Nodes and Networks
(Photo taken from Stanford University Libraries)

In a time where we witness a general obsession with advanced digital tools and techniques, form, as a concept, gains even more complexity and ambiguity than ever. From a parametric point of view, form results from a form-finding process, meaning, it is a bottom up design strategy where the architect is capable of defining the components of a system as well as the laws governing the corresponding relationships between them, but is incapable of predicting the resulting form. In Parametricism, process makes up the essence of design, while the outcome may always be subject to scrutiny.

Todays’ tools offer architects and designers the luxury of setting the stage for highly complex designs arising from intricately defined correlations. In the chapters “On Growth and Form” and the “Genesis of Form”, form is essentially a product of a Mathematical formula or a Grid- To distort the form, deform the grid. Similar formal manipulations can be recognized in parametric urban design schemes where paranoia lies in clear geometric forms and their simple repetition or juxtaposition. It is worth noting that the starachitect Zaha Hadid, as a main promoter of the Parametric Era, had a graduate foundation in Mathematical studies before pursuing Architectural studies, hence her undisputed proficiency in employing mathematical operations in the architectural design process.  but, why this obsession with deformation?

We finally agree that the straight line is a bore; let’s go back to organic nonlinear connections. After all, we have come to acknowledge that the ‘donkey’s path’, as random as it may have seemed, does follow an inherent rational logic, attributing its characteristics to the nature of paramaetricism. According to Steven Johnson, the unorganized behavior of individual variables in nature ultimately results in a seemingly designed complex system. This system works as nodes within a network – a crucial property of living systems.

In an attempt to emulate Natural Systems by employing fluidity and complexity in the form finding process, Parametricism presents a radical break with the Modernist approach that denies man’s inherent complex nature for a simplistic interpretation of the idealized abstract man/the average man. Available Parametric design tools are finally capable of responding to the ever differentiated demands of the post-fordist society. The Architectural and Urban Design disciplines are advancing in ways that allow for mass customization to be simpler, accessible and affordable.

Patrik clearly states the critical role of computational techniques in the form-finding process. Essentially, we have finally arrived at a time where the machine can ‘do Architecture’, where man and machine engage in collaborative efforts to produce forms and articulate relationships, previously impossible to simulate, let alone comprehend. In reference to Steven Johnson’s Emergence, that sheds light on the significant role of bottom up processes, local rules govern the global structure: Feed the software the necessary parameters, define the laws that govern the relationships between them and watch the system emerge. Vary one given, and observe how the system updates in such a way that the configured relationships are maintained. These defined sets of rules, at the micro-level attest for the emergence of form and patterns on the macro-level. Using scripting and parametric tools, we are setting the DNA of the intended architectural form; we can not predict the result or the phenotype. We can only define its ‘virtual’ existence, the genotype.

At the city level, sidewalks make up the heart of the emergent system, why? Because they are the sites for local interaction, ie, where relationships and links are formed; these in turn, make up the city’s DNA; they characterize the global system and govern its formal growth.

Mutually accentuating systems: topography, massing, path-network
Masterplan Competition, Appur, India, Zaha Hadid Architects, 2008

But what is Zaha Hadid suggesting when the final Urban Design looks like this? (!)

For seemingly noble intentions of emulating nature’s spontaneous growth patterns, this final outcome suggests everything but natural processes in urban formation the way we know them. We are time and again confronted with even more austere top down designs that leave lesser room for the “non-average” man to express and practice his personally unique needs and desires. In this case, could we decide to accept that vernacular architecture and organic urban growth, in terms of outcome, present a more parametric architecture than today’s Parametric Architecture?

>This manifesto addresses the future role of the architect in designing a primitive kind of space. It particularly refers to caves and ruins as references for the design of an architecture of diversity, complexity and emergence.

The Cave

The cave is a recurring theme carried out extensively throughout the paper. Why cave? Because it exists. Simply. It is discovered, explored and appropriated. It is nature. A natural ruin. Incomplete, Accidental; and thus much more pleasurable to adapt. The manner in which the cave is appropriated becomes purely a question of ergonomics. The human scale shall never be ignored. It is but celebrated.

Architecture of the future should embrace the qualities of the cave. Question is: how to purposely design a space of no predetermined purpose? Designing for an orchestrated disorder – A doubt arises.

As a designer, when do I stop the design process?

The Simple Diagram> The Possibility of Recognition - Impossibility of Comprehension

If we think of architecture as a simple diagram, we begin to set a framework for complex relationships to emerge. A clear diagram does not mean the architecture is simple; it just provides a clear framework within which complexity and irregularity can operate. Sou calls to abandon the top-down approach for a bottom up design strategy -A call for a catalytic architecture presented in its incomplete state. To Design for relationships: An open ended resolution of design that allows life to take unpredictable form.

1 nothing + 1 nothing = Something

Harmony arises from the emergence of relationships between components. Remove the orderly structure and there will be no chaos. Only harmony – an orchestrated chaos. When relationships emerge, the rigid structure is dropped.

Blurred Boundaries> Architecture as the Design of Interface

The notion of blurred boundaries covers both physical and relational realms: <Keywords: forest, cloud> Architecture in this article is defined as the making of the exterior envelope in form of an interface and not merely a façade. The designer should question and attempt to reinterpret, redefine and reinvent the relationship with the exterior. Gradation is one strategy we can find recurring in Fujimoto’s works. One way in which it is achieved is by Nesting or Layering: box within a box. The transition from inside to outside or vice versa is regularly interrupted to induce a sense of fuzziness, uncertainty, until the boundary is confused.

When the boundary is confused, it is lost.

Reversibility- when boundaries are confused, the relative position could be reversed. Inside could become outside and the opposite. The house could become the city and vice versa. Blurring the boundaries is pushed further to reversing the scales. An architect can now design the house as a city and start planning the city as if it was a house leaving no detail untreated.

>the relationship between the designer and the user gets blurred in such a situation as they both potentially surprise one another – They both don’t know what to expect as they confront the same unknown.

Relational Themes

Ultimately, Foujimoto’s architecture is a testimony to architecture’s disturbed relations with its context. Through manipulating the interface in unconventional ways, he questions taken-for-granted values of public v/s private; in v/s out, natural v/s man-made, creating a general atmosphere of unease. The design decisions he takes directly affect the users’ life and are never neutral with respect to the entourage

On the other hand, he repeatedly references nature’s layering, changeability, unpredictability and diversity (forest, clouds, caves, mutations…). Designing in parallel to natural forms of existence gives Foujimoto’s work metaphorical relations with the natural environment. Just like nature intrigues and inspires us in many ways, Sou opts for an enticing adventure in man-made ‘accidents’.

Relationship to the other Texts

Foujimoto understands function as an outcome. He revolts against the imposed structure suggested by Modern architecture, and thereby calls for Deprogramming, similar to the other texts. Function is not to be designated. We should design for relationships to emerge. By creating a framework for different things to happen, we are designing for flexibility, adaptability, diversity and liveliness. This flexibility gives architecture a 4rth dimension where time becomes a key element in displaying the full palette of gradation available within a particular context.

Research Interest

Bottom up approaches today gain popularity and much recognition with the rise of parametric and computational digital design tools. The architect’s role and scope of work in shaping the built environment is reformulated as we confront a major paradigm shift.

Now that we understand that the main area of interest lies within the process rather than final outcome, the challenge becomes how to design for an empowered community enjoying enough freedom to transform spaces into places –how to provide the framework for things to happen, to irrigate territories with potential by providing catalytic interventions and consequently, stage and celebrate the uncertain.

If architecture should be regarded as an animated, living domain, in a continuous state of evolution, what parameters should guide the design process and inform the designer’s strategic approach? What will the architect be designing and what limitations does he have to face? How does the architect-user relationship inform the design process and how will the architect of tomorrow know when to stop designing and when exactly to withdraw?