(Image Source : http://www.informatblog.com/partnership-google-apple-nel-futuro)

“it’s not the consumers’ job to know what they want” is a well-known phrase spoken by the deceased CEO of Apple. Apple users know best why they purchase apple products. It’s so easy that it blends into your hand. It’s so easy that you don’t know why it is so easy.  that’s the result of a top-down design. You are pretty much disoriented but you still don’t feel it, you just feel good and in control. While Google relies on experiments and data from the users out there. The company used the data offered by customers as input. By googling, you are giving your data. And google is smart enough to bring you in as a design partners. The result is that you know where you started, where you are going and where is your destination.

The design approach of these two giant companies are far opposite. It is undeniably interesting when you put something so intelligent into a kid’s hand and he know exactly how to use it. In the other hand, you put something not so intelligent with a manual to a 15 years old, what’s going to happen? He is likely going to start learning about it. I have heard so many arguments on the topic Apple vs. Google and I am not here to judge which one is better. I am going to compare one small tangible design to another massive-atmospheric urban scale design. And we can see how these two universes are close to each other.

Digital Cities talks mostly about urban design works produced by help of computational methods. Parametricism, Swarm Intelligence, Breeder, Urban Experiments, Morphogenetic Urbanism, or even smaller scale like Hyperhabitat etc. I’ll start with the bright sides. I have been astonished by the intelligence of these tools and aware how they are going, rapidly, to change the face of the planet. From the human scale – Chlorofilia, we can’t deny that that is not going to happen. The birth of it is on the timeline already. If it is something that humanities need then it is going to happen and expand eventually. The documentary was a hugh provocation. Manuel DeLanda’s Urban Simulation is a great example of how to extract the best interest out of the people the design was for. The continuous and discrete theory seems to be a perfect interweaving of the city and it’s population. When he talked about the discrete models of urban simulation where he introduced “multi-agent” system, an agent whose decision is specified by rules. The agent follows the rules but also produces an emergence. Is the agent an individual? or a community? And this push the boundaries of agent and the city far closer. Either way, there are good and explainable connection between these two.

The connection and relation is, of course, a total different thing. Emergence doesn’t know the whole. It is a part of the whole, however. So we might say that the only relation of the two is that the emergence build the whole without knowing so. What is the use of it the

n? Would it be ok if we put an entire of ant colony into an abandon colony? Will the ants still work as they do in their old colony? My guess would be yes. They would probably know exactly what to do. They still have their basic instinct that we know for sure. They still have their neighbors and they still get their work done by the end of the day. My thinking is that they won’t feel very happy for some reason and will start reforming their home. It is a thin layer between the agent and the surrounding, either in bigger scale or smaller, it’s in the cloud area of 5 senses. We can ignore the fact that these ants will never learn anyways so why bother teaching them how to grow but we can’t do that to human. We learn through 5 senses. Putting human into a new earth, we just going to find out how we got there. So if the relation is in the senses, does the digital intelligence have enough soul to fill that gap? The feeling of touching the wood, the smell of dirt, the humidity of the rain forrest, the force effect of a new landmark in town, the festival lights? These are inputs that only the population a.k.a. customers can give. Any scale of agent, these are the most truthful and determining factors. The type that Google wouldn’t hesitate to grasp. The real source for bottom-up approach. It is a surprise how we are so familiar of technologies today without questioning them so much. I guess we can make that clear by pairing product design with urban fabric, and by pairing user’s interface with community behavior. So until the computers are able to detect the senses as good as we can. It will still be top-down.

On this essay Manuel DeLanda is trying to investigate and interpret the work of Gilles Deleuze on the genesis of form. In general the essay is about the generation of form. in particular, Deleuze differentiates form into two categories. the first is the “strata” and the “self-consistent aggregates”. Strata is the concept of the tree. Trees are synthesis of homogeneous elements and provide a form that is predictable and can be explained through mathematics. The self-consistent aggregates are heterogeneous and dynamic mechanisms based on the rhizomes that provide a form which is not predictable in anyway and form dynamic connections to become a collection of mechanisms.

Deleuze’s philosophical thinking is greatly based on mathematics and on physics to understand and to decompose the virtual form as well as a tool to help to the actualisation of the virtual. In this text, DeLanda is also writing about how form emerges from organisational structures of biological, molecular as well as socioeconomic environments. these organisations can provide a form wich can be described in diagrams.

To conclude, I think that Deleuze’s tools (mathematics and physics) are in a way the tools to disassembly what happens in nature, but the concept based on the rhizome and the emergence of form and organisational structures are far more interesting to investigate.

Patrik Schumacher

” Each space is in fact a communication. It invites its visitors to participate and gives them clues on how should they behave, what to do. But people are no longer satisfied with simple ordering of space with rigid forms and strict compartmentalization. They need to communicate with each other and move swiftly. This is why rooms should not be separated but rather interconnected. Spaces should be constructed in such a way that everyone can easily see, find and communicate with everyone else.”-Schumacher

Parametricism by Patrik Schumacher is not a style, but a continuous process of research, a movement which tries to solve and bind relational solutions to every spaces of human scale. Schumacher is predicting the future by a continual research of these platforms that have the capability to process large quantities of data for the development of complex topological structures and environments, as well as new understandings of space, both real and virtual.  Being a theorist and as well as an architect he is making a “theoretical foundation” a research line of a completely new style in architecture which will probably dramatically change the way the word looks, and a few steps are being implemented at this point in time but still not evident being far as it came to a point that it has become the bible of architecture. Tackling and defining what the future will be, what is behind of all this attempt and movement? what made Schumacher realize all this diversity, and relation to what humans should live in?

He made modernism a flaw in architecture and open up an idea that every human should move in a fluidic way, in a natural way that lets them communicate with each other as well as create a move that would enhance on the way they feel and sense that there is a need of relation of spaces to humans and one another, rather than a way that people walk in a point, to a point, creating a space that defines them without realizing that there is a need of connection a relationship and a sensible feeling to each one of them, and a space that relates them to each other. Architecture should increase interaction and information exchange, and can no longer insist on physical separation, it should resemble how nature acts to its environment, how nature construct itself to adapt to it. He explains that architecture should not push people to go in a straight line, it should not dictate them on where to go, but allow them to self-organize in complex matrix of differentiated spaces and enables them to create multiple communication scenarios, and ordering social processes in space that is a true natural communication.

The article relates the reality that we are in the continuous process of making more complex matrixes for a more complex social processes that has been waiting to unfold. this is portrayed by parametricism, a continuous free flow of lines, in every different spaces, in a space there should be many options to go, and many things to view in a simultaneous way, there are choices to go sites to view, a choices to be made, and more importantly not to miss everything.

In relation to other article, parametricism speaks about that architecture should not create an environment of grids, an environment that dictates where people should go, an atmosphere created to have one goal, but rather architecture should create a feeling of “choice”, a living space that every human have a choice and an environment that adapts to that choices, parametricism is a feeling and an act of connecting each other by means of parametric computational behavior of humanity. In Conclusion to parametricism, it is belief is to have a more complex way of arranging the hierarchy of architecture, the scale and proportion of it,  trying to break the old laws of architecture which makes sense of today’s challenges that humanity is facing, it is trying to look for choices that humanity would take, rather than instilling that answers to them, parametricism is introducing questions for humanity to have answers and create their own different interaction and communication with each other, having a difference in order, in form, in environment that it creates and an element that people interact with each other, these is what parametricism is trying to change, trying to convince that architecture should adapt to what humanities choices will be, rather than controlling what humanity should be.

Coming up to this point and reasoning, wondering what Architecture should be for the next generation and trying to get out to what we are already are in, Architecture should have a good reminder that matrixes and parametric reasoning should not be controlled by animation and technological advancement computing, rather than it should have a sense of individuality, a character and a behavior which human can interact. Is there a need of creating a second nature built environment? or is there a need to create a natural environment that goes back to its roots? parametricism is having a built environment that is unified, that is interconnected to what humanity have choices, an environment that let them interact and interconnect with each other, but the questions will remain unanswered of how will it suite to that different choices of human, on how would it have an impact to that human choices?  I firmly believe  it will have a big impact on the future, parametricism is  striving to work smarter, more integrated, and more efficient, but questions remain on how would it change the face of the world, and how would it change the laws of architecture that is already proven, it is a great risk, as well as a great opportunity to open up new possibilities of what architecture would really be in the future.

The reading to analyze is about Saint Jerome, a saint who lived 1100 years before it became an artistic reference for painters between 1400 and 1700.

The artistic movement vary according years of painting and the author. The important thing to note is the cunning of the author of the article in question, as it takes this artistic reference of earlier times to refer to human needs.

The author’s analysis is divided into three main points:

Saint Jerome in the desert.

In the representation of St. Jerome in the desert, the author clearly states the individual’s interaction with nature in the simplest way, without protection of any kind of rock or sand, and in direct contact with nature and the introspection of the individual.

Saint Jerome and the Study

In the analysis of this stage of the monk’s life, it becomes evident the emergence of civilization, the building and the greatness of man through the study, organization and order, developing into community and to the common greatness of individuals.

Saint Jerome and the Grotto.

At this stage of artistic representation, is expressed at a Saint Jerome hybrid, in contact with nature and the study but protected by a cave.

Personal conclusion

It is evident that of the three passages in which is exposed the life of St. Jerome (for me a representation of the human being), the first two are completely polarized.
The first, the life in the desert, it refers to an austere lifestyle and in direct contact with nature, in total isolation from any interaction with other humans, highlighting the spiritual and divine through study and meditation.

The second, the study, it refers to life in the city, the civilization protection in contact with other human beings, more human way , civilized , physical and material where what matters is knowledge and the greatness of human.

Moreover, the third, St. Jerome and the Grotto , is a fusion of both human needs , not only divine but also material, not only natural but also with artificial protection , not only spiritual but also intellectual, making this mixture between “The desert and the study” , reveals the perfect way to complement the man , “enclaves” of nature – civilization or civilization – nature.

This apparent need to blend between two poles “Nature and Civilization”, is precisely successfully expressed in the draft House N by Sou Fujimoto, in which is easily to deciphered the architect’s intention, the need to interact between the house and the street, the city and the nature, getting to generating an advanced architectural project with a simple set of forms, gardens, spaces and the interaction between all previous with the city and the environment.

The reading, Toyo Ito’s Learning from a Tree, was an intriguing mini-manifesto from the Japanese architect. While his concepts in the opening text felt a bit vague and idealist, the clear references to his ideas in the following case studies embodied his ideologies for architecture of the 21st century. Connections can also be drawn to concepts of architectural systems by relations, as discussed in class.

In his text, Ito, like many other forward-thinking architects, uses modernism as the scapegoat for many problems in contemporary society. He argues that we must move more and more away from the functionalist, pure, lucid geometries and homogenous spaces that dominate our lives and, by learning from the tree, restore a vivid and rich humanity. The tree is a very strong metaphorical relation that he constantly refers to. He says that architects today must not just build sustainably, but humans must sense the nature that they are a part of through the buildings they live in. The integration of nature and architecture that is prominent in Asian cities should be taken to the form of a highrise. “Architecture like a tree that spreads its branches widely.” He refers to a tree extending vertically and horizontally to its physical effect to photosynthesize, and says that architecture must adopt a similar fractal shape. Architecture should still be based on simple rules and geometry, but should be composed with a complex order, much like that of a tree. With this fractal geometry, inside/outside boundaries are blurred, resulting in creating ambiguous, adaptable spaces in architecture. In addition to obvious environmental relations, such as the need to constantly be open to the environment, it was the difference between atmospheric and disturbed relations that struck me as a key paradox. Toyo Ito is a strong believer that architecture must “not be unequivocally decided, but begin with a loose image that is gradually clarified by repeating various simulations.” He again returns to the tree, mentioning that through studies with biologists he discovered that a certain tree’s growth is not just based on its DNA, but also with interrelations with its surrounding environment. This repeated feedback between the tree and the environment, which defines its evolving shape/role is a strong atmospheric relationship. Having said this though, it is also important to note that each tree in nature, as he says, egotistically insists on its presence so as to maintain dominance over others (a disturbed relation). He compares this inner fight to nations, corporations, and people in capitalism. The main difference is that while the tree has this ego to put itself above others, unlike capitalism, it succeeds through interrelations with its immediate environment and the ability for change within its thick roots. The balance of atmospheric (interrelating) and disturbed (destructive) relations can therefore be drawn to architecture. How does our architecture of the 21st century accommodate for the two in tandem? If we must remove ourselves from the modernist machine, how will our new capitalist trees survive? These are questions Toyo Ito has for the next generation of architects, but he has already started to answer them, no better than in the example of his Sendai Mediatheque, a project which he claims changed his views on architecture.

The Sendai Mediatheque is a very apt case for Ito’s manifestos as he confesses that even years after the completion of the building, he feels that the building is “eternally under construction”, like the metaphor of the tree, that can adapt and interrelate with its environment, or in the case of the Mediatheque, its users. The lack of a fixed program gives the building a never-ending sense of evolution, adaptation, and mystery. As he puts it well himself, “architecture without an archetype is for me ideal architecture.” These themes of eternal construction and incompleteness have inspired me in my personal work and research this term at IaaC. Working in the wind ‘social’ energy studio, we are focused on integrating our low-frequency piezo energy harvester device with Valldaura’s trees. Our aim is to use the energy produced on site to emit sounds to attract a host of birds, insects and small mammals to a specific tree. We hope to create a network of such trees, and through the attraction of native species back to the Valldaura, promote a system of controlled pollination in the area, which from our research, is seriously lacking. At the moment the design of our product is too homogenous, it is like a frozen moment of a myriad of possibilities to enhance wind flow through our device. Our goal therefore is to leave this archetype and instead focus our study on adaptable forms, concepts, and materials. Much like Ito’s Mediatheque that doesn’t have a fixed program, our device will not have a fixed shape or fixed tree it will be interrelating with. Our aim is to create a highly integrated and advanced product (with a certain ego) that succeeds due to its ability to play our various simulations due to its loose image and fractal shape. Embraced by Valldaura’s society and eternally under construction. Ito would be proud, I hope.

In Philippe Rahm’s thinking the architecture is therefore mold according to the climate conditions: heat, humidity, air flows shape the space and allow the functions and its users’ behaviours to find a place in it, while the simulation of the radiation, convection, conduction, evaporation and pressure aims to reproduce a natural environment into the architecture. Effectively, the climate assume the role of Architecture, while the Architecture, in its forms and functions, becomes the vehicle to create a climate environment. Eventually, his architectural approach doesn’t want to establish an open dialog with the Nature, investigating the blurry and unclear space between the black and the white as in Fushimoto’s research. He is not even creating a physical contoured space as for the Alison Smithson’s grotto, but rather an atmosphere of trascendence, a series of sensations, feelings and mapped motions borrowed from the Nature and enclosed in a timeless space.

Dealing only with the air and through the integration of invisible limits, Rham’s effort is an envelope of atmospheres, an invisible architecture of flows modeling the livable space. His sense of Architecture is a poetic and technological approach to the creation of  a comfortable space, made by undefined colors and different air densities.

Nevertheless, the Architecture is reduced to a filter- if not a wall- between man and Nature. It’s not the external climate that shape the Architecture in its forms and programmes, but it is rather a hi-tech and controlled reproduction of it. The need to control the climate derives from a modern society which is not anymore able to deal within an ‘unfriendly’ environment. The technology helps the human being to reach a better comfort level, but at the same time permits the growth of new and more sophisticated needs. Since the artificial environment is affecting the natural sphere, this relation is going to be an endless escape from a reunion with Nature. Perhaps, an advanced architecture should be even that one that forces the human being to have a natural- more than artificial- relationship of acceptance with the climate and its ‘caprices’.

PROTESTOR GUARDING HIS TREE /  POLICEMEN GUARD THE DESTRUCTION

WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM A PARK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_protests_in_Turkey

Summer of 2013 something happened in Istanbul, the monetary system wanted to take the only green space left in Taksim, the GEZİ PARK, wich was the last public breathing point for the people and the reason to do so was to build a SHOPPING MALL

Like Toyo Ito says, the rapid economical growth was there, trying to reach every corner of the city, every valuable space was being occupied by big “bosses” to be sold. The park was tried to be destroyed with the help of police force. People resisted, the resistance spread to the country, that mall was not built. This shows if people themselves have the respect to the nature, we have a lot to learn from a tree, everything startet with a tree at gezi park but of course had political background.

 WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM A TREE

Toyo Ito mainly focuses on the idea of creating a connection between nature and human living environments “cities”. There is the example of the tree, which can grow vertically but also create harmony with his surroundings and in itself by sharing the sunlight with every leave democratical as neighbours living in harmony. He asks the question why humans today “lost” that connection wich he had with the nature in rural horizontal cities, what did we miss trough the inevitable proccess of going vertical in the city.

Ito runs his office for over 40 years and he talks about the different eras of arcitectural growth of the city, and for him the word city means “Tokyo”. The swimming in the sea of consumption, extreme fast economical changes influence architecture and create almost impossible relationships in the city texture. He and his colleagues ask the same questions in every era, even if  rules of the game changes in every 10 years period. Who is the architect, how much an architect can influence the world in this rules and for whom is architecture practiced and how can we learn from the nature.

He accepst and creates an anology with the rules of the game in the human world, in the the ecosystem “the forest”, when if only one tree tries to abstract himself form the system, gets eliminated, as this fight between spiecies creates their harmony. Harmony comes from the constant fight, which fight brought us to live worse. Instead of creating indusry for sustainability, we should simply learn from nature.

Modern times create so called fictional architecture, Ito states, as we architects fix on an image and miss the importance of building creation proccess and humanitary needs also naturality. His own Sendai Mediatheque building period is for him an example of, how reality changes the mind of an architect by time, the end product may vary from the idea or image, but get better qualities after facing reality. The imaginary idea dies, leaving huge amount of construction work behind. However your image is idealised, the building is real.