Redefining Play In Architecture - Degree Project Booklet

AASHNA BAJAJ MAGIC STUDIO FALL 2022

DEGREE PROJECT RESERACH FACULTY: SAUL ANTON, ADAM ELSTEIN, FRANK GESAUDI

WHAT’S

THE

PLAY? HOW TO PLAY? HOW HAVE OTHERS PLAYED? THE MAGIC CIRCLE OF FOUND OBJECTS TIME IN BROOKLYN

abstract project statement research essay amethodology statement context statetement/ non site

abstract WHAT’S THE PLAY?

Our project aims to explore new ways of incorporating flexibility and playfulness in architectural design. We are particularly interested in exploring the potential for customization in the 21st century, specifically in regards to the relationship between a building’s structure and its outer skin. By designing the outer skin as a separate entity that is independent of the structure, we believe we can create a more flexible and playful design. We will examine a variety of different approaches to designing the outer skin, including different materials and techniques, and we will also consider how these approaches can be integrated into the overall design of the building. Our goal is to discover new ways of designing flexibility and playfulness into architecture and to create a more engaging and dynamic user experience.

In an era of rapid social change, migration, and environmental transformation, we believe that flexibility and play have important roles in architectural thinking. Our project focuses on the flexibility of the outer and inner envelope of architectural structures, and aims to explore ways to allow customization and evolution over the lifespan of buildings and structures. We are particularly interested in the ways in which humans interact with the elements of the interior as they age, and how this interaction changes from childhood to adulthood and old age.

One solution we are considering is the use of changeable and recyclable skins for the outer envelope of buildings. These skins would allow for a wider range of material selection, and would allow buildings to keep pace with the rapid change of the city. Currently, once a building is constructed, its form and overall structure are fixed unless there is a major renovation, which is time-consuming and generates a lot of waste. Our modular system aims to address this issue by allowing for the easy removal or detachment of outer layers from structural elements, similar to the way in which animals shed their external epidermis in order to grow or prepare for their next life stage. The old skin that is replaced can be recycled through another system. “The building will be designed with flexibility and playfulness in mind, allowing the form, structure, and appearance to adapt to the social and environmental context. This concept will be reflected in the relationship between the exterior “skin” of the building and the interior core, which includes the program elements and interior spaces.” The exterior of a building is not just a functional element, it is a way for the building to engage with its surroundings, other buildings, and users. It creates a sense of ritual, a world of play and possibility, and projects a magic circle. We envision the building’s skin as a commercial product that users can actively design, similar to how consumers can customize a pair of Nike shoes. To achieve this, we want to develop a system that enables users to participate in choosing materials and deciding the look of each part of the building facade through a series of games that allow for experimentation and ultimately result in user satisfaction. These games will be physical, social, and emotional, and aim to create a learning and creative experience for the user.

In contrast, the interior of the building is a protected space that establishes a relationship between different interior artifacts such as furniture, programmatic space, and materials. Users may also have the opportunity to participate in the design of the interior, depending on their background and taste, or in response to the design and decision of the outer skin.

HOW TO PLAY Project Statement

HOW HAVE

OTHERS

PLAYED? Research Essay

“Play is not a predefined activity, but an open-ended exploration of possibility” (Bogost, Play Anything, p. 4).

The timeline of play in the built environment can be traced back to ancient civilizations, where children and adults engaged in recreational activities in public spaces such as parks, squares, and streets. As cities and communities evolved, so too did the design and function of play spaces, which became more specialized and often separated from the rest of the built environment. In the 20th century, there was a shift towards more formalized and structured play environments, such as playgrounds and recreational facilities, which were designed and constructed according to specific standards and guidelines. In recent years, there has been a growing recognition of the importance of play and its role in promoting physical, social, and cognitive development. This has led to a renewed focus on creating diverse and inclusive play spaces that cater to the needs and interests of all members of the community.

In ancient civilizations, play and recreation were an integral part of daily life and were often closely intertwined with the built environment. Public spaces such as parks, squares, and streets served as places for people to gather, socialize, and engage in recreational activities. These spaces were often central to the life of the community, and were used for a variety of purposes, including physical exercise, games, and performances. For example, In ancient Greece, play and recreation were an important part of daily life, and the built environment played a central role in these activities. The agora, or public square, was a central gathering place for the community, and was used for a variety of purposes, including physical exercise, games, and performances. The agora was also a place where people could socialize and relax, and it was an important part of the social fabric of the community. Play in ancient civilizations was not necessarily seen as a separate or distinct activity from work or other daily activities. Rather, it was seen as an important part of life that helped to promote physical, social, and cognitive development. It was also a way for people to relax and enjoy themselves after a hard day’s work. Different relations can be seen in other ancient civilizations - namely the Indus Valley, Ancient Rome, Mesopotamian Civilization.

Today, we see more formalized and structural play environments, such as playgrounds and recreational facilities that create a structured leisure activity or “game”. Ian Bogost’s concept of “play anything” suggests that play can emerge in any context that offers the right conditions. This idea challenges traditional notions of play and suggests that the built environment has the potential to foster play in a variety of ways, depending on the affordances it offers.

“The Bouncing Bridge stimulates play and interaction between people, and creates a new type of public space where people can meet, play, and relax” (AZC Architects, Bouncing Bridge).

For example, the concept of the “playable city” is an urban design strategy that aims to create cities that are more engaging and interactive for citizens. This approach encourages the use of public spaces for play and encourages the incorporation of elements such as playgrounds, interactive public art installations, and other interactive elements into the built environment.

One notable example of a playable city is the “Bouncing Bridge” by AZC Architects in Amsterdam, which is a trampoline-like bridge that invites pedestrians to play and interact with the structure.The bridge not only provides a functional connection between two sides of the city, but also serves as a playful and engaging public space that encourages social interaction and physical activity.

Another concept that is relevant to the relationship between play and the built environment is Johan Huizinga’s concept of the magic circle. The magic circle is a boundary that separates play from the rest of life and helps to create a sense of immersion and engagement in play. In designing spaces for play, it is important to consider how the magic circle can be created and maintained, whether through explicit rules or implicit understandings.

“All play moves and has its being within a play-ground marked off beforehand either materially or ideally, deliberately or as a matter of course” (Huizinga, Homo Ludens, p. 10).

One example of an architecture project that effectively creates a magic circle is the Bioscleave House by Arakawa and Gins. The house is designed as a “machine for living” that encourages play and exploration through its unique design features and interactive elements. The house is filled with ramps, slides, and other interactive features that invite residents to explore and play in their own home. The design of the house creates a sense of separation from the outside world and encourages residents to engage with their environment in a playful and immersive way.

“The Bioscleave House is a space for play, for testing limits, for exploration and for finding new ways of living” (Arakawa and Gins)

Another example of a project that creates a magic circle is the township of Auroville in the southern state of Tamil Nadu in India. In the context of Auroville, the city can be seen as creating its own magic circle by providing a special and separate space for its residents to live, work, and play. Auroville is a utopian city that was founded in 1968 as a place where people from around the world could live in harmony and create a new kind of society based on human unity and spiritual values. The city is designed to be self-sustaining and to integrate with the natural landscape, with a strong emphasis on environmental sustainability and conservation. Auroville is also designed to be a place of experimentation and innovation, with a focus on creating new forms of architecture, urban design, and community living that are responsive to the needs and aspirations of its residents.

The ideas of adhocism and affordances are also relevant to architecture and design as they suggest that play can be fostered by designing for flexibility and adaptability. Adhocism, as introduced by Bogost, is the idea of using what is at hand to achieve a goal without concern for the intended use of the materials or tools, and can encourage creativity and resourcefulness in users. This concept can be incorporated into the design of spaces for play through the use of flexible and adaptable elements such as modular furniture or interactive elements that can be rearranged or repurposed by users.

“Adhocism is the art of making do with what you have, of turning the accidental and the mundane into something more interesting and useful” (Bogost, Play Anything, p. 103).

Similarly, Gibson’s theory of affordances suggests that the potential actions or uses presented by an object or environment are discovered by the perceiver as they interact with it, rather than being predetermined by the object’s properties. In designing spaces for play, it is important to consider how these concepts can be incorporated to encourage users to find new and creative ways to interact with their environment. One example of an architecture project that effectively incorporates affordances is the “Liquid Space” project by architect Aleksandra Jaeschke. The project consists of a series of inflatable structures that can be reconfigured and adapted to meet the needs of different users and events. The flexibility and adaptability of the structures encourage users to explore and find new ways to interact with their environment.

THE MAGIC CIRCLES OF FOUND OBJECTS Methodology Statement

The concept of the magic circle, developed by Dutch cultural historian Johan Huizinga, refers to a space that is set apart from everyday life, where the rules and norms of the outside world are temporarily suspended. Within the magic circle, individuals are able to engage in activities that are purely for the sake of play, without the constraints of reality.

In the context of architecture, the magic circle can be used to create spaces that encourage playfulness and flexibility. One way to do this is through the use of kitbashing, a technique in which architects or designers assemble a structure or object using various components or “found objects.” By bringing together seemingly unrelated or unexpected elements, kitbashing allows for the creation of unique and dynamic spaces that encourage exploration and creativity.

One example of a project that successfully employs the magic circle and kitbashing is the “Hakoniwa” installation by Japanese architect Kengo Kuma. The installation, which was built for the 2010 International Garden and Greenery Exposition in Japan, consists of a series of interconnected wooden boxes that visitors can enter and explore. The boxes are filled with a variety of objects and materials, such as sand, water, and plants, allowing visitors to interact with their environment in a playful and imaginative way.

Another example is “The Beach,” an installation by British artist Rachel Whiteread. The Beach was a temporary structure built in London’s Trafalgar Square in 2000, consisting of a mound of sand surrounded by a wooden frame. Visitors were invited to play and interact with the sand, creating their own sculptures and structures. By creating a space that was physically and conceptually separate from the city around it, Whiteread was able to create a magic circle that encouraged playfulness and creativity.

Overall, the use of the magic circle and techniques like kitbashing can be an effective way for architects and designers to create spaces that are flexible and encourage playfulness. By suspending the usual rules and norms of the outside world, these techniques allow individuals to engage in activities purely for the sake of play, fostering creativity and imagination.

TIME IN BROOKLYN

Context Statement

Partner work with Jijan Chen

“A work of art when placed in a gallery loses its charge, and becomes a portable object or surface disengaged from the outside world.”

(Robert Smithson)

“To represent Smithson’s non-site, we bring you to the neighborhoods of Clinton Hill and Downtown Brooklyn in New York. The magic circle we have created here is time, which operates in both linear and rotatory fashion. For example, during the fall season, we experience time as something visible to us in the present moment. Time is also visible through a slower, more gradual approach, such as the transition from brick to glass as a material on the exterior of buildings.

In our non-site model, we combine space and time, depicting the immediate time of fall through the long, slow time of the neighborhood. To construct this magic circle, we employed the idea of the “found object” and “kitbashing” to represent the neighborhood in November and December. Our found objects, including bricks and metal, medicine, leaves, and twigs, represent fall in the neighborhood on a macro scale. On a micro scale, we considered time in the neighborhood from the perspective of college students, using found objects like foam, pins, wood, and paper to represent submission time.”