I wanted to give a little insight as to the direction my thesis proposal is currently headed. I will be posting some sketches and images in the coming days to graphically represent the ideas discussed below.
The last two week’s sketch problems have been dealing with public vs. private space, transitions, sequence, layers, etc. I realize some of my ideas and posts jump around a bit, but that’s mainly because I haven’t had time to delve into many of the readings I brought back and really analyze everything I’ve created up to this point. I had a chance to do just that this past weekend and I feel I am headed towards a more defined thesis proposal at this time.
Layers. Our lives are filled with layers. When we think of something that has many layers, we typically have a positive yet inquisitive reaction. A person who is said to have many layers is thought of as spiritually deep, skilled or diverse in their base of knowledge. A problem with many layers, be it mathematical, economic, architectural, etc. requires inquisitive thought and is not easily solved with a singular answer. Speaking in terms of architecture, layers create multi-dimensional space that provides the user with a sequenced experience rather than a singular event. Stepping from my car in the parking lot at work and walking towards my office is a singular event. The building exists solely as an object in space and provides no sense of procession or sequence. A layered approach is absent.
The spatial condition created by layered architecture is sequence. Walking through a museum is a sequence as is strolling down Newbury Street . The sequence can be augmented, varied, interrupted or stopped. This is done in a number of ways including change of scale, proximity, defined paths and edges to name a few. I have been exploring these relationships and spatial ideas the past two weeks with my sketch problems. So how do layers translate to a thesis proposal?
One of the ideas I have been interested in from the start of thesis is a “sense of place,” or spaces that are highly identifiable and hold special meaning for the individual as well as the community. Spaces with many layers can provide this sense of place as they are multi-dimensional and speak to our explorative spirit as human beings. But people change. Opinions change. Not all architecture is iconic and designed to withstand the test of time.
How can we use our knowledge of layers and sequence to create space that is adaptable and inter-changeable over time? A space that remains inspiring and attractive even when the function changes. To be blunt, like peeling back on onion to reveal more and more, or can we rewind and add more layers just as easily?
Or, just as we are encouraged to use layer upon layer in our approach to “making something”, can this idea be manifested in built form? I believe architecture can do this and that is what I will be specifically exploring this week.
This may still sound a little abstract, but I am working on some images and a thesis statement to better represent the possibilities here.
I find some of the ideas that are coming out about spatial experience fairly compelling. Do you think it would be useful for you to apply this ideas in a rigorous way to some precedents - do very complete documentation (redraw plans/sections/elevations, locate images you find in plan), analysis (application of idea and graphically represent clearly to communicate) and synthesis (abstraction of the ideas in analysis and application to thesis)? To start, what kinds of precedents are you interested in looking at? Do you want to brainstorm and make a list? I know that a few weeks ago, you were trying to explain what architects you liked and why - this is a different sort of exercise - intended to be rigorous and with clear intent. The deliverable would be graphic in nature - intended to EXPLAIN CLEARLY. I know you have a sketch problem in mind for the next few days - and I definitely would like to see that in relationship to the written words here, precedent work could be next step after that if you want to take it up....You might also find a precedent analysis that you think you would like to use as an initial model and show us - as what we understand as precedent analysis might be different than what you are thinking.....it would be good to make sure we are on the same page before you head in this direction.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think?
oh, one more thing....ONE really well done precedent would be way better for your proposal than 3 done not as deeply. You can always say in your proposal as part of your methodology that you intend to do three more precedent studies/analysis in the upcoming months.
ReplyDeleteI think precedent analysis would be a good step for me at this point. I tend to get bogged down in the "making" and lose focus on the idea I am striving towards. now that i have a little better idea of what interests me, I think gaining an understanding of the principles I am discussing will help to narrow my focus even further. I am interested in public / semi-private space; spaces in which we gather in large quantities but do not necessarily have direct physical or verbal connection with everyone. Museums, restaurants, public plazas, even streetscapes could fall under this category. I agree that choosing one and completely disecting it would work best for me. I think some brainstorming investigation is next to find the spaces or buildings which speak to my idea and then single one out from that list. I can continue to develop my idea through quick sketches as my precedent analysis takes form.
ReplyDeleteSo we are thinking that you need to find a precedent that operates in a layered way that also has a sense of community.
ReplyDeleteIs it like the vatican? The relationship of the Piazza San Marco? to the Vatican?
or is it Times Square/where the TKTS booth is and the plaza infront?
or is it Maki's Media Lab at MIT or Gehry's Stata center at MIT
or Tsein&Williams Neuro-Science Institute in LaJolla ...