PORTFOLIO
|
JOSE CARLOS GARCIA M. ARCH II
|
JOSE CARLOS GARCIA Southern California Institute of Architecture M. Arch II 510 S. Normandie Avenue, Apt. #115 Los Angeles, California, 90020 1 + 708-262-6099 jcgsas17@gmail.com Š 2017 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission of copyright owner.
PORTFOLIO
|
JOSE CARLOS GARCIA M. ARCH II
|
Table of Contents Personal STATEMENT 6
2GAX - FALL 2016 Design Studio I - REPLICA
8-39
Visual Studies I - THE ANIMATE LINE 40-65
Advanced Materials + Tectonics I - FACADE TECTONICS 66-87
History and Theory I - APPROPRIATION 88-95
|
2GBX - Spring 2017 Design Studio II - THE SHAPE OF KNOWLEDGE
96-121
Visual Studies II - FAKE FACADES 124-157
History and Theory II - APPROPRIATION II
158-165
6 |
Statement Jose Carlos Garcia is a developing architect currently advancing his graduate studies as an M.Arch 2 Student at the Southern California Institute of Architecture. Prior to joining SCI-Arc, Jose played a crucial role in the developing Chicago based architecture firm JGMA, where he worked as a Project Designer in the design department of the firm. Some of his main roles here included early design development for various projects, as well as being the Project Architect for a renovation and addition project in Florida. At one of the difficult moments of development of the firm, Jose took the role of Marketing Coordinator for almost a year. While being at the marketing department, he developed a big part of marketing material of the firm, including document organization for proposal submission, social media, but mainly logo and graphic standards defining the unique and peculiar image of the firm. Jose joined JGMA in the fall of 2012, when he was awarded the opportunity to join the firm for an entire academic year during his senior year of undergraduate studies. A year later, Jose graduated from the University of Illinois at Chicago where he earned a Bachelors of Science in Architecture. With a little over seven years in the academia and the professional field, he sees his time at SCI-Arc as the ideal opportunity to develop his career both as a passionate individual that believes in the discipline of architecture while having the opportunity to have an influence in the built environment. He seems himself practicing architecture at a professional level, while always keeping a foot towards the academia.
| 7
8 |
| Design Studio I
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
Replica Semester Course Instructor Team Description
2GAX Fall 2016 DS 1200 - Design Studio Complex Morphologies Marcelyn Gow Raul Casillas + Jose Carlos Garcia The studio focused on exploring three different interests in which the discourse of architecture takes place: a formal language, various tools of representation, and a function. The formal interest of the studio interrogated the potential of the replica in architecture. Advancing debates regarding influence, affinity and appropriation in architecture, the project adopted an approach that exploits the potential for architectural acts of appropriation to engender new forms of authenticity and to challenge context and type within an architectural project. As a starting point the studio worked on producing a replica of a selected source material, the Thonet chair, that redefines the part to whole relationships inherent in the chair and shifts these toward an architectural scale. Such an approach required the utilization of digital tools, such as Rhino and Maya. The software allowed us to break down the geometrical qualities of the Thonet splines in order to be able to duplicate them, re-assemble and assemble them to generate a new object. As part of the exploration, the ambition was to develop a set of splines, allowing surface generation and eventually volume. The new object was then complemented by articulating the facade utilizing the mapping technique of an image into the volumes. At the architectural scale, the project investigated the possibilities of creating a campus of five incubator buildings (one per team within each respective studio) focused on promoting emerging green technologies.
| 9
10 |
| Design Studio I
Thonet Chair THONET #14 CHAIR # 14
Study Source Material - Thonet Chairs
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
Thonet Chair THONET Rocking Chair ROCKING CHAIR
| 11
Spline Extraction + Re-Assemblage
12 |
| Design Studio I
Spline + Volume Study 01
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 13
Spline + Volume Study 01
14 |
| Design Studio I
Spline + Volume Study 02
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 15
Spline + Volume Study 03
16 |
| Design Studio I
Mapping Texture Condition A
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 17
Mapping Textures Conditions B + C
18 |
| Design Studio I
Mapping Texture Condition A
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 19
Mapping Textures Conditions B + C
ATH BIKE P
20 |
| Design Studio I
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
O RON PR RIVER F E MONAD
ION RD
S MISS
6TH
Site Plan
STR E
ET B
RIDG
E
| 21
North Elevation
22 |
West Elevation
| Design Studio I
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 23
_ L+ 121 Ft
_ L+ 109 Ft
_ Shared
_ Restaurant
_ L+ 97 Ft
_ Shared _ L+ 85 Ft
_ Private
_ GH_Lab
_L+ 73 Ft
_ Shared
_ Public
_ L+ 61 Ft
_ Shared
_ Private _ L+ 49 Ft
_ GH_Lab
_ Auditorium _ L+ 37 Ft
_ Private
_ Administration
_ L+ 25 Ft
_ Public
Building Section
24 |
| Design Studio I
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
BREAKROOM
AV
AUDITORIUM SHARED OFFICE
DN
SHARED OFFICE
First Floor Plan
| 25
JC
SHARED OPEN OFFICE
WORKSHOP CLASSROOM OPEN TO BELOW
DN
OPEN TO BELOW
MICRO-CLIMATE
OPEN OFFICE
RESEARCH LAB UP
Fourth Floor Plan
26 |
Northeast Facade
| Design Studio I
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 27
Secondary Facade Structre
Secondary Grid Structure Central Core Structure
Elevator Core Perimeter Structure
Facade Openings
Composite Deck Floor Slab
Unitized Metal Panel
Building Chunk - Facade Detail
28 |
| Design Studio I
South Facade + Downtown
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 29
Facade Close-Up (East)
30 |
| Design Studio I
Facade Close-Up (Ground)
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 31
West Facade
32 |
| Design Studio I
Northwest Facade + 6th St Bridge
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 33
Facade Close-Up (Northwest)
34 |
| Design Studio I
Model Photographs
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 35
Model Photographs
36 |
| Design Studio I
Model Photographs
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 37
Model Photographs
38 |
| Design Studio I
Model Photographs
| Replica
| Marcelyn Gow
| 39
Model Photographs
40 |
| Visual Studies
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
The Animate Line Semester
2GAX Fall 2016
Course
VS 4200 - Visual Studies I GR
Instructor
M. Casey Rehm + Kristy Balliet
Team Description
Absalom Espinoza + Jose Carlos Garcia The course covered issues of contemporary representation and the development of splines in relation to complex digital form, physical and visual space. Visualization today encompasses the development, exploration and communication of information and ideas in multiple mediums. The course engaged recent techniques related to splines, gesture interfaces and virtual reality. The course goal was to develop critical visual literacy and review methods for generating and evaluating lines, surfaces and volume. The class was heavily invested in reviewing modes of drawing and modeling in three dimensional space, including the importance of precision and abstraction. This course will introduce students to methods and concepts of three dimensional drawing (zero gravity), digital modeling, multiple realities and digital/physical fabrication.
Exercise 01
The course covered three exercises ranging from straightforward drawing tasks, to tasks that required aggressive experimentation: The Gestural Line
Exercise 02
The Agency of Images
Exercise 03
The Gestural Volume Each exercise consisted of various modes of representation including line/ spline drawings, 3D modeling, 3D Printing, Rendering + Photography
| 41
42 |
| Visual Studies
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
The Gestural Line Exercise 01
This project explored the potential and differences of the stroke, the gesture and the line. It required the generation and design of lines through gestural animation. We created a series of lines in space and then redesigned their relationships and qualities, which allowed us to generate a vessel-like 3D digital model opened in a few locations articulating the relationship between what could be exterior versus interior. In this first exercise one of our ambitions was to represent selected splines as thicker seams, where the spline itself appears to have a surface-like language.
| 43
MODEL 1 - Gesture Tracking [Isometric View] A combination of both, lines generated from gesture driven, natural body movements and lines generated from more systemitized hand gestures: X-like Gesture + Straight Gestures
MODEL 2 - Animated Line [Isometric View] Four Animated Lines circulate around to intersect each other at various locations. Four additional animated loop lines are integrated to connect between a selection of these points
MODEL 3 - A New Design [Isometric View] A combination of connecting loops and hand gestures, suggesting connection between the digital and virtual space
MODEL 1 - Gesture Tracking [Front View] The different lineweights correspond to the different levels of dept within the Virtual Space. Here the X-Gesture can easily be identiďŹ ed
MODEL 2 - Animated Line [Front View] By using different lineweights and dots where intersections happen, the Animated Lines start to create a more coherent arrangement. The loops are portrayed with a more apparent thick lineweight
MODEL 3 - A New Design [Front View] A range of lineweights portray a combination of connecting loops and hand gestures, suggesting connection between the digital and virtual space
Kinect Gesture Tracking Drawings
44 |
| Visual Studies
Gesture + Digital Spline Study
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
| 45
Spline, Surface + Volume Study
46 |
| Visual Studies
Spline + Surface + Volume Model Photograph
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
| 47
Spline + Surface + Volume Model Photograph
48 |
| Visual Studies
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
The Agency of Images Exercise 02
This exercise dealt with pattern, texture, and surface articulation using Processing. By using the Robot house, in this assignment we were able to take an unrolled elevation photograph of the 3D model from Exercise 01. This gave a high resolution image which we then imported into Processing in order to re-arrange the original pixel configuration giving us a new image. Such an image, we then re-mapped back to the original 3D Digital Model generating a new vessel-like 3D model to be 3D printed in powder in order to translate the digital mapping into a physical vessel-like model.
| 49
50 |
| Visual Studies
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
| 51
Unfolded Elevation from Exercise 01
52 |
| Visual Studies
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
| 53
Processed + Composed Unfolded Elevation
54 |
| Visual Studies
Elevation of Re-Mapped Processed Imaged
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
| 55
Perspective of Re-Mapped Processed Image
56 |
| Visual Studies
Textured Powder 3D Print Close-Up Photograph
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
| 57
Textured Powder 3D Print Photograph
58 |
| Visual Studies
Textured Powder 3D Print Photograph
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
| 59
Textured Powder 3D Print Photograph
60 |
| Visual Studies
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
The Gestural Volume Exercise 03
The ambition of this exercise was to explore Virtual Reality environments as modeling and design platforms. In this exercise, we were able to continue generation of splines through the gestures of our human body. The tool allowed us to change the radius of the splines as a way to start generating a composition of geometry with certain volumetric qualities. The software gave us a digital OBJ model which we then were able to render and 3D print.
| 61
Gesture Lines from Virtual Reality Modeling
62 |
| Visual Studies
Virtual Modeling Geometry Output
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
| 63
Virtual Modeling Geometry Output
64 |
| Visual Studies
Geometry Output 3D Print Photograph
| The Animate Line
| Kristy Balliet + Casey Rehm
| 65
Geometry Output 3D Print Close-up
66 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
Advanced Material + Tectonics Semester Course Instructor Team Description
2GAX Fall 2016 AS 3200 - Advanced Materials and Tectonics Maxi Spina Andy Magner + Evan Mason + Jose Carlos Garcia The class paired areas of investigation and speculation were Tectonics (building envelopes) and Performance, consisting of technical, technological, cultural and environmental dimensions. Working in groups throughout the entire semester, we were able to analyze and document the San Francisco Federal Building in order to formulate a series of hypothesis in an attempt to construct a number of interrelated tectonic conjectures. In scrutinizing building assemblies, we attempted to position construction analysis so as to produce both technical knowledge and critical awareness of embedded cultural habits.
The Alternative Tectonic. The second part of the course sought out an alternative understanding of the Tectonic, one that not only mirrors the realm of construction (materials, methods, sequences, tolerances, etc) but also embraces architectural processes of expression, encompassing issues of geometry and technique; posture and character. The seminar culminated in reformulating the initial tectonic conjectures so as to adapt to a slightly altered design scenario.
| 67
68 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
4’
2’
2’ 2’
1’
Envelope Assembly - System + Parts
| 69
Perforated stainless steel panel with folded edges Extruded aluminum panel hinge clip Extruded aluminum panel hinge clip reciever Aluminum support tubing for panel 5.25” steel washer plate
4” galvanized steel vertical support Vertical support connector plate Bolts connecting horizontal tubing to vertical tubing Horizontal support connector plate 4” galvanized steel horizontal support tubing secondary t-bar support primary t-bar support threaded steel rod for bracing brace connection plate connecting bracing to t-bar support hydraulic piston for actuating panels piston supoprt plate
Perforated stainless steel panel with folded edges Panel hinge clip Hinge clip reciever Aluminum panel support Steel skin support frame
fig. 1
Hydraulic piston frame plate
4’
fig. 2
3’
fig. 1
2’
fig. 2
2’
1’ 1’
T bar support to slab 4” Steel support for panel Connection plate to vertical tube Connection plate to horizontal tube
Envelope Assembly - Systems + Parts
70 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
NT
LS
EILING
SLAB
AL SYSTEM
NT
1
WALLS
2
LS
SLAB
4’
2’ 2’
Envelope and Structure
| 71
VERTICAL REBAR REINFORCEMENT
STIRRUPS REINFORCEMENT
REINFORCED CONCRETE COLUMN
EXTRUDED ALUMINUM PROFILE
OPERABLE WINDOW 2’x2’ FLOOR FINISH PANELS UNDULATED CONCRETE CEILING RAISED FLOOR PEDESTAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB HORIZONTAL REBAR REINFORCEMENT MAINTENANCE CATWALK
DOUBLE SKIN STRUCTURAL SYSTEM PERFORATED STAINLESS STEEL PANEL
VERTICAL REBAR REINFORCEMENT
STIRRUPS REINFORCEMENT
REINFORCED CONCRETE COLUMN
REINFORCED CONCRETE WALLS
2’x2’ FLOOR FINISH PANELS
RAISED FLOOR PEDESTAL
REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB HORIZONTAL REBAR REINFORCEMENT
Envelope + Structure Assembly Details
1
72 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
1) PRIMARY STRUCTURE | BUILDING CORES
3) PRIMARY STRUCTURE | CONCRETE COLUMNS
Primary + Secondary Structure Systems
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
2) PRIMARY STRUCTURE | CONCRETE SLABS
4) SECONDARY STRUCTURE | BUILDING SKIN
| 73
ROOF STRUCTURE [secondary structure]
CENTRAL CORE [primary structure]
LOAD BEARING CONCRETE WALL
CONCRETE COLUMNS [primary structure]
REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB [primary structure]
4’
2’ 2’
Structure Assembly
74 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
N double wall solar chimney: the stainless steel scrim gathers solar heat gain, radiating the heat into the wall cavity. warm air rises through the cavity, sucking the warm, interior air through the building. This constant air flow cools the interior throughout the day.
annual windrose: the orientation of the building takes advantage of the strong prevailing winds from the northwest. the data driven operable windows open automatically to accept the air pressure. this air then flows through the interior before exiting the south facade through an identical mechanically operated curtain wall.
night flush cooling: data driven windows open at night, sucking cool air into the building. this energy is harvested by the concrete floor slabs whose high thermal mass stores the energy and releases it during the daytime when the interior temperature rises.
N
solar radiation/ sun path: oriented towards the south, the stainless steel scrim takes the majority of the heat load, preventing it from radiating directly into the interior by an open air cavity.
Precedent Study: US Federal Building, San Francisco, CA Facade System: High Performance Double Skin [ Window Wall System and Perforated Panel Secondary Skin ]
ENVIROMENT ENVELOP SY
| 75 energy effeciency standards for federal buildings: The Energy Conservation & Production Act (ECPA) established minimum energy efficiency requirements for federal buildings. Newly constructed commercial and residential federal buildings must meet or exceed these efficiency standards, which are based on the model energy codes. DOE is directed to update the federal standards regularly based on model code revisions, and to ensure energy efficiency across the federal building stock. (42 USC 6834 & 6835). The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is directed to updated provisions regulating the construction of new federal commercial buildings, including high-rise residential buildings. These buildings must be designed to achieve energy consumption levels that are at least 30 percent below the levels established by the referenced baseline edition of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, which is the national model energy code for commercial buildings. The current federal standard for commercial buildings is based on Standard 90.1-2013, effective January 5th, 2016. (80 FR 68758)
concrete floor pates: high thermal mass properties of concrete is used for night flush cooling where the building is opened at night, allowing cool air to be absorbed by the slab and released during the day. 50% of pollution intensive, portland cement replaced with an industrial by product, blast furnace slag stainless steel scrim: filters daylight, minimizing solar heat gain. double wall system generates stack effect which pulls cool air through the interior and upwards through the scrim. mechanically operated stainless steel scrim panel: linked to weather data, opens scrim to allow solar heat gain and maximize interior views. mechanically operated glass curtain wall panel. connected the weather data which controls opening size in order to maximize natural ventilation. user operated glass curtain wall panel: user controlled so that individuals can customize their comfort level, independently from the mechanically operated systems.
4’
2’ 2’
ENVIROMENTAL PERFORMANCE ENVELOP SYSTEM ENVIROMENTAL PERFORMANCE
Envelope System Enviromental Performance Advance Tectonics 3200 Jose C. Garcia, Andy Magner, Evan Mason
76 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
The Alternative Tectonic The second part of the course sought out an alternative understanding of the Tectonic, one that not only mirrors the realm of construction (materials, methods, sequences, tolerances, etc) but also embraces architectural processes of expression, encompassing issues of geometry and technique; posture and character. The seminar culminated in reformulating the initial tectonic conjectures so as to adapt to a slightly altered design scenario.
| 77
SHADOW AN SUMMER 5:
OPTION 01 In this option, Optionthe A original running bond pattern layout of the perforated panels is kept as system. To allowInfor better performance, grid has rotated 45 of degrees. The system allows for this option, the originalthe running bondbeen pattern layout the perforated each panel to be rotated to an speciďŹ c angle depending on the position of the sun, helping heat panels is kept as system. To allow for better performance, the grid has gain reduction while providing enough visibility for the user
been rotated 45 degrees. The system allows for each panel to be rotated to an specific angle depending on the position of the sun, helping heat gain reduction while providing enough visibility for the user
SOLAR HEA
Precedent Study: US Federal Building, San Francisco, CA Facade System: High Performance Double Skin [ Window Wall System and Perforated Panel Secon Facade Development Option 01
78 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
SHADOW ANA SUMMER 5:0
OPTION 02 Option B The strategy of strategy moving the rectangular bases corners both the xy axis allows The of moving the rectangular basesincorners in vertical both theand vertical the system to respond to the differential solar conditions on a facade. The panels start out as and xy axis allows the system to respond to the differential solar conditions horizontal shading devices on the south facade, transitioning to a vertical system on the west to a facade. panels start as horizontal shading devices on the south compensateonfor the lessThe controllable solarout angles.
facade, transitioning to a vertical system on the west to compensate for the less controllable solar angles.
Facade Development Option 02
SOLAR HEAT
| 79
SHADOW AN SUMMER 5
Option C
OPTION 03 While the operable panels have been removed, the building’s skin is still able While the operable panels have been removed, the building’s skin is still able to perform via to perform solar shading, air fl ow, and aesthetic kinetic-ism. Portions the and solar shading, air flow,via and aesthetic kineticism. Portions of the original panels are of faceted original panelsporosity are faceted and folded upwards, to create porosity for daylight, folded upwards, to create for daylight, circulation, and unobstructed views. The original panel grid is maintained. circulation, and unobstructed views. The original panel grid is maintained.
SOLAR HEA
Facade Development Option 03
Jos
80 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
FOLDING D 0 - 20% OP REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB
SLAB CONNECTION / BRACING
SUBTRUCTURE
PANEL FRAME
PERFORATED PANELS FOLDING DENSTY 1 0 - 20% OPEN FACADE ASSEMBLY
FOLDING D 20 - 50% O
ED E SLAB
FOLDING DENSTY 1 0 - 20% OPEN
FOLDING DENSTY 2 20 - 50% OPEN
Developed Facade System Assembly
REINFORCED CONCRETE SLAB
SLAB CONNECTION / BRACING
| 81
F
DEVELOPED OPTION Taking into account the pros and cons learned from the original facade system, in combination with the three proposed options to improve the system, the Developed Option, contains the varying elements that work together to deal with a series of issues including solar heat gain, natural sunlight, indirect sunlight, overall building performance, views to the outside, and overall aesthetic composition
S T w c
Developed Facade
82 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
Model Photography
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
| 83
Model Photography
84 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
Model Photography
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
| 85
Model Photography
86 |
| Advanced Material + Tectonics
Model Photography
| Facade Tectonics
| Maxi Spina
| 87
Model Photography
88 |
| History + Theory I
| OOO in Architecture
| Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivison
Object-Oriented Ontology in Architecture Semester Course Instructor Team Description
2GAX Fall 2016 HT 2200 - Theories of Contemporary Architecture Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivision N/A The main objective of this seminar was to learn a platform of knowledge to do work on the territory of contemporary, global architectural practice in the interest of formulating my studio production as well as my future professional agendas. Currently, practice is in the process of being actively redefined by shifting political, social, technological, and ecological paradigms. Taking as a starting point the idea that various modes of appropriation have been formative in the shaping of architectural history, the class examined the complex terrain defined by the recent shifting of paradigms and examine how these acts of appropriation are actively configuring the contemporary moment. Acting as architectural entrepreneurs, the goal was to identify niches for future action and innovation. The seminar introduced several contemporary disciplinary themes through readings and project presentations. These themes are aligned with the content of the 2GAX studio and are intended to outline research trajectories that we pursued collectively throughout the duration of the course in the form of in-class discussions and presentations. We were required to conduct ongoing research, culminating in a clearly formulated argument that advances a specific position on one of the disciplinary themes introduced in the seminar. This material is presented in the form of a written essay.
| 89
“the idea that we live our lives on a layer of invisible equipment has significant ramifications for architecture, a discipline that produces the equipment on and in which we exist.” - Todd Gannon
Peter Eisenman Architects, City of Culture in Galicia
In looking at architecture and the progress it has made during the last century, we often find different movements that represent the different ideologies and ambitions of architects of the corresponding time. To mention a few, the list may include modernism, post-modernism, de-constructivism, parametrisism, all suggesting, at a certain level, ‘new ways’ of design, where discussions of process, of style, of originality, of authorship always
have taken place leading to several writings and architecture projects that are often the result of such discussion. Most recently, the philosophical concept of Object Oriented Ontology has made its way into the architectural discourse, which in many ways has created a shift and suggests new ways of looking at the architectural object, although it still in its very early development, there has been a few architects that have started
90 |
| History + Theory I
| OOO in Architecture
| Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivison
Mark Foster Gage Architects, Guggenheim Helsinki Design
to integrate such philosophy into their architectural agendas.1 Because of the complexity of the topic, most the projects are still highly speculative, and haven’t been built. Therefore, as OOO starts to have a bigger impact in the architectural discourse, it is crucial to analyze a selection of key built projects, i.e. City of Culture by Peter Eisenman, through the eyes of Object Oriented Ontology. By comparing such projects, to those that are still at a speculative level, i.e. Guggenheim Helsinki Proposal by Mark Foster Gage and various projects by Tom Wiscombe, I would like to elaborate on the idea of whether an OOO Architectural Object is possible, and if so, does this suggest, by what OOO proposes, a way of creating pieces of architecture
without precedents, in other words pieces of architecture that are original and which provide a level of authenticity? In doing so, it is crucial to establish an understanding of architecture through the lenses of Object Oriented Ontology; to break down and delaminate the different concepts that Graham Harman utilizes in his philosophy, or at least understand the way different architectural theorists and practitioners have tried to find OOO relevance in architecture. For example, Mark Foster Gage gives a clear explanation on his interpretation on the subject, explaining that “OOO suggests that buildings, as objects, should be understood to have vast number of qualities, properties, and even relations but
1 Gannon, Todd, Graham Harman, David Ruy & Tom Wiscombe, “The Object Turn: A Conversation.” Log 33 (Winter 2015): 73
| 91
Tom Wiscombe, The Main Museum of Los Angeles Art
that their fully reality can never be reduced to a single, simplistic observation.”2 He relates OOO to architecture by looking at the ‘tool analysis’ by Graham Harman which “posits that while a tool is functioning, or its function is visible, the mind registers it as equipment and, as such, it is render invisible to our attention.”3 Meaning that as we utilize every day tools we tend to ignore the presence of such objects, we automatically push them to the background and all the sudden became unaware of their existence, as we use these tools we don’t notice their physical qualities, aesthetics, color or materiality. This is quite relevant due to the fact that the basis of architecture as a discipline relies on the creation of such objects, Mark states that “the idea
that we live our lives on a layer of invisible equipment has significant ramifications for architecture, a discipline that produces the equipment on and in which we exist.”4 By using such argument it becomes clear why OOO may have such an important impact in future conversations within the discourse of the discipline. And although it is not a simple task to find a built project with the characteristics expressed by Mark, we still get an approximate idea of how a OOO Architecture can start to look like. Should it be weird? Should it look like something we are familiar with? Should it not look like a building? These questions are raised in a recent online conversation between Todd Gannon, Graham
2 Foster Gage, Mark, “Killing Simplicity: Object Oriented Philosophy in Architecture” Log 33 (Winter 2015): 102 3 Foster Gage, 97 4 Foster Gage, 97
92 |
| History + Theory I
Harman, David Ruy and Tom Wiscombe about the same subject. Here David argues that “designing something to look weird is not the answer, because it inevitably looks weird in a way we would expect the weird to look.”5 An experiment in trying to create an OOO Object can start to be more successful “when familiar objects have their relationships to other objects severed and rewired.”6 These conversations tell us that is not all that simple to identify an OOO Architectural Object, and whenever we do, it will not be total, “there will always be various degrees of resonance and different possible paths.”7 Meaning that, due to the demands of an architectural piece of work, in contrast to the concept provided by Graham which says that a OOO should be free of any relationship, as suggested by the idea of undermining, overmining and duo-mining, we will hardly find an architectural precedent free of any relationship. Mark Gage posits that “through the lens of OOO, we can recognize that a building’s reality can never be fully known – or reduced to any simple diagram, metaphor, or big idea – but rather presents a vast and complex depth that requires new forms of acknowledgment and allusion.”8 The challenge then is looking for architectural precedents that don’t fit within such description, but even a bigger challenge is to integrate such belief in an architectural agenda. Another subject that comes to the
5 Gannon, Todd, Graham Harman, David Ruy & Tom Wiscombe, 85 6 Gannon, Todd, Graham Harman, David Ruy & Tom Wiscombe, 85 7 Gannon, Todd, Graham Harman, David Ruy & Tom Wiscombe, 85
| OOO in Architecture
| Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivison
discussion is that of originality and authenticity. If we start to criticize architecture through the lenses of Object Oriented Ontology, we will quickly find that in many ways much of architecture, especially now days is the result of interdisciplinary relationships that don’t belong to the discipline of architecture. Such object relationships can be categorized using three of the key terms from OOO: undermining, over-mining and duo-mining. When an architecture is being undermined it means that the reason of existence of the specific object is more important than the architectural qualities. According to Mark Foster Gage, there is many ways architects undermine their architecture, one of the most common one is when the goal of the architect is to achieve a level of LEED Certification, where there is a misguided belief that such certification can be seen as a good piece of architecture, and where all the other qualities are ignored. Other examples of undermining include Rem Koolhaas’s 2014 Venice Biennale and Patrick Schumacher’s approach on parametrisism. When an architecture is being over-mined, it generally means that the building is the result of a ‘big idea’ or ‘concept’ “which is more often than not manifest today in the graphic-diagram-as-building scenario”9 this can also translate into the idea of the arrow building, which we often see in many architecture schools and architectural
| 93
practices. Although Mark doesn’t give specific examples of such, one practice that’s comes to mind immediately is Bjarke Ingels Group’s approach to architecture, where often the ‘big idea’ becomes an arrow diagram which literally becomes the building itself. Another problem that comes with overmining is when an architectural building is the result of a metaphor, an example to this is the Calatrava’s World Trade Center Transportation Hub which was inspired in a flying bird, Daniel Libeskind’s Denver Art Museum where he claimed that the design was inspired by the mountains nearby. A building is duo-mined when its architecture is justified by the contextual influences; sun path, wind flows, set-backs, adjacent buildings, where the design itself is informed by such information while belonging to the urban scale becoming part of a larger context. If we were to take Object-Oriented Ontology as a serious set of rules for design, the above-mentioned relationships that we as architects often find relevant to became our basis of design, according to Mark, are problematic. To elaborate further on this idea, it is necessary to look at projects that have been built which start to integrate some of these ideas (intentionally or unintentionally). There is mainly a couple of reasons why I think looking at a built project is important. First, in many ways an architectural project
8 Foster Gage, 102 9 Foster Gage, 100
is not complete until is built, it proves a level of contextual responsibility while responding to multiple forces that affect an architectural project, functionality, aesthetic desires, environmental responsibilities, etc., therefore, a building will always have to respond to such responsibilities, it is inherited in the reason of why it needed to be a building in the first place. Inevitably, the object relationships that Mark Foster Gage argues against will always have to be present in an architectural project, of course not if it remains at a speculative level. Secondly, although Graham Herman says that an object, as OOO sees it, can be either physical or ideological, I believe that in order for OOO to have a real impact in architecture we have to take into account the experiential qualities that a building can have on people, while also understanding that the experience of individuals will be different for everyone, depending on their background; how they utilize the building, when they visit it, etc. Herman argues that the OOO Object should be free of any relationship that may undermine it, overmine it or both, that it must be free of any familiarity or resonance, that we shouldn’t expect it to look like a building. The question is how do you create a building that has no sort of relationship, that looks extremely strange, while not looking too strange because it will be pretty obvious that is the intention was to create
94 |
| History + Theory I
a strange object? Let’s suppose that you do create a building that complies with such characteristics, inevitably because of the nature of familiarity, its user will still get used to it and will see it as a normal building after a while. Such an approach may be a lot more effective on people in other parts of world, that can only see it through digital media, magazines etc. which in many ways can have a very similar effect to that of an unbuilt project. Even though, it was most likely not the intention of the author, there is one particular project that has come to my attention which I think, contains many of the characteristics suggested by ObjectOriented Ontology. The recently completed project, which doesn’t necessarily have the scale of an object, and if does, it can be categorized as a pretty large scale object, which is isn’t a single object but more of a cluster of objects, which in an architectural sense, all belong to one architectural composition, is the City of Culture of Galicia by Peter Eisenman Architects. Although Peter was not trying to produce an Object-Oriented architecture, I think what he produced has a level of relevance to the discussions taking place about the subject. What I find particularly interesting about this project is the process that was taken to achieve enough architectural difference while providing all the necessary functional
| OOO in Architecture
| Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivison
spaces required by the client. One big critique from Mark Foster Gage was that many building todays, have a very clear process and often the process turn into a diagram which becomes the building in itself. In the case of City of Culture shows a level of complexity where the has a difficult time trying to figure out exactly where all these layers of different systems are coming from. The tectonics of the architecture show a certain familiarity throughout, the type of geometry, the relationship between commonly used tectonic assemblies, the material applications. But it becomes particularly very interesting when the system that the architect created to come up with these shapes starts to break all those familiarities, and starts to produce strange, maybe uncomfortable relationships between systems. From looking at an aerial image is hard to tell what are the architect’s priorities, weather the roof is more important or the ground is more important. Because of the way the project is executed, it seems that neither the roof are the ground are important but rather the vertical cuts that happen throughout, reveling the profile of the roof. What makes this project particularly very strong is the unexpected moments that the architecture produces, although they were not intentionally made this way, the architect still was the creator of the system that gave birth to such weird relationships. In a lecture that he gave with
| 95
Greg Lynn, they discussed, together with other Eisenman’s projects, the particulates that led to this project, he explains: let’s take Santiago, the way we took the diagrams of control into the digital, and it’s an elaborate digital project, who knows weather is right or wrong according to what the original idea was, I certainly don’t know, the reason that is out of control is when I go there I say ‘wow that’s fantastic how did they did they do that?’ and somebody said ‘well, you did that’ and of course I didn’t do that.”10 I find extremely intriguing is when the architect admits to not be the creator of those types of relationships, that in many ways these moments became to existence purely by coincidence and therefore they are free of any intentional relationship to their creator.
While it might not be possible to create a total Object Oriented Ontology Architecture, I still believe that in our contemporary world, we can still create pieces of architecture that are both inspired and represent a level of attention to what OOO is suggesting. I do agree with Mark Foster Gage, that most of architecture today is being undermined and overmined by interdisciplinary information, and that we have lost track of our role as architects in the path to create relevant architecture that more is concerned with its disciplinary affects rather than issues outside the discipline. I look forward to continue to find the relevance of Object Oriented Ontology in architecture, it is an intriguing thought to believe that it may as be next big movement in the architectural discourse.
Peter Eisenman Architects, City of Culture in Galicia
10 Eisenman, Peter, “The Foundations of Digital Architecture.” CCA Channel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKCrepgOix4&t=1792s)29:30
96 |
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
The Shape of Knowledge Semester Course Instructor Team Description
2GBX Spring 2017 DS 1201 - Design Studio Generative Morphologies Kristy Balliet Jennifer Dow + Jose Carlos Garcia This studio took on the controversial discussion of how the universities and places for education should look in the future, and attempted to delineate how contemporary architecture could engage with the cunning politics of architecture in relation to learning spaces. The class was led by three different professors, each of them with one particular and unique focus on such problem. Kristy Balliet's studio focused on an architecture that challenges the presumption of an architectural front and engages a design discussion centered on a multitude of orientations. As a typology, the academic building historically prioritized the front. Often an elevated mass, it commanded attention as it ‘faced’ the campus. In lieu of the architectural front, we focused on architectural profiles and their capacity to reorient, frame spaces beyond, address diverse audiences and maintain attention both inside and out. In the studio we designed a set of architectural profiles, seemingly unrelated, in order to create an architectural mass and volumes that oscillate between singular and multiple, hidden and exposed – to design a building that is all front. The version of architecture ‘in the round’ engaged volumetric layering to both highlight and blur transitions. Our project developed into a problem of single and multiple. In an institution multiple activities have the function of one, and the architectural qualities of a campus often read as multiple, our challenge was in creating a proposal of multiple objects that where connected all in one. Such an approach allowed intricacies between geometries which generated spaces with qualities to accommodate multiple activities, all within and around a single mass.
| 97
98 |
y
Concept Diagram
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
| 99
Object + Character Studies
100|
| Design Studio II
Multiple Objects + Single Object Diagram
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
ELEVATION FIGURES ELEVATION FIGURES
FAC FAC
PLAN FIGURES PLAN FIGURES
FAC FAC
|101
FACE PROFILES
PLA
PLAN + ELEVATION PROFILE CHARACTER FACE PROFILES
PLA
Figural Elevation + Front Profiles
102|
| Design Studio II
PHASE II Residential Tower Wellness Center
Program Organization Diagram
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
|103
PHASE I Auditorium New SCI-Arc Gallery Administration Building
EXISTING Existing SCI-Arc Building SCI-Arc Wood Shop + Robot House Magic Box
104|
Operation Diagram
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
OOR PLAN
0”
|105
B
A
PARKING AMPITHEATER
AUDITORIUM A
B
OPEN PLAZA
RETAIL LOBBY
PARKING
Plaza + Parking Level Floor Plan
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
SANTA FE
B
ME RR IC K
ST
106|
PARKING
ENTRY LOBBY A SCI-Arc STORE + PRINT CENTER AMPITHEATER
AUDITORIUM A
OPEN PLAZA
RESIDENT LOBBY
FITNESS CENTER LOBBY
SCI-Arc OUTDOOR SHOP YARD
4T
H
ST R
WOODSHOP
EE
T
MERRICK ST
OR PLAN
B
Ground Level Floor Plan
MAGIC BOX
SANTA FE
ST ME RR IC K
PARKING
A ADMIN M W
GALLERY
AUDITORIUM A
M
W
B
RESIDENTIAL TOWER
WELLNESS CENTER
SHOP YARD
4T
H
ST R
EE
T
ST
0”
B
MERRICK
OOR PLAN
|107
Third Level Floor Plan
108|
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
|109
B
B
Longitudinal Building Section
110|
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
A
A
| Kristy Balliet
|111
Transverse Building Section
112|
Axonometric
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
|113
Scenarios: SCIArc Connection + Inside/Outside Amphitheater
114|
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
|115
Scenario: Plaza + Amphitheater Relationship
116|
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
|117
Scenario: 4th Street Campus Access
118|
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
|119
Scenario: Overall Campus Image
120|
| Design Studio II
Model Photographs - Overall
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
|121
Model Photographs - Northern + Southern Facades
122|
| Design Studio II
| The Shape of Knowledge
| Kristy Balliet
|123
* Click to see Animation
Final Animation
| Visual Studies II
124|
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
Fake Facades Semester Course Instructor Team Description
2GBX Spring 2017 VS 4201 - Visual Studies II Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh Jennifer Dow + Jose Carlos Garcia This course was in response to the recent US political elections. According to critics, the use of graphic design during the 2016 campaign and its ability to misrepresent information and truth through fake news, image making and exaggerations contributed to the spread of mass communication of information that over time changed the definition of those subjects’ correctness. During the post-2008 US election, Alejandro Zaera Polo wrote an essay in Log 17 titled, The Politics of the Envelope. This course is a prequel to similar notions of the building envelope and its role as a political tool in modern architecture. More specifically, the course focused on further developing “spherical envelopes” as a surface problem for contemporary practice. We investigated an effective link between architectural graphics and architectural elements through the making of Fake Facades. The ultimate aim of the course was to produce a conversation, through renderings and animations, around the use of images as a political tool within the built environment. The course was broken down into a series of exercises which culminated into a final exhibition of midterm work in combination with three animations generated from early exercises
|125
126|
| Visual Studies II
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
Spherical Envelopes In this exercise, we were charged with the idea to generate a spherical envelope that would serve as a canvas and a point of departure for following exercises. This assignment introduced to ZBrush and its potential to quickly transform geometrical primitives into new and unique geometrical objects
|127
ZTools A + B
128|
| Visual Studies II
ZTools A | Front + Back
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|129
Scenario:ZTools OverallACampus | Left +Image Right
130|
| Visual Studies II
ZTools B | Front + Back
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|131
ZTools B | Left + Right
132|
| Visual Studies II
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
Facade Geometry This assignment allowed us to transform Experimental Jetset’s Automatically Arranged Alphabets into geometry using Zbrush. The previously generated object were used as a point of departure. After repeating the exercise a couple of times, we generated a new facade geometry
|133
ZTools A + B
134|
| Visual Studies II
ZTools A | Front + Back
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|135
ZTools A | Left + Right
136|
| Visual Studies II
ZTools B | Front + Back
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|137
ZTools B | Left + Right
138|
| Visual Studies II
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
* Using the 2.5 Brushes in ZBrushed, in this assignment we took an existing facade image and transformed it into something new. The brushes introduced simple operations which allowed a level of controlled complexity necessary for the mid-term assignment
Original Image
|139
Transformed Image with 2.5 Brushes
140|
Original Image
| Visual Studies II
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|141
Transformed Image with 2.5 Brushes
142|
Original Image
| Visual Studies II
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|143
Transformed Image with 2.5 Brushes
144|
| Visual Studies II
Mid-Term
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|145
146|
| Visual Studies II
Mid-Term Exhibition: Board 2.a
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|147
Mid-Term Exhibition: Board 01
148|
| Visual Studies II
Mid-Term Exhibition: Board 03
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|149
Mid-Term Exhibition: Board 2.b
150|
| Visual Studies II
| Fake Facades
Final Exhibition Animations
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|151
152|
| Visual Studies II
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|153
* Click to see Animation
Animation 02 - Distorted Fields
154|
| Visual Studies II
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|155
* Click to see Animation
Animation 02 - Constructed Object
156|
| Visual Studies II
| Fake Facades
| Ryan Tyler Martinez + Shawn Rassekh
|157
* Click to see Animation
Animation 03 - Misleading Surfaces
| History + Theory II
158|
| Continued Conversation on Communication
| Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivison
A Continued Conversation on Communication Semester Course Instructor Team Description
2GBX Spring 2017 HT 2200 - Theories of Contemporary Architecture Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivision N/A As a continuation of the first semester, the main objective of this seminar was to learn a platform of knowledge to do work on the territory of contemporary, global architectural practice in the interest of formulating my studio production as well as my future professional agendas. Currently, practice is in the process of being actively redefined by shifting political, social, technological, and ecological paradigms. Taking as a starting point the idea that various modes of appropriation have been formative in the shaping of architectural history, the class examined the complex terrain defined by the recent shifting of paradigms and examine how these acts of appropriation are actively configuring the contemporary moment. Acting as architectural entrepreneurs, the goal was to identify niches for future action and innovation. The seminar introduced several contemporary disciplinary themes through readings and project presentations. These themes are aligned with the content of the 2GBX studio and are intended to outline research trajectories that we pursued collectively throughout the duration of the course in the form of in-class discussions and presentations. We were required to conduct ongoing research, culminating in a clearly formulated argument that advances a specific position on one of the disciplinary themes introduced in the seminar. This material is presented in the form of a written essay.
|159
“How architecture engages in regimes of representation, and how architects represent themselves within these relationships is a domain in which we need to engage if we are to tamper with the regimes of power within which we need to practice� - Alejandro Zaera-Polo
The Great Wave off Kanagawa, Katsushika Hokusai
Conversations about the influence of clients in architecture rarely takes place within the academia environment, and is seldom a topic of interest to historians or critics. Academia generally teaches us how to communicate with each other, but it rarely tells us how to sell our ideas to clients. While we can perfectly understand our design decisions and deliver the message to an audience of architects, peers, or classmates, such
language of communication admittedly is a language that most of clients simply won’t ever understand. This is particularly a problem when a young practice starts to chase realistic projects after exhausting their speculative project, and although it may seem unnecessary, having a method of communicating with a client all the sudden becomes extremely important. I believe that an academic discussion on the topic is perfectly valid. I will be laying
160|
| History + Theory II
| Continued Conversation on Communication
out my argument based on a recent essay written by Alejandro Zaera-Polo called the Hokusai Wave (a follow up from a series of lectures given at Princeton and UCLA) where he mainly addresses the issue of communication with clients in the architecture practice. It is also necessary to incorporate some of the criticism stated in following responses from Sylvia Lavin and Jeff Kipnis. In such conversation, Alejandro, in a nutshell, argues that our best way to communicate with clients is by relating our design decisions to iconography or imagery for which the client can understand and relate to. He argues that is even a better scenario if we could use such iconography to “forecast the development of a discipline of form with a double agenda, operating simultaneously as an organizational device and as a communicative device.”1 Which is to say that using the image or the icon as a metaphor should serve as the organizing tool as well as the communicating tool. To this, Sylvia Lavin argues that “metaphors aren’t useful enough – they are inadequate pretexts for driving or justifying a project – to compensate for the appearance, sentimental attachment to meaning, to the logic of identity and to the regime of appearance.”2 The conversation is continued by Jeff Kipnis which agrees with neither Alejandro or Sylvia, but rather claims that “what we need is failure to communicate!!”3 Thus, we have two critic
| Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivison
historians making an argument against the practicing architect, which I find, although constructive, counterintuitive to what Alejandro was trying to get at in the first place. Given that FOA is a very experienced practice with a vast number of projects, both built and speculative, how can we really judge if they have done right or wrong? All we can really say is that FOA has managed to solve a standard business problem, and has executed work which is not necessarily linked to an architectural theory as Sylvia or Jeff would’ve preferred. As the conversation continues, it is necessary to speculate what Alejandro would’ve responded to their criticism, trying to make an argument of why iconography and meaning as a point of departure to justify architecture may as well be a valid method to communicate with clients and the general public. Realistically, many of us end up practicing real architecture, weather we go on and teach for a few years, or immediately start working, our ultimate goal will always be the realization of one and many architectural projects. Even if some of us decided to keep a foot within academia, our goal will still be to teach great designers who will eventually end up practicing. Some will end up working for a firm and make a solid career out of it, while others may start their own young speculative practice. Still, at some point of their career such practices will end up with a client and
1 Zaera-Polo, Alejandro, “Hokusai Wave.” Quaderns (April 2005): 86 2 Lavin, Sylvia, “Conversations over Cocktails.” Quaderns (April 2005): 89 3 Kipnis, Jeff, “What we Got Need is Failure to Communicate.” Quaderns (April 2005): 98
|161
encounter the necessity to communicate their ideas utilizing methods other than the ones utilized within the speculative practice. I believe that this is when the real challenge begins, all the sudden what we thought to be the right way to talk about design, is simply a bunch of fluff for others. The realization here is that each of these different young practices is going to eventually find their own unique way of communication, and in many, such way of communication won’t be exemplary of what an intellectual like Jeff or Sylvia would’ve desired. This was FOA when they first started, a highly academia driven and speculative practice, that as it started to win commissions they encountered issues that weren’t particularly part of their intellectual endeavors. One of which is the central topic for Alejandro’s essay, the role of clients in the architectural project and the means of communication when convincing the client of a particular architectural idea. According to Alejandro there is two types of architects: (1) The ones that invite the client for cocktails and operate through a narrower set of constraints, with usually a more conservative architecture output, and (2) the ones that usually stay more connected to the academia and intellectual environment, which operate through exhibitions, writings,
4 Zaera-Polo, 77 5 Kipnis, 99 6 Zaera-Polo, 77
competitions etc.4 In very simple words and to settle terms as I formulate an argument, what we see here is the type of architect that is focused primarily in providing an ideal architectural service which is different from the architect that stays within academia as a way to execute more speculative projects which allow interest of greater audiences. Both are very common categories nowadays, but in the urgency to stay financially afloat, architects within academia seek for alternatives to make their way into an economically sustainable practice. Kipnis puts it simple “outside the academy and thus within a common ambition to build, the antithesis of speculative architecture is architecture conceived as a service profession.”5 It sounds rather disappointing and sad, but it is part of our reality. How we do it and the methodologies utilized by different practices is going to vary from practice to practice, no one has the right formula, or better said, there isn’t a determined particular series of steps taken to persuade clients into believing that our ideas are what they should be spending their money on. While Alejandro brakes it down into two categories, he admittedly states that “of course neither category exists in a pure state” 6 neither does he believe to be part of one nor the other, but rather a combination of the two. Which he argues that “in doing so, we guarantee a certain initiative in our
162|
| History + Theory II
relationship with whoever is invested with the authority to commission and administer projects, and we are empowered to pursue certain goals beyond the mere provision of architectural services.�7 Which is to say that the more they keep clients within a friendly relationship, the more they are able to pursue a certain speculative research that addresses issues bigger that the client or the project itself. For FOA this is essential part of their practice, which led them to believe in this issue of power and control in relationship to representation, and is essentially the base for their growth as a firm, and many of their projects. FOA’s practice, as Alejandro puts it, although it has heavily invested in the academia for a good amount of time, due to their architectural ambitions and their desire to build, eventually found their way into practice with a specific thought that
Yokohama Ferry Terminal, FOA
7 Zaera-Polo, 78 8 Zaera-Polo, 78
| Continued Conversation on Communication
| Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivison
formulated itself as they won commissions and executed a variety of projects: how architecture engages in regimes of representation and how architects represent themselves within these relationships is a domain in which we need to engage if we are to tamper with the regimes of power within which we need to practice.8 In other words, Alejandro argues that by utilizing an image, which the client is able to understand as a tool of not only communication but also formal organization, then they are able to achieve a certain amount of power that enables them to pursue other speculative ideas within architectural project. Such belief has been formulated at the same time as many of their project were taking place, the most famous of all, the Yokohama Ferry Terminal, followed by a series of local projects in Spain, a police station, a theater, a center for technology, a high-rise tower, and later other commissions all around the globe.
Villajoyosa Municipal Police Headquarters, FOA
|163
In very short terms, it can be interpreted that Alejandro exhausted the method of using an icon as a metaphor which helped the project take an organizational formal language while sending a clear message across of legitimacy and culture sensibility. This interpretation sparkled a light of emergency for both Sylvia and Jeff, which both came across with a very harsh criticism on Alejandro’s approach to his built architecture. In the one hand, Sylvia bases her disagreement on a series of interpretations that might have not been Alejandro’s intention. Her criticism came after she listened to Alexandro give a lecture at UCLA, were he mainly talked about his projects in a catalog manner, and not necessarily following the argument that he had built up in his essay. What she grabbed on the most was that “Alejandro offered the audience a series of metaphors as a way to organize this massive oeuvre:
the filmstrip, the palm tree, the bullet wall and so on.”9 She continues to discuss that “metaphors remained the dominant feature of his discourse to the UCLA audience composed not of clients but of students, peers and colleagues”10 I guess my question to Sylvia will be if she actually believes that he was doing anything wrong in talking about his work in this way? I mean, at many different capacities this may as well be the only way to talk about the work, not because is right or wrong but because this is what the work is in reality. Which is to say, I dare to argue that not every explanation for an architectural project should have a theoretical background, which in this case I believe he does have one, at least at the methodology level and not a project level. He manages to give the audience of academia a reason of why metaphors, without bringing it up when talking to clients. I can see why he would want such
BBC Music Centre, FOA
Torrevieja Theatre, FOA
9 Lavin, 88 10 Lavin, 88
164|
| History + Theory II
thing, and because of that he gets not very pleasing responses from Sylvia and Jeff, but I happen to be in his side for the only reason that I can see how, in his struggle to explain projects to clients he had to come up with such an approach. This is a struggle where many of us as architecture students are headed, and sooner or later will have to come up with our own methods of communication. With Jeff Kipnis response, although highly theoretical and heavy on terminology, and a very ambiguous title “What we need is failure to communicate,” I believe that he manages to undo what Alejandro had achieved in his essay, which was to try to find a way to communicate. I believe this a real struggle of real life and in the
| Continued Conversation on Communication
| Marcelyn Gow + Tim Ivison
practice of architecture, that again as young practitioners will have to address sooner or later. And one thing I’m almost sure of, the majority of us will probably not be selling our projects through the use of a highly speculative language, yes, most likely it will be part of our repertoire but it would probably not be the center of conversation with the client. In one thing, I do agree with Jeff, he argues that “other architects have managed to communicate with clients without compromise and in so doing have even advanced the experimental project itself”11 where he gives as an example Coop Himmelb(l)au’s BMW headquarters project where they were able to “produce a stunning film walk-through of the BMW building-to-be that combined computer graphics, computerized motion photography
BMW Headquarters, Coop Himmelb(l)au
11 Kipnis, 95
|165
of physical models, blue-screen techniques and digital animation… the film functioned as a virtuosic performance of the building’s architecture, and the client got it.” Therefore, the problem with Alejandro’s approach, according to Jeff, is not about him ignoring the relevance of theory in his methods, but rather his interest in the metaphor and the symbol. For Jeff “revisiting the problem of architectural communication is flogging a dead horse, particularly when such desiccated terms as metaphor, symbol and other blatant forms of architectural signification begin to climb out of the crave again”12 While Jeff believes that this issue of the iconography and the image is an architectural discourse that has already taken place, I still question whether or not is actually wrong. At the end of the day, FOA has managed to convince more than one client and has been able to produce great pieces of architecture. Although I agree with Jeff and Sylvia at some capacity, I don’t believe is too much of a problem.
It’s actually quite admirable what FOA has been able to achieve utilizing this method of client communication. By no means, I agree with Alejandro’s method one hundred percent, on the contrary I disagree at many capacities, what I do agree on is that we must learn at least one way of communicating with clients. At the end of the day, we all can agree that most of the times, clients don’t really care nor understand the architect’s actual design intensions. Generally speaking, all they are looking for is a project that is on budget, that serves their architectural necessities and is somewhat aesthetically pleasing. Of course, this doesn’t excuse us from being aware of the intellectual conversations taking place around us. It is in our responsibility to push an architectural idea that goes beyond architectural service necessities, but when it comes down to explaining a project to the city, the community, the government or whoever the client maybe, we must seek for an alternate conversation bringing the public and academia to a common ground.
References 1. Zaera-Polo, Alejandro, The Hokusai Wave, Quaderns 5.0, April 2005 2. Lavin, Sylvia, Conversations over Cocktails, Quaderns 5.0, April 2005 3. Kipnis, Jeff, What We Got Need is Failure to Communicate!! , Quaderns 5.0, April 2005
12 Kipnis, 94
|
OILOFTROP