic in the premodern 'Academism' with the frenetic belief that modern  design (light, hygiene, mobility, etc.) would make human life more heavenly.

The most imortant insight of your suggestion: the seemingly ultra-modernist Le Corbusier gained his ultimate convictions from history, from myth, from religion. He might thus may be studied as an example of the 'primordial legitimation syndrome'.

Maybe he failed, because, like so many others, he remained trapped in historical constructs and their fictive grandeurs.  Unaware of the factual time depths of architecture (~~22 million years!), he was prisoner of a merely historically postulated absolute dualism (See 'polarity' and 'dualism' in our website)

>If any of that is of interest to the list, I may expand on it, up to the
>point of his confession to suicide, at another time.

Please do!

>But then, Corb is
>so far from today's examples, I should not be surprised if only history
>minded types cared.

I don't think so: there was an exhibition on spiritual roots of modern art some years ago (LA?). It was discussed with considerable interest.
 

Best regards,
 

Nold Egenter

P.S.: Probably the expression 'world order' for Le Corbusier is not adequate. You probably meant 'ontology', world view. The latter has no political aftertaste and is not necessarily global.
 

____________________

>Sometime ago Brian asked what I meant by this term, and it recently
>occurred to me that I should be more precise about it.
>
>Phase I
>The Corbusian World Order would have little to do with Clinton's vision
>of it, but Plato would probably recognize Corb's ambitions. But none of
>this trio were too modest to want to see their name in lights as king
>(one wonders if Clinton will make his move behind the curtain of some
>Y2K FEMA emergency act?); one difference: While both Plato's and Corbu's
>version of World Order were Organic and religious, Clinton's would
>presumably be Mechanistic and profane.
>
>Thus, in Corbu's cosmos there was this a little known allegiance to a
>god. This god would be the controller of Corbu's universe, and perhaps
>Corbu might be at his right hand; I not certain, but such would fit his
>ego.
>It is very nearly fact now, that Corbu's scheme of things would fit into
>a cosmological plan, and the World was a primary part of this scheme.
>
>The Cosmological Scheme
>I came to this conclusion by accident while researching Sumarian and
>Mesopotamian texts at the British Museum Library, in 1985. A connection
>sprang up from a mental note out of Corbu's "Journey to the Orient",
>wherein he remarked upon six winged genii. I guess this comment stuck
>because I had only seen the four winged variety portrayed. In the BM
>though, I saw my first depiction of a six-winger. And then Corbu's many
>comments re: the Temple of Man came to mind (before this I had
>associated the phrase only with Jesus' phrase, the Son of Man). But as I
>came across an obscure Persian god, Man (not to be confused with Mani),
>and his potential relationship to Manicheism, other peculiar but
>persistent comments of Corbu's came to mind. (Cf specifically p.118-19
>of Oeuvre Complete 1910-1929.) It began to emerge that many of Corbu's
>comments were solid Manicheistic theology, and at the same time, they
>were compatible with much Gnostic commentary. Perhaps he knew that these
>two notions -- Manicheism and Gnosticism -- were a continuous line of
>thinking, and not merely the Christian heretical pigeon hole normally
>assigned to Gnosticism. Thus, Corbu's interest in the subject is based
>upon a set of dogma going back at least to 400BC.
>Also, at some point (I cannot remember whether it was before or after
>1985) I found out that Corbu's mother was Gnostic. That being the case,
>it became highly likely that Corbu's family left France in 17thC (which
>he mentions) because they were driven out. They were from the infamous
>town of Albi, and to this day, the term, "Albigensian", refers to those
>Gnostics run off by virtue of the religious persecutions at the time.
>
>As a Gnostic, Corbu would reverence knowledge and light. His theology
>would believe in a malignant god (probably, Yahweh) who had been tossed
>out of the rings of heaven for his obstreperous actions up there. This
>god was given the Earth as his special plaything to keep him out of
>problems above.
>As a result, Earth is the evil plaything of this god, and this god's
>purpose is to entrap all the souls on Earth for his own purposes. Each
>soul is represented by a splinter of light broken off from the higher
>heavens and fractured over and over among the procreations on Earth.
>Given this scenario, there are two primary motives for a good Gnostic to
>follow. First, one must be a teacher of the light, and thus convert as
>many souls as possible to the higher heavens. Second, one must not
>splinter the already diffused splinters of light any further.
>In other words, if it were followed, Gnosticism, like many Quaker sects,
>could not thrive because they do not believe in procreation. Le
>Corbusier married a couple of times, but he never had children.
>
>The Earthly Scheme
>Among Corbu's Gnostic beliefs lay the source for his piloti schemes. I
>once asked Bernhard Hoesli (about whom Corbu said, "He is the only
>person who ever worked for me who has some of the same talent that I
>myself possess.") what was the basis for piloti models, and especially
>why did Corb persist in the massive Unite schemes (Bernhard had done
>much designing on the first Unite at Marsailles, while he was also
>compiling the first Modulor for Corb). Hoesli did agree that the Unite
>had proved to be a disaster, but he claimed not to know why their form
>persisted, nor what was behind the piloti form.
>Well, I now know that this is what was behind it! Corbu hated the Earth
>because it was evil. One must have as little contact with it as
>possible. Instead, one must seek a spot closer to the heavens, in "These
>translucent prisms that seem to float in the air without anchorage to he
>ground -- flashing in the summer sunshine, softly gleaming under the
>grey winter skies, magically glittering at nightfall...etc" Of course,
>the "prisms"  were his "widely spaced crystal towers which soar higher
>than any pinnacle on earth." Pinnacle here refers to Christian steeples.
>As for the people far below, in the gloomy clefts of streets which
>disgrace our towns, there are appalling conditions which only reveal
>their full horror on Sunday, for then they are empty. Otherwise, one may
>be amused during the dismal hours as people elbow their way along, by
>looking into "this sea of lusts and faces."
>
>Indeed, these pages 118-119 are truly a confession of Le Corbusier's
>religious beliefs. They example much of what he did, and his purposes
>for it all. This is only the foundation for his sense of World Order.
>If any of that is of interest to the list, I may expand on it, up to the
>point of his confession to suicide, at another time. But then, Corb is
>so far from today's examples, I should not be surprised if only history
>minded types cared.
>
>Richard McBride, Assoc. Prof.
>School of Architecture
>University of Texas at Arlington

----

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:59:24 -0600
From: mcbride3 <mcbide3@airmail.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Nold Egenter <negenter@WORLDCOM.CH>
Subject: LC's Ontology (re:CWO)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 1815
Status:

Greetings Nold:

[I sent this post yesterday evening to Des-L, but it hasn't been posted,
so this copy directly to you.]

Your reply to an earlier message of mine was very thoughtful and
provocative -- indeed, your reply was on a higher plane than my message
probably deserves.
But no matter how quickly done was mine, I would like to take your
points and reply/amplify on some of them. And also, I should like to add
one more message on certain small issues relating to Corb, and then
close them off with his death.

But first, would you send your WEB Pate ADDRESS. I could not find it in
the previous message.

Also, do you know of some way to make jpg attachments handier? I would
be good to illustrate some of Corb's thinking with his graphics, because
this work is more interesting, I think, than his words. But just using
the normal "Attachment" button on my Navigator takes quite a long time.
If there is no better way, I suppose I could break up my illustrated
comments into individual messages, one or two graphics plus text with
each message?

Again, thanks for your well read response. I has made me more aware of
certain issues than previously I had been.

Rick McBride

PS
I agree with your hesitation over the CWO thing. It is not at all
appropriate, and I used it only because someone else had planted the
term. It seemed convenient at the time.
Your choice of "ontology" is far more appropriate, and cannot be at all
in error.
I think that "cosmology" is more to the point, however, esp. concerning
LC's vision.
And yet, that too lacks reception as a  widely used aesthetic term. The
aesthetic term which fits better your meaning for an Ontological
Aesthetic would S. C. Pepper's term, Organic (being one of four
extremely large World Hypotheses). Perhaps, we may get into this
discussion as well.



From ???@??? Mon Dec 20 18:58:56 1999
To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"               <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: negenter@worldcom.ch (Nold Egenter)
Subject: Re: Admin Stuff
Cc:
Bcc:
X-Attachments:
Message-Id: <v01530500b4841a7e4b32@[212.74.155.101]>

John wrote:

>Apology, Nold, for misspelling your surname, sir.
>
>Mail is now arriving here, thanks for the feedback.
>
>Something's awry with the server. It unsubbed me
>a while back, perhaps as a result of the switchover
>to a new box, perhaps due to "fixing Y2K" which
>now seems to be a mantra for concealing inept
>fiddling while Rome incinerates. TEOTWAWWIW.

____________________

Dear John,

Rick had answered privately to me. I did not understand why *it hasn't been posted*. Now I do and send his answer and my short reply to the list again. A longer reply to Rick will follow.

____________________

Dear Rick,

just two points:

>WEB Pate ADDRESS (Web Page Address?)

It is: http://home.worldcom.ch/~negenter
Most recent and most complete is the file: 'Research Series Online'

>Also, do you know of some way to make jpg attachments handier?

Maybe they can be compressed? But, maybe jpg is already a compressed format, e.g. compared with PICT. Sorry, technically I feel rather like a 'bricoleur' in the sense of Levy-Strauss!

This is just for the moment, I will send you a longer reply later

Regards,

Nold
 

______________________

Rick wrote:

>>Greetings Nold:
>>
>>[I sent this post yesterday evening to Des-L, but it hasn't been posted,
>>so this copy directly to you.]
>>
>>Your reply to an earlier message of mine was very thoughtful and
>>provocative -- indeed, your reply was on a higher plane than my message
>>probably deserves.
>>But no matter how quickly done was mine, I would like to take your
>>points and reply/amplify on some of them. And also, I should like to add
>>one more message on certain small issues relating to Corb, and then
>>close them off with his death.
>>
>>But first, would you send your WEB Pate ADDRESS. I could not find it in
>>the previous message.
>>
>>Also, do you know of some way to make jpg attachments handier? I would
>>be good to illustrate some of Corb's thinking with his graphics, because
>>this work is more interesting, I think, than his words. But just using
>>the normal "Attachment" button on my Navigator takes quite a long time.
>>If there is no better way, I suppose I could break up my illustrated
>>comments into individual messages, one or two graphics plus text with
>>each message?
>>
>>Again, thanks for your well read response. I has made me more aware of
>>certain issues than previously I had been.
>>
>>Rick McBride
>>
>>PS
>>I agree with your hesitation over the CWO thing. It is not at all
>>appropriate, and I used it only because someone else had planted the
>>term. It seemed convenient at the time.
>>Your choice of "ontology" is far more appropriate, and cannot be at all
>>in error.
>>I think that "cosmology" is more to the point, however, esp. concerning
>>LC's vision.
>>And yet, that too lacks reception as a  widely used aesthetic term. The
>>aesthetic term which fits better your meaning for an Ontological
>>Aesthetic would S. C. Pepper's term, Organic (being one of four
>>extremely large World Hypotheses). Perhaps, we may get into this
>>discussion as well.



Date:         Thu, 6 Jan 2000 02:40:49 -0600
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: mcbride3 <mcbride3@AIRMAIL.NET>
Subject:      previous LC message
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 105
Status:

OR DID IT?
Did I get the correct address on the long LC message?

I'm so sleepy I can hardly tell.

rick



Date:         Thu, 6 Jan 2000 02:30:34 -0600
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: mcbride3 <mcbride3@AIRMAIL.NET>
Subject:      Blessings for this New Year
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 825
Status:

Happy New Year
to all on the D-L list!

After having recovered my PC from the hospital (it crashed immediately
after John Young got me back on line at Christmas), and after having
survived the peaceful turn into the next century (thanks be to God), and
now that all's right with the World again,

I wish to tell the list how much I have missed receiving its thoughts.
Indeed, there are more erudite lists, but then there are also ample
examples of boring lists (some of which has been of my own creation);
but thanks to a thoughtful moderator and to many thoughtful
contributors, this one raises the thinking on design to a level which is
far more provocative than I should have imagined possible.

I hope that the year goes as well as it has started (unless you happen
to be long in the market at the moment).

Rick McBride



From ???@??? Mon Dec 20 19:17:58 1999
To: mcbride3 <mcbide3@airmail.net>
From: negenter@worldcom.ch (Nold Egenter)
Subject: Re: LC's Ontology (re:CWO)
Cc:
Bcc:
X-Attachments:
Message-Id: <v01530500b482d0c021f6@[212.74.155.101]>
 
 

Dear Richard

thank you for your message. To say it frankly, your previous text was really a discovery for me. I had always wondered where LC's extreme  convictions came from. They can not be explained by conventionally discussed backgrounds. Your suggestions gave me important hints, positively - that LC had some deeper rooted convictions - but also in the problematic sense: that modern 'architectural theory' - even in the prorammes of a most progressive modernist figure like Le Corbusier - has retained elements of a basically mythical structure.

As mentioned before, Gnosticism was very vital in the important theological and philosophical discussions of the rather syncretistic periods before Nicaea (325), particularly the important dispute between Athanasius and Arius about the relation of the AT's God father and the NT's Christ as God's son. Athanasius was logistically absolute (Identidy), whereas Arius was still more relational (difference), the process reflecting a development from 'polar logos' (Arius) to 'dualistic logos' (Athanasius).

There are other interesting Gnostic discussions, its Pneuma-Theory related to which we find also presocratic sources and its dualistic opposition to the term hyle (materia). Pneuma as 'breeze', 'breath of air', 'breath', 'movement' and its relation to 'the spiritual', 'the sacred' (the second letter of Clemens called the church 'pneumatic'!) is an interesting problem.

In short, what would be striking in a study about LeCorbusier and his relation to Gnosis and Manicheism (Parsism?) is the fact that with a modern architect - and a famous one - we come into a domain of religion, myth, archaic philosophy where things were not yet so clear as they pretend to be today. We touch a wide transitional field of thought, in which,  the deeper we go, there is an increasing empirical component which we might decode by using spatial and architectural parameters. This might provide another point in regard to LC.
 

>WEB Pate ADDRESS (Web Page Address?)

It is: http://home.worldcom.ch/~negenter
Most recent and most complete is the file: 'Research Series Online'

>Also, do you know of some way to make jpg attachments handier?

Maybe they can be compressed? But, maybe jpg is already a compressed format, e.g. compared with PICT.

______________________
>Greetings Nold:
>
>[I sent this post yesterday evening to Des-L, but it hasn't been posted,
>so this copy directly to you.]
>
>Your reply to an earlier message of mine was very thoughtful and
>provocative -- indeed, your reply was on a higher plane than my message
>probably deserves.
>But no matter how quickly done was mine, I would like to take your
>points and reply/amplify on some of them. And also, I should like to add
>one more message on certain small issues relating to Corb, and then
>close them off with his death.
>
>But first, would you send your WEB Pate ADDRESS. I could not find it in
>the previous message.
>
>Also, do you know of some way to make jpg attachments handier? I would
>be good to illustrate some of Corb's thinking with his graphics, because
>this work is more interesting, I think, than his words. But just using
>the normal "Attachment" button on my Navigator takes quite a long time.
>If there is no better way, I suppose I could break up my illustrated
>comments into individual messages, one or two graphics plus text with
>each message?
>
>Again, thanks for your well read response. I has made me more aware of
>certain issues than previously I had been.
>
>Rick McBride
>
>PS
>I agree with your hesitation over the CWO thing. It is not at all
>appropriate, and I used it only because someone else had planted the
>term. It seemed convenient at the time.
>Your choice of "ontology" is far more appropriate, and cannot be at all
>in error.
>I think that "cosmology" is more to the point, however, esp. concerning
>LC's vision.
>And yet, that too lacks reception as a  widely used aesthetic term. The
>aesthetic term which fits better your meaning for an Ontological
>Aesthetic would S. C. Pepper's term, Organic (being one of four
>extremely large World Hypotheses). Perhaps, we may get into this
>discussion as well.



Date:         Thu, 6 Jan 2000 07:34:29 -0500
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: John Young <jya@PIPELINE.COM>
Subject:      Le Corbusier (finally)
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 11194
Status:

[Forwarded for Rick McBride]

Belated reply (in part) to Nold Egenter's remarks :

Subject: Re: LC's ontology (Corbusian World Order)
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:12:19 +0100

Dear Richard,

your hypothesis that Le Corbusier had a gnostic/manicheistic component
in his worldview sounds very interesting. It would be worth to be further
developed, I think. It might provide new hints for understanding  the
tremendous energies of this epochal architectural figure and its
problematical role in our soon to end century.
........................

McB on 6 Jan says:

Looking over some of these messages, it might seem that I am promoting
myself as a Corbusian expert. Perhaps I should be, considering the
inordinate impact his design has had on my work. But truly, my interests
have been either marginal or due to a confluence of circumstances.
Indeed, I have tried to remove myself from the historical study of Le
Corbusier. Yet, it seems that at so many turns, there he was, standing
before or beside some attempted design goal, big hand raised up over his
head to catch a fly ball.

It is more a matter of fate than intention that I come by these tidbits
of Corbusian lore. And it seems necessary to say this, in light of the
opposite type of regimen displayed by Steve Lauf, who has so
energetically mined his field of Mars (and other interests); not to
loose sight of John Youngís extremely wide ranging and quick witted
knowledge of the contemporary scene. Then along comes Nold Egenter,
peering out from his deep and dark Alpine valleys, who seems to equal
both Lauf and Young in spread and enthusiasm.

Considering as much, I should say, what this scenario does NOT need is
yet another purely hypothetical and personal (i.e.: unresearched)
rendition on the subject. But that is about all I can offer, without
going to a great deal of trouble -- but perish that thought!

Perhaps, Nold Egenter may appreciate better than he realizes, the
primary trait I found in Le Corbusierís personality. It was that dour,
gray, almost sullen and certainly waspish view of the mountains which
contains and restricts the souls of the Swiss. All winter long they peer
at a craggy gray horizon above their heads. Even Swiss National Defense
contributes to the problem -- all those tunnels and caves, deep into the
rock, way down under countless tons of mountain. It is to wonder what
the change in magnetic and gravitational waves does to a person
traveling them. And when one is not spending national service time down
below, there is all that business of sealed doors into everything above
ground. Its like living in a submarine, with windows -- looking at gray
mountains swimming by in the mist. Beautiful as early Summer may be in
Switzerland, it seems winter is so long and summer so short, that even
the period of blue skies isnít enough to raise the Swiss spirits.

Its not until the Swiss escape beyond the Alpine rim that they become
imbued with a new soul -- a soul of sunlight and fresh breezes.
Unhappily, some of them are too fixed to the old valleys to be able to

engage the new soul. Le Corbusier, I think, realized as much. Yet, the
duality of which Nold so poetically spoke was there. Corb was constantly
seeking the sun, and just as often he seemed to find the downpour.

Once I had become fairly certain of Le Corbusierís secrete Gnosticism (I
say secret because no one at the time spoke of it, yet, it was known
that his mother was Cathar), I asked Jullian dela Fuente about it. He
said most assuredly that that was the case. In fact, Jullian accompanied
Corb on a trip into the Pyrenees to visit a Gnostic convent. I believe
they stayed only a short while, not over night. Still, the visit cannot
but reinforce the strong belief in his curious religious ways. It must
have been a very deep belief (deep like those Alpine tunnels) to have
carried on for centuries in the family. (I believe I mentioned earlier
that the family had been forced out of the town of Albi, as I recall,
during the latter stages of the Huguenot persecutions; and since being
Albigensian is tantamount to being Gnostic, it seems that this last
attempt to rid the country of Gnostics [the previous purge had been
around 1200AD] was lumped in with the general purge of Protestants.)

As for the later history of the Gnosticism, it is only speculation on
how far back its roots in Manicheism may go. What increases speculation
is the extensiveness of the writings of Mani. Fragments of his work have
been recovered in more than the Persian language, in Coptic, in
Uigur-Turkish and in Chinese. But Mani himself was born about 215 AD.
Indeed, Maniís intention was to fulfill the role of the paraclete
successor to Jesus.

This later history of Manicheism entwines with Gnosticism after Maniís
time, erupting dramatically in the person of Augustine of Tagaste, later
to become the Blessed Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo. It arose in
several other heresies, often with powerful consequences, not the least
of its defendants having been Origin. And it continues to this day,
capturing the imaginations of many, usually theologically naive,
converts. Perhaps, Ayn Randís followers are not even an outstanding
version of contemporary Gnosticism, so prolific has it become.
Generally, it may be detected as the underpinning to most New Age
thinking, when that form of thinking becomes specific enough to be tied
down. However, Gnosticism never becomes organized enough to substantiate
a solid theology. Its argument always falls into a logically
indefensible dualism -- justifying itself, somehow, by the very fact of
its contradictory basis. The Churchís position is that had not Satan
been chained for the past two thousand years (leaving a fairly clear
road for Christianity to travel), Gnosticism could well be the religion
of choice today. This belief suggests that what Gnosticism lacks in
Christian revelatory authenticity is made up for in its covert
association with creative witchcraft and demonology. Since it is such a
large presence in US high schools, I can understand the Churchís
antipathy toward it.

Prior to Maniís time, the prevailing Gnostic currents were encapsuled in
Zoroastrianism and Buddhism. It of course supported some sort of

salvation, and as Nold has said, it was founded upon a primeval conflict
between the kingdom of darkness, evil, chaos, cupidity and all manner of
iniquitous stuff, and a kingdom of light, life, orderly peace, and many
other good things. The good kingdom became dominant when it managed to
devise a combination of that mixed up crazy world for the sake of
salvation -- a purification of the rotten oleo, used to restore what was
presumed to have been a preexistent separation between goodness and
evil. etc. etc.

I suppose the point for our story is that Gnosticism possesses neither a
well structured theology nor a sophisticated logic. It could appeal, one
must imagine, only to the naive and the lazy -- with an important
exception. Gnosticism has also appealed to brilliant defenders of that
subfaith as a vehicle for obtaining power. Origin and Blessed Augustine,
to my mind, fall into this latter group. Presumably, so does Le
Corbusier.

Having said that, it must be added that even though DUALISM is at the
heart of the Gnostic heresy, dualism itself does not always limit itself
to such ad homonym arguments. For dualism is also at the heart of
Ontology, as that study which refers to the knowledge of being. Ontology
parallels the rise of Modernism in Western thinking. Modernism issued
forth with the pronouncements against the Church by John Locke, circa
1700, and thus the inception of the English Enlightenment and modern
Science. Ontology as a term came into general use by that time as well,
having been initiated by Goclenius and developed by Clauberg, about 50
years earlier. Ontology has had at least two avenues of thinking. The
(later) Scholastic version has rendered it more applicable to
metaphysics, while the more abstract version has followed the line of
mathematical logic. Quine has become the modern advocate of the latter
version. I donít know who might champion the other -- perhaps, Le
Corbusier? No, I think not.

I mention all this because Nold has opted for the Ontological theme for
LC, which is a necessary improvement over my misspoken use of "WO". But
considering the extent of his interests, it may also be suggested that
Le Corbusierís ultimate ambitions are more in line with the seven rings
of Gnostic heaven, than with either metaphysics or mathematical logic.
Thus, it would seem that "cosmology" better describes the range of his
interest than "ontology". Certainly, his thinking was broad enough to
support the Cosmological thesis.

For Gnostics there are traditionally three levels of existence. At the
bottom there are the grunts, the Workers -- as I said earlier, ìfar
below in the gloomy clefts of streets which disgrace our towns...î (from
pp. 118-119 Oeuvre Complete 1910-1929). Over the Workers are the
Soldiers who are capable of carrying out the orders of the highest, the
teachers, or the Elect. It was Corbusierís mission to teach as many as
would harken, of the way to heaven. If one learned oneís lessons
properly, one was instilled with the urgent need to return oneís own
splinter of light to its source in the seven layers of heaven, without
having splintered it further through procreation. But one also needs the

key for getting there. The malignant god is always trying to thwart that
sacred passage back to the higher heavens, so it is not an easy task.
Again, it was LCís mission to teach of the way.

The final statement of Le Corbusier begins, "I am 77 years old, and my
moral philosophy can be reduced to this: In life it is necessary above
all to act, and by that I mean, to act in a spirit of modesty, with
exactitude, with precision." There was, however, a great distance
between his ambitions and reality, for this last letter is also a sad
recognition of failure, for "A large number of excellent projects...were
torpedoed by the bureaucrats."

This almost bitter recognition of his exclusion from power elite shows
up often in LCís remarks. It may be this bitterness which lead him to
sympathize with the Vichy Government during the war. Yet,
"In Chandigarh, one evening, I said to Pierre Jeanneret: 'Only those who
play are serious types!...The mountain climbers, the rugby players and
the card players, and the gamblers, are all frauds, for they do not
play...A reason for existing: to play the game, To participate, but as a
human being, that is to say, within a system of order, within a pure
order.' "

Then, "I have been endowed with occult powers, higher mathematics, the wisdom
of numbers, etc. I am a stupid ass, but one who has an eye that sees...I
am and I remain an impenitent visionary...the Modulor is always right,
but you are the ones who feel nothing."

Le Corbusier said, "Consider also the entire world rounded by the azure
sky replete with the good that men will have achieved...for, after all,
everything returns to the sea."
For Gnostics, the sea is a vision of heaven.

On August 27, 1969, Le Corbusier waded out into the sea to begin his
journey among the stars.



Date:         Fri, 17 Dec 1999 16:12:19 +0100
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: Nold Egenter <negenter@WORLDCOM.CH>
Subject:      Re: LC's ontology (Corbusian World Order)
Comments: To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
          <DESIGN-L@lists1.cac.psu.edu>
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 11471
Status:

Dear Richard,

your hypothesis that Le Corbusier had a gnostic/manicheistic component in
his worldview sounds very interesting. It would be worth to be further
developed, I think. It might provide new hints for understanding  the
tremendous energies of this epochal architectural figure and its
problematical role in our soon to end century.

You write:
>Perhaps he knew that these
>two notions -- Manicheism and Gnosticism -- were a continuous line of
>thinking, and not merely the Christian heretical pigeon hole normally
>assigned to Gnosticism. Thus, Corbu's interest in the subject is based
>upon a set of dogma going back at least to 400BC.

This is the most important, but probably also the most critical point.
First, to make this *continuous line of thinking* plausible and second, to
provide sources showing that LC had a sufficiently strong interface with
such concepts. Some remarks in the following:

* As you suggest, Gnosis and Manicheism would have to be dealt with
structurally, stressing the drama along this 'axis mundi' of an absolute
dualism. Two vertically aligned spatial empires, one of lightness, the
other of darkness. Nota bene: occupied by kings (a common mythical trait:
the inaccessible domain is socially structured).

* Important: the moral concepts it suggests, a kind of light-mysticism. The
son of the light king, temporally primordial man. He heroically enters into
conflict with the powers of darkness. Its outcome decides who ends in
light, who ends in the dark. Plausible for LC's outlooks!

* And, as you indicate, convincing presentation of LC's
Gnostic/Manicheistic backgrounds could clarify his  uncompromising
dualistic rationalism, his emphasis on form, neglecting the factual humane
conditions (e.g. the gigantomanic horror of the Paris plan!).

* His egocentric quasi fanatic self conviction would gain a plausible
background. Le Corbusier's world view could be of interest also to those
who search for mythical (or pseudo-theological) survivals in modern
architectural theory.

* Definitely Gnosticism would also imply eternity. But, very likely, in
this respect,  LC would turn in his grave today, could he see that, what
was based on very ancient convictions and what was built to survive him, is
already dead to a great part, at least theoretically, if we refer to
Jenck's dictum 'Modernism is dead'.

* Regarding Gnosis and Manicheism:  both had probably much deeper roots
than 400BC. If one sees them structurally in a wider transitional field
between preurban village cultures and their developments into urban
monumental civilisations with beginnings of written history, concepts like
heaven and earth, light and darkness, destruction of the world by fire,
etc.  can be recognised as part of a preurban village stratum, but such
structural concepts were later conceived in spatially expanded ways due to
the extension of early city states (see 'Urban Rural Dichotomy' in our
website). New, more extended concepts had to be handled with care as
Akhenaton's case shows. His misjudgment of the conventional territorially
bound cult system as a constitutional factor is unique in the Ancient
World: all his 'imperial' sun-disk cult sites were destroyed after his
death! Further, the Ancient Testament can be seen as a synthesis of the
high culture of Egypt's New Empire and Hebraic agrarian, resp. cattle
breeder populations. Platon too belongs into this transitional field
between pre-urban village cultures and early urban empires experimenting
speculatively with greater axial systems (Ancient Egypt/Mesopotamia ->
Heraclitus -> Parmenides -> Platon and the 'Aristotelic reaction'). Gnostic
traditions played also an important role in the second century AD, before
Nicaea (325) and later when European outlooks were programmed as an action
/ reaction scheme by absolute analytical postulates of  empirical versus
idealistic 'realities'.

* Plausible also in view of the 'redemption' element of Gnosis and
Manicheism: Le Corbusier, a Redeemer who was prepared to play the role of a
heretic in the premodern 'Academism' with the frenetic belief that modern
design (light, hygiene, mobility, etc.) would make human life more
heavenly.

* The most imortant insight of your suggestion: the seemingly
ultra-modernist Le Corbusier gained his ultimate convictions from history,
from myth, from religion. He might thus may be studied as an example of the
'primordial legitimation syndrome'.

* Maybe he failed, because, like so many others, he remained trapped in
historical constructs and their fictive grandeurs.  Unaware of the factual
time depths of architecture (~~22 million years!), he was prisoner of a
merely historically postulated absolute dualism (See 'polarity' and
'dualism' in our website)

>If any of that is of interest to the list, I may expand on it, up to the
>point of his confession to suicide, at another time.

* Please do!

>But then, Corb is
>so far from today's examples, I should not be surprised if only history
>minded types cared.

* I don't think so: there was an exhibition on spiritual roots of modern
art some years ago (LA?). It was discussed with considerable interest.
 

Best regards,
 

Nold Egenter

P.S.: Probably the expression 'world order' for Le Corbusier is not
adequate. You probably meant 'ontology', world view. The latter has no
political aftertaste and is not necessarily global.
 

____________________

>Sometime ago Brian asked what I meant by this term, and it recently
>occurred to me that I should be more precise about it.
>
>Phase I
>The Corbusian World Order would have little to do with Clinton's vision
>of it, but Plato would probably recognize Corb's ambitions. But none of
>this trio were too modest to want to see their name in lights as king
>(one wonders if Clinton will make his move behind the curtain of some
>Y2K FEMA emergency act?); one difference: While both Plato's and Corbu's
>version of World Order were Organic and religious, Clinton's would
>presumably be Mechanistic and profane.
>
>Thus, in Corbu's cosmos there was this a little known allegiance to a
>god. This god would be the controller of Corbu's universe, and perhaps
>Corbu might be at his right hand; I not certain, but such would fit his
>ego.
>It is very nearly fact now, that Corbu's scheme of things would fit into
>a cosmological plan, and the World was a primary part of this scheme.
>
>The Cosmological Scheme
>I came to this conclusion by accident while researching Sumarian and
>Mesopotamian texts at the British Museum Library, in 1985. A connection
>sprang up from a mental note out of Corbu's "Journey to the Orient",
>wherein he remarked upon six winged genii. I guess this comment stuck
>because I had only seen the four winged variety portrayed. In the BM
>though, I saw my first depiction of a six-winger. And then Corbu's many
>comments re: the Temple of Man came to mind (before this I had
>associated the phrase only with Jesus' phrase, the Son of Man). But as I
>came across an obscure Persian god, Man (not to be confused with Mani),
>and his potential relationship to Manicheism, other peculiar but
>persistent comments of Corbu's came to mind. (Cf specifically p.118-19
>of Oeuvre Complete 1910-1929.) It began to emerge that many of Corbu's
>comments were solid Manicheistic theology, and at the same time, they
>were compatible with much Gnostic commentary. Perhaps he knew that these
>two notions -- Manicheism and Gnosticism -- were a continuous line of
>thinking, and not merely the Christian heretical pigeon hole normally
>assigned to Gnosticism. Thus, Corbu's interest in the subject is based
>upon a set of dogma going back at least to 400BC.
>Also, at some point (I cannot remember whether it was before or after
>1985) I found out that Corbu's mother was Gnostic. That being the case,
>it became highly likely that Corbu's family left France in 17thC (which
>he mentions) because they were driven out. They were from the infamous
>town of Albi, and to this day, the term, "Albigensian", refers to those
>Gnostics run off by virtue of the religious persecutions at the time.
>
>As a Gnostic, Corbu would reverence knowledge and light. His theology
>would believe in a malignant god (probably, Yahweh) who had been tossed
>out of the rings of heaven for his obstreperous actions up there. This
>god was given the Earth as his special plaything to keep him out of
>problems above.
>As a result, Earth is the evil plaything of this god, and this god's
>purpose is to entrap all the souls on Earth for his own purposes. Each
>soul is represented by a splinter of light broken off from the higher
>heavens and fractured over and over among the procreations on Earth.
>Given this scenario, there are two primary motives for a good Gnostic to
>follow. First, one must be a teacher of the light, and thus convert as
>many souls as possible to the higher heavens. Second, one must not
>splinter the already diffused splinters of light any further.
>In other words, if it were followed, Gnosticism, like many Quaker sects,
>could not thrive because they do not believe in procreation. Le
>Corbusier married a couple of times, but he never had children.
>
>The Earthly Scheme
>Among Corbu's Gnostic beliefs lay the source for his piloti schemes. I
>once asked Bernhard Hoesli (about whom Corbu said, "He is the only
>person who ever worked for me who has some of the same talent that I
>myself possess.") what was the basis for piloti models, and especially
>why did Corb persist in the massive Unite schemes (Bernhard had done
>much designing on the first Unite at Marsailles, while he was also
>compiling the first Modulor for Corb). Hoesli did agree that the Unite
>had proved to be a disaster, but he claimed not to know why their form
>persisted, nor what was behind the piloti form.
>Well, I now know that this is what was behind it! Corbu hated the Earth
>because it was evil. One must have as little contact with it as
>possible. Instead, one must seek a spot closer to the heavens, in "These
>translucent prisms that seem to float in the air without anchorage to he
>ground -- flashing in the summer sunshine, softly gleaming under the
>grey winter skies, magically glittering at nightfall...etc" Of course,
>the "prisms"  were his "widely spaced crystal towers which soar higher
>than any pinnacle on earth." Pinnacle here refers to Christian steeples.
>As for the people far below, in the gloomy clefts of streets which
>disgrace our towns, there are appalling conditions which only reveal
>their full horror on Sunday, for then they are empty. Otherwise, one may
>be amused during the dismal hours as people elbow their way along, by
>looking into "this sea of lusts and faces."
>
>Indeed, these pages 118-119 are truly a confession of Le Corbusier's
>religious beliefs. They example much of what he did, and his purposes
>for it all. This is only the foundation for his sense of World Order.
>If any of that is of interest to the list, I may expand on it, up to the
>point of his confession to suicide, at another time. But then, Corb is
>so far from today's examples, I should not be surprised if only history
>minded types cared.
>
>Richard McBride, Assoc. Prof.
>School of Architecture
>University of Texas at Arlington

----

> > > > > > > > > > See our INTERNET-Homepage: http://home.worldcom.ch/~negenter

Nold Egenter
DOFSBT, Chorgasse 19
CH-8001 Zuerich, Switzerland
Tel.: +41-1-2516075
Fx:  +41-21-3231707
----or:
e-mail: negenter@worldcom.ch



Date:         Fri, 7 Jan 2000 17:37:43 -0600
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: mcbride3 <mcbride3@AIRMAIL.NET>
Subject:      D-L LC erratum
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 964
Status:

"On August 27, 1969, Le Corbusier waded out into the sea to begin his
journey among the stars.

I believe it was 1965. And it may have been July. Is there an historian
in our midst?"
.............

"Le Corbusier died 27 August 1965.

The text by Le Corbusier entitled "Nothing is transmissible but thought"
is
dated July 1965."
...............

Actually, this was a test, to see if anyone reads to the end of a long
message.
If you don't believe that, then believe "errare est humanum." Thus, I
declare my membership in that species.

Otherwise,
Steve Lauf is correct: "Le Corbusier died 27 August 1965." So, now you
have your historian, Michael, and Steve wins the happy face. But please
ignore the misspelled words, and we may lay the LC thing to rest.

Rick McBride
PS
Jonh Young may tell you that I can't get my own return email address
correct; so, what's the big deal about a few years in a death date typo?
The main thing is, you got the message this time.



From ???@??? Tue Jan 11 21:27:35 2000
To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)" <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: negenter@worldcom.ch (Nold Egenter)
Subject: Re: LC's ontology (Corbusian World Order)
Cc:
Bcc:
X-Attachments:
Message-Id: <v01530502b4a139d27c3f@[212.74.155.199]>
 
 

Sorry for my silence. I have spent the festive period in bed with flu, fever, antibiotics treats etc. Gradually better now.

I will add some lines which I had written for Richard before

_________________
Dear Richard

thank you for your message. To say it frankly, your previous text was really a discovery for me. I had always wondered where LC's extreme  convictions came from. They can not be explained by conventionally discussed backgrounds. Your suggestions gave me important hints, positively - that LC had some deeper rooted convictions - but also in the problematic sense: that modern 'architectural theory' - even in the prorammes of a most progressive modernist figure like Le Corbusier - has retained elements of a basically mythical structure.

As mentioned before, Gnosticism was very vital in the important theological and philosophical discussions of the rather syncretistic periods before Nicaea (325), particularly the important dispute between Athanasius and Arius about the relation of the AT's God father and the NT's Christ as God's son. Athanasius was logistically absolute (Identidy), whereas Arius was still more relational (difference), the process reflecting a development from 'polar logos' (Arius) to 'dualistic logos' (Athanasius).

There are other interesting Gnostic discussions, its Pneuma-Theory related to which we find also presocratic sources and its dualistic opposition to the term hyle (materia). Pneuma as 'breeze', 'breath of air', 'breath', 'movement' and its relation to 'the spiritual', 'the sacred' (the second letter of Clemens called the church 'pneumatic'!) is an interesting problem.

In short, what would be striking in a study about LeCorbusier and his relation to Gnosis and Manicheism (Parsism?) is the fact that with a modern architect - and a famous one - we come into a domain of religion, myth, archaic philosophy where things were not yet so clear as they pretend to be today. We touch a wide transitional field of thought, in which,  the deeper we go, there is an increasing empirical component which we might decode by using spatial and architectural parameters. This might provide another point in regard to LC.

_______________

in view of the letter forwarded by John Young for Rick McBride:

>Considering as much, I should say, what this scenario does NOT need is
>yet another purely hypothetical and personal (i.e.: unresearched)
>rendition on the subject. But that is about all I can offer, without
>going to a great deal of trouble -- but perish that thought!
 

In the meantime the Corbu/Gnosticism/Manicheism topic seems to have petered out. A pity. It somehow shows the handicap of architecture



Date:         Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:00:44 -0500
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: John Young <jya@PIPELINE.COM>
Subject:      Re: LC's ontology (Corbusian World Order)
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
In-Reply-To:  <v01530501b471a9b89ef2@[212.74.155.39]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 3557
Status:

A resend of my Dec 17 message:

I second Nold's request for more on Corb's and modernism's
prehistorical and historical roots.

Historic preservation as we know it today has yet to make that
deeper exploration as well, not to mention New Urbanism and
the neo-modernists such as Gehry, Koolhaas, Eisenman.

I wonder if there is a relationship between refusal to examine,
and admit, mythic and preintellectual influences on modernism
and its successors and the rise of science and technology, along
with the diminution of architectural designers' capabilities with
concepts and skills and increasingly anxious dependency on
engineers and technicians.

The utilization of computers and other high-technologies to
simulate their authentic products in non-tradtional architectural
fields is of interest, in particular the modeling of virtual reality for
both historical research and contemporary design purposes.

The residue of military- and intelligence-sponsored research now
making its way into civil design -- architecture, law enforcement
and surveillance, data gathering, archiving and manipulation,
privatization and corporatization of education, electronic voting
and polling to shape public policy and planning, information security
and protection of intellectual property coupled with enhanced
means for governments to spy on citizenry -- offers a hard to miss
target.

One example: we are preparing a volume on electronic surveillance
and espionage available through interception of electromagnetic
emanations that are emitted by various architectural components
-- electrical wiring, piping, steel structure, equipment -- which act
as "unintentional antennas" for broadcasting signals of the activities
which take place in buildings. This technology (called TEMPEST
or compromising emanations) and defenses against it have been
long known, and highly classified, in military and intelligence circles
but only now becoming known in public, albeit in relatively shallow
forms.

We are aware that many of the buildings being newly built or
retrofitted for high-tech usage will emit "compromising emanations"
not only by equipment (for which commercial protection measures
are available) but by the architecture and engineering components
themselves, and for which few commercial protections exist outside
military and intelligence facilities. Such buildings are "transparent"
to interception equipment, as if made entirely of glass.

What this electromagnetic transparency signifies for architectural
design remains unexplored but could be as provocative as the
widespread use of glass in modernism and the negative reaction
against it by traditionalists and those who did not wish to be
exposed to public scrutiny, literally or metaphorically.

The spread of terrifying, anxiety-producing technology
often induces a reactive search for comforting myths, whether
deeply authentic or shallowly reconfigured only for the day in
dress that is familiar, readily available and fashionable.

Brian Carroll's investigation here and elsewhere of electromagnetic
architecture, its benefits and evils, is a remarkably prescient and

exemplary project for considering what comes after 2000 and
whether we will be able to embrace a transformative change of
state required by EM transparency or will struggle to maintain the
fiction of bricks and mortar security.

A change in who will be considered architects after 2000, and what
will be architecture, and what revisions will forthcome in architectural
history and theory, are exhilirating ontological prospects.



Date:         Sun, 19 Dec 1999 13:44:27 -0500
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: John Young <jya@PIPELINE.COM>
Subject:      Admin Stuff
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 328
Status:

Some of us are not receiving Design-L mail, if there
has been any since Nold Enteger's post of Dec 17,
which I answered but never received an ACK or
copy. Anybody see my message, or getting list mail?

All other listserver actions appear to be working okay.

This is a challenge to the PSU mail box to get over Y2K
malingering.



Date:         Mon, 20 Dec 1999 06:56:42 +0700
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: josef prijotomo <jospri@INDO.NET.ID>
Subject:      Re: Admin Stuff
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
 At 01:44 PM 12/19/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Some of us are not receiving Design-L mail, if there
>has been any since Nold Enteger's post of Dec 17,
>which I answered but never received an ACK or
>copy. Anybody see my message, or getting list mail?

John,
I see your message as well as your respond to Nold Egenter.



Date:         Sun, 19 Dec 1999 20:00:28 -0500
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: John Young <jya@PIPELINE.COM>
Subject:      Re: Admin Stuff
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
In-Reply-To:  <l03130301b4828fb83769@[205.134.241.51]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 845
Status:

Apology, Nold, for misspelling your surname, sir.

Mail is now arriving here, thanks for the feedback.

Something's awry with the server. It unsubbed me
a while back, perhaps as a result of the switchover
to a new box, perhaps due to "fixing Y2K" which
now seems to be a mantra for concealing inept
fiddling while Rome incinerates. TEOTWAWWIW.

I'll look into the fried dates Brian discovered. However
soothseer s-lauf probably has a more devilish numerical
explanation.

Creepy picture of mephistophelean Donald Trump
with Muschamp's (swan?) song to himself today in
the NY Times. Warhol seduced Muschamp into
coming to NYC from Penn. Did you know that Steve?
Do you care? Now that the world as we wished it was
is near the end of time.

What are the odds a bunch of buildings are going
to blow over the holidays? I think Bilbao is a bullseye.



Date:         Sun, 19 Dec 1999 13:31:43 -0800
Reply-To: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
              <DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU>
From: brian carroll <human@ARCHITEXTUREZ.COM>
Subject:      Re: Admin Stuff
To: DESIGN-L@LISTS.PSU.EDU
In-Reply-To:  <199912191846.NAA10630@smtp7.atl.mindspring.net>

>Some of us are not receiving Design-L mail, if there
>has been any since Nold Enteger's post of Dec 17,
>which I answered but never received an ACK or
>copy. Anybody see my message, or getting list mail?
>
>All other listserver actions appear to be working okay.
>
>This is a challenge to the PSU mail box to get over Y2K
>malingering.

 i didn't get the 1st message, but i noticed Y2K glitches
 when searching the archive via the SEARCH DESIGN-L command...
 here's an e-mail i sent regarding that topic a few weeks ago:
 

 my ISP went offline so i decided to do a search
 to see if i missed any emails. i searched for the
 letter 'a' to make sure to get everything. i did
 not miss a post, but i did get back posts from
 1920, 25 Apr 2004, and 9 Feb 2020. this has me
 wondering if design-l might crash on Y2k. bc
 

>> SEArch design-l a FROM TODAY
>-> 9 matches.
>
>Item #   Date   Time  Recs   Subject
>------   ----   ----  ----   -------
>002810 04/04/25 20:59   33   Re: Ethics of computer enhanced photographic
>images
>003427 20/02/07 16:28   42   Shape Grammars: Where are the People?
>003450 20/02/09 12:40   50   Re: Shape Grammars: No Politics?
>003614 04/06/22 02:18   43   Re: Inquiry into Photography and Architecture
>004737 20/05/03 15:04  108   Duchamp on Haha
>004771 20/05/04 22:35   43   Architecture as Symbol producer (was: Duchamp
>on Haha)
>004821 20/02/05 18:53   66   No Haha Allowed about Haha
>013701 99/11/27 01:22   16   scully interview
>013702 99/11/27 00:27   35   Vince Scully Award
>
>To order a copy of these postings, send the following command:
>
>     GETPOST DESIGN-L 2810 3427 3450 3614 4737 4771 4821 13701-13702
 


Back to beginning
Homepage