‘To architect’ is to establish an order
whereas there is none.
The orders of architecture are
structural primitive intentions
which hold the matter
at the commencement.
They are not images
or figures of an order which would be elsewhere
nor of styles, idealistic figures of remand to the past.
The orders don’t show anything
they are inaugurating the notion of holding
or stance at dis-stance of the Real
for the subject who is living there.
There is a relation of ‘side to side’,
if not a relation of ‘crossing’
between the holding of the matter
and the holding or stance of the subject
who is there and becomes ‘the there’,
the subject of architecture.
All this is necessary from this that
the holding of what distinguishes itself primitively,
barely as a ‘thing’ in the Real,
is the constant primary interrogation
of the un-animal anthrop.
The un-animal anthrop is ‘question’.
And this interrogation is endless.
Never it has an adequate final answer.
‘To architect’ sustains this interrogation.
Architecture sustains the ‘question’
Architecture sustains the un-animal anthrop
Architecture affirms eventually the question
without ever tell an answer.
like in poetry,
before all signification
by inaugural events
by stances at dis-stances.
Architecture is dis-stance.
Dis-stance of the question to the real,
Dis-stance on the real for the question.
Dis-stance, is to establish a holding
or a stance….
Without more. Without any deposit in signification.
It is a sense without signification.
A passage from stance to stance or stances
by dis-stance or ….at dis-stances.
Architecture establish itself in the dis-stance.
And this is an introduction to the holding or stance.
Architecture establish a holding or stance
whereas there isn’t.
Architecture is an operation.
So it is nor a notion, nor a concept.
Architecture permits us to hold us on the Real.
Or to hold us at dis-stance of the Real
The order, -principle of the architecture-,
is there therefore.
It commences to weave.
It doesn’t weave. It commences to weave.
(Ordiri, Latin etymology of order,
to commence to weave.)
There is more holding or stance
in commencing to weave
than in weaving.
Before order, there is no holding.
Before order, there is no stance.
Before order, there is no Reality.
Before order, there is only the Real.
which permits holding,
which permits stance,
the life of the question or the anthropic life is permitted,
because on the order it is deposed
and by order it is proposed.
Order or ‘to commence to weave’
is to establish at distance from the Real
a holding or a stance from where
the life of the question, or of the anthropic life,
can hold itself and welcome the events.
the welcome and the inauguration
of the anthropic life.
Order is so a commencement and not an origin.
Order is not an accomplishment.
Order permits, but doesn’t make anything.
Order is a restricted action.
There is an ethical restraint of order.
It commences to weave. It doesn’t weave.
The principle of order is the principle of architecture.
They are commencements.
The ‘Doric’ order indicates the holding of the point,
crossing, concentration and irradiation
of the point which becomes line.
The ‘Ionic’ order indicates the holding of the line which curves itself and establish the surface.
The ‘Corinthian’ order indicates the curvature of the surface to a volume.
The ‘Composite’ order indicates how
side by side,
the holdings of the point, the line, and the volume
wears the holding or stance of the anthrop in a body brought to the world in his ‘real’ nudity
at the very moment
where he becomes reality in all his question.
Just look at it.
Architecture maintains itself there.
It permits to the one who is there
–the subject of architecture-
to be close to a primitive notion of holding
or stance at dis-stance of the Real
scripture by the matter in order
of the augur of the anthropic life
to be founded in holding
or in his inaugural stance of un-animal anthrop
or in dignity.