Abstract
The article analyzes architecture as a special interface, presenting the concept of interface through the functions of linking and separating. These functions manifest themselves in various types of architectural space organization: firstly, as intermediary connecting residents with their culture and living space, and secondly, in the image of a smart home connecting the body, imagination, and technologies of the house into a single, continuous network. The article offers a critique of the logic of the interface, which assumes transparency and the effect of direct access to the image of a controlled and perfect life. To conduct a critical analysis, the problem of breakdown is introduced as a necessary condition for the existence of technologies and the material environment of human habitation. Based on the research of N. Thrift, the concepts of uninhabited space by G. Agamben and C. Boano, the processes of rupture and destruction of the material, and the ways of interaction of residents of crisis areas with their homes are analyzed as an alternative to the invisible interface of the smart home. Confrontation with biopolitical control mechanisms is a condition for a critical attitude to the treatment of the living space of the house. Alongside crisis housing forms, Diller and Scofidio’s project is considered to further critique smart home architecture as an invisible interface closely linked to the power of visuality in a given space.
In the conclusion of the article, an inference is made about the role and function of architectural interfaces in organizing life and the possible strategies for critiquing the space of interfaces.
References
Agamben, G. (2020). Inhabiting and Building. Ill Will. https://illwill.com/inhabiting-and-building
Aliev, R. T. (2024a). Beyond Usability: A Critical Analysis of Interface Research. Galactica Media: Journal of Media Studies, 6(2), 223–259. https://doi.org/10.46539/gmd.v6i2.493
Aliev, R. T. (2024b). Interface as a Mirror: Reflexivity of the Individual and the Collective. Philosophy and Culture, 3, 82–97. https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0757.2024.3.70212
Baltazar, A. P. (2017). Architecture as interface: A constructive method for spatial articulation in architectural education. Architectural Research Addressing Societal Challenges, 1099–1106. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315226255-170
Boano, C. (2017). The Ethics of a Potential Urbanism: Critical encounters between Giorgio Agamben and architecture. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315542218
Boano, C. (2020). Forms of (Collective) Life: The Ontoethics of Inhabitation. Architecture and Culture, 8(3–4), 549–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/20507828.2020.1802199
Boano, C., & Astolfo, G. (2020). Inhabitation as more-than-dwelling. Notes for a renewed grammar. International Journal of Housing Policy, 20(4), 555–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/19491247.2020.1759486
Diller, L., & Scofidio, R. (2002). Blur Building. Dsrny. https://dsrny.com/project/blur-building
Friedberg, A. (2006). The Virtual Window: From Alberti to Microsoft. MIT Press.
Galloway, A. R. (2008). The Unworkable Interface. New Literary History, 39(4), 931–955. https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.0.0062
Graham, S., & Thrift, N. (2014). Troubleshooting: Repair, maintain operation and understand. Neprikosnovenniy Zapas, 2(94).
Heidegger, M. (1997). Being and time. Ad Marginem.
Hookway, B. (2014). Interface. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9919.001.0001
Kazys, V. (2008). Networked Publics. MIT Press.
Latour, B. (2006). When Things Fight Back: The Possible Contribution of “Science Studies” to the Social Sciences. Territoriya buduschego.
Lenkevich, A. S., & Latypova, A. R.. (2015). Interface as an Object of Reflection. Pushkin Leningrad State University Journal, 2(2), 181–190.
McCullough, M. (2005). Digital Ground. Architecture, Pervasive Computing, and Environmental Knowing. MIT Press.
McQuire, S. (2014). The Media City. Media, architecture and urban space. Strelka Press.
Puchkov, M. V. (2011). Interface Model of Architecture and Methods for the Forming of Modern Urban Space. Akademicheskij Vestnik UralNIIproekst RAASN, 2, 57–60.
Savchuk, V. V. (2012). Topological reflection. Canon+.
Savchuk, V. V. (2022). Fence as a balance of forces. Academy of Cultural Research.
Sennett, R. (2016). Flesh and stone. Strelka Press.
Simmel, G. (1996). Ruin. Yurist.
Simões, D. (2023). How to Create a Smart Home: A Complete Guide for Beginners in Home Automation. ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily.com/1010597/how-to-create-a-smart-home-a-complete-guide-for-beginners-in-home-automation
Vakhstein**, V. (2024). Imagining the city. New Literary Review.
Zielinski, S. (1997). Art and apparatus (a flusserian theme) plea for the dramatisation of the interface. Interface Critique. https://interfacecritique.net/journal/volume-1/zielinski-art-and-apparatus/
** – Recognized as a foreign agent on the territory of the Russian Federation

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

