Does architecture insert itself into culture or is culture inserted to architecture?

             In “Preexisting conditions and issues of contemporary building practice” Ernesto Rogers thoroughly explains his “new program for architecture” from a rationalist perspective. Rogers is advocating that designers, “…insert the needs of life into culture and conversely, to insert culture into everyday life: this is the task of the architect…” (Rogers) I found this particular relationship between life, culture, and architecture to be interesting. I began to question what element in this complex relationship is applying the most force upon the others? Before any connection can be made we must first look back to the creator of the form, the architect.

An architect designs a form based on their own perception of what culture is asking for.  Rogers states in his essay, “Forms must convincingly document the subtlest ethical claims of collective and individual man, continuing the ancient discourse.” (Rogers) Representing the collective and the individual creates a problem for the architect. Culture cannot be defined by a single idea because it is composed from very different parts. Within any culture there are many subcultures: from politicians to anarchist, religious to atheist.  So the question becomes not whether architecture or culture is imposing on each other but how to impose them in a “convincing” form.

            According to Rogers the solution to the design problem is to look at every question in a different context, “One who today confronts a creative problem must insert his own thought into objective reality, which each time presents itself in terms of its own interpretation…” Architects should design according to the context of the project. This context is what makes a building specific and natural to its environment. Rogers believes that context can be found in the history of a place, “…the events of the past find their reason in the coherent consistency of the original acts that have determined them… the present is, in its turn, an original creation. That which, however, disintegrates history unifies it in a sense of continuity whereby the past is projected into present occurrences and the latter are joined together in finding their roots in anterior facts.” When architecture is rooted in context it is culture.

Ernesto Nathan Rogers, "Preexisting Conditions and Issues of contemporary Building Practice,"from Architecture Culture       1943-1968: A Documentary Anthology, edited by Joan Ockman (New York: Columbia Books of Architecture/Rizzoli,     1993) 200-204.

What comes first: Form or Function?

The process an architect takes to achieve a form or design spaces in architecture will define their style of architecture. The whole stylistic nature of architecture comes from the architect’s particular method of creating. What and architect values most will always take precedence when deciding on a final form for a building.

In the early 19^th century the technology of constructing skyscrapers was advancing and becoming more popular. In his article “The Tall office Building Artistically Considered,” Louis Sullivan talks about the idea of form fallowing function. He states in the article:

“It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic,

Of all things physical and metaphysical,

Of all things human and all things super-human,

Of all true manifestations of the head,

Of the heart, of the soul,

That the life is recognizable in its expression,

That form ever follows function. This is the law. “ (Sullivan)

The idea that form follows function conveys that the architectural shape of a building should be directly related to the program or purpose of the building. The skyscrapers in Chicago designed by Sullivan were an excellent example of his motto “form fallows function,” because they were mostly void of any ornamentation. The buildings Sullivan designed were very direct about there purpose.

            New ideas about the roll of form and function began to arise from the modernist movement, that began to question Sullivan’s method of designing buildings.  Louis Kahn in particular had a very different idea about where form is derived from. According to Kahn “what a thing wants to be” creates form apposed to the function of the thing creating the form. Design is “how” the form is achieved. Kahn believed that “A space in architecture shows how it is made.” (Kahn) He often achieved this idea by allowing the structure of a building to show through. To khan steel and concrete were more than just necessary structurally but aesthetically as well.

Louis I. Kahn, "Architecture is the Thoughtful Making of Spaces," from Architecture Culture 1943-1968: A Documentary Anthology, edited by Joan Ockman (New York: Columbia Books of Architecture/Rizzoli, 1993) 270-272.[textbook]

Sullivan, Louis H. The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered. Lippincott's Magazine, 1896. Print.

"This I believe: architecture should . . ."

            In Architectural History we learn about the primitive hut; the first attempt at architectural ideas. These simple dwellings were founded on nature and built by the people that would inherently live there. I find the idea behind the primitive hut to be attractive not only because it laid the foundation for architecture but it gave the builder supreme architectural authority. The builder understands what is desired for their dwelling more than anyone else could. This direct connection between building and builder is the spice that makes architecture interesting.

Fast foreword two thousand years, to a culture that no longer has a direct connection to their dwellings. Our culture relies on the creative talent of architects to design their environment in a responsive way. In a since the responsibility of the builder (architect) has greatly increased. Instead of constructing a dwelling solely for their own purposes, the builder must accommodate for the needs of many.

The personal convictions, of any architect will show up in their work. If the people who occupy the building can feel these convictions it is an indication of a skilled and rigorous architect.  As an architect student I am constantly thinking about what my preliminary architecture is advocating. I find that inspiration comes from ones own character. We base our design according to issues that are important to us. My personal ambition for architecture relates to a building’s sentimental value in relation to its occupants, a strong connection to nature, ability to cultivate social interaction, and to be an expression of one’s culture. To epitomize these characteristics I believe architecture should be driven by the human experience.

            When referring to sentimental objects one may think of childhood toys or personal gifts given by a loved one, but could a building not also provoke the same emotions? Architecture has the ability to shape the way we feel by the mood and ambience the building creates. A great example of architecture creating a particular mood is the Jewish Museum in Berlin, Germany by Daniel Libeskind. The museum is dedicated the WWII holocaust victims and there families. Libeskind creates an overwhelming sense of atmosphere in the museum by controlling the position and amount of light entering the building. One gallery space in particular emphasizes the loneliness felt by Jews trapped in concentration camps, by leading visitors through a narrow corridor, which is solely lit by natural light cascading through a high slit in the wall.  Libeskind states, "I believe that this project joins architecture to questions that are now relevant to all humanity. To this end, I have sought to create a new Architecture for a time, which would reflect an understanding of history, a new understanding of Museums and a new realization of the relationship between program and architectural space. Therefore this Museum is not only a response to a particular program, but an emblem of Hope."  It is evident in this project that architecture can people feel for others, but also question how people feel about themselves.

The presence and integration of nature is an important aspect of the human experience. A building is imposing its self onto a site and in return it should become apart of the ecology of that site. The approach of a building starts from the moment a person begins on their destination and ends when they have passed through the threshold of the building. The famous Villa Savoye by Le Corbusier developed the approach of the building from miles away. Corbusier intents travelers to arrive from the busy city of Poissy, outside of Paris. As travelers become closer to Villa Savoye the city life begins to determinate into the background. Once on the country road leading to Villa Savoye one can start to see the building through the passing trees. On the final approach of the vacation home, the forest opens up to reveal the house in a center clearing. This gradual change in setting from urban to rural creates a mental transformation for the individual visiting. Corbusier develops this transformation to shape the type of human experience he desires.   

The approach of a building and its surrounding site is only part of the roll nature plays in the human experience. It is evident, to me, that people find symbolism between religion (higher power) and nature.  Nature is a force that cannot be controlled by man and the same is true for the eventual death we all must experience.  So it seems expected that natural elements would be accentuated in religious buildings.  The Church on Water designed by architect Tadao Ando is a clear example of nature and religious symbolism merging together. The church on the water is located in the rural part of Tomamu, Hokkaido, Japan. After a short walk visitors arrive at the site where they descend a staircase, on level with a roof pond, into the chapel.  Ando replaces the front wall of the chapel with a view of the surrounding pond. With this simple notion Ando is representing the “creator” as the giver of nature.  By placing the retaking pond on the roof Ando is blurring the line between what is natural and what is man made. In addition to using natural elements to appeal to the human experience Ando states, “When I design buildings, I think of the overall composition, much as the parts of a body would fit together. On top of that, I think about how people will approach the building and experience that space.” I believe that Ando is dead on when compares the parts of a human body to the parts of a building. If a body part is missing from the whole then the rest of the body will cease to function.

            If Architecture can stimulate an interaction with a higher power, I believe that it is quite possible that architecture can cultivate human social interaction. A building’s shape and program can become a social lubricant that makes people feel more comfortable in social situations. For instance a large room with an elevated stage or podium is a lot more menacing to some than a smaller conference room where people are arranged in a circle. By designing the size, shape, and temperament of a space architects can elevate or increase the level of social engagement. Frank Lloyd Wright used a simple application of this effect when designing his own home.  As apart of the front entry Wright designed a “C” shaped entry that directed guests to the sides of the living room. This simple movement off the center axis allowed guests to enter the room indirectly and casually.  On the opposite social spectrum buildings such as dorms, hotels, and gyms want to provide a sense of gathering and social interaction. It is important that architecture habilitate social interaction when it is needed and not isolate people from the group.  Stadiums are a great example of how architecture has the ability to gather thousands of people into one place and still maintain order and function.

            Architecture expresses who we are as a culture. Buildings are one of the largest man made objects and the footprints they leave behind define the people who create it. Often times the form of a building or site gets transformed into a patriotic symbol for a nation. The United States is full of buildings that have become an icon for the western way of life. The world trade center was symbolic of pride for the US so it became a target for terrorist aggression.  Buildings become mental monument that represents our achievements as a nation. We look at the advancements make in construction and we see how far we have come.  In other cases a building can represent a culture’s heritage, for instance The National Assembly Building of Bangladesh, designed by Louis Khan. Even though Khan was an American architect he designed the building with respect to Bangladesh culture. By creating an icon that the people of Bangladesh honor, khan helped bridge the gap between Eastern and western culture.

I believe that Khan sought the essence of human experience during his career as an architect; in regards to humans as a finite material khan says, “All material in nature, the mountains and the streams and the air and we, are made of Light which has been spent, and this crumpled mass called material casts a shadow, and the shadow belongs to Light.”

Being Green Or Making Some Green?

     Going green, Eco-friendly, sustainable, these are terms that are often thrown around in the design world. Essentially the idea behind "going green" is to lessen our impact on the environment. There are many products out there that advocate being "green" but in actuality do very little for the environment. These companies are riding the "gone green train" all the way to the bank. Sometimes determining what is fake and what is legitimate can be an arduous task. To be a well informed consumer you must go to the source of the product and analysis their motives for being "green"

     William Mcdonough is a world renowned advocator of sustainable design. He coined the term "cradle to cradle" which means designing products that can be used over and over again essentially with out producing waste. Mcdonough suggests that industries innovate the way their products are made so that the product can be broken down an used somewhere else. The concept behind "cradle to cradle" design has been widely excepted in the green community, which has made Mcdonough a powerful and wealthy man.

     Since his popularity has taken off Mcdonough has promoted his green campaign to big industries, government organizations, and others all over the design field. According to Danielle Sacks, author of "Green Guru Gone Wrong", Mcdonough is turning green design into a lucrative business. Sacks states, "Every time he certifies a product, whether as simple as a diaper or as complex as a new office cubicle, he records each of its ingredients' "cradle to cradleness" in a master database. Ultimately, his plan is for the data to become a sort of Human Genome Project for chemicals." In this articular Sacks exposes how Mcdonough doesn't always fallow his own teachings and his validity maybe questionable. I believe that Mcdonough is ultimately trying to change the wasteful nature products are made, but as Danielle Sacks is implying we must be careful to blindly fallow a green guru.


William Mcdonough: cradle to cradle design

Cleared vs Constructed Site: Which Has More Architectural Merit?

     Should the building's site be treated as a blank canvas for the architect to paint on, or should the site influence the end result of the building? Carol J. Burns states in "On Site: Architectural Preoccupations" that there are two ways architects deal with the issue of site: a cleared site or a constructed site.

    The cleared site ideology is an "assumption that the site as received is unoccupied, lacking any prior constructions and empty of content." The land is cleared to make a foundation for the building and beyond that the site has no more function. This blank site idea is often implemented in places where there is no history of construction to link up with. In my opinion when the architect chooses to clear the site they are disregarding the natural elements that already exist as part of the site. By leveling a site the architect has now made the building Mobile. A building with a neutral site can be picked up and place anywhere. The site becomes servant to the building. Contrary to a cleared site a building that responds to the forces of a site uses the constructed site method.

     A building that forms a relationship to the site becomes apart of its natural environment. The building is no longer a foreign object that is solely created by the architect but becomes a combination of architect and site forces. The materials used to construct a building should also be considered in correspondence to the site. using materials that are common to the region is more economically responsible due to amount of fuel used in transporting those materials.
     I believe that it is the responsibility of architects to improve upon the existing site not degrade it by demolishing its inhabitants. The buildings we create should invoke the spirit of the site.

Man VS computer: incorporating digital design into the SOA

    It is evident that architecture around the world is effected by new developments in digital design. Just open any current architecture magazine and you will see renderings of proposed projects so realistic that it could be mistaken for a photograph. digital design is great for showing the end results of a project, but it is not so great at expressing how that idea developed. Digital modeling is being introduced into schools of architecture as early as first year, in some cases. It is important that as students we learn the basics first before entering into the 3D world of digital modeling.
     Learning how to draw a line is the first step for an architecture student. Hand drafting allows you to physical see how thick and dark a line should be, where as on a computer it is imposable to really know until the drawing is printed. Also hand drafting is essential to setting up the underlying geometry in a building. When you run lines longer than is needed it helps set up a grid that other elements can connect to. The background experience that hand drafting gives a student enables them to use the same skills in 2D drafting programs like and Autocad and Bentley Microstation.
    Similar to hand drafting, building models by hand gives you the ability to physically perceive the project in a way that the computer cannot. The scale of a model is easier to distinguish when it is based on units that are physically comparable. A model designed in Rhino is based on vector information which is easily changed and can seem to lose its proportion. When students are hand crafting a model there is a tendency to use certain media to represent different elements of the design. This is especially useful in the beginning stages of design because patterns of materials are created, which can lead to organization. So it is clear that hand drafting and modeling is extremely important to the development process, but as architect students we must stay current with technology in order to survive in such a cut throat profession.
      There is a lot to be said for the roll of digital design in architecture. If we did not have digital modeling capabilities Frank Gehry would have to stop crumpling up pieces of paper to make buildings. Software makes the lives of architects easier, by taking out some of the repetitive steps. It can make our drawings look sexy and appealing to clients, which is helpful in our current time of architectural recession. I believe that only when we fully understand the basics of design can we then explore new technology that will essentially exalt those same basic design principles.

"Beauty is in the phi of the beholder"

     When a person sees a building for the first time it is a natural reaction to judge it's beauty. This sense of beauty is atributed to our idividual perseption. As architect students we are tranied to analysis a building further than our own personal taste. We may not like the way a building looks on the outside but we can absorb other qualities of a building that are beautiful. So what is beauty exactly?
     Beauty is often related to human physical attraction. This quality of attractiveness can be broken down into a phenomenon found in nature.  The golden ratio, or phi, is a mathematical constant that is used in art, architecture, fashion, music, geometry, and many other facets because it always produces harmonious proportions. The human body is a prime application of phi. For instance the golden section, which is based on the golden ratio, gives order to our face. Our eyes, nose, chin, and mouth all corrospond to the golden ratio. When a person smiles it makes their face more inline with the golden ratio opposed to a frown which has the negative affect.  Even the ear uses the Fibonacci spiral, another variation of the golden ratio, to obtain it's shape. The attractiveness we find in other people has the same mathematical basis for the attractiveness we find in architecture.
     Architecture atributes a majority of its beauty to proportions and order. Architecture must use proportion somewhat different than that of painting or sculpure; architecture must consider the human scale. For with out human occupancy what value does architecture have? Lewis Kahn compairs architectural beauty to poetry, he says "Beauty is an all-prevailing sense of harmony, giving rise to wonder; from it, revelation. Poetry. Is it in beauty? Is it in wonder? Is it revelation?" I believe that any form of architecture has the potential to be beautiful, but great architecture must instill wonder and revelation to those who embody it.

I am a man NOT a number! - viewing architecture through human perception

           Often times when I am at parties with other architecture students we get into our own little world and discus the intricacies of architecture. Some times we will discuss the current project we are working on for studio, we use words like architectonic, datum, and functional space vs poche space. when other people over hear what we are talking about they call us "pretentious assholes" or "architecture nerds." What people say about us may be true or untrue, but one thing is certain: as architect students we must not forget whom and for what purpose we design buildings for.
           Of course the knowledge we learn in architecture school is vitally important to our future careers but that knowledge alone will not make us good architects. It is my opinion that a good architect must have a strong understanding of the human condition. What kind of space makes us as humans feel safe at night, exited to come home, or comfortable after a long day? Pallasmaa say's "It is time that we considered whether forms or geometry in general can give rise to architectural feeling. Are forms the real basic elements of architecture at all? Are even such elements of building such as walls, windows or doors the real units of architectural effect?"I believe that the real unit of architectural effect is a building's ability to provoke a sensation or mood.
 

Vitruvius: The Education of an Architect

         Matthew Frederick, author of 101 Things I learned In Architecture School, said "An architect knows something about everything. An engineer knows everything about one thing." I believe that Vitruvius was trying to emphasis this theory in "The Education of an Architect." Vitruvius goes into great detail why an architect must be well rounded in academics. He starts by listing the obvious qualities architects must have: ablity to write, draw, do geometry, have knowlage of history; then he discribes some qualities that may seem outlandish to archetectural education. Amonst these qualities Vitruvious lists knowledge of music, medicine, law, and astronomy. Vitruvius argues that these qualities are just as important to an architect as his ablity to draw.
          Vitruvius's reason behind an architect having a liberal education is that "An architect ought to be an educated man so as to leave a more lasting remembrance in his treaties." An architect's work, no matter what it is, will have a greater significance in relation to man, if he has worldly knowledge. By studying astronomy an architect can accurately predict the sun's pattern in relationship to his buildings.  By studying medicine an architect will be aware of such things as water quality and unhealthy climates in which to build. By studying music an architect will understand rhythm, acoustics, and in vitruvius's case the correct pitch of a cable on a catapult.
          The description of an architect's education, as Vitruvius sees it, is as true in 25 BCE as it is in modern day architecture firms. Matthew Frederick sums up Vitruvious's theory by stating "An architect must know enough about each discipline to negotiate and synthesize competing demands while honoring the needs of the client and the integrity of the entire project."

Response To The Problem of Architecture.

 After a thorough read of "The problem of Architecture" I found that Scruton raised some important questions about architectural theory. First off what is the difference between architectural theory and architectural aesthetics? WBDG.org (whole building design guide) describes aesthetics as "the branch of philosophy which studies concepts of beauty." WBDG goes on to say that aesthetics are "theories of beauty that vary over time and reflect preferences which, when widely agreed upon are called taste, and which also reflect more basic currents of thought in societies." In my opinion aesthetics are the center point of what architectural theory is based on. In addition to distinguishing theory from aesthetics Scruton asks what is aesthetic preference in a purely philosophical stand point? Why do we as humans value particular aesthetic qualities over another? I believe that our aesthetic preferences are what make us human. Each person has there own set of beliefs and will therefor have different inclination to what is aesthetically beautiful. 


In this exert Scruton talks about the dangers of treating architecture like sculpture. By evaluating architecture only from its exterior skin you are robbing the building of its representational value. The program of the building should be where all ideas about the design start. A building that is aesthetically pleasing but fails to meet the functional qualifications is worthless. To conclude a building must be scrutinized on both its aesthetic and its functional qualities in order to insure a solid design.