What's next; after our fascination with computer software and its ability to form, fragment, and aid the construction of our geometrically augmented architectures wears off? A speculative response to this question, after the page-jump..
Photograph by Stephen Coorlas
Recent conversations, amongst some of us young aspiring architects, have begun to entertain the characteristic of "Modesty" becoming a more prevalent attribute of our current Architectural era. The over exposure of complex geometric forms will naturally encourage us to explore the complete opposite end of the spectrum; invisibility.In recent trends, we [Architects] have been trying to stimulate and reactivate user experience through a cacophonic orgy of visual effects. Perhaps, in order to refocus people's attention away from their iphones, pods, and pads we need to begin rethinking & redesigning the way people engage events, occasions and experiences. Through this approach, we can create shifts and jogs within ordinary routine (a "hiccup" if you will) which, might reengage the public with their surroundings.
In this scenario we are relocating the emphasis of design, not on form or space, but instead on sequence and experiential rhythm. Architecture simply becomes the framework, system of organization, or method behind the arrangement of these newly designed activities.
1 comment:
An architect that comes to mind after reading this is Libeskind and his design for the Jewish Museum in Berlin. Through his design he was able to tell a story by guiding visitors through a sequence of events and spaces. He was able to use complex geometric forms for the overall building design but he used modest, yet powerful, spaces throughout the museum to really make an impact on the user's senses. To me, those were his hiccups.
Unfortunately, Libeskind no longer designs in such a deep way but instead it seems as though he is trying to keep up with the young architects who are trying to design the most complicated forms with the least amount of logic. It's too bad. You can see this from Libeskinds most current work.
Stephen you mention relocating the emphasis of design, not on form or space, but instead on sequence and experiential rhythm and I agree to a certain extent. I believe, if thought through, spaces can be used to re-engage the public as well.
What do you exactly mean by invisibility? Are you saying that Architecture will be second to what's happening within? In other words, getting 'rid' of architecture to put emphasis on program and interaction? The past two Pritzker Prize Laureate's both have a modest approach but the user experiences two different things. SANAA '10, uses glazing as a way to make the architecture disappear so that the attention is focused on the users in and around the building while Zumthor '09, on the other hand, uses materiality to have the user disappear in the moment of each space.
If Architecture becomes a framework, system of organization, is it able to be flexible and adaptable? The problem I see, is that very complex geometric forms really limit a space to its initial purpose. I believe that inflexibility equals failure. Projects need to evolve over time ,and can they with geometrically augmented Architecture?
Videos of Libeskind's Jewish Museum:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQ6SPYaiST8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OYlkSukgKI&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2fKtlQ05A0&feature=related
Post a Comment