ARC 6989: Reflections in the Architectural Design Tutor: Carolyn Butterworth Submit by: Fengyan ZHU Registration number: 110204235 MA Architectural Design School of Architecture
Before I came to Sheffield, more exactly is that before the course-reflections in the Architectural Design, I never thought about changing the architectural design process deeply. The conventional process is research, site analysis and design. It is a time-based process and I never had an idea that what is missing in my design methodology and how should I understand the architectural design process in a broader way. The structure that I propose to develop the theme of this essay will begin with understanding architectural education in my opinion. I will also introduce Peter Zumthor s thinking architecture and ways of looking at thing. Then I will continue I will continue by addressing my learning process and my reflections on architectural design at the University of Sheffield. After that, I will talk about my studio work to illustrate how to connect research and design. Most importantly, I chose two great examples trying to answer the two questions- How to develop response? How research can be defined in a field like architectural design? As a conclusion to this essay I will explain my final comprehension about architectural design. How to understand architectural education? When I think about architecture, images come into my mind. Many of these images are connected with my training and work as an architect. Then contain the professional knowledge about architecture that I have gathered over the years. Some of the other images have to do with my childhood. There was a time when I experienced architecture without thinking about it. Sometimes I can almost feel a particular door handle in my hand, a piece of metal shaped live the back of a spoon. (Peter Zumthor, Thinking Architecture p9.) When Zumthor talked about architecture, he always mentioned the words experience, image, feel, etc. he never introduced a historical theory frame, never told how to achieve his design process and never shown some principles of architectural design. His words sounded more like a craftsman rather than an architect. After six years of studying architecture, I have learned several theory frames, several strategies of designing, and professional knowledge about architecture. But I appreciated the words, because I found that Zumthor stressed the views are missing in my architectural design study. It is a good perspective to think architecture, and the way of looking things. We all experience architecture before we have even heard the word. The roots of architectural understanding lie in our architectural experience: our room, our house, our street, our village, our town, our landscape- we experience them with the countryside, towns and houses that we experience later on. As architects, I should not only respond to the experience of studying architecture, but also respond to the experience when I use architecture in childhood. Practicing architecture is asking oneself questions, finding one s own answers with
the help of the teacher, whittling down, finding solutions. Over and over again. (Peter Zumthor, Thinking Architecture p65.) I always asked teacher what I should do next, before I came to study in Sheffield. On the contrary, teachers always asked me what do you want and what do you want to achieve. But I do not think architectural design is simple as finding answers to questions. Beyond that, historic economic, social, and political relationships should be considered carefully in the architectural design process. I should analyze the connections and respond to them. How to understand response during the architectural design process? As part of my learning process on my course, I have been encouraged both in my studio work (MAAD X2) and Reflections on architectural design module, to attempt new ways to approach my designs outcome. The results of these have been series of tactical approaches within a specific project, which have encouraged me to articulate the design process in different ways. Reflections on architectural design module is based on site-response-make structure, and it allowed me expressing my past experience with present reflections and help me comparing the difference in my design methodology. The site really represents not only a physical place, but also means social, historical, economic, political aspects. It embodies the material elements of the territory it is set in, and the history of the beings that inhabit it. For instance, our first research site is the Occupy Movement and the movement contains spaces, time, social and political connections. Unfortunately, one of the site design methodologies is narratives and I never tried this methodology in my past design works. I attempted to apply the narratives in my individual project, and homeless people and local community are the main actors. The design process then is not simply the clapping of solution on to problem, like a snuffer on candle, but is the interaction of two agents in a reiterative process of discovery. This exchange of energies has no parallel in any other art; and it is the reason why there can be no such thing as autonomous architecture. Unless it is born out of this dialogue, no work can ever achieve the statue of architecture: it can only be a folly. (Colin ST John Wilson, Architectural Reflections P31) Those words illustrate the core of design process- interaction is the most fundamental thing in process. In my personal opinion, response should be regarded as a synonym of interaction. Response constitutes the construction of a critical position towards a site and its features; that enables you to engage in an architectural exercise in a creative way. Response essentially could be seen as the
core of an architectural project and can be constructed and contextualized in any way; it is directly a linked with the design methodology that the architect employs. Architectural drawings try to express as accurately as possible the aura of the building in its intended place. But precisely the effort of the portrayal often serves to underline the absence of the actual object (Peter Zumthor, Thinking Architecture p12.) Make is not only making representations of designs to discuss with clients, to refine a design into detail, to experiment to assemble ideas, but also to understanding the materiality of the response. Research and Design My studio theme is Civil Society and mapping is an important tool to record information. We really did several categories of maps. To my opinion, it is hard to define the map in architectural area accurately. The map is more than just territorial drawings. During the research process, I do not care what information look like to me. I formulate a research question, collect the data and make it visual. Initially, I thought this way of mapping is beyond architects work. The information design work should be more suitable for the graphics designers. But after the work we did to record the occupy movement in London and Sheffield, I totally changed my mind. Maps of Occupy Movement
Mapping is important for us to understand the urban environment. Maps are primarily received as directional; a subway or bus map is understood as a tool to help you get somewhere. After looked at the London subway maps over time, for example, the different depictions of Central Park in various versions of the map. I could make the decisions that mappers made demonstrates how much information I accept uncritically, and how much images participate in forming my understanding of the world. More specifically, mapping is an efficient way for me to analyze the urban environment in Sheffield. After the analyzed the empty spaces, fundamental public spaces, relationships, etc., I chose my site properly according to the geographic information and social information. During the design process, Map is regarded as media to influence my design. It is no doubt that map belongs to an outcome of make section. My project should be considered as research project. It is unusual to choose the site after decided the proposal of design. So not only our response of site can influence make section, but also our response of make can direct us to choose the site. How to develop RESPONSE? Maps of empty spaces and public spaces in Sheffield city centre Historically, architecture has been dominated by two opposing extremes: an avant-garde full of crazy ideas, originating from philosophy or mysticism; and the well-organized corporate consultants that build predictable and boring boxes of high standard. Architecture seems entrenched: naively utopian or petrifyingly pragmatic.
In the book of YES IS MORE, BIG believes there is a third way between these diametric opposites: a pragmatic utopian architecture that creates socially, economically and environmentally perfect places as a practical objective. Unlike a classic architectural monograph, it is more of a manifesto of popular culture, in which BIG s methods, means, processes and approach to the concept of architecture are revealed as being as unconventional, unexpected and result-producing as the world in which it exists, continually reaffirming its mission with a resounding YES. In YES IS MORE BIG shows how its members respond to the polymorphous demands, complex rules and highly specialized knowledge of society, creating tangible solutions through artistic processes: solutions that time and again attract the interest of the population at large while earning the respect of aficionados across the globe. YES IS MORE P178-179 Play needs firm limits, then free movement within these limits. Without firm limits there is no play (Rem Koolhaas, S, M L, XL) Architect should set rules and frameworks, constitutions and manifestos to develop the response. YES IS MORE speaks the language of popular culture, allowing the sublime to shine through in the commonplace. We (not only as architects) can gain insights into BIG s processes, methods and results through the most approachable and populist means of communication the cartoon.
They won't even be the creators of architecture but rather the midwives of the continuous birth of architectural species shaped by the countless criteria of multiple interests. The whole world insists on conflict. The media craves conflict, and the politicians craving media presence need to engage in conflict to get there. What if design could be the opposite of politics? Not by ignoring conflict, but by feeding from it. A way to incorporate and integrate differences, not through compromise or by choosing sides, but by tying conflicting interests into a Gordian knot of new ideas. An inclusive rather than exclusive architecture. An architecture unburdened by the conceptual monogamy of commitment to a single interest or idea. An architecture where you don't have to choose between public or private, dense or open, urban or suburban, atheist or Muslim, affordable flats or football fields. An architecture that allows you to say yes to all aspects of human life, no matter how contradicting! BIG s method is say yes to the site; say yes to the client; say yes to the users; say yes to the government; say yes to all request. Then, they will use all this condition as a restrict rule to generate form, to make response to the site, shape the building base on the site conditions and along with the Yes requirements. Certainly, the outlook of the building will contain certain degree of architects artic taste and individual humorous. This is a visualized method which could be easily understood. BIG s methodology of designing introduced an example of how to communicate with response during the design progress. I cannot make judgments on the methodology whether is right or wrong, but their responses to the conflicts, conditions and relationships directed their design outcome.
How research can be defined in a field like architectural design? Venice architecture biennale 08: Swiss Pavilion The theme of the Swiss Pavilion emphasized essential points of architectural reflection by bringing into light the conflict and permeation of spatial, organizational and production-technical dynamics. Architecture is making use of experimentation, enhancing the practice with widely divergent inventories of knowledge, cross disciplinary boundaries and exploring new terrains. The pavilion demonstrates how unproductive the customary differentiation between basic and applied research is in relationship to architectural design. In place of it, concepts of methodologies, networks, didactics and technology are presented. Architectural research does not try to limit itself to any one particular statement of a problem. Instead, it tries to associate itself with more divergent fields of knowledge so that their approach may seem less academic and more experimental. Humanities and science are introduced to practice-oriented and creative approaches so that they may experience their compression and expansion within the design process. Their aim is to debate the meaning of design research in the applied discipline of architecture, and to provide alternative takes on a term, and an academic field that still lack sharp definition. In a time of perceptible technological and socio-economic change, architecture can no longer rely on preconceived concepts, established typologies and design methodologies nor can architectural education. Rather than perpetuating a
particular formal school, academic style, or pedagogical orthodoxy, institutions need to focus on a critical re-examination of design processes themselves, with an aim to formulating new models of collective learning and research practices. At more than 100 meters in length, a brick wall structure stands within the Swiss pavilion, dividing the space into four parts. The structural wall divides the space into four sections Images from designboom.com R-O-B robotic system outside the Swiss Pavilion Semonstration of the computer program used to render R-O-B robotic system laying bricks the brick wall Floor plan of the brick wall's position within the Swiss Pavilion The computer program is rendering a wall The installation is titled 'structural oscillations' and this construction element stands in direct relationship to the pavilion and expresses the current approach to architectural research. The design was produced through a computer program which rendered the structure, ensuring its stability and was then setup on-site using the R-O-B robotic system. Alongside the wall are architectural models which question the idiosyncrasies associated with architectural research and their
potential. The display aims to invite discussion, broadening our perspective in order to clearly outline the possibilities and limitations of this particular way of encountering the world. Conclusion The site response make structure is the key elements in architectural design process, and whenever I address this structure to establish connections between my past and present I will be referring to them in any particular order, not necessarily in the one they are currently stated in. Response should be used as bridges to connect the site and make. Research and design should not be considered separately as two different parts. Response played an important role in both research and design. Architects should never forget to make response to both site and make. Response could be developed according to setting rules and frameworks, constitutions and manifestos appropriately. No matter what kind of strategies I will use in the future, having a stop and architecture reflection will lead positive position.
Reference: Peter Zumthor Thinking Architecture, Birkhäuser, 1999 Colin ST John Wilson Architectural Reflections, Manchester University Press, 2000 Bjarke Ingels Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution,Taschen, 2010 Rem Koolhaas S, M, L, XL, Benedikt Taschen Verlag GmbH, 1977 Venice architecture biennale 08: Swiss Pavilion http://www.designboom.com/weblog/cat/9/view/3932/venice-architecture-biennale-08-swiss-p avilion.html, Accessed on April 16, 2012 Mapping as a Spatial, Political and Environmental Practice http://urbanomnibus.net/2012/02/mapping-as-a-spatial-political-and-environmental-practice/, Accessed on April 21,2012