Building Form – PRECEDENT | RESEARCH
Research and Thoughts
Pallasma and Zumthor approach the modern and historical languages of architecture with critical thought and seek to proclaim for calling back to a progressive, holistic return to design. As we within society move to a globalized, flattened world, it is therefore much easier for the specifics of place and time to be lost in the global translation. Pallasma and Zumthor critically address the issues of time and place, and the more important role of the architect within these contexts. Pallasma’s Eyes of the Skin focuses on the lack of anything other than a visual connection in the modern world around us. This is strongly paralleled in Zumthor’s Thinking Architecture, where there is a conscious plea for a return to the sensory architecture, the architecture that speaks to both mind and body through the many other senses. Pallasma’s work brings into play many different theoretical ethoses, creating a critically sound argument for the return from the depths of the ocular-centric environment. Zumthor sees and describes, in great literary richness, the depth and impact visual memory plays in the design of his architectural projects. In combination, both authors seek to touch the reader, through the rich descriptions and critical analysis of the current and past works of design and theory. A close and critical examination of the modernist movement through the eyes of history is relevant alongside the writings of Pallasma and Zumthor. Understanding the natural impact of Aalto and Wright, the machine-like sleekness of Corbusier, and the failure of modern urbanism is vital in understanding the current state of architecture, as well as the context for the authors above. Though globalization seeks to connect the world through technological advances and wireless connections, there is blatant disconnect from the actual time and space which we occupy. Architecture and art are the lasting impressions that can influence how both time and space are shaped through time. Architecture that seeks to just respond to current conditions, with no thought to the past or the
future, fails to speak to the memory. It is easily forgotten, easily understood as a moment to be erased, judged, faulted, or denied. It is written off and praised, yet still does not find a place within our memory as something touching. Without the holistic looking glass, it is hard to design a time-honored architecture. As Zumthor writes in the Thinking Architecture, “Contemporary architecture should be just as radical as contemporary music. But there are limits. Although a work of architecture based on disharmony and fragmentation, on broken rhythms, clustering and structural disruptions may be able to convey a message, as soon as we understand its statement our curiosity dies, and all that is left is the question of the building’s practical usefulness.” I strive to design an architecture that is static and dynamic, adaptable and yet irreplaceable. I have not been successful in this aim for an entire project, but I have sensed success in some smaller areas. I am trying to approach the ideas of tactility and sensory perception from many different scales within this project. The visual presence of the building as a landmark within the city, as well as the visual connection of the occupant to their surroundings, is equally as important. I am consciously trying to design a building that fits within its context, not simply visually, but more so in how the building addresses the place within which it is located and the user within that place. One of the filters I use to critically examine my project is the filter of responsibility. I believe it is the architect’s responsibility to touch the earth lightly (Murcutt). I believe it is the architect’s responsibility to provide comfort to the occupant of the building, and I also believe we as designers are responsible for the current and future impacts our buildings have on current and future generations. We are responsible to set the appropriate example. In this light, I believe the tactile, holistic design approach is the most appropriate way to achieve a responsible design. Sight, touch, smell, sound, and taste are as much a part of the environment as they are a part of our sensory perception of space. I am designing this building to address the nature of human occupation within a working environment.
Building Form – 43 Of 129