III Conclusion: Naturalness and Functionality

It will be clear from the foregoing discussion of the values of interior design and atmosphere that the entire system is founded on the concept of FUNCTIONALITY. Colours, forms, materials, design, space -- all are functional. Every object claims to be functional, just as every regime claims to be democratic. The term evokes all the virtues of modernity, yet it is perfectly ambiguous. With its reference to `function' it suggests that the object fulfils itself in the precision of its relationship to the real world and to human needs. But as our analysis has shown, `functional' in no way qualifies what is adapted to a goal, merely what is adapted to an order or system: functionality is the ability to become integrated into an overall scheme. An object's functionality is the very thing that enables it to transcend its main `function' in the direction of a secondary one, to play a part, to become a combining element, an adjustable item, within a universal system of signs.

The functional system is thus characterized, in a thoroughly ambiguous way, on the one hand by a transcendence of the traditional system under its three aspects -- as the primary function of the object, as drives and primary needs, and as a set of symbolic relations between the two -- and on the other hand by a simultaneous disavowal of these three mutually reinforcing aspects of the traditional system. In other words:
[p. 64]

1. The coherence of the functional system of objects depends on the fact that these objects -- along with their various properties, such as colour, form, and so on -- no longer have any value of their own, but merely a universal value as signs. The order of Nature (primary functions, instinctual drives, symbolic relationships) is everywhere present in the system, but present only as signs. The materiality of objects no longer directly confronts the materiality of needs, these two inconsistent primary and antagonistic systems having been suppressed by the insertion between them of the new, abstract system of manipulable signs -- by the insertion, in a word, of functionality. At the same stroke the symbolic relationship likewise disappears. What emerges from the realm of signs is a nature continuously dominated, an abstract, worked-upon nature, rescued from time and anxiety, which the sign is constantly converting into culture. This nature has been systematized: it is not so much nature as naturalness (or, equally well, `culturalness' [53] ). Such naturalness is thus the corollary of all functionality -- and the connotation of the modern system of `atmosphere'.

2. The always transcended presence of Nature (in a far more consistent and exhaustive fashion than in any earlier culture [54] ) is what confers on this system its validity as a cultural model and its objective dynamism. But at the same time the always denied presence of Nature makes the system into a system of disavowal,
[p. 65]
lack, and camouflage (and this, too, in a way far more consistent than in all previous systems).

On the one hand, then, organization and calculation; on the other, connotation and disavowal. Both flow, however, from a single function of the sign, and together they constitute the one and only reality of the functional world.

III: Conclusion: Naturalness and Functionality

Note from page 64: 45. For indeed, there is no longer any antagonism here between culture and nature, save in the most formal sense, and the two are exchangeable at the level of signs. When we speak of naturalness [naturalité] and `culturalness' [cultumlité], the `-ness' is the important thing: the French suffix `-ité' always marks the shift to an abstract, secondary meaning operating at the level of signs, as witness fin/finalité (goal/teleonomy), fonction/fonctionalité, histoire/historialité (history/historicalness), personne/personnalité, etc. Such words tend, therefore, to have an essential role in the analysis of systematizations, particularly in connection with the structures of connotation. They have thus cropped up a good deal already in our present discussion, and will crop up again later. [Translator's note: As may be seen from the author's examples of `-ité' words, the cognate suffix `-ity' is not used in a way that would allow this pattern of meaning to be reflected in English translation. `Culturalité' has generally been translated as `cultural connotation'.]

Note from page 64: 46. For culture, after all, has never been anything else. But today, for the first time, at the level of everyday life, the foundation has been laid for a system whose abstractness makes it capable of completely determining objects, hence of extending its internal autonomy very widely, even to the point (and this is its teleonomy) of achieving a perfect synchrony between man and his surroundings by reducing both to simple signs and elements.