Peter Eisenman – Church of the Year 2000

[The] classical scripting of musical notes _ stave _ grid _ process

The reading starts with an interesting comparison of two primitive typologies of shelter. This reference to the instinctive necessity of sheltering, somehow takes the reader to the beginning – the raison d’être of the discipline of architecture. The geographical positioning, the typology, the morphology, the construction method and the organisational layout of the concept of a shelter have been progressively changing, perhaps evolving, since the existence of the human race. This primitive demand for sheltering still is present today, and will probably always be present in the future. Thanks to the reassurance of the presence of this demand, concerned individuals – in this case architects, keep on discussing, critiquing, developing and improving the various features of the past, present and future shelters. (The features being the stated geo-positioning, typo-morphology, method, layout…) The author criticises the modernist approach through a computer science simile of 0s and 1s, arguing that the perfectly functional “nests” of the modernist era as lacking the gradient between the two, in other words, the opportunity and the space for creativity and unexpected encounters, if to quote, “accidents”. While this argument adverts to a prominent issue of the recent past of our built environment, the author renders this insufficiency of the modernist model by objecting to Van der Rohe’s musical description of architecture as the staves. An image of music notes hanging in air without the staves is defended to be as – or even more, coherent (by effacing the main elements of the classical scripting of musical notes), yet rigid numeric ordering and hierarchic titling is used for the organisation of the text. Even though the (post…) post-postmodernist architecture seems to be the anarchist, it actually is the rebellious child of the previous modernists, and like every child, has had a lot to learn from the progenitors.

Although the real meaning of the word “nest” comes to mean a shelter built by birds, when correlated to the word cave, takes a “manmade” implication, where the cave is interpreted as an already existing geographical formation occupied by men. With the introduction of the word “locale” the text goes more into detail about the impact of the occupant and his objects, highlighting the opportunity of these notions to identify the space. With the phrase “manipulated nature” the author defines the garden, which could also have been an interesting “in-between” description of the previously mentioned titles of the cave and the locale. Following the reference, it is important to underline that the occupants have had manipulated the existing – the cave, in order to turn it into their locale. It does not seem correct to conceive the cave as a gift of mother nature for human beings to shelter and seek for opportunities, but more as a space for the occupant to manipulate (through objects, mural artwork, as well as preliminary constructional interior design) and create opportunities through its potentiality.

By the time most of the individuals reach the age to leave the “nest”, they tend to look for a suitable (un-)built environment to find shelter, directed by their individual wills and conditions. This search, just as stated further in the reading, can take the form of a town or a city, a neighbourhood, a street, a house, a room, a bed… Opposing to the inflexible definitions of architectural entities by the modernist – or the “ordinary”, the author gives the reader a different perspective by redefining the part/whole – house/city relationship from a scaleless point of view. The rigid boundaries of a house and a city are questioned, bringing into attention the concepts of inside out – outside in. The Wall House analysed during the previous week of the course is potentially a good example for the practice of this vision. Multiple layers of the skin providing a “delicate” passage from the interior to the exterior (alongside of their sophisticated environmental gains) creating new experiences on how to inhabit the house as well as the landscape surrounding it.

Ruins are defined as “the end” and “the simultaneous beginning” of architecture, putting forward the parameter of time. At this point, the part about the exterior envelopes and how they intercede the relationship with the physical world, brings up an absorbing question of how in the future, architecture could succeed to be the medium between our fast-growing virtual world and our indispensable physical world.

Mehmet Yilmaz Akdogan

The Never Never Land House situated in Cala Vadella Valley – Ibiza explores the idea of integration of built environment with existing natural environment. There are three main principles considered in designing this integration. First is the continuity of the immediate green. In order to accomplish this, tree removal is minimised on the construction site by beginning the design process with mapping of the existing trees and situating the construction on the vegetation-free area. Here, Positional Relation can be identified. Trees are regarded as vertical architectural elements and proximity of trees to the construction is highly considered. Second principle is preserving the bio/geodiversity of the valley through various means of sustainability. More than 80% of the building mass is raised on piles in favour of not causing any disturbance to the soil and species living. Also, spaces for waste filtering, water treatment, water tank, etc., are placed into a compact concrete vessel for preventing contamination of soil. This is also an example of Disturbed Relation where built elements and nature are separated explicitly, put in contrast. This continuity idea is also carried out in the third principle which involves the spatial arrangement of the house. The space is not divided according to activities which takes place in it. It rather has an open plan where private and common activities happen simultaneously. The Never Never Land House is designed as a place of freedom where nature and architecture merges and numerous actions flow into each other.

The Never Never Land House is an approach to integrate built environment with immediate natural environment. One of the main goals of the project is to not disturb the natural environment. Yet, the piles are standing on concrete blocks, and also there is a large concrete mass for water tank etc. on the ground level. In addition, materials which are used in construction are not environmentally friendly. Also, climate-which is an important concern in sustainability-is not taken into account at all. The intention of preserving the qualitative continuities of the valley is valid. However, I believe it is an approach which is taken only on the surface.

In Form & Function Follow Climate, Philippe Rahm proposes a new kind of relation for form and function in current architecture. First, the concept of sustainability and how it is interpreted often in architecture is explored. The term sustainability is first defined in late 20th century as “a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. This definition was often read poorly as “reduction of energy consumption”. Therefore architecture often produced completely sealed off buildings and turned most ecological buildings into most isolated ones. It is argued that we should break off with these preconceptions and habits. Later in the text, the two major theories on form and function is explained. In late 19th century Louis Sullivan comes up with the idea of “form follows function” where architect gives the “appropriate” form to functions. However, this statement is too univocal and rigid, as needs and functions may change in time. Following Sullivan, Louis Kahn and his contemporaries come up with “function follows form” declaration which suggests, a system rigid in terms of structure but flexible in terms of programme. What Rahm proposes is “both form and function follow climate”. He believes that we should abandon traditional approaches and create a new spatial organisation where function and form can emerge spontaneously in response to climate. Architecture, formally should not be representative and analogical. It rather should present physical, climatic, geographic, physiological spaces and times. Architecture should be independent of programme. It should be open to variation of weather conditions, day&night transitions, passage of time. He conceives that architects should work with matter of space which is density of space, intensity of light, geography, shifting climates, atmospheric qualities etc. Capacity of architecture should not be tied to function. Spaces should be open to interpretation and should be liberated from function altogether.

Form & Function Follow Climate, proposes giving freedom to the functional interpretation of space. Furthermore, it suggests that this kind of design approach can only be achieved if climate is the main and only concern. Rahm believes that if architects design with climate and matter of space, one can be able to liberate form from function and create a space independent of its function. However, climate cannot be the only matter. There are other aspects as well which architects should take into account, such as culture, ethics, habits, materiality, natural resources etc.

I would like to do a research on “material energies” that is mentioned in The Shape of Energy, Sean Lally. Personally I find it very interesting breaking off with the statics limits of the conventional materials(stone, steel or glass) and controlling electromagnetic, chemical interactions, thermodynamics etc that surrounds us for creating their own architecture. With these new set of building materials, architect who used to work with points, lines and surfaces now work with new types of boundary edges like gradients of intensities and fallout.