image: Politics of Parametricism, conference by Matthew Poole and Manuel Shvartzberg

Patrik Schumacher’s Parametricism – A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design is a clear statement of how he visualizes the architecture world today. To him, social complexity defines the relation between architecture and urbanism through parametricism; it is beyond style, it is a continuous research line…The author starts off by defining Parametricism as a new style, rather than just a new set of techniques. He does not deny the fact that the improvement in animation, simulation and movement have been a stimulus to going beyond modernism, yet the new ambitions and values left a need to find a new line of research and hence allowing the execution of intricate correlations between elements and subsystems. The question here is whether parametricism is top-down approach (which starts with the big picture and breaks down from there into smaller segments) or bottom-up (which is a type of information processing based on incoming data from the environment to form a perception). In the article, Schumacher asks the reader to ‘imagine (there are) no landmarks to hold on, no axis to follow and no boundaries to cross’; but are the values and cultures of societies a limitation for the evolution of architecture? He also mentions about parametricism that ‘aesthetically it is the elegance of ordered complexity and the sense of seamless fluidity’; but are the aesthetics the only values that define social complexities? It is clear how visualizes the process as a top-down bottom process rather than resembling the system he is defending as  a “seed” model, whereby the beginnings are small but eventually grow in complexity and completeness… He goes on to define agendas that inject new aspects into the parametric paradigm, which are:

- Parametric Inter-articulation of Sub-systems (relation of a part to the whole)

-Parametric Accentuation (enhancing the overall sense of organic integration)

-Parametric Figuration (how to integrate the user and the environment)

-Parametric Responsiveness (the built environment acquiring responsive agency)

-Parametric Urbanism (integrating the built environment as a part of the system)

In relation to modernism, Schumacher identifies the modern approach of Le Corbusier, in which he condemns the straight path as the most favorable one for people and that the non-regular path of the donkey’s way is totally discarded. The author mentions how the order that Le Corbusier anticipated was limited to the technology he had at the time which is no more the same in the world we live in today. He proposes to learn from Frei Otto’s experiments on form finding and optimized networks which study the relational fields in order to understand the space.

To project on that, and according to the analysis within the  expert team, it is understood that in the issue of sensitivity with the environment and social interaction,  other architects, such as Sou Fujimoto, are capable to integrate all these complexities without having to use Parametricism. Another issue worth discussing was the fact that he uses concrete in most of his projects which contradicts the necessity for change and evolution as concrete is a very rigid material (neither interactive nor responsive to changes).

After analyzing this article, I find it really interesting to always relate the identity and the culture of the society/ environment in the frame of the design process. Technology and networking have been the beginning of losing this intact relation, when in fact it is perhaps rather an enriching factor. As the picture attached shows,the networking that is connecting the world together might be a solution at some point, a threat to history and culture at another. The critical question is how will parametricism achieve the goal of bottom-top strategy and preserve the social complexities and cultural diversities at the same time?

The article I was assigned for was Sou Fujimoto’s “Primitive Future”.

The author divided his logic of achieving an ideal architecture over 20 titles, yet it is clear that his strategies are basically three.
The title hints the theme to be discussed, a ‘primitive’ habitation as a spatial study, giving it a ‘futuristic’ interpretation. For Sou Fujimoto, the main challenge for an architect is to design intentionally a space that has a spontaneous purpose. He considers a living space experimental and that people mold it according to their habits and purpose behind its use. To him, ‘ideal’ design is achieved when following the below strategies: gradation, relations, experimental/accidental.

-‘gradation’ are the possibilities that arise in real life. It is the grey zone that does not have specific limit, as it lies between inside and outside, public and private, morning and evening…something spontaneous and natural. These relations can be considered as ‘disturbed’ since the blurriness of its horizons creates and architecture that blends with its environment. Nature is always evolving when taking the time factor into consideration.
-‘relations’ strategy is then discussed as it gives the architecture a specific function and identity. These relations are relevant because they vary among societies which highlight the concept of flexible and unexpected. To him, architecture has to contain an incomprehensible diversity. The array of relations between spaces is defined by ‘intangible relations’
-‘experimental and accidental’: the author expresses this relation by wishing to make diagrams of architecture that even a child can draw. He intends to highlight the intuitive relations that people create with spaces more than showing what is right or wrong. A variety of strategies explore these relations such as ruins that have an accidental notion and trigger possibilities for function yet saving the emotions and memories within it.

So as we conclude, Sou Fujimoto perceives ‘ideal’ architecture as one that is liberated from the constraints of arranged relations between spaces. The study I am interested in is the definition of the nuances that set the logic behind this liberation. To me, a cave is rich only with the memory of the ‘nest’ in our minds. The question is: ‘how will the ‘cave’ still define the future urban fabric if ‘nests’ do not exist anymore?’

The image above explicitly defines the randomly natural relationship between each bird in the herd. Is not about the whole figure (as Sou Fujimoto projects in a city), yet it is about the relation between each individual bird (the cave) that explores the specificity and identity of this natural community.