Friday 28 June 2013
EXP3: FINAL SUBMISSION
"A RATIONAL IRRATIONALITY"
My proposed theory derived from a mashup of three articles:
1. George H. Marcus, Le Corbusier: Inside the Machine for Living (New York: The Monacelli Press, Inc, 2000), 30.
2. Andrew Benjamin, "The Standards of the Non Standard," Architectural Review Australia, 2000-2003, AR087.
3. Kate Nesbitt, Theorising a New Agenda for Architecture: an Anthology of Architectural Theory 1965-95) (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, date not specified)
Implicating that the architectural features should act as acelebration of the structural frame, Le Corbusier's "Machine for Living" paradigm idealises that "One of the most important concerns of modern architecture is to determind precisely the function of the materials (Le Corbusier)". This utilitarian approach is contradicted by Eisenmann who critiques the traditional opposition between the qualities of the good, the rational, and true, and of the terrifying sublime (the unnatural and unpresent).
While indeed, “Architecture must displace the former ways of conceptualizing itself,” and“requires a more complex form of the beautiful, one which contains he ugly, or a rationality that contains the irrational.” a continuity or a confluence between mathematics and matter is capable of overcoming the separation between form and function wherein replacing the opposition is an approach delimited by "morphogenesis" proposed by mathematician Abraham robinson.Accordingly, the University located between two factions of the valley will demarcate the rational, but through a controlled ravelling and unravelling of program and structure that differentiates between, yet unites, the various meeting, circulation, and teaching and learning spaces. Such is my theory of the "rational irrationality".
The elevators, the folly, and more:
To download the cryengine environment:
http://www.mediafire.com/download/i94lnjgu83no6n5/LLHQEXP3WEEK13finalwithinports5_editor.zip
To download the sketchup model:
<iframe src="http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/mini?mid=a56297250f2e82ed59e7ab9376b97d17&etyp=sw&width=400&height=300" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0"
My proposed theory derived from a mashup of three articles:
1. George H. Marcus, Le Corbusier: Inside the Machine for Living (New York: The Monacelli Press, Inc, 2000), 30.
2. Andrew Benjamin, "The Standards of the Non Standard," Architectural Review Australia, 2000-2003, AR087.
3. Kate Nesbitt, Theorising a New Agenda for Architecture: an Anthology of Architectural Theory 1965-95) (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, date not specified)
Implicating that the architectural features should act as acelebration of the structural frame, Le Corbusier's "Machine for Living" paradigm idealises that "One of the most important concerns of modern architecture is to determind precisely the function of the materials (Le Corbusier)". This utilitarian approach is contradicted by Eisenmann who critiques the traditional opposition between the qualities of the good, the rational, and true, and of the terrifying sublime (the unnatural and unpresent).
While indeed, “Architecture must displace the former ways of conceptualizing itself,” and“requires a more complex form of the beautiful, one which contains he ugly, or a rationality that contains the irrational.” a continuity or a confluence between mathematics and matter is capable of overcoming the separation between form and function wherein replacing the opposition is an approach delimited by "morphogenesis" proposed by mathematician Abraham robinson.Accordingly, the University located between two factions of the valley will demarcate the rational, but through a controlled ravelling and unravelling of program and structure that differentiates between, yet unites, the various meeting, circulation, and teaching and learning spaces. Such is my theory of the "rational irrationality".
The elevators, the folly, and more:
To download the cryengine environment:
http://www.mediafire.com/download/i94lnjgu83no6n5/LLHQEXP3WEEK13finalwithinports5_editor.zip
To download the sketchup model:
<iframe src="http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/mini?mid=a56297250f2e82ed59e7ab9376b97d17&etyp=sw&width=400&height=300" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0"
ADDITIONAL IMAGES
Dean and academic staff headquarters
The student meeting space on the rooftop of their studio space is open to the elements yet simultaneously enclosed by the glass facade which transcends from the space below.
View of the entire scheme bridging the valley
Each individual computer/research space is separated from its neighbour
Gallery
Architectural folly and student elevator
View from Deans elevator
Tuesday 25 June 2013
The end is near
The denser (left) half of the school contains the deans headquarters and staff meeting space (top of the school), studio workspaces (in the enclosued space behind the jagged glass facade), student meeting space (on the roof of the studio workspaces behind the jagged facade), and lecture theatre and gallery (the thing that curves over the walkway).
On the other hand, the research spaces and library are isolated from the rest, where they can serve as intimate, semi-private, serene spaces.
view from the studio workspace room
student meeting space is out in the open.
Wednesday 12 June 2013
Monday 10 June 2013
Monday 3 June 2013
First draft attempt
Although I have a pretty strong image of shard-like, stretched buildings elongated vertically in my head, the scheme Ive made sits awkwardly in the landscape and Im not quite sure how to proceed.
Walkway flanked by meeting rooms for general and academic staff, and lecture theatre (back)
Studio spaces, workshops, and computer labs for students (note- many missing faces- this is just an idea)
The entire scheme actually resembles a Chinese dragon now that Ive seen it in the landscape.
Sketchup screenshots:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)