UNDERGRADUATE ARCHITECTURE PORTFOLIO
AMAR PIYUSH MEHTA 2010 - 2013
AMAR PIYUSH MEHTA RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Mas Por Ellos Foundation
Nairobi, Kenya
founding member + project architect design + construction of theTala Orphanage (July 2013 - present)
Habitat For Humanity San Diego, California
rehabilitation of a single-family home in La Mesa drafting + construction
(April 2013)
TBD: University of San Diego San Diego, California
design + construction of set
(March - May 2013)
1349e Goshen Street, San diego CA 92110 Phone: +1 408-460-0420 / +254 731 751 269 Email: amarmehta@sandiego.edu
EDUCATION University of San Diego
Major GPA: 3.94 Cumulative GPA: 3.68
San Diego, California
Bachelor of Arts, Architecture Minor in Art History (May 2013)
USD Study Abroad
Semester GPA: 3.71
Madrid, Spain
(August 2011 - January 2012)
Lexia Study Abroad Berlin Architecture Program
Semester GPA: 4.0
Berlin, Germany
(June 2012 - August 2012)
HONORS Honorary Thesis Mention
San Diego, California
design + construction of set
(January - April 2013)
Foothill College Design Centre
Los Altos Hills, California
project + account manager designed the marketing poster for the campus card
(January 2010 - June 2010)
Dimension Architects
Nairobi, Kenya
architectural intern Involved in the development of Kihingo Village, Ol Tukai Lodge (amboseli) and the Burudani Theatre. personal work selected for the design of the Ol Tukai gift shop. (July 2009 - December 2009)
June 2013 - Creating Kibera
Exceptional Performance in Architecture + Departmental Honors
Graduation - June 2013
Magna Cum Laude + 1st Class Honors Graduation - June 2013
Deans Honor List
September 2008 - May 2013
LEADERSHIP Beta Theta Pi (Zeta Omega Chapter) Philanthropic Chair
San Diego, California
(January 2011 - August 2012)
Teaching Assistant: Architecture 101 San Diego, California
(January - May 2011)
University of San Diego Club Soccer + intramural soccer captain (January 2012 - May 2013) San Diego, California
(September - December 2010)
PROFICIENCY computer aided design
rhinoceros NURBS 4.0, V-Ray, ArchiCAD
adobe
photoshop, illustrator + indesign
microsoft
word, excel + powerpoint
SKILLS strong communication and interpersonal skills problem solving and interpretative skills hand drawings + renderings conceptual thinking
Associated Students of Foothill College Member of the Senate
Los Altos Hills, California (September 2008 - June 2009)
East African Model United Nations Nairobi, Kenya
(September 2004 - June 2007)
LANGUAGES english native
gujrati native
spanish
Iintermediate
(comprehension + oral)
kiswahili
Iintermediate
hindi
(comprehension + oral)
(comprehension + oral)
introductory
intermediate
french
(comprehension)
THESIS
CREATING KIBERA
DANIEL LOPEZ + WHITENY MOON
FULLER STUDIO FROM SPHERES TO ATMOSPHERES WHITENY MOON
11-16
BERLIN STUDIO TEUFELSBERG RE-CREATION PARK MARGARETHE MUELLER
THEATRE STUDIO STAGING THE GLASS MENAGERIE
WHITENY MOON
ART
THE FADING LEGACY OF NATIVE AMERICANS JOE RAGEY
29-32 WRITING
THE INTENTION OF ARCHITECTURE
WHITENY MOON + JULIANA MAXIM
SPRING 2010
FALL 2010
SPRING 2011
FALL
LOS ALTOS, CA
SAN DIEGO, CA
SAN DIEGO, CA
MADRID, ESP
FOOTHILL COLLEGE
UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO
UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO
PONTIFICIF
1-10
17-22
23-28
33-38 2011
SPRING 2012
SUMMER 2012
FALL 2012
P
SAN DIEGO, CA
BERLIN, GER
SAN DIEGO, CA
FIA COMILLAS
UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO
LEXIA INTERNATIONAL
UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO
SPRING 2013
UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO SAN DIEGO, CA
“
A contiguous settlement where the inhabitants are characterized as having inadequate housing and basic services. Often not recognized and addressed by the public authorities as an integral or equal part of the city.
UN-Habitat
Creating Kibera
SPRING 2013: ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 494 UNDER THE INSTRUCTION OF DR. DANIEL LOPEZ PEREZ AND PROFESSOR WHITENY MOON
The increased development of informal settlements is the dominant form of urbanization in most developing countries. As a consequence, rapid urbanization and fabric degradation have not only led to economic and political unrest, but subsequently have led to cultural congestion and social segregation. The following thesis intends to present and comparatively analyze Kibera (Nairobi, Kenya) the largest informal settlement in Sub-Saharan Africa. Although isolated efforts have been made to provide the essential infrastructural needs such as water, sewage disposal, and paving, most “upgrading schemes” still ignore the most basic reality that slum communities are highly complex and integral components of the slum urbanization process. Therefore, Kibera deserves and necessitates a comprehensive design that not only enhances the existing and constantly evolving urban fabric, but one that tackles specific issues relevant to time, need and location. “Creating Kibera,” builds on this awareness and questions the role of excessive foreign intervention in informal settlements through the dual analysis of culture and ecology. Through a thorough anthropological investigation of Kibera in the summer prior, coupled with a critical analysis of works by the likes of Michelle Foucault and Rem Koolhaas, this thesis develops a network of flexible, yet variable dependant formal systems. These systems configure to adapt to specific social and infrastructural needs in order to preserve or enhance the vibrant informalities of unique urban ecologies. My findings suggests the threshold of any upgrading intervention lay between the romantic utopian ideals of Le Corbusier’s Ville Radieuse, and the postmodern approach of tackling the informal with the informal itself.
M
SPRING 2013: ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 494 For the longest time Kibera has been seen as a virus that has constantly crippled the economic development of the country. However Kibera can no longer be seen as separate entity to that of the city of Nairobi, but must be seen as an integral part of the greater city. The diagram highlights the most basic relationships between Kibera and the “city of Nairobi.” Through this exploration, it becomes evident that although there is a level of cohesiveness and transparency between the two so called entities, there still exists a superficial boundary that separates them brought out programmatic instability, lack of basic infrastructure and government negligence. KIBERA’S 12 VILLAGES: KIANDA
MASHIMONI
SOWETO WEST
MAKINA
RAILA
SIRANGA
GATWEKERA
LAINI SABA
KISUMU NDOGO
SOWETO EAST
LINDI
M
AREA OF RECREATION: CENTRAL PARK KIBERA
GENERAL KEY: MALE RESIDENT FEMALE RESIDENT
M
AIRPORTS
BUST STOPS
FOREST
TRAIN STOPS
PUBLIC PARK
LOW INCOME RESIDENTIAL
GOLF COURSES
MEDIUM INCOME RESIDENTIAL
WATER BODIES
HIGH INCOME RESIDENTIAL
M
CENTRAL DISTRICT
KIBERA
The diagram on the left is a collection of data gathered through a “100 man survey” conducted from various regions within KIbera. The data highlights various demo-graphic information but more importantly is an accumulation of data that places Kibere residents outside their “confinement.” The digram not only highlights the informal settlements central location, the various transportation links that connect the settlement to the greater city, but more importantly shows the relationship between the residents of Kibera with vital open space.
431 zv
2
0.08km2
1371
398
0.43 km
0.06km2
2
989 0.24km2
KIBERA ANALYSIS: SUMMER 2012
1293
The diagram on the left shows the 12 distinct districts that combine to make the dense urban mass of Kibera. The density of Kibera is estimated to be that of 2000 people per hectare - the same as the entire population of New York living in the area the size of Central Park. It is estimated that the population of Kibera exceeds 1,000 000 people, yet as already highlighted, the physical space remains the same. The average population growth is estimated to be around 10% (7% greater than that of the Capital, Nairobi).
0.25km2
N
KIBERA’S 12 VILLAGES: 1390
431
0.16km2
1059 0.29km2
503
1373
0.17km2
0.13km2
0.26km2
867
1:200m
0.21km2
KIANDA SOWETO WEST RAILA GATWEKERA KISUMU NDOGO LINDI
MASHIMONI MAKINA SIRANGA LAINI SABA SOWETO EAST KIAMBU MURU
22.69
HEALTH
22.69
22.69
22.69
22.69
22.69
2 2.6 9
22.69
WATER
22.69
22.69
22.69
22.69
22.69
2 2.6 9
22.69
BATHROOMS
22.69
22.69
22.69
2 2.6 9
22.69
22.69
0.08km2
1423
Reasons to Live in KIbera: 22.69
22.69
Poulation Demographics:
22.69
2 2.6 9
22.69
22 .69
2 2.6 9
RELIGION
1. Cheap rent
Other
Female Male
2. Work there 3. Own business there
Kisii
4. Stay with relatives there 5. Own Prroperty there
Kamba
EDUCATION
22.69
22.69
22.69
22.69
22.69
2 2.6 9
2 2.6 9
Kikuyu 7. Low income 8. Parents live there
Nubian
9. Married to resident 10. Cheap Food
Source: Kibera social and Economical Mapping: Husehold SurveyReport GoK/ UN Habitat 2002.
Luiya
Luo
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
ACCESSIBILITY
22.69
2 2.6 9
2 2.6 9
22.69
2 2.6 9
2 2.6 9
COMMERCIAL
22 .69
22.69
2 2.6 9
2 2.6 9
22.69
2 2.6 9
22.69
0
ACCESSIBILITY
COMMERCIAL
EDUCATION
RELIGION
HEALTH
WATER
BATHROOMS
Through the exploration of the various villages in Kibera, my thesis narrows down to a critical analysis of Makina and Kisumu Ndogo. From the diagram on the left, we can observe the distribution of programs as highlighted by KENSUP. By critically observing the programmatic relationship between the two villages, the uneven distribution in the less than effcient fabric becomes apparent.
e
a
Water: Sanitation: Health: Education: Commercial: Church: Mosque:
X 10
MQ - 4
f
b 1
Water: Sanitation: Health: Education: Commercial: Church: Mosque:
chem -8 health - 4
health - 5
X 10
g
CH - 1 chem -2
chem - 7
chem -3
chem -1
health - 6 MQ - 3
health -3
SPS - 1
SPcl -1
chem -4
PS - 2
chem - 5
CH - 2
health - 1 PS - 1
MQ - 1
health - 2
chem -6
CH - 4
CH - 5
CH - 3
chem -9
PS - 3
Water: Sanitation: Health: Education: Commercial: Church: Mosque:
X 10
Water: Sanitation: Health: Education: Commercial: Church: Mosque:
X 10
Water: Sanitation: Health: Education: Commercial: Church: Mosque:
X 10
Water: Sanitation: Health: Education: Commercial: Church: Mosque:
CH - 6
c
Water: Sanitation: Health: Education: Commercial: Church: Mosque:
Water: Sanitation: Health: Education: Commercial: Church: Mosque:
PS - 4 MQ - 2
X 10
SPS - 2
d
health - 7
N
chem -10
X 10
SS - 1
1:50m
Permanent Path
Chemists: Chem - 1: Ado Pharmacy Chem - 2: Beineish Chemist: Chem - 3: Pona Chemist Chem - 4: Wnanchi CHemist Chem - 5: Home Pharmacy Chem - 6: Jamii Chemist Chem - 7: Herbal Chemist Chem - 8: Chemi Chemi Chem - 9: ---Chem -10: Rainisi Chemist Chem - 11: Raisi Chemist
Primary Schools PS - 1: Optimist Educational Center PS - 2: Calvary Adventure School PS - 3: Adventure Primary School PS - 4: Huruma Primary School Primary + Secondary SPS - 1: Makina Slef Help School SPS - 2: Akili Complex Specialized Schools SSPR - 1: Girls Soccer Secondary School
Clinical Centers: Health - 1: St. Basil Helath Clinic Health - 2: Makina Clinic Health - 3: Natural Health Center Health - 4: New Makina Clinic Health - 5: Chemi CHemi CLinic Health - 6: St. Augustus Medical Clinic HEalth - 7: Kipawa Health Services
Mosques MQ - 1: DC MOsque MQ - 2: Makina Mosque MQ - 3: Mosque MQ - 4: Makina Mosque Churches: Ch - 1: Holy Trinity Church Ch - 2: Seventh Day Adventist Church Ch - 3: Matendo Ministry Church Ch - 4: St. Dominic Catholic Church Ch - 5: Makogeni Catholic Church Ch - 6: African Devine Church
Specialized Clinics: SpCl - 1: Upendo Vision Clinic SpCl - 2: Marie Stopes Center
j
h
chem - 11
LEGEND:
a b c d e f g h i
X 10
water
bathrooms
health
commercial education
church
mosque
a b c d e f g h i j
k L m
k L m
existing
proposed
Existing Church Existing Mosque Exiating Educational Facility Exisiting Health Facility Existing Public Bathroom Existing Bathroom Basin
New Public Bathroom New Bathroom Basin
Existing Water Point Existing Water Basin
New Water Point New Water Basin
Resulting Site Boundary
water
bathrooms
health
commercial education
church
mosque
Although the Makina district in Kibera boasts the widest range of human demographics, the sense of community exists purely as a byproduct of the high density architectural fabric. Due to the lack of open space, whether it be public or private (or a combination of both), Makina almost ritually undergoes a “tribal cleansing,� where the minority Kikuyu residents forcefully remove the majority Luo. By creating high density programmatic public spaces, that are maintained and supervised by the panoptic presence instilled by local authority, coupled with the negotiable semi private spaces that exist between residences, I believe Makina can establish and adherently benefit from a strong communal presence.
[b1-b2] u t i l i t y t o w e r b1
[LS1] l i v i n g f a c a d e [s1] m ix e d u s e s t a d i u m [L1 -L2] u r b a n l a n d s c a p e b2
L1 s1
L2
solar energy
open space
water availabilty
H H public bathrooms
food production
commercial
$
c H
H
methane production
income generator
housing
LS1
1. pervious concrete pavers 2. 3. ATSM aggregrate 4. ATSM aggregrate 5. crushed aggregrate base 6. 7. subgrade
A[1]. B[1].
A[2]. C[3].
B[2].
D[1]. C[1].
C[2].
pervious concrete pavers concrete/steel structure
not only provides support, but the hollow intrior allows for the transportaion of water through the various structural layers.
A[1+2]. H H
$
c
H
H
B[1+2]. C[1+2+3]. D[1].
compost chambers sloped concrete underground water tanks borehole
concrete watertank
connected to the underground water tank, as well as the filtering drainage system. Becomes the hub for water circulation within the structure.
built in resting bench
S U B S U R F A C E: infrastructure
S U R F A C E: urban landscape
Not only does the thesis address the fundamental issues ranging from water distribution to housing, but the thesis begins to uncode methods of creating sustainable districts that enhance the existing fabric. Fundamental to this idea is improving the networks between the various programs, whilst also increasing and evenly distributing new programs to create negotiable mixing chambers that encourage interaction.
Inspired by the success of the Grassroots movement established by FIFA prior to the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, the Kibera Mixed Use Stadium aims to emulate this achievement. Although depicted as soccer pitch, the space has the flexibility to transform to accommodate the multiple needs of the area - whether it is a temporary car park or an extension to the market, the flexible place provides a formal location, for various informal activities.
S U R F A C E: living facade
Through the analysis of, annual population growth, average income, program ratios and basic infrastructure, we are able to determine various parameters that determine the growth of the interventions. By coupling formal interventions with the flexible program instabilty, Makina is transformed into a constantly evolving module that adapts with both time and need.
Inspired by the highly successful “adopt a light” street lighting program established in Nairobi in 2004, the Kibera “Rent a Roof” program aims to create an external source of generative income for individuals within the informal settlement by allowing companies to advertise on the roof and the façade of residential units. The fact that Kibera exits in one of the cities lowest points naturally provides the remaining city of Nairobi with panoramic view of the “slums” roofs.
Makina Utility Tower: The Makina Utility Tower is a mixed use structure that not only operates as a public bathroom that services the suggested site, but also provides the residents of Kibera with a viewing and entertainment platform on the third floor, office space for local or international authority on the second, and a compost and septic tank with the capability of converting solid waste into usable methane gas. The tower as a secondary symbiotic function provides the residents of Kibera with a signifier of aid as well as guiding beacon that allows them to safely navigate through the chaotic fabric.
$ public + open space
$
office space Makina Mixing Chamber
$
m+f public bathrooms
H H
c H
H
$
solid waste compost chamber
Commercial Educational Public Utility
The diagram above demonstrates how the Makina Utility Tower fits in with its surroundings. The towers unique circular shape and height in comparison to the single story standard box grids found in Kibera, immediately draws in positive attention.
Makina Street Condition: Concrete slabs
Beam-to-Bearing Wall Connection
1
2
Beam-to-Column Connection
1
prefabricated bearing wall precast column with corbel
By opening and freeing up the chaotic fabric, residents can benefit not only from the new urban typology that stems from the implementation of open space, but the newly enhanced fabric creates the potential for residents to define the space. By consciously pairing the programmatically stable with the unstable, Makina residents can enjoy the benefits of the informal, but can develop due to the formal. The idea is not to eradicate the chaos within the fabric, but to enhance the fabric through systematic interventions through various degrees of repetitive unit modulation.
inverted Tee-Beam
2
The prefabricated concrete modules allows for the rehabilitation site to ecologically adapt to Makina’s evolving needs. Although fitted to fuse into the existing fabric, the unit modulations are configured to specific program ratios that allow for 26 variations. This not only provides Kibera with adoptable system to continue its rehabilitation, but it also provides a network of negotiable and vibrant mixing chambers.
From Spheres to Atmospheres
SPRING 2011: ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 102
UNDER THE INSTRUCTION OF PROFESSOR WHITNEY MOON
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The 102 studio focuses on the evolutionary dome studies of Buckminster Fuller and engages the various part-to-whole relationships that produce these structures. Throughout the course of his productive career, Fuller produced approximately 30 spherical prototypes (the best known being the geodesic dome). Fuller domes are fascinating models for analysis given they are ‘spherical’ in nature, but more interestingly are a synthesis of flexible formal systems. Although his prototypes are an approximation of a spherical enclosure, each case is unique in the sense that each formation has a unique structural relationship between parts and spatial affects. Using Fuller’s original Plydome prototype, this project seeks to embrace the flexibility of this spherical enclosure to produce complex formal variations and site specific transformations.
After forming a digital understanding of the part – to – whole relationship, I began to experiment on various variations of the Plydome through physical model making. The image on the left is a 135 panel variation of Fuller’s initial Plydome structure.
21. Plydome
The Plydome results from the configuration of regular rectangular (plywood) panels that are assembled together at specific points that result in surface overlap at specific positions. Each panel is physically manipulated to form a spherical shape that is dependent on the number of individual sheets in relation to the total arc length and radius.
S
Due to the plydome’s unique structure, stress and load are evenly distributed and dead weight is non existant.
W
The subdivisions are standardized into sixty-four panels of distinct sizes, and can be arranged to form four opening types, varying in forms of triangles, squares and pentagonal shapes.
R
V
Panels are fastened together at points where they overlap with areas of the geodesic lines of pattern. As a result the shingled panels become inherently geodesic. The structure becomes both roof and beam, and wall and column.
S 6 5
4 3
2 1
I
U
(a) (a) (b) (b)
R W Rectangular panels are shingled together to form a three-way grid pattern.
part to whole relationship:
double curvature tensile panels (a)
(a)
60� x 36� aluminium + elastic cord frame (b)
(a)
(a) (b)
(a)
aluminium quadrant divisions
translucent tensile fabric
(a)
structural integrity is not enabled by both the modular aluminium frames, but also through the tension created by the elastic fabric.
morphological joints the various joint types not only distributes stress and load out evenly, but allows for structural flexibility.
The combination of pre-stress resulting from the elastic bending during the assembly process and the morphological differentiation of the joint location enables a very lightweight and materially efficient modular system.
N
W
E
S
The Shiley Performance Container aims to re-orientate the users of the Camino Courtyard by breaking symmetry and distorting perception. With the aid of light and shadow, the pavilion not only manages to pixelate the built environment, but produces dynamic affects that constantly force audiences to engage the kinetic structure. As a result, individuals not only form a basic typological awareness, but develop a continuous dialogue with the structure and it’s environment.
The manipulation of light, shadow and form is crucial in developing the affect performance. Form manipulates movement, whilst the performance of light in relationship to the composition entices select movement at specific times.
Teufelsberg Re -Creation Park SUMMER 2012: STUDIO + SEMINAR 330
UNDER THE INSTRUCTION OF PROFESSOR MARGARETHA MUELLER
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Lexia summer program was a dual seminar + studio course that focused on the critical analysis of affect and monumentality in Berlin. The studio focused in on the events that revolved around the Second World War, and in particular those that helped shape the forgotten monument of Teufelsberg. Unlike most the monuments that are spread across the city, Teufelsberg is a “natural” landmark that has literally evolved and subsequently documented the cultural transformations of the city since 1915. The historic mound has not only accommodated the utopian visions of Adolf Hitler and Albert Speer, but later played a critical role in determining the outcome of the Cold War too. Today however, Teufelsberg is a site of political controversy. A select few are adamant that Teufelsberg should be a place for urban development, whilst others continue to push for its protection under Berlin’s land use bill. My project however begins to bridge the gap between the two perspectives, and provides a solution through diverse design implementations that are derived between various cultural and historic parameters.
Case Study: Holocaust Memorial - Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe. Study of movement and interaction between the site and its temporary occupants. Data collected of time and type of program interaction.
“ “ “
It is the only place in Berlin Like it. I don’t think anything should change. Marc Boehm
It is a huge place, and as long as people can exercise and enjoy this beauty I would not mind. Magartha Mueller
3:30 hr
I think people should be more aware of the unique history of this place.
Maja Birke
1:30 hr
2:00 hr
1950
1947
1960
Physical formation of Teufelsberg
Cold War begins
1945
WWII
1939
The time line to the right highlights the various events that have influenced the formation of Teufelsberg.
Existed as a forest
1915
The diagram above not only provides a mapping of Teufelsberg, but also provides an analysis of the existing usage. The highlighted areas represent program density, whilst the radius implies usage times, relative to hours.
Wehrtechnische
1968
Topographic contours gets more geometric and aggressive as one approaches the Germania Memorial - symbolizing the violence experienced within that era.
1960
The Idea when creating the Teufelsberg Re-Creation Park revolved around the success of the various interactive monuments across Berlin. The likes of the Holocaust Memorial and the scarred walls of the Neu Museum provided for a fascinating case study on how to convey various layers of history through singular representation. The Re-Creation Park, not only increases the surface area for program interaction, but simultaneously and consciously reveals moments from Berlin’s past.
1952
Protected landmark
Re-Creation Park
2012
1991
Fall of the Berlin Wall
1989
1968
NSA listening station
2008
1930
Since the formation of Teufelsberg in 1950, the natural landmark has undergone a series of reinventions. In the early 1900’s the then flat landscape was defined by forest, however during Hitler’s Nazi regime, the site made way for the Wehrtechnische Fakulat – a military university that occupied the end point of Speer’s utopian vision of Germania. Following the Second World War, and the complete destruction of the city, West Berlin struggled to efficiently dispose the mega tons of rubble, and as a result, the Wehrtechnische Fakulat military campus became a dumping ground. As workers began to clear the site, they soon realized that the monumental university proved too difficult to destroy, thus leaving the structure intact and under over 1,000,000 cubic tons of rubble. As a result, Teufelsberg is not only the highest point in Berlin, but it is over 10 times the size of the Great Pyramid of Giza.
The model above is a 1:1000 scale representation of the physical transformation to the NE façade of the main peak.
The entire site becomes a transformative monument dedicated to the Germania vision. The monumentality of Speer’s vision is celebrated through a full scale landscape + topographical site deformation. Thus visitors not only get to broaden their activity range and location, but at the same time get a chance to appreciate and experience the scale of Wehrtechnische Fakult’s monumentality.
wheelchair ramp
gallery wall - Germania display
rest bench rubble pit
The memorial does not solely serve as a museum depicting Albert Speer’s and Adolf Hitler’s heterotopic vision of Germania, but it also enhances the experience of the mountains visitors by prolonging various and exploratory interests.
The rubble pit, adds to the performance of the space, as it directly engages the audience to take part in the physical exploration of the layered space. Visitors get a chance to shift through the rubble and collect distinct pieces from the diverse history. rubble pit
Architecture and Performance
SPRING 2012: ARCH DESIGN STUDIO 301
UNDER THE INSTRUCTION OF PROFESSOR WHITNEY MOON
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This exercise begins to test and push the boundaries of architecture and allows one to investigate the discipline in and around its peripheries. The studio not only tackles the reality of theatre production through the analysis and investigation of light, sound and space, but eventually delves deeper to investigate the performance of space and its influence and subsequent effect on an audience. The 301 studio closely looked at Tennessee Williams, “The Glass Menagerie,� in order to produce another rendition of the American classic. The exercise moved away from computer aided design and instead allowed one to explore the subject through various mediums such as, collage, relief, model making, video and photography. This particular rendition projects the essence of the play through the fragile mindset of the plays main protagonist, Laura. Through the investigation of various precedents such as Jo Mielziner, I was able to develop various theatrical and architectural strategies to transform elements of the human psyche into tangible visual stimuli that coerce the audience into a singular understanding.
Scene III plays a pivotal role in shaping the outcome of The Glass Menagerie. The omnipresent character of the estranged father reappears and manifests himself as Tom as both the breadwinner and a probable deserter. Laura’s helplessness and fragility begin to show, whilst it also becomes apparent that Mrs. Wingfield too lives in a world of perfect illusion.
Scene III
The exploration of this production was conducted through various mediums. Above is a representation of Laura’s fragmented mind that mirrors her attachment for her glass menagerie. Although immersing herself in a utopian memory, she falsely lives her life through her glass figures.
In scenes 2, 3 and 6, the omnipresent father is personified as a set of moderating eyes. Instead of the standard photo frame version depicted in the original rendition, this surreal approach portrays the fathers engulfing presence as an animated pair of eyes (framed by a ‘photo frame’ window) peering into the Wingfield apartment. The emotion in the eyes would react as the audience would.
surreal
real
As the play progresses, the deeper we climb into Laura’s mind and the more surreal it gets. Scene V captures a rare and pleasant encounter between Tom and Amanda. The two gather on the fire escape and wander off to the Moon, describing on another’s ambitions. Tom reluctantly admits that he has a male guest coming in for dinner, whilst Amanda ignorantly assumes he is a gentleman caller for Laura.
Scene V
Although never present, Tom’s and Laura’s father always seems aware and present, and his existence manifests itself in various avatars throughout the play. Initially he appears as an abstract, Picasso like representation, however his form later morphs as an animated pair of eyes – continuously reacting to what unfolds before him in the Wingfield ‘Prison.’ Above is a relief model of the abstract photo frame of the father.
In scenes 1, 4 and 5, the father emerges as an abstract impression of the photo frame depiction. His static rendering mirrors the impression Laura has of him; a vague yet present figure that has undoubtedly shaped her life.
Scene V was not only explored through relief studies, collages and models, however with the aid of Stop Motion, I was able to create a short clip that captures the dream like qualities of the act. In this rendition, after Amanda and Tom wish upon the moon, Amanda walks off the fire escape and is swallowed up by a sentient fog – a sudden reencounter of Tom’s disgust towards her as he snap back into his reality.
“
I would have stopped, but I was pursued by something. It always came upon me unawares, taking me altogether by surprise - Tom.
Scene VII
The Glass Menagerie, Scene VII, 64-67 Tennessee Williams
Scene VII captures Tom giving his last monologue as the play come to a dramatic end. Tom finally breaks away from the shackles forcefully forged onto him by his family’s slow but inevitable decay. This rendition captures Toms escape, however narrows in on the psychological barrier that still exists. Tom, although physically detached is still haunted by his past and his sympathy towards his disabled sister Laura. No matter how far he runs and how frequently he moves, his character is consistently tormented by his feeble will and guilt of abandonment. The scene closes with the metaphoric hand engulfing Tom and returning him to his state of imprisonment.
Scene 7 is the only scene where there is no physical reference to Tom’s father. Instead, Tom replaces the character with his personal evolution. Tom becomes the physical manifestation of his father.
As well as being a memory play, this depiction of the Glass Menagerie delves deep into the disturbed psychological mindset of Laura. By constantly manipulating space through various and visible set configurations, I aim to coerce and transport the audience in to the fragile and surreal mind of Laura. Unlike most productions, this rendition embraces the technicality of theatre production through the implementation of a Kinetic Platform; a secondary stage assembled from various movable parts that shifts and transforms during the production. This continuous motion not only adds another dimension to the theatrical performance, but in doing so further taps into the idea of a memory play – the continuous reconfiguration of space with the aid of light and sound consistently alienate the viewer.
The Fading Legacy of Native Americans SPRING 2010: EXHIBITION COMPETITION UNDER THE INSTRUCTION OF PROFESSOR JOE RAGEY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The issue of cultural assimilation in the United States has become an increasingly controversial topic. Minority cultures have been confined into scattered pockets of distress, whilst the ever expanding reach of the “American Dream” continues to emboss hope but bring forth an inevitable cultural decay. “The Fading Legacy of Native Americans” was a first placed competition piece for the Native American Heritage Exhibition in Los Altos, California. The submission not only aims to address the issue of cultural degradation, but aims to celebrate the vibrancy and diversity of cultures in North and Central America. The final entry did not just consist of the final canvas print, but was a documentation submission that not only highlighted the process of artistic development, but more subtly symbolized the gradual decay of Native American culture.
After a set of preliminary sketches, the project was further developed through the combination of digital and physical media.
The Intention of Architecture SPRING 2012: ARCH SEMINAR: 330
UNDER THE INSTRUCTION OF PROFESSOR WHITNEY MOON + DR. JULIANA MAXIM
Throughout the semester we have strived to define the characteristics of performance through the investigation of the minds and theories of various architectural thinkers. However, the constant questioning has not only led to the broadening of the definition to accommodate various new terms and ideas, but the absolute definition itself will always be out of reach. For this essay, I will look at performance beyond the literal definition, but begin to relate it to architectural intention - the relationship between a building and its audience. The exploration will orbit closely around the idea of communication, action and re-action; how, what and why architecture informs its audience. With the aid of Henrich Wolfflin’s five principles of architecture, I will not only explore the various architectural methods used by Frank Gehry in producing the Guggenheim museum in Bilbao, but I will also begin to decipher the ‘architectonic’ qualities that contribute to the buildings performance. * * * Architecture is often perceived as a cultural symbol veiled as a work of art. It can be seen as a medium of cultural expression derived from a specific set of principles that are designed to be interpreted in order to unlock and understand the culture of a nation. As with any form of art, architecture carries with it a specific message, formed by the architect in order to communicate to the public. Subsequently, architecture becomes more than a building; it marks societies progress through out time. The task of architecture as with the case of literature is to “represent the 1 characteristics of the age .” In a similar fashion to literature, which is “called upon to express the spiritual image of life in its particulars,” the purpose of 2 architecture is to “design the artistic image of space. ” 1 2
Mallgrave, Harry Francis. Architectural Theory. Vol. 2. (Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub, 2006), 74. Mallgrave, Harry Francis. Architectural Theory. Vol. 2. (Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub, 2006), 77.
Heinrich Wolfflin was very influential 20th century Swiss art historian, who primarily strived to establish and distinguish the vast differences between the renaissance and baroque movements in painting, sculpture and architecture. He considered the study of art history a science, and subsequently established clear cut ‘procedures’ that allowed the viewer to decode meaning from art and architecture.
static. The irregular forms and clever manipulation of geometry forces the eye to bounce around. It is almost impossible to view the building the same way twice, let alone be seen the same way by different people. As stated by Wolfflin, in his text, “painterly architecture restricts the space at the spectator’s disposal – limited by the viewer, not by multiple standpoints. ”
In an effort to quantify his theory, Wolfflin developed his ‘five concepts of understanding’. Five unique stages of comparison that emphasize on a single visual element that collectively combine to derive meaning from the visual. Through Wolfflin’s theory, viewers are not only provided with access to the artistic heritage of the renaissance and baroque periods, but also the means and necessary procedure to unlock meaning in art and architecture.
The Guggenheim was without doubt designed to be aesthetically pleasing. If serving function was Gehry’s priority, The Guggenheim might have as well have been a white box. Its only programatic ‘function’ is to serve as a museum, yet with its audacious design, we understand that it is infinitively more - it is a visual stimulus. “Painterly architecture is particularly interested in making its basic form appear in as many and as various pictures as possible ”. All architecture is intended to be beautiful, but what separates the linear from the painterly is the interaction with the visual. Linear architecture requires the viewer to interact with the space, however in painterly it is how the space interacts with the viewer. When experiencing the architectural wonders of the Guggenheim, you are basically exposed to a new world. Being the alien in the foreign space, the building has the upper hand and consequently the ability to control your movement. Gehry intended for his building to be interactive, you are not just visualizing, but when in the Guggenheim your interactions are dictated – your body moves according to how the building intends it to move.
According to Wolfflin, architecture can be seen as the intentional manipulation of form to create space, thus according to his theory, the role of an architect in essence can be simplified into two objectives: 1. An underlying intention; the basic intention to create space 2. Manipulation; the intention to enhance the characteristics of space. For example, Wolfflin’s first level (linear vs. painterly) revolves around the idea of ‘change,’ or the lack of it. Linear architecture according to Wolfflin’s theory is the static nature of a building; a building that is designed to carry a universal meaning that is easily comprehensible. On the other hand, painterly architecture emphasizes ‘change’, it is a movement that encapsulates the ‘intentional’ use of light amongst other natural elements to define space. Painterly intentions divert from function and geometry, and focus purely on aesthetic values. Central to his definition of painterly architecture is the idea of merging line and form with the aid of light and shadows Gehry’s inspiration for the building was aroused by the sensation of a moving ship. Movement was key in determining whether something is to be considered linear or painterly. Painterly architecture is not about a moment but about a natural evolution - change. From a purely visual standpoint, it is universally accepted that the Guggenheim is anything but
Painterly architecture is not bound by strict lines and angles, but instead it neutralizes the line of boundary. At a glance, geometry does not at all seem to apply to the Guggenheim. The building is asymmetrical and lacks any recognizable structural pattern. Symmetry is a linear aspect and cannot be associated with the painterly. Painterly as mentioned before is about being limitless, and symmetry brings forth visual limitations. By simply following the gentle and natural contours of the structure the viewer’s eyes are eased in the transitions between forms and changes in directions. The movement of the eye, caused by the Guggenheim registers as natural and not static, there is a beginning but no end. In relation to neutralizing lines and boundaries, Wolfflin suggests in “Principles of Art History,” that the enemy of painterly is the isolation of a form; he argues that forms must entwine and infuse. The Guggenheim is a synthesis of multiple forms that are dependant on each other, and as a 3 R,
Solomon. “Guggenheim.” The History of the Gueggenheim. N.p., n.d Web. 19 Dec. 2012
result you understand the building to be a whole. It is impossible to pick out an independent piece out of the Guggenheim; it is a perfect unification of forms. Like in the case of analyzing painting, tangibility is a linear characteristic. Even though the Guggenheim resembles a shiny toy you cannot wait to get your hands on, it is still intangible. Our desire to touch the Guggenheim is merely brought out by our fascination with the bizarre structure and not its tangible qualities. When it comes to ‘tangible architecture’ in relation to the concepts of linear and painterly, it refers to the understanding of how the building comes apart. As mentioned already, the Guggenheim is a synthesis of forms that produce a whole, and from a visual standpoint it is impossible to fully recognize how these forms come together yet alone come apart. Since it is almost impossible to understand how the Guggenheim comes apart, it cannot not be tangible. The most important element that separates linear architecture from the painterly is how the building dictates the movement and essence of light and shadow. In linear architecture, light and shadow is dependant on the form, however in the case of the Guggenheim (the painterly), light is treated as an independent element. Painterly architecture encapsulates the ‘intentional’ use of light and the fact that Gehry intended for light to interact with the Guggenheim in a specific manner emphasizes on the importance of light as an individual element. Gehry based the design of the Guggenheim on the foundation of ‘channeling this energy’. With its reflective titanium walls and large glass windows, Gehry controls the uncontrollable; he manages to treat light as another building material with his ability to manipulate it in order to fulfill his architectural needs. Performance in relationship to “painterly architecture” can be seen through a multitude of lenses. Not only does Gehry treat texture and light as elements in a literal theatrical performance, but by doing so he begins to construct a foundational relationship between his audience and the building. Wolfflins next step in unlocking meaning revolves around his concept of ‘planar vs. recession’. Architecture is always dependant on spatial recession. Without depth and volume, we would not have architecture; we would have a two-dimensional space – the paradox. Instead, Wolfflin 4
Wölfflin, Heinrich, and Marie Donald Mackie Hottinger. Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Later Art. (New York: Dover, 1950), 64. Print.
distinguishes ‘planar’ and ‘recession’ in terms of the purpose and reason for the existence of architectural space. Planar space in relation to architecture is a volume created as a byproduct of raising four walls and a ceiling, it can be beautiful, but at the end of the day it still remains a byproduct. Recessional space on the other hand, is a volume created with the intention of understanding the “real essence of space, ” and according to this definition, the Guggenheim has to be recessional. Gehry, with his ‘randomness’ in design still has intention. His mastery of creating space for purpose can not only be seen through his ‘free architecture’- that lacking geometry, but also through his deep understanding of light and its manipulative qualities to enhance space. According to Wolfflin, recessional architecture as in the case of ‘painterly’ uses light to define and create more spatial relations within a single space, and the fact that Gehry manipulates light to benefit space in the Guggenheim is fitting. Besides using light to enhance the appearance of a space, recessional architecture intends for space to be defined. For example in the Guggenheim, the massive atrium, that pushes up through the center of the structure was designed for a single purpose and function – it cannot not be anything else. For example, in his book Wolfflin describes the difference with his analogy of a round room. He argues that in the planar, a round room would just be a round room, but in the recessional, he states, “equality becomes inequality”, meaning that even in a round room, there is a front and a back – space is always defined. Like with painterly, the recessional qualities of architecture allow for the Guggenheim to further build on the relationship already created. However, recessional architecture goes further and begins to influence the audience directly. If painterly architecture is an image of an object, then recessional architecture is the object itself. Having understood the Guggenheim’s spatial essence, Wolfflins method further develops to accommodate the third stage in his five-part method. As with defining ‘planar’ and ‘recessional’ space, ‘tectonic’ and ‘a tectonic’ forms prove difficult to define in terms of architecture. In accordance with Wolfflins previous definition, architecture must be tectonic. You cannot have unplanned architecture, everything is 5
Wölfflin, Heinrich, and Marie Donald Mackie Hottinger. Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Later Art. (New York: Dover, 1950), 67. Print.
ntended. With this in mind Wolfflin conjures up a different meaning that allows one to analyze architecture in terms of ‘tectonic’ and ‘a tectonic’. Tectonic architecture according to Wolfflin is a strict arrangement that adheres to rules and is restricted by limitations of function. A tectonic architecture on the other hand, is aesthetic, it is free of limitations and is free of arrangement. He goes further and states that a tectonic architecture, like painterly and recessional is a movement, but in this specific case it is an organic evolution. The architecture is meant to embody a natural growth, that comparable to a growing vegetable. It must ‘not look’ intentional but be intended. Predicting the architectural movement of the Guggenheim is virtually impossible. If one cannot understand its spatial relation, it is unlikely that someone can recognize its movement. The Guggenheim is personified, as it is not physically bound by necessity, but instead forms aesthetically. Wolfflin, in effort to explain the difference between ‘tectonic’ and ‘a tectonic’ architecture formulates three laws; i. Tectonic architecture is a strict arrangement and abides to rule. A tectonic on the other hand is lawless and aesthetic. ii. Tectonic architecture exemplifies completeness and adheres to physical limitations. A tectonic architecture looks unfinished, less perfect in proportion, and highlights movement. iii. A tectonic architecture is the transformation from the rigid into the flowing. – Angles bend into curves – freedom. Nothing about the Guggenheim is ‘arranged’, nor is it confined by limitations; the Guggenheim is flowing body of architecture. As explained by Wolfflin, it is free from rigidity, and its angles flow into curves. The building seems to act on its own, and its ability to do so highlights its organic qualities. Just like an organic structure, the multiple elements of the Guggenheim act harmoniously with each other to work as a single unit. The Guggenheim has an unexplainable impulse to form and as mentioned early on, it has a beginning but no end. Wolfflin states that a tectonic architecture, “transforms the impression of a strictly bound into the impression of the freer ”. A tectonic architecture is like a theatrical performance. Everything is about mimicking and exaggeration of what 6 Wölfflin, Heinrich, and Marie Donald Mackie Hottinger. Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Later Art. (New York: Dover, 1950), 115. Print.
already exists; a wall can no longer just be a wall, everything evolves further. In almost identical fashion to Wolfflins definition of multiplicity and unity in reference to painting, his idea of architecture adheres to the same law. Multiplicity identifies how each specific element in architecture is unique and independent (each separate part is its own picture), yet only when together can one understand and appreciate it. Meanwhile, unity exemplifies how there is a strong bond with each separate element and how they work together to create a whole (how each part is a smaller part of a complete whole). Unity in the case of architecture refers to the deprivation of a structures independence; one can not exist or function without the whole. Again it is impossible to imagine the Guggenheim without its dominating atrium, or its sweeping left wing. The architecture acts as a whole without boundaries. The fact that the Guggenheim was designed to symbolize a ship and project the organic qualaties of Bilbao culture solidifies the idea that the building carries a theme. When glanced upon, the viewer can point to multiple aspects of the Guggenheim that appeal to him or her aesthetically, but it is when you isolate each of these forms when the beauty dissolves. Wolfflin, to explain this coins the term, total motif - how elements are dependant on each other in order to achieve function. Function is key in understanding the difference between, unity and multiplicity. The Guggenheim is a kit of parts that work together to function as a whole. In a same way a car is no longer a car without its engine, we cannot consider the Guggenheim for what is it, without its atrium. In his text, Wolfflin states, “Great sections of space have abdicated their independence in favor of a new total effect.” Unity is enforced in the Guggenheim; each part is deprived of its independence to serve as a whole. As seen so far through the length of the essay, each step in Wolfflin’s method goes a step further in unlocking meaning and performance in architecture. He begins by summoning a relationship, and then begins to probe at different methods in which he can engage the audience (physically, aesthetically etc). The last stage in Wolfflins ‘five steps of understanding’, centers on absolute clarity and relative clarity. Both taking on a different definition as previously associated with painting 7 Wölfflin, Heinrich, and Marie Donald Mackie Hottinger. Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Later Art. (New York: Dover, 1950), 152. Print.
and sculpture. Absolute clarity, according to painting refers to how a work has only one viewpoint and consequently a single meaning. Relative clarity on the other hand emphasizes on the looseness of the piece. However when it comes to architecture, both ideas orbit around the concept of “decoration, not imitation” and visual perception. Absolute clarity as defined by Wolfflin refers to architecture of the renaissance, and how beauty lies in the ‘ultimate enduring’ form that can be seen visually. Relative clarity in ironic fashion concentrates on the ‘visual unclearness’. According to Wolfflin, forms that are relative in clarity should represent ‘change’, and as with ‘a tectonic’, it should be natural. As already seen through this essay, the Guggenheim embodies change and movement. Absolute clarity highlights the permanence of architecture – the ultimate lasting form, but 7 with the Guggenheim, the building constantly looks to be evolving, nothing stays the same. By manipulating elements from its surrounding; for example how light is purposely channeled between its walls, and how the reflection of the water shimmers off the structures titanium skin, we notice how everything is relative to something else, nothing is independent and everything is constantly changing due to the number of variables. The building morphs with time; the amount of light received is dependant on the time of day, and because of this, the building not only differs visually but also interacts with the viewer differently at different times. Wolfflin states that, “Life and beauty in architecture lies in its inconclusiveness of it appearance ”. This ties back in with the ‘a tectonic’ understanding of space. A tectonic architecture deals with comprehending the essence of space, and relative clarity deals with intricate use of space. Architecture that is relative in clarity must not be understood at an instance as it would highlight its limitations. and since the Guggenheim is not bound by limitations, as its spatial qualities cannot be understood at a glimpse it must be relative. Its twisting surfaces and winding interiors bring out ‘Unclearness’. The Guggenheim is full of wild visual intersections; each of its forms has a tendency to overlap and protrude. Walls blend into ceilings and floors; it is the chaos of forms that brings forth the buildings blurred visual clarity. Wolfflin states that incomprehensible beauty lies in form and can be seen visually, and in relation to absolute and relative architecture, he explains this through intentionality. 8 Wölfflin, Heinrich, and Marie Donald Mackie Hottinger. Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Later Art. (New York: Dover, 1950), 185. Print. 9
Wölfflin, Heinrich, and Marie Donald Mackie Hottinger. Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Later Art.
We first encountered architectural ‘intent’ when explaining recessional architecture, which emphasized on volume, intended to be created by understanding the real essence of space. Intentionality when it comes to the absolute and relative goes a step further. Wolfflin explains this progression in concept through the example of architectural intersections. He argued that in classical architecture (absolute) beauty coincided with the visual; what the viewer see’s has to be perfect from all vantage points; consequently visual intersections are byproducts of the layout and plan, and to mask this unwanted visual obstacle they would decorate it. In support of this, Wolfflin explains, “Since classicism represents an art of tangible values, it must always have a heart to make these values appear in the most perfect visibility. ” However in the Baroque and in the case of the Guggenheim, they embodied this visual obstruction. Intersections were adopted into the plans – you had to live and work with the obstacle; beauty lies within the unclearness in view. Everything about the Guggenheim was intended by Gehry. His spatial layout and its consequent visual obstructions were undoubtedly planned. The manner in which the multitudes of forms interact with each other and in turn interact with its audience is a visual and an experiential mystery; what the viewer gets is the essence of the whole. Although it may seem that his five stages are independent, throughout this essay we can see how they are all dependant on each other. No stage is more significant than the other, but instead they all work in tandem. Besides formulating and providing a clear-cut procedure in looking at architecture, Wolfflin with his five principles unlocks a method for tabulating architectural performance through architectural intent. As described earlier, architectural performance is the intent to accommodate the interaction and the constant relay of information between an audience and the building. With the Guggenheim Bilbao, Frank Gehry does not just highlight this, but his intent emphasizes that architectural performance can be seen as the choreography of architecture. BIBLIOGRAPHY: 1. Wölfflin, Heinrich, and Marie Donald Mackie Hottinger. Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Later Art. New York: Dover, 1950. 64. Print. 2. Mallgrave, Harry Francis. Architectural Theory. Vol. 2. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2006. 74+. Print. 3. R, Solomon. "Guggenheim." The History of the Guggenheim. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Dec. 2012.