So I continue with Poetics in Architecture. As the research evolves and I try to filter through different books, I stumble upon the definition of Pragmatism (concerned with practical consequence).
I thought about the role pragmatism has in what new Architecture and the creation of the unprecedented in Poetics should be. In the creation of the Poetics we cannot think about the reality or the pragmatic, we must envision Architecture with metaphor and the surreal. It is this kind of thinking that would allow us to create poetic space. The poetics within a metaphor is a tool that helps us create individual space, just like a work of Art that is created to be interpreted individually. On a thought on individuality today I was thinking about Art. Why is it that Van Gogh did not try to duplicate "The Starry night"? or DaVinci "La Mona Lisa"?
I still don't have an answer, but a thought is that they don't create art with money in their mind, okay maybe not all of them, even if they are commissioned something new comes out. Every piece of Art is different from one another, so why do we as people want to buy structures that are similar? Where is the poetics that the individual structure will create? Where I live I have heard stories that people are more comfortable buying a spanish revival home because they know is familiar. How do they know they are not missing out on something.
On a colleague's blog, our Studio professor said, "A building solves problems; it allows me to move from here to there. A piece of architecture does this and so much more. It allows me to consider my place in the world, in history, in urbanity, and any number of situations". I think what he said is brilliant, because is exactly what I have been trying to say about why sometimes the meaningful becomes utilitarian, a building should not just solve problems.
A house on the side of the road with four boards up is nothing more than just shelter, it sure has meaning to the occupant, however when anyone just builds or we allow developers to build repetitive structures then its use is nothing more than the house on the side of the road. To some, protection from the rain is enough, but life is so much more, so why settle for this. Even the cave formation was different.
Architecture though Poetics should speak of itself or a space, tell a story, have individualism, push Architecture to something more than just solving a problem. Here is a question to ask yourselves, Why are we trying to design a store that is different from anything else in the square? Why not take Trinity Church, duplicate it and call it a store? Do you as an Architect visualize a smile from a toddler experiencing your store or do you think it looks like that because its cool? From the walls to the screens, everything is important.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Eddie,
I just want to say thank you for all the insight and suggestions this semester. Your last paragraph of this post is an example of what I am thanking you for. I feel you have really pushed many of us further in both studio and theory.
I completely agree that architecture is so much more. I loved Ted's comment as well. This is my question though. How do we do this? As a profession we are always facing people outside of our profession and in our profession who are against these ideas. They think that Architects are just overated and that we don't have any original ideas. How do we get them to see that we do and that we don't just want to stick up a box that is there to serve function only? Also, designing a poetic piece of architecture will cost more in detailing. How do we get them to see that we can scale back the building and still spend the same amount? Can we convince our clients to scale back? Everyone seems to believe that bigger is better in today's society. How can we change this perception?
Jaclyn,
I am humble by your words and honored to take on this Master's of Architecture challenge with all of you. :-)
In my attempt to answer your question on how we do this, my best answer is that we are already preparing ourselves to do so. Meaning, we are pursuing a Master degree in Architecture because we are either passionate about the career or in love with Architecture. I think the more we educate ourselves and learn, the more we will be able to push the envelope and therefore convincing the public should be less challenging.
In regards to the poetic costing more, I don't think it has to cost more, is how much imagination we have with how we detail and use materials. If you get a chance, take an hour to watch in you tube a Charlie Rose interview of Peter Eisenman and The Aronoff Center. If you go to you tube, type: "Peter Eisenman - The future of Architecture", you'll enjoy it.
Clients, "The bigger,the better", hmmm, I wonder if the economy is going to give us a hand with this one, it did in the late 80's when a lot of corporate lobbies were like a marble stone quarries and then they seem to ease down.
On my thesis I write about the wall, glass, doors and a thought came to mind when you mention bigger places. Is the solidity of walls the result for wanting to build bigger? Perhaps the feeling of enclosure made people want to have bigger places because of the thick skin? I feel Frank Lloyd Wright's houses are poetic in nature and always feel intimate at the entry door and then its an explosion of the space. The use of glass gives that feeling of openness that people are probably looking for.
I think to change the perception of society in regards to space, we as Architects should research in sociology or anthropology for this answer. I don't know if its a feeling of superiority or necessity to build a bigger place.
Post a Comment