Identity in architecture and art : Versailles, Giverny and Gyeongju

Abstract

This paper explores the different “identities” projected by the palace and gardens of Versailles, the house and garden of Claude Monet in Giverny (France), and Mount Namsan in (South) Korea. It is argued that the palace and gardens at Versailles are the embodiment of what Deleuze and Guattari call “striated space” — a specific modulation of space according to lines of power that organise, hierarchize or exclude. Monet’s estate, while not devoid of a subtle kind of striation, may be seen as an exemplary instance of fusing it with “smooth space”, where the freedom of nomadic exploration breathes a welcoming aroma in the midst of gentle spatial striation. Ranciére gives one another, complementary perspective on Versailles with his evocative phrase, “the distribution of the sensible”, which is the manner in which the extant world is organised, arranged, and ordered according to what is visible, audible, admissible and sayable. In the 17th and 18th centuries this meant a hierarchy of classes from royalty through nobility and the bourgeoisie down to the fourth estate, or proletariat, whose absence from this elevated space is conspicuous in that they are not represented in the artworks surrounding one. Compared to Versailles, the home of Monet is gentleness incarnate; here the “distribution of the sensible” operates according to inclusion, not exclusion. What Ranciére labels the art of the “aesthetic regime” is conspicuous here, in contrast to the hierarchical art of the “representative regime” at Versailles. The paper focuses on the distinctive cratological “identities” of Versailles and Monet’s estate, respectively, through the lenses of Deleuze/Guattari and Ranciére, and then shifts to a different cultural context as a comparative case: the fusion of striated and smooth space on Mount Namsan near Gyeongju, Korea

Hierdie artikel ondersoek die verskillende “identiteite” wat deur die paleis en tuine van Versailles, die huis en tuin van Claude Monet in Giverny (Frankryk), en die berg, Mt Namsan, in (Suid-) Korea geprojekteer word. Die paleis en tuine by Versailles is die toonbeeld van wat Deleuze en Guattari “gelaagde ruimte” noem – ‘n besondere modulering van ruimte wat dit volgens magsbeginsels van eksklusiwiteit en hiërargie organiseer. Ofskoon Monet se huis en tuin ook ‘n subtiele soort “gelaagde ruimte” vertoon, smelt dit hier saam met “gladde ruimte”, waar die vryheid van nomadiese eksplorasie hand aan hand gaan met die struktureringsfunksie van gelaagde ruimte. Ranciére bied ‘n alternatiewe perspektief op Versailles met sy suggestiewe uitdrukking, “die verspreiding van die sintuiglike”, wat ‘n beskrywing is van die wyse waarop die wêreld volgens kriteria van sigbaarheid, hoorbaarheid, toelaatbaarheid en beskryfbaarheid georganiseer is. In die 17de en 18de eeue het dit die vorm aangeneem van ‘n klasse-hiërargie vanaf koninklikes en die edelstand tot die middelklas en die proletariaat, waarvan die afwesigheid in die hoë ruimtes van Versailles opvallend is deurdat hulle nie in die kunswerke wat ‘n mens omring verteenwoordig is nie. In vergelyking met Versailles, word die tuiste van Monet deur vreedsaamheid gekenmerk; hier funksioneer die “verspreiding van die sintuiglike” in terme van insluiting in plaas van uitsluiting. Wat Ranciére as die kuns van die “estetiese regime” bestempel, is opvallend hier, in teenstelling met die “kuns van die representatiewe regime” by Versailles. Die artikel konsentreer op die onderskeibare kratologiese “identiteite” van Versailles en van Monet se huis en tuin aan die hand van Deleuze/ Guattari en Ranciére se teoretiese invalshoeke, onderskeidelik, voordat daar op vergelykende wyse na ‘n ander kulturele konteks oorgegaan word, naamlik na die sintese van “gladde” en “gelaagde” ruimte op die berg, Mt Namsan naby Gyeongju, Korea.