Audio Essay: Metaphysics of Space

On the ontology of the existing:

Metaphysical – Physical – Metaphysical

This is the template of Existence.

The metaphysical is both the cause and the effect. The physical is the bridge between two metaphysical realms. It is an instrument for crossing over.

We can think about these instances of Cause and Effect in the context of two Forces. One that pushes us and the other that pulls us. One that deconstructs and fragments, and the other that distills and reconfigures (conceptualizes).

In a simplified sense, the pushing force can be thought of as negative (in terms of architecture, moving away from external negative influences), while the pulling force is positive (in terms of architecture, the values we aspire to).

Architecture as a Metaphysical Idea

From caves to skyscrapers, from agricultural fields to landscape design, architectural practice has undergone significant transformations. What initially served to protect us from external influences – the Cave – has now become an exponent of our public (or private) Persona – the House – Apartment.

Although the prevailing idea is that architecture is a practice primarily reserved for the “privileged” – historically institutions, churches, or the ruling class – because they were the only ones who could afford it, the truth is that, to a greater or lesser extent, we are all architects. Each of us has an inherent need for aesthetic space. The same can be said of philosophy. While we might argue that not everyone is a chemist, biologist, or physicist, we are all, in some way, philosophers.

Each of us seeks something more from a space than merely pragmatic or utilitarian functions. We look for stimulation, inspiration, a sense of intimacy, a sense of identity, or protection from the “negative” influences of the chaotic outside world. Space tends to be purposeful. However, how does this purposefulness shift in meaning when we move beyond its most banal (initial) functions and approach transcendental interpretations – or at least comparative inquiries.

Architecture and Linguistics

Just like the genesis and evolution of language, architecture has followed a similar path. Language moved from individual terms (Structuralism – de Saussure), through syntax (generative-transformational linguistics – Chomsky), to discourse. From the smallest meaningful unit to the largest interconnected system. Architecture evolves the same way. From simple huts, through ornamental cathedrals – seen as a series of micro-ornaments – to buildings as macro-ornaments. This type of progression appears across many scientific disciplines. It also exists within artistic movements. Architecture simply follows the natural spirit of development.

Claude Lévi-Strauss explained the development of language as follows:

First, we linguistically label what is dangerous to us. After that, what is useful to us, and finally, what has no significance to us.

A similar development can be observed in architecture. In the beginning, we built simple shelters – as basic protection from the elements. Then we introduced decorative elements into these shelters. Through aesthetic symbols, we began to express our ideals, desires, and visions. Eventually, architectural space became an arena for creative play and conceptual exploration. Space ceased to be purely functional. It became a medium of expression. Through its form, we began to think about the world, ourselves, and our place in the universe.

Architecture and the Psyche

Compartmentalization is a term that originally emerged from architectural practice. Separated parts of a larger system that can function autonomously without mutual influences. If one part collapses, the other remains intact. This is a defense mechanism that, in its ontological definition, is conservative, not progressive. Although the term is architectural, it found greater application in psychological practice, particularly Freudian. What problems does this approach create?

When parts become separated from the whole, they begin to oppose each other as a result of the desire for sovereignty. This is most visible in education. In many schools, especially universities, we can observe how subjects stand almost opposed to each other. Professors will defend their department as the most important to the point of denying others. This creates an inner conflict that does not lead to a common goal. Recognizing natural connections between subjects is essential for the growth of knowledge. But compartmentalization goes against this, and therefore becomes a major obstacle.

A similar problem has occurred in architecture. By the definition of aesthetic epochs, we have reached the stage of the “macro-ornament” – where the entire object is one ornament, one message, one idea. However, its parts no longer relate through a deeper grammar. They are only stylistically connected into a visual shell. That shell is merely form, not meaning. Aesthetics have become ethics. Form has replaced content.

In the majority of cases, juxtaposition has remained the only rhetorical figure through which architecture is explained.

Room Analysis and Their Metaphysical Causes

Every room, every space we occupy, carries a certain metaphysical meaning far beyond its physical functions. It’s no wonder that in the psychoanalysis of dreams, rooms-spaces are taken as representatives of parts of the psyche. Rooms are reflections of internal states and symbolic messages that people unconsciously or consciously embed into the space. They function as physical forms of our thoughts, needs, and emotions, and their configurations can have deep consequences on our psychological state and inner world.

For example, the living room may symbolize social interaction, gathering, and sharing experiences. But it is also a place that projects our image to the outside world – how we want others to see us. In that sense, the living room is the space through which our public Persona is expressed, while the bedroom, in contrast, represents the inner self, a place of intimacy, regeneration, and introspection. Symbolically, the bedroom can be associated with retreating into the unconscious, similar to returning to the state of sleep and inner dialogue.

The kitchen, as the center of daily activities, becomes a space of transformation – a place where raw materials become something new, where physical food symbolizes the creative process. The kitchen is a metaphorical space of alchemy, the transformation of ideas into action. Similarly, hallways and passages can be seen as transitional phases of life, connecting different aspects of our being and moving from one state of consciousness to another. Hallways are bridges.

In conclusion:

Architecture is a metaphysical mirror. Just as rooms reflect our inner worlds, so too is every architectural object a result of the evolution of society, culture, and the individual. Space becomes not just a physical shelter but a medium for expressing (exploring) our philosophy of life, our relationship to the world, and ourselves. In this synthesis of the material and immaterial lies the true power of architecture – not only to shape our world but to guide us through it, connecting us to the deeper layers of existence.

The post Metaphysics of Space appeared first on The Architectural Mythologems.

Audio Essay: The Negation of Historicity

Further analysis, however quirky, has helped me understand (personal) relationship with work in a broader sense. I hope that the following interpretation may also assist others in finding a different perspective toward their work, one that is not solely defined by basic ideas.

This interpretation mainly refers to the movie Skyfall, though it is likely applicable to all Bond films.

Archetypal Patterns

Bond as a Man of Action – The Hero Archetype

Bond represents the archetype of the Hero, always ready to face dangers and moral dilemmas. His story in Skyfall portrays a fall, redemption, and return, passing through physical and inner conflicts, which makes him a complex hero. Action and instinct drive him through his missions, but this film adds depth to his character, making him a hero who faces his own limitations.

M – The Wise Old Woman – The Great Mother Archetype

M symbolizes the Wise Old Woman and the Great Mother, providing Bond with guidance and protection. As an authority figure and moral compass, she is someone Bond respects. Her death in the film has a strong emotional impact on Bond, as he loses a key maternal figure, forcing him to take on greater responsibility.

Death and Rebirth – The Transformation Archetype

In Skyfall, Bond undergoes the archetype of Transformation – his “death” at the beginning and eventual return symbolize a metaphorical rebirth. This cycle leads him through physical and emotional renewal, reexamining his identity and role, which is a crucial phase on the hero’s journey.

Reaching His Goals Mostly Through Women – The Anima Archetype

Bond’s relationship with women reflects his Anima, the feminine aspect of his soul. Women like Séverine often serve as catalysts for his actions, but they are also key to balancing his emotions and rational world. They open space for his introspective side, making them vital to his inner development.

The Shadow Archetype

Silva, the main antagonist represents Bond’s Shadow. He is a dark version of Bond, someone who has gone through a similar process but has chosen a different path. Silva personifies Bond’s inner fears – what he could become if he lost faith in MI6 and its authorities. As Bond’s shadow, Silva highlights the dangers of individualism without moral boundaries – the Lucifer (fallen angel) symbol.

The Father Archetype

MI6 and its institutional framework act as the father archetype, providing Bond with direction and tasks, offering him structure within which he operates. While MI6’s authority may sometimes appear cold and distant, it symbolizes a paternal figure guiding Bond through his mission, even when their relationship is strained.

Analysis of James Bond and What We Can Learn from His Relationship to Work

What caught my attention about James Bond (aside from all the well-known moments) is his relationship to his work. More precisely, the nature of his job, which differs from that of most people. The essence of his work is not about acquiring material wealth, which we can say is the nature of almost all jobs. For James Bond, his home or wealth does not matter. As a member of the secret service and a top operative, everything is provided for him. What retains importance is the Suit of Armor (his suit and watch) and his cars. Both can be seen as serving the function of defining his Persona. The suit is an exponent of a uniform (a certain mode of functioning), his watch represents precision, while the car signifies thought – its speed and elegance. These gadgets have their small additions and applications, but the core idea is deepening his purposefulness.

Bond’s Nature in Relation to Himself – The Negation of Historicity

Bond lacks historicity. He is not nostalgic in any way. Historicity, in his case, would be a crutch that would cause him to stumble. His conditional movement is directed straight toward the future. More precisely, he receives direction from MI6, the exponent of the Good (metaphysical, collectively supraconscious). This is a crucial point; Bond’s directions do not come from his personal consciousness (personal definitions of good), but from something greater, something universal. This idea is made explicit in Skyfall when Silva offers him the opportunity to “choose their own missions,” which Bond naturally declines. Although MI6 is depicted in the film as morally ambivalent (or even morally displaced), from an ordinary observer’s perspective, Bond still recognizes it as a higher moral authority.

This Good comes with collateral damage and has no sympathy for individual sacrifice, as long as the mission is accomplished – a reference to God (the metaphysical), who executes His Plan regardless of individual suffering. Bond is often in conflict with MI6 (the metaphysical) for this very reason: its lack of empathy toward individual suffering. His concern for the individual is what makes him human.

This type of conflict is something we all experience to such an extent that we often doubt the “authority” and its goals – just as we might doubt God’s plan. Skepticism is a healthy stance, and it must exist. However, faith must also exist, a faith that follows this “Greater Good,” even if we do not fully understand it.

Note: Suspension of disbelief – we interpret MI6 as it is portrayed in the film, as an objectively “greater good,” and not as a human construct full of anomalies and personal pretensions, as it probably is in reality.

On the Conditionals of This Kind of Work Relationship

Ancient Greek philosophers argued that one must rise above existential problems to engage in philosophy (higher matters). One must finish with the “lower” to deal with the “higher.”

That is exactly what James Bond does. He has finished with material accumulation and serves exclusively the “greater good.” This way of functioning puts him in an instrumental position, opposite to the autistic urges for repetition, ergo, security. His life is on the line at every moment, and each day could be his last. At the core of his actions is almost absolute Action, without contemplation or reflection on past experiences. There is no nostalgia, no desire for the old days or past events. Each day is a New Sun (Heraclitus), taken to the limit of the absolute. Thought (contemplation or conclusions) is reduced to almost instinctual (intuitive) action. He doesn’t need to reflect and conclude, he knows. Reflection is part of analysis (the material), intuitive guidance is part of instinct (the metaphysical, or already understood – conceptualized – part of a larger pattern that is not deduced but is self-evident). Intellectual muscle memory. Bond is not historical, even in thought. His identity does not derive from a historical mosaic of experiences but from active aspects that lead to his Goal, and that goal is established by an “other” – the Collective Supraconscious – the Good.

The post The Negation of Historicity appeared first on The Architectural Mythologems.