The "Canon" And Misreading Of Architecture

Starting from the understanding of architecture, we found the interpretation ofthe building text has been to exist the discussion of uniqueness for the truth explained.However, under the great influence of the natural sciences, the modern architecture ofthe dogmatism produced has been a tendency by the post-modernist reflection. Sowhether had the rule-based interpretation of the building text, or never existed in theso-called truth. Here I introduce "canon" and the misreading of dialectical thinkingabout the interpretation of the text on literary theory.on the other hand with thehermeneutics and philosophy showed the interpretation of the building text in thedifferent horizons, completed the interpretation themselves of the building text forreflection from both inside and outside directions of the architecture.First,the papers cardings the hermeneutics history of the four periods.Fordifferent periods of hermeneutics main areas of concern and related methods, wecombined with architectural characteristics of their subjects, creative interpretation ofthe building text delimit the interpretation activities in the four horizons of "form,meaning, function,‘dao’". This article begins with analyzing the specific explanationhorizon produced by combining hermeneutics and architecture. And this processstarted from the primary to senior, from the phenomenon to explore the nature. Firstly,in the architecture "form" horizon provided by the classical hermeneutics, applicationof "symbolic logic method" and "language rhetoric" on the construction of theoccurrence and development to make assumptions, followed by the construction ofthe present and future were review and outlook. Nextly, in the discussion horizonahout the author intention,the reader meaning and the text means constructed by thegeneral hermeneutic, we completed the investigation of the architecture"meaning".Then followed in the help of the existentialism, we found the existencesignificance of the architecture interpretation in the "function" horizon.Lastly, thenear-metaphysical "dao" as the domain showed by philosophical hermeneutics, andunder the guidance of the interpretation of the "dao",the "canon" and misreading inthe interpretation of the building text are distinguished. At the same time the positionof misreading the building text in hermeneutics is creative established. Finally, we want to emphasize that though to explain the combination ofphilosophy and architecture is based on its own course of development ofhermeneutics as the time axis. But that does not mean that in the four horizons of" form, meaning, function,‘dao’",the interpretation of the building text has asignificant level difference, which is also the author introduces "horizon" as a basicconcept in mind. Another focus of the papers is to reveal that if by our ownexplanation horizon we get the explained results which are different from others.If itwas defined as a misreading, that does not mean the failure of interpretation, on theother side,the fact tell us that is just the beginning of the interpretation.