Page 1

Digital Learning  Por.olio   Architecture  101   Thomas  Biba  


Icebreaker

•  • 

•  •  • 

Program: How  can  I  express  the  quality  of  searching     Use  of  design  tools:  Sketch,  Metaphor   Transforma=ons:  From  mental  to  physical  –  idea  to  structure   Ques=ons:  What  is  literal?  What  is  abstract?  (What  cap=vates   other  people?)   Analysis  of  Elements:  Shape,  Angles,  Alignments     Strengths:  spiral  mo=on,  built  from  a  grouping  of  triangular   and  curving  shapes,  perpendicular  beam  creates  contrast  and   juxtaposi=on   Weaknesses:  no  enclosure,  metaphor  is  not  abstract  enough     Conclusion:  architecture  is  about  space  and  communica=on   through  abreact  three  dimensional  language   Hypothesis:  create  enclose  –  define  space  –     Text  elements:  Representa=on,  typology,  tectonics,  language   metaphor,  organic  metaphor,  harmonic  propor=on,   authorship   Class  elements:  Hierarchy,  form,  rhythm,  repe==on,   propor=ons,  rela=onships  between  elements  

• 

Inspira=on –  “Architecture  is  essen=ally  Human;  it  is  the  Human  spirit  manifes=ng  itself”.     Text  Ques=on:  How  does  architecture  impact  our  consciousness  and  shape  our   experiences?  Why  can  architecture  and  design  in  general  be  constructed  as  a  language?                 Language  is  based  on  theory.  Language  is  a  concrete  way  to  communicate  abstract  ideas.   Architecture  is  a  physical  way  to  communicate  different  ideologies  about  human   existence,  experience,  and  how  it  relates  to  the  experience  or  existence  of  the  structure,   and  its  purpose  and  place  within  the  human  experience.  The  phenomenological   approach  says  that  the  building,  the  feeling  inside-­‐ness  is  the  context  for  the  human   condi=on.  We  are  in  our  bodies,  and  we  view  the  physical  world  as  external  –  just  as   when  we  are  in  buildings  we  feel  this  same  feeling  of  inside-­‐mess.  So  architecture  is   another  reflec=ve  dimension  of  the  human  experience  in  the  realm  of  percep=on  –  the   unity  between  internal  and  external.     Adjec=ve  to  describe  myself  –  introspec=ve   Ra=onal  –     Reflec=on:  I  feel  like  this  piece  was  an  explora=on  of  me  beginning  to  understand  what  it   means  to  have  literal  representa=on  and  what  is  means  to  move  into  abstract,  non  literal   representa=on,  and  how  this  is  a  language  that  I  did  not  know  how  to  speak  before  I   made  this,  that  I  am  s=ll  learning  how  to  speak.  This  model  is  my  first  uVerances.  I  took   the  metaphor  of  a  tree,  how  it  is  a  physical  manifesta=on  of  earth  cycles  of  water,   sunlight,  and  sap.  It  is  a  manifesta=on  of  those  cycles,  and  since  these  elements  run   through  the  tree,  within  it,  then  out  of  it  again,  they  somehow  convey  introspec=on.  But   a  tree  is  too  literal,  and  in  this  piece  I  did  not  have  the  abstract  language  as  conscious  yet,   but  looking  back  I  was  using  the  spiral  shape  to  start  to  try  communicate  turning  within.       The  second  part  of  the  experience  of  this  first  itera=on  was  that  when  I  brought  my  piece   to  class  all  excited,  the  students  chose  to  focus  on  the  other  pieces  and  I  wondered  why   mine  did  not  catch  people’s  aVen=on,  then  I  realized  that  I  did  not  account  for  that  when   I  made  it.  I  wasn’t  trying  to  make  it  visually  interes=ng  to  other  people,  I  was  just  trying   to  make  it  an  expression  of  myself  –  since  then  I  have  learned  that  it  is  a  unifica=on  of   the  two  


Itera=on 2   • 

• 

Text Ques=on:  Why  is  ordering  of  any  value?  What  are  the  manifesta=ons  of  order?  Nature  is   structured  and  ordered,  therefore  all  life  exists  under  these  forces,  architecture  is  just  one   manifesta=on  of  that.  Regularity  is  one  of  the  most  abundant  elements  of  nature,  there  is  a   hierarchy  of  birds  whose  beaks  are  very  similar  yet,  they  are  all  slightly  different  because  they   perform  different  tasks.  Within  those  tasks  are  links  in  different  food  chains,  balance  scales  of   forces  which  all  interact  to  create  this  wondrous  whole  that  we  call,  nature  ,  the  universe,  and   the  earth  –  the  world.  So  our  architecture  will  consciously  or  unconsciously  mirror  that,   however  when  we  harness  it  in  our  conscious  arsenal  we  can  order  design  that  mirrors  that   higher  or  more  original  order  of  nature,  which  is  pleasant  to  the  eye  because,  our  whole  living   structure  socially  and  physically  is  built  on  order.  So  it  is  naturally  pleasurable  to  us.  But  if  you   could  make  something  that  goes  beyond  that  simple  mimicking  pleasure  and  construct  a  design   whose  purposes  and  func=ons  and  structures  work  within  this  cycle,  we  will  have  an  even  more   pleasant  world  _  ci=es  are  unpleasant  places  because  they  are  ordered  in  a  certain  way  (but   usually  arbitrarily  or  for  one  human  purpose  –  in  nature  habitats  and  ecosystems  are  structured   out  of  interdependence  of  creatures,  rarely  dominated  by  the  influence  of  one  creature  over   the  others,  in  terms  of  physically  imposing  on  territory.  How  could  we  order  ci=es  so  they   structurally  harmonize  a  mul=tude  of  func=ons.  (the  forms  come  out  of  that.     I  was  so  distraught  and  upset  from  the  last  class  where  we  put  our  “icebreakers”  on  the  table   that  I  was  determined  to  come  up  with  something  so  visually  interes=ng  and  complex  so  that  I   would  catch  people’s  aVen=on.    (although  looking  back  now…  is  this  and  essen=al  aspect  of   architecture,  do  all  architects  try  to  do  this?  Should  they  all    be  seeking  aVen=on.)  (the  most   radical  ones  command  or  demand  aVen=on  –  not  my  favorite..?  This  mo=vated  me  to  create   something  different  –  to  push  my  boundaries    

Program: What  is  the  proverbial  “box”  of  this  project  and  this  coarse?   Use  of  design  tools:  metaphor,  model  building  was  crucial  for  this  one  –  I  played   with  many  triangular  forms  and  found  what  I  needed  to  create  hierarchy  within   that  play   Transforma=ons:  no  enclosure  to  enclosure   Ques=ons:  What  is  visually  interes=ng?  What  cap=vates  others   Analysis  of  Elements:  hierarchy,  cube,  triangles     Strengths:  primary  secondary    and  ter=ary  elements  (clear  and  legible),  interes=ng   play  of  posi=ve  and  nega=ve  space,  repe==on  of  triangle  forms,  varia=on  in   repe==ve  forms  gives  it  a  very  basic  yet  present  rhythm,  has  elements  of  symmetry   and  asymmetry     Weaknesses:  message  in  program  s=ll  somewhat  unclear,  what  is  the  design   fulfilling,  how  does  it  convey  my  program?   Conclusion:  achieved  hierarchy  of  forms,  used  metaphor  to  describe  myself  (more   abstract  language   Hypothesis:  focus  on  minimalism  (based  on  class  feedback)  


Itera=on 3   • 

• 

Text ques=on:  How  do  we  shape  ac=ons  and  experiences  in  our  design?   In  this  piece  I  am  using  a  symbol,  which  in  the  text  is  an  aspect  Charles   Sanders  Pierce’s  philosophy  about  icon,  index  and  symbol.  The  “box”  or   cube  is  a  symbol  because  the  actual  thing  has  an  arbitrary  link  like  a   word  has  to  a  thing  -­‐    the  structure  to  the  idea.  (however  this   phenomenon  is  not  true  in  all  language  –  just  mainly  western  language)   However,  index  icon  resembles  the  thing  it  signifies,  and  an  index  is  a   signifier  that  points  to  the  thing  it  signifies.  These  are  all  aspects  of   “legibility”.  The  box  may  be  an  Icon  and  the  triangle  may  be  a  symbol  of   breaking  through  the  box.  Because  a  cube  resembles  a  box,  but  a   triangle  does  not  directly  relate  to  breaking.     In  class  the  someone  men=oned  that  the  piece  looked  minimalist    

Program: How  can  I  break  outside  this  box  -­‐     Use  of  design  tools:  theme  –  con=nuing  to  explore  the  box  metaphor,   sketch  –  exploring  how  the  triangle  can  interact  with  the  cube   Transforma=ons:  complex  to  simple  –  less  individual  elements     Ques=ons:  How  can  I  break  outside  of  the  box?  What  language  can  I  use   start  to  tell  this  story?   Analysis  of  Elements:  triangle,  cube,  angles,  points  of  interac=on   Strengths:  Use  of  propor=on,  cube  is  made  insignificant  in  rela=on  to   larger  triangular  form  cufng  through  it,   The  extreme  angles  rela=ve  from  cube  to  triangle  –  communicates   complex  rela=onship   Weaknesses  (s=ll  using  literal  metaphor  to  drive  work),  no  ter=ary   element,     Conclusion:  developing  some  =ny  uVerances  of  a  language  to  speak  about   metaphor,     Hypothesis:  play  with  minimalist  language,  increase  vocabulary  by   breaking  forms.  Figure  out  what  they  are  not,  so  you  can  discover  what   they  are  (this  will  start  to  reveal  the  truer  language  and  quality   underneath  the  box  metaphor  created  


• 

• 

• 

Text Ques=on:  Of  what  value  are  inten=onally  interjec=ng  ambiguity,  complexity,   and  contradic=on  into  our  designs?  How  about  inten=onally  challenging   expecta=ons  or  crea=ng  architectural  irony  by  delivering  the  opposite  of  what  is   expected?  (Collisions,  juxtaposi=ons,  fragments,  distor=ons,  randomly  occurring   aspects)    -­‐          In  my  design  the  breaking  of  the  cube  from  into  just  its  minimal  elements  was  an   example  of  an  aesthe=c  inten=on,  and  then  I  broke  the  form  by  taking  out  the  last   connec=ng  piece.  The  layered  meaning  comes  from  the  this  ideology  of   deconstruc=ng  the  denota=on  of  the  shape  to  its  barest  elements  or  “root”   words,  and  making  a  language  which  is  more  archaic.  By  breaking  down  the   denota=on  you  reassert  and  re-­‐ques=on  the  original  connota=ons  of  each  form.   What  does  it  mean  to  be  a  cube  in  the  concrete  sense  and  what  does  it  mean  to   be  a  box  in  the  abstract  sense.      By  breaking  down  the  form  in  this  way  the  piece  asks  these  ques=ons.  (the   breaking  of  the  form  would  be  a  parole  in  the  larger  context  of  the  Laugue  which   is  deconstruc=ng  of  form.  And  the  use  of  metaphor  comes  in  the  ideology  of  the   box.  What  does  it  mean  to  be  inside  or  out  of  the  box…  well  first  we  have  to   explore  what  the  box  is…  then  how  can  we  make  it  nothing,  then  the  form  holds   ambiguity.  This  can  be  useful  because  it  creates  a  vessel  to  hold  what  one  cannot   inten=onally  communicate  –  there  are  limits  to  inten=onal  communica=on,  and   some=mes  we  communicate  things  we  don’t  like  (the  double  coding  in  this  piece   is  the  box  metaphor,  which  someone  may  not  get  by  looking  at  the  piece,  but  it  is   really  deeper  than  that,  therefore  the  piece  ambiguous  but  not  arbitrary   Program:  discover  boundaries  of  box  metaphor  –  find  what  you  really  want  to   communicate  about  yourself   Use  of  design  tools:  pre  model  making  -­‐  ,  narra=ve,  and  cri=cal  ques=oning-­‐    What   is  a  cube  in  denota=on  and  connota=on?  What  does  it  mean  to  be  outside  the  box?   What  is  the  box?  How  does  this  relate  to  the  story  of  me  and  my  personality?     Transforma=ons:  regular  to  irregular   Ques=ons:  How  can  I  break  outside  of  the  outside  of  the  box  metaphor?   Analysis  of  Elements:  angled  lines  90  degree  angles   Strengths:  breaking  form  of  cube,  contrast  in  line  weight,  interac=on  of  forms,   penetra=ons   Weaknesses:  not  enough  dimensionality,  no  discernable  inside  or  outside  space,  no   ter=ary  element,  too  many  planar  surfaces,  you  can  only  get  deconstruc=on   metaphor  from  one  angle   Conclusion:  ambiguity  is  different  than  being  arbitrary     Hypothesis:  apply  what  you  learned  in  this  itera=on  to  the  full  explora=on  in  three   dimensions    

Itera=on 4  


Itera=on 5  

• 

Text ques=on:  How  can  the  quality  of  character  of  material  used  to  construct  expand  and  deepen   the  meaning  of  your  design?  How  does  materiality  impact  human  experience?        -­‐  some  people  find   drawing  to  be  the  utmost  expression  of  form  ….  But  for  me  building  it  the  utmost  expression  of   form.  When  I  build  something  I  cannot  fully  conceive  of  the  complexity  of  three  dimensions   without  touching  it,  turning  it,  rota=ng  it,  breaking    it  by  accident  and  discovering  something,   making  a  new  connec=on  that  was  unable  to  be  seen.  I  created  this  design  with  no  drawing  at  all,   and  it  actually  helped  me  to  understand  how  to  create  space,  by  using  my  hands;  its  an  interac=ve   experience,  between  hands  and  mind,  it  doesn’t  start  in  one  and  then  move  to  the  other.  The   material  used  in  building  this  model  was  balsa  wood,  very  thin  and  briVle  over  large  areas  but   somewhat  stronger  over  short  areas.  Its  character  is  light,  sok  and  briVle,  but  when  you  build  it  in   short  pieces  with  =ght  angles,  it  appears  to  be  rough,  strong  and  heavy.  The  material    is  the   essence  of  the  human  experience.  In  life  we  are  souls  in  bodies,  our  very  existence  is  based  of   physicality,  our  meaning  and  cause  and  opportunity  for  living  and  how  we  live  is  our  bodies.   Everything  we  think  or  do  influences  the  way  our  bodies  grow  and  develop.  If  we  mistreat  our   bodies  we  perish,  so  we  must  be  careful  with  them.  The  physicality  of  architecture  is  no  different,   the  material  is  the  context  for  the  existence  of  the  idea.  The  buildings  existence  is  predicated  on   the  existence  of  its  material.  

Program: Loose  the  box,  what  is  lek  –  line  and  angles   Use  of  design  tools:  pure  model  making   Transforma=ons:  sculpture  like  forms  to  space  defining  forms   Ques=ons:  Once  you  have  rhythm,  how  would  you  like  to  play?   Strengths:  repe==on,  rhythm  (in  propor=ons  and  angle  of  three  triangular  sec=ons   mimic  each  other  yet  they  are  all  unique),  asymmetry,  scale,  legible  from  all  angles   (great  explora=on  of  3  dimensions   Weaknesses:  crak,  scale,  no  line  density   Conclusion:  building  with  your  hands  is  a  very  useful  tool  in  your  arsenal   Hypothesis:  play  more  with  the  concepts  of  rhythm  and  reple=on  using  the  same   materials  


• 

Itera=on 6  

Text ques=on:  Is  space  so  flexible  that  anything  can  happen  there?  How  do  you   achieve  this?          Emanuel  Kant  described  space  as  “a  priori”  which  roughly  means  a   given.  Or  in  the  work  of  architect  Filippo  Brunelleschi  the  concept  of  space  is  a   “con=nuous  void”.  Space  is  poten=al.  Space  is  empty  and  its  emp=ness  remains   even  aker  rooms  have  been  built,  the  art  comes  in  how  you  shape  that  emp=ness,   What  you  build  will  not  change  the  par=cles  of  nothingness  within  the  enclosures   you  create,  it  merely  shapes  the  context  for  anything  to  take  place  in  that  area.   Anything  can  happen  in  nature  because  anything  that  happens  happens  under  the   laws  of  nature  that  define  the  reality  of  the  space.  So  if  you  create  a  construc=on   that  interacts  with  the  physical  laws  of  nature,  anything  can  happen  there.  If  you  are   building  in  a  forest,  Mimic  the  spaces  of  the  forest  –  tall  structures  strong  and  sturdy   with  founda=ons  twice  the  size  of  branches  themselves,  open  space  throughout   with  varying  levels  in  vegeta=on  interac=ng  openly  beneath  I  lightly  draped  canopy.   What  can  happen  there  then?  Anything  you  can  imagine  –  the  space  is  open  and   each  level  interacts  uniquely  depending  on  where  you  are  in  this  labyrinth  of   openness  and  life  and  possibily.  (how  can  you  create  a  building  that  puts  oxygen   back  into  the  atmosphere)  (   Program:  Now  that  I  am  outside  the  box,  who  am  I,  where  did  I  come  from  and   where  do  I  go?   Use  of  design  tools:  buildng/modelling   Transforma=ons:  increase  in  complexity   Ques=ons:  What  is  defined  by  the  forms?  What  is  inside?  What  is  outside?   Analysis  of  Elements:  propor=on  of  repe==ve  diamond-­‐like  forms,  acute  angles   Strenghts:  repe==on,  dynamic  line  posi=ons  –  lots  of  diagonal  line  in  many  planes  in   many  direc=ons,  legible  from  many  angles  (  in  almost  infinite  compelity  and   varia=on  depending  on  POV   Weaknesses:  rhythm  is  present  but  not  con=nuous,  it  is  stopped  at  the  boVom,   ter=ary  elements  are  present  but  not  clear,  therefore  there  is  no  harmony,  r   harmonic  propor=on   Conclusion:  program  is  evolving  but  s=ll  in  explora=on  mode   Hypothesis:  start  to  focus  in  more  on  pinpoin=ng  the  quality  and  diving  into  it  


Itera=on 7  

• 

• 

• 

Program -­‐  My  goal  is  to  create  a  structure  that  –  through  its  form  –   inspires  people  to  look  within  themselves;  to  introspect.   Introspec=on  is  the  self-­‐examina=on  of  one’s  thoughts  and  feelings   (their  mental  state,  and  their  soul).  I  want  to  create  a  visual  hierarchy   of  forms  that  guide  the  eye  inward,  then  outward,  then  around,  then   inward  again,  in  a  process  that  happens  in  cycles,  with  intervals  of   =me  dictated  by  rhythms    in  the  form  and  structure.     I  want  to  create  depth  in  this  itera=on;  in  order  to  do  this  I  used   research  to  discover  the  idea  of  the  hypercube.  Now  there  is  space   within  space,  no  outside  and  inside.  It  is  a  4  dimensional  shape.  How   can     Text  ques=on:  How  do  you  dis=nguish  between  design  by  nature  and   design  by  humans?  As  Le  Corbusier  envisioned  it,  architecture  is  the   “masterly,  correct,  and  magnificent  play  of  forms  in  light”.  This  quote   suggests  implicitly  that  the  act  of  architecture  no  maVer  how   ar=ficial  it  may  seem  s=ll  interacts  with  the  sunlight,  without  the   sunlight  it  would  not  exsists,  or  at  least  we  would  not  be  able  to   perceive  it  from  a  distance  and  with  our  eyes.  So  the  “truth”  is  that   all  architecture,  all  tectonic  language,  no  maVer  what  dialect  it  is   speaking,  is  spoken  with  a  human  mouth  by  a  human  mind,  but  the   vibra=ons  that  move  the  air  that  becomes  the  sound  that  is  natural,   yet  it  is  manipulated  through  human  ac=on.  The  hypercube  is  a  form   that  has  come  out  of  our  mind,  yet  once  it  is  built  and  it  is  placed  into   the  world  it  becomes  a  part  of  nature,  because  it  interacts  with  the   light,  and  the  way  that  we  perceive  it  is  through  nature.  So  all   architecture  is  natural,  once  the  form  has  been  realized  in   constructed  material,  once  it  has  lek  the  eye  of  the  mind  and  has   entered  the  physical  world  to  be  perceived  and  experienced  through   the  eye  of  the  body,  within  the  natural  laws  of  the  physical  world.   (however  that  which  first  exists  radically  in  and  only  in  the  mind,   when  it  is  made  manifest  in  the  physical  world,  seems  supernatural.    


Itera=on 7   •  • 

•  •  •  •  • 

• 

•  • 

Program: convey  and  describe  and  create  the  experience  of  introspec=on  –  the  self   examina=on  of  the  heart  mind  and  soul   Use  of  design  tools:  research  on  hypercube,  sketching,  use  of  narra=ve  –  hypercube  is  a   window  into  a  world  within,  it  starts  out  natural  and  then  it  turns  and  seems  to  constrict   but  it  is  supposed  to  be  a  story  of  one  opening  a  window  inward  to  see  their  soul   Transforma=ons:  3  dimensional  to  4  dimensional   Ques=ons:  What  does  it  mean  to  be  within?   Elements:   Analysis:   Strengths:  complexity  of  ideas  translated  into  construc=on  through  research,  effec=vely   break  form  of  hypercube  while  s=ll  evoking  its  essence,  Hierarchy  –  inside  is  focal  point  –   outside  is  secondary  –  connects  from  inside  to  outside  can  be  ter=ary,     Weaknesses:  feels  confined,  no  ter=ary  element,  no  harmony,  some  rhythm  but  not   enough  consistent  repe==on,  acute  angles  communicate  intensity,  fear,  is  this  a  part  of   introspec=on?  –  yes   Conclusion:  beginning  to  understand  and  realize  program   Hypothesis:  Use  snap  shot  of  image  of  looking  through  the  window  to  start  your  processing   for    nest  itera=on  

At the  end  of  the  chapter  on  space,  the  author   discusses  the  context  of  architecture  in  poli=cal   context.  In  the  US,  the  more  money  there  is  the   more  crea=on  aVaches  on  to  it,  but  then  the   architect  designs  for  the  person  that  has   money  and  not  for  the  people.  In  communist   Russia  it  was  not  this  way,  they  designed   buildings  for  social  efficiency.  Then  it  takes  it  all   out  of  context  and  say  what  if  a  program  could   just  be  a  story,  a  narra=ve  and  that  is  what  it   truly  should  be.  The  narra=ve  of  the  people  it  is   created  for  (if  the  architect  is  self  centered  it  is   created  for  them,  if  he  is  not  and  he  is   conscious  it  is  designed  for  the  people    


Strengths –  line  rela=onships,   repe==ve  groups,  parallel  +   perpendicular  rela=ons   Weaknesses  –  propor=onal   rela=onships,  center  points,   rela=on  of  parts  to  whole  

Strengths –  curvalinear  spiraling   inward,  hierarchy  of  centerpionts,   repe==on  of  form,  eye  shape  –   (introspec=on     Weakness  –  placement  within   whole  (spiraling  outward  not  inward   alignments  too  wild  

Shapes –  acute  triangles,  irregular   quadrilaterals   Forms  –  diamonds  dimensionally   Rela=onship  w/  each  other  –   woven,  adjacent,  spiral  paVern   Alignments  –  perpendicular  lines   Center  points  –  central   quadrilateral,  its  corners   Parallel/perpendicular  rela=ons  –   lots  of  overlap,  no  right  angles,   but  concentric  turning   quadrilaterals   Repe==ve  groups  –  circula=ng   triangles  around  an  imperfect   square   Propor=onal  +  scale  rela=ons  –   inner  quad  is  1/3  of  outer  quad   Forms  -­‐  organic   Placement  in  whole  –  =ght  spacing   with  loose  outer  structure   Shapes  of  defined  forms  –  half   circles,  eye  shape,  irregular   polygons,  curvilinear  +  linear  lines   Alignments  –  curves  expanding  all   over  place   Center  points  –    1  primary,  3   secondary,  1  ter=ary   Parallel/perpendicular  rela=ons  –   curvilinear  and  straight  varia=ons  of   interrela=on  –  mirroring  curves   Repe==ve  groups  –  spiraling  half   circles  inside  irregular  polygons     Propor=onal  +  scale  rela=ons  -­‐    no   shape  repe==on  form  large  to  small   –  no  hierarchy  of  dimensionality     CONCLUSION:  transi=on  to   effec=ve  curvilinear  language,   s=ll  exploring,  yet  discovering      

Snap Shot  (1)   Shapes  –    mixture  of  organic  forms  with   acute  linear  form   Placement  -­‐    fragmented,  needs  more  of   a  paVern   Shapes  of  spaces  –  more  biomorphic,   free  flowing,  dynamic  (needs  more   inward  focus)  outer  bulbs  detract  from   central  focal  point   Alignments  –  moving  around  the  center,   perpendiculars  are  disconnected   Center  points  –    around  eye  shape  and   next  to  it  3-­‐4  secondary  –  1  ter=ary   Parallel/perpendicular  rela=ons  –  more   directly  connected   Repe==ve  groups  –  eye  bulbs  (not   enough  to  have  solid  repe==on   Propor=onal  +  scale  rela=ons  –  larger   lengths  curved  shapes,  smaller  more   sound  core     Forms–    conversing,  jumbled,     Placement  –  spiral  mo=on,  fluidity,   overlapping   Shapes  –  complex  biomorphic  shapes,   intricate,  interes=ng,  all  poin=ng   inward   Alignments  –  emana=ng  from  center,   curving  not  parallel   Center  points  –  1  primary,  3   secondary   Parallel/perpendicular  rela=ons  –   converging,  turning  into  center   Repe==ve  groups  –  smaller  internal   shapes,  larger  outer  repe==ve  shapes   (not  similar  enough  for  rhythm)   Propor=onal  +  scale  rela=ons  –  1:3   from  center  to  perimeter  (make  it  like   golden  ra=o  

Strengths –  bulb  forms,  biometric   converging  points   Weaknesses  –  repe==on  of   dissimilar  shapes,  no  focal  cert   points,  no  rhythm,  or  repe==on,  

Strengths –  spiral,  curved  shapes   poin=ng  inward,  solid   propor=ons,  slight  hints  of   repe==on,     Weaknesses  –  too  many   intersec=ons,  no  repe==on,   streamline  forms,  looks  too   much  like  shell  


Itera=on 8   Text  ques=on:What  is  essen=al  when  our  design  responds  to  nature?  Aside  from  these  responses,   what  are  other  ways  to  respond  to  nature  at  enhance  and  deepen  our  design?           •  Essesn=als   •    Organic  architecture  is  not  just  architecture  that  is  curvilinear  or  that  mimics  nature,  but  it  is   architecture  whose  rela=onship  between  material  and  form,  space  and  form,  are  interrelated  in  a   interac=ve  way.  In  the  mind  of  Fank  Loyd  Wright,  “a  building  was  organic  if  is  emerged  naturally   from  the  circumstances  of  its  crea=on”.  What  Wight  is  talking  about  here  is  most  raw  and  essen=al   essence  of  what  it  means  to  have  organic  architecture.  What  he  means  is  that  a  building  should   relate  to  the  weather,  the  soil,  the  climate,  the  people,  the  animals,  all  things  that  will  inherently   relate  to  the  building  whether  your  design  for  it  or  not.  However  if  the  architect  is  aware  of  these   things,  he  can  design  a  building  whose  form  material  and  func=on  interact  with  natural  processes   an  natural  condi=ons  around  it  so  that  its  very  existence  is  harmonious  with  nature  (not  that  it  just   mimics  a  shape  found  in  nature)  –  this  is  arbitrary.  In  Wrights  view  architecture  is  just  another  form   in  nature’s  ecological  system  and  hierarchy.  However,  it  is  my  believe  that  architecture  should   func=onally  interact  with  nature’s  hierarchy  of  ac=on  reac=ons,  forces  and  situa=ons,  not  just  in   form.   •  Deleuze  takes  this  idea  further  in  his  discussion  of  extended  and  intensive  forms.  He  argues  that   extended  form  (like  Plato’s  vision  that  all  form  exists  first  in  the  mind  of  God,  then  manifests   through  humans)  is  a  “naïve  illusion”  because  the  world  is  intensive,  “it  responds  to  forces,   temperature,  pressures,  speeds,  and  chemical  concentra=ons.”  To  Deleuze  architecture  is  a  intense   phenomenon,  whatever  is  built  and  constructed  must  withstand  and  interact  with  the  great  force   of  nature  around  it,  and  therefore  it  is  natural,  because  it  must  abide  by  these  forces  to  exists,  but   in  order  to  flourish  it  needs  to  harmonize  and  improve  it  scien=fic  and  biological  connec=on  with   ecological  systems  of  nature,  not  fight  them.     • 

Program:  I  want  to  create  a  design  that  conveys  introspec=on  through  its  design  language.  In  this  itera=on  I  want  to  keep  structures  small,  and  to  make  it  stronger.  I   want  to  begin  to  use  curvilinear  language,  and  my  utmost  goal  is  to  really  inspire  the  viewer/”experiencer”  –  the  one  you  is  either  looking  at  the  work  or  walking   through  it  if  it  were  life  size  -­‐  to  look  within  the  structure  and  as  a  result  have  them  feel  as  though  they  are  looking  within  themselves.     Use  of  design  tools'  used  the  tool  of  snapshot,  ver=cally  layered  charcoal  drawings  to  refine  my  design.  the  problem  with  the  ver=cal  is  that  It  only  exsists  in  one   plane.  I  used  these  drawing  extensively  to  analyze  elements  of  propor=onal  rela=onships,  alignments,  shared  centers,  parallel  or  perpendicular  rela=onships,   repe==ve  groups,  scale  rela=onships  between  elements.  Through  the  analysis  of  these  criterion,  I  discovered  that  the  use  of  a  converging  group  of  center-­‐points   could  be  an  important  unifier  in  manifes=ng  the  feeling  of  introspec=on  (a  mul=layered  focus  on  being  centered).     Transforma=ons:  rec=linear  to  curvilinear  language   Ques=ons:  What  doors  does  using  curvilinear  language  open?  How  does  it  change  the  way  I  can  communicate  introspec=on?  How  does  spiral  describe  =me,  with   respect  to  introspec=on   Strengths:  mul=layered  center  points  +  spirals,  creates  sense  of  withiness,  interconnectedness  ,  visually  complex,  glimpses  of  inten=onal  ordering  good  use  of  new   material  –  connec=ons.         Weaknesses  not  enough  repe==ve  groups,  no  differing  line  weights,  hierarchy  of  form  is  unclear,  design  is  not  readable  from  all  angles,    I  feel  I  could  have  put  in   more  effort  to  this  piece,  but  I  was  experimen=ng  with  a  new  material     Conclusion:  needs  more  inten=onal  ordering,  varying  line  weight,  and  more  focused  propor=onal  rela=onships,,  but  good  start,  you  are  gefng  closer  to  conveying   introspec=on  wiith  use  of  curvilinear  language  and  spirals   Hypothesis:  use  same  principles  and  apply  it  to  a  design  that  is  layered,  ordered,  and  varies  in  line  weight.  


Snap Shot  2   Pros  –,  propor=onal  rela=on  from  inner  spiral  to  outer,   concentric  spirals,     Cons  -­‐  shared  center  points,  conges=on  of  line  at  top  and   upper  middle  area   Pros  -­‐  more  rhythmic  top  center  point,  slightly  more,   harmonious  frame  structure  (repeated  forms),  layers  of   expression,  more  ordering   Cons  –  right  side  there  is  a  hick-­‐up  in  rhythm  and  fluidity,    

Pros –  more  visually  interes=ng  and  fluid  with  outer  jut   modified  to  curve  back  wards,  add  unity  to  the  form,   more  discernable  hierarchy   Cons  –  alignments  of  lines  running  across  top  middle   sec=on  could  be  at  a  different  angle,  

Pros –  approaching  clearer  ordering,  PST,  movement   beginning  of  outside  to  inside  flow   Cons  –  too  much  angular  change?  Ordering  s=ll  not  very     inten=onal  though  there  is  more  inten=on  that  the  last   snap  shots,      


Itera=on 9  

•  • 

• 

• 

Program: Communicate  introspec=on  using  3-­‐4d  curvilinear   communica=on.     Transi=ons:  From  2d  drawing  from,  3d  structure  to  glimpses  of   mimicking  4d  structure,  too  much  flatness  in  itera=on  8,  I  want   more  depth   Research:  Use  of  concept  of  Hyper  sphere  –  4  dimensional  sphere   (theore=cal)  –  communicate  extra  “within”  dimension  in  curvilinear   language.  A  hyper  sphere  or  a  n-­‐  sphere,  with  sub  sphere's  called   glomes,,  a  where  there  are  a  system  of  n-­‐dimensional  manifolds    of   constant  posi=ve  curvature,  so  there  would  be  all  types  of   interconnec=ng  curved  parts.   Ques=ons:  how  does  my  knowledge  of    hyper  sphere  change  my   perspec=ve  on  what  introspec=on  can  be,  and  what  it  is?  What  are   the  component  parts  of  introspec=on  or  the  glomes?        What  are   the  connec=on  between  this  research  and  your  piece  


Itera=on 9   •  •  • 

• 

•  • 

•  •  • 

Frame expression:  not  enough  webbing  or  meshing  to  suggest   surfaces  but  improved  structural  integrity  and  poten=al  for   more  structural  elements   Transforma=ons:     Ques=ons:  What  are  the  connec=ons  to  the  hyper  sphere?   How  does  this  help  us  understand  introspec=on?  (outside   moving  inward)  (feedback  said  people  thought  it  was  the   opposite  way.)  –  introspec=on  by  defini=on  is  internal  self   reflec=on,  that  it  is  not  based  on  external…  so  the  design   should  communicate  within-­‐ness  first,  as  primary   Elements:  larger  spiral  form  of  heavier  line  weight,  inner   sphere,  smaller  inner  sphere,  implied  larger  round  structure   suggested  by  edges  of  heavier  line  weight  elements,  sense  of   turning  inward  from  the  larger  line  weight  pieces  penetra=ng   sphere,  and  going  within  to  smaller  inner  sphere   Assessment:  how  does  this  support  program.  Idea  of  turning   inward  and  within-­‐ness   Strengths:  line  weight,  very  clear  and  inten=onal  hierarchy  of   form  established,  solid  propor=ons  from  very  big  to  very  small,   repe==on  but  no  rhythm  because  there  is  not  enough   varia=on  in  repe==ve  elements,  crak  –  strong,  bold  forms.   Weaknesses:  crak  –  could  be  cleaner,  Not  enough  varia=on,  no   frame  skeleton,  or  suggested  surfaces   Conclusions:  good  grasp  on  hierarchy  and  ordering,  now  focus   on  repe==on  with  varia=on  (so  much  poten=al  of  space  to   define   Hypothesis:  create  frame  expression  with  suggested  surface   and  star  to  create  repe==ve  forms  with  varia=on  


Itera=on 10   • 

•  •  •  • 

• 

•  • 

Program: create  refined  frame  expression  based  on   skeleton  from  itera=on  9  that  implies  surfaces;  that   expresses  introspec=on  through  discernable  interior,   exterior  and  “within”  spaces,  and  blends  and   connects  them   Use  of  design  tools:    Transi=ons:  From  somewhat  simple  and  regular  form   or  more  complex,  intricate  and  rhythmic  form   sketches:  explore  possibili=es  of  to  connect  different   parts  of  skeleton  to  achieve  flow,  +  rhythm  through   repe==on  with  varia=on   Ques=ons:  How  can  I  connect  the  larger  line  weight   pieces  from  itera=on  9  design  that  creates  a   con=nuous,  flowing  form,  from  pieces  that  are  quite   extreme  in  how  they  end  abruptly?  How  will  I  define   internal,  external,  and  within-­‐ness  in  the  form  and   structure  of  one  unified  form?     The  piece  to  the  lek  is  how  I  began  itera=on  10  by   unifying  the  external  implied  circle/sphere  around  the   endpoint  of  the  three  heavier  spiraling  extensions   from  itera=on  9,  by  turning  the  implied  into  the   explicit.   Strengths:  crak,  poten=al  for  connec=on  to  create   implied  surfaces,  change  in  propor=ons   Weaknesses:  less  dras=c  propor=onal  rela=onships,   complicate  legibility  of  form  


•  •  •  •  • 

•  •  •  • 

Itera=on 10    

Frame expression:  yes   Use  of  design  tools:   Elements:  original  skeleton,  added  ribbing   Transforma=ons:  Skeleton  to  implied  surfaces,     Ques=ons:  How  can  I  draw  focus  to  internal  first?  Then  what  should   exsist  around  it  as  a  connect  for  that  internal  focus?  Should   internalness  exist  within  a  shell  or  should  I  float  in  nothingess?  Does   inside-­‐ness  need  an  outside  to  be  defined  and  experienced  as  such?   Strengths:  Reple=on  with  very  gradual  varia=on  in  form,  creates   complicated  and  intricate  rhythms  of  many  tones  and  harmonies     Weaknesses:  At  some  angles  of  viewing  the  form  becomes  confusing   when  discerning  internal  space  from  external  from  within  space   Conclusion:  higher  level  of  rhythm  and  complexity    3  dimensional   space  achieved   Hypothesis:  experiment  with  different  skin  techniques  to  see  what   spaces  are  created  when  different  areas  are  filled  in  

Frame with  pantyhose:   Transforma=on:  implied  to  actual   surfaces   Ques=ons:  What  happens  to  internal   structure?  What  is  the  meaning  of  it?   Strengths:  Very  interes=ng  parabolic   surfaces  created,  external  form  is  less   confusing,  legible  from  all  angles   Weaknesses:  No  rendering  of  within   spaces   Conclusion:  Without  defining  inside   or  “within”    space  this  doesn’t   communicate  introspec=on     Hypothesis:  Try  covering  internal   parts  with  pantyhose  and  crea=ng   openings,  and  different  layers  of   enclose,  and  openneness  


Itera=on 11   •  •  •  •  •  •  • 

• 

•  • 

Program: create  sec=oning     Sec=oning:   Research:     Use  of  design  tools:   Transforma=ons:  Surfaces  back  to  implied  surface   Ques=ons:  How  can  using  a  sec=oning  approach  help  deepen  my   understanding  or  how  forms  can  communicate  or  trigger  introspec=on  in   the  experience?   Strengths:  Effec=vely  communicate  skin  and  translate  overall  skin  to   sec=oned  approach,  rhythm,  repe==on,  and  regularity  in  the  form  of  slowly   changing  sec=ons;  each  sec=ons  is  hollowed  out  to  create  interior  space   (hard  to  see  but  there   Weaknesses:  Crak,  somewhat  ordinary  –  what  are  other  ways  to  sec=on   (sec=oning  style  seems  to  ordinary,  kind  of  boring,  no  openings  to  look   within  the  form,  (this  is  where  introspec=on  could  be  implied…,  no  aVempt   it  seems  at  communica=ng  introspec=on  in  this  itera=on.     Conclusion:  I  have  grasped  concept  now  I  can  expand  on  approach   Hypothesis:  play  with  sec=oning  at  different  angles  and  create  openings  


Itera=on 12   •  •  •  •  • 

Program: use  sec=oning  more   crea=vely     Use  of  deign  tools:  sketches,  help   planning  or  specific  part  I  want  to   sec=on  at  certain  angles   Research:     Transforma=ons:  mul=  angled   sec=oning   Ques=ons:  How  can  using  a  sec=oning   approach  help  deepen  my   understanding  or  how  forms  can   communicate  or  trigger  introspec=on   in  the  experience?  (same  ques=on   lingers)..  What  does  different  angled   sec=oning  communicate?   –  Folds   –  Layers   –  Contras=ng  percep=ons  


• 

•  • 

•  • 

Inten=ons: Create  complexity,  windows  into   interior,  so  the  viewer  will  in  a  way  be   introspec=ng  to  the  piece,  (but  they  wont  be   physically  looking  at  themselves,  however  they   will  be  looking  at  empty  spaces  which  may   remind  them  of  something  within  themselves   Elements:  Different  angles  of  sec=oning,   openings,  perpendicular  sec=oning  at  openings,   use  of  foam  board   Strengths:  rendering  of  form  is  accurate  while   allowing  for  more  interac=ve  experience  with   space,  the  many  opening  are  windows  to  viewing   the  same  interior  space,  but  depending  which   angle  you  look  in  you  see  something  totally   different.     Weaknesses:  some  minor  details  in  crak  that   would  beVer  unify  figure.     Things  learned  about  sec=oning   –  – 

•  • 

Fun Useful  tool  or  re-­‐understanding  and  simplifying   form  

Conclusion: gefng  closer  to  introspec=on   communicate  through  sec=oning,  windows  and   interior  space   Hypothesis:  work  on  crea=ng  within  space  in  the   sec=oning,  also  work  try  using  more  repe==ve   sub  forms  in  work  

Itera=on 12  


Gesture Drawing  

1 2  

3

5 min   Pros  –  good   propor=ons     Cons  –  no  line   weight,  strokes  are   all  in  one  direc=on  

5 min   Pros  –  more  varia=on   in  stroke  direc=on,   beVer  change  in  line   weight   Cons  –  S=ll  very  even   strokes  unidirec=onal   at  boVom  right  

2 min   Pros  –  good  varia=on  in   direc=on,  stronger  gestural   strokes,  beVer  line  weight     Cons  -­‐    


Itera=on 13   •  • 

• 

• 

Tools: Narra=ve:  person  wandering  through  rooms,  eventually  comes   to  one  room  in  a  system  of  spiraling  rooms  with  windows  into   center  room,  then  once  that  person  enters  the  center  room   they  experience  some  form  in  the  rooms  structure  that  guides   their  eye  toward  their  own  chest  in  the  place  they  are  standing   Gesture  drawing:  helps  capture  emo=ons  of  introspec=on  –   quali=es  discovered  –  audacious,  light  yet  strong,  broad/wide,   muscular,  folding   Sketches:  structural  and  spa=al  outlay  


Itera=on 13  

•  •  •  •  • 

•  • 

Program: Find  a  deeper  expression  of  introspec=on   Ques=ons:  How  can  the  narra=ve  illuminate  the  design  which   illuminates  the  purpose  of  the  design?  How  does  sec=oning  make   this  process  easier?   Strengths:  Complex  ordering,  Rhythmic  ,  Repe==on  +  regularity,   Juxtaposi=on  of  forms,  pleasant  propor=ons  between  elements  and   within  whole  shape,  strong  structural  use  of  sec=oning   Weaknesses:  not  hollowing  out  the  cores  of  the  subunits,  this  would   allow  for  more  to  be  seen  –  does  it  sa=sfy  program?   What  do  I  know  now  about  introspec=on  that  I  did  not  know  before,   More  turning  in,  turning  around,  and  turning  within,  inside  spaces   defined,  outside  spaces  defined,  and  within-­‐  spaces  defined  and   harmoniously  related  to  whole   Conclusion:  very  strong  understanding  and  applica=on  of  design   principles  to  meet  program   Hypothesis:  Improve  crak,  and  intricacy  of  structure    


Itera=on 14   Program:  refinements   Ques=ons:  is   introspec=on  truly   this  spiraling  mo=on   Strengths:  fluidity  in   rhythm   Weaknesses:  poor   construc=on  and   crak   Conclusion:  Manage   my  =me  beVer  .  .    


Concept learning  Map  

Thomas Biba's Learning Portfolio  

my architecture 101 midterm assesment document

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you