The Typology of Contemporary Counter-Monumental Landscape with Peircean Semiotic Approach

Document Type : Original Research Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Art & Architecture,Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Art &; Architecture, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.

3 Associate Professor, Department of Art & Architecture, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.

Abstract

New monuments (counter-monuments) as frameworks through which remind collective and personal memories from past in the present, reject the traditional memorial works. In recent decades with an increasing variety of counter-monumental landscape in public spaces and the distinct intentions behind them on the one hand and the growing need of human societies to recover collective memory of urban landscape on the other hand necessitate the systematic analysis of the adopted strategies Based on the importance of this issue, the article aims to answer the following question: "what are the typological components of a contemporary counter-monumental landscape based on semiotic knowledge?” The present study was qualitative and was performed based on a descriptive-analytical method using the library documents to develop a conceptual model of the typology of the contemporary counter-monumental landscape with pierce's semiotic approach. Components of counter-monumental landscapes were explicated on using three methods, namely formal-functional topology of Argan, interpretive-historical topology of Moneo, and archetypal topology of Ardalan and Bakhtiar which served as basis for investigating visual, narrative and archetypal components. To prove the hypothesis, the classification of types was based on the definitions and previous studies in this field, and to test the hypothesis, all 32 extractive components were studied comparatively by randomly selecting 64 case studies from the middle of the twentieth century to the present day. Findings show that according to Peircean semiotic, icon, and index ad symbol were triple typologies of the sign in the memorial landscape survey. By considering objective, subjective and objective-subjective components of landscape, the contemporary counter-monumental landscape signs were classified into three categories namely visual, archetype and narrative types. Visual types consist natural elements, artificial elements, and activity and function; archetypal types include empty grave, stella-obelisk, sacred path, circle-spiral, flight, cosmic mountain-large stone, cosmic dome- cosmic arch, cosmic tree-garden, light-water; and narrative types are divided into traumatic experiences, individual-local & collective values.

Keywords

References

Doss, E. (2010). Memorial Mania: Public Feeling in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ardalan, A. & Bakhtiar, L. (1973). The Sense of Unity. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Argan, G. C. (1963). On the Typology of Architecture. In K. Nesbit (ed.), Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture: An Anthology of Architectural Theory 1965-1995. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, pp. 242-246.
Bagheri, S., Einifar, A. (2017). A Classification of Semiotics in Architecture: The Delimitation and Clarification of Manifestation and the Inclusion Domain of Semiotics in Architecture. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 9(17), 1-10.
Bellentani, F. & Panico, M. (2016). The meanings of monuments and memorials: toward a semiotic approach. Punctum, 2(1), 28-46.
Bradshaw, S. & Storm, L. (2013). Archetypes, symbols and the apprehension of meaning. International Journal of Jungian Studies, 5(2), 154-176.
Chandler, D. (2015). ‎‭Semiotics: The Basics (M. Parsa, Trans.). Tehran: Soore-ye Mehr. (Original work Published 2007)‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
Colquhoun, A. (1981). Modern Architecture and Historical Change. Cambridge, Mass & London, England: The MIT Press.
Eco, U. (1976). A theory of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana university press.
Ferwati, M. S. & Khalil, Rania. (2015). Semiotic aspects of museum landscape: contextual integration and symbolic application. International Journal of the Inclusive Museum, (8), 17-31.
Forczek-Brataniec, U., Luengo, A. & Williams, T. (2017). Lessons from Landscape, Landscape Archetypes. Archaeologica Hereditas, Preventive conservation of the human environment, Architecture as an element of the landscape. Institute of art history of the University of Warsaw, Poland.
Golabchi, M. & Zeinali Farid, A. (2019). Archetypal Architecture. Tehran: University of Tehran Press.
Hamejani, Y., Bayzidi, Q. & Sahabi, J. (2017). A Qualitative Study of Implications of Meaning in Hawraman-Takht Architecture from Semiotics Perspective.  Bagh-e Nazar, 14(57), 45-62.
Hamejani, Y., Bayzidi, Q. & Sahabi, J. (2018). The Semiotics of Pir-e Shaliar Ritual Ceremony in Cultural Landscape of Hawraman.  Bagh-e Nazar, 15(67), 17-30
Hay, I, Hughes, A. & Tutton, M. (2004). Monuments, memory and marginalisatuion in Ade laide’s prince henry gardens. Geografiska annaler, 86 (b3), 201-216.
Jung, C. G. (1919). Instinct and the Unconscious1. British Journal of Psychology, 1904-1920, (10), 15-23.
Jung, C. G. (1936). The Concept of the Collective Unconscious. In collected works, vol. 9i. London: routledge & kegan Paul.
Karamanea, P. (2015). Landscape, memory and contemporary design. Craft plus designenquiry, landscape, Place and Identity, (7), 113-134. 
KhajehSaeed, F. & Jovand, H. (2018). A Comparative Study of Changes in the Spatial and Semantic System of the Houses of the Qajar Period of Tabriz, Sample Studies: Amir-Nazam house, Nikdel house, Ghadaki house and Heidarzadeh house. 1st International Conference on Architecture and Urbanism of the Islamic World in the Age of Globalization. Tabriz: Tabriz University of Islamic Arts.
Khateri, Sh. (2010). Battelfield Tourism around the World. Tehran: Aftab Graphic Publishing.‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬
Kiani, M. & Yari, A. (2007). War Memorials, cultural symbols. Abadi, (58), 18-27.
Krier, R. (1988). Architectural Composition. New York: Rizzoli.
Krzyzanowska, N. (2015). The discourse of counter-monuments: semiotics of material commemoration in contemporary urban spaces. Social semiotics, 26(5), 465-485.
Krzyzanowska, N. (2017). (Counter) Monuments and (Anti) Memory in the City. An Aesthetic and Socio-Theoretical Approach. The Polish Journal of Aesthetics, 47(4), 109–128.
Kužnik, L. (2015). Typology of dark tourism heritage with it`s implications on slovenian future dark tourism products. RSC, 3(7), 308-317.
Lindström, K., Kull, K. & Palang, H. (2011). Semiotic study of landscapes: an overview from semiology to ecosemiotics. Sign Systems Studies, 39(24), 12-36.
Mahan, A. & Mansouri, S. (2017). The study of “landscape” concept with an emphasis on the views of authorities of various disciplines.  Bagh-e Nazar, 14(47), 17-28.
Mansouri, S. (2005). An introduction to Landscape architecture identification. Bagh-e Nazar, 1(2), 69-78.
Mansouri, S. (2010). What is an urban landscape? MANZAR, 2(9), 30-33.
Mehrabani Golzar, M. & Khamseh Ashari, A. (2016). War Memorial Landscape: from Realism to Metaphor. MANZAR, 8(34), 68-81.
Memarian, G. & Dehghani Tafti, M. (2018). Seeking to Find a Novel Concept to Type and Typology in Architecture (Case study: Vernacular Houses in Taft, Type of Tallardar). JHRE, 37(162), 21-38.
Memarian, Q. H. & Tabarsa, M. A. (2013). Species and typology of architecture. Journal of Iranian Architecture and Urbanism, 4 (6), 103 114.
Miniator Sajadi, A., Mohammadzadeh, S. & BoAlizadeh, N. (2015). Narrative lines of landscape The Garden Museum of Holy Defense. MANZAR, 7(31), 78-85.
Moneo, R. (1978). On typology. Oppositions, (13), 23-45. 
Mumford, L. (1938). The Death of the Monument, The Culture of Cities. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
Muratori, S. (1959). Studi Per Una Operante Storia Urbana di Venezia. Rome: Instituto Poligraphico dello Stato.
Muthe, S. S. (2016). A Voice for Public Memory: A Comparison Between the Memorial Practices in India and the United States of America to Propose a Suitable Response to the 2611 Attacks in Mumbai (Unpublished Masters Thesis). Historic Preservation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Nejad Ebrahimi, A., Gharehbeiglu, M. & Vafaei, S. (2019). Effective factors on Communication and Semiotics in Architecture- case study: Kabood mosque in Tabriz. Sophia Perennis, 15(34), 179-202.
Noble, J. (1997). The Architectural Typology of Antoine Chrysostome Quatremere De Quincy (1755-1849). Edinburgh Architectural Research, 145-159.
Noghrekar, A. & Raeisi, M. (2011). Semiology’s analysis of Iranians housing system based on relations of texthousing layers. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba Memary-va-Shahrsazi, 3(46), 5-14.
Nora, P. (1989). Between memory and history: les lieux de mémoire. Representations, (26), 7–24.
Olszewska, A. A., Marques, P. F., Ryan, R. L. & Barbosa, F. (2016). What makes a landscape contemplative?, Environment and Planning: Urban Analytics and City Science, 45(1), 7–25.
Osborne, B. (1998). Constructing landscapes of power: the George Etienne Cartier monument, Montreal. Journal of historical geography, 24(4), 431–458.
Peirce, c.s. (1958). Collected papers of Charles sanders Peirce. In Ch. Hartshorne, P. Weiss & A. Burks (eds.). Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Raaphorst, K., Duchhart, I., Van der Knaap, W., Roeleveld, G. & Van den Brink, A. (2017). The semiotics of landscape design communication: towards a critical visual research approach in landscape architecture. Landscape Research, 42(1), 120-133. 
Raisi, M. M. (2013). Semantics in Architectural Works to Promote Mosque Design (A Case Study of Semantics in Contemporary Tehran Mosques). (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Faculty of Architecture, Tehran University of Science and Technology, Iran.
Rashidi Al Hashem, M. R., Ebrahimi, Kh. & Nora, M. (2017). The Role of Martyrs’ Memorials in Promoting Spirituality in Society. Journal of Cultural Guardianship of the Islamic Revolution, 7(15), 117-152.
Rossi, A. (1982). The Architecture of the City. Cambridge: M.T. Press.
Shieh, E., Behzadfar, M. & Namdarian, A. (2017). Theoretical framework Codification for urban scape using “the production of space” theory and influential forces on scape. Motaleate Shahri, 6(24), 81-94.
Steadman, P. (1983). Architectural Morphology. An Introduction to the Geometry of Building Plans. London: Pion.
Stevens, Q. & Franck, K. A. (2015). Memorials as Spaces of Engagement: Design, Use and Meaning. (1st ed.). Routledge. New York and London.
Stevens, Q. (2006). The shape of urban experience: a re-evaluation of lynch’s five elements. Environment and Planning, (33), 803–823.
Stevens, Q., Franck, k. A. & Fazakerley, R. (2018). Countermonuments: the anti-monumental and the dialogic. The Journal of Architecture, 17(6), 951-972.
Taghvaei, S. H. (2012). Landscape Architecture, an Introduction to Theory and Meaning. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University.
Taheri, F., Aeinifar, A. & Shahcheraghi, A. (2020). A Comparative Comparison of Typology of the Space Organization and Physical Elements of the Qajar-Pahlavi Period with Traditional Houses in Kermanshah. Pazhoheshha-ye Bastan shenasi Iran, 9(23), 149-168.
Tanovic, S. (2015). Memory in Architecture: Contemporary Memorial Projects and Their Predecessors. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis of Science Architecture). Technische Universiteit Delft, University of Sarajevo. 
Teimouri, M. (2010). Urban Landscape Theory and Neighborhood Renovation Neighborhood Urban Landscape Design, the strategy of identity continuity in the renovation process. MANZAR, 2(10), 51-54.
Villari, S. & Durand, J. N. L.  (1990). Art and Science of Architecture, Trans. New York: Rizzoli.
Vossoughi, L. & Rajabi Moghadam, N. (2018). Motivational Factors in War Tourism: The case of Khorramshahr war museum. Bi-Quarterly Journal of Social Tourism Studies, 6 (11), 1-26.
Young, j. E. (1992). The counter-monument: memory against itself in Germany today. Critical Inquiry, 18(2), 267–296.
Young, j. E. (2000). At Memory’s Edge: After-Images of the Holocaust in Contemporary Art and Architecture. New haven, ct: Yale University Press.
Zarghami, E., Ghasemi, S. S. & Bahrami Doust, P. (2014). Explaining the views of designing the monuments of the holy defense martyrs and the tombs of Iranian celebrities. Proceedings of the First International Congress of New Horizons in Architecture and Urban Planning, Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University.
MANZAR, the Scientific Journal of landscape
Volume 13, Issue 56
October 2021
Pages 44-57

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics