The Concept of Limit in Architecture; its application in a rehabilitation project

The Concept of Limit in Architecture;

its application in a rehabilitation project

"ION MINCU" UNIVERSITY OF ARCHITECTURE AND URBANISM, BUCHAREST

SUMMARY

1. The limit: the expression of individual essence

The acts of an individual are predicated upon his conditioning. There are two types of conditioning. The initial one is inscribed in the human nature, while the second is of the result interaction with the cultural context.

1. 19319t1915t 1. 19319t1915t            The individual essence as the generating core of the limit

The individual conditioning can be understood as a set of limits, in the sense that that they outline the individual identity, determining everything the human deems its own action. At the center of the system of limits lies the individual essence, while the external conditionings are being developed concentrically around it. In order to be able to act upon the individual limits one needs to become aware of them and to get outside of them.

1. 19319t1915t 2.           The center and the limits between tradition and innovation

"The most remarkable feature" (CASSIRER) of both individual and human society in general is not the structure, either physical or metaphysical, but creation, understood as a means of expression. The creative thrust of humanity can be briefly defined in general cultural terms. Culture itself is formed by two opposites. The stabilizing tendency relates to a significant and indisputable past, while the evolutionary tendency relates to an imminent future.

2. The relation between individual and space, from concept to physical representation

Any discussion of the individual has to take into account the relationship between him and the space he inhabits. This relationship can be seen at a conceptual level as the very essence of existence or, in the social context, as an abstract expression of the organization of the structure of human life in general. The concrete form of this relationship is space organization: humanity's material creation. One common feature of all these approaches is that the individual is seen and discussed in cultural terms.

2.1. 19319t1915t            The essence of dwelling as the existence principle in the phenomenological approach

Phenomenologically, space is a defining trait of the individual, while formal space representations are only a limiting aide of the essence. The phenomenological assumption is based on fundamental anthropological experiences.

Hidden dimensions and concentric fields of social existence

According to proxemics the individual is surrounded by invisible interaction space fields, which can be seen as conditionings emerging from the relationship between individual and society. The invisible dimension of these fields is rooted in the individual's connection with a specific cultural identity.

Generating spatial patterns by referring to individual and community

A universal way of dwelling is determined by the way, in which the individual perceives the relation between space and his intimacy. These structures can be seen as spatial patterns are upon which individual (or community) identities are layered.

3. The individual-community relation in traditional societies

The individual defines himself as part of his community. Man becomes aware of his own individuality only in contrast to an Other, in the context of social life. The awareness of one's individuality is almost completely absent from archaic societies. In fact, it was not acceptable in a traditional society, whose values were rooted in stable formulas. In this respect, traditional societies, small communities, and minorities are exemplary because they highlight certain features of the individual-community relationship.

3.1. 19319t1915t Visible and invisible limits of space. The example of some communities

A community formally defines its space by a founding act or through other types of space organization and through the immaterial limits of the state, language or other elements of community identity.

3.2. Permissiveness: a characteristic of social limits

The ability to adapt represents an intrinsic human quality and can be expressed through the permissivity of the established limits. Within communities, the permissiveness of limits is a way to acknowledging and accepting in order to assert and maintain one's own identity.

3.3. Organizing space in a concentric way in a traditional society

In a traditional society, space is often structured around a protective core that contains the fundamental identity information of that community. Therefore, concentricity comes to define the way in which space is occupied, an important characteristic for both individual and community.

3.4. Canceling the community center as a result of acting upon limits

Acting upon limits means an mutation in the their relation with the center. Thus, the limits are re-oriented towards a different center, which generates a new structure and a new set of relations. When multiple layers do not sustain the center, its principle of existence disappears.

3.5. Acting on limits to reinforce the generating center

Consequently, reinforcing the existing center should be done by protecting the supporting layers. Moreover, a direct action upon its essence could threaten the coherence of the existing set of relations.

4. Highlighting the concept of limit

4.1. 19319t1915t Cultural identity as limitation of a cultural space

The components of cultural identity can be seen as limitations in the shape of physical objects or as living manifestations of a given community. Their significance must be decoded in the specific context of a community.

4.2. Significance as an instrument of limit identification

The process of decoding limits through signs establishes a hierarchy between the center and the limits.

4.3. The cultural heritage: a way to identify centers and limits

The cultural heritage identifies specific cultural identities by comparison and reference to universal values.

5. Moving from abstract to concrete when defining an architectural concept

Bibliography

STUDIES AND ARTICLES:

1. The limits: an expression of individual essence

The acts of an individual are predicated upon his conditioning. There are two types of conditioning. The initial one is inscribed in the human nature, while the second is of the result interaction with the cultural context. In his Despre Limita[1], Gabriel Liiceanu discusses the meaning of the individual determinations.

1. 1. 19319t1915t The individual essence as the generating center of the limit

The conditionings that rule man's being become assumptions of the individual's existence precisely because, for the modern man, they prove to be "negotiable". These conditionings are essentially human as they are reflected in man's deep structure. The somatic and mental endowments, just as gender, are intrinsic gifts that one carries with him from birth. Origin, nationality, religion, class, time-period, and place are conditionings, which are further reflected in the deep structure and related to the demographics, and/or socio-economics of an individual. One can create an infinite number of limit-conditionings and operate with endless criteria on them. In this case, however, it is important to consider the way one conceives of one's own existence. The perception of such conditionings foregrounds the idea of concentricity. Therefore, the essence-building or individualizing conditionings are those, around which the new context-induced limits develop. The totality of these conditionings makes up the individual's identity as a whole.

The appearance of "the Other" is the first form of awareness of one's own individuality, of assuming one's identity and the relativity of one's center.

The recurrence of the set of essential limits reflects the continuity of being, while tradition can be seen as the manner in which contextual conditionings are transmitted. For this reason they are, to a certain extent, changeable limits. One can perceive tradition as a given only inside an archaic society, because there it is rooted in the individual's internal structure. The awareness of tradition initiates a process, which acts upon tradition itself, taking it out of the deep structure, out of what Liiceanu calls the "alien-intimate"[2] foundation. To go beyond the limit means to become alienated. Essentially, Modernity means coming out of tradition - once you become aware of it -, and negotiating with tradition. Moreover, the "Modern Man" apparently negotiates with the entire set of limits ; he negotiates because he can step outside and look back from a distance; however, the result is somewhat formal due to the definition of human nature as the first conditioning. The only way in which one can transcend one's own limits is, according to Liiceanu, through suicide . Suicide annuls the identity and the essential core of conditioning. Outside the scope of suicide, man's actions are governed by his limits.

Tradition involves evolution and slow change through accretion, leading to adaptation. This type of adaptation affects a man's way of life, his predecessor's and his posterity's way of life. Consequently, one can be modern, but not new, and the result of the negotiation between man and tradition can never end in freedom of conditioning, but only in submission or complete rejection. One identifies one's initial gifts (or limits) with one's own personality in a spontaneous and unconscious way. The sum of these limits can be seen as the assumption, which generates the individual's identity.

1. 19319t1915t 2.           The center and the limits between tradition and innovation

The set of limits/conditionings can only be defined against the cultural context.

Just as the limits, against which the individual is defined only make sense in the cultural context, so is culture dependent on the social phenomenon, on its milieu. It is through culture that we decode the individual's limitations and it is society, understood as a sum of individuals (from a holistic point of view) that confers culture its meaning. What we have is a product of a whole set of activities and information accumulated by "humanity"; a product that generates and feeds its own structure projected in the future. Language, myth, religion, art, history and science are specific parts of culture that are representative for the human being. According to Cassirer, culture is the humanity's "remarkable characteristic"[6], while the individual's and society's existence are only the aide for this essence. It is this 'remarkable characteristic', seen within the social context of "you and I" and in the broader context of the entire society, that brings into sharp relief the difference between human society and any other kind of society. Cultural phenomena can be decoded on various levels and in various ways, and the key to this process of decoding is signification.

The pretext of culture is the fight against the ephemeral. Within the human culture, myth and religion are the most conservative phenomena because they relate to a distant past, whose rules are deemed unchangeable. The destruction of the initial order would lead to the collapse of the whole structure. The archaic societies are markedly conservative. At the opposite end of the spectrum we see innovation as the engine of the cultural evolution.

2. The relation between individual and space, from concept to physical representation

There are several ways, in which the individual-space relation can be approached, such as: phenomenology, proxemics, and theory of architecture. Phenomenology offers that determination begins with the very fact of being ("dwelling in an essential manner"). Proxemics[7] analyzes this relation by using the 'private' and 'public' characteristics of space. The theory of architecture presents way of modeling space in relation to a generic manner of living on the part of the individual.

2.1. 19319t1915t            The essence of dwelling as principle of existence in the phenomenological approach

"To dwell means recollection, a turning to oneself,

a passage back home, into a land of exile, as it were."

Emmanuel Lévinas[9]

The relationship between the individual and the space he occupies cannot be discussed outside the framework of phenomenology. Phenomenology activates the meanings of space as existence, essence, place, and limit. There is a great distinction between place-as-limit and space. Place is something established; however, in relation to human existence, its mere presence does not amount to much. By way of contrast we see the essence of dwelling. Phenomenology strips the individual to his essences and offers terms like the place-as-space as "dwelling in an essential manner" , and 'dwelling-building' as means of existence. All these share the fundamental principle of the tetrad earth-heaven-men-gods .

Heidegger considers that dwelling is not the mere "dwelling" (in its architectural or ordinary meaning) but a "settling together", a place for the tetrad. The space, ordered in such a manner, becomes "place", and the relation that defines the essence of dwelling is one between individual and place. Generally speaking, space is an alien space, while space-as-place belongs to the sphere of existence. Heidegger provides the example of the bridge to illustrate the place-as-space relation. This example can be extended to any "built" thing with certain characteristics. Building is dwelling, when the latter starts off from the "essence of dwelling" . The essence of dwelling is the existence of the individual below the skies and the gods, on this earth, which signifies being. A space exists to the extent to which it is being "dwelt". The difference between a space and a place is given by the 'built thing' seen as a means of being. This formal expression of the existence within a certain space is not the result of a relationship between the natural and the mineral spheres, but rather between the savage and the tamed worlds. Phenomenology is not interested in the formal aspects of the space, but rather in its 'qualities'. From a phenomenological point of view, the main characteristic of the 'built thing' is not the manmade attribute (implicit, included, and subordinated to the relations that inform the existence) but the organization principle. Organization means limitation and establishing. The limit is not a reference to the exterior, but to "the place where a thing's essence begins". As Heidegger suggests, the archaic meaning of the word Raum (space), Rum - a freed area for the settlement of a colony or camp - is the one that truly illustrates its significance. Dwelling can only be achieved through colonization, through an increased closeness of the non-space, of the space with an alien identity, to that of the individual.

Settling together, organizing, setting limits, colonizing, and dwelling are manifestations of existence. Thus, existence is conditioned by its own essence.

2. 2. Hidden dimensions and concentric fields of social existence

Proxemics offers another point of view; it researches the space by measuring the distance that defines the individual's relations to it. Its means of research are the analyses of the senses and of the body language. Proxemics offers the alternative of immaterial fields that cannot be directly defined, but which can be divined. It is the social side of the human being that generates such invisible fields around each individual; they are always related to a specific cultural context. The theory of Proxemics states that man is surrounded by variable size fields containing different information, and that the nearness and remoteness from one person to another can be felt, perceived in various intensities, yet never concretely explained. E. Hall names this accumulation of variables "the hidden dimension" through which man, as a social individual, articulates unseen spaces of interaction around him. One can find the intimate space - the sphere closest to a person, where the physical relation prevails and is addressed towards those in close proximity; the social and consultative space - the space of social intercourse, relating both the acquaintances and the strangers - and, finally, the public space - where relations are perceived impersonally and almost anonymously.

E. Hall is the first to bring to light the problem of space anthropology, the importance of the relative and of the interrelated, as opposed to the absolute. In addition, he discusses the various ways in which certain communities create and use a territory.[14] Thus, proxematics can be understood as the hidden dimension of human culture, which we, as social beings, practice unawares. Hall's second assumption is the impossibility of the human being to free himself from his own culture. As a social product, culture is malleable; it evolves continually and, therefore, varies in time. It is passed on by means of tradition, from generation to generation.

Through the study of the individual, proxemics points at invisible dimensions of existence as a sub-structure of space organization. Intuitively, proxemics offers hypotheses, which can be applied to direct communication, either among individuals, or through the medium of an organized space.

Generating spatial patterns by referring to individual and community

Architecture is the "living reality", within which man dwells and lives as a social being. A built framework signifies a spatial organization, which presupposes the change of this space, which allows for the emergence of the "you and I" relation. This kind of spatial ordering is realized according to a series of recurrent events pertaining to architecture as a phenomenon and, in particular, to the human being as a user. Christopher Alexander[15] uses the concept of pattern to define the coordinates through which a space becomes architectural. In Romanian this concept is translated as "matrice generatoare a limbajului architectural" (approximately, architectural language generating matrix), and addresses the architectural object as formal representation, and the phenomenon as an intrinsic rule of evolution.

The patterns of space organization are entities that describe a repetitive set of problems that contains essential data and cultural determinations translated into a specific architectural language. The way in which Christopher Alexander, the author of A Pattern Language, identifies such organization patterns is by signaling a specific problem, assembling the essential data and coagulating them into a model-hypothesis, which generates a certain space. The language used belongs to the archetypal models born out of the essence of human nature, of the activities (actions) and the relations in the framework of society. Their applicability ranges from the relatively small sphere of the house and its neighborhood to that of the public space, the town.

Christian Norberg Schulz was the first to discuss the invisible fields around individuals in a concrete manner. They start from the intimacy of the body and extend to the spheres of the house and of the town, transitioning gradually from private to public.

3. The individual-community relation in traditional societies

The individual is defined as a part of the community. Identification and separation represent the double condition of the social consciousness[17] and man becomes aware of his individuality only through the perception of his difference from an Other in the context of social life. It expresses the sequence "to be, to be aware of, to be finite" by one's affirmation against a whole, by relating of two different essences , and by understanding the limit as the definition of an essence in relation to a new limit. This definition does not contain the refusal implicitly, but only some sort of aloofness, and finally the intercourse with the other limit by assenting, denying, or ignoring. The "you and I" relation can be applied to communities because the individual and the society are similar according to the principle that the part is like the whole and all parts are like the whole. This definition is true for the smaller, traditional communities, where such relations between individuals are extremely stable.

3.1. 19319t1915t The visible and invisible limits of space. The example of some communities

"The domestic space in both a limited and larger sense of dwelling is traversed by invisible lines that define zones that are sometimes intersected or overlapping, by specific activities, with their entire inventory of objects. The order of objects in the inhabited microcosm speaks of the indications and interdictions imposed by the collective mentality."[21]

Smaller communities, colonies and minorities could offer an example of established limits at the society level, on the basis of direct communication between individuals and their identification in relation with an unified majority.

Some of the foundational rituals in traditional Romanian villages testify to the choosing of the place by throwing a stone or shooting an arrow. The boundary was traced either by horseback riding all day around the newly established settlement or by digging a ditch or a furrow. Another custom was to give the youngest child of the village a sound beating near the milestone so that he should remember and transmit the "consciousness" of the village limit. Intuitively, these rituals speak about limitation as a necessity of expressing one's identity and the sacrifice required at the time of establishing the limit. Moreover, they show the necessity to perpetuate the awareness of one's identity.

The Saxon colonists who came to Transylvania from the 12^th century exhibit an idiosyncratic notion of the "foundation of the limits" due to a certain historic context. In the Middle Ages the Hungarian kingdom was an important player in the Central and South-East European politics and its expansion was directed towards the Southwest with an eye on an exit to the Adriatic. Their expansion into Transylvania took place between the 10^th and 12^th centuries through a series of stages that can be identified by looking at the defensive system used by the Hungarians. The border was a stretch of land "10-14 km in width, in a state of dereliction, with a thick forest, hard to cross" , controlled by access gates. This system proved to be ineffective against the Tartars' invasion. Thus, from both economic and strategic reasons the strategy of a controlled colonization of the region seemed the most appropriate. Its advantage was that it secured the borders and revitalized an important part of the kingdom. "The guests", i.e. the Saxons, were offered privileges like: property over the land, personal freedom and the right to move, provided that they defended the border.

The territories that were offered to the colonists were in fact former apiaries that had to be converted into farmland. This was the first instance of establishing the limit. The right of property over the land, followed later on by the right to establish a political unit with its own government and elected judges led to the formation of the "Saxon County" (literally, "The Saxon Country"). Both the individual freedom and a physical mobility granted by law to pointed to the change in social status. To defend themselves against the Turkish invasions they built fortifications around the churches; such buildings could shelter the entire community during a siege. The limits established by the Saxons around "their places" are not only of defensive nature, to protect themselves against real enemies, but also the limits of a certain identity status, the limits created by a new self-definition inside their own culture. Not only do we see a functional limit in this case, but also, equally important, we witness the founding of the symbolic limit. The formal expression of this limit is a territory inhabited by a community that has a certain status.

3.2. Permissiveness: a characteristic of social limits

The "you and I" relation finds its most profound manifestation in smaller communities. A fragment from an ethnology paper is very relevant for this matter:

In the village everything is out there, in the open, you can see the others and are seen in your turn. A stranger is immediately noticed. The village knows no discretion. A stranger will receive a nickname right away. And so, he ceases to be anonymous, and becomes the 'stranger of the village' for the rest of his life. One would be mistaken to assume that the village is tolerant. In the village one finds leniency. The lenient man acts leniently out of a wisdom of sorts, while the tolerant man is only being polite.

In the world of the traditional village there is no anonymity, and the individuals are constantly brought together, either directly or through socially-ordered activities. For example, their meeting place is the sacred space, the church.

The hidden dimension of the public space to which E. Hall refers in his theory of proxemics can be applied to the Romanian village to highlight its 'limit characteristic' (to be expected in the case of a small community). The stranger is neutralized, tamed. There is no aggressiveness, only the permissiveness of the limits, their permeability. A good example from the world of the Romanian village is the protective fence of the courtyard. Next to it there is a well that offers water to strangers. By offering them protection it also tames them. On the other hand, the same protective limit of the yard contains the stile: a narrow passage over the fence, a dangerous liminal place that can be crossed only one's acquaintances and relatives. One has to jump over the stile. The establishing and crossing of the limits requires a considerable effort in the village world. To conclude, this "hidden distance", quite narrow in the context discussed, brings to the fore one of the qualities of the limit: permissiveness.

3.3. Organizing space in a concentric way in a traditional society

In relation to the disorganized space located outside the limits, the latter can be seen as an expression of the essence, of its definition. A characteristic of the limit is concentricity. The establishing of limits in a traditional society is structured around a center. In the world of the Romanian village space organization, and the dwelling itself is built concentrically, around the hearth. The hearth is the fireplace, signifying the first element of human existence. It purifies and gives warmth, food, and light. The fundamental acts of human life are connected to it: birth and coming into the world. The hearth is the only connection to "heaven" and "the underworld". Thus, it has to be protected by elements with a special significance: the hearth icon, and the blessed basil, because the hearth is the meeting place between the palpable existence and the invisible that generates the essence (the good and the evil). Other concentric spaces, more or less visible, emerge from this center/core. The home icon, hung on the Eastern wall establishes new limits: the East-West axis indicates a mediated relation to the outside world, while the threshold establishes a direct relation with it. New limit generating centers are established by the porch, marked by magic signs and Fate spirits, the fence, the gates (to the interior there is the stile, for the acquaintances, and to the exterior the crosses, for the strangers). The lanes, the crossroads, the fountain-crosses represent the next limits of the microcosm that surrounds the home. The significance of the objects that stabilize and protect these liminal spaces decreases as one moves away from the center.

The whole community is organized around a center, the church. Next to it there is the school. The courtyards of the two buildings are concentrically grouped in relation to them,[27] while the next layer consists of "shops", the pottery, the smithy and the pub. The fields represent the final limit; they contain temporary shelters (with protecting artifacts inside) and then the milestone.

This way of organizing the world rests on a highly significant "core", with less and less important spaces warping around. It puts both the individual-family relation and the individual-society relation at the center of meaning. Moreover, it expresses the idea that limitation is established/founded at the place "where the essence begins". The weakness is the center, not the limits.

3.4. Canceling the community center as a result of acting upon limits

The only way to renounce one's limits is to commit suicide; it is the only possibility to change and implicitly deny the limits. Within a given society, the suicide means the canceling of the center represented by the community identity. For the community, "the suicide" is a refusal to communicate on the part of individuals. In an archaic society one does not find typically modern manifestations like this; a small community cannot bear individualism. Both the complexity of the new kind of relations, with their emphasis on the essential-individual limits, and the elimination of tradition from within the deep limits with the emergence of modernity led to the "canceling" of the small communities. The thinning of Saxon population follows a similar scenario. Under certain circumstances, the community members do not only abandon their colony, the village, their native home, but also give up on them. They seek a new identity in a new country, which makes the concept of the double identity an impossibility. The community stepped outside its own limit and denied it. The full consent was replaced by denial, by suicide. This kind of canceling also takes place at the community level and so, it is spontaneous and, therefore, unconscious. Here lies the difference between leaving/turning-down of this community in particular and the simple denial the modern man would profess. Tradition was not "taken out" altogether from the intimate-alien core of the community; its limits have been turned "upside down" to achieve a new identification.

The attempt to cancel a community results in a new identification vis-à-vis a new majority. It can be understood as a new 'colonization', a new reference to the essence. A good example in this respect are the Diasporas or the reference to a new essence of the majority. An example, in this respect, would be the consensual agreement to the limits of this majority. There is also the extreme case of ill-adjustment , in which the denial of the initial limit is not followed by the consent to the new one. So, outside the individualism-oriented society that obeys a new set of limitations and the ill-adjustment to the new complex of conditionings, suicide will never stem from the very reason of the intrinsic and functional structure of the individual and society.

3.5. Acting on limits to reinforce the generating center

"The cultured man" - that person who recognizes his identity as an a priori - does not like theories; he needs "a pragmatic profit" from his negotiation with tradition.

"His profit from the ethnology should be a pragmatic one first and foremost. And indeed, one lives differently with the awareness that one is but a cultural variant among many others, and that one's immediate interest in those who are different from you is natural, not a bit vulgar."

The profession and the theory signify stepping beyond the limit, becoming aware of it. Returning to the problem of the traditional village, one could argue that the relation between the ethnologist and this closed world - in which the decoding of limits passes through folklore - consists in becoming aware of the limits. Negotiating with the limit can lead one to denial or indifference as long as the ethnologist is a conservationist of folklore or a theorist; he may consent to it when the result is a pragmatic one. As concerns the relation of ethnology to folklore, the telling example is that of the Museum of Ethnology and the special case of the Museum of the Romanian Peasant: in the case of the latter we see an example of acceptance and establishing of a new limit. At the Museum of the Romanian Peasant cyclical events take place that have similar significances with those in the traditional village. Actions are re-invented , such as: thematic fairs accompanying the religious holidays or popular holidays (the fair of the icon painters - on the Day of the Cross; the 1^st of March fair - the celebration of spring; "Saint Nicholas" fair, Christmas fair). Thus, a limit is founded ceremoniously, because society needs the ritual and the representation.

4. Highlighting the concept of limit

The components of cultural identity can be seen as limitations in the shape of living manifestations or as objects. The decoding of the limits through signs establishes a hierarchy of relations between the center and the limits. The cultural heritage identifies specific cultural identities by comparing and valuating them against universal values.

4.1. 19319t1915t Cultural identity, limitation of a cultural space

The cultural identity of a community is expressed through objects, manifestations, and constructions, their inclusion in the category of art or other particular aspects of the community itself notwithstanding.

In a traditional community, objects are first of all "useful"; but not in the way in which the objects are functional in a consumption society where the novelty, the function of the object prevail. For instance, in the village world objects are used to communicate and are celebrated for their utility; when they are celebrated, they are adorned; their symbolic message allows for communication, and their use for a different purpose is not a matter of chance but symbolic as well. Together with the newly born infant, they place a loaf of bread in the cradle; otherwise the cradle will eat up the baby . The objects make up a different world whose use-meaning will influence the essence of the world in general, if misunderstood or ignored. It is forbidden to use the baby's diapers as legging because the child will die. If the objects are assigned a direct significance in relation to their function, then a symbolic significance will be added; an example in this respect would be the Sunday clothes and those for everyday activities. A Saxon peasant said that over the traditional costume, the one he wore at balls or community activities, he would wear a cape and a belt, which would make it suitable for the church and other special events. What is important in this case is the reference to the object and not the belief according to which they are assigned various significances. This does not mean that the objects cannot be replaced or that they are never changed; they have a life of their own, just like men, from birth to death. When they become useless, they are abandoned. Within this universe the object is taken as such, for its own use, especially since there are more or less useful objects. What matters is the relation to the essence of the object and the awareness that it is being used deliberately. This is why, in such a world, one can discuss about objects as limitations of their own functions.

The events connect all the community members, and refer to all and each of them and their existence (birth, wedding, death - the coming and passing away). They represent the initial pretexts and the fundamental symbolic events. Their temporal adjustment to the social context manifests itself variously - through rituals, dances, meetings where the whole community is involved in the events that take place against a specific background. They all belong to the "frail" layer of cultural identity. The activities represent yet another component of the cultural identity. These can be crafts, ways of manufacturing objects or other activities connected to a particular context.

The buildings appear simultaneously with the community life. However, it is the buildings that remain standing after the disappearance of a given culture and the community that had created it. If we look into this world, the buildings-dwellings, "family shelters" can also be thought as objects that have a very particular use. Moreover, we can relate to them in a similar manner. The difference lies in the fact that the dwelling is the formal expression of "the dwelling in an essential manner" of the human existence itself. In addition, the temple-church is the significant construction within a community, either as a founding event or a defensive means or as a territorial claim on the part of the community. One could say that the church is the only building with symbolic significance. It is a sacred space, the representation of a place that it is not there. It represents the identity of the community. In the Saxon churches the position of each individual is fixed with respect to the structure of the community, and each has his own place; inside the Greek-Catholic churches, the community members' names are inscribed on their benches.

Signification as an instrument of limit identification

Cultural identity expresses itself through objects-products, behaviors and actions with symbolic value or belonging to the sphere of the functional. Without appealing to semiotics and assuming that the cultural identity is a representation of culture, we could separate its components conventionally into iconic[36], index , and symbols . Thus, the objects - including the farmstead buildings - have an iconic component, because they are representations of their own functions. Manifestations (activities or events) do in fact reference the "something else", and without being a goal in itself, can be called indices or contextual signs meant to highlight an Other, a main actor. The third category, to which certain constructions belong, can be classified in the category of symbols. The reason why only certain buildings have a symbolic significance is discussed above. The three categories of representation belong to the community life, to the living culture of a society. When the society vanishes, its cultural identity disappears together with the community members. The disappearance of the objects is proven by the fact that the objects no longer have their initially established significance, that of their use; they no longer participate in the community life and lose their meaning. The events and activities can only be restored to life inside their initial context; since the latter has disappeared, the meaning of the event has been either diminished or has perished altogether. However, the abiding question is whether the symbolic components follow the same path. Our reasoning is based on a small traditional culture where culture is produced unconsciously, functionally, as a means of living and internally organizing the society. Is such a community able to perform symbolic gestures, and if it is, does it perform them consciously or unconsciously?

The building of Romanesque churches started in the 12^th century; historic events urged the communities to defend their life (even more than to observe the property-defense convention) and fortify the church, surrounding it with fortifications. It was only later[39], towards the end of the 19^th century that the precincts are dismantled and the stone is used to build schools, usually on the same site. All these events are part of an economic and functional context dictated by the conservation instinct. 19^th century is an age of development in most of European villages and towns . Public functions are diversified and amplified. The schools could have been built on an entirely new ground just like many other constructions that housed the public functions. In this case one can speak about the recognition of the value of the consecrated space of the church as the community space.

The cultural heritage: a way of identifying centers and limits

".an open horizon as a limitation that does not limit, until one is able to leave the historic time through creation"[42]

The discussion around the concept of culture-space was originated in the context that recognizes the notion of cultural heritage. The concept of cultural heritage appeared in the 20^th century. It speaks of humanity's need to conserve and relate to tradition, which means to step outside and negotiate with the limit. The second step on the path of increased awareness is denial or consent, in other words, conferring a certain value to the components of cultural identity. The cultural heritage means proving to humanity one's cultural identity and the limit of a specific cultural space.

According to theory, cultural heritage means the research of cultural significance and of the social values, of the analysis that leads to the acceptance of an object or of a place as something meaningful for a certain community. Objects, collections, constructions, and "buildings" begin to be acknowledged as belonging to the heritage and responsible decisions are taken within the present context.

Today, the cultural heritage of a community includes symbolic constructions, functional buildings, traditional homesteads, as well as traditions[43] as such. A greater importance is given to the idea of preserving the crafts, the transitory components of the cultural identity, if only to confer the initial meaning to the objects. The appeal to significance speaks about the way in which these elements of the cultural heritage are being considered.

The path from abstract to concrete in defining an architectural concept

Architecture (building and restoration) is the path from the concept to the concrete, to form. The discussion above represents an attempt to substantiate a concept that can be applied in the particular case of the restoration of the historic monument site of the Cincu fortified church. The concept is that of limit, understood as an "open horizon, limitation that never limits". The approach takes into account the discussion of the characteristics of the limit.

The discussion about the meanings of the limit - as iconic, as index, and as symbol - finds its answer in the establishment of the limit, which has to be done in a ritualistic way, and in the symbolic meaning that such an action should have. It is the symbolic components that remain when a culture vanishes; the other components can be altered. After the majority of the villagers left - now there are a few Saxon families - the Romanians occupied their houses. The same thing follows from the analysis of the public/laic functions from that settlement. It is hard to imagine that the Romanians will also take over the Evangelic church, due to its interior organization.

The founding of the limit should by symbolic in relation to both present and past (the celebration of essence).

Concentricity as reference to essence represents another quality of the limit. The essence of this community is the church space as a reflection of the society organization (each community member has his/her place in the church).

Permissiveness refers to present society and the changes that took place. The current community is made up of both Romanians and Saxons.

For the purpose of this discussion, the limit is a way in which the community relates to its own identity through the language of culture, or the way in which cultural identity limits the cultural space. The limit, founded through objects (with or without symbolic significance), through ways of organization, events or buildings, is a manner of representing cultural identity. The latter results from the individual's need to relate to his own identity and that of the communities', to distinguish themselves one from another.

The way in which we act, even if "outside the limit", that is, from the point of view of our profession and theory, is subordinated to a limit, because we can only negotiate with the limit. We carry the limits inside and can only perceive them if we assign values to them, meanings, even if temporarily. Of course, they will diminish or adjust just as it happens to man.

We need these symbolic limits to celebrate both life and death, both the presence and disappearance of a cultural identity. We have to fulfill it, even if we are immersed in the cultural space or contemplate it from a distance.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

ESSAYS AND ARTICLES:

ILLUSTRATIONS

THE MASQUE: A SYMBOLIC OBJECT

THE EVENTS: COMPONENTS OF THE CULTURAL IDENTITY

THE SAXON FORTIFIED CHURCHES (TRANSYLVANIA)

GARBOVA: THE VILLAGE GRAVEYARD

A HISTORIC MONUMENT COMPOUND: THE FORTIFIED CHURCH FROM CINCU MARE

THE LIMIT: THE ILLUSTRATION OF THE CONCEPT