Research and Design Strategies Essay Book by Orran Slade

RESEARCH AND DESIGN STRATEGIES

ESSAY BOOK

ORRÁN SLADE

I - Diagrams

Diagrams are an architect’s tool for suggesting the intangible elements of a proposal, if used expertly they grant the utility of distilling a complex concept or design intention in as little as a few lines.

In Simon Sadler’s Diagrams of Countercultural Architecture, he states that countercultural diagrams: “…reminds us that architecture is hermeneutic - that it is a way of interpreting the world.” (Sadler, 2012). In Sadler’s journal entry he cites a diagram that epitomises how diagrams can communicate the unseen in architecture: (see figure 1) Energy flows in closed system habitat (van der Ryn, 1973). The diagram uses the typical ‘bubble’ diagram to illustrate how the ecosystem is utilised in a self-sustaining home. It does not suggest anything about the building’s form, architectural style or typology- but tells the reader a great deal about how the house uses its environment to power the home’s utilities.

The architectural diagram’s role in architectural practice is unique in that it can communicate architecture to just about anyone, as opposed to an information dense orthographic drawing, whether that be a client or other built environment professionals.

An extreme example of how diagrams make architecture accessible is this sectional diagram of Renzo Piano’s Shard on London’s South Bank (Figure 2). The drawing isn’t intended for contractors to put construct the building, or for clients to know the exact sizes for the various amenities that the building will hold, it illustrates the dynamics of space throughout the changes in verticality, with orange shading to highlight inhabitation and arrows highlighting key views. It is in the selective inclusion and redaction of architectural information that makes the design digestible in diagrams of this resolution. A section drawn to a precise scale, with structural and services information is all well and good, but it does not allude to the unseen, intangible design intentions of the architect.

Figure 1: Energy flows in closed system habitatby Sym van der Ryn (van der Ryn, 1973).

Figure 2 : Shard Place sectional diagramby Renzo Piano (Piano, n.d).

II - Buildings

Buildings, of course, are what architects are immediately concerned with, we design them, we study them, but we can also use them as an instrument for design research, by designing or observing a building in a way that transcends its programmatic purpose. An exemplar example of this transcendence of space into something that pushes the boundary of what buildings can be is Bernard Tschumi’s Parc de la Villette. In our lecture on Buildings by Sophia Banou, she explained how Tschumi investigated how programme/events relate to the architectural space in which it happens, stating: “… events that the space forces are not to be considered as a functional thing, but they are some sort of a material themselves” (Banou, 2021).

Another building that Tschumi’s theory of programme and architectural space reminded me of is Daniel Libeskind’s Jewish Museum in Berlin.

The museum was Libeskind’s first commissioned project, won through competition, once completed the museum was opened in 1999 empty, with the initially planned conventional exhibitions not being installed and unveiled until 2001 (Reeh, 2016). The architectural space itself served as the exhibition, with the building expressing in its own way the grief and multitude of emotions surrounding the strife of the Jewish people during the holocaust, and the subsequent grief after. Libeskind organised the museum in an experiential manner that articulates ‘three historical developments for the Jewish people, manifested in three axes, exile, holocaust and continuity (see figure 3 and 4) (Jewish Museum Berlin, n.d.).

I see Libeskind’s design intentions as a similar abstraction of programme to how Tschumi explored in his research and actualised in Parc de la Villette. Libeskind used the specific programme of the Jewish Museum as a material for creating meaning and to evoke emotion in its users through purely the architectural space.

Figure 3: The Axis of Exile and the Axis of the Holocaustby Thomas Bruns (Bruns, T. n.d).

Figure 4 : Map of lower level of Libeskind Building by ‘dylank’ from miriamposner.com

(dylank. 2017).

III - Drawing

“God created paper for drawing architecture.” – Alvar Aalto (Aalto, 1958). There has been a deep intrinsic relationship between architecture and drawing since the profession’s inception, with architectural drawings as old as 5000 years found in Malta (Unwin, 2007, citing Cilia, 2004). Drawings enable designers to articulate, analyse, ponder, test, and express their ideas, opinions, and observations in the form of projections of space.

The element of invention of space that architects’ drawings strive to communicate, in my opinion, is where the beauty of drawing is found. This perspective drawing of a design for a Renault Distribution Centre by Sir Norman Foster is an example of a drawing that attempts to simulate inhabitation of space in the manner I am referring to (Figure 5). Prior to the introduction of digital

rendering in architectural practice, the only way to represent a space as it would be experienced was through perspective drawing. Alas, drawings can never replicate how the human eyes see but must construct an abstraction of reality using conventions of drawn perspective.

In a research context, drawing can be used as an analytic device to investigate aspects of buildings after they have been built. Arguably the most well-known studies into architectural proportion were the works of Rudolf Wittkower. His research was concerned with understanding Andrea Palladio’s theories of proportion and how Renaissance architecture derived its characteristics from Ancient Roman architecture, culminating in his seminal book: Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism (1949). To highlight the proportions of buildings Wittkower produced sketches, (Figure 6). From these sketches, Wittkower can observe and measure the exact proportions and geometrical rules at play, noted beneath the sketches.

Figure 5: Perspective drawing of Renault Distribution Centreby Norman Foster (Foster, N. 1982).

Figure 6: Villa Malcontenta plan and elevation sketchby Rudolf Wittkower (Benelli, 2015).

IV - Walking

“I wander thro’ each charter’d street,Near where the charter’d Thames does flow.And mark in every face I meetMarks of weakness, marks of woe...”‘London’ by William Blake (1794)

Walking is the most pure mode of experiencing architecture and place. Sure you can read about great architecture, or marvel at it in a film but you cannot truly ‘feel’ the building until you approach it, assess its scale

against your body and the activity around, venture through and wander. There is only

so much two-dimensional media can convey of a space’s dynamics, exploring and controlling your own point of view is unique to each and every person who visits a place.

I remember walking through the monumental, yet delicate arches of La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona

(by Antoni Guadi), breaking the threshold, the bustle of the streets outside silenced by the vastness of space, instead the sounds of feet across the marble floor, echoed off the ornate walls (Figure 7). This memory reinforces what I believe about the significance of walking in the context of architecture and the built environment.

Walking is an established topic of study in architectural academia, but walking has also been used as a research device for analysing the built environment. In Peter Smithson’s: ‘Bath: Walks within the Walls’, Bath’s architecture is examined through five distinct curated walks through the city (Smithson, 1971).

I believe that this method of framing a place with a set of routes that capture the essence of the city is really effective- due to the fact Smithson does not use something fixed like a photograph as its reference for conclusions but uses a spatial sequence of walking to define his observations (Figure 8).

Figure 7: La Sagrada Familia InteriorPhotographer unknown (Musement, n.d).

Figure 8: Map of ‘Walk 2’ in Bath: Walks within the WallsPeter Smithson (Smithson, 1971).

V - Atmospheres and Environments

What is atmosphere? Does every environment have a unique atmosphere? Does form create atmosphere or is it something deeper, something outside the realms of an architect’s control?

I believe that form can guide a space in the direction of an intended atmosphere but is ultimately dictated by the inhabitation, the emotion, the life that the building facilitates. This quote from architect Peter Zumthor articulates my view quite precisely:

“Architecture is exposed to life. If its body is sensitive enough, it can assume a quality that

bears witness to past life.”

In the context of research within the architectural academic sphere, atmospheres in their intangible nature is very tricky to quantify such complexity scientifically and methodologically. In our lecture

on this subject, delivered by Dr. Yayha Lavaf-Pour, he cited investigations by Philippe Rahm Architects. The subject of said research was specifically the manner in which “architecture is a thermodynamic mediation between the macroscopic and the microscopic, between the body and space...” (Lavaf-Pour, 2021, citing Rahm, 2008). I found this approach to studying atmospheres and environments, in an architectural sense, very interesting, especially in that the observations were substantiated by quantifiable data, in this instance thermal heat maps.

But can architecture be deemed ‘environmental design’ purely based upon its thermal performance, i.e. Passivhaus standards? In short, no it cannot. To create a piece of architecture that exists harmoniously in its setting the architect must consider, measure and respond to a much more holistic, a more macro idea of environment that transcends ideas as reductive and rigid as performance or notions of low embodied carbon.

Figure 9: Dramatic interior image of Therme Vals by Peter Zumthor

by Fernando Guerra (Guerra, F. 2020).

Figure 10 : Digestible Gulfstream(Rahm, 2017).

READING ANALYSIS: Cultural Identities

Gender, race and culture in the urban built environment Ann de Graft-Johnson

The first text of the assigned reading for the topic of Cultural Identities details the complexity of barriers that were evident in the career of the author: UWE’s very own Ann de Graft-Johnson. The text unpacks and assesses various scopes of how gender, race and culture affect participation, success and ultimately inclusion within the architecture industry and the wider built environment. These scopes being: International, European, Britain, then a more concentrated analysis of the work achieved by matrix, a female-only architectural practice and finally how gender, race and culture manifest in problems and barriers within formal architectural education.

The most salient point made in the essay, in my eyes,

is that of the exclusion of women and people of colour in executive decision-making regarding architecture. De Graft-Johnson credits inequalities and lack of inclusion as being slowed by the decision making at the top being very much controlled by ‘white males’. Acknowledging these biases and discrimination against minorities in the built environment is essential to facilitate progress on the frontier of equality.

My view on the conclusions made in the text are that of anti-climax, I thought while reading the overwhelming proof in the form of statistics and anecdotes that it would culminate in a more tangible, directional manifesto of how the system could be shaken up and improved in pursuit of wider inclusion. Despite this, I understand that journals of this nature do not tend to come to conventional conclusions due to the complexity of the issues it analyses - and ultimately cannot change the world in one fell swoop. But what it can achieve is a consolidation of problems that need to be addressed going forward and this is what this journal does.

Undulating grounds, undisciplined bodies: the Soviet Rationalists and the Kinaesthesis of revolutionary crowds. Harem Ziada

This journal entry from architect, urbanist and historian Harem Ziada, focuses upon how the concept of the “mass urban crowd” has sparked innovation and architecture’s response to the phenomenon. He illustrates these developments in design by comparing Soviet rationalist design to the work of Soviet director V. E. Meyerhold.

The writing style of the text is that of academic journals of art history, using very conceptual and high academic language to dissect complex ideas and comparisons between the two bodies of subject matter. I personally found some of the ideas and terms used in this text difficult to grasp immediately, a few google searches allowed me to obtain some sort of understanding the observations in the text.

The main points Ziada makes is that designs for Soviet government public spaces approach the problem of mass crowd in a theatrical way, sharing similarities with Meyerhold’s sets and how in a film context he composed and captured crowd’s movements.

I feel that this comparison is expertly illustrated and is a really interesting relationship that could be explored in other contexts, within different architectural styles. The theatrics of space is something that I find intriguing, especially how public space can be engineered to dictate activity and human movement.