What do you think?
Rate this book
Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture
The words we use when we talk and write about architecture describe more than just bricks and mortar—they direct the ways we think of and live with buildings. This groundbreaking book is the first thorough examination of the complex relationship between architecture and language as intricate social practices.
Six rigorously argued chapters and a vocabulary of key terms investigate the language of modernism; language and drawing; “masculine and feminine” architecture; language metaphors; science in architecture; and the social properties of architecture.
Six rigorously argued chapters and a vocabulary of key terms investigate the language of modernism; language and drawing; “masculine and feminine” architecture; language metaphors; science in architecture; and the social properties of architecture.
335 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 2000
27 people are currently reading
361 people want to read
About the author
Adrian Forty
23 books12 followersAdrian Forty is Professor of Architectural History at The Bartlett, the Faculty of the Built Environment at University College London. He is the Programme Director of the MSc programme in Architectural History.
In 2003, he was awarded the Sir Misha Black Award for Innovation in Design Education.
Forty's main interest is in architecture's role in societies and cultural contexts. His research includes work on the design of consumer goods; on language and architecture; and on architecture, collective memory, and forgetting. As of lately, he is concerned with the history, aesthetics, and cultural significance of concrete as a construction material.
In 2003, he was awarded the Sir Misha Black Award for Innovation in Design Education.
Forty's main interest is in architecture's role in societies and cultural contexts. His research includes work on the design of consumer goods; on language and architecture; and on architecture, collective memory, and forgetting. As of lately, he is concerned with the history, aesthetics, and cultural significance of concrete as a construction material.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
June 21, 2012
A rather rare piece of architectural theory that's well written, critically informed. More when I finish it - just about to start the second section.
The first section looks at the key metaphors used to understand architecture, whilst the second part breaks down into key pieces of terminology and unpacks them in order to interrogate their full meaning and implications.
The first section looks at the key metaphors used to understand architecture, whilst the second part breaks down into key pieces of terminology and unpacks them in order to interrogate their full meaning and implications.
February 24, 2021
The chapter on ‘Language Metaphors’ was my go to starting place, and it opens with the notion that these are some of the richest and most contentious metaphors in architecture, triggering deep debate across the field. One of the debates surrounds the idea that we ‘read’ a drawing but that does not mean that the building is automatically a linguistic sign. Forty states that there are three main distinctions that can be used as reference points. First, that architecture is like language, not that it is language. In other words, it has similar attributes and conventions, but it is not the same thing. Secondly, language has two parts which; semantics (meaning) and syntactics (eg grammar) each of which can be used as a frame. Thirdly, architectural metaphors can be based on literature-language or linguistics-language. [The former are those designs inspired by texts by Kafka, Woolfe and so on, and the latter relates more to ‘semantic’ architecture, for example Eisenman and Tschumi.]
Language Metaphors have been used in the past used to show that architecture was a liberal art like literature, or that its parts were representative of the whole, to explain the ways in which buildings communicate or attempt to depict origin stories. It could also be used to emphasise the comparison with grammar or semiotics. These, Forty suggests, are the overriding categories of language-metaphors used in architecture. Each approach was framed by the readings and writings of the time and influenced the collective thinking about art, literature, and architecture. As with the question regarding whether we ‘read’ buildings, is the secondary debate; whether it can be ‘read’ like a narrative to external events, or whether it is just there, being itself. The first approach relates to most mannerism styles and the latter to early modernism. [Although of course modernism created its own narrative that was then used to be ‘read’ by its adherents].
Goethe suggested “that architecture, like language, was not simply a medium of individual expression, but more importantly expressed the entire collective identity of particular peoples, the Volksgeist.” Barthes, the original master of mythological signs, came to realise that no meaning could be eternally fixed, that even metaphors have chains of associated metaphors attached to them. Trying to reduce a sign to a single meaning was impossibly reductive. Similarly, after the semiologists had their turn at trying to turn everything into a science of symbols, Lefebvre wrote of how Gothic churches were made before they were read, and not even made to be read, they were simply spaces for living people with bodies and lives to live in, in their own particular urban context. As such, Forty suggests, it is now more fashionable to condemn linguistic analogies rather than to support them. However, he notes: “…this reaction seems excessive. Even if architecture is not a language, it does not lesson the value of language as a metaphor for talking about architecture.”
In other parts of the book he explores the gender-metaphor and notes that it was a selection device for hundreds of years, and then suddenly, post WWII the distinction disappeared. Partly he thinks this is because Modernism wanted to be different and partly because of a political sentiment that saw the work of Fascism (Nazism and Communism) as being particularly ‘masculine’. Forty notes however that “The absence of metaphor may not mean that the distinction has altogether ceased to exist.” He suggests that form, materials, movement all come loaded with covert suggestiveness that replace the more literal gender tropes.
In the end I read the whole first half of this book and gained a lot of useful information and some powerful insight into the language-metaphor and to a lesser extent the science-metaphor.
Language Metaphors have been used in the past used to show that architecture was a liberal art like literature, or that its parts were representative of the whole, to explain the ways in which buildings communicate or attempt to depict origin stories. It could also be used to emphasise the comparison with grammar or semiotics. These, Forty suggests, are the overriding categories of language-metaphors used in architecture. Each approach was framed by the readings and writings of the time and influenced the collective thinking about art, literature, and architecture. As with the question regarding whether we ‘read’ buildings, is the secondary debate; whether it can be ‘read’ like a narrative to external events, or whether it is just there, being itself. The first approach relates to most mannerism styles and the latter to early modernism. [Although of course modernism created its own narrative that was then used to be ‘read’ by its adherents].
Goethe suggested “that architecture, like language, was not simply a medium of individual expression, but more importantly expressed the entire collective identity of particular peoples, the Volksgeist.” Barthes, the original master of mythological signs, came to realise that no meaning could be eternally fixed, that even metaphors have chains of associated metaphors attached to them. Trying to reduce a sign to a single meaning was impossibly reductive. Similarly, after the semiologists had their turn at trying to turn everything into a science of symbols, Lefebvre wrote of how Gothic churches were made before they were read, and not even made to be read, they were simply spaces for living people with bodies and lives to live in, in their own particular urban context. As such, Forty suggests, it is now more fashionable to condemn linguistic analogies rather than to support them. However, he notes: “…this reaction seems excessive. Even if architecture is not a language, it does not lesson the value of language as a metaphor for talking about architecture.”
In other parts of the book he explores the gender-metaphor and notes that it was a selection device for hundreds of years, and then suddenly, post WWII the distinction disappeared. Partly he thinks this is because Modernism wanted to be different and partly because of a political sentiment that saw the work of Fascism (Nazism and Communism) as being particularly ‘masculine’. Forty notes however that “The absence of metaphor may not mean that the distinction has altogether ceased to exist.” He suggests that form, materials, movement all come loaded with covert suggestiveness that replace the more literal gender tropes.
In the end I read the whole first half of this book and gained a lot of useful information and some powerful insight into the language-metaphor and to a lesser extent the science-metaphor.
December 29, 2022
Like all specialists, architects work with an arcane technical language most people cannot comprehend, but beyond this professionalism is the realm of cultural discourse, in continuum with the great conversations of history: Trissino and Palladio, and beyond. That is the world Adrian Forty identifies as the place where culture is sustained, with architecture a part of it - so if you consider yourself a cultured person, you should read this book.
At the outset he admits it is difficult to discuss architecture verbally, since architecture communicates through the senses. Mies said: "Build, don't talk" but of course architects do talk and Mies was no exception. The eloquence of Mies' buildings is their silence; but to get there the work did need to be done; only after the talking's finished can architecture speak.
In his "Vocabulary" Professor Forty tries to analyse the discourse about architecture as discrete parts. By bringing together a large number of quotations from many sources, discussed as a series of themes, he shows how architecture-as-idea develops not via narrow specialisms like technology, but via the opening up of larger, universal philosophical areas such as "Truth" or "Space". Alas, if that really is his point it doesn't come across clearly enough and one wishes for a more assertive Introduction than that given here. A stronger entry point with a clear statement of intentions might have been the thing this otherwise admirable book needed to give it the real significance it merits. Instead, Professor Forty has contented himself with demonstrating a compendious understanding of his material, whilst fastidiously avoiding any new interpretation of it.
Aldo Rossi believed that "the history of architecture is the very material of architecture". Forty is excellent at explaining where ideas like that come from - in this case Milan during the Sixties, Ernesto Rogers, and "Casabella" - although in each instance he merely reports the salient facts and doesn't suggest how they might be relevant now. Not prepared to take a position he seems happiest gathering, collating, and presenting other peoples' ideas and leaving it at that; but his refusal to take a view is disorientating. Running through the elements of his "vocabulary" who'd have thought that "History" could have the same importance as "Space", "Nature" or "Truth"? Yet that's how it seems. Quite mechanically, each chapter names its theme, presents some ideas about it and then describes how the theme has evolved. The chapter on "Form" is typical, beginning with Aristotle and ending - refreshingly - at Situationism, although Forty never says if he's attracted to Situationism himself. This abstentionism can be quite infuriating. Strangely, there are no chapters on Style, Decoration, Landscape or Cities whilst things like "Flexibility" are given lengthy expositions as though they were as important as History, Space - or even Truth.
What Forty has actually written is not a vocabulary but a history of ideas, and a valuable one; however in the chapter specifically devoted to History he descends to the level of the theme park and talks about "reliving the experiences of the past" or even "recovering the past meanings of words". His refusal to accept interpretation as an ingredient in any discourse leads him into a territory where the existence of Difference is not acknowledged; his thematic material may be impressive but he has no applecarts to upset, no attitude, no edge.
T&H have done him proud with the production and the illustrations, which are fantastically good, and all unusual. This book is very elegant, free of the gimcrackery publishers get up to these days, a handsome object that looks like a major work - which it very nearly is.
At the outset he admits it is difficult to discuss architecture verbally, since architecture communicates through the senses. Mies said: "Build, don't talk" but of course architects do talk and Mies was no exception. The eloquence of Mies' buildings is their silence; but to get there the work did need to be done; only after the talking's finished can architecture speak.
In his "Vocabulary" Professor Forty tries to analyse the discourse about architecture as discrete parts. By bringing together a large number of quotations from many sources, discussed as a series of themes, he shows how architecture-as-idea develops not via narrow specialisms like technology, but via the opening up of larger, universal philosophical areas such as "Truth" or "Space". Alas, if that really is his point it doesn't come across clearly enough and one wishes for a more assertive Introduction than that given here. A stronger entry point with a clear statement of intentions might have been the thing this otherwise admirable book needed to give it the real significance it merits. Instead, Professor Forty has contented himself with demonstrating a compendious understanding of his material, whilst fastidiously avoiding any new interpretation of it.
Aldo Rossi believed that "the history of architecture is the very material of architecture". Forty is excellent at explaining where ideas like that come from - in this case Milan during the Sixties, Ernesto Rogers, and "Casabella" - although in each instance he merely reports the salient facts and doesn't suggest how they might be relevant now. Not prepared to take a position he seems happiest gathering, collating, and presenting other peoples' ideas and leaving it at that; but his refusal to take a view is disorientating. Running through the elements of his "vocabulary" who'd have thought that "History" could have the same importance as "Space", "Nature" or "Truth"? Yet that's how it seems. Quite mechanically, each chapter names its theme, presents some ideas about it and then describes how the theme has evolved. The chapter on "Form" is typical, beginning with Aristotle and ending - refreshingly - at Situationism, although Forty never says if he's attracted to Situationism himself. This abstentionism can be quite infuriating. Strangely, there are no chapters on Style, Decoration, Landscape or Cities whilst things like "Flexibility" are given lengthy expositions as though they were as important as History, Space - or even Truth.
What Forty has actually written is not a vocabulary but a history of ideas, and a valuable one; however in the chapter specifically devoted to History he descends to the level of the theme park and talks about "reliving the experiences of the past" or even "recovering the past meanings of words". His refusal to accept interpretation as an ingredient in any discourse leads him into a territory where the existence of Difference is not acknowledged; his thematic material may be impressive but he has no applecarts to upset, no attitude, no edge.
T&H have done him proud with the production and the illustrations, which are fantastically good, and all unusual. This book is very elegant, free of the gimcrackery publishers get up to these days, a handsome object that looks like a major work - which it very nearly is.
July 10, 2017
I found it very interesting, although the language is quite hard for a non-native English speaker. The book shows the evolution of words used to describe and talk about architecture - words that we find very common but that may have had a different meaning a century ago or not even exist back then. Interesting for people in the architecture field.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews