The Softness of Theory: A T(r)opological Reading of Lisa Robertson’s Soft Architecture
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This essay examines, from two different perspectives, the relationship between material and metaphoric modes of representing urban experience in Lisa Robertson's Occasional Work, first exploring the process by which the discourse of theory is supplemented by an embodied practice; and, second, probing and testing the radical potential of this combinatory choice. This is not Descartes locked in his room. This is philosophy in motion and art in practice and something else entirely--life, perhaps. --Daniel Coffeen, An Emphatic Umph In her preface to Lisa Robertson's Occasional Work and Seven Walks from the Office for Soft Architecture, Petra Blaisse celebrates the porosity of Robertson's textuality, praising its elaborate slippage between theory and poetic prose, political inquiry and personal memorabilia. (1) A soft architect herself, Blaisse oozes nonchalance in her two-page, one-paragraph, one-sentence entry into Robertson's enigmatic world: wonder if anything of value can be added by me [...] before one starts reading Lisa's own flowing cutting dreaming slashing warming warning texts that are the voice of a person who experiences the urban environment like the interior of a room or the sensuous stroll through a landscape (its organization a permanent political and economic thermometer) (7). With this poise, Blaisse takes us right into the heart of Robertson's text, where cityscape is a disconcerting field, associated with politics and economics but happening in the intimacy of a room and in the slow motion of words propelled by sound or semantic associations. intricate knitting of these disparate experiences of the urban remains an enigma in her work, whose theoretical architecture acts as a textual scaffold, holding, under its glossy cloak, a transforming structure. For Geoffrey Hlibchuk, Robertson's multifarious plasticity may be best approached through the trope of fabric, which makes her language flexible and malleable, her rhetoric devices intentionally movable and deformed: The book reveals the enfolding, morphing, and twisting of not only objects but also affectations, emotions, and states of mind, Hlibchuk writes. Fabric is emblematic of this process, as rippling sheets endlessly billow and breathe in the nocturnal breeze of the city. Through these and other textual strategies, tropology is contorted into (225). To extend Hlibchuk's perceptive reading, I argue that, in Robertson's work, the distance between topology and tropology is not only defined through the relationship between space and language; it is also actively produced in the fluid movement that occurs between what Henri Lefebvre calls representations of space (space as abstraction) and representational space (space as it is lived and experienced through practice) (94). This essay examines the tension between those two modes of looking at space (which for Lefebvre results in its social production) in Occasional Work. In the first place, I explore how highly theoretical discourses coming from Western intellectual traditions are supplemented, and thus transformed, by the intimacy of words, lodged in the geography of the body. This combinatory process is what I refer to as the softness of theory, a form of knowledge that, by drawing attention to the body, probes the effects of the self-conscious overlapping as well as the intricate weaving of those two modes of experience. Arguing for the political relevance of Robertson's textual performance, the second part of this essay investigates how her unusually transdisciplinary practice may shift assigned meanings and endow urban locations with new social and political potential. I focus particularly on Robertson's undermining of hegemonic frameworks of spatial organization through her use of the Situationist strategy of detournement. It is through these different but related meaning-making designs that I attempt to read Robertson's t(r)opological manufacturing of a changing urban landscape, where topology, with its emphasis on the materiality of locations, crosses paths with the figurations of tropology in an endless interpretative twirl. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,054 |
| Communication savante | 0,013 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».