This weeks reading is:
Kolarevic, Branko, and Kevin R. Klinger. "Manufacturing/Material/Effects." Manufacturing
Material Effects: Rethinking Design and Making in Architecture. New York:
Routledge, 2008. 5-24. Print.
Menges, Achim. "Integral Formation and Materialization: Computational Form and Material
Gestalt." Manufacturing Material Effects: Rethinking Design and Making in
Architecture. Ed. Branko Kolarevic and Kevin R. Klinger. New York: Routledge,
2008. 195-209. Print.
Architecture is full of depth, from the material, to the form, to the function. The progressive nature of the profession has allowed for an evolution of the architect throughout time. As the architect gains a new method, purpose, and technology they begin to adapt these innovations into their work. Of course as the authors convey, this growth can be interpreted a number of ways. If the celebration has moved from the ornamental result of the effect to the mechanic operation is this a step in the wrong direction? What is a designer? A designer is an inventor, an experimenter, a researcher; the thrill of design comes in the incorporation of multiple facets in completing a design. The technology available illustrates a further appreciation and awe not to just what the machine is capable of doing, but to how we can control and understand the machine in relation to other elements. Architecture will always be ornamental in a sense, and that is because design is an aesthetic first and foremost. There can be an added depth to provide deeper meaning, perception, and experience and this only adds to the aesthetic and intellectual quality of the architecture.
ReplyDelete“By understanding materials’ basic properties, pushing their limits for greater performance, and at the same time being aware of their aesthetic values and psychological effects, an essential design role can be regained and expanded.” Toshiko Mori
The section on effects, about the articulation of surface and formal effects can have a tremendous affect on the experiential veracity of architecture. Peter Eisenman is quoted describing that “Effect…in architecture is the relationship between some object and its function or meaning...affect in architecture is simply the sensate response to a physical environment.” “Well-crafted material effects can engender powerful affects.” I feel this is subjective considering that not everyone is going to have the same emotional response to architecture as I might. However, I agree with it.
ReplyDeleteOrnament Redux? How appropriate are these new possibilities of non-uniform, non-monotonous, variable patterning, and texturing of surface? I think the reason I was stubborn before was the negative connotation that the word decorative has developed or how I perceive it. Adolf Loos described ornament as a need of the primitive man, arguing that the lack of decoration is a manifestation of a progressive, advanced culture, with the Modern Movement subsequently causing the removal of all ornament for much of the 20th century. These facades were not as affectionate as those with ornament, and were basically not aesthetically pleasing to the eye. I am in agreement and feel that the aesthetics are justifiably a function. A sum function of effects creating affects. The challenge then is creating that affect, that experience. They don’t always have to be just for decoration either. Examples were given on how decorative works were made to disguise unsightly objects, hvac units, etc. The part about patterns existing in nature is nice and all, but I don’t buy it. I feel like the author is trying too hard to justify the point to decorate or the importance of it. We all want the most pleasing aesthetics immediately. Instant gratification.
Question: page 197 second paragraph. Realizing the potential of computational design and computer controlled fabrications is twofold: first it enables (re)establishing, a far more immediate relation to the processes of making and constructing by unfolding innate material capacity and behavior, and, second, understanding his behavior as a means of creating not only space and structure but also micro-climatic conditions. Spatial organization can be now thought of as differentiated macro- and micro- climatic conditions, providing a heterogeneous habitat for human activities? Having trouble understanding these macro and micro climatic conditions, is it just talking about larger and smaller spatial organizations?
I found this article to be very interesting for a few reasons. I did not find the part about CAD/CAM to be very interesting, only knowing that the computer is also a tool to help shape the material that is used. What I found interesting was the part about the materials used in a design. First I thought that the article finally touched upon something that I was interested in reading about, and that is how the materials used in a structure can actually mold and form the shape that the structure takes. Another thing that I found interesting was how the author talked about material as if it were just as important as the actual design of the building. Material can change the mood of an area as well change the way people view that space. The author made a point about how the design of the building is no longer held back by a material choice. The designs choices are almost limitless with the new technologies that are available to shape that material. The author doesn’t say it but seems to be going in that direction, where he believes there will come a time the vision of a space can be had and than any material can be applied to that space. It seems that with the new technologies that are constantly evolving the materials can continue to evolve at a constant pace along with the change in design thinking. I think that there will be a time when the material will be chosen first for a desired effect and then the space will be designed not worrying about the limitations of the material but designed knowing that the material will be able to be shaped and molded and changed to have the desired effect. This got me to begin thinking, if this can be used in architecture why can these same principles not be used in the landscape. To an extent we already do this with the use of different colors and textures with the plant materials we use. But the way I see this to be useful is when structure or other hard material surfaces are used. Why not design a space with a desired effect to be in place and then make the materials chosen make the desired effect even if that is not what they are supposed to do. I think that in the landscape we have unlimited possibilities of what we can do with materials because we can use plant material to get a certain feel, but I still think that this is very applicable to the landscape.
ReplyDelete"If the celebration has moved from the ornamental result of the effect to the mechanic operation is this a step in the wrong direction?"
ReplyDelete@Hany...I don't think its wrong...like art, architecture incorporates a dialogue to society (status quo), it's tastes and aspirations. The machine was percieved as special and powerful for its time, hence why they wanted those "immaterial effects." Its because machines made it!
@Steve, I'm so with you on the statement of ornament though I am glad he at least tried to address it. His reason for the "necessity of pattern" made me lol. I think he's also hinting that "functions" themselves vary from individual to individual, and that it can't be set in stone.
I also like how he discussed all the different materials that these design firms were using in their systems, it gave the blob a more tactile aspect. I still think whole concept is still too introspective to be implemented...its kind of obvious from how he's jumped between materials to efficiency, and ornament...he's trying hard to address all the flaws that architecture in past has exhibited. Commendable...but from the looks of the conclusion, he also realizes that there is still a long way to go.
I think what Kolevaric is saying is that architecture has and always will be the unity of the skin, structure and effect. Recent technologies have allowed for these components to be woven together in a less procedural way. The skin and structure can become one, as well as the effect whether it is light, heat or feeling. The materials used can be transformed to serve a function that would traditionally be fulfilled by a separate material. What happens to the joints at this point? If the architecture is “seamless” and completely unified, has the importance of joints transformed as well? If the joint is the quality of the continuous form, it is discreet or unseen. Does the joint become present in the imagination of the viewer, thinking about where the components where manufactured, or perhaps to someone in the trade, the program in which it was designed?
ReplyDeleteMaterials have a language of their own as well as structure. So when the two are re-defined and woven together, there must be a new language that is formed. A language that may not answer the traditional questions of geology, origin, gravity and time…When I say it does not answer these questions I am speaking for the users of the built structures. The designers know the process and roles of the constituent materials. The goal is to have a synergetic design, one that is “”determined” and fully completes the problem, including time. So I guess my question is, is there a new language? And how should we read it? What are the joints?
This first chapter of this reading brought to my attention the design possibilities of a type material by manipulating its variables. He provides many examples of this discovery and technologies I never knew existed, such as translucent wood and metal! He suggest that the morphing of a form could be interactive. For instance, it can respond to light, heat, and mechanical stress. He also gave a “shot out” to polymers, such as polycarbonate, calling it an old material that is being used more often in architecture because of it is easily moldable.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting how the author compared the “effect” and “affects” of a material. He defined “effect” as a something produced by an agent or cause, and “affect” as the conscious subjective aspect of an emotion considered apart from bodily changes. In other words, to experience the effect of a material we our senses such as hearing and touch. I understand affect as being the impressionable side of the experience and how our emotions are engaged. It is more personal. What I come away with most from this reading is that there are always new possibilities to explore with materials because a materials properties are not exploited enough. Relating this reading to what we are working on with our project now, I think a huge factor that needs to be considered and might even change parts of our rule set is material selection. The material selected needs to work as a system.
Christine it was a rhetorical question.
ReplyDeleteInteresting reading. A part that confused me was the paragraph discussing the legal “firewalls” that are said to be designed to keep architects away from the shop floor and construction site through en exchange of information unrestricted by antiquated legal mechanisms….what is the firewall exactly and why was it developed. The industry will “retool” in order to take advantage of the digitally driven design and production from reach new design endeavor and new collaboration towards material fabrication. Materials and digital technology is changing design intentions and strategies in a new innovative way. We are studying in a time of material excitement, new materials are being created and old materials are being explored with in order to find new ways to be tooled. This is particularly exciting for me, as a young person studying landscape architecture because we can reap the benefits of these new materials and perhaps create new ones or find alternative ways these materials can be fabricated.
ReplyDelete