As a public thing architecture is never immune

As a public thing, architecture is never immune from power play that shapes, constructs, sustains or demolishes its presence. Accordingly, architecture as observed by Banham is human condition that moves always with the time because it carboxypeptidase a helps to create the time (Banham, 1974: 3–4). For him, professionally, architects are believed to be capable of being form-giver, creator, and controller of human environment. In the light of Zeitgeist (Eisenman in Hays, 2000: 529. See also Nesbitt, 1996: 217; Tournikiotis, 2001: 154), architects are morally responsible for the quality of the built environment because they are trained and educated for making places, instead of destroying them into pieces. The thing of architecture for Banham is one of the thinkable modes of design that for some reason had come to occupy a position of cultural privilege in relation to construction industry (Banham, 1999: 294). As a thinkable thing, architecture, by its design, presents functional environment, attractive form, and truthful construction, which qualifies it as a cultural artifact. In this respect, design does make a difference for the built environment to be qualified as architecture. In doing so, architects as designers are morally due to perform their best effort for a well-designed building by which human needs are well accommodated with safe, healthy, and beautiful environment. Since his interest in history is what happens along the shifting frontier between technology and art (Whiteley, 2003: 407), this study will be focused on Banham\'s critical assessments, positions, and thoughts on three main categories of architecture as a thinkable thing: function, technology, and aesthetics. Indeed, the historical context of his works in the United Kingdom and in USA becomes crucial for understanding his propositions and expositions on the architecture of the 20th century. In short, the research on Banham\'s works and thoughts is to concern with the questions of form-function, truth-technology, and healthy world-aesthetics. Studies on Banham\'s works include documentations, compilations, and historical analyses. Fully dedicated works on Banham\'s endeavours have been presented by Richardson (1987) and Whiteley (2003). Richardson provides us with literary documentation on Banham\'s publications until 1986. Whiteley studies Banham\'s background and his thinking on history and theory of modern architecture. Whiteley\'s book is undoubtedly a substantial contribution to a documentary exposition. However, Whiteley\'s book has not yet covered the most recent Banham\'s theoretical positions, especially on the urban landscape of USA. Moreover, regarding Banham\'s understanding on history of architecture and his passion on technological modernity, his works are remarkably inspiring and challenging for studies on history and theory of architecture. Tournikiotis is correct in describing Reyner Banham as a historian who writes of things that historians had concealed (Tournikiotis, 2001: 145–166); this is sometimes done consciously and sometimes not. For him, history and critical analysis are indispensably an integrated part of questioning as well as thinking of modernity. Despite the polemics of Banham with other historians and critics are obvious on many cases, the stature of his scholarship becomes more and more solid in compliance with his vision on history as an immediate future. Until now, in Banham\'s texts and traces this vision considerably remains hidden, which stipulates us for further investigation and deliberation. In order to dismantle Banham\'s ideas and thoughts, it is necessary to discuss the basic concepts of architecture, history, and modernity from which he develops his vision on modern culture of design. Undoubtedly, architecture is one important platform of modern experiment that demonstrates an integration of new material, technology and aesthetics into a functional form. Unlike before, modernity discloses its futurist possibilities of form based on the innovations of science and technology. Indeed, Banham reads and envisages these possibilities in terms of functional form that performs industrial aesthetics. The important references for this aesthetics are mostly from Germany such as Turbinenfabrik by Peter Behren (1909) and Faguswerk Headquarters by Walter Gropius in collaboration with Adolf Meyer (1911). Both buildings are not only new, in terms of construction, material, and form, but also a breakthrough for its functional interpretation for what a workplace is. What is modern architecture?