We do not in general question, or even feel that it is necessary toquestion, what structure and ornament actually signify, or to ask whythey so typically appear as an oppositional pair. Nor do we oftenseriously reflect on the historical origin of the pair {which isgenerally grossly misdated} or study the implications of thatorigination. In the absence of such critical analysis, we fail torealize how pervasive and compelling a figuration of architecture thestructure/ornament pair is, and that it determines in massive ways muchof how we think and write about many aspects of architecture and itshistory, and even to a large extent how we build. To initiate such ananalysis is the primary aim of this essay, which is intended not toresolve issues attending specific historical sites but rather toexcavate and closely scrutinize certain assumptions and problematicsthat pervade and frame structure/ornament, and thereby to put tocritical questioning the seemingly transparent nature of much recentand current architectural discourse.
findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0422/is_4_80/ai_54073966/pg_1