Architecture Disgusted by Architecture an Architectural Reflection on George Bataille's Concept of Formless

Regarding the concept of formless “l’informe” in Georges Bataille's philosophy, it has been discussed that the very notion of formless is the opposite of architecture. Thus the formless architecture, if the adjective could ever be applicable to architecture, must be somehow symbolic or metaphoric. On the other hand, in Bataille’s philosophy, formless is the “condition of possibility” of art. If we assume architecture as an art, how can we bring formless and architecture together? What can “formless architecture” mean to us? This paper is a reflection on the relationship between architecture and formless. The main purposes would be to give an interpretation of Bataille's “l’informe”; to find the “condition of possibility” of architecture based on Bataille’s formless; and to study philosophical implications of a possible formless architecture that can set free human from its current rigid point of view. This question-based research meditates on the paradoxical concept (formless architecture) with a philosophical approach. In this regard, the possible meanings of formlessness in architecture are discussed. The paradox of formless architecture resembles the paradox of “poetry of silence” in Bataille's ideas; a poetry that sacrifices the language in order to be an art and blooms in the ruins of language. In Bataille's works, this sacrificing of representation and meaning is the necessary condition of art. But in architecture, which in Bataille's world is the reference of human representation and the base on the human form, sacrificing is to make human formless. Bataille’s historical quest for formless human had led him to Lascaux cave galleries, where human are represented unclothed, animalesque, and faceless. Bataille interprets these figures as human desire to negate himself. He defines formless human as the nonstop negating force or nonstop negativity. This is the ideal picture of human in the “General economy” because by negating himself man can be the best representative of extravagancy and can replace a limited view with a general one. Thus formless creates a Copernican turn from a limited viewpoint to a general one. As we will see, in this rotation, the world of form starts to float on the excess of forces that have directed our deeds, and formless defines the foundation and the condition of form. A condition that has directed architecture like other human deeds: just as architecture, which prima facie seems to be a shelter from death, is rather an excess which does not fear ruining vital forces and in its highest forms plays with the fear of death and makes fun of it. In Bataille's opinion in the shadow of pyramids, the fear of death is rendered pointless. But what is the most basic wealth to spoil in architecture? This Copernican turn engages architects with this consistent question: what makes architecture architecture? What makes a place a place? Formless will present itself as the foundation of architecture or the “condition of possibility” of architecture. This Copernican turn paves the way that takes Bataille from Hegel’s “negativity” to Nietzche’s “extravagancy” and ultimately to Proust’s “quest”.