Page 1

M ix


presentation workshop Mon, April 11 2011

• • Arata Isozaki, Re-Ruined Hiroshima, Japan, 1968

• • Cedric Price, Thinkbelt, Staffordshire, UK, 1964-6

• • Peter Cook, Oslo East, Norway, 2005

• • Christine Hawley, Peckham House, London, UK, 1982

• • CJ Lim/Studio 8, World of Cow, London, 2000

“A rchitects

are, and always have been, conscious of the parallel state of fine art : hence the uneasy quote of the ‘art drawing’.”

• • Nat Chard, ThirdGeneration Architecture Built Within the Body, 2002 & Indeterminate Apartment, 1999

• • Diller + Scofidio, The Desiring Eye, Gallery MA, Tokyo, 1992

• • Diller + Scofidio, Tourisms, suitCase studies, Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, 1991

• • Diller + Scofidio, Tourisms, suitCase studies, Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, 1991

• • Diller + Scofidio, Tourisms, suitCase studies, Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, 1991

• • Constant Nieuwenhuys, New Babylon, 1963

• • Yuri Avvakumov & Yuri Kuzin, Red Tower (Homage to Vladimir Tatlin), 1986-9

• • Peter Cook, (with Christine Hawley and Gerry Whale), Sponge City, 1975


can state something as an inventory, as an arrangement of parts, as a layout, as a timetable. We can show the distinct and correct position of the arrangement. We can now very easily depict this arrangement from every conceivable viewpoint. Yet something is missing. What is it like? How might it feel to be there? Is it bland, fresh, lively, shiny, wispy, heavy, gloomy or spooky? In making an effort to answer such questions we have to communicate.�

• • Peter Cook, Instant City, Airship Sequence of Effect on an English Town, 1968

• • Michael Webb, Suitaloon, 1967


this way one experiences drawing as a commentary . Perhaps it was always so: and in particular with technical inspiration.�

• • Marcos Cruz, In-Wall Creatures, Plan 1:1 (Stage 2), Hyperdermis study, 1999-2001

• • Bernard Tschumi, The Manhattan Transcripts, Part 4: The Block, 1979-80

• • Eric Owen Moss, Fun House, 1980

“A ll

the time we must be ready to interrogate

the architecture of the unlikely

in order to push further the architecture of the predictable. Drawings and ‘near-drawings’ have a special role in all this.”

• • Coop Himmelb(l)au, Dosen-Wolke 1968

• • Coop Himmelb(l)au, Open House, 1983 & 1988-9

• • Coop Himmelb(l)au, ZAKSukunftakademie, Haslau, Austria, 1999

• • Lebbeus Woods, System Wien, Energy building #1 and #3, 2005


is even conceivable that there will be a period of creativity around a kind of faux reality ... they’re fun anyhow. Consider a situation where nearly all architecture is a folly?”

• • Enric Miralles, Osthafen, 1992

• • Enric Miralles, Bremerhaven, 1993

• • Enric Miralles, Bremerhaven, 1993

• • Enric Miralles, Takaoka Train Station, 1991-3

“A n

assumption of how much the observer wishes to be told, how much he or she already knows, how much else needs to be alluded to. C reative laziness comes into it as well. Why should a designer bother to draw or explain more of the idea than is strictly necessary?�


yourself as a superhero, what kind of room would you have? It can be an existing superhero, or your own made-up character. Explain your choice of character and her/his peculiarities. Explore them further. Treating your existing room as a given, what would you change & what would you keep? C ommunicate your imagination using three or more of any kind of media you deem appropriate for your idea .


us your best effort! There are going to winners , each will be given

be three R p5ook. This is indeed a

competition !

Sources: Benjamin, Andrew, ed. Architecture - Space - Painting. Academy Group, 1992 Cook, Peter. Drawing: the motive force of architecture. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 2008 Tagliabue, Benedetta, ed. Architectural Monograph No 40. Enric Miralles: Mixed Talks. Academy Group, 1995

Mix Media workshop presentation  
Mix Media workshop presentation  

.a presentation module given for first-year architectural communication class, international program, university of indonesia, april 11th 2o...