The Architect in the Clinic of Obsessional Neurosis: From Anamorphosis to Artificial Intelligence

To draw out some of the challenges and possibilities between the architect and the psychoanalyst, this chapter starts by revisiting the Architecture Association’s conference Psychoanalysis and Space, 2000, and its wish to find a systematic relation between Lacanian psychoanalysis and the practice of architecture. The paper begins by examining the claim of Mark Cousins, Anthony Vidler, and Joan Copjec that psychoanalysis cannot provide ways to design therapeutic buildings because neurosis does not have an architectural cause. Thus, architects who hope to improve the mental health of their clients can only avail themselves of behavioral or environmental psychology. In light of this impasse, this paper questions what architects can and cannot do for those with Obsessional Neurosis (OCD), and how they might collaborate with analysts to design therapeutic environments for them. This paper covers theoretical issues raised by overlapping the architect in the position of the analyst using Lacan’s four discourses. As an example of the challenges, it then presents a case study of an obsessional neurotic in search of a therapeutic home environment. It proposes a new type of design process using anamorphic repositioning assisted by AI image generation.