EXP3: Article Mashup Theory

Architects discuss the objectives, requirements and budget of a building, creating works of public good: what any one person or institution builds and others must live with. Architects and students studying architecture look to the future and they understand architecture as a dynamic system of relationships, aiming to articulate a vision that blurs distinctions between digital and physical, natural and artificial, simulated and observable. Architecture occupies a peculiar place in society and one can feel overwhelmed by the richness and complexity of such architectural works, as an architect’s skill and aptitude for critiquing and analysing architecture transforms the process of idea articulation into an art unlike any other forms of artwork- architecture that envelops us. In a rapidly changing world with many possible edge-of-control projects there is a need for new technologies and advancements for architectural-computing students, an emerging branch of architecture outside of architecture schools. They have become particularly important for Architecture as technologies that help students produce three-dimensional models have replaced traditional drafting paper and pencil. Such new technology in turn attracts a diverse crowd of practitioners, academics and students from a broad range of backgrounds into the field of architecture.  Good analytical, communication, creative, critical-thinking, organisational, technical, and visualisation skills are highly valued in architecture schools, and are strived for as architecture’s ability to shape tomorrow’s places is more significant than its role in producing buildings. Articulating a future vision and program for architecture and urban design within architecture and architectural schools creates new potentials in the field not yet discovered.

Blue Text:
Muli, T. 12th May 2013. “For the love of buildings”
http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000083459&story_title=for-the-love-of-buildings
(Accessed 13/5/13)

Red Text:

Goldhagen, S.H. 12^th January, 2013. “Architecture is more than just buildings”

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/art/111828/architecture-more-just-buildings-in-remembrance-public-minded-critic#

(accessed 13/5/13)

Green Text:

Roudavski, S. 27^th November 2012. “The future of architectural education”

http://www.archdaily.com/298112/frontier-learning-the-future-of-architectural-education-stanislav-roudavski/

(Accessed 14/5/13)

 

 

Experiment Two: Links

Sketchup Monument
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=821ccf1ebfe7c2814390acffb6ee4696

Cry Engine Monument
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/30897931/ARCH1101%20Files/Final%20Monument/monumentarch1101_v13doubleup_26.cry

Experiment Two: Cry Engine Models FINAL

This image depicts the location of the monument respective of its surroundings. It is placed in a small hidden cove and is embedded into and cantilevering on a small cliff, reflecting my concept of "Minimalistic Integration", where the monument is literally part of and integrated into the landscape.

The monument is actually composed of two shapes, and they are not at all touching, but inter-looped with each other, as the smaller monument sits above the larger loop of the second one. This shows the idea of the "integration" aspect to my concept.

The meeting ground for the studies of architect students is the sandy beach just below the monument, and shows the environmental aspect of this monument, because is desired a monument where the students could meet and talk about the monument in a natural setting, rather than another block that is connected to the monument itself.

Experiment Two: Detailing of the Monument FINAL

Since my concept is "Minimalistic integration" I aimed to have the monument to have as simple details as it could have, so I made simple cantilevered steps and a simple ramp on it to allow the visitor to walk on the monument(s). I also added small walls with window like openings as well to allow them to look around their surroundings.

Experiment Two: Sketchup Monument FINAL

My chosen axonometrics combined:

The light texture is to depict the Minimalistic feature of Luis Barragan's concept: it is as simple as his buildings, and reflects an uncomplicated and basic feel that is given off from his architecture.

The medium texture shows both concepts and monuments are interwoven with each other, as well as overlapping with the environment. The blocky texture represents something like 'building blocks', where each feature over lap and integrate with one another to create a more grandiose and more larger piece of architecture. It represents my concept of "Minimalistic integration", and how the building should work together with the environment, rather than be removed and juxtaposing it.

The darkest texture seems like a rocky formation, and is a natural material, relating to Farahid's concept of environmental integration, how the piece of architecture is to adapt to its surroundings. It is the darkest so as to contrast the surroundings ( like Barragan's own architecture,) but it still retains natural aspects that relate to Farshid's concepts (as it has rocky and natural patterns to it).

Experiment Two: Combined Axonometrics FINAL

"Open/Revealing" and "Density and Heaviness"

"Integration" and "Minumalistic"

"Emotional integration" and "simplistic/ basic"

Experiment Two: Electroliquid Aggregation FINAL

Moussavi: environmental integration
Barragan: minimalism

The combined concept for these two:

"Minimalistic Integration is when the object becomes part of the environment, achieved through the use of simple shapes and structures that results in a contradictory piece of work, where it is both embedded and integrated into its surroundings, yet still contrasts and redefines itself in the landscape."

Because Moussavi and Barragan have very different concepts and approaches to architecture, there is a certain conflict in ideology that prevents their monuments from being connected and touching in my axonometric for assignment two, such as the use of materiality. Moussavi favours camouflage and natural harmony with use of glass and reflective material, whereas Barragan favours interruption of the environment with his solid and colourful blocks of architecture.

However, within this concept, I have articulated the idea that both architects embrace and utilise basic shapes and geometry, and have evolved them into great works and pieces of architectural art. Moussavi favours triangles and tessellating geometric shapes, whereas Barragan favours rectangular prisms.

Even though these architects have different pieces of architecture at the end, there is a clear common starting point for them in terms of idea articulation and use of simple geometric shapes, which are "Minimalistic" and a basic beginning to their architectural schemes.