Between Culture and Form in Hays’ “Critical Architecture” K. Michael Hays, in “Critical Architecture: Between Culture and Form,” presents an argument for a discourse of architectural criticism that transcends the commonplace dichotomy of culture and form and instead, while acknowledging the compelling aspects of both polarities of critical discussion, seeks to embed these elements within an oppositional mode of discourse that challenges canonical forms and the hegemony of cultural determinants. This essay will, through a critical interrogation of Hays’ work, argue the thesis that while Hays’ overall argument is sound, his reference to the work of Mies van der Rohe as being embedded in the context of early 20th century Modernist culture...The end:
..... flux. The strength and importance of architectural criticism – as a mode of discourse that is integrally linked to architectural design and practice – lies in its support for the recognition of the dynamic authority of architecture as a mode of production whose cultural meaning is continually open-ended. Thus, Hays’ contention that architecture and architectural criticism must be understood as changing and evolving, rather than rigidly seen as “set in stone” of a specific cultural moment or abstract formal system, may be seen as ultimately sound and critically valid. Bibliography Hays, K. Michael. “Critical Architecture: Between Culture and Form.” In Todd Gannon, ed. The Light Construction Reader. New York: Monticelli Press, 2002, 389-397.