>>>>>intuitive praxis and pensive production
Sanford Kwinter
>>>>>openings
This term the teaching
objectives of the Bachelor Program for the 2nd and 3rd year will focus on
different approaches to openings.
”(...) The snow crystal is different. Its genesis is dynamic and can be situated initially at the convergence of three distinct fluxes: mica and mineral particles; a moisturesaturated field; and a thermal flow of heat exchange. One does not know in advance where or when such a crystal will begin to nucleate or form, but one knows it will emerge- apparently spontaneously- from a flux or convergence of flows, not in a prepared form or space. The form of the crystal, however, is not fixed from the beginning it is merely an incarnated singularity, a speck of dust-ice, that has been carried to a new level where it interacts with higher-order flows- gravity, wind, barometric pressure, humidity, other silicate dust, water, crystals, and thermal and even acoustic flows, plus electrical and magnetic gradients. All of these conditions vary continually in relation to themselves and affect the snowflake's trajectory. The crystal does carry some fixed information along with it- its preestablished molecular structure, developed within a rigid tetrahedral lattice of hydrogen and oxygen atoms, determines the even formation of hexagonal plates with six "inflections" or surface asperities.(...)”
Sanford Kwinter
KWINTER, Sanford: Architectures of Time. Toward a Theory of the Event in Modernist Culture, MIT Press paperback edition, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2002, pg.26-29
It is quite obvious that architecture is no longer interested in auto-referenced objects. Not only did architecture gradually become subject-oriented— prioritizing the experienced—, but it also got inscribed in a very complex network of relationships. Our thinking about the relation between the human being and the environment— initiated by phenomenologists— turns to everyday reality as a base of observation and action. Thus, the definition of experienced is not to be attributed to merely subjective feelings, of a merely psychological reality. It is also related to a space based on vital relationships, a space in which our life takes place, a space that is not a neutral, static medium, but one full off meanings, possibilities and suggestions. Thus, the aim is to stress on instrumental investigation of our surroundings and its spatial, historical, social, environmental and climatic factors, reading the inherent possibilities of the place and understanding that it is also important to consider all the existing conditions— also those regarding the user, program, function or construction in particular. The question is how these issues can be used as the matter of the project and processed spatially.
The aim is to respond to this question by exploring the complexity of the architectural process through mutual —direct and indirect— interaction between analysis and synthesis, theory and practice, doing and making, representation and communication, the analogue and the digital, the subjective and the objective, the natural and the artificial, the material and the immaterial, reality and fantasy… Likewise, by thinking relationships— even those based on an awareness of dichotomies— between the phenomenal world and noumenal world, between our personal experiences and the collective ones; it is an interesting challenge.
The unit 2+3 d is to be conceived as a laboratory based on heuristic approach, phenomenological methodology and pragmatic verification. It leads to the work and study method, which emphasises experimental approach as well as investigation, critical thinking and discussion as parts of the development process, where there is a place for both the individual projects and the projects that emerge from a process of collective dialogue and collaborative enquiry. But this laboratory is far from what is commonly considered as a hermetically sealed space of scientific investigation. It is a contingent space, open and responsive to external influences [1]. Thus, a spreading network of connections and references is to be developed by incorporating workshops, theory seminars, lectures, current cultural agenda, etc. to the programme. The main goal is to stimulate an attitude of explorer with the capacity of discovering and unravelling places, habits or phenomena, and the ability to question and wonder.
The crucial final stage in this approach is to be able to transform what seems to be evident into something extraordinary, to replace the catalogue of the predetermined with a reflexive and tacit knowledge. The activity of the unit 2+3 d is based on the assumption that the architectural practice is a heterogeneous assemblage of knowledge, skills, experiences, intuitions, desires, reasonings, references etc. rather than the application of prescriptive methods.
Structured around a series of sequential exercises— of different scales and duration— the research and project development lead to the understanding of the architectural production as a cumulative and transformative process. The studio focuses on analytical and creative thinking through experimentation with both manual and digital techniques, in order to stress the importance of architectural representation, beyond the usual plan and section— although these are both crucial—, thus developing what the French philosopher Jacques Rancière denominates pensiveness [2]— a combination of different ways of representation, a narrative intertwinement, where different mediums exchange their power. In this way, drawings, diagrams, maps, pictures, movies, models and one-to-one prototypes are used as the means of documenting processes, articulating ideas and their communication to the exterior. Likewise, it raises the interesting question of whether only visual data of architecture can be transmitted. How to represent and communicate what is invisible? How architecture is converted into medium? Moreover, if we consider space to be a living and changing environment (also affectively composed) and materiality as an active element that triggers action and both corporal and emotional engagement, then we should think about other representational ontologies as being able to evoke effects and sensations, to re-enact the experiences. The aim is thus to reduce a distance between the experiential and sensorial multiplicity existing in our day-to-day life and the graphic methods that allow to synthesize and to express our thoughts. Therefore, experiments on the different forms of notation and representation are to be carried out continuously during the research and project developments.
Architectural space is to be imagined, formed, communicated, fabricated, perceived and experienced. Bearing this in mind, space-generating strategies will be explored in both conceptual assumptions and physical techniques deployed in the process, focusing on that conclusive moment when the speculative re-engages with the everyday world of experience. It also allows to explore the relationship between doing and making. Through the overlapping of conception and production, the aim is to offer an understanding architecture, as an experience of the process, which leads to experiencing the space, where thinking is converted into action and action into construction, bridging the gap between abstract thoughts and built structures and removing the existing dichotomy between the academic projects and the reality. It is also about regaining consciousness of our body, of the time, of the matter and our limits and forces.
[1] Here the definition of laboratory formulated by the French theorist Bruno Latour should be evoked- see:
LATOUR, Bruno, "Give me a Laboratory and I will raise the World", in KNORR-CETINA, K. and MULKAY, M. (eds.), Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science, London: Sage, 1983, pages 141-170.
[2] RANCIÈRE, Jacques, “La imagen pensativa” in RANCIÈRE, Jacques, El espectador emancipado. Ellago Ensayo, Castellón, 2010, pages 109-129 (original Edition: Le spectateur émancipé. La Fabrique éditions, 2008)
The fall semester is to
be devoted to a series of investigative probes as it is understood as a
practice-based research. The unit 2+3 d addresses investigation
as a creative process, encouraging experimentation and the invention of
different methodologies of examination and representation.
The spring semester is to
be focused on the implementation of the research in the project development.
No comments:
Post a Comment