1 ISSN 1712-8056[Print] ISSN 1923-6697[Online] www.cscanada.net www.cscanada.org Canadian Social Science Vol. 11, No. 7, 2015, pp. 1-13 DOI: 10.3968/7240 Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture Deconstructivism: Translation From Philosophy to Architecture Aida Hoteit [a],* [a] Ph.D., Department of Architecture, Institute of Fine Arts, Lebanese University, Beirut, Lebanon. * Corresponding author. Received 4 April 2015; accepted 8 June 2015 Published online 26 July 2015 Abstract There has always been a significant interaction between architecture and the human sciences, such as philosophy, psychology, and sociology. Intellectual and especially philosophical currents of thought have influenced architecture at the time that it was created. This research article examines the study of the philosophical current of “deconstruction” and its relation to deconstructivist architecture. First, the research explains the basic principles of this philosophy, which began with the work of Jacques Derrida. Next, it defines the basic terms and vocabulary of this philosophy. Then, this research identifies the deconstruction concepts that were transferred to architecture and became the basis of deconstructivist architectural styles. Deconstructivist projects and buildings initially seem to be fragmented and lack any visual logic; however, they are unified under the principles and concepts of deconstruction philosophy. The “transfer” of the concepts of deconstruction to architecture was not direct and literal; some concepts were modified and renamed to suit architecture. Moreover, iconic deconstructivist architects were not committed to all concepts of this philosophy; they were known to focus on one or two concepts in deconstruction and make them fundamental principles of their personal styles in architecture. Peter Eisenman focused on the concepts of presentness and trace, Daniel Libeskind concentrated on the concept of absence, and Frank Gehry focused on binary oppositions and free play. Finally, a deconstructivist architect is not as free as a reader or a philosopher; not all that one can do or apply in language and philosophy can be done and applied in architecture. Key words: Deconstruction; Deconstructivism; Jacques Derrida; Peter Eisenman; Presentness; Trace Hoteit, A. (2015). Deconstructivism: Translation From Philosophy to Architecture. Canadian Social Science, 11 (7), 1-13. Available from: http://www.cscanada.net/index.php/css/article/view/7240 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/7240 INTRODUCTION Architecture is one of the oldest human crafts. It began with the birth of man and accompanied him through the different stages of his development, changed as he changed and mirrored his different influences. Therefore, architecture, similar to man, is influenced by society, customs, traditions, intellect, politics and economics (Hoteit, 2015). Architecture is not just a physical art; it is a social humane art. Consequently, any new idea or principle that is present in a certain society is reflected in its architecture. In fact, architectural designs are similar to writings. By reading them, we can understand the structure of the society where they were built, its social relationships, and its overview of life and the outside world (Hoteit, 2015; Hoteit & Fares, 2014). From here, there has always been a significant interaction between architecture and the human sciences, such as philosophy, psychology, and sociology. Intellectual, especially philosophical, currents of thought have always influenced architecture at the time it was created (Hoteit, 2015). Thus, philosophy employs architecture to represent its ideas, whereas architecture exploits philosophy to create an existence that carries profound implications and dimensions that ultimately allow it to transcend the definitiveness of matter (Wigely, 1993; Hoteit, 2009). This research examines the study of deconstruction and its relation to deconstructivist architecture. First, the