The Conditioned Outdoor Room

By Renata de Castro Lotto | Published: November 9, 2013

rene-magritte-la-victoire
Rene Magritte

Introducing the text with the question “Can we really retreat into self-contained boxes without losing something of the essence of being human?”, the author leads us to reflect on the use of open spaces in contemporary life, thus how climate influences the use of these spaces and interpersonal relationships.

Humankind cannot establish good relationship with environment if there is no shelter to protect its inhabitants from climatic agents. Furthermore, if the available shelter is insecure or not comfortable enough to overcome these elements, humans detract from the earth what interests and move forward to other lands due to a lack of strong connection with the site.

In an attempt to establish these connections, modern man have increasingly invested in air conditioning – heating or cooling the ambient inside their homes – and leaving aside the external areas. This culture has been established in contemporary houses: garden separated by glass walls as a space for contemplation or separation between the neighboring houses, not for everyday uses as an extension of the house.

Ancient Romans used their gardens as part of the house, not distinguishing materials applied in or outside the house. They used to create elements such as walls to give privacy to the resident, protection from whether elements, or even as pure decorative purposes.

The passage makes us reflect on how we design outdoor spaces so they are actually used as an extension of the house, and not area for contemplation only. We shall add elements such as walls, pergolas and benches to the area to make it more comfortable for users, making them feel part of the environment regardless of climate elements.

However, the use of these areas, its integration with the environment and with the rest of the house, and finally the elements used in the project rely on geographic location. The same designing concepts cannot be applied to projects in hostile climate countries and mild climate countries; adaptations must be done, case by case.

Possible personal work:

The revitalization of empty spaces in metropolis based on the flow of the city to transform these voids into locals with life, adding economic and social interests.

Posted in Relational Logic - Critical Readings, Renata de Castro Lotto | Comments closed

Saint Jerome

By dimitriosaidonis | Published: November 9, 2013

“Saint Jerome – The Desert … The Study”, written by Alison Smithson, is an analysis of the allegories derived from the depictions of Saint Jerome during the Renaissance. The Saint is situated in three different environments, according to the chronological situation of the painting. In the early Renaissance he is seen living in the desert, later on in a study and during the late Renaissance period, he lives in the grotto. Each one of these situations come with an allegory, which reveals interesting architectural manifestations.

First, in the desert, the Saint is totally exposed to nature. He is in the “wildness”, unable to defend himself against the natural phenomena, but at the same time “pure”, “naked” and in full appreciation of nature. On the other hand, in the study, St. Jerome benefits from the conveniences the city provides, he is protected and can dedicate his time on studying. Finally, in the grotto, the Saint has found a place where he can combine both the previous: He is still in nature, but inside a protected enclave were he can study. By studying the two extremes and the consequent combination, we can compare to our present living environments.

All of the assignment texts deal with the relationship between the human built environment and nature, in terms of questioning why they sometimes end up being so separate and distinct. Concepts as: enclaves, scale, atmosphere, interaction, sustainability, opacity, morphology, blending and vertical growth are explored, in comparison to how each of these are interpreted in nature. Nature has always been successfully incorporating all of the above concepts in its life forms and therefore is, as it should be, a continuous source of knowledge and inspiration for architecture, as well as the very basis of it. As society tends to be more and more dependent and driven by economy, architects should be skeptical about this situation’s impact on the fundamental notions that instruct architectural creation. The primitive purpose of architecture has evolved along with society, but the basis is still solid. Alterations in mentality should invigorate rather than shake these foundations.

By reading, listening and discussing these interconnected topics, and after personal thinking, I was left with a question, which could potentially be subject of further research: I understand that architecture can create new buildings that consider the values delivered from the discussion, but what about the existing ones? Are there ways of re-thinking these complex relationships between humans and their surroundings and incorporating these values in the existing city, as a whole, or in parts of it? What can be done to improve our everyday experience as citizens, considering what we analyzed? Could there be other types of intervention, apart from constructions?Is there a way of revitalizing a city from within?

sketch0

Posted in Relational Logic - Critical Readings | Comments closed

Atmospheres

By rodolfoparolin | Published: November 9, 2013

atmosphere

What defines one atmosphere? Its a difficult question that us, as architects, need to try to answer. In the dictionary definition, atmosphere is a layer of gases surrounding a material body, in this case atmosphere is much more than that.

First of all is necessary the understanding of several inter-relationships that helps to create it. The main character of this, is the user, the principal affected, who notice and is influenced for this atmosphere. We can include in this net of relationships, the architecture produced by the man, the nature and another users. In this infinite net we can look since the small scale of relation, until the city scale, if is possible define borders for all the different atmospheres, this borders are blurred and almost imperceptible. Naturally, architecture create spaces and physical separations of spaces, but we can see them like devices to create different atmospheres.

Every single detail is important in the construction of one atmosphere, and all these relations between physical things and intangible effects will define it.

This should be the first objective for an architect. More than just buildings, what we construct is an atmosphere, and many aren`t even conscious of this. A good architecture creates a good atmosphere, but it can`t be direct perceived.
This has never been an easy task, but nowadays, even if is impossible to have an absolute control with this new architecture, we have different tools and new possibilities to try to control and predict many aspects that can be essential in the construction of an atmosphere.

Posted in Relational Logic - Critical Readings, Rodolfo Parolin Hardy | Comments closed

Can I have an atmosphere?

By pongtidasantayanon | Published: November 9, 2013

Can I have an atmosphere?

 

 

The architecture of the atmosphere

 

What is the atmosphere? Is it gas that surround the earth? Is it the climate? Is it the sound and smell of living creatures that fill in a certain space? The text written by Mark Wigley raises a discourse about ‘atmosphere’ in relevance to architecture. He believes that “to construct a building is to construct such an atmosphere” so what you feel when you enter  a building is the atmosphere. To enter a building is to walk from one atmosphere to another. As if the walk is infinite, no inside, no outside.

Wigley points out the concept of atmosphere associated with architects that it either chases those who try to run from it or run away from those who try to chase it. How is that?

In this text, there are examples of both case. Such as Frank Lloyd Wright’s drawing, the architect insisted that powerful architecture can not be directly perceived, it’s not in the walls, the floors or the decoration, it surrounds people who root in it. Created by integrating every single detail and by thinking as a whole, the intangible ambience automatically wraps around, in between the buildings or fill up the living space. Unlike the later generation of architects, he trusted in this power of architecture, rather than making a powerful drawing and hoping to convince the audience that their designs will deliver some kind of special feeling when entering to each part of the project.

Another example was described by the attempt of a situationist from Guy Debord’s “Introduction to a Critique of Urban Geography of 1955″, to redefine architecture as pure atmospherics. The situationists proposed the removal of any indistinct border zones between intense ambiences in order to redesign the architecture by exploiting the radical potential of atmosphere.

 

There were also other situationists that had been working on different approaches on experience of atmosphere in architecture.

In 1958, Debord and Constrant Nieuwenhuys’ “Amsterdam Declaration” claimed that to redesign a city, situationist architects had to start with the development of complete decors.

In 1953, Ivan Chtcheglov’s “Formularly for a New Urbanism  had introduced the idea of “constructing situations by playing with changeable decoration.

1956 Constant Nieuwenhuys proposed “New Babylon”, the project is this massive machine that produces changing atmosphere, to prove that atmosphere can be made with precise calculation. Debord later rejected this project he called “ambience-city” along with other situationist architect who started to argue that  the atmosphere can no be planed that way. It is rather defined by the users. This denotes that the architects are no longer in control of atmosphere in architecture.

 

Wigley seemed to agree on this situation, from the text, he believes that there was no way to learn how to create atmosphere. This intangible ambience can not be designed or predicted. Architects as special effect producers had to learn that the drawing they produced with fancy lines that create powerful effect to the audience and the atmosphere in architecture are distinct. The point where the construction stopped is where the atmosphere begin to grow and to define the architecture itself.

 

// Totally agree on that but humbly, I would like to see the power of technology and advanced science to step into this controversial. Half a century is more than enough to drift the direction of architecture wave. Increasing in modern technology in life has been the most significant part in the last leap of mankind. May be there is a way to argue to Wright and that last part of Wigley’s text by using advanced architecture as a weapon. Is it time for a new era of simulated theatrical atmosphere in architecture? Imagine today is a nice day, sunny outside, with light breeze, we are working in front of a computer, in an enclosed space, there is noises outside, cars on the street, I asked, Can you turn on some beach music? I want to go to the beach. And there it is, the ambience of the whole living space drifted. So what happened? We, the user of the space not an architect, just designed our own atmosphere? from a list of music? composed by musician? The same thing might apply here. Architects are the musicians. How do we sell our music to the user?

 

Posted in Pongtida Santayanon, Relational Logic - Critical Readings | Tagged | Comments closed

“Tarzans” in the “Media Forest”

By Chirana | Published: November 9, 2013

 

tree

 

Picture source: http://freehdwalls.net/tree-drawing-art-hd-wallpaper/

From the first chapter of the book Toyo Ito tried to make a conclusion of how architecture can be learnt from nature – in this case from a tree.  How the tree gives more lessons or principles  to us as architect to designing or creating architecture in life nowadays, which is total the opposite of how the principle of modernist architecture is. The main points of the lessons are : architecture must be based on the relativistic relationship with the environment,  designs are supposed to be decided with gradual also repeated of various simulations, simple rules are composed by complex order, outer space has to have ambiguity of inside-outside relationship, and the last point and most important is that architecture has to be open to the environment.

In the next chapter along until near the end, mainly he talks about his part (also along with his colleagues from his generation) as architects, as the medium of the fast phase of economy, city, people, and technology. As the “tarzans” in the “media forest”. These way of thinking gives a sense of lost of identity. Lost of the identity, the city an also the people.  He also mentions about the construction of one of his work, Sendai Mediatheque, which is built by not a one-to-one relationship of space and functions, but more with unregulated programs, a more general usage assigned together. And in the end it changed through the five years process and gives his architecture into more a realistic strength, and he says about how his architecture being embraced by society.

In the end of the reading he wants us to contemplate about architecture, “for whom is architecture made?”, “why is architecture made?”, and “how is architecture made?”. And for conclusion we should go back to the basic, learning from nature, learning from a tree.

Relationship take a big part of architecture. New-old, inside-outside, open-close, single-plural, detached-connected. It depends on our behavior how to evolve ideas from before to after in a better way.

Nature Called

For my personal research i’m interested to continue what has been brought by Toyo Ito. Economy and all materialistic aspect took a big role in a growth of a country with high new technology for its tool. It is a good aspect to go that way, but in the end all things must be related to the nature purpose. How to design architecture or just ways of life. Going back to what nature has offered in the origin; completion of basic needs, relationship to other, togetherness, unfixed programs, open plan, community-slash-environment oriented, etc. And the main role is taken place by ones behavior. So instead of changing idealism, style, paradigms in creating architecture one should back to the nature of changing behavior. Improve (or even change) our behavior for the sake of “better living”. And to achieve such goal, one (example: us from today’s generation) should learn from nature with new technology as tools. The question is “How?”

Posted in Chirana Lemuel Sumendap, Relational Logic - Critical Readings | Comments closed