Designing a Mystic Writing Pad after Auschwitz: Daniel Libeskind and Peter Eisenman
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31522/p.31.1(65).5Keywords:
Architectural Criticism, Berlin Memorial, Peter Eisenman, Daniel Libeskind, Writing PadAbstract
In an attempt to revisit two architectural pieces of commemoration designed by two influential architects, the Garden of Exile by Daniel Libeskind and the Memorial for the Murdered Jews of Europe by Peter Eisenman, it is worthwhile to recall Sigmund Freud’s 1925 essay “A Note Upon the ‘Mystic Writing-Pad”. This paper elaborates on the association between writing and memory and introduces how these architects use topography while placing gigantic rectangular blocks as a peculiar analogy to Freud’s technique per se, that is, ‘writing on a surface.’ This argument opens up the discussion on the longitudinal cross sections and the experiential qualities of these projects concentrating on their particular internalization of memory and time. Then comes Walter Benjamin and his notion of allegory into the picture to claim that Libeskind’s concept of ‘reading the note’ may differ from Eisenman’s in a reasonably crucial way. The latter’s architecture expands the idea of memory and it’s further functioning and places it in the realm of allegorical experience.
References
Alberro, A. (2004) ‘Specters of Provenance: National Loans, the Königsplatz, and Maria Eichhorn’s Politics of Restitution’, Grey Room, 18, pp. 64-81. https://doi.org/10.1162/1526381043320769
Beiner, R. (1984) ‘Walter Benjamin’s Philosophy of History’, Political Theory, 12(3), pp. 423-434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591784012003005
Benjamin, W. ([1928] 1998) The Origin of German Tragic Drama. London : New York : Verso.
Bloomfield, M.W. (1972) ‘Allegory as Interpretation’, New Literary History, 3(2), pp. 301-317. https://doi.org/10.2307/468317
Brody, R. (2012) The Inadequacy of Berlin’s “Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe [Online]. Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/the-inadequacy-ofberlins-memorial-to-the-murdered-jews-of-europe [Accessed: 8 May 2023].
Chappell, S. (2017) ‘Plato’. In: Bernecker, S. and Michaelian, K. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Memory. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 385-407. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315687315-31
Clough, P.T. (2000) ‘The Technical Substrates of Unconscious Memory: Rereading Derrida’s Freud in the Age of Teletechnology’, Sociological Theory, 18(3), pp. 383-398. https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00107
Cowan, B. (1981) ‘Walter Benjamin’s Theory of Allegory’, New German Critique, 22, pp. 109-122. https://doi.org/10.2307/487866
Derrida, J. and Mehlman, J. (1972) ‘Freud and the Scene of Writing’, Yale French Studies, 48, pp. 74-117. https://doi.org/10.2307/2929625
Diduck, R.A. (2011) ‘Reach Out and Touch Something (That Touches You Back): The Iphone, Mobility and Magic’, Revue Canadienne d’Études Cinématographiques / Canadian Journal of Film Studies, 20(2), pp. 55-74. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjfs.20.2.55
Dorrell, E. (2004) Libeskind’s Ground Zero sidelining a ‘disgrace’ claims angry Eisenman [Online]. Available at: https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/archive/libeskinds-groundzerosidelining-a-disgrace-claims-angry-eisenman [Accessed: 8 May 2023].
Eisenman, P. (1992) ‘Representation of the Limit: Writing a “Not-Architecture’. In: Libeskind, D. (ed.) Daniel Libeskind: Countersign. Rizzoli; First Edition, pp. 120-121.
Eisenman, P. (1998) ‘Diagram: An Original Scene of Writing’, ANY: Architecture New York, 23, pp. 27-29.
Eng, E. (1980) ‘Locke’s Tabula Rasa and Freud’s “Mystic Writing Pad”, Journal of the History of Ideas, 41(1), pp. 133-140. https://doi.org/10.2307/2709107
Foster, H. (2010) ‘New Monumentality: Architecture and Public Space’, Perspecta, 42, pp. 135-139.
Freud, S. ([1925] 2001) ‘A Note upon the Mystic Writing Pad’. In: Strachey, J. (ed.) The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. 19: (1923-25) The Ego and the Id and Other Works. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psychoanalysis, revised ed. London: Vintage, pp. 227-232.
Gandelsonas, M. (1998) ‘The City as the Object of Architecture’, Assemblage, 37, pp. 129-144. https://doi.org/10.2307/3171359
Isenberg, N. and Benjamin, W. (2001) ‘The Work of Walter Benjamin in the Age of Information, New German Critique, 83, pp. 119-150. https://doi.org/10.2307/827791
Koepnick, L.P. (1996) ‘Allegory and Power: Walter Benjamin and the Politics of Representation’, Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 79(1/2), pp. 59-78.
Libeskind, D. (1990) ‘Between the Lines: Extension to the Berlin Museum, with the Jewish Museum,’ Assemblage, 12(12), pp. 19-57. https://doi.org/10.2307/3171115
Libeskind, D. (1992) ‘Between the Lines: The Jewish Museum, Berlin’, Research in Phenomenology, 22, pp. 82-87. https://doi.org/10.1163/156916492X00089
Libeskind, D. (2001) Jewish Museum Berlin [Online]. Available at: https://libeskind.com/work/jewish-museum-berlin/ [Accessed: 8 May 2023].
Osman, M. (2005) ‘Benjamin’s Baroque’, Thresholds, 28, pp. 119-149. https://doi.org/10.1162/thld_a_00329
Owens, C. (1994) Beyond Recognition: Representation, Power, and Culture. University of California Press.
Petersen, L.H. (2011) ‘The Presence of “Damnatio Memoriae”. In: Roman Art, Notes in the History of Art, 30(2), pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1086/sou.30.2.23208566
Sodaro, A. (2013) ‘Memory, History, and Nostalgia in Berlin’s Jewish Museum’, International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 26(1), pp. 77-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-0139139-6
Verhoeff, N. (2009) ‘Grasping the screen: Towards a conceptualization of touch, mobility and multiplicity’. In: Van den Boomen, M.; Lammes, S.; Lehmann, A.-S.; Raessens, J.; Schäfer, M.T. (eds.), Digital Material: Tracing New Media in Everyday Life and Technology. Amsterdam University Press, pp. 209-222.
Young, J.E. (2000) ‘Daniel Libeskind’s Jewish Museum in Berlin: The Uncanny Arts of Memorial Architecture’, Jewish Social Studies, 6(2), pp. 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1353/jss.2000.0007
Zografos, S. (2019) ‘On Archives’ Architecture and Fire: A Psychoanalytic Approach to Conservation. UCL Press, pp. 18-38. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvb6v6jq.7
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Pelin Yoncacı-Arslan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2021 authors and journal.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
In agreeing this form, you certify that:
- You read the ethical codex of the PROSTOR available at journal web.
- You submitted work is your original work, and has not previously been published and does not include any form of plagiarism.
- You own copyright in the submitted work, and are therefore permitted to assign the licence to publish to PROSTOR.
- Your submitted work contains no violation of any existing copyright or other third party right or any material of an obscene, libellous or otherwise unlawful nature.
- You have obtained permission for and acknowledged the source of any illustrations, diagrams or other material included in the work of which you are not the copyright owner.
- You have taken due care to ensure the accuracy of the work, and that, to the best of your knowledge, there are no false statements made within it.
- All co-authors of this submitted work are aware of, and in agreement with, the terms of this licence and that the submitted manuscript has been approved by these authors.
