THE STAIR THAT LEADS NOWHERE

* [CONTRADICTIO IN TRMINIS] NACHO RUIZ ALLN

First Act

It is 1964

complete

significan

Venturi, w

Architect

this way,

through t

ended up

find one

We are ta

placemen

that hang

room on

author, w

paint the

4 at 8330 Mi

ed his first bu

nt architectur

was immerse

ture. In the

house and b

two complim

p becoming m

element, hard

alking about a

nt between th

gs above the

the first floo

whimsical. Ev

ceiling above

illman street

uilt work. The

ral manifesto

ed in the writin

ir parallel de

book, book a

mentary techni

matter. From

dly relevant, w

a stair. Not t

he chimney a

previously m

or and ends a

ven though, o

e it.

in Chestnut H

e Vanna Vent

es of the sec

ng of the boo

velopment, th

nd house, m

iques: writing

m within the c

which we prop

the renown m

and the porch

mentioned ma

against a wal

on the other h

Hill, a suburb

turi House, th

cond half of

ok that will ca

he cross-con

morph into the

g and drawin

commotion o

opose to rescu

main stair that

h. We are ref

ain stair inter

ll. Because

hand, he rem

b of Philadelp

he house for

the twentieth

atapult him int

ntamination b

e same objec

ng. And drawi

of all the com

ue.

t connects th

ferring to ano

rrupting the v

of this it cou

minds us, it se

hia. A young

his mother,

h century. At

to fame, Com

becomes inev

t that is susc

ing, as is usu

mplexities that

e ground floo

ther stair. On

void above it.

uld be consid

erves to clean

g American a

will become

t the time, its

omplexity and

vitable. It wa

ceptible of be

ually the case

t take place in

or to the first

One that is sm

. This stair s

dered, using

n the window

architect has j

one of the m

s author, Rob

Contradiction

as deliberate.

eing represen

e in architectu

in the house,

floor, forcing

mall, discreet a

springs from

the words of

w on its side a

just

most

bert

n in

In

nted

ure,

we

g its

and

the

f its

and

Second Ac

We are n

rises a s

House VI

responds

the habit

simultane

process,

interactio

The two

layout an

the one t

the first

rotated e

this stair

ct

now in Cornw

strange house

I. Designed b

s to ambitious

tual discrimin

eous coexist

all of the el

on.

stairs are the

nd pigmentati

that ascends

floor to the s

equivalence o

is not such, r

wall county, C

e whose nam

by New York

s spatial stra

nation betwe

tence. To do

lements that

e only eleme

ion respond t

from the gro

second. We

of the first, sh

rather, it is on

Connecticut,

me hints at th

architect Pete

tegies in an e

een exterior a

o so he use

define the r

nts of the ho

o the same g

ound floor to

say suppose

howing the ne

nly the invers

1975. Place

he possibility

ter Eisenman

effort to dism

and interior,

ed color, am

residence are

ouse that are

game of recip

the first. Th

edly because

egative of its

se of the real

ed in a natur

of finding sim

as a vacation

mantle the esta

front and b

ong other st

e painted whi

e colored. On

procities whic

e red one, is

e even though

steps, the h

one.

ral setting and

milar constru

n home for clo

ablished cano

ack, frontal

trategies. Fo

ite or gray.

ne is green.

h originated t

the one whic

h from below

house does n

d hidden am

uctions in oth

lose friends.

on. He attem

and oblique,

ollowing a st

The conflict

The other r

the project. T

ich supposed

w the stair ap

not have a se

mongst the tre

her places. I

Its formalizat

mpts to elimin

...by forcing

trict codificat

arises out th

red. Their fo

The green stai

dly ascends fr

ppears to be

cond floor. A

ees,

It is

tion

nate

its

tion

heir

orm,

ir is

rom

the

And

Third Act

Years lat

emulating

unit resi

possibilit

the expe

materializ

them.

Each one

homes ar

room allo

generous

missing a

ter, at the ot

g his mercha

idential comp

ties of mergin

erimental grou

zed serve as

e of its reside

re located on

ows, in some

s dimensions

an indispensa

ther end of

ant ancestry,

plex. Its c

ng the urban

uping of Mie

a virtual plin

ences is dev

n the upper le

e cases, to p

s, has typica

able element

the world, in

overcomes J

called Nexus

grid of a rom

es van der R

nth for the ne

veloped in thr

evel. Living R

place a balco

l handrails a

for its use. I

n Fukuoka, th

Japans legen

World. Its

man city whe

Rohes cour

ever built tow

ree levels gro

Room, room

ony at a high

and wood flo

It does not ha

he largest ci

ndary insular

s author, Rem

ere the object

rtyard houses

wers that were

ouped around

with tatami a

er level. This

ooring... All

ave a stair.

ity in Kyushu

r hermetic na

m Koolhaas.

t quality of th

s. The two

e supposed t

d a patio. Th

and terrace.

s balcony, ha

in all, its inh

u, Japan. A

ature and buil

. The proje

he residences

blocks in wh

to have been

he most publi

The great he

alf interior ha

nhabitable. N

Dutch archite

lds in 1991 a

ect explores

s is diluted, w

hich the proj

n erected beh

ic spaces of

ight of the liv

alf exterior, is

Nevertheless,

ect,

a 24

the

with

ject

hind

the

ving

s of

its

Robert Venturi, Peter Eisenman and Rem Koolhaas. The audacity of mentioning three architects with such distant

positions in the same text, as well as associate them under the common denominator of a stair requires at least an

explanation. It is a simple one: they are not so divergent. The three share a similar critical attitude towards the

complexities of the world in which they have had to build, whether it be theory or buildings.

In terms of theory, a comparative reading of their principles, interests and objectives, makes it possible to venture

that beyond what might appear at first sight, there lies a deep connection. All three have come to the same

conclusion: the only way to regenerate the discipline of architecture in the postmodern era, a period in which the

confidence of its ideological function has been lost, is by calling into question the coherence of its internal nature.

In terms of practice, it gets even more complicated. If the faithful transfer of the world of ideas into matter already

presents itself as a difficult exercise, it will be even more difficult to verify the link that, in theory, keeps them

together. The similarities, equivalences, reciprocities... are diluted in practice, where the reality of the built work is

imposed over mental abstract constructs.

Nevertheless, occasionally, the similarities of their theoretical frameworks have successfully transcended the

conceptual plane to materialize into matter. Examined through a carefree Benjaminian perspective we could say

that we are dealing with fortunate coincidences. This is possibly true without a need for further questioning. But,

why not venture an alternative hypothesis? If we accept that, in the end, they all follow the same libretto, even

though interpreted in different keys, we should stop talking about coincidences. And considering the absolute lack

of innocence that has guided their respective professional careers, we would not fare well to consider them

fortuitous.

Jeffrey Kipnis claims the architectural tale only makes sense if it generates a productive fiction. Following this idea,

we will put forward an alternative interpretative view of their architectural connections. To prove it, we will

concentrate on three particular versions of the same architectural element: the stair. Venturis whimsical stair in

the Vanna Venturi House, Eisenmans unreal stair in House VI and Koolhaas non-existing stair in the Nexus World.

The stair in the Vanna Venturi House does not lead anywhere1 as it is absolutely unnecessary. The only motivation

that we can assure it responds to is the elaborate play of juxtapositions and coexistences that define the residence.

Venturi has no objection in considering it whimsical. Like other elements of the domestic narrative, this stair does

not have a structural2 meaning, nor a functional one. It only has value as a simple de-contextualized object. Its

1 Robert Venturi described it as the little nowhere stair. See Venturi, Robert, Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture, New York, The Museum of Modern Art Press, 1966, 118. 2 Here the term structural is used in a sense close to the structuralist discourse. According to which in every form one can distinguish, on the one hand, its elements first, and on the other, the relationships that are established between such elements that guarantee the existence of the ensemble as a system. The most synthetic proposal of structure was formulated by Louis Hjelmslev for whom it is, essentially, an autonomous entity with internal dependencies.

existence is only justifiable as a symbolic representation of the stair as an architectural element, and not as a stair

itself since what matters the least is that it responds to the expectations of use that its presence suggests.

The stair in House VI cannot be considered real3. Even though it aspires to be so, or at least it appears to be. It is

not just another element, placed freely wherever. Its form, design and dimension are justified by the play of

relationships that gives form to the house. Moreover, this stair forms part of the spatial and conceptual core of the

project. Even so, it cannot be utilized. And contrary to the previous case, it does not pretend to symbolize the

object commonly known as stair, since this house is conceived in a way that all of its elements strip themselves of

their habitual semantic connotations. Therefore, that which looks like a stair, as is the case for the rest of the

architectural elements, only has meaning as a syntactic notation of an abstract compositional process. Nothing

more.

In the Nexus World there is not even a stair, even though it is necessary to access the unreachable balcony4 that

projects over the living room of some of the residences. An inclined mast, that would be difficult to climb, is the

only element the connects the living room and the balcony. Its presence makes the absence of the stair even more

palpable. It does not even appear as a mere symbol or notation, as occurs in the previous examples. Nor signifier

nor signified. Even though its function is more than justified and there is a place to be reached, it is nowhere to be

found.

If there is something the three cases have in common is the incomplete presence of the object/stair. Only part of

its internal nature is exhibited. The stair in the Vanna Venturi House only has a symbolic presence, the stair in

House VI is nothing more than a structural notation; the one in the Nexus World only gets alluded to by a functional

necessity. If we were to add these three qualities we would obtain a complete stair whose presence would be, at

the same time, symbolic, structural and functional. As is usually the case.

Each one of the these stairs is the physical materialization of the main arguments that have guided the trajectories

of their authors. Venturi maintains a close relationship with the semantic aspects of architecture. Eisenmans

efforts have concentrated in divulging his idea of architecture as syntax. Koolhaas shows a special predisposition

for everything concerned with program, or in other words, the programmatic component of the discipline. Their

respective work represents the three currents in which the postmodern practice of architecture has split into, once

consummated its transformation into language.

3 In an article about House VI, Robert Gutman called it the unreal staircase. It was his understanding that this staircase was used to inform the visitor that this house could not be read according to typical architectural conventions. See Eisenman, Peter, Gass, William y Gutman, Robert, House VI: Residence, Critique of Weekend House by Pilosopher, Sociologist, and Architect Himself, Progressive Architecture, n 58, June 1977, 65. 4 Hard-to-reach balconies as understood by Roberto Gargiani. See Gargiani, Roberto, Rem Koolhaas/OMA. The construction of merveilles, Lausanne, EPFL Press, 2008, 185.

Without abounding in their dislocated physical presence, but rather in what the stairs suggest as an ensemble, it is

possible to venture that all of them respond to an act that is, in essence, the same: the decomposition of the

internal logic of what has been normally been called a stair, making it unnecessary, not useful or non-existent.

These other stairs are the built version of the common crusade that these three architects have carried out against

the substance of architecture as it is traditionally conceived.

The choice of the stair as the theme is not circumstantial. Most likely, this was the first complete architectural

episode in history, one in which we simultaneously find space, determined by form, and time, necessary for the

development of action that the stair suggests. On the other hand, when communicating different levels, it is not

absurd to consider the stair as the embryo of the vertical component in architecture. Putting into question its

nature means, in a way, to dismantle some of the most rooted principles of the discipline of architecture that have

been passed on from generation to generation since the beginning of time.

In addition, to dislocate a stair inscribed in a domestic space supposes an act too perverse to be considered

innocent or merely rhetorical. In doing so, the architectonic dogmas, as well as the social conventions that are

responsible in many ways for giving historical consistency to them, are put into question. Implicit in this act lies

the insinuation that, as we are already settled in post-modernity, the only way in which o can do architecture is to

situate ourselves beyond the limits imposed by the dogmas and the conventions. Wherever its influence does not

reach and the legitimacy of its precepts crack.

In those years, in which this last cultural period was starting to be given built form, Venturi, Eisenman and Koolhaas

were not the only ones to operate this way. Perhaps the most clear example we find in Lars Lerups conceptual

drawings.

For Lerup, the home was the most apt battlefield in which to explore the conflict between architecture and a set of

conventions in which it has no place5. Lerup proposed a series of planned assaults whose aim was to subvert the

logic of all that formed part of the domestic phenomenology. In this way, besides the stairs, he also dislocated

other habitual components, such as doors, windows, floors and ceilings. The result are intertwined fragments of

house and architecture, he claims, defying any complete readings and rejecting all dogma 6.

Venturi, Eisenman and Koolhaas produced similar operations over the course of their respective careers. If there

was something guiding them, it was their eagerness to distort in different ways a pretty ample repertoire of

common architectural elements. Amongst them, the choice of the stair seems of special interest because it adds

an extra dimension to the matter: the metaphoric.

5 Lerup, Lars, Planned Assaults, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press, Canadian Centre of Architecture, 1987, 55. 6 Lerup, Lars, bid, 56.

Their reformulations of this element are the synthesis of two consecutive impulses. One, as Umberto Eco would

say, has to do with the effect that the stair produces as a universal architectural sign: it stimulates one to climb7.

The other, added by them, is new and it is presented in dialectical opposition to the first. Once one is invited to

climb, the ascent, in one way or another becomes impossible.

Nothing stops one from using the stair at the Vanna Venturi House, but it lacks a destination. The stair in House VI

suggests the existence of an upper floor, but this one does not exist. In the Nexus World there is a place to be

reached, but the absence of a stair makes the attempt to do so worthless. Even though in the three situations the

ascend is tentatively insinuated, it is not possible to reach that other place, whether it is because it does not make

sense, because it does not exist or simply because it is unreachable. If we add the received stimulus with the

possibility of its accomplishment, one can conclude that these stairs lead us nowhere.

The stair that leads nowhere is the cruel metaphor of the postmodern architectural condition. The modern myths of

progress and utopia have lost their redemptive capacity, and the most recent architecture does not pretend to be a

promise of a better future. It does not even maintain its faith in the classic belief that the evolution of the discipline

continues ad eternum in an ascendant line to higher levels. It no longer aspires to erect towers of Babel nor Jacob

ladders. The doors to the beyond have been closed. The faith in architecture as a necessary vehicle to transform

the world has derived into a skepticism much closer to the complexity of the present reality. Lets not get scared.

Perhaps it is only the transition from puberty to maturity. Contemporary architecture, at last, has lost its innocence.

The reactions to this situation have been varied. Some wandered over the rubble of past beliefs, trying to

reconstruct conceptual armatures without much resistance. Others maintained a happy and carefree adhesion to

reality, this is what there is, they must have thought. The rest took refuge in a telling silence. Nevertheless, despite

these divergent attitudes, none of them was able to free themselves from the verdict pronounced by Tafuri: if

something distinguishes architecture for some time now is its sublime uselessness8.

To deal with this situation, Venturi, Eisenman and Koolhaas were able to embody an interesting alternative. And

what is more, they learned to provide an answer that was implicated in the matter, transforming that uselessness

into an operative tool. Their reasoning would be the following: if architecture has definitely settled into a sublime

uselessness, lets make use of this circumstance. Let's make it vox populi that the architecture itself reveal this

new condition from its interior, that it rip to shreds the formulation of its discourse; that it rebel against it, that it

stop aspiring to perfection and coherence, that it show its scars, lacerations, contradictions and hidden

repressions. In short, that it come clean with its own anguished reality.

7 Eco, Umberto, La struttura assente. La recerca semiotica e il metodo structturale, Miln, Bompiani, 1968. 8 Tafuri, Manfredo, Progetto e utopia: Architettura e sviluppo capitalistico, Bari, Laterza, 1973 (English edition: Architecture and Utopia: Design and Capitalist Development, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press, 1979, IX)

If in addition, it is also able to shake the consciousness, putting into question the image of the world that has been

described, penetrate the cracks of reality, understand that other sensible horizons exist and point towards new

aesthetic paradigms, that is, propose a critical positioning, an aspiration that guided its first theoretical impulses,

the road ahead presents itself productively.

And since we are talking about the road ahead, lets not forget that it no longer has a ascendant logic. It is a

truncated road due to the way it enters into territories from which it is no longer possible, nor indispensable, to look

for a way out. This is fuel that feeds an activity that no longer is concerned with going in a specific direction, but

rather, extract the maximum profitability from a situation in which, as Reinhold Martin has recently expressed, there

is nowhere left to go9.

Venturi, Eisenman and Koolhaasstairs are the precise reflection of this circumstance, when metaphorically

manifesting the incoherence of a movement as impossible as it is useless, that does not lead anywhere. In them is

held, at least implicitly, the distorted logic that guided the drawing of Piranesis Carcieri series. Responsible in

Tafuris view of a negative utopia whose grandeur lies precisely in its denial to create alternative possibilities10.

And also, why not, something of the architecture without purpose of the city of the immortals described by Borges,

whose creators, esteeming all exertion vain, resolved to live in thought, in pure speculation11.

In conclusion, every time the dysfunction of a stair implies the risk of falling, we will have to conclude that the

modern promenade has finally turned into the postmodern precipice. But not so that we jump, but rather so that

the temptation of the abyss reminds us, that for some time, the seams of the road have become undone.

9 Reinhold Martin considered that postmodernity had meant the rupture and fragmentation of modernitys linear narratives. The result is an architectural panorama in which there is nowhere to go. The best way he found to explain it was through a story similar to the one told here. Using the logic of architectural circulation sequences, he compared Le Corbusiers conciliatory and cinematic promenade architecturale of Le Villa Savoye of 1929, the anticlimactic truncated circulation routes of James Stirlings Neue Staatsgalerie in Sttugart of 1983, Oswald Mathas Ungers never built Wallraf-Richartz Museum in Cologne of 1975 and Charles Moore and Richard Chylinskys Rogger Hofflander Condominium in Los Angeles of 1978. In this last building, Martin detected numerous stairs that lead nowhere in particular. He related the frustrated connections of its interior spaces with Piranesis engravings in which the sinister and the sublime took place. For Martin, this project, as well as the previous ones, has been content to exchange the master narratives of modernism for any number of inconclusive, episodic, and noncommittal micronarratives that add up, exactly, to nothing. See Martin, Reinhold, Utopias Ghost. Architecture and Postmodernism, Again, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 2010, 153-164. 10 Tafuri, Manfredo, La sfera e il labirinto: Avanguardia e architettura da Piranesi agli anni 70, Turn, Einaudi, 1980 11 According to Borges, in this city there where corridors that led nowhere, unreachably high windows, grtandly dramatic doors that opened onto monklike ceels or empty shafts, incredible upside-down staircases with upside-down treads and balustrades. Other staircases, clinging airily to the side of a monumental wall, petered out after two or three landing, in the high gloom of the cupolas, arriving nowhere. Borges, Jorge Luis, El Aleph, Buenos Aires, Editorial Sur, 1949.