Page 75 - AC-2-1

Arts & Communication Nebula rasa: The diaphanous in architectural design

2. Historical background fully experiences the creative force of the Divine. God’s
7
energies are not special powers, but they are akin to divine
The notion of the diaphanous derived initially from potentials that can be experienced rather than talked
Aristotle, although it is mentioned already in an embryonic about. This approach was derived from so-called apophatic
2
form in Plato’s Timaeus. In De Anima, Aristotle describes (or negative) theology. The idea is that certain phenomena
it as a phenomenon that renders objects visible. The (like noetic light) cannot be described in determinate,
word diaphanēs comprises the Greek “dia” (through) clear concepts. All one can do is try to say what they are
and “phainein” (to show). Importantly, Aristotle draws not by tracing a silhouette that negatively demarcates them.
an explicit parallel between “light,” the diaphanous and There is a certain parallel with creative processes here:
actuality: often, it is hard to tell what defines a good idea or what
“Light is as it were the proper colour of what is influence contributed to its (final) form. Often, the (artistic)
transparent, and exists whenever the potentially concepts to define an idea clearly are lacking or have still
transparent is excited to actuality by the influence of fire to be invented, yet the creative impetus that shapes ideas is
or something resembling ‘the uppermost body’; for fire undeniably present.
too contains something which is one and the same with
the substance in question.” 4 Due to semantic changes that occurred during translation
and the scattered usage of the concept in Medieval Europe,
The link between potentiality, actualization, and the notion of diaphanous became almost synonymous with
an object or phenomenon that becomes visible can be visual translucence or partial opaqueness. While this usage
discerned in the wording: the excitation of the “potentially is not explicitly ruled out by the original Greek concept,
transparent” into something actual is rendered as “phôs it is worth remembering that Aristotle’s usage is certainly
de estin hê toutou energeia, tou diaphanous hê diaphanès.” broader and closely related to the phenomenal structure
The word “energeia” does not just mean “energy” in of perception, instead of being narrowly focused on the
the way we commonly use it. It connotes activity or an visual character of an image. In its modern, narrow usage,
active operational principle. Anca Vasiliu notes that this we easily equate diaphaneity with the visual characteristic
way of framing the diaphanous stages is an “impossible of being vague, ambiguous, nebulous, veiled, translucent,
ontological encounter”: it conjoins the (i) subject’s sense opaque, blurry, or indistinct.
of sight, (ii) an external object to which the gaze is
directed, (iii) the medium that ensures visibility or at least Although this interpretation of the diaphanous
5
tangibility, and (iv) a principle of actualization. Neither a represents it as a visual characteristic, it also invokes a
body nor a body’s property, the diaphanous participates in creative, visual dimension due to the fact that it visually
the visibility of everything, without being part of anything. stages the “impossible ontological encounter” in the
It is a phenomenal attribute that suffuses the visual realm perceptual field. This generative aspect of the original
and that structures and stages its accessibility. Aristotelian concept becomes obfuscated if we focus only
on the diaphanous as a visual characteristic. Notably in
When classical Aristotelian philosophy was transmitted architectural design processes, such seemingly impossible
to Medieval Europe through the Islamic world, the word encounters are essential for developing ideas and design
was rendered in Latin as diaphanum, leading ultimately concepts alike.
to the introduction of the neologism transparens and
later on becoming synonymous with the Latin perlucida,
which both connote visual transparency in the way that we 2 Pseudo-Dionysius provides allegorical descriptions of the
commonly use the term. creative, dynamic force of the Divine. In this passage (1987:
184), we can see how he introduces the ceaseless play of
Some of the properly operative nature of the original creativity by comparing it to fire, a theme that François
Greek concept was retained in the Eastern Christian Jullien would take up while discussing Chinese thought: “It
theological context, whereby the presence of God was lights up everything and remains hidden at the same time.
equated with the character of light or so-called “noetic In itself it is undetectable and becomes evident only through
illumination.” This development can be traced back to its own workings on matter. It is unstoppable. It cannot be
Plato’s treatment of knowledge as illumination, using light looked upon. Yet it is master of everything. Wherever it is,
it changes things towards its own activity. It bestows itself
as a metaphor for achieving insight. Still, we can see the upon all who draw near. (…). It makes distinctions and is
influence of the Aristotelian concept, for instance in the nevertheless unchanging. It rises up and penetrates deeply. It is
thought of St. Gregory Palamas, who held that everyone exalted and never brought low. It is ever on the move, moving
participates in God’s energies – using the Greek word itself and others. It extends in all directions and is hemmed in
6
energeia again. God is immanently present throughout nowhere.” Note how all this applies to the characteristics of
creation, and in the moment of noetic illumination, one both diaphaneity and the concept of shi (efficacy).

Volume 2 Issue 1 (2024) 3 https://doi.org/10.36922/ac.1922