Other Order Occurs
More than ten years have passed since the definition of OOO (Object Oriented Ontology) by philosophers such as – among others - Graham Harman, Quentin Meillassoux, Ray Brassier and Iain Hamilton. Suddenly, however, this thought begins to be used in the architectural discourse. After the first and hesitant references to this theory, nowadays, to read this philosophy seems to be a “must”.
Nonetheless, how is a philosophical discourse embodied by architecture? For many, there is a simple metaphorical analogy, meaning that there is not any proper translation from one field to the other, but rather a transliteration. In other words, and quite simplistically, the project formalises philosophy. Object oriented ontology becomes Object Oriented architecture. Which is to say: architecture as an object.
Of course, Object Oriented Philosophy tells us that we should not undermine objects, and that they are not the simple manifestation of a more fundamental reality, even the ones that exist without perceiving “dormant objects”1 ) are at the centre of the universe. Rather, everything is an object, and it is potentially “weird”. In other words, as summarised by Ian Bogost: “OOO puts things at the center of being. We humans are elements, but not the sole elements, of philosophical interest. OOO contends that nothing has special status, but everything exists equally”2.
Objects are the centre of our world. Yet, to simply design “architectural objects” is not such an interesting idea or, at least, we can easily argue that it is quite a simple architectural interpretation.