Arqueertecture

Arqueertecture, rather than architecture. Arqueertecture is more than a word game –after all, queering architecture was, is, and will be a serious task. Why should one miss the chance to lunge into the abyss of queering architecture? Accumulations in art and architecture have their queer potentials: Agglomerating, congesting and stacking, distances the architectural process from the normative. It metamorphoses, deterritorializes. Stacking gives a shortcut to producing new spaces of desire. The melting of dichotomies in architecture and the formation of in-betweens is queering. Neither structural nor decoration; synchronically structure and decor will be queer. A figure becoming an abstraction and an abstraction that is figured is also queer. A figure becoming background and vice versa would be queer in architecture. A form that becomes a function and a function that turn out to be a form are queer. Anti- Cartesianism in geometry will lead to queer in architecture. In folding architectures, topologies open the path to queer but the monolithism regained by folding reproduces uniformity. (From Fordist economy towards a Foldist economy.) The famous rhizome of Deleuzian terminology is still important for an arqueertechture. Defunctionalism can be a new way to queer a conventional architecture. A queer architecture invites; it is carnivalesque, an outburst, and overcrowding. All the following may also have queer potentials in architecture: Intentional functional gaps, accidents in the design process, ad-hocism in design, an interchangeable function in space, garbage aesthetics. From kitsch to ornamentalism, from hyperspace to junkspace and uncanny; these concepts and many others may help queering architecture.