WRITING MAKING MAPPING by Etulan A. Joseph
UNIVERSITY OF WESTMINSTER SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT MA ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH AND POSITIONING
WRITING, MAKING, MAPPING. by Etulan A. Joseph
WRITING, MAKING, MAPPING. FINAL LOGBOOK
SUBMITTED ON JANUARY 10TH, 2019
ETULAN A. JOSEPH [STUDENT I.D. 1708803] UNIVERSITY OF WESTMINSTER MA ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH AND POSITIONING TUTOR: DR. KRYSTALLIA KAMVASINOU
CONTENTS Contents
i
Writing
1
Making
13
Mapping
27
Citations
41
i
WRITING
ARCHITECTURE AS A NARRATIVE ARCHITECTURE AS A DIALOGUE ARCHITECTURE AS AN EXCHANGE
A Review Of The 2018 Serpentine Pavilion
There is something to be said when a space holds an almost
cinematic quality; where time meets space meets atmosphere in a choreographed manner. As said by Psarra (2009) in her book “The Formation of Space and Cultural Meaning”, “Architecture is often seen as the art of a thinking mind that arranges, organizes and establishes relationships between the parts and the whole. It is also seen as the art of designing spaces, which we experience through movement and use. Conceptual ordering, spatial and social narrative are fundamental to the ways in which buildings are shaped, used and perceived.” There is power in architecture that is shaped through such a theory. It allows for architecture to explore a range of qualities such as physical construction, temporality, senses beyond the eyes, and the hidden layers of meaning towards those that use the architecture. This plurality of meaning is one that may be lacking or not questioned in more permanent structures in the built environment such as skyscrapers, housing, and churches. However, with more temporary structures such as exhibitions, pavilions and sets, there is an opportunity to explore and test these themes; and with the 2018 Serpentine Pavilion, this is no exception.
Experiencing this year’s Serpentine Pavilion as seen in
Figure 1.1 designed by the Mexican architect, Frida Escobedo, gave a strong sense of this concept, which is good considering this was her intention. The relationship explored with the pavilion as a whole in its three dimensional quality, the 3
Figure 1.1. Serpentine Pavilion 2018 by Frida Escobedo London, United Kingdom
4
Figure 1.2 Discovery Through Movement
5
spatial ordering as well as the forth
an
architectural
physical environment, brings
narrative
that
informs
a
cultural
experience that sits between pleasantly familiar yet excitingly new. One of the main questions that Escobedo’s design personally asks me is “How important are architectural narratives to the built environment, for both architects and the public?” To answer this would require me to delve deeper, but time does not permit such at the moment. However, specific conclusions as well as more questions can be obtained to further the discourse.
As Borson(2014) said, “Architects are natural storytellers
– it’s a process that is inherently built into our creative process - and when used properly, it’s one of the very best tools in our tool bag.” It is sort of an echo to Bernard Tschumi’s interest in sequencing space and how programs can be generated from such theories of narration and events. As Tschumi said, “There is no architecture without action, no architecture without event, no architecture without program.” It is my belief that Escobedo employed this theory of sequencing and narratives in her design.
From the moment one sees the pavilion, one may question
why such a structure would be in Hyde Park, given its very heavy and dark appearance which juxtaposes the park’s very bright and airy quality. Therefore, the narrative of the space had already begun, by allowing for one to question the identity and meaning of the pavilion. As one proceeds to enter the pavilion, it’s as if there is a choice in the way you can move throughout the 6
space creating discovery through movement. This strengthens the individual’s experience,
I believe, as their own path
of exploring the pavilion is imprinted in their own specific memories. The elements of the built structure, such as the interwoven concrete roof tiles, which Escobedo imports from Mexico to play with social notions of private and public, the subtle reflective pool as interactive element
as well as the
curved reflective roof all contribute to this imprint of the narrative. However, instead of merely acting as built elements, these parts interact with the environment, adding to the notion of the architecture as a narrative. Anyone stumbling into the shallow reflective pool would not be a surprise to Escobedo. This sort of small surprise gives the space an animated quality. The porosity of the walls, shifting what can be seen as one moves throughout the space also emphasizes this animation. At times, it’s as if the wall is disguising what’s outside and at other times it’s revealing. The way the walls are angled as well almost leads an individual on. One part lines up with a path towards the gallery – another tool of narration. These specific design actions and others build multiple layers of meaning and memory into the space. To Frida Escobedo, creating such an architectural narrative was important and almost ushers other architects to consider such an approach.
This approach to narration also ties in with the Pavilion’s
cultural and physical context where Escobedo creates a narrative and even a dialogue between Mexican and British architecture. 7
Figure 1.3 Series of Moments in the Narrative
8
As
previously
mentioned,
the
building
design
such
as
the
sequencing of space that forms a courtyard stems from her Mexican cultural and architectural background; even the interwoven bricks is a traditional building technique from Mexico due to climate. The bricks, however are sourced from the United Kingdom itself. That sort of dialogues adds another layer of narration to the architecture, enriching not only the experience of the pavilion but also the pavilion itself.
To
the
public,
this
kind
of
approach
may
have
been
meaningful, or at least interesting. Some individuals at the pavillion who were not architects, designers or artists, found the space engaging and refreshing when asked about it. When asked, pointed at specific moments they remembered such as the pool or the angle of the wall meeting the roof when looking or the way it lined up to the gallery. It appears as if layering moments allow for the public to engage and be more open to spaces like Escobedo’s Serpentine Pavilion. The events held in conjunction with the Gallery also re-established that connection. So how important are architectural narratives to the built environment, for both architects and the public? Well, maybe a bit more than we currently conceive.
9
WRITING REFLECTION
How Can Writing Inform Research?
Sometimes,
curious
connections
concoct
remarkable
revelations. Upon reflection of writing about the Serpentine Pavilion, a question came to the forefront: Why did I do this? Obviously, it was a task given to me but what’s the purpose? Why do we, as architects and students of Architecture, write? Yes, we write for communicating our ideas and thoughts as well writing about past architectural and historical theories but again, what is the purpose? Why do we as architects do not simply stick to visual communication of ideas? Though it took some time to be drawn out, I believe the answer can be summarized in two words: “criticality, clarity”.
There were several layers to the process of writing about
Escobedo’s Serpentine Pavilion. I had to go to the Pavilion to experience it, possibly multiple times as I did, both in August and October; simultaneously “documenting” the journey and experience. Then, read other reviews, descriptions, short essays and the like about it; that is, digest what others have written about the pavilion. Soon after, write my own review of the Pavilion. However, by the time I had to do my own writing, I had amass such a considerable amount of information, that my thoughts were saturated. Staring at the blank page on my computer screen, I had to sift the ideas and theories that were critical in my experience that produced a coherent thread, contributing to the discourse as well as informative to the experience and to the readers. All the aforementioned is associated with clarity; ; writing about the pavilion allowed 11
for me to examine multiple angles of my experience, become aware and understand them for what they are and remove the ambiguity that may come from just photographs, montages or any visual representations of the Pavilion. Writing brought out criticality and clarity, the two main things learnt from this process.
This practice of criticality and clarity is needed in the
development of my thesis design. Being able to be critical of what should be at the forefront, what should be supporting and even what needs to be forgone is paramount to the process. This constructive filtration allows for articulating the thesis in the most presentable way. Some previous thesis was also reviewed and at times, such criticality and clarity is what lacked in the overall work. What was interesting, particularly in those that were a ‘hybrid’ of sorts, is that the writings within the body of work were more clear than the actual design proposal. The exercise of writing, required that mental discipline. However, it shouldn’t stop there but also feed into the design itself. This sort of dialogue can and will be an effective tool in the development of my thesis.
The process of writing can be an effective tool in design.
Yes, it communicates our ideas, but it also can aid in being critical and clear; two essential characteristics for a thesis. The blank page for writing may just be the tool to capture and articulate the architectural imagination.
12
MAKING
ANA // MORPHE
An Excercise in Extraction
Anamorphosis is derived from the Greek language; ‘ana’
meaning back and ‘morphe’ meaning shape. With anamorphosis, a viewer has to specifically place his or herself in a vantage point in order to see a particular image. This distorted projection is used in multiple forms of media from photography to film to paintings (Sánchez-Reyes, Chacón, 2016). With this project, anamorphosis was used more as a concept versus an end result; it was a process, a series of iterations in order to explore architectural operations in a design research framework.
Making the model and projecting the geometries was the
initially the primary task. However, upon revision and critique, a second model was made and then, a third. Within the three, different projection were made to see which vantage points worked better. Addtionally, production of spatial ordering and spatial montage was also looked at, hence the final model as shown in a drawing in Figure 2.1. Elements from all three models were assembled together in the fourth iteration in order to produce a new understanding of the previous three. Aperatures were added, planes were scaled or removed. However, one projection was kept. What was derived is a new perception of the circle - same perception but different vantage point.
The drawing of these iterations, an instructional drawing
as well as an expressive drawing, were then created. They became a sort of iteration in themselves because upon production of them I had to ask, “How much further can this go?”
15
A B
C D
A B’ C’ D’
Figure 2.1 Final Model With Projections
16
Figure 2.2 Anamorphic Projection
17
Figure 2.3 Model Iteration I
18
Figure 2.4 Model Iteration II
19
Figure 2.5 Model Iteration III
20
A
B
D
21
Figure 2.6 Instructional Drawing
C
E
F
22
Figure 2.7 Expressive Drawing
MAKING REFLECTION
How Can Model-making Inform Research?
Within architectural practice, drawing, model making and
photography are all conventional methods of design production. They
are
“natural”
parts
of
any
design
process
of
every
architectural firm. However, in “How Architectural Drawings Work” by Sonit Bafna, there are questions generated that look at the criticality of these technique and how that translates within the discipline at large. Are drawings the means of communcating? Are they simply representations of space of a final product? Is a drawing ever final? Pairing these questions with the process of constructing the four models and producing anamorphic projections, these distinctions between what is imagined and what is constructed began to appear.
From the given task, the concept began to bare more
importance as the drawings began to inspire more imaginative thinking versus something that is quite notational. It became more about thoughts, process, and what is to be discovered versus answers, results and what is final. Hence, the final expressive drawing was created. Through the previous visuals, this montage of iterations was generated. It is not literal, it is not accurate, there are different scales, orientations and the like. However, it does function as a visual work that responds to a proposition of perception and possibilities of how an object may be constructed or deconstructed for simply inviting creative thought. In design research, it just may be the starting point of one’s endevours.
26
MAPPING
THROUGH THE AGES
A Map That Holds Past, Present and Future Personal Narratives
Figure 3.1 Through the Ages Etulan A. Joseph
29
According to Stefoff (1995), a map is “A drawing that
shows where various things are located in relation to one another.” Corner (1999, p.235) also refers to mapping as a tool that “constructs the unconscious...to do with performance.” These two notions served as a framework for the map, “Through the Ages.” I conceived the map of my personal geography as a
series
of
events
in
relation
to
each,
not
necessarily
plotted along a singular timeline but as a logistical and performative collection of events that are interconnected, layered and continuous, generating a multiplicity of readings and interpretations. However, there was a process behind the map’s construction. It began with the instinctive decision to use the layering technique as I felt that my personal journey was complex, layered and continuous; then making reference to Rem Koolhaas’s program map for Yokohama as seen in Figure 3.2 and his layer diagrams for the Parc de la Villette as seen in Figure 3.3 as they were stimulating and had strong relationship to the technique to be employed.
Layering
programmatic
as
stated
arrangements”
by
Corner
through
(1999), the
“creates
superimposition
new of
autonomous layers. Though the result of this superimposition appears random and even chaotic, internally, there is order, logic, a system. This complex composition can be seen in both the program map for Yokohama and the Parc de la Villette layer diagrams. Looking at both critically, they are layered with geometries, relationships and elements. Particularly looking 30
Figure 3.2 Program Map for Yokohama Office for Metropolitan Architecture
31
Figure 3.3 Layer Diagrams for the Parc de la Villette Office for Metropolitan Architecture
32
Figure 3.4 Independent Layers to be Superimposed
33
at the layer diagrams, a new system is generated from the hybridization of the independent layers. This condition left the diagram open ended for as much extraction as possible. Elements such as the squares or heavy lines are mere abstraction of what exists and could exist; a character that I felt my map needed as I personally felt that both the old and new parts of my journey felt like a composed cacophony.
Drawing from the precedents, multiple independent layers,
seen in Figure 3.4 were created around events, ages, locations, feelings. These components were then abstracted as to simplify the visual and establish the logic for the map in its entirety. This way, the notion of suggestions and open-endedness becomes more central and compelling within the map. The layers were then superimposed to create the ‘new structure’ or ‘new fabric’ of
interdependent
conditions.
Simultaneously,
cartographic
techniques were employed in order to have the map visually cohesive and structurally logical. Elements such as the border and title were kept simple in order to provide a balanced frame for the physical map itself. With regards to visual hierarchy and even centring, the superimposition challenged this as the map appears to be assembled around different points. Yes, there were points to which the eyes were drawn to, such as a largest black circle; but then it notices the numbers, and a thick black band across the bottom. The parts that even seem to be woven in and out of the each other plays along to this multiple visual references, again challenging visual hierarchy. However, 34
certain layers were drawn out due to the superimposition which gives some degree of visual hierarchy to the map. The numbers and colours also evoked things such as wonder and intuition – what do they mean, their significance? These also allow for viewers to drawn out their own interpretations or experiences from the map itself.
However, with all these elements coming
together, a balance and logic is maintained through things such as distance, size and general geometry.
“Through the Ages” seeks to express my personal geography
of life through the mapping technique of layering. Drawing from Koolhaas’ works fused with personal objectives and design intuition, it serves as a personal reflective composition that’s open for meaning, speculation and interpretation by the viewer, expressed through the superimposition and association of the multiple elements and concepts.
35
MAPPING REFLECTION
How Can Mapping Inform Research?
37
Figure 3.5 Collective Map
38
Corner
(1999,
p.213)
stated
that
“mapping
unfolds
potentials;” translating, organizing and shaping space through critical selection. What was curious about this process of mapping,
is
the
relationship
it
has
to
design
research.
The process raised certain questions, particularly “How can concepts of mapping inform the process of research?” Is it all speculative or does it also produce design outcomes? One of the personal things drawn from the mapping process is more metaphorical or symbolic as well as methodological than anything. The production of the map was like the production of a design research thesis, in the sense that it was systematic, investigative and producing something in the end; though these were done quickly and not in depth, they still were part of the process. All these elements are an acute reflection of design research, particularly that of the production of knowledge.
In our contemporary times, there exists massive volumes of
works that serve in the production of knowledge. Information of others contribute to the generation of our own new information; in design research it’s no different. There were precedents involved in its production; that is, references of past works to inform the current work. Referring to Koolhaas’ work to produce my own map is a reflection of this; it informed me on what existed before, the process in their production, specific aspects that are highlighted. Through this examination followed by my own application and creativity, I was able to produce my own work. 39
In relation to the aforementioned, there exists a context
in which my work is situated, likewise will my thesis. It is
imperative
that
the
context
is
acknowledged
because
methods, elements, objectives are not universal in theory nor application; what works in one situation may not work for another since frameworks are different. My personal map was set among the maps of my colleagues, which were staggeringly different from my own. Essentially, the criteria and scheme for our individual productions varied. Some used another method of mapping, different elements, etc.
Upon creating a collective
map, another layer of context and relationships was generated. The process of that generation is informative of being aware of context and existing works and how they can inform, build on or even destroy bodies of knowledge. Likewise, the work produced through design research have various schemes and frameworks in which they are produced, thus creating multiple outcomes though the question or task may have been the same. Context orients production, be it singular or collective and in design research we should be aware of such.
Although mapping can be an active tool in design research,
what has been interesting to me is how the process of mapping translates into the process of design research; that is having an objective, setting context, having precedents and considering one’s own production as well as the collective. Through this understanding, my thesis can be better informed; giving it richness, criticality and integrity. 40
CITATIONS
REFERNCES
A List of Sources Cited
in
Texts
REFERENCES
T
Bafna, S., 2009. How Architectural Drawings Work - and what that Implies for the Role of Representation in Architecture. The Journal of Architecture, 13(5), pp. 535 - 564. Borson, B., 2014. Architectural Storytelling – It’s My Thing. [Online] [Accessed 13 October 2018]. Corner, J., 1999. The Agency of Mapping: Speculation, Critique and Invention. In: D. Cosgrove, ed. Mappings. s.l.:Reaktion Books, pp. 231 - 252. Psarra, S., 2009. Architecture and Narrative: The Formation of Space and Cultural Meaning. s.l.:Roueledge. Sanchez-Reyes, J. & Chacon, J. M., 2016. Anamorphic Free-Form Deformation. Computer Aided Geometric Design, 23 June, Volume 46, p. 30. Stefoff, R., 1995. The British Library Companion to Maps and Mapmaking. s.l.: The British Library Publishing Division.
43
WRITING, MAKING, MAPPING. FINAL LOGBOOK
SUBMITTED ON JANUARY 10TH, 2019
ETULAN A. JOSEPH [STUDENT I.D. 1708803] UNIVERSITY OF WESTMINSTER MA ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH AND POSITIONING TUTOR: DR. KRYSTALLIA KAMVASINOU