“Hadid and Schumacher, claiming that the formal complexity of their architecture coincides with the social complexity of the conditions it is designed to service, have represented their work as a contribution to a progressive project. This claim is also premised on the turn to complexity undertaken within contemporary models of managerialism.”
Spencer is emphasizing the multi-layered complexity
of the architecture. He exemplifies Zaha Hadid’s projects for investigating how
the architectural profession can leak from the buildings through the social structure.
With the neo-liberal society conditions, architecture can extend its meaning even
with the aim of profit. The other dimensions of the geometry can create other
dimensions in terms of social organization. With respect to that, the architectural
power in the public spaces can be investigated. Actually, our investigation
methods rely on generic (common) architectural implementations. However, in the
case of Zaha Hadid, the rules and expectations organized for the general urban
fabric should not be the case for evaluation.
According to Spencer, the works of Zaha Hadid
and Schumacher hide the structures of support, not to mention the human labor
and political power that builds. So this multi-layered approach also changes
the representational qualities of the architecture. For instance, if we
investigate the BMW Central building, the dimensional changes can be seen. The separations
between the functions or between the private and public are very fluid. With
this fluidity, the building gets a different organizational pattern. In the end,
buildings like that make us questioned the boundaries of neo-liberalism. Their
unique conditions show us what kind of relations can be created. However, the
question is, are those different examples enough for determining the neo-liberal
conditions which are objected to all the society.
