It is generally thought that the plan is a means for describing lifestyle. The fundamental principle of this descriptive technique is division. It is thought that the lifestyle inside a house is divided with the device of “walls.” Therefore, if only the elements called “walls” are picked out, and given an expression in which they are emphasized, people may understand the lines on a drawing that indicate the “walls” as describing the essence of a house. Yet should a house be “walls”? Why can we not describe a house just by furniture? Why can we not describe a house just by tableware? Or what about a descriptive method using only floor textures? As the floor is the only component that the human body directly touches (actually, there are also doorknobs and toilet seats), if we were to describe a house by a technique of scanning with the body, the house would be described as a collection of textured floors. Or it would also be possible to describe a house in terms of air temperature, or in terms of malodorous places due to wind flows. Why have I become so skeptical with regard to the descriptive method of walls? It is because I feel a sense of unease with the division of lifestyle, and the corresponding methods of spatial division. The cause might lie in devices such as mobile phones, which invalidate spatial divisions, and might also lie in the transformation (the becoming-amorphous) of interpersonal relationships and family relationships. Or, perhaps the “lifestyle” of the person that was the initial premise for the “division of lifestyle” disappears during the era of building a house. Because a person perhaps builds a house for somewhat distinct purposes, if this is investigated more thoroughly, the house, including every “thing,” rather than being something made for some particular purpose could also be said to somehow become a manifestation of its era. Taking a broad view of all of this, I am interested in a plan-less condition.
Kengo Kuma. Brief for Shenkenchiku Residential Design Competition “the plan-less house”.
See japan-architect.co.jp/english
The diagram might offer a method by which we can become “plan-less”.
The diagram, “functions as an instrument of visualization and organization, exempt
from the inviolability of finalized form. The diagram represents an open, generative
process of design that promises to mediate between the disordered complexity of the
information society and the demands of architecture”. (Confurius. G 2000, p 5)
diagram:
noun, a drawing giving a schematic representation of the appearance or structure of
something. verb, (diagrammed, diagramming; US diagramed, diagraming) represent by
means of a diagram.
Compact Oxford English dictionary retrieved from http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/diagram?view=uk
1: Locate a diagram or series of diagrams that you find interesting. (It can be a diagram
on any subject/material). Copy the diagram, in colour if it uses colour. Reference the
source of the diagram. Bring the copy of the diagram to studio on Thursday at 9:00am.
2: Make a series of diagrams of your home. You could consider: density of occupation, things
that you touch and registrations of pressure, temperature, light intensity, residues, moisture, activity patterns, live/work, zones, density of electromagnetic waves, the accumulation and dispersal of materials. You could also look outside you home and diagram parameters that you inhabit that sit outside the walls of the house such as mobile and broadband networks and utility networks that service your house.
The diagrams can be 2D and/or 3D. They must be rigorous and exploratory. The visual language of the diagram must be carefully considered. Also consider your methods of data collection and compositional elements such as sheet size and sequence.
Diagram pin up Thursday 31 July, 9:00am.
Reading list:
Articles by Kengo Kuma and JA number 38 (short loan)
Kuma, K. (2002) Dissolution of Objects and Evasion of the City, JA 38, p58
Kuma, K. (2002) Relativity of materials, JA 38, p86
Kuma, K. (2002) Particle on Horizontal Plane, JA 38, p120
Mckay, B and Walmsley, A. (2005) Pacific Space: The Pacific Conception of Building, IDEA Journal, Attiwill, S. & Lee, G. eds. QUT, P 61-71. (cecil)
Deamer, P. (2004) The millennium house : Peggy Deamer Seminar and Studio 2000-2001, Yale School of Architecture / edited by Nina Rappaport.
New York, Monacelli Press. (short loan)
Allen, S. (2000). Mapping the unmappable, on notation. From Practice, architecture, technique and representation. London and New York: Routledge. Pg 31- 45 (short loan)
Allen, S. (1999). Points + lines : diagrams and projects for the city. New York: Princeton Architectural Press (short loan)
Confurius, G. (ed) (2000) Diagrammania. Daidalos, n74. Special issue on diagrams (short loan).
Lotus International number 127, 2006. Special issue on diagrams. (Short loan)
Tufte, E. R. (1990). Envisioning information. Cheshire, Conn., Graphics Press. 12-35 (Short loan)
Image above: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:ER_Diagram_MMORPG.png
No comments:
Post a Comment