A NEW MANIFOLD
SAC JOURNAL 1
4 CONTRIBUTORS
6
EDITORIAL
A NEW MANIFOLD FOR THE DISCIPLINE AND ITS DISCOURS
JOHAN BETTUM
26
INTRODUCTION TO SAC
SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL
JOHAN BETTUM
28
ESSAY A AD
KNOWLEDGE FORMATION
CHRISTIAN VEDDELER
8 ARCHITECTURAL
PRACTICE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF AN EXPANDED PROFESSION
BEN VAN BERKEL WITH K AREN MURPHY
34 PROJECT
THE FLEABITE EFFECT
GEZIM BONO
12 HOW TO COLLECT
46
JOHAN BETTUM
LERPONG REWTRAKULPAIBOON
18 OUT-MIESING MIES:
58
BE ATRIZ COLOMINA
JOHAN BET TUM
FRAGMENTS
SANAA IN THE BARCELONA PAVILION
PROJECT
SPACE IN-BETWEEN
ESSAY A AP
THE CRITICALITY OF ARCHITECTURE
CONTENT
64 PROJECT
LATENCITY
IVA BAL JK AS
76 ESSAY APD
THE OS OF ARCHITECTURE
MIRCO BECKER
122 PROJECT
BRISTLES
SHIMA MOR ADI
132 PROJECT
HEAT PRESSURE LAMINATION
MORIT Z RUMPF
144 PROJECT
LATEX TENSILITY
MELISSA SWICK
84 PROJECT
NODE FOLDING
156 STUDENTS AT WORK
FABRICATION IN PROGRESS
SE AN BUT TIGIEG
96 PROJECT
SHEET FORMATION
AYA X ABREU GARCIA
108 PROJECT
158
K AVIN HOR AYANGKUR A
COLOPHON
FLEXIBLE FORMWORK SYSTEM
BEN BEN VAN VAN BERKEL BERKEL Ben van Berkel is a professor of conceptual design and the dean of the Städelschule Architecture Class. Van Berkel studied architecture at the Rietveld Academy in Amsterdam and at the Architectural Association in London, receiving the AA Diploma with Honours in 1987. His first projects were built almost immediately after founding van Berkel & Bos Architectuur Bureau. Among the buildings of this first period are Karbouw, the Remu Electricity Station and Villa Wilbrink. Being elected to design the Erasmus Bridge in Rotterdam (1996) profoundly affected his understanding of the role of the architect today and constituted the foundation of his collaborative approach to practicing, leading to the foundation of UNStudio in 1999. Recent projects, which reflect his long-standing interest in the integration of construction and architecture, are the Mercedes-Benz Museum in Stuttgart (Germany, 2006), Arnhem Central (Netherlands, 2007), GOW Nippon Moon (Japan, 2012).
JOHAN BETTUM Johan Bettum is a professor of architecture, the programme director of the Städelschule Architecture Class and vice-dean of Städelschule. Bettum studied at the Architectural Association (AA) after gaining a BA with a major in biology 4
from Princeton University. He has taught and lectured, amongst other places, at AA, UCLA, the Berlage Institute, Innsbruck University, the EPFL, Lausanne. His main interests reside in the intersection between materials, geometry and architectural design. He was a research fellow at the Oslo School of Architecture from 1997-2001 and headed a nationally funded research project on polymer composite materials in architecture. Until 2000 he led the OCEAN group in Oslo whose work on polymer composites and advanced digital modelling greatly influenced the group's projects in this period. Bettum's PhD is entitled ‘The Material Geometry of Fibre-Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composites and Architectural Tectonics’.
CHRISTIAN VEDDELER Christian Veddeler is a guest professor at the Städelschule Architecture Class where he leads the second-year thesis specialisation, Advanced Architectural Design with a focus on system thinking in architecture. As an associate director at UNStudio in Amsterdam he is responsible for the design and execution of several international projects. Currently, he is lead architect on the project for the Singapore University of Technology and Design. In close collaboration with Ben van Berkel, he was in charge of a series of pavilion projects focusing on integral and emergent design processes, such as the Holiday Home at UPenn's ICA, the Changing Room for the Venice Biennale, the Burnham Pavil-
CONTRIBUTORS
ion in Chicago, the New Amsterdam Pavilion in New York City, the Motion Matters Series at Harvard GSD, Aedes in Berlin and the Maxxi in Rome. His continuous involvement in academia includes numerous teaching assignments, amongst others at Harvard University, TU Delft, the Berlage Institute and the University of Illinois in Chicago. He is a registered architect and received a Master of Science degree in Architecture with honours from Delft University of Technology.
MIRCO BECKER Mirco Becker, guest- and ‘Stiftungs’-professor at the Städelschule Architecture Class brings his knowledge in computation and geometry in the design and execution of projects to the Master degree specialisation, Architecture and Performative Design. He has been responsible for building up advanced expertise in this emerging area of architectural design at offi ces, such as Foster and Partners and Zaha Hadid Architects in London. At Hadid’s offi ce, Becker worked as a lead designer with responsibility for BIM integration on various projects. Before this, Becker was senior associate principal, heading the Computational Geometry Group at Kohn Pedersen Fox in London for fi ve years and responsible for the geometric design for the Abu Dhabi Airport. At Foster and Partners he was a member of the Specialist Modelling Group. He has taught in Diploma Unit 1 at the Architectural Association (AA) in London (2003-05), was a visiting professor for Digital Design Methods at Kassel University (2006-08) and
tutored at the AA Design Research Lab. His work has been exhibited and published in Europe, the US and Asia, including at the Latent Utopias and Beijing Biennale. Becker founded informance 2012 in Berlin and holds an M. Arch. degree from the AA. His position at the Städelschule is generously supported by the Heinz und Gisela Friedrichsstiftung.
BEATRIZ COLOMINA Beatriz Colomina is an architectural theorist, professor and founding director of the programme ‘Media and Modernity’ in the School of Architecture, Princeton University. She has written extensively on questions of architecture and the modern institutions of representation, particularly the printed media, photography, advertising, film and TV. Among her works are ‘Privacy and Publicity: Modern Architecture as Mass Media’ (1994, AIA 1995 International Book Award); ‘Sexuality and Space’ (1992, AIA 1993 International Book Award); ‘Architecture Production’ (1988), ‘Double Exposure: Architecture through Art’ (Madrid, 2006); ‘Domesticity at War’ (2007) and ‘Clip/Stamp/Fold: The Radical Architecture of Little Magazines 196X-197X’ (2013). She has been on the editorial boards of Assemblage, Daidalos and Grey Room and lectured at institutions and events throughout the world. She is the recipient of several prestigious grants, including from the Chicago Institute for Architecture, SOM Foundation, Graham Foundation, Fondation Le Corbusier, and the Center for Advanced Studies in the Visual Arts in Washington. 5
JOHAN BET TUM EDITORIAL
A NEW MANIFOLD FOR THE DISCIPLINE AND ITS DISCOURSE With this inaugural issue of the SAC Journal, A New Manifold, the Städelschule Architecture Class (SAC) reflects on its postgraduate master programme. In its ambition to contribute to the development of architecture through research, experiments and the excellence of its graduates, SAClike other educational programmes - faces an increasingly multitudinous and complex context in addressing the future of architecture. Yet, A New Manifold is also the beauty and multi-facetted opportunity that this future offers. Contemporary architecture, whether pursued academically or professionally, must answer to growing societal pressures of all different kinds. This includes increased public concerns with what is built in cities where land is often scarce and expensive; scrutiny of the use of money for public projects; heightened awareness of environmental responsibilities; increased technical demands and regulations, and so much more. In addition to this comes architecture’s expanded horizon of improved and new technologies, be it in the form of novel material systems, construction methods or infrastructural and service systems. In sum this offers a plenitude of possibilities, a rich fauna of architectural futures leveraged by the discipline itself, contemporary technology and the wild and beautiful power of architectural imagination. Given the complexity of this future one may ask if it is at all possible to maintain architecture as a holistic discipline where the architect is typically thought to be a generalist, knowing a little about a lot and answering to everyone? The new manifold, which is the sum total of the contemporary condition for architectural explorations and production, proffers a nervous platform for future practitioners and theorists. In the process, will this not dismantle the architect 6
as the master builder and once and for all bury the illusion that buildings are signed off by a single individual who draws inspired sketches of his or her complex designs? Or, will it once and for all deliver us to the free market vernacular, a built tomorrow without architects? Meanwhile, architecture still demands an idea of the whole or, at least, a will to contribute to this whole. The new manifold needs to be collected and directed. At SAC, these questions lead to research and experiments that unequivocally celebrate architecture as a discipline and architectural design as its greatest and most passionate expression. A modest reflection of the new manifold is to be found in SAC’s small size and the way its programme is sub-divided and structured. SAC is the meeting ground of its origin, the classical master class, and the new manifold. It is the continuous negotiation of the many and the one. This negotiation does not conflate either of these; it is fully focused on architectural design as a discipline, understood in all its historical glory and served at best through a continued, experimental approach in the form of research. In the second of the programme’s two-year course, leading up to the master thesis, SAC offers its students three alternative thematic specialisations, each led by a professor or guest professor. SAC’s specialisations are: Advanced Architectural Design, which invites its students to develop a design thesis around a building proposal driven by research on a select, annual topic while considering architecture a product of the traditional, modernist amalgam of form, programme and structure; Architecture and Performative Design, which approaches building design with a focus on how material,
constructional and technological systems influence design decisions and the final thesis outcome; and lastly, Architecture and Aesthetic Practice (until July 2013 called Architecture and Critical Spatial Practice), which attempts to benefit from SAC’s unique relation to the arts within the Städelschule and use art theory and practice to invigorate architectural discourse and design. Thus, comprising its own small manifold, SAC sees the three specialisations as complementary to each other and pursues the liveliest possible exchange between the faculty and students involved in the programme. To portray SAC’s approach to architectural design, the first issue of the SAC Journal presents the projects that were nominated for the first ever Master Thesis Prize at SAC in July 2013. The prize was generously supported by the Architekten- und Ingenieur Verein Frankfurt am Main (AIV), which also has supported this publication. The finalists represent all three second-year specialisations. The Master Thesis Prize was won by Kavin Horayangkura with Lerpong Rewtrakulpaiboon receiving an honourable mention. Guest professor Christian Veddeler introduces the work conducted in his group, Advanced Architectural Design. Guestand ‘Stiftungsprofessor’ Mirco Becker introduces the projects completed under his tutelage in Architecture and Performative Design. Lastly, the project completed in the specialisation, Architecture and Critical Spatial Practice, led under this name by Markus Miessen from 2011 until 2013, is introduced by professor Johan Bettum. In addition to SAC’s tutors and many guests providing invaluable support and guidance, guest professor Mark Fahlbusch, of the engineering firm Bollinger+
Grohmann Ingenieure, consulted the students in structural design and material choices for their project’s. The first part of A New Manifold presents three essay, each by a member of the SAC faculty. SAC’s dean, professor Ben van Berkel, teams up with Karen Murphy to delve on architects’ responsibilities and opportunities within the current professional climate. Their essay, Architectural Practice within the Context of an Expanded Profession, calls for intense research efforts and attention to the ‘softer side of the profession’. Johan Bettum, professor and SAC’s programme director, unfolds his ideas about teaching architecture in the face of the many influences that will weigh on future architects. His essay, How to Collect Fragments, traces the contemporary fragmentation of the discipline and provides comfort by arguing that strategic design methodologies may also defend it by catering to the essence of the discipline through language and close collaborative ties. Last but not least, SAC’s guest professor in history and theory, Beatriz Colomina, turns her attention to SANAA’s installation in Mies van der Rohe’s Barcelona Pavilion (2008-9). Under the title, Out-Miesing Mies: SANAA in the Barcelona Pavilion, she expounds on a contemporary notion and role of transparency, demonstrating that disciplinary issues are not only alive but can be probed, devolved and, in astounding beauty yet shocking simplicity, contribute to the continued development of the discipline of architecture.
7
BEN VAN BERKEL WITH KAREN MURPHY
ARCHITECTURAL PRACTICE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF AN EXPANDED PROFESSION
With the emergence of the digital age and the introduction of computational tools and design techniques, architects have not only experienced substantial changes to their methods of practice in recent times, they are also now faced with designing for a rapidly changing and increasingly connected world. A world of changing lifestyles and one in which innovation is no longer limited to isolated ‘experts’, but where instead social innovation quickens the pace of progress and challenges architects to reassess the core strengths and results of both their methods and their output. In a recent article for the Financial Times, Charles Leadbeater stated: ‘Digital technologies are innovation multipliers: each new wave of technology amplifies our ability to create, [...and...] this is changing what people can do and where they can do it, reducing their reliance on professionals and formal institutions.’ Most interesting is his perception of how the current digital age differs from times of rapid progress in the past: ‘Whereas all previous civilisations created technologies that were tools to amplify our capacities, in this mobile and networked age, technology will become more like a form of life, which we will inhabit, all of the time.’ 1 For the architect then, it is not digital design tools and methodologies alone that are bringing about change. It is precisely the shifts in how we live, work and play – this ‘form of life’ and the repercussions thereof – that have an essential role in determining what buildings are required to provide; how they need to operate, how they are organised and ultimately how they are experienced by the user. It could be said that it is in fact these concerns that have played an essential role in propelling the most significant changes that have occurred within the profession in recent years. 8
But what does this mean for the actual practice of architecture? In the past, architects learned to design through the triad of the eye-mind-hand relationship, at a time when learning was primarily concerned with the development of new and practical techniques for design. However, this applied approach is no longer tenable on its own in a profession which has recently undergone such considerable expansion in its scope, requirements and – therefore ultimately – in its possibilities. Similarly, we can no longer concern ourselves purely with aesthetics. It is for some time now that aesthetics no longer carries the all-encompassing meaning it once enjoyed, neither in architecture nor in a wider cultural context. Moreover, in architecture today aesthetics is linked to a healthy form of provocation, with the architect now in a position to reference other creative disciplines, such as art, fashion, literature etc. By the same token, the scope of the profession has in recent years also expanded considerably in terms of its functional responsibilities and requirements. In contemporary practice we are concerned - now more than ever – with the utility of space, with efficiency models, with the importance of incorporating sustainable constructive elements and with global and economic constraints and considerations. This augmentation of what is required from the contemporary practice of architecture means that architects today need not only to resolve complex structural relationships, but are also called upon to find a cohesive integration of variables. A building can no longer simply be approached as a purely autonomous entity or the sum of disparate elements merely in terms of a grid, a façade or as an iconic ‘image’. Today’s architect is in fact in a position to create an architecture
that is as integral and fully holistic as possible. In order to achieve this however, there is call for a multifaceted means of judgment, one that involves the synthesis of a broad spectrum of variables and one that is ultimately a dynamic method of evaluation that celebrates choice whilst being guided by experience. DIGITAL DESIGN We additionally live in a time where hard data is becoming increasingly ubiquitous and easily accessed. This not only affords the architect a vast source of readily available information, it has also enabled us to devise numerous computational tools with which to process data and apply explicit parameters in order to meet the requirements of precisely tailored designs. Computational design has propelled the profession almost inestimably in recent years and has brought about vast changes to the practice of architecture. In particular there has been much excitement surrounding the adaptability of form enabled by the use of digital tools, and this continues to be the case today. However form-making is no longer tenable on its own in the context of an expanded architecture. It is essential that transformative computational processes enable a more intelligent architecture. Digital design as it is applied today is therefore – and is required to be – the result of adaptive processes. Through engaging with all of the parameters contained in a project brief we are now in a position to give architecture a new expression. We can engage the computational to include and process data that is specifically related to parameters
garnered from multiple sources and to tailor this information to the specificities of the project at hand. What is of most importance, however, is the way in which this knowledge and data are combined in the parametric and the influence that this adaptive information has on all architectural ingredients: technical and constructional systems, spatial constructs, integrated sustainable solutions, programme organisation, materials and, of course, form making. Considerable developments in design and production techniques have also been brought about by the application of knowledge garnered in analytical phases and the linking of this to technical data applied in later design stages. In a future that seemingly promises increased levels of available data and knowledge along with inevitable new tools to process this information, if we ourselves adapt accordingly, we will be in a position to create a more intelligent, responsible and performative architecture. DESIGN KNOWLEDGE AND RESEARCH However, if computational tools are to hold the responsibility of calculating and correctly proportioning vast amounts of relational information, they of course rely on the input of relevant data. So how does the practice of architecture set about acquiring this specific knowledge, and how does it organise itself to not only have vast stores of potentially relevant knowledge at hand, but also to generate and share this information? If we understand that knowledge generates further knowledge and that knowledge-sharing is essential for co-creation and innovation, then it is essential that today’s architect puts systems in place that enable these mechanisms to operate as fluidly as possible. This I believe also re9
quires a shift in focus from approaching projects as singular endeavours with their own specific problems, to placing research in a position of key importance within the practice. By so doing, we create a serial effect within our work and witness a more efficient application of knowledge and a continual refinement and evolution of our design thinking and practice. It must be added, however, that we do not and certainly should not limit ourselves merely to the research or knowledge that we ourselves undertake or generate. It is equally essential that we look outside of the profession for all that will assist us in optimising our work. We need to spread a wide net that captures relevant knowledge from a broad range of sources, from the sciences to the arts. We need to have indepth knowledge of the social sciences, scientific innovations, even of new theories of time and space – in short, everything that is scientifically understood to affect the way we live and perceive the world around us. At the same time we need to garner knowledge about the ‘softer’, more subjective side of human experience: art, music, literature, film – the list goes on. It is a big task, but in today’s society it is also an essential one. If designers or architects are to fulfil a relevant role and continue to make a substantial contribution to how the physical world is experienced, then we need to continue to build on existing knowledge from the past, whilst thoroughly researching and engaging our design thinking with all aspects of how we live our lives today. APPLYING KNOWLEDGE IN PRACTICE So what happens when we reach a point where we have data, we have knowledge and we have external references from multiple and varied sources? What happens when we are fortunate enough also to have the digital tools to process and adapt this information to an exacting level of precision throughout all design iterations and adaptations and which can communicate all changes at the blink of an eye to all actors involved? I propose that what is then required of the architect is an extremely strict editing process – because lest we forget, we also have a design brief, financial constraints, environmental concerns, contextual and typological considerations; in short, the basic ingredients of any project. But it is to this mix that the designer is required to provide ‘added value’. It is here that the architect can apply a trained form of judgement and choose to incorporate only the most cogent ideas and concepts in order to arrive at a design that fulfils all requirements on a pragmatic and functional level, whilst additionally incorporating spatial constructs and experiential effects that determine how the building is ultimately perceived and experienced by the user. Here - in a seeming contradiction to what may appear to have been suggested above – I believe that it is in fact imper10
ative to be reductive in our approach and limit ourselves to a small number of key details in our designs, to ‘big details’. Whilst it is essential to garner all the knowledge possible during the research of projects, it is equally essential to integrally incorporate multiple functions and effects as efficiently as possible into the final design. We must not make the mistake of interpreting expansion to mean that architecture becomes overly complicated, intricate or laden with excessive detailing. Instead we have to be ruthless but innovative in our editing and assimilating processes and incorporate multiple architectural ingredients into a small number of large, integral gestures. By so doing, we can create a form of multilayered efficiency that, although seemingly simple, in fact requires a highly complex degree of design thinking and decision making. The void is perhaps a pertinent example of a big detail that holds significant potential to incorporate and influence multiple facets within architecture, but which to date has for the most part only been acknowledged for its capacity to affect an experiential response. The interior architectural void is of course, in its most literal sense, an empty space devoid of matter; a vacant, hollow vertical expanse, if you will. However, if we instead approach the void as a very present and essential ‘negative’ space, much like in a painting, then the void can in fact be appropriated and serve to define and compose all that surrounds it. With such an interpretation, architects can utilise the void to its full capacity and discover its potential as a device for the management of numerous essential concepts and fully integrated organisational solutions within buildings. In terms of organisation, the void can be designed not only to manage the infrastructure, routing, circulation, view corridors, interior climate and crowd control, but can also determine the massing, load-bearing and even exert its influence on the façade design. In addition of course, the void can influence perceptions of scale; it can create double readings and in so doing, it can encourage the desire for further discovery. In short, essential elements of buildings can be brought together and integrally managed by this one large yet seeming “empty” detail. THE ‘SOFTER’ SIDE OF THE PROFESSION As alluded to above, design thinking cannot be carried out purely by rationally biased or computational thought processes alone, as this would introduce a one-dimensional method of communication towards the user. If the goal of design, beyond the purely pragmatic, is to guide how the work will be perceived and experienced by the end-user, the architect has to assimilate and synthesise the abstract and the figurative within the design process in order to create buildings that are operative on multiple experiential levels. Throughout history the subtle but conscious (or semi-conscious) exploitation of visual perception was for the most part the prerogative of the artist. If the objective of a work of art is primarily to communicate, then the artist must possess a cer-
BEN VAN BERKEL WITH K AREN MURPHY ARCHITEC TUR AL PR AC TICE WITHIN A CONTE X T OF AN E XPANDED PROFESSION
tain understanding of how to manipulate the potential readings of his or her work; how to effect an immediate psychological, subjective receptivity whilst simultaneously trigger a more engaged cognitive response. In so doing, the artist either guides the viewer towards an understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the work, or conversely elicits individual experiences and interpretations. The artist could be said to typically first engage the viewer by means of visual intrigue, but once this has been achieved, an immediate merging of secondary cognitive reasoning and associative, metaphoric and subconscious thought processes occurs. And it is this assimilation of thought processes that results in the eventual individual interpretations of the work. In architecture, however, we have to add functionality to this equation. Yet, by merging the abstract and the figurative, the hard and the soft sides of the profession, we can enrich architecture greatly and allow for unexpected moments of innovation and creativity within the design process. As a result, we can introduce elements of illusion and ideas of the oblique into the psychological effects of transformative spaces. Spatial experiences and multi-representational effects can emerge by understanding and employing merged thinking and design techniques. In this way architecture can effect paradoxical readings and provide complex spatial experiences. The contemporary media façade can perhaps provide a fitting illustration of how scripting technology, material experimentation and abstraction can embed knowledge by means of an adaptive approach to design and produce an architecture that is informative, rather than merely form-driven. A common misconception of the media façade is that it is simply a contemporary interpretation of the “Times Square Effect”, whereby ubiquitous individual neon advertisements are replaced by large-scale LED media screens; screens which continue to display high definition advertising content whilst dematerialising the architecture that supports them and thus rendering architecture two-dimensional and somewhat irrelevant once daylight fades. In recent years, however, architects have conscientiously investigated the further potentials of the media façade and its capacity to form an integral part of an overall architectural strategy and language. Yet, oftentimes the demand still remains for the facilitation of commerce through high density pixilation in order to communicate recognisable branding within the building’s skin. However, the architect can approach this communication medium as an opportunity for the practice to further embrace art, creativity and abstraction and, in so doing, present an alternative, holistic approach to branding. The challenge is then to adapt and integrate an abstracted interpretation of the language of media-generated imagery into the inclusive concept of the building and thereby generate public constructs, cultural objects and urban effects. By working in col-
laboration with lighting experts and engineers, we can experiment with, innovate and invent integral and site specific solutions and, in so doing, paint and clothe buildings in ways that express their meaning and function through the abstraction of accepted advertising parlance. We can thereby create possibilities for art and commerce to be housed under one and the same roof. TO CONCLUDE Although the expansion of the profession calls for a form of trained judgement and an understanding of the psychological effects and readings of space, it is important to note that this is not in any way formulaic, nor does it provide some kind of optimum or infallible blueprint for architecture. What it encompasses, however, is a flexible form of analysis, pattern recognition and choice-making related to how we guide and direct information in design. The broad spectrum of information and knowledge available to the architect today ultimately requires the facilitation of a critical approach and the editing of all parameters, irregularities and values in order to facilitate new relational choices which would inevitably through acquired skills – seamlessly combine all elements needed to create a design that ultimately simply “works”. The question then arises: can such an approach be taught? Or does it remain the privilege of the seasoned practitioner with years of experience and numerous built projects under his or her belt? I would argue that it can and should be imparted to future architects. Whilst the unforgiving necessity of experience cannot be denied, on a basic level what is required is the ability to recognise the changes and the abundance of new possibilities within the profession and to act upon these. Furthermore, architectural theory has always been seen as the most important aspect when learning about the practice, however if you do not educate about the latest scientific developments in all their complexity and diversity, then you are not teaching how to design. Yet, in order to guide the student in the process of design, not only is it necessary to impart knowledge about and encourage research into the hard side of the profession, it is also essential to train students how to judge, select, edit and combine both hard and soft knowledge and to apply these creatively and intelligently in their designs.
NOTES 1.) Charles Leadbeater, ‘Digital Innovation for Social Change’, Financial Times, Nov 8th 2013. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/64203e92-4747-11e3-b4d3-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2l66ctySB.
11
‘TRANSPARÈNCIA NIPONA’ The Fundació Mies van der Rohe presents the installion by Kazuyo Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa (SANAA)
BEATRIZ COLOMINA
OUT-MIESING MIES: SANAA IN THE BARCELONA PAVILION ‘We decided to use acrylic to make transparent curtains. We imagined an installation design that leaves the existing space of the Barcelona Pavilion undisturbed. The acrylic curtain stands freely on the floor and is shaped in a calm spiral. The curtain softly encompasses the spaces within the pavilion and creates a new atmosphere. The view through the acrylic will be something different from the original with soft reflections slightly distorting the pavilion.’ (SANAA, 2008) SANAA in the Barcelona Pavilion. The ultimate encounter, since SANAA is widely considered the inheritor of Miesian transparency — ‘a challenge’, as Sejima admitted in an interview — a return to the scene of the crime, one could argue. The installation carefully marks off a part of the pavilion with an acrylic curtain acting as a kind of crime scene tape, leaving as SANAA put it ‘the existing space of the Barcelona Pavilion undisturbed.’ And yet a completely new atmosphere was created. 18
But what crime has been committed here? What has been cordoned off? Is it the freestanding golden onyx wall at the center of the pavilion? Or the two Barcelona chairs for King Alfonso XIII and Queen Victoria Eugenia of Spain, where they were to sign the golden book during the building’s opening ceremony? Or is it the space outside the spiral that has been marked off, preserved, ‘undisturbed’? (Fig. 1 and 2) In any case, the cordon is loose; the spiral is open. We can walk in, but not so easily. First we have to find the entrance, slide around the outside of the curtain. Only when we are in the other side, having squeezed between the acrylic curtain and the front glass wall of the pavilion, can we suddenly fold back into the spiral by making a 180 degree turn, which echoes the two 180 degree turns already required to enter the Barcelona Pavilion. Just as Mies narrowed the entrance down, subtly constraining the visitor with a folded path, SANAA spins and squeezes the visitor between the narrow planes of acrylic that curve around until suddenly one is inside, facing the two Barcelona chairs, or rather the chairs are facing us,
tury becomes something far from itself, but contained within itself. All the classic images imbedded in the brain of every architect now have additional layers of reflections.
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
SANAA returns the curtain to the pavilion, or is it the pavilion to the curtain? The acrylic free standing curtain recalls the Velvet and Silk Café, the brilliant collaborative work of Lily Reich and Mies for the Exposition de la mode in Berlin, two years before Barcelona, where draperies in black, orange and red velvet and black and yellow lemon silk, hung from metal rods to form the space. (Fig. 4) In its radical approach to defining the space by suspending sensuous surfaces, the café was a kind of prototype of the pavilion. In the pavilion, the richly veined onyx surfaces took over the role of the curtains — the hard surfaces absorbing softness. In fact, Mies pretended that they were curtains, denying their structural role, even if we now know better. The forensic work for reconstruction revealed many veiled secrets of the building — the theatrical quality of its main polemical effects, the illusion of modernity. That the walls are curtains may also explain why we don’t enter the Barcelona Pavilion frontally, but at an angle, as if entering from backstage. SANAA’s project reminds us that the Barcelona Pavilion comes from curtains, from a soft material. The beginnings of architecture were textile. It is a Semperian idea of architecture, beautifully adopted by Adolf Loos who wrote:
Fig. 3
as if the King and Queen were still there, sitting down, presiding over everything. (Fig. 3) There is a new chair beside us, as if for us. It is the SANAA plywood chair with two asymmetrical bunny ears: whimsical, childlike, fragile, uncomfortable, funny. A kind of inexpensive school or cafeteria chair facing the wide, ceremonial, orthogonal, plush, leather and chrome chairs of Mies as in some kind of playful challenge. Another bunny chair is placed outside the acrylic curtain, behind the Barcelona chairs, as if guarding the crime scene. The new chair represents SANAA just as much as the old one represents Mies. The bunny belongs to the acrylic curve while the Barcelona belongs to the onyx. But what do they mean when they say that the space of the pavilion is left ‘undisturbed’? Something has changed. In fact, everything seems to have changed. The simple spiral makes a new pavilion out of the old one — a pavilion inside a pavilion, each transforming the other to produce a whole new architecture. The most famous pavilion of the twentieth cen-
‘The architect’s general task is to provide a warm and livable space. Carpets are warm and livable. He decides for this reason to spread one carpet on the floor and to hang up four to form the four walls. But you cannot build a house out of carpets. Both the carpet on the floor and the tapestry on the wall require a structural frame to hold them in the correct place. To invent this frame is the architect’s second task.’ 1 The space that SANAA has wrapped with the new transparent curtain is precisely the centre of the pavilion, the throne room with its poignantly empty chairs for the King and Queen of Spain. In old photographs, the space is marked by a black carpet on the floor, which nobody dares to step on — as in the image of the mysterious woman (is it Reich?) standing outside its border, her back to the camera, looking in. (Fig. 5) SANAA’s curtain is the invisible cloak that further protects that space; a royal transparent cloak. The garment moves. It billows outwards, allowing us to enter between its folds. Space is defined in a kind of invisible movement, neither limited nor unlimited, a paradox that the spiral has always communicated. ‘“My house,” writes Georges Spyridaki, “is diaphanous, but it is not of glass. It is more of the nature of vapor. Its walls contract and expand as I desire. At times, I draw them close about me like protective armor… But at others, I let the walls of my house blossom out in their own space, which is infinitely extensible.” Spyridaki’s house breathes. First it is a coat of armor, then it extends ad infinitum, which amounts to saying that we 19
AAD ADVANCED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
CHRISTIAN VEDDELER is an associate director/senior architect at UNStudio, Amsterdam, and guest professor at the St채delschule in Frankfurt where he is leading the master thesis specialisation, Advanced Architectural Design (AAD), with a focus on system thinking in architecture. His continuous involvement in academia includes frequent teaching assignments, amongst others at Harvard University, Delft University of Technology, the Berlage Institute and University of Illinois in Chicago.
CHRISTIAN VEDDELER
KNOWLEDGE FORMATION ‘To achieve sustainable innovation you need to seek persistent disequilibrium. To seek persistent disequilibrium means that one must chase after disruption without succumbing to it, or retreating from it.’ (Kevin Kelly) 1 Recent digital developments in technological and social reality redefine conditions for communication, collaboration and production and open up the potential for extensive participation and diversity. At the same time, however, conditions of association, relativity and complexity are introduced. Here, open-source thinking seems to favour bottom-up strategies, while unconventional visionary leadership promotes the most flamboyant innovations. Consequently, for the global knowledge economy there exist on the one side keywords like ‘collaboration’, ‘sharing’, ‘group intelligence’, ‘inter-/trans-disciplinary networks’, ‘self-organisation’, and on the other, terms such as ‘creative leadership’ and ‘inventive entrepreneurship’, which together mark the arrival of a significant renewal of knowledge environments. While ‘collaboration’ as such obviously is not new, the scale, tools and intensity involved are.
knowl·edge noun 1. acquaintance with facts, truths, or principles, as from study or investigation; general erudition: knowledge of many things. 2. familiarity or conversance, as with a particular subject or branch of learning: A knowledge of accounting was necessary for the job. 3. acquaintance or familiarity gained by sight, experience, or report: a knowledge of human nature. 4. the fact or state of knowing; the perception of fact or truth; clear and certain mental apprehension. 5. awareness, as of a fact or circumstance: He had knowledge of her good fortune. 2 These new conditions challenge educational systems, in particular their working-, learning- and research-environments – in short, their ‘knowledge spaces’, as formal hierarchies and bureaucratic superstructures seem to vanish. The focus lies on intellectual initiative, rather than physical production, and challenges current generations of students, scholars and ‘knowledge participants’ to position themselves 29
Marcos Polydorou
within the knowledge economy of the 21st century. Its main driver can be identified as the increasing, world-wide competition for productivity, creativity, originality and innovation. Yet, while there is a noticeable change in knowledge and educational models, substantial new models for concomitant knowledge spaces have not appeared. Quantitatively, the intellectual and economic interests in an emerging knowledge industry can be identified in a significant increase in educational institutions, facilities and programmes. Around the world an exponential growth in the numbers of students confirms an increasing demand for higher education. Knowledge becomes the key resource in any educational but also economy driven environment with innovation being its main target. To avoid any form of stagnation,3 the appeal for replacing standardised learning and training environments with ones that are adaptive and responsive is heard ubiquitously, and with this comes the demand for an intelligent reconfiguration of ‘educational spaces’. Knowledge formation does not come off-the-shelf, as it were, but needs to be nourished. The design of architectural spaces and the organisation of their programmes can play a significant role here. Former paradigms based on departmentalisation, strict hierarchies and segmentation, specialist work routines, dogmatic chains of command and a linear understanding of knowledge directives favour stable and predictable environments. 4 However, routines of any kind seem to be disadvantageous where the production of novelty is concerned. Often fairly isolated from a wider discourse, many educational institutions are still organised solely according to disciplinary autonomy, while substantial knowledge production and dissemination have never been only self-contained. The programme in the master thesis specialisation, Advanced Architectural Design (AAD) 2012-13, started with 30
extensive research on how knowledge formation in educational environments emerges and what the role of architecture can be in this process. The goal was to see how the research would inform the design methodology as well as the planning of the building projects for knowledge spaces. Both social and spatial relations were taken into consideration and informed discussions of domains, territories and interfaces to name just a few. Furthermore, conditions of the absolute and the relational, the individual and the collective, formality and informality, function and form, rigidity and adaptability, norm and difference, etc. were vital considerations for both research and design. In order to understand the complex nature of knowledge formation, the AAD research was initially based on case studies of select educational initiatives. Both abstract educational models and realised educational buildings were investigated. The research initially focused on dynamic models of sharing, open- and crowd-sourcing, forms of self-organisation of individuals and groups, as well as diverse methods for teaming, networking and group intelligence. 5 In turn, the research delivered an in-depth understanding of how social and spatial relationships are differentiated within institutional, provisional and virtual educational facilities. On the basis of this research speculative design strategies were formulated, accounting for differentiated interests and diverse degrees of participation of individuals and groups, and - in consequence - the articulation of social and productive interfaces and territories within the educational environments. Based on a critical parameter inventory, prototypical design strategies were elaborated for how contemporary educational models, their functions, targets, organisational patterns and protagonists would be accommodated within architecture. In regards to a larger discourse on emerging systems, the work delivered spatial prototypes that indexed and challenged different forms of organisation and latent functions that the research had uncovered.
CHRISTIAN VEDDELER KNOWLEDGE FORMATION
Marcos Polydorou
The prototypes comprised hybrid structures that integrate structural necessities with the articulation of potential space, programme, and form. The prototypes further generated speculative design scenarios for enduring knowledge spaces and, finally, architectures. The architectural projects that developed from this research and experimentation prioritised relational instead of absolute settings. Not standardised classrooms but multi-functional spaces for communication, interaction and collaboration became the backbone for the design of educational buildings. The definition of potential strata of impacts, the development of relevant design techniques and the evaluation of design-steps concluded with the formulation of an inventive architectural statement. The focus on the systematic use and development of interfaces is visible in the work of Lerpong Rewtrakulpaiboon, The Space In-Between. The multi-scalar articulation of interfaces allowed for specific moments of complementarily exchanging information. In a series of adaptions of a generic prototype, Lerpong investigated the consequences of diverse influences on a spatial system. With the potential differentiation of social and spatial relationships, Lerpong forecast a design strategy for how to translate behavioural patterns and geometry into the architectural form of a building proposal. With a focus on interfaces in these adaptations, intricate form could be generated with specific control of attention to diverse parameters, such as context, attendant structure and programme. Within the system of Lerpong’s Schinkelplatz Experience Design Centre in the heart of Berlin, expressive but resolute spaces were created by means of constituents such as borders, connections, collisions, transitions, shifts, inclusions, exclusions and gradients. The design comprised a strategic use of spaces that were adaptable to various programmes. The transition zones, articulated as ‘in-between spaces’, accommodated distinctive interfaces, ranging from
diverse information programmes, informal work spaces, breakout areas and collective meeting platforms. The research of Gezim Bono, The Fleabite Effect, comprised an extensive investigation into educational models in-between the physical realm of campus universities and the ever growing network of digitally enabled, virtual participation in rapidly expanding study-programmes. His parallel inquiry into the work of Gordon Matta-Clark and edX 6 of Harvard University and MIT raised the question of how to resolutely decipher the syntax of complex spatial and educational models into design strategies. In alliance with the logic of rule-based approaches, intricate forms of organisation for a novel education environment were developed in his ‘flipped school’ project for Aalto University in Helsinki’s harbour area. Gezim’s emphasis on relational parameters of structure, programme and participation allowed for processing, ordering and making operational an enormous quantity of information. The objective was to mediate between technological advancements, programmes and users in order to develop a novel and adaptable system that would invite a diversity of users to participate. By so doing, Gezim placed the user in a position to orchestrate his or her approach to acquire knowledge in a highly differentiated knowledge space.
ADVANCED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ‘It will be remembered that the principle of exclusion is a very simple, not to say primitive, principle that denies the values it opposes. The principle of sacrifice admits and indeed implies the existence of a multiplicity of values. What is sacrificed is 31
34
THE FLEABITE EFFECT
GEZIM BONO The design thesis is for a new university building to be part of Aalto University in the harbour of the Finnish capital, Helsinki. The thesis relies on research on contemporary knowledge spaces, in particular the open online course-platform, EdX, which fosters alternative hierarchical relations between content providers and users through extensive participation and various forms of sharing. Additional research on formal aspects in the work of Gordon Matta-Clark uncovered how surprising exposure of structure and interiors turns the viewer into a participant. Seeking to generate an open and interdisciplinary platform for knowledge creation, the building proposal embraces a spatial organisation of connectivity and visual exposure to stage its various programmes. The facade design emphasises the spatial-programmatic solution with a playful variation in transparency. The building’s organisation promotes sudden and unexpected encounters between users and visitors and comprises a ‘flipped school’ system where the traditional and hierarchical roles of teachers and students are suspended.
35
AALTO UNIVERSITY south west orientation
The design thesis is based on research on educational models that critically examine the idea of knowledge formation. The aim of the research was to develop an adequate design strategy for future knowledge spaces and educational environments. Educational models are often highly complex due to the diversity of stakeholders involved in contemporary educational environments. The challenge is to describe and understand the multiplicity of relationships within knowledge systems. The relationships between participants in and the content of such systems need to be understood as central to knowledge creation. The research consisted of an analysis of the open, online learning platform, ‘edX’, of Harvard University and MIT as well as a parallel analysis of the spatial articulation of unexpected relationships in Gordon MattaClark’s work. The design of the final building proposal, an educational facility for Aalto University, was based on translating the findings of the research into an elaborate spatial and programmatic design strategy. The building is located in the harbour of Helsinki, Finland. The design delivers a ‘flipped school’ building which promotes users’ unconventional behaviour as well as learning by sharing knowledge. Former paradigms of a one-way definition of functions and hierarchies, exemplified by the traditional relationship between teachers and students, are challenged by new types of spaces within which novel relations between users are formed. Open areas within the building allow new and sometimes unexpected user-encounters that trigger collaboration and the creation of knowledge. 36
THE RESEARCH The research on models of knowledge formation focused on how the creation and formation of knowledge emerge and what role shared knowledge, the interaction of individuals in regards to competing or even conflicting ideas and the negotiation of knowledge standards and external pressures play. EdX is a large scale, open online-platform for academic courses that was founded by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard University. Being a non-profit project, the aim was to create a high quality, open-source knowledge platform that would be world-wide accessible for diverse users through a virtual interface and thereby support a wide spectrum of ideas, perspectives and expertise for unconventional findings and solutions to problems. The platform allows for establishing virtual ‘niches’ dedicated to the creation of individual and self-organised knowledge initiatives in the form of discussion fora and EdX Wiki spaces. Moreover, EdX makes institutional expert knowledge and sharing of individually defined content simultaneously available. ‘Time’ and ‘interdisciplinarity’ are crucial parameters as users are encouraged to collaborate, formulate unconventional ideas and partake in discussions. Parallel research was conducted on the work of Gordon Matta-Clark. The surprising spatial relationships and confrontations that emerge in Matta-Clark’s geometrically manipulated buildings were used as inspirational reference to pursue the idea of spatial and programmatic interactions and their effects on observers.
GEZIM BONO THE FLE ABITE EFFEC T
feedback
local students
knowledge
AALTO UNIVERSITY CONTENT
global students local students
local students
AALTO UNIVERSITY organisation diagram
feedback
Matta-Clark’s work process, the roles of existing and new structures as well as emerging spaces are fundamental in his projects. The introduction of an ambiguous relationship between the manipulated building and its observer, the play on object and subject as well as private and public produce a vital shift in perception. The change of perspective redefines roles, the conditions of seeing and being seen and transforms passive observation into active participation. Matta-Clark opens up parts of buildings by locally deleting its material constituents. Through the subtraction of large parts of matter (walls, floors and ceilings), spherical voids appear. The brute force but precision of the operations are evident. As radical as exact, as unexpected as efficient, interiors are transformed into exteriors; hidden spaces and formerly embedded infrastructure are made visible. Hitherto separate parts of the buildings become connected. The attack on the viewing habits of the observer surprises and disturbs at the same time through the creation of an ambiguous environment of programme and structure. Alleged boundaries and the safety of a domestic environment are voyeuristically stripped of their walls. New spatial constructs and visual and programmatic relationships are radically exposed. THESIS BUILDING PROPOSAL The design for the Aalto University building proposal aimed at exploring the research findings reported above to form a larger, emerging knowledge environment. Aalto University is a merger of Helsinki University of Technology, the Helsinki School of Economics and the University of Art and Design, and the new building hosts the respective programmes of the three schools. While the existing campuses
are on the outskirts of the city, the proposed building forms an open knowledge platform and a central hub situated in the inner city, thereby promoting widely accessible knowledge. The harbour attracts annually 5.4 million passengers, and the building serves students of Aalto University as well as travellers. The building is organised around four mainly open plateaus that allow initial access and potential encounter with other visitors and users to facilitate participation, discussions and exchange of knowledge around the display of content presented by Aalto University’s different programmes. The plateaus connect with successive platforms, and this forms the circulation principle in the building. Users move from one programmatically differentiated plateau to another on a journey of discovery and surprise encounters. All plateaus finally merge into a central space that allows the users of different programmes to meet, discuss and interact. The building’s façades support the individual programmes by either displaying content to the outside or securing moments of privacy. In a playful manner, transparent and opaque sections control the visual impacts on users and programme. Different degrees of visibility and visual connections organise the programmatic relationships throughout the building. The visitor gets indications of how to use the building and relate to other visitors. In order to provoke interaction and break with established viewing and operating habits, the positions and roles of observers are transformed into participants at select locations.
37
pus
is ax
cam
PL ATEAU CONNECTION
2
EDX INTERFACE OF LEARNING
a.n
wi de
w
or
ks
ho
ps
a.n
loc
al a
lab
.n
s s tu
axis
dio
1
axis
clas
tu lec
re
th
e
e atr
lib
un
se
cl
de
on
er
d
st
ud
st
iti
ed
yr
ro om s
s
4
info
y
hub
ud
hib
sroo
m
ry
st
ex
ra
clu
oi
axi
38
s
oo
m
s
3
GEZIM BONO THE FLE ABITE EFFEC T
THE FLEABITE EFFECT IN EDX Time frame = 0-1 growing hierarchy of different contributors in relation to their performance and feedback to the community
Time frame = 2-3 overlapping of contribution between the teacher and the main contributor: community more connected and clear
Knowledge distribution
Knowledge distribution
Time frame = 3-4 main contributor not anymore active: connection of ‘trust’ community lost
Time frame = 2- infinite hypothesis for not losing the main contributors
Knowledge distribution
Knowledge distribution
TR ANSITION BET WEEN PL ATEAUS
Connected
Physically and visually separated
Visually Connected, differentiated plateau A & B
Physically
Vertical physical and visual connection one direction
Visually separated
Vertical physical and visual connection two directions
Physically and visually separated
Vertical physical and visual connection, emergence of the shared space
39
144
LATEX TENSILITY
M E LI SSA S W I C K The research for this design thesis was on processed latex membranes as tensility systems. These tensility systems provided design opportunities with the ability to create multifaceted structures encompassing a large range of spatial situations by means of an ever-adaptable structural system. The flexibility of form, partly derived from the hyper-plastic quality of the latex membrane, gave rise to spatial-programmatic variation in the form of a dialogue between the user and the architecture. In the thesis design proposal for a series pavilions for a wellness club, the non-static attributes of the tensility system propagate performative design qualities in the form of fl exible architecture. The structure serves as an apparatus for physiological stretching by means of elastic resistance to physical, human interaction with the structure itself. The architectural structure becomes a tool for physical wellness, thus blurring the line between machine and architecture.
145
STUDENTS AT WORK FABRIC ATION IN PROGRESS
156
157
SAC JOURNAL No. 1 A NEW MANIFOLD Series Editor: Johan Bettum Issue Editor: Johan Bettum Executive Editor: Sylvia Fadenhecht Editorial office: SAC-Städelschule Dürerstrasse 10, D – 60596 Frankfurt am Main, Germany Tel +49 (0) 69 60500869, architecture@staedelschule.de Design and Layout: Jacqueline Jurt Image Editor: Jacqueline Jurt Layout and Compilation: Ayax Garcia Abreu, Matthias Behrmann, Sujata Chitlangia, Amin Eivani, Sabina Eivazova, Harald Pridgar, Sophia Passberger and Vasily Sitnikov Cover Image: Gezim Bono Logo design: Surface Gesellschaft für Gestaltung The editor has conscientiously endeavoured to identify and acknowledge all sources and copyright holders. All those holding illustration copyrights who have not been identified or credited here are requested to contact the editor. SAC Journal is published one to two times per year. Publication © Copyright 2014 by Spurbuchverlag Baunach, Germany; Städelschule Architecture Class, Frankfurt am Main; and authors. All rights reserved.  No part of the work may in any mode (print, photocopy, microfilm, CD or any other process) be reproduced nor – by application of electronic systems – processed, manifolded nor broadcasted without approval of the copyright holder. The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic information is available on the internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de This publication has been generously supported by: Architekten- und Ingenieur Verein, Frankfurt am Main The AIV Master Thesis Prize Jury: Johan Bettum, Stefan Burger, Manfred Grohmann, Ferdinand Heide AADR – Art, Architecture and Design Research publishes projects and research with an emphasis on the relationship between critical theory and creative practice. AADR Curatorial Editor: Rochus Urban Hinkel, Stockholm Production: pth-mediaberatung GmbH, Würzburg Publisher: Spurbuchverlag Am Eichenhügel 4, D – 96148 Baunach, Germany Tel +49 (0) 9544 - 1561, Fax +49 (0) 9544 - 809 info@spurbuch.de, www.spurbuch.de ISBN 978-3-88778-411-9 ISSN 2198-3216 Städelschule Architecture Class: www.staedelschule.com/architecture Spurbuchverlag: www.spurbuch.de / AADR: www.aadr.info
158