DESIGN WORKSHOP ABPL20050
REFLECTIVE JOURNAL
Cedric Chua 835148 1
2
CONTENTS
6-13
part
A -
framing
and generating design
16-21
part
B -
exploring
design ideas
24-35
part
C -
evaluating
design ideas
36-37
conclusion
40-54
appendix
3
4
Design Workshop Part A Submission Framing and generating design
5
On Creativity
A1
Greg Missingham “How do we recognise creativity? Through noting the presence of that triumvirate of qualities: relative novelty, domain enrichment and suggestiveness that is further productive for others.”
Alex Selenitsch “Creativity has unpredictability as one of its qualities, both in timing and substance. It is a way of reconfiguring a context or situation. It can be induced by an individual’s insight, through a general failure of habitual behaviours, or through the appearance of new situations or desires.”
Andrea Mina “The assessment of creative works is necessary if one is seeking original thought, new ways of doing things or new uses of materials rather than simply responding to the pragmatic requirements of a brief.”
Reflection Through the readings on how various architectural teachers view creativity, I have found that they agree on certain aspects of what constitures creativity. Firstly, creativity is unpredictable. Secondly, creativity pushes the boundaries of a particular profession. (domain enrichment) Thirdly, creativity is original, authentic and responds to the context of the design. As a student, I think it would be quite unreasonable to expect myself to achieve domain enrichment. I can, however, focus on authenticity in my projects, responding to the context of site and generating unique designs.
Alex Selenitsch’s notes on supporting creativity are also of great help. He encourages the collection of books, magazines, films, etc. These are great resources for inspiration and precedent studies. I will start to do daily precedent studies to develop my designerly thinking, Other things to do include carrying a pocket sized sketchbook, using a pin-up wall for current projects, being open-minded and trying out different medias and talking to peers and tutors about design project.
6
A1
Gregg Pasquarelli Lecture
The Porter House (above) was a residential project where SHoP utilised a 3D software (Solidworks) to generate 400 different protoforms for the zinc panels. The panels were then fabricated with individual labels and instructions for assembly. The Barclays Centre (below) was designed as a stadium for NBA. 12,000 panels were fabricated through a factory that was set-up specifically for this project. Mobile applications were also created to aid in the assembly of the panels. (they could be scanned and have their specified locations to be identified)
SHoP Architects is leading the architectural profession in regards to prefabrication of components for large scale buildings. Some their works include the Barclay’s Centre in Brooklyn and the Porter House in New York. This lecture highlighted the importance of parametric tools and fabrication in architecture today. The use of parametric tools allows for generating a wide array of variations that can be selected to fit the design requirements. This allows for creative and unique designs. (particularly in façade design) Gregg also showed that manual fabrication of materials is possible for buildings at a large scale. He has really made me consider the potentials of parametric tools and digital fabrication in designing buildings. This is a topic I will try to read on and understand better. I have found a few texts on the subject: The Elements of Parametric Design, Architectural Geometry, The new Mathematics of Architecture and The Next Architect, that I will read and study from. Hopefully I will be able to apply this field of knowledge in the future.
7
A2 Design S 1. Framing problems
Understand the brief and the problems to be addressed. Make a priority list. Precedent analysis. Site analysis and research. User observations. Trend mapping. Refer to the brief.
2. Diverge Crazy 9s. Mind maps. Silent critiques. Open critiques. Repeat exploration with all aspects of design brief. Refer to the brief.
3. Decide Compile and categorise ideas. Analyse and rank ideas. Choose the best ones and develop them. ProInAssTest. (Ensuring that decision is justified) Refer to the brief.
8
Sprint 4. Develop
Draw, Write and Model Fidelity towards own ideas. Finished not perfect. Focus the design on the concept. Prototyping. Refer to the brief.
5. Validate Check that the design addresses its assumptions. Validate thinking with others and clarify your design.
This was the first design model I have seen that is based on the architectural design process. It is quite detailed and there are a lot of methods that were listed in the lecture, in an organised manner too. Each phase of the design sprint is also further divided into 5 subcategories: knowledge, analysis, application, synthesis and evaluation, and this really goes to show the rigour of a good design process. I want to be more aware of how my design progresses in my future design projects. As I go along designing, I will look back at what I have done and how it relates to the 5 phases and its subcategories. This way, I can realise how close I am to the end goal of the design as well as whether I have done enough work. Another important point that I took from the lecture was that a designer must always refer back to the design brief and ensure that the design process is relevant to its core concept.
9
“On Writing”
by Stephen King
“The most interesting situations can usually be expressed as a What-if question.
“
”
Stories are relics, part of an undiscovered pre-existing world. The writer’s job is to use the tools in his or her toolbox to get as much of each one out of the ground intact as possible… No matter how good you are, it’s impossible to get the entire fossil out of the ground without a few breaks and losses. To get even most of it, the shovel must give way to more delicate tools: airhose, palmpick, perhaps even a toothbrush.
”
Stephen King is one the bestselling writers in the world, releasing content so loved that it has seeped its way into pop culture. In his book “On Writing,” he wrote about his fascinating writing philosophy. He devoted a short section to how he sources his ideas and turns them into a coherent story. He believes that stories are “found.” He lets his fictional characters ‘talk’. What he meant was that stories should flow naturally (in a way that makes sense, given the context of the story) from a bottom-up approach. According to King, a topdown approach may end up destroying as much of the ‘fossil’ as it liberates. How could this translate to architectural design? I think that the key point here is to base your design decisions on authenticity. Every decision made should emerge naturally in response to site and brief constraints. Another point is that a totalitarian design method may end up generating elements that do not quite fit into the natural site or relate to the brief at all. There is this sense of faith that I feel Stephen King puts into the discovery of “an undiscovered pre-existing world”, and I believe that as a designer that I should adopt this attitude as well. I must not compromise the natural characteristics of my designs by forcing superficial concepts into it. Another thing that struck me was how King turns simple thoughts into complex narratives. He could write a sixteen-page story based on a dream he had on a flight to London alone. He did not even know how the plot was laid out. He just found fragments of a fossil and began to dig. King also renders complex situations through ‘What-if’ questions. Doing something as simple as switching the roles of the protagonist and the antagonist could drive the story in a different but more interesting manner. The combination of 2 elements into one could result in a harmonious whole, or perhaps a contradictory but thoughtful story. In architectural design, these questions could come in the form of: “What if I turned this wall into a row of columns?” “What if this pathway was elevated?” and so on. Keeping this questioning and open-minded attitude could lead me to interesting designs.
10
A2 Tutorial Exercise
Question: What is the best way of translating a design idea? And what is the best way of generating design ideas?
Physical Model Making
Sketching
Diagramming
Parametric Tools Prototyping
Virtual/Augmented Reality
Visualisation
Simulation/ Analysis Tools
I decided to address both questions through one Venn diagram instead of doing a two-part answer. Essentially the diagram divides design methods into physical and digital, and there are some methods that could be either physical or digital. As for the questions, there is no clear answer to them. Different translation methods are used for different purposes. As long as it is appropriate and conveys the concept of the design well, any form of medium can be used. There is no best method.
11
A3 On
Generative Diagrams
Explanato Diagrams
12
Diagramming
ory The lecture gave an interesting categorization of different methods of diagramming. The idea of diagramming in architectural practice is quite straightforward; they are tools for conversing with the design process, to generate formal qualities of a design and to deepen our own as well as other people’s understanding of a design. Diagrams reduce and abstract selective components of a design, allowing for permutations and development of concept within the constraints of the design requirements. There are many ways of doing so, as shown by the images on the left. Before this lecture, I was already aware of the idea of using diagrams as tools for design. However, the lecture showed me many different diagramming methods that I have not seen before. It then took the next step and divided the diagrams into generative, exploratory and rhetorical categories. Usually I just intuitively draw diagrams where necessary. What I realised I should do is to be aware of what type of diagram I am drawing, and how it contributes to the design. This not only gives me greater control over the design process, but it also helps me to realise if there are any additional diagrams that I could use to enrich my design.
Exploratory Diagrams 13
14
Design Workshop Part B Submission Exploring Design ideas
15
B1 Cinema & A This lecture by Hamid goes over the similarities between film and architecture. The key takeaway from this lecture for me is the use of storyboarding to design spatial experience. Film and architecture is similar in the sense that both imagine an unbuilt environment where a narrative takes place. Both mediums require the designers to consider different points of views as well as information about the imagined space. Factors such as movement, time, focus, scale, peripheral vision and the five senses are to be considered. An assemblage of specific points of views is then made in the designer’s mind and translated into storyboards, a technique that can be applied to both arts. The principle here is that every space must be planned and embody some kind of meaning or purpose.
Gordon Cullen’s book The Concise Townscape gives many examples of how different points of views can be framed as one moves through a space. His examples also illustrate the relationship between different elements in a POV and how they affect the spatial and emotional experience. The image on the right is one of many examples from this book.
16
Architecture
17
B2: Design Decisions The lecturer classified design decisions into 3 categories: what, how and outcome. What I learnt from this segment of the lecture is that I should be more conscious of my design decisions and how they contribute to the overall design. This is not new as I have learnt about the need to be conscious of what I do every step of the way (particularly in the A2 and A3 lectures).
WHAT
HOW
OUTCOME
The ‘what’ design decisions consist of understanding the context and requirements of the design problem. It is the phase of careful consideration and intense research. This category includes: (i) Attacking the context, (ii) suspending the judgement, (iii) embracing its complexity and (iv) expanding on design brief as well as focusing on specific aspects of it.
The ‘how’ design decisions builds upon the ‘what’ decisions. It deals with development and its justification. It includes: (i) recognising patterns in the design, (ii) deepening the themes of the design, (iii) sharpening the frame of the design and (iv) being able to support your interpretations of the design.
The ‘outcome’ decisions are concerned with final refinements and evaluations of previous design decisions. It includes: (i) discussion with others regarding ‘what’ and ‘how’ decisions and (ii) applying the feedback back to the design.
The lecture also touched on common design mistakes, as follows: Excessive Optimism – Overestimating design decisions. Confirmation Bias – A decision that yielded a successful result may only be successful in one out of five instances. I have to acknowledge that just because something worked once, it doesn’t mean it will always work. Instead, I need to look at the design context objectively and make an informed judgement. Anchoring and Insufficient adjustment – I must avoid having too much emotional attachment towards a design value, as not certain values may be inappropriate for a design project and I must be able to readily adapt to new values. Groupthink – This is relevant to collaborative work. In future group work, I need to ensure that someone adopts the leadership role and drives our design in a clear and unified way, instead of going for middle ground design decisions. Egocentrism – I have to be more open to criticism and consider other’s opinions seriously. This way I will not be confined to a narrow point of view. Loss Aversion – I have to be willing to accept failures. If I don’t take risks, I will not be able to yield interesting results. Especially while I’m at architecture school, failures do not matter compared to professional/paid work. Sunk Cost Fallacy – Again, I have to be willing to accept failures and move on quickly in the dynamic and everchanging nature of a design.
18
B2
Homework: 15 questions What is the issue at hand? What kind of design approach should I take? There must be a thorough understanding of the problem and what needs to be addressed.
Have I considered enough iterations/ variations of possible design concepts/ solutions? Am I making decisions based on my goals/values? Do not act upon emotions.
Are my design decisions the best out of all available options?
Do other people disagree with my design decision? Be open to criticism and apply changes where necessary.
Could I add more layers to the design? Complexity enriches design.
Keep in mind to aim for a finished product, rather than a ‘perfect’ but unfinished one.
Could I drop what I have done to start a new and more appropriate design?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
(I couldn’t come up with 20)
What is the overarching concept of the design? Design decisions should always relate to the concept and brief.
Are there any patterns in the design? Recognizing a pattern creates a logical framework for the design to develop.
Can I work on the design from a different scale?
Find more relationships that link the design together.
Am I able to convince someone that my decision is right?
Is my design concept clear and simple? Remove redundant elements from design.
Have I tested enough prototypes for the design?
Can I validate the relevance of the prototypes and design decisions back to the design brief?
19
B3
Overcoming Conceptual Blocks in James L. Adam’s Conceptual Blockbusting - Chapter 7
This reading is concerned with how to overcome ‘conceptual blocks’, ie what to do when I am stuck on a design. In summary, the chapter brings up three main points: (i) having a questing attitude, (ii) being flexible and open-minded and (iii) using thinking aids. I – A Questioning Attitude This section talks about how we conform to societal norms as we age. This conformation leads us to a lack of questioning things. To Adams, this hinders our creativity. Questioning helps us to conceptualise, see new problems and new ways to solve it. He expresses it as “a healthy scepticism.” A discontent feeling with the present state of conditions can lead a designer to come up with creative solutions. Adam states that this block can be overcome once we realise the imperfect nature of humans. What I learnt from this is that I should always consider the possibility of being able to add my personal values to a design, thus yielding a more unique and creative outcome. II – Fluency and Flexibility in Thinking This section is about making/generating a list of design possibilities without bias and judgement against crazy or impractical ideas. IE. Being able to consider nonconventional uses for something. Adam wrote about the psychologist Maslow’s experiments where he found out that people who were more expressive, natural, spontaneous and less controlled were more creative and less self-critical. I fully agree with this notion. However, I also have a problem with this, to an extent.
20
(Top) An example of attribute listing.
Regarding flexible thinking, I don’t think that it is reasonable to expect ‘flexible’ and unique solutions through quick list-making methods. The greatest inventions in history come about through years of thinking and research, and the realisation of a solution comes about in an ‘eureka’ moment. I feel that this kind of method leads to, although unique, uninformed designs that the designer cannot guarantee will work. On a small scale, this method works and I can see its merits. But on a larger scale, other factors (urban context, politics, economy, etc.) play a big role and I personally think that, even as an architectural student, I should not fall into this train of thought where I am designing using a crazy concept that, say, deals with impressive utopian visions just for the sake of it being interesting. I think that I should instead approach my designs through careful precedent research and making design decisions based on things that have been proven to work well. III – Thinking Aids This section talks about attribute listing, where a parameter of requirements is used to generate multiple potential solutions. The most appropriate options are then chosen. This is quite a rational approach to design. In my architectural projects, I could apply this method by listing out different aspects of the design using the scales of consideration (C1), and then rapidly listing out all possible alternative means of addressing each aspect of the design. For each aspect, the most appropriate alternative is chosen. The chosen alternatives should also relate to each other when possible. The author also lists other methods, such as devising a design framework/plan, following through the plan in a step-by-step manner and keeping a design journal to record the thought process. Keeping a design journal is something I will definitely do in the future. In one of my design studios (DDF), I wrote a brief record of my design process during week 5 of the semester. When I reread those notes on week 12, I found that I my thoughts/opinions have changed since then. This observation is very interesting to see and gives me something to reflect and improve on. Additionally, it helps me to understand my earlier design decisions, as well as to keep track of small details that I would have otherwise forgotten by the end of the semester. Overall, this chapter is mostly about keeping a ‘free’ mind that is open to all ideas. Adam wants designers to have an absence of fear and to actively free our unconscious minds so that we can think creatively.
21
22
Design Workshop
Part C Submission
Evaluating Design Ideas
23
Lecture: Developing Design Ideas This lecture focused on tactics/ strategies for developing design ideas, with the focus on: 1. Key Determinants of Design Outcomes (Site, Task and Personal Values) 2. Designer’s Frame of Reference (A subdivision of pt.1 into Technology, Amenity and Poetry) 3. Scales of Consideration 4. SCAMPER 5. Design Strategies
C1
Greg then went on to talk about design tactics (S.C.A.M.P.E.R.) and strategic classes. As I listened, I felt confused about the difference between a tactic and a strategy. A quick google search led me to how chess players differentiate between tactic and strategy. Tactics are a specific task used to achieve a subgoal. A strategy is an overall organization of resources and tactics to achieve a clear goal. This hierarchy is something I will be considering in my future design projects. (What does this tactic achieve? How many tactics would I have to use to achieve the overarching goal?) This hierarchy is also relatable to the scales of consideration, which will be explored later.
Design Tactics
Design Strategies
S C A M P e R
1. Cloning - Repetition, Set, Series, Variation, Multiplications.
ubstitute ombine dapt
2. Decompose - Hierachic Decomposition, Fractals, Fracturing. 3. Counterbalance - Narrative, Counterpoint, Opposition, Suite. 4. Elaborate - Building on hints, Mutating, Morphing 5.Graft 6.Sequential Enrichment - Step-by-step layering of elements
odify
ut it up for another function
liminate earrange
24
C1
Small
Medium
Large
Homework 1: Elaborating on the Scales of Consideration
Technology
Amenity
poetry
Site Conditions
Relation to City
Architectural Concept
Tectonic Layers
Local relationships
Massing/Geometry
Fabrication and Construction
Building Program
The task was to take the Scales of Consideration diagram in the lecture and replace the top row with Technology, Amenity and Poetry. Although a simple task, it took me quite a while to come up with appropriate entries for each column. I especially learnt of my lack of knowledge in the field of technology and amenity in architectural design (which will hurt me in my career).
This is a problem I should address to tutors. However, this was the first time I have formally considered design on define scales. Prior to this I only thought of different scales in an arbitrary manner. This diagram will help me enrich my design process and provides me with a complete checklist of (almost) all available scales. This will lead me make more controlled and informed
Experiential Qualities
design decisions.
25
Homework 2: Expanding on the SoC on based on Poetry
C1
Concept
Narrative Dialogue Trope Counterpoint
Massing/Geometry
Opposition Fractals Repetition Series Proportion Datum Grid Variation
Experiential Qualities
Movement/Transition/ Journey Spatial Boundaries Materiality Light 5senses 26
I wanted to further explore the scales of consideration in terms of poetry because it is something that is more relevant to an architectural student compared to technology and amenity. It is also something I want to be highly familiar with by the time I finish my undergrad. To fill out this table, I took several design strategies from the lecture and applied it here. Another helpful resource was Andrea Simitch’s “The Language of Architecture”, where he lists 26 architectural principles (in which I could apply 10 of them here). I could confidently say that I have covered most of the aspects in relation to poetry in this table and that this is something I will be referring to in my future design projects. This will help me to identify the scale at which I implement a design strategy. Sometime that I could even further expand on are the design tactics that can be used at each scale and strategy.
(Top and Middle) Toyo ito’s Sendai Mediatheque is an example of how a concept (metaphor of tree) could be successfully translated from a parti into an actual building. (Bottom right) Sou Fujimoto’s House NA illustrates how a grid can be overlayed to create a fluid overall from using rectilinear geometries. (Bottom left) Mies van der Rohe’s Barcelona Pavilion is the embodiement of pure architectural spaces that is complimented with light, movement, time, materiality, simple point-line-plane elements and so on. This shows how simple experiential qualities can hold a space together.
27
C2
Evaluating and Selecting Between Ideas This is probably the most information heavy and interesting lecture of the subject for me. As a student, the main focus of the lecture was on the assessment of student work and what aspects of our design projects that we should focus on improving. However, Greg also brought into the lecture insight on how professionals evaluate their own work as well as methods of building up a good team environment. He also talked about different methods of criticism which were (I assume) based on his personal experience. I want to elaborate my thoughts on the last two points first.
28
On Evaluation
C2
(Right) Designing a building based on canonic principles may lead to failure. The Destruction Pruitt-Igoe was a famous example that is seen as the failure of modern planning ideals.
Some methods:
methods that are specific to the design problem.
SWOT Analysis, Checklists, Performance Specifications, Decision Trees, Trade-Off Games, Decision Matrices, Value Management, 6 Thinking Hats and PostOccupancy Evaluation.
The Delphi Method and ‘Trade-Off Games’ are also interesting to me. These are methods that I should use in future group assignments to ensure that all team members are on the same page. A similarity I noticed in both methods was that it involved the accumulation of every member’s ideas and opinions, and going through each of them individually with the entire team. Feedback is given on each idea and a vote is called to which decision should be made. In the progress of my current design project in ‘DDF’(a group project that takes place over the course of 10 weeks), I often found that our ideas clashed. Rather than systematically coming to terms with one idea, I often found myself having to compromise my ideas without any meaningful discussion with the group. The design process took off in a direction that I did not fully agree with, yet I did not know how to push it in a direction that I thought was right. (which I believe was also due to my inexperience with digital tools and lack of understand of learning objectives, and possibly lack of mutual respect for team members as well, which led me to giving up) I believe that these methods, along with a good understanding of the requirements of the design brief, could help me avoid such situations in the future. Team management is a skill I need to develop if I want to become a good designer.
The part that stood out the most to me about this section of the lecture was the part on different “Bases of Choice” on which to measure a design. Greg mentioned that, among the bases of choice, a designer may make design decisions based on market trends or through comparison with ‘canon.’ This gave me the notion that collectivism and fashionable styles may influence one’s work. However, I feel that this may not always turn out well as one could produce ‘inauthentic’ designs that are made for the sake of being up-to-date. At the same time, not all trends are bad. For instance, sustainability is crucial for the future of civilisation and architects should implement sustainable design into their buildings. I think that comparison with ‘canon’ is something a designer should be wary of. One must be very informed about the consequences of making design decisions based on trends and their intentions of doing so. Personally, I do not want to give in to any particular ‘styles’ as a student and I want to explore a wide array of different design perspectives. Hopefully, from this sea of knowledge, I will be able to pick out appropriate
29
On criticism
C2
Attoe’s Model: Normative Criticism - doctrinal and ideological. Interpretive Criticism - advocatory crit. Descriptive Criticism - tries to be factual.
Critic’s Focus: Before the work - The context of the design (eg. socio-political, client, the brief, ecological, etc.) On the work - The design process, formal qualities, precedents, etc. After the work is done - Consequences, reception, production, etc.
Critic’s Intent: To describe building, provide a surrogate experience, explain its relation to antecedents. After these steps, critics may either: Advocate for a certain doctrine/theory OR provide a new work of art based on the building.
While this information is not applicable to my design projects, it is something that I should be aware of when I am reading architectural theories and magazines. I would be able to attain an unbiased view of what the critics are writing if I constantly ask myself questions such as: 1. Is the critic pushing for a doctrine? Or is he/she using ‘Descriptive Criticism’? 2. Is the critic commenting on the work before, during or after it is constructred? 3. What kind of tone is the critic using? How does this relate to the content? 4. Does the critic back-up his arguments with sound evidence(buildings)? 5. What is the structure of the essay? (ie. Description, Surrogate Exp., Antecedents, Advocate)
30
C2
ON Student Assessment (Precedent analysis is evident, site analysis has informed design)
2. Rigour of and effort put into design process.
(The brief should be tackled from a range of different scales, forms, programs and issues)
3. Neatness of communication
(The drawings must be clear and convey the concept)
4. Personal Growth
(Student is to be judged on whether or not he/she has learnt/tried new methods of design)
1. Does the student’s work show the learning objectives of the studio? 2. Does the student’s work reach the minimum standard of work required? 3. *Again* Social expectation (Student should conform to a certain extent to the standard of the studio)
4. Graduate Attributes
student-based assessment
1. Research
authority-based assessment
Project-based assessment
According to Greg, an architecture student is judged based on 3 aspects: 1. Product
(Knowledge of architecture)
2. Process
(Reflective skills/ Evaluation and standard of work)
3. People
(Personal Development)
5. Social expectations
(Student should conform to a certain extent to the standard of the studio)
6. Intellectual Ambition (bonus points)
This is new information to me. This lecture has shown me different perspectives on how a design is evaluated. (Critic, Teacher and Self) The rubrics from the lecture are especially helpful as they reveal a lot about what is expected of an architecture student in detail. What I realised from this lecture is that I need to take up the responsibility of studying the learning objectives of each design studio carefully, and ask questions if there is something I don’t understand or agree with in the subject outline. I need to understand what is expected of me, and what personal values I can add on top of that to enrich my learning experience while undertaking a subject.
31
c2 Homework #1
Collect three different critics’ pieces on a building. How do you describe what they are doing in each piece? What rhetorical tropes are in evidence? Whose interests are being served in each case?
(Above) The Neue Statsgallerie by James Stirling, Stuttgart.
Charles Jencks:
Heinrich Klotz:
William J. Curtis:
He advocated for semantic theory in Postmodern buildings. (something he calls “enigmatic signifiers”) He believed that buildings should suggest abstract meanings “in just the right way.” In regards to the Neue Staatsgalerie, he interpreted the building as an acknowledgement of the complexity in past and present cultures. The colourful and modern steel components are superimposed onto the traditional background. To Jencks, this was a clash of the old and the new and a “unity of difficult inclusion”, to quote Venturi. He praised the building, possibly because it allows him to prove his notion of “enigmatic signifiers.” Jenck’s may be considered as an “Interpretive Critic” as he writes about semantics in Postmodern structures in a matter-of-fact manner.
He advocated for the need of an architectural narrative in Postmodern buildings. However, he does not make explicit reference to any fictional narrative in his analysis of the Neue Staatgalerie. He only mentioned its formal qualities, and how Stirling’s previous works have influenced this building. The idea of an architectural fiction is one of the main messages of his book and we can see an inconsistency here. Perhaps, the Neue Staatsgalerie did not have a clear narrative and Klotz merely mentioned the building due to its fame.
He makes the most detailed analysis of the Museum out of the three critics. He also wrote the most unbiased analysis, addressing different opinions from other critics as well as looking at the different contexts of the time. Curtis’s writings may be considered as a “Descriptive Criticism” under Attoe’s Model.
From this exercise, it was made clear to me that every critic has their own intentions. There will always be differing opinions towards any topic of conversation and it is crucial to keep this in mind, otherwise I might fall into the trap of ‘fashionable’ architecture. It is far better for me to read about the same topic from multiple perspectives and be able to make informed judgements that way.
32
c2 Homework #2 How should your own design work be assessed?
The product is not very relevant to the design brief and personal goals.
Satisfactory The product addresses the core issues of the brief and design headed in a desired direction. Design is clear.
Merit In addition to satisfying the brief requirements, I have added personal values that enrich the design. The concept is crystal clear and easily understood even by laymen.
The formal qualities of the design is inappropriate to the task at hand.
The formal qualities are appropriate and basic.
The formal qualities are appropriate and have different layers that add complexity to the overall geometry. Bonus if form conveys narrative/ concept.
Few ideas are considered.
I have done a fair amount of exploration across different scales and issues.
I have rigorously explored a wide array of ideas and issues in each scale of consideration. The most optimal option was chosen.
Precedent studies are done just for the sake of being done.
Precedents are carefully studied and I have understood the designer’s intent.
Each precedent is studied from different perspectives. The theoretical/ historical/ cultural aspects of the precedent are studied. Influence of research is also evident in my design project.
Presentation Quality is not up to standard.
Presentation is neat and understandable. Drawings/Models could be reduced or have added complexity to convey the concept better.
Presentation is fully reduced to required elements and highlights the concept well. A professional standard of graphics is also reached.
I have not bothered to reflect on design decisions.
Design decision is validated, reasonable and justified. I am aware of mistakes I have made and will make sure it is not repeated.
A weekly design journal is kept. Different methods (eg SWOT analysis, Perf. Spec., etc.) are used to understand my design process.
Nothing new is learnt.
I have integrated new information from the design studios into my design project.
In addition to learning from course material, I have actively tried to find external resources regarding the topic at hand, learnt from them and developed a personal understanding of the content.
Pe r
so
na
lG
ro w
th
Ev al ua tio
n
Pr es en ta tio
n
Re s
ea
rc h
Ex
pl
or at io id n o ea f s
Fo r
m
de
riv at io n
De
si
gn
Re so lu
tio n
Unsatisfactory
33
c2
tutorial exercise For this week’s workshop exercise, we (in groups of 2) had to understand the design brief for an aquarium design competition and design its identity. (through a logo, theme and concept of the aquarium)
- The absence of an aquarium in NYC. Designing an aquarium with an iconic and cultural identity would enrich the urban character of the region.
After reading the brief, we focused on the most significant features of the site and its requirements, such as:
- The exterior should connect to the interior in some way.
- The site is located next to a basin of water, which we may use as part of our design.
- Experimentation and innovation in the design of an aquarium. - The aquarium should have educational facilities.
We then began to develop the identity and theme of the aquarium based on these points. We looked through different precedents such as the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium and Turkazoo Aquarium, which are some of the largest aquariums in the world. The biggest feature of these buildings that stood out was that they expressed a very playful (maybe even utopian) atmosphere, with defined/controlled pathways that led visitors through the complex in a narrative fashion. There was also a dynamic layout of different levels and how they connect to each other. To design an experimental aquarium complex, we decided to avoid conforming to this ‘theme-park’-esque idea and instead to design using a relatively unique concept, porosity. The task of designing an aquarium is incredibly difficult and I was amazed at the precedent examples that I viewed and the complexity in its designs. This exercise also brought to my attention the issue of designing icons. I had to ask myself questions such as “What is an icon?”, “What do people like in an icon?”, “Should architecture be designed with the intention of becoming iconic?” and “Is it even possible to ensure that a design becomes iconic purely through design alone?” These are not simple questions and they demand rigorous research and readings. However, I do realise that I could be required to design such ‘iconic’ buildings in my future design studios and possibly even during my career. (I wish) If such a task were to arise, then it would be incredibly helpful to understand the implications of injecting a building with a particular (iconic) concept.
34
c3 Selling Ideas
1. What is the big idea and how is it made clear to the audience?
2. What is the studio objective and how have you addressed it?
3. What about your personal agendas? 4. Are the drawings/models/explanations appropriate for and related to this ‘big idea’?
5. Can you reduce your design into a diagram? 6. Have you addressed the brief well? (users, client agenda,
This lecture was all about convincing other people about your architectural ideas. This was like a ‘tips and tricks’ session for what and what not to do in my design presentations. Some of the points that stood out the most to me are listed on the right. These are very general advices, but form the fundamental elements for a good presentation. Even if one of these points are missing out from my presentation, it could significantly hinder my presentation. This list will be used as a checklist for my future presentations to come.
program, etc.)
7. Have you explained the reasons behind your design decisions for major feature of your design? (eg materiality,
chosen site, phemonology, etc)
8. Have you shown the relation of the design to
realistic considerations (construction, social and cultural context, etc.)
*not necessary in some studios
9. Have you shown how precedent studies have affected your design?
10. Does the narrative of your presentation flow
smoothly and in a logical way?
11. What is the visual hierarchy in your presentation? (incorporate bold colours, negative space, large vs small images, etc.)
12.
Plan your layouts.
13. Test print to ensure colour is shown clearly. 14. Rehearse for your presentation. 15. Talk with enthusiasm. 35
Conclusion The final lecture explores a range of design methods (some very unconventional), such as film, physical model making, photography, narrative, empathy for users, artistic diagramming, technological exploration and wearable space (as shown by images on then right). The point was to prompt us to be brave in exploring different mediums for representation. I’ll never know if something will work until I try it, something I have to keep in mind during my future projects. Overall, I have learnt a lot about what constitutes a good design process, what I lack as a designer as well as what I need to do to improve. Part A taught me about different design models and I recognised a general structure of a design process through them. Part B taught me about the need to always be reflective about my design decisions as well as keeping an open mind. Part C taught me to divide my design process into different scales and how to evaluate my design process. Other things I learnt included types of diagrams, storyboarding and the fundamental elements of an architectural presentation. The content of this subject has been extremely helpful towards my personal growth as a designer.
36
37
38
Appendix
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
End
55
56