ingold, tim. the conical lodge at the centre of the earth

8/12/2019 INGOLD, TIM. THE CONICAL LODGE AT THE CENTRE OF THE EARTH.

1/28

THE CONICAL LODGE AT THE CENTRE OF THE EARTH-SKY WORLD

Tim Ingold

University of Aberdeen

Department of Anthropology

School of Social Science

University of Aberdeen

Aberdeen AB24 3QY

Scotland, U

tim!ingold"abdn!ac!#$

December 2%&%, revised A#g#st 2%&&
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/28

I

'n the gro#nds of (roms) *#se#m, a conical tent or lodge had been erected of a $ind

traditionally #sed among indigeno#s, forest+delling peoples right aro#nd the

circ#mpolar -orth ./ig#re &0! (he frame as made of long, sto#t ooden poles that

converged at the ape1, b#t splayed o#t at gro#nd level aro#nd the perimeter of a

circle! (his as covered ith laborio#sly prepared reindeer s$ins, caref#lly sen

together! (ho#gh e1tending all the ay to the base of the frame, they reached not

#ite to the ape1 b#t to a level #st short of it, leaving the ape1 itself #ncovered!

ntering thro#gh the door+flap, ' fo#nd myself in a remar$ably capacio#s, interior

space, at the centre of hich as a place for the fire! ' $nelt on the gro#nd! 't as still

daytime and the light as streaming in thro#gh the ape1, hich remained open to the

s$y! 5oo$ing #p, it made me blin$ ./ig#re 20! At the same time, thro#gh my $nees, '

felt the clammy depth of the earth hich gave me s#pport!

'n a moment of revelation, ' #nderstood hat it meant to inhabit a orld of

earth and s$y! 't as to be at once bathed in light and rapt in feeling! B#t it also

daned on me ho closely the idea of landscape to hich ' as acc#stomed from my

on #pbringing is lin$ed to a partic#lar architect#re6 to the habitation of rooms ith

hard floors belo, ceilings above, and indos set in vertical alls! 'magine yo#rself

as the resident of a modern s#b#rban apartment, ith large pict#re indos that

afford a commanding, panoramic vie of the s#rro#nding co#ntryside! 7hen yo#

loo$ o#t from the indos yo# see the land stretching o#t into the distance, here it

seems to meet the s$y along the line of the far hori8on! 'nside the lodge, hoever,

there ere no hori8ons to be seen! arth and s$y, far from being divided at the

hori8on, seemed rather to be #nified at the very centre of my emplaced being!

2


3/28

nrapped ithin the lodge ' nevertheless felt open to a orld! B#t this orld as

not a landscape b#t hat ' shall henceforth call the earth-sky!

/#rther reflection led me to thin$ that hat is at iss#e here is not #st a

partic#lar architect#re b#t the very idea of architect#re itself! /or more than five

cent#ries, it has been both the claim and the conceit of the architect#ral profession that

every b#ilding is a mon#ment to the geni#s of its creator, standing as the end#ring

realisation of an original design concept! 'n the mid+fifteenth cent#ry, in his treatise

On the Art of Building in Ten Books, 5eon Battista Alberti had painted an

#nashamedly self+aggrandising portrait of the architect as a man of 9learned intellect

and imagination:, ho is able 9to proect hole forms in mind itho#t any reco#rse to

the material: .Alberti &;


4/28

poer of reason, the other dependent on preparation and selection: .&;


5/28

hich it is displayed or 9set off: to best advantage! (ogether, the mon#ment and its

landscape are #nderstood to comprise a totality that is complete and f#lly formed!

?ere, land is to scape as material s#bstance is to abstract form, and the land is shaped

by their #nification! As historian Simon Schama rites, introd#cing his magn#m op#s

onLandscape and Memory, the scenery 9is b#ilt #p as m#ch from strata of memory as

from layers of roc$ it is o#r shaping perception that ma$es the difference beteen

ra matter and landscape: .Schama &;;6 =, &%0! 'f the bedroc$ of the physical orld

provides the matter, then the h#man mind contrib#tes the form! 5and+scape, in short,

e#als matter+form!

7ith these reflections on the meanings of architect#re and landscape in mind,

let me ret#rn to the conical lodge! 'n hat follos ' arg#e that e mis#nderstand the

lodge by imagining it as an instance of architect#re6 that is, as a str#ct#re b#ilt to the

prior specifications of a formal design, and set #pon the stage and amidst the scenery

of a landscape! (hose ho hold s#ch a vie @ and they incl#de a s#bstantial maority

in the fields of ethnology, c#lt#ral anthropology and material c#lt#re st#dies @ do

recognise, of co#rse, that as an e1ample of hat is called 9vernac#lar: architect#re, the

lodge manifests a design that is attrib#table to the geni#s of c#lt#ral tradition rather

than individ#al creation! (he b#ilders of s#ch traditional str#ct#res, according to

architect#ral theorist Ehristopher Ale1ander, do not $noingly implement designs of

their on ma$ing b#t rather s#bmit to the reprod#ction of forms sanctified by eight

of tradition! (heir b#ilding is, in this sense, 9#nselfconscio#s: .Ale1ander &;F46 3F0!

-evertheless, the f#ndamental ass#mptions of the hylomorphic model remain! (hese

are that hile the ra materials of the lodge are s#pplied by nat#re, the form is added

by c#lt#re, carried #n$noingly in the minds of the people and passed from

generation to generation thro#gh force of c#stom and habit! 't is s#pposed that in


6/28

b#ilding the lodge, this ideal form is proected #pon the s#bstrate of the material

orld!

(he alternative vie, hich ' shall no attempt to establish, is to comprehend

the process of b#ilding not as a proection of form onto matter b#t as a binding

together of materials in movement! (h#s the lodge, far from being b#ilt #p #pon rigid

and impervio#s fo#ndations, is stitched into the very fabric of the earth! 'nstead of

thin$ing of the lodge, then, as a material artefact set in a landscape, it o#ld be better

#nderstood as a ne1#s of materials in a orld of earth and s$y! (o establish this vie,

' ill proceed in fo#r steps! 'n the first, ' e1amine the difference beteen to ays of

thin$ing abo#t b#ilding6 as the assembly of elementary solids and as the eaving and

splicing of fibro#s material .'ngold 2%%%6 F4+ 2%&&6 2&&0! 'n the second ' consider

the essential m#t#ality of earth and s$y, and hat it means to say of the lodge that it is

both of the earth and of the s$y! 'n the third step ' lin$ the idea of the earth+s$y, in

contrast to landscape, to that of smooth space, and sho ho this lin$age is

manifested in the materials of the lodge! /inally, ' e1plain the conical form of the

lodge as an #pended spiral @ the envelope of a process of groth and regeneration!

II

7e are contin#ally being told, these days, that the orld e inhabit is b#ilt from

bloc$s6 not #st the orld that e o#rselves have made @ of artefacts or the b#ilt

environment @ b#t the orlds of nat#re, the mind, the #niverse and everything!

Biologists spea$ of the b#ilding bloc$s of life, psychologists of the b#ilding bloc$s of

tho#ght, physicists of the b#ilding bloc$s of the #niverse itself! So pervasive has this

metaphor become that e are inclined to forget ho recent it is! ' had not even

realised this myself #ntil a year ago, hen ' chanced to read a little boo$, entitled The

F


7/28

most beautiful house in the world, by the architect#ral historian 7itold >ybc8yns$i! 't

as not #ntil the middle of the nineteenth cent#ry, >ybc8yns$i tells #s, that the

metaphor of 9b#ilding bloc$s: came into common #se, along ith a domestic

architect#re @ of prospero#s homes e#ipped ith dedicated n#rseries @ in hich

b#ilding ith bloc$s co#ld literally become child:s play .>ybc8yns$i &;


8/28

originally referring to the or$ of the carpenter b#t s#bse#ently e1tended to b#ilding

or ma$ing in a more general sense! 't goes bac$ to the Sans$rit taksan, hich signified

the craft of carpentry and specifically the #se of the a1e .tasha0! C#r #estion, then, is

abo#t the balance @ or the relative priority @ of stereotomics and tectonics in the

b#ilding of things!

(his as a #estion that m#ch preocc#pied the historian of art and

architect#re, Gottfried Semper! 7riting in the middle of the nineteenth cent#ry, #st as

the stereotomic idea of b#ilding bloc$s as on the rise, Semper arg#ed in #st the

opposite direction, namely that the threading, tisting and $notting of linear fibres

ere among the most ancient of h#man arts, from hich all else as derived,

incl#ding both b#ilding and te1tiles! 9The beginning of building:, Semper declared,

9coincides with the beginning of textiles: .&;


9/28

binding and $notting threads or fibres, are engaged in the activities of the same

general $ind ./rampton &;;6


10/28

force of gravity b#t that it sho#ld not be sept aay by the ind! (his leads him to

compare the all of the tent ith the sail of a ship, or even the ing of a glider, the

p#rpose of hich is not so m#ch to resist or brea$ the ind as to capt#re it into its

folds, or to deflect or channel it, in a ay that serves the interests of h#man delling

./l#sser &;;;6 F0!

7hat if e ere to follo /l#sser and commence o#r #nderstanding of alls

by thin$ing abo#t, and ith, the ind6 by flying $ites rather than b#ilding ith

bloc$sJ >ather li$e Semper before him, /l#sser disting#ishes to $inds of all

.corresponding to WandandMauer0, thescreenall, generally of oven fabric, and

thesolidall, hen from roc$ or b#ilt #p from heavy components! 7itho#t going

into the #estion of relative antecedence, this for /l#sser is the difference beteen the

tent and the ho#se .&;;;6 F+=0! (he ho#se is a geostatic assemblage of hich the

elements are held firm by the sheer eight of bloc$s stac$ed atop one another! (he

force of gravity allos the ho#se to stand, b#t e#ally can bring it t#mbling don!

7ithin the cave+li$e enclos#re formed by the fo#r solid alls of the ho#se, /l#sser

arg#es .&;;;6 =0, things are possessed @ 9property is defined by alls:! (he tent, by

contrast, is an aerodynamic str#ct#re that o#ld li$ely lift off, ere it not pegged,

fastened or anchored to the gro#nd! 'ts fabric screens are ind alls! As a calming of

the ind, a loc#s of rest in a t#rb#lent medi#m, the tent is li$e a nest in a tree6 a place

here people, and the e1periences they bring ith them, come together, intereave

and disperse in a ay that precisely parallels the treatment of fibres in fabricating the

material from hich the tent:s screen alls are made! 'ndeed the very ord 9screen:

s#ggests, to /l#sser, 9a piece of cloth that is open to e1periences .open to the ind,

open to the spirit0 and that stores this e1perience: .&;;;6 =0!

&%


11/28

As ho#se is to tent, then, and as the containment of life:s possessions o&er and

againstthe orld is to the eaving together of life+paths inthe orld, so is the

clos#re of the solid roc$ all to the openness of the indblon screen all! 9(he

screen all bloing in the ind:, /l#sser rites, 9assembles e1perience, processes it

and disseminates it, and it is to be than$ed for the fact that the tent is a creative nest:

./l#sser &;;;6 =0! Cf co#rse, li$e all seeping generalisations, this is far too cr#de,

and any attempt to classify b#ilt forms in these terms o#ld immediately collapse

#nder the eight of e1ceptions! (here are tents that incorporate roc$ alls, and ho#ses

hose alls are screens! Cne has only to thin$, for e1ample, of the screen alls of the

Kapanese ho#se! Laper+thin and semi+transl#cent, these alls defy any opposition

beteen inside and o#tside, and cast the life of inhabitants as a comple1 interplay of

light and shado! (he traditional Kapanese ho#se, as the architect#ral historian

enneth /rampton has observed, belonged to a orld that as oven thro#gho#t,

from the $notted grasses and rice stra ropes of domestic shrines to tatamifloor+mats

and bamboo alls ./rampton &;;6 &4+&F0! 'ndeed in its commitment to the tectonic,

Kapanese b#ilding c#lt#re stands in star$ contrast to that of the estern mon#mental

tradition ith its emphasis on stereotomic mass!

(he general contrast beteen the geostatics of the roc$ all and the

aerodynamics of the ind all remains, hoever! 'ndependently of /l#sser, b#t

draing directly on the earlier or$ of Semper, /rampton ta$es #s bac$ to the

fo#ndational distinction beteen stereotomics and tectonics, and to the #estion of the

balance beteen them! (raditions of vernac#lar b#ilding aro#nd the orld reveal ide

variations in this balance, depending on climate, c#stom and available material, from

b#ildings @ s#ch as the Kapanese ho#se @ in hich the earthor$ is red#ced to point

fo#ndations hile alls as ell as roofs are oven, to traditional #rban dellings in

&&


12/28

-orth Africa here stone or m#d bric$ alls arch over to become roof va#lts of the

same material, and in hich br#shor$ or bas$etor$ serves only as reinforcement

./rampton &;;6 F+=0! 'n the former case the stereotomic component, and in the latter

case the tectonic component, is red#ced to a minim#m! 'n some instances, materials

are transposed from the one mode of constr#ction to the other, s#ch as here stone is

c#t to resemble the form of a timber frame .as in the classical Gree$ temple0, or here

bric$s are not so m#ch heaped #pon one another as bonded into co#rseor$ that has

all the appearance of a eave! /rampton:s interest, hoever, lies in the 9cosmic

associations evo$ed by these dialogically opposed modes of constr#ction that is to

say the affinity of the frame for the immateriality of s$y and the propensity of mass

form not only to gravitate toard the earth b#t also to dissolve in its s#bstance: .ibid!6

=0! 'n these associations, the b#ilding is revealed as a marriage not of form and matter

b#t of earth and s$y, and as the cons#mmation of their #nion! (o thin$ of the b#ilding

as s#ch is to sit#ate it in an earth+s$y orld!

III

't is in these terms, then, that ' propose to consider the conical lodge @ not as an

artefact in the landscape b#t as a partic#lar synthesis of earth and s$y that allos

h#man life to ta$e root and gro, draing s#stenance from the earth even as it

breathes the air! 'n order to #nderstand the nat#re of this synthesis, let #s start from

the gro#nd! ' have already noted ho the idea of 9b#ilding bloc$s: pres#pposes a

gro#nd that is level and rigid6 a fo#ndation #pon hich the obects of o#r interest, or

that afford everyday life, are mo#nted! 'n his manifesto for an ecological psychology,

Kames Gibson compares the s#rface of the earth to the floor of a room! 5i$e the floor,

he arg#es, the gro#nd is 9the #nderlying s#rface of s#pport: on hich all else rests

&2


13/28

.Gibson &;=;6 &%, 330! Yet a bare gro#nd, devoid of feat#res, o#ld be no more

habitable than an #nf#rnished room! (o be rendered habitable, a room m#st be

f#rnished ith the miscellany of obects that ma$e possible the everyday activities

carried on in it! Similarly, the gro#nd can harbo#r life only beca#se it, too, is

f#rnished ith obects of one $ind and another! 9(hefurnitureof the earth:, Gibson

insists, 9li$e the f#rnishings of a room, is hat ma$es it livable: .&;=;6 =


14/28

(he anser ' ish to propose is that the lodge is not an obect at all b#t a

thing! (he obect e1ists as an entity in a orld of materials that have already

precipitated o#t and solidified in fi1ed and final forms! 't stands before #s as a fait

accompli, presenting only its congealed, o#ter s#rfaces to o#r inspection! (he thing,

by contrast, is ever+emergent as a certain gathering or intereaving of materials in

movement, in a orld contin#ally coming into being, alays on the threshold of the

act#al! 7hereas the obect, as /l#sser notes, 9gets in the ay: and bloc$s o#r passage

./l#sser &;;;6


15/28

orld, b#t of a $not hose constit#ent life+lines, far from being contained ithin it,

contin#ally trail beyond, only to mingle ith other lines in other $nots! (he conical

lodge, ' s#ggest is s#ch a thing ./ig#re 20!

As s#ch, to ret#rn to o#r earlier #estion, the lodge is neither on the earth nor

in the s$y! /or far from being confined to their respective domains by the hard s#rface

of the gro#nd, in the constit#tion and dissol#tion of things earth and s$y contin#ally

infiltrate one another! 7herever life is going on, indeed, the interfacial separation of

earth and s$y gives ay to m#t#al permeability and binding! (he painter La#l lee

bea#tif#lly evo$ed this binding in the image of a seed that has fallen to the gro#nd!

9(he relation to earth and atmosphere:, he rites, 9begets the capacity to gro (he

seed stri$es root, initially the line is directed earthards, tho#gh not to dell there,

only to dra energy thence for reaching #p into the air: .lee &;=36 2;0! (he groing

plant is not mo#nted uponthe gro#nd s#rface b#t rooted init! /or that very reason it is

sim#ltaneo#sly earthly and celestial! 't is so, as lee pointed o#t, since the

commingling of s$y and earth is itself a condition for life and groth! 't is beca#se the

plant is of.and not on0 the earth that it is also ofthe s$y!

(he same applies to the conical lodge! 't, too, is at once of earth and s$y6 a

place here earth and s$y are bro#ght together in the groth and e1perience of its

inhabitants! vidently, then, the gro#nd of the lodge is no mere platform! 't is rather

an enveloping matri1 that both anchors and no#rishes the lives of its inhabitants, #st

as the gro#nd beyond its circ#mference n#rt#res the vegetation that gros there and

the animal life that feeds on it! (h#s, the gro#nd o#tside the lodge does not resemble

the gro#nd inside beca#se it is similarly f#rnished ith obects! >ather, it is the

gro#nd inside the lodge that resembles the gro#nd o#tside, since it provides shelter

and no#rishment li$e the s#rro#nding earth! 't is inthis gro#nd and not on it, as

&


16/28

?eidegger p#t it @ in this earth, this 8one of groth and transformation @ that 9man

bases his delling: .?eidegger &;=&6 420! 'n an admittedly florid passage, ?eidegger

describes the earth as 9the serving bearer, blossoming and fr#iting, spreading o#t in

roc$ and ater, rising #p into plant and animal: .ibid!6 &4;0! Yet this earth, ?eidegger

insisted, is #nthin$able itho#t also thin$ing of the s$y, and vice versa! arth and s$y

are not, then, separate hemispheres hich, p#t together, add #p to a #nity! >ather,

each binds the other into its on becoming! (he earth binds the s$y in the tiss#es of

the plants and animals it s#stains and no#rishes the s$y seeps the earth in its

c#rrents of ind and eather! And at the centre of this orld of earth and s$y lies the

conical lodge!

IV

ven if this arg#ment is accepted, hoever, e have still to acco#nt for the specific

ay in hich earth and s$y are bro#ght together in the conical lodge! ?o, for

e1ample, does the lodge compare in this regard ith the traditional dellings of

people ho lived by farming and forestry rather than by pastoral herdingJ Cne ay to

thin$ abo#t this difference might be in terms of a distinction, introd#ced by

philosopher Gilles Dele#8e and psychoanalyst /Ili1 G#attari, beteensmoothand

striatedspace! (his distinction ta$es #s bac$ to hat /l#sser called the screen all of

the tent, and more partic#larly, to the material of hich it is made! >ecall that for

/l#sser, the tent+all is a oven fabric that gathers, holds and disseminates the lives

of those ho dell ithin! As s#ch, it epitomises the very 9thinginess: of the lodge, in

?eidegger:s terms! 't is 9open to e1periences:, /l#sser says .&;;;6 =0, and dras

people in! B#t does it reallyJ Semper, after all, had ass#med to the contrary that the

f#nction of the oven all as, first and foremost, to enclose .Semper &;


17/28

As the all of the fence or pen, oven from stic$s and branches, enclosed crops or

herds, so that of the traditional ho#se, hose oven alls might have been plastered

ith attle and da#b, enclosed its people!

7riting more than a cent#ry later, in &;


18/28

animal hides, as indeed as the case in the lodge from hich ' began, clothed as it

as ith a patchor$ of reindeer s$ins! Dele#8e and G#attari are #ic$ to assimilate

the patchor$ @ 9an amorpho#s collection of #1taposed pieces that can be oined

together in an infinite n#mber of ays: @ to their idea of smooth space .2%%46 2F0! 't

is li$e felt in having no consistent direction, or lines of striation! (he #se of fabric as

tent covering, hoever, presents more of a problem! (he nomadic pastoralists of

-orth Africa, for e1ample, $no nothing of felting, nor do they cover their tents ith

animal hides! >ather, they #se ool to eave their tent+cloth! ?o can e ta$e oven

fabric to be a hallmar$ of agrarian life, hen it is fo#nd e#ally among pastoral

nomadsJ

(o get aro#nd the problem, Dele#8e and G#attari displace their initial

distinction beteen felt or patchor$ and fabric onto one beteen to $inds, or

conceptions, of fabric, corresponding respectively to the striated and the smooth! Cn

the one hand, they arg#e, among sedentary farmers @ inhabitants of the striated @

fabric enfolds the body and the o#tside orld ithin the confines of the immobile

ho#se! ?ere, its f#nction is to enclose! (he fabric of nomads, on the other hand,

9inde1es clothing and the ho#se itself to the space of the o#tside, to the open, smooth

space in hich the body moves: .2%%46 20! K#st ho one might disting#ish a fabric

of the first $ind from one of the second is hard to say, and ith no means of doing so,

the arg#ment does s#ffer from a certain circ#larity! -evertheless, ith this

#alification, the respective claims of /l#sser and of Dele#8e and G#attari, apparently

in contradiction, can be readily reconciled! 7e have merely to ac$noledge that

/l#sser:s 9screen all: @ open to e1perience, spirit and ind @ is a oven fabric of the

second $ind! And the implication is that as the setting of fabric shifts from tent to

&


19/28

ho#se, so the open screen becomes a closed solid all or, more probably, a all+

covering or tapestry that hangs from it!

1actly the same happens ith the carpet, another invention of tent+dellers,

as /l#sser goes on to sho! (he carpet, he rites, is 9to the c#lt#re of the tent hat

architect#re is to the c#lt#re of the ho#se: ./l#sser &;;;6 ;0! 'nitially, hen carpets

entered the ho#se, they ent #p on the alls! >ecall that even Semper referred to

carpets as all+hangings and to carpet eavers as among the first all+fitters .Semper

&;


20/28

.as in eaving0 and to#ch at a distance .s#ch as on a $eyboard0! (hey are rong,

hoever, to e#ate the opposition beteen the haptic and the optical ith that

beteen the smooth and the striated! 't o#ld be closer to the mar$ to recognise that

the optical and the haptic correspond to to ays of striating space! (his, indeed, is

hat disting#ishes the modern sense of the landscape from its medieval prec#rsor

.'ngold 2%&&6 &340!

(he landscapes of modernity are striated, b#t not by the arp of the loom, the

f#rros of the plo#gh or the mar$s and c#ts of masons and carpenters, hether etched

in stone or folloing the grain of timber! >ather, they are striated by the abstract

lineamenta, and by the ratios and proportions, of proective geometry! (hese

striations, then, are of an entirely different order! (o amplify the difference, e can

ret#rn to /l#sser:s idea of the screen all! 7ith this idea, /l#sser is primarily thin$ing

of the oven fabric of the tent covering! /or many contemporary readers, hoever,

the ord 9screen: is more li$ely to bring to mind the opa#e screens of proection @

s#ch as in the cinema or conference room @ #pon hich are cast images of one $ind

and another! E#rio#sly, /l#sser .&;;;6 =0 believes that they, too, assemble and store

e1perience, in #st the same ay as the fabric alls of the tent! (his, hoever, is

precisely hat they do not do! 'n the cinema, the movements of life are proected onto

the screen, not dran into its fabric! (he screen itself remains blan$ly impervio#s to

the images that play #pon its s#rface! 5ight, so#nd and feeling, the f#ndamental

c#rrents of sensory e1perience for the tent+deller, are red#ced in the orld of

cinematic representation to vectors of proection in the conversion of obects to

images!

'ndeed the difference beteen the screen as a oven fabric and as a s#rface of

proection precisely parallels the contrast in ays of thin$ing abo#t b#ilding, beteen

2%


21/28

the gathering together of materials in movement and the proection of ideal form onto

material s#bstance, that ' have so#ght to establish! 9(he #navoidably earthbo#nd

nat#re of b#ilding:, rites /rampton .&;;6 20, 9is as tectonic and tactile in character

as it is scenographic and vis#al:! Cnly in the former sense co#ld it be said, ith

/l#sser, that the screen all is 9open to e1perience:! (his leaves #s ith one problem,

hoever, that has still to be resolved! ?o, e1actly, does the perception of nomadic

pastoralists, the archetypal deni8ens of smooth space, differ from that of sedentary

farmers in their hands+on activities of shaping the landJ ?o do the gatherings and

eavings, and the sensory engagements, of smooth space differ from those of the

striatedJ Cnly hen e have ansered this #estion can e finally p#t o#r finger on

the specificity of the ay in hich earth and s$y come together in the conical lodge!

V

All life is lived #nder the s#n, and in this, the farmer is no e1ception! Leople ho

rest a living from the land have also to contend ith the vagaries of ind and

eather, hatever their mode of s#bsistence! 9't is evident that the peasant:, rite

Dele#8e and G#attari, 9participates f#lly in the space of the ind, the space of tactile

and sonoro#s #alities: .2%%46 3%+&0! (his is not an optical space @ a space of

proection @ herein the orld is revealed to the beholder in a manner a$in to images

on a screen, nor is it a haptic space of close+#p engagement ith the materials of life!

't is rather atmospheric, a space of light, so#nd and feeling that inf#ses the body,

sat#rates aareness, and both constit#tes and #nderrites the capacities of inhabitants

to see, to hear and to to#ch! (o inhabit the atmosphere is to see ith the light of the

s#n, to hear ith the so#nds of the elements and to to#ch ith the breath of the ind

.'ngold 2%&&6 &340! B#t hile nomad and peasant may live #nder the same s$y, and

2&


22/28

imbibe the same atmosphere, their respective relations to the earth are f#ndamentally

different! /or in the peasant:s labo#r of shaping the land, the earth presents itself as a

field not of forces to be harnessed b#t of resistances to be overcome! ?ere, earth and

s$y meet not in #nison b#t in discord @ a discord played o#t in the constr#ction of the

delling, as e have already seen, in the opposed principles of stereotomics and

tectonics! 7hereas in the tent of the nomad, earth and s$y meet at the hearth, in the

ho#se of the peasant they are divided beteen the stereotomic mass of the alls and

fo#ndations, hich gravitate toards the earth, and the tectonic frame and covering of

the roof, hich mingles ith the s$y! 'n the division beteen roof and alls, the

peasant delling is divided against itself! (he orld of the peasant, e might say, is

not so m#ch an earth-skyas an earth'sky! (o highlight the contrast, let me introd#ce

another comparison, beteen the farmer:s life on land and the mariner:s at sea!

(he ocean is s#rely smooth spacepar excellence! (he mariner ensconced in

his vessel, feeling the aves as they lap the h#ll and catching the ind in his sails, all

the hile scanning the s$y for the movements of birds by day and of the stars and

other celestial bodies by night, is a point of rest in a orld in hich all aro#nd is in

movement .Gladin&;F46 &=&+20! 'n striving to rein in the forces of the elements he is

the precise opposite of the farmer ho bends m#scle and sine to co#nteract the

friction of an immobile and often #nyielding earth, dragging himself and his

e#ipment over the hard gro#nd and inscribing trac$s and pathays in the process! (o

describe the mariner:s s#rro#ndings from the farmer:s perspective, as aseascape

.Eooney 2%%30, o#ld be to confer on aves and tro#ghs, or on becalmed or t#rb#lent

aters, a permanence and solidity that they lac$ in reality! Setting sail, the mariner

does not simply relin#ish one set of s#rfaces, of the land, for another, of the sea!

>ather he enters a orld in hich s#rfaces ta$e second place to the circ#lations of the

22


23/28

media in hich they are formed! ?ere the gro#nded fi1ities of landscape give ay to

the aerial fl#1es of ind and eather above, and the a#atic fl#1es of tide and c#rrent

belo! (hese fl#1es, and not the s#rface of the sea, absorb the mariner:s effort and

attention! (he orld he inhabits is not, then, a seascape b#t an ocean-sky(

Eo#ld the same not be said of the nomadic pastoralistJ *#ch as mariners ride

the aves, nomads ride the past#res, carried along on the indsept e1panses of

sand, steppe and sno, and responding in their movements, at every moment, to real

and imaginary forces, both celestial and s#bterranean .'ngold 2%&&6 &330! At home in

the lodge, the nomad feels the earth ith his body as his ga8e mingles ith the s$y!

As a centre of stillness and a calming of the inds, the conical lodge is indeed

comparable to a vessel at sea, and not #st in the fact that the covering of both boat

and lodge is stretched over a tectonic frame! 7e have reports of *icronesian mariners

lying on the bottoms of their canoes hen travelling far o#t of sight of land, sensing

the sell ith their bodies hile ga8ing directly heavenards .*ac$ 2%%=6 &33+40! 'f

for the mariner in his boat, the orld is a blend of s$y and ocean, then for the nomadic

pastoralist in the lodge, it is li$eise a blend of s$y and earth! (his is to thin$ of the

land as smooth rather than of the sea as striated! (here are s#rfaces in the earth+s$y

orld, of co#rse! B#t they are s#rfaces of a different $ind! (he landscape, carved and

striated, has t#rned against the s$y! 't is, as Dele#8e and G#attari say .2%%46 3%0,

closed off and apportioned! B#t in the smooth space of the earth+s$y, the s#rfaces of

the land @ li$e those of the sea @ open #p to the s$y and embrace it! 'n their ever+

changing colo#rs, and patterns of ill#mination and shade, they reflect its light they

resonate in their so#nds to the passing inds, and in their feel #nderfoot or #nder+hoof

they respond to the dryness or h#midity of the air, depending on heat or rainfall! 'n

23


24/28

smooth space, to contin#e ith Dele#8e and G#attari, 9there is no line separating earth

and s$y: .2%%46 42&0! Cne co#ld not e1ist itho#t the other!

'n his Tristes Tropi)ues, Ela#de 5Ivi+Stra#ss lin$ed the birth of architect#re to

the invention of riting, and both to the creation of cities and empires ith their

attendant str#ct#res of poer and e1ploitation .5Ivi+Stra#ss&;6 2;;0! Both riting

and architect#re strive for hierarchy, mon#mentality and permanence! (heir forms are

stereotomic, assembled from bloc$s and made to last! 'n the tectonic orld of the

earth+s$y, hoever, nothing lasts6 there are no indelible records, end#ring mon#ments

or rigid hierarchies! /rom an architect#ral point of vie, the b#ilt forms of the earth+

s$y orld appear ephemeral @ as ephemeral, even, as spo$en ords! 't o#ld seem,

indeed, that the mon#ment is to the lodge, and the landscape to the earth+s$y,

precisely as riting is to speech! K#st as the ords of oral narrative dissolve in the

very act of their prod#ction, so the binding of materials in smooth space is alays

accompanied by their #nbinding! And yet the lodge, as e have seen, is a thing, and

the thing @ to recall ?eidegger:s ords @ carries on 9in its thinging, from o#t of the

orlding orld: .&;=&6 &


25/28

mi1 and mingle ith air and moist#re from the atmosphere in the ongoing prod#ction

of life! As a gathering place of forces and materials, the lodge is not closed over! 't

does not t#rn its bac$ on #s! 't is open6 a confl#ence of persons and materials, dran

together in the movements of its formation! At the generative heart of the lodge is the

fire+place, the hearth! And here life binds, in the groth of living things, fire

#nbinds, in their comb#stion .'ngold 2%&&6 &220! 'n the smo$e of the fire, materials

no#rished by the earth, and bo#nd together in life, are released once more to the s$y,

hence they ill f#el f#rther groth! (o concl#de, ' ant to s#ggest that it is in

relation to this perpet#al cycle of binding and #nbinding that e sho#ld #nderstand

the conical form of the lodge! 'nstead of thin$ing of this form in terms of p#re

geometry, as a Llatonic solid set #pon a plane, e sho#ld perhaps regard it as the

envelope of an #pard spiral @ that is, as an #pended vorte1 ith the hearth as its eye!

(he spiral is a movement that goes aro#nd and #p, rather than a s#rface that divides

inside from o#tside! 't th#s signifies groth and regeneration rather than enclos#re! 'n

short, as a vorte1 in the c#rrents of earth and air, here the smo$e from the hearth

rises to meet the s$y, the conical lodge brings to a foc#s the generative fl#1es of the

orlding orld!

2


26/28

Reference

Alberti, 5! B! &;

and >! (avernor! Eambridge, *ass6 *'( Lress!

Ale1ander, E! &;F4!!otes on the synthesis of form! Eambridge, *ass!6 ?arvard

University Lress!

Alpers, S! &;

Gibson, K! K! &;=;! The ecological approach to &isual perception! Boston6 ?o#ghton

*ifflin!

Gladin, (! &;F4! E#lt#re and logical process! 'n%xplorations in cultural

anthropology, ed! 7! ?! Goodeno#gh! -e Yor$6 *cGra+?ill, pp! &F=+==!

?eidegger, *! &;=&!.oetry/ language/ thought, trans! A! ?ofstadter! -e Yor$6

?arper and >o!

'ngold, (! 2%%%! *a$ing c#lt#re and eaving the orld! 'nMatter/ materiality and

modern culture, ed! L! Graves+Bron! 5ondon6 >o#tledge, pp! 324+332!

'ngold, (! 2%%=!Lines* a brief history! 5ondon6 >o#tledge!

'ngold, (! 2%&&!Being ali&e* essays on mo&ement/ knowledge and description!

5ondon6 >o#tledge!

2F


27/28

lee, L! &;=3!!oteboooks/ &olume 0* The nature of nature, trans! ?! -orden, ed! K!

Spiller! 5ondon6 5#nd ?#mphries!

5Ivi+Stra#ss, E! &;! Tristes tropi)ues, trans! K! and D! 7eightman! 5ondon 6

Konathan Eape!

*ac$, K! 2%%=! (he land vieed from the sea!A,ania* Archaeological 1esearch in

Africa 42.&06 &+&4!

Clig, ! 2%%


28/28

Fig!re

/ig#re &

(he conical lodge, vieed from the o#tside, in the gro#nds of the *#se#m! (he

people standing beside it give an idea of the scale Mperhaps e sho#ld say ho they

are, and give some more details of the provenance of this partic#lar tentN

/ig#re 2

5oo$ing #p thro#gh the ape1 of the tent, the linear poles intereave to comprise a

comple1 $not, from hich each nevertheless contin#es, reaching #p into the open s$y!

ingold, tim. the conical lodge at the centre of the earth

Documents