Page 1

INTERLACING SPATIAL BOUNDARIES

JUSTIN CUA


Published by Lulu Press Copyright 2013, Justin Cua/Cal Poly Architecture Department All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the copyright owners. Project Editor: Justin Cua Designer: Justin Cua Advisor: Doug Jackson Project: Interlacing Spatial Boundaries Term: 5th Year Thesis 2013 Site: Los Angeles, CA Program: Mixed Use/Public Space


For my parents, who always nurture the things I love.


CONTENTS

01

Manifesto

02

Design Explorations

03

Site

04

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries

05

Presentation

Architecture of Architecture of Architecture of Architecture of

8 the Heterogeneous the Monumental the New Author the Indeterminant

30

The Interstitial Section Nodal Multiplicity Radialactive

40

Los Angeles Historic Park Site Photography Context

Scale Program Segment Weavers

Probe

48

Visualization Model Photography

98


6

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Abstract In a society that leans toward instability and is more focused on temporary events, architecture struggles to relate to culture. Culture was once disseminated from the top-down, but has now shifted to a bottom up system where individuals define cultural experiences. The new individual has shifted from a passive consumer to an active producer of their daily experiences and architecture must also take an active stance in order to remain relevant. Architecture must produce new and emerging experiences for its inhabitants. Interlacing Spatial Boundaries is a collection of written, physical, and graphic work that explores the ideas of rethinking programmatic boundaries and designing architecture that can produce emerging interactions on a larger public scale by nurturing indeterminate use.

Abstract

7


8

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Manifesto Architecture of the Heterogeneous Monumental New Author Indeterminant

Manifesto

9


Figure 1a - “Maison Du Verre� (House of Glass). The concept of this house was to create a full bleed experience between various programs within the house, which includes a medical suite, living , and social spaces. The glass facade is meant to serve as a screen that abstracts the constantly changing light and outside activity.

10

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


ARCHITECTURE OF THE HETEROGENEOUS Space is not uniform and homogeneous, but rather complex and heterogeneous in nature. The term heterogeneous means consisting of a range of qualities or differences. In an essay entitled “En Route”, Hight states that “heterogeneous space therefore neither preexists diversity, nor is it simply the effect of processes of differentiation; rather, it is the immanent field of relations between differentials. It is not static but always in flux” 1. Within a given space, the relationships between objects, people, and their interactions are always changing, creating divisions or aggregates of spatial relationships. Instead of attempting to define space in terms of physical boundaries, space is defined by relationships. Amplifying heterogeneity in architecture constructs new and diverse interactions between people and architecture that offer an unlimited possibility of social exchanges. An example that distinguishes heterogeneous space from homogeneous spaces is the comparison of two different board games: Chess and Go. In chess, the pieces move in a static and defined boardindividual movement without interaction with other pieces. In the game of Go, pieces can be moved, but must stay in that position until surrounded by pieces of the opposing player- the game space is composed of spatial networks. Once a certain piece is surrounded by opposing pieces, movement is allowed depending on intensities.The relationships are always fluctuating; space is always in flux. Hight continues this example by saying, “One plays Go by managing spatial differentials; one plays chess by deploying already defined differences in space” 2. Dealing with heterogeneity, similar to playing Go, calls for a certain engagement and management of spatial relationships.

1 Hays, K. Michael, “Critical Architecture: Between Culture and Form,” Perspecta, vol. 21 (1984) pp. 14-29. 2 Hight, Christopher, Michael Hensel, and Achim Menges, “En Route: Towards a Discourse on Heterogeneous Space Beyond Modernist Space-Time and PostModernist Social Geography” in Michael Hensel, Christopher Hight, and Achim Menges, eds., Space Reader : Heterogeneous Space in Architecture (Wiley, 2009), pp. 9-37.

Manifesto 11


Heterogeneity produces an ambiguous and indefinite space that fosters unexpected interactions, breaking from the mundane. Architectural space is not static and should not be perceived through the distinction of physical boundaries, but through relationships between accordances, people, and architecture. Architecture must steer away from mere visual representation of heterogeneity and strive for production and performance.

3 Isozaki, Arata, Ma, Space-time in Japan (Cooper-Hewitt Museum, 1979).

Figure 1b - “Flocking�. A term used to describe an example of heterogeneity and spatial flux. Within a flock of birds, space is always changing and emerging based on the spatial relationships between the birds.

12

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


study: japanese tea gardens Figure 1c

In japanese tea gardens, rice paper was used as walls to divide the spaces, yet the characteristics of the material allowed a connection with adjacent rooms. The material was used to create “moveable planes, so thin as to be transparent, are placed one in front of another, controlling the transmission of light and lines of vision and producing ambiguous, indefinite space.� 3. If someone were to walk around the exterior of a room, their shadow would be casted onto the rice paper, interacting with the interior space and those in it. The activity in a room was subject to occurrences outside of itself, enabling intervals of new interaction and stimulation.

Manifesto 13


Figure 1d - “The Parthenon�. The Parthenon is an example of architecture derived from top-down dissemination of culture.

14

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


ARCHITECTURE OF THE MONUMENTAL Monumentality, the idea that a piece of architecture could properly embody the ideas of a given culture, is now impossible due to the shift from a top-down to a bottom-up society. In the top-down system, culture was dictated by those that governed a region or that had a high influence. Like the pyramids in Egypt or the Parthenon in Greece, Architecture was once able to respond to this system and define the way the the population viewed architecture and its aesthetic. This top-down system no longer exists in contemporary society due to the proliferation of information and technology; culture is now heterogenous and unstable. It is now defined from the bottom-up, by individuals contributing their ideas to the larger whole. With the ability to network on a global scale, exchange of information has created global paradigms in the local setting, creating a regional culture that cannot be distinguished. With social networks such as facebook, twitter, wikipedia, and youtube, sharing information and interacting with others anywhere in the world occurs instantaneously regardless of space and time. Through blogs and various websites, the population can consume architecture through a flow of images that attempt to substitute actual experience. Cultural identity becomes less uniform and more heterogeneous as individuals begin to identify with what is accessible on the internet. Architecture that fails to connect with a culture can only be regarded as a mere object of the environment. Formalism assumes the stance to disregard this volatile culture and create architecture through its form alone. This process “is proclaimed, not by its virtue of its power in the world, but by

Manifesto 15


the virtue of its admitted powerlessness.” 4 Reducing itself to solely formal expression, this type of design debilitates itself in order to maintain purity between intention and comprehension, yet it has no voice within today’s society, resulting in muted architecture. Muted architecture is “denied its special status as a cultural object with a causation, presence, and duration of its own.” Rather than disregard culture due to do its instability, architecture must continue to strive for relevance and empha¬size temporality and the individual. Through the proliferation of choice within virtual space, the individual of contemporary society has shifted from a passive consumer to an active producer of their daily experiences, a tendency that will extend to actual space. Max customization is the new norm that the physical dimension must integrate into the design, in which the user has the capability to produce their own experience in the environment. Through manipulation by the individual, amplification and creation of heterogeneous space is produced, creating the possibility for more possibilities of interaction within a space. Paralleling the individual, architecture can no longer be passive in today’s society; it must be an active participant in generating interactions and the exchange of diverse culture. With the flux of culture and the nature of the discipline, architecture will forever be in a struggle to perfectly connect, yet in order to maintain relevance, architecture must strive to relate. Architecture can no longer be dictated from the top-down, but rather be shaped and influenced by individuals. In striving for an architecture that adheres to bottom-up culture, the discourse of the profession became concerned with temporal environments- designs that were more focused on current moments rather than permanence. It has become apparent that “stability has become less important than speed today.. now today, that which happens in much more important than that which lasts.” 5

16

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries

4 Hays, K. Michael, Perspecta: Critical Architecture: Between Culture and Form (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1984): 14-29 5 Ruby, An¬dreas, Architecture in the Age of Its Virtual Disappearance: An interview with Paul Virilio (Paris, October 15, 1993) 179-186 6 Cook, Peter, Archigram, (Princeton: Princeton Architectural Press, 1999): 89-95


study: the instant city Figure 1e

The Instant City 6, featured in an avant-garde architecture journal called Archigram, identified the new focus and addiction to the temporal. The idea consisted of large structures, carried by hot air balloons and towed by airplanes, that integrated the use of virtual technology. These structures would fly to various places and create temporary cities that identified to the given location. When the “city� arrives, it is quickly constructed, facilitating events, displays, and educational programs. This city stays for a limited period and then in flown to the next location, modifying every two years. Monumental architecture than is concerned with permanence must now be more focused on moments, creating significance of separate events and transforming with culture.

Manifesto 17


Figure 1f - “Bubbles�. Bubbles is a pneumatic installation built in Los Angeles, CA which attempts to push the idea of interactive architecture and how it can produce social alchemy within a space.

18

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


ARCHITECTURE OF THE NEW AUTHOR In order for architecture to shift its focus to the individual, it must offer continual stimulation in a culture that is accustomed with temporality. This trend towards temporality has only been perpetuated with the growth of virtual space. Currently, virtual space is the main outlet for people to express themselves, yet architecture has the capability to be a mode of expression in the physical dimension. Blogging, media sharing, and social networking are only but a sample of mediums through which a person can be creative within the virtual world and produce their own experience. In Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics, Claire Bishops refers to the origin of relational aesthetics “as a response to the virtual relationships of the Internet and globalization, which on one hand have prompted a desire for a more physical face-to-face interaction between people, while on the other hand have inspired artists to adopt a do-it-yourself approach and model their own possible universes.” 7 Members of contemporary culture are no longer passive consumers of their daily experiences, but rather active producers, yet in order for this new tendency to persist, there must be reciprocation with the physical environment. This reciprocation between a user and the architecture will give birth to individual authorship and optimize heterogeneity for the collective whole. Designers have attempted to communicate a connection with the individual and their temporal interactions through kinetic and technological applications, yet it has resulted in a responsive architecture that reacts to activity instead of producing activity. “Bubbles” 8, an interactive installation located at the Materials and Application

7 Bishop, Claire, Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004) 54 8 Glynn, Ruairi. “Interactive Architecture”

Manifesto 19


site in Silver Lake, CA, is a spatially adaptable pneumatic environment. The installation is composed of suspended, large, air bags that inflate or deflate dependent on the physical human interaction between the lower air bag of the pair. If someone bumps into an air bag at the ground level, a connected air bag above them responds. Visitors must then navigate through the space left over by the various spheres. When there is no interaction and no visitors are present, the system remains at a stand-by state in which all the bags are deflated. Though this project is successful at displaying a fluid connection between the actions of the individual and their environment, it is a passive response in which it is only reacting to the activity as opposed to creating it. The inflation and deflation of the spheres is visually enticing, yet it is still ineffective in producing continued engagement. After interpretation, stimulation declines. For the active producer to thrive, they must encounter a sense of authorship with the space, an experience created through the ability of active spatial production through the idea of “play”, creating stimulation and giving higher meaning to the space. When a person is allowed to be the author of their spatial reception, he “experiences himself as the lord of the products of his imagination- because it is virtually unlimited, play is the eminent manifestation of human freedom.” 9 The act that is produced by the “player” must not be trivial; the act must be an architectural act that begins to shape the architecture and interject where the architecture is uniform. Through the manifestation of human freedom within a piece of architecture, the individual creates their own meaning of the space that is independent of designed intention, recognizing the implications of their actions and what effects it yields in the

20

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries

9 Fink, Eugen, and Saine, Ute, and Saine, Thomas, The Oasis of Happiness: Toward an Ontology of Play, (New Haven, Yale University Press: 1968) 22


study: the fun palace Figure 1g

Cedric Price addressed the notion of architecture being the servicing kit to interpret potential change in social experiences in his conceptualization of the Fun Palace. Program spaces, circulation, and a kit of parts are all supported by an overall steel structure that allows the manipulation and connection of spaces dependent on the needs of the users. This is an example of architecture that creates a sense of authorship between the individual and space, resulting in a facilitation of future social experiences. Within the project, these spontaneous and unscripted interactions are made possible through the participation and creativity of the user. An architecture that reciprocates the needs of the individual through creative manipulation creates an opportunity for sustained engagement with the environment and other people.

Manifesto 21


Figure 1h - “The Oblique Function�. The Oblique Function is an idea by Paul Virilio that theorizes that an architecture composed of inclined planes could combat indeterminancy of engagment by causing the public to be more aware of their environment.

22

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


ARCHITECTURE OF THE INDETERMINANT The intended use of a space is irrelevant and will forever remain indeterminate. Over the past century, architects have felt compelled to place a function on a given space, yet this would start to limit the possibilities of activity. With the architectural program, “there is no cause-and-effect relationship between an architectural signification and its possible interpretation. Between signifier and signified stands a barrier: the barrier of actual use.” 10 The disconnection between the signifier and the signified puts architects in a peculiar position: to design with indeterminacy in mind, facing the realities of incomplete control. In this sense, the art of writing is comparable to the discipline of architecture in that an author anticipates a certain interpretation of his or her work, yet the work’s meaning is left responsible to the reader, or in reference to architecture, the user. In the discourse of writing, “everything is to be disentangled, nothing deciphered; the stricture can be followed, ‘run’ (like the thread of a stocking) at every point and at every level, but there is nothing beneath: the space of writing is too ranged over, not pierced; writing ceaselessly posits meaning ceaselessly to evaporate it, carrying out a systematic exemption of meaning.” 11 Though intention in architecture can be misinterpreted, architecture must be designed to perform rather than function, facilitating an excess of use that promotes authorship and fluidity of the virtual and actual. In predetermined space, the new author is bound to impress their own actions to the architecture, positing an alternative meaning to the space unintended by the architect. As a user “reacts to the play of stimuli and his own response to their

10 Tschumi, Bernard, Architecture and Disjunction (The MIT Press, 1996). 11 Barthes, Roland, “The Death of the Author,” in Claire Bishop ed., Participation (Whitechapel, 2006) pp. 41-45.

Manifesto 23


Figure 1i

patterning, the individual addressee is bound to supply his own existential credentials, the sense of conditioning which is peculiarly his own, a defined culture, a set of tastes, personal inclinations and prejudices. Thus, his comprehension of the original artifact is always modified by his particular and individual perspective.” 12 An individual’s experience of architecture is dependent on their relationship with the building and their current state of mind. One’s relationship with the building is defined by previous experience and preference, which can affect their engagement with the architecture. Engagement is also contingent upon current mental states; architecture is threatened by distraction. With products, such as smartphones, the internet is now mobile, and access to virtual space is independent of location. Preoccupation with virtual space and telecommunications detaches a person from their physical environment, making “sense of place” less important in today’s society. The architect must evoke a heightened engagement through the

24

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries

12 Eco, Umberto, “The Poetics of the Open Work,” in Claire Bishop ed., Participation (Whitechapel, 2006) pp. 20-40.


emergence of meaning. The focus must shift from a space that functions to a space that produces. As stated by Henri Lefebvre, “In produced space, acts reproduce ‘meanings’ even if no ‘one’ gives an account of them.” 13 Predetermining the meaning of a space anticipates a certain perception, yet this perception is conditioned by human interpretation, and is thus undefinable. Rather than predefining meaning, meaning should be continually reproduced by individuals through active participation and authorship within the architecture. Designing for “excess” creates an environment where there is a fluid relationship with the virtual and the actual. In The Future of Space by Elizabeth Grosz, the “virtual” refers to the imagined possibility of interactions and relationships in a space, and the “actual” refers to manifested uses of a space. She states, “the virtual is the realm of productivity, of functioning otherwise than its plan or blueprint, functioning in excess of design and intention. This is the spark of the new that the virtual has over the possible: the capacity for generating innovation through an unpredicted leap, the capacity

13 Lefebvre, Henri, The Production of Space, trans. by Donald Nicholson-Smith (Blackwell Publishing , 1991).

Figure 1j - “Parc de la Villette”. Designed by Bernard Tschumi in the 1980s, Parc de la Villette explored the idea of indeterminate use through the medium of follies placed on a grid around the park. Each follie suggested varied use through its architecture, but did not specify determined use.

Manifesto 25


for the actual to become more than itself, to become other than the way it has always functioned.” 14 With a fluid relationship with the virtual and the actual, architecture can interact with indeterminism, creating social innovation. This manifestation occurs in successive momentary events, continuously emerging and receding. In this way, architecture can retain relevance with an undefined culture that focuses on temporality. An architecture that performs rather than functions creates a space of excess that interacts with indeterminate space. Though there is a lack of control over the intention of design, “rather than submit to the ‘openess’ as an inescapable element of artistic interpretation,” the architect must subsume “it into a positive aspect of his production, recasting the work so as to expose it to the maximum possible ‘opening’” 15 The fluidity between the virtual and the actual can bring about unexpected interactions within a space and a heightened engagement between the user and the architecture. Heterogeneity, the constant fluctuation of relationships, can bring about a state of excess. Creating a heterogeneous space that promotes collective social engagement needs the participation of the individual. Due to the proliferation of activity within virtual space in contemporary society, the individual has transformed from a passive consumer to an active producer of their daily experiences, a new freedom that can extend to the physical environment. In order to interact with the active producer, architecture must also be active and incite a sense of authorship for the individual, calling for a direct cause-and-effect relationship with the architecture to produce architectural acts. In this way, architecture can maintain relevance with a bottom-up culture that is constantly being reshaped by individuals, affecting the collective.

26

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries

14 Grosz, Elizabeth, Architecture from the Outside: Essays on Virtual Space, The Future of Space, (Cambridge, MIT Press: 2001) 117. 15 Eco, Umberto, “The Poetics of the Open Work,” in Claire Bishop ed., Participation (Whitechapel, 2006) pp. 20-40.


study: “free” Figure 1k

Within the arts of relational aesthetics, artists aspire to create a framework that generates the manifestation of excess. Rirkrit Tiravanija’s artwork “Free” used the implications of eating and gathering to produce unplanned social interactions within a museum. In this installation, he set up a couple tables and chairs in an empty room and handed out free curry and rice. Initially, the visitors were surprised to be receiving free food at the exhibit, but then began to fill up the seats and talk to strangers as they ate. The food was used as a point of departure to create the actual work of art, which was the emerging interactions. Architecture must focus on incorporating a point of departure that brings about excess.

Manifesto 27


28

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Manifesto 29


30

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Design Explorations The Interstitial Section Nodal Multiplicity Radialactive

Design Explorations 31


The Interstitial Section This design exploration aims to explore the possibilities of implementing ideas of individual authorship of space and how it can create a heterogeneous environment. The interstitial section divides two larger program spaces. When the section is inactive, the two program spaces are segregated and static. As one walks through, they have the opportunity to manipulate the walls of the interstitial space, creating a dynamic effect on the overall space and connecting the two program spaces. Limitation: the section mostly produces an open/ closed effect and needs more motivation for program interference.

32

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Design Explorations 33


Nodal Multiplicity Through the use of nodal rotating discs, unscripted interactions can be achieved by circulation. As one begins on path A, their desire to continue on that route is thwarted by the turning nodes, making the user travel on paths B, C, or D. This multiplicity of paths and route changing intersections bypass the predetermined agenda and promotes unanticipated experiences with other individuals.

34

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


a

d

b

b

c

a

c

d

a

d

b

b

c

a

d

c

Design Explorations 35


Radialactive Composed of two profiles, Radialactive can be manipulated to create many different seating positions or uses. This exploration seeks to examine the idea of user authorships and continued stimulation. The furniture piece provokes the user to use their body to find a preferred position in an alternative experience.

36

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Compression Handle 0.5” Steel Rod

1.5” Threaded Pipe

.125” Rubber Washer

Design Explorations 37


38

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Design Explorations 39


40

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Site LA Historic Park Site Photography Context

Design Explorations 41


LA Historic Park The site chosen is Los Angeles Historic Park in Downtown Los Angeles. In 2000, 35 community and civic officials prevailed in persuading the state of California to purchase the 32 acre strip of land as a state park. Since then, 13 years later, the park has remained unfinished and vacant, leaving a large void in the heart of Los Angeles. Surrounding this site are high-volume areas such as Chinatown, Dodgers Stadium, the LA metro, industrial district, and residential sectors, and the park could be a place where all these communities merge. Expectation remains high in the region to create a park or a place for expression. Currently, the main use of the park is to host music festivals, in which large temporary stages are built and torn down only for one night’s use. Though there is occasional activity, the site doesn’t facilitate it. It exists merely as a disengaged lot. This empty space can offer a new cultural identity for the city of Los Angeles, which is a fragmented and diverse city. The park can be transformed into an environment for the active producers to spark activities.

42

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Design Explorations 43


44

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Design Explorations 45


Dodger Stadium Dodger  Stadium Dodgers Stadium

Context

ChinatownChinatown Chinatown

Los Angeles State Historic Park is adjacent to many different cultural areas in the city and could be considererd a significant node to Los Angeles. With its current vacancy, there is a high crime rate near the Chinatown area, causing nearby businesses to close earlier in order to avoid danger. Within the dense city of Los Angeles, a new public space could offer a more positive social atmosphere of community engagement.

Downtown DowntownDowntown

Thesis Design  Presentation Thesis  Design  Presentation

46

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Residen Residential

Industri Industrial

Union Union S Station

Justin Cua  |  ARCH  481  

Design Explorations 47


48

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Interlacing Spatial Boundaries Scale Program Segment

Weavers Visualization Model Photos

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries 49


50

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Scale 51


Scale The masssing of the architecture on the site takes on a braiding gesture of the landscape. Instead of a piece of architecture on the site, the project is one with the site. Measuring at about one and a half thousand feet long, the architecture offers continuous public space at various levels along LA Historic Park.

52

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Scale 53


Program Focused on open and public use, the various programs are organized along side one another, unlike programs sandwiched between unlike programs. Through weaving gestures, program adjacencies are rearranged. The roof undulates up and down to allow access to the elevated park space at multiple levels. This weaving creates a blurred dinstiction between programs and park space.

54

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Public Programs Library School Museum Cinema

Retail Restaurants Recreation

Weaved Parkspace

Program 55


Segment

56

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Ground Floor Plan

0

50

100

200 N Segment 57


Third Floor Plan

0

50

100

200 N

58

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Elevated Park Plan

0

50

100

200 N Segment 59


60

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Segment 61


62

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Segment 63


64

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Segment 65


Weavers The weavers are a series of mutated interstitial spaces that intersect with unlike program and introduce inhabitable public spaces that directly affect adjacent programs. These tubed spaces are accessible from the elevated landscape strata and provoke user manipulation. With each mutation accompanies various actions that facilitate certain programmatic uses. The actions do not dictate use, but merely suggest it. The use of the action directly affects the programs which the weaver intersects. When the weaver is not in action, the LED skin informs those outside of the intensity of activity within the tube.

66

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


LED Activation

Mutation A

Mutation B

Mutation C

Weavers 67


Sectional Actions The Screen Opportunities: Guerilla Film Projection Billboard

The Panels Opportunities: Gallery Art Wall Reading Space

68

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Hydraulic Panel Detail

Swivel/Track System

Weavers 69


The Meeting Spot Opportunities: Studying Area Picnic Table Street Vendors

The Stage

Opportunities: Fashion Show Concert Street Performers

70

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


The Exposure

Opportunities: Alt. Weaver Entrance Shading

The Bridge

Opportunities: Bridged Program Spaces Weaver Access

Weavers 71


72

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Physical Models 73


74

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Physical Models 75


76

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Tubes extend into the park space, allowing for impromtu performances that produce new social dynamics. Transparency in the facade allows for continuous visual activity with the various programmed spaces.

Visualization 77


The roof acts as an elevated park space that undulates and weaves with the programmed spaces. This creates frequent access from the interior to public space.

78

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Visualization 79


80

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Panels of the weavers pop out at various times of the day to expose unepected programs, such as an art gallery, dance space or mini movie theater to unlike programs.

Visualization 81


The weavers invade programs to create unplanned effects on a space. Occupants of the weaver could be watching a film, which affects the activities within the gallery space.

82

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Visualization 83


84

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


The public can come in and make the weaver their own dance practice space. The exposure to the more normative programs alters the experience and interaction.

Visualization 85


86

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Even when the weaver actions are subdued, openings allow for visual connection.

Visualization 87


88

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Visualization 89


90

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Physical Models 91


92

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Physical Models 93


94

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Physical Models 95


96

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Physical Models 97


98

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Presentation Probe

Presentation 99


Probe Probe was an exploration of layering digital and physical information through the use of sensors and iPad technologies. Wood panels and ceiling structure was fabricated to act as the platform for displaying our completed digital work. In order to view the digital work, a visitor could touch the panel and their motion would be picked up by a Kinect sensor. The user is physically involved with the digital work. iPads attached to the panels by gooseneck, which used an installed Aurasma application to visually layer more content upon recognition of a trigger image. The entire thesis show was coneptualized and built within the span of two months. All components of the show were designed and fabricated by the studio.

100

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Photos taken by Josef Kaserovich

Presentation 101


102

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Presentation 103


WORKS CITED Figure 1a “Maison du Verre” Francoi Halard, “The Best Hous in Paris”. 2007. By Nicolai Ourossoff. http://www.nytimes. com/2007/08/26/arts/design/26ouro.html?pagewanted=all. Digital Photograph. Figure 1b “Flocking” Brant Wilson, Flock of Birds. 2009. http://lostandtaken.com/2009/01/flock-of-birds-10black-and-white.html. Digital Photograph. Figure 1c “Japanese Tea Gardens” http://hothardware.com/News/ASUS-Xtreme-Design-contest/default.aspx?PageIndex=2 Figure 1d “Parthenon” http://toptravellists.net/parthenon-athens-greece-hd-desktop.html Figure 1e “Instant City” Basulto , David. “Question: What would Archigram have done for the 2012 London Olympics?” 20 Jul 2012. ArchDaily. Accessed 07 Jun 2013. <http://www.archdaily. com/248129> Figure 1f “Bubbles” Mafox, B*U*B*B*L*E*S. 2006. http://ibubbles.blogspot.com/2006/09/friends-photos.html. Digital Photograph. Figure 1g “Fun Palace” Cedric Price, “Fun Palace”. 1973. http://dprbcn.wordpress.com/2011/05/08/lordre-dessimulacres/. Digital Photograph. Figure 1h “Oblique Function” Vililio, Paul. “The Oblique Function by Claude Parent and Paul Virilio”. 2010. http:// boiteaoutils.blogspot.com/2010/09/oblique-function-by-claude-parent-and.html. Digital Photograph.

104

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries


Figure 1i “Virtual Distraction” Asfari, Nicholas. “Smartphone sales surge, along with antisocial behaviors”. 2013. http:// photoblog.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/01/17552339-smartphones-sales-surge-along-withantisocial-behavior?lite. Digital Photopgraph. Figure 1j “Parc de la Villette” Fillon, Vincent. “Works built in Ile de France: Parc de la Villette”. 2010. http://www. lemoniteur.fr/157-realisations/article/retrospective/698032-uvres-construites-en-ile-de-france-610-parc-de-la-villette-paris. Digital Photograph. Figure 1k “Free” Masuike, Hiroko. “Some favorite things not hanging on a wall”. 2011. By Roberta Smith, Ken Johnson, Karen Roseberg. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/30/arts/design/some-favoritethings-not-hanging-on-a-wall.html?pagewanted=all. Digital Photograph.

Works Cited 105

Interlacing Spatial Boundaries  

Justin Cua's 5th Year Thesis

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you