C a l i f o r n i a P o l y t e c h n i c U n i v e r s i t y, San Luis Obispo
Nathan Mok Arch 101 - Fall 2015 Professor Michael Lucas
Nathan Mok
born September 4, 1997
from Castro Valley, California Bay Area Native
loves eating, sleeping, basketball, and soccer
In the book, Experiencing Architecture, the author Steen Eiler Rasmussen discusses what is explained in the title. He addresses various different ideas and elements that explain how his experiences during his journey in the topic of Architecture took place. For me, the novel was very interesting because when I first chose the major of Architecture, I hardly had a clue about what it represented, the details of it, or what it was even about. Reading the novel was like an introduction into the world of architecture for me. It gave me a first taste of what it was like and what it was going to be like for me for the rest of my life. In the beginning of the book, the main topic Rasmussen talks about is the job of architect. An architect’s job is creating many different sets of instructions to follow for projects to come, instead of simply just finishing the object. In the book, he states that details do not tell anything important about architecture, but rather they are simply puzzle pieces to create something great as a whole. These series of words appealed to me because it totally changed my view of architecture from that point. All my life, I thought architecture was looking and evaluating small details, and from those small details are where everything falls into place. It was very interesting to me because it makes a lot of sense; when architects build something, they spend their time making it into a whole, rather than just many small factors, and these things appear as one rather than appearing as a separate. It taught me small details are unnecessary to what the final product is seen as when it is a whole, and expanded my view of the functionality and experience of Architecture in the process. In the second and third chapters of the book, Rasmussen explains solids and cavities, and how important these elements are to the world of Architecture. He explains the importance of concave and convex forms in a structure, and how the allow us as spectators to see space or lack thereof in a picture or object. An example is how a concave form could give us an impression that there is space in an area, and how a convex form could give us an impression that we are seeing mass when there isn’t actually any in the presence. In the book, Rasmussen talks about the Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne in Rome and about it’s structure. Being built on a curved road, the structure gives a slightly convex shape, giving spectators like us a feel that there is a large concavity on the inside. When looking at it in real life, it turns out that there isn’t actually a concavity, just a large space instead. This way of thinking allows us to have our imaginations run free and see things that are not actually there, being sort of like an illusion in a sense. When we leave our mind to imagine things, we can create images in our head of how it is actually shapes, which is why the way that solids and cavities are placed is such an important part of architecture. Learning about spaces showed me how something so small or something that we don’t usually pay attention to can have such a large effect on the final product, even when we don’t think it will in the first place. One interesting thing that really appealed to me while I was reading the book was about rhythm, and how it persists in Architecture. The definition of rhythm always appeared to me as a musical thing, but after reading the book, it is something that I associate with Architecture as well. According to Rasmussen, rhythm is apparent in almost all structures, and within each structure that it applies to, there is a default rhythm. The rhythm can either be renown or common, but essentially, there is a rhythm. In the text, Rasmussen says “the absolutely regular repetition of the same elements, for example solid, void, solid, void, just as you count one, two, one, two. (128)” This means that the rhythm is like a repetition, and it appears and reappears very commonly. This is something that I have noticed while looking at building but never associated it with being called “rhythm” until now. He also states that in the world or architecture, the most delightful examples of rhythm are seen with “strict regularity,” which means according to him, the most beautiful things are found in simplicity. As rhythm relates to music and architecture, another thing that can be associated with both is scale and proportion. Scales differ from one another. Through the work of scales and proportion, we can see so much of how a building is planned to be built, without even building it yet. It gives us an image of what can be done, or what will be done in our minds. Designs, diagrams, graphs; they all come from the use of scale and proportion. Scale and Proportion helps us to see the possibilities of what we can do in the Architecture world, and gives us a limitless imagination of what we can do. Rasmussen talks about the importance of scales and proportions in his books because it gives us “harmony” in finding a way in which things are produced. With the use of these tools, architecture has expanded in ways that we see things, big or small. I learned so much about the world of architecture from Steen Eiler Rasmussen. Though some concepts were difficult for me to grasp, his view on architecture is something that has guided me throughout my first quarter, and words that I can now cherish for the rest of my life. I am very thankful for this book because even though it was a tough read, my perception of architecture is now completely different from what I had before I came to 3 Cal Poly, and it has guided me in the right direction. I will definitely put what I learned into good use for my future years as an Architecture student and beyond.
Styles are basically visual enhancements that allow viewers to distinguish differences in pieces of work. What it has to do with architecture is that it allows designers and architects to create something in their own little way, and to express themselves through their artwork, buildings, or models they create. In the past, we would have styles of various historic eras in which they closely resemble each other, based on the area or time in which it was made. “Most architecture can be classified as a chronology or styles which changes over time reflecting changing fashions, beliefs and religions, or the emergence of new ideas, technology, or materials which make new styles possible” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architectural_style). Right now, the era in which we are creating work is called the modern era. I’ve learned that as we look at different styles, we are trained to admire them and to see them as an example for something that we also want to create and/or replicate, but not exactly copy. By looking at different styles of past architects, we are aiming to take what we like from their style of work and to create our own little twist to it to make it into something somewhat original. We can make our own style by using the fundamentals of the three time models: pass pushing, immediacy and presence, and future pulls. For pass pushing, we use past models and what we see in the dominance of our memory to as a fundamental building block to start what we are creating. In immediacy and presence, we use our experience of what we have learned to create something. From the category of future pulls, we find possible innovations that can be made to create something new. Our goal is not to design “in” a certain style but to learn from it and add our own toppings to the cake. A big part of style is take simple ideas that you like from one “style” and simple ideas from another “style” that you like, and combine them to make your personal style.
http://www.presidentsmedals.com/showcase/2009/l/2449_06185311005.jpg
In Architecture, the word “function” means the exercise of performing an activity, or in an architect’s world, creating something new based on known knowledge. The word function is considered forbidden in the world of architecture. Based on the word “function,” there are four crucial differences or subtitles of the word when using function in an architecture sense. The words are conventional, practical, functional, and pragmatic. These words explain to us different ways of how the word “function is used,” and teach us the proper ways to use it in the world of architecture. The word conventional in architecture means in accordance with or based on what is generally thought or believed. This is important because it means functioning in an original way, or doing something the way it should be done. Conventional means to do something that’s not out of the ordinary. The word practical in architecture means using an idea, method, or plan likely to be more successful that using something else, like a theory or an idea. This is kind of similar to conventional, in that it uses known facts for creating something. It is relevant to functioning in architecture because it means doing something that seems to work, instead of going out of the box or out of the ordinary. The word functional means designed to have a practical use, or used to contribute to the maintenance or development of a larger whole. This is relevant because it means it is a small part of a larger function. The word pragmatic in architecture means dealing with things sensible and realistically. This word is relevant because it bases things off practical things rather than theoretical things. All of these four words shows what function means, in that we use ideas known to create something, instead of the theoretical. Learning of these four subtitles, I understand why the word “function” is forbidden; because the word means that we already use ideas given to us or we “copy” ideas, instead of creating new ideas of our own. The word “function” is something we would rather not use, because for an architect, it is important to be original and create our own theories rather that using other known ideas that might have already been used. Instead of avoiding these ideas, we should try to appeal to it and own it, and take it in as our own. We should try to use parts of things that we know and try to create something different. What I’m trying to say is that we take a little part of something known but instead of copying it fully, we should try to make something out of it that we created out of our own original mind, so it can be something different and something that’s your own, while also being linked to old ideas of architecture in some way. https://www.architecture.com/Explore/Stories/Assets/Images/TheEvolutionOfTheSkyscraper/ BritishAndAmericanSkyscrapers_IMG_4361_1269x548px.jpg
5
Format is a term for the way a page is used to tell a story. In the world of Architecture, the way something is formatted means everything. No ones going to go into a building that’s formatted like it’s going to be dangerous or if it’s unappealing. Architecture is all about how something looks and how appealing it is to a certain person, which in many cases, are the people around you. A format is a way to reach out to someone, to gauge their interest, and to extend information to them in a way that doesn’t use words. With format, you can appeal to someone without even saying a thing. When formatting media, the things that are most important are the sizes, the fonts, the images, and so much more. By formatting them in a way that makes it appealing to the spectator, you have already drawn their attention. If the media is messy looking or hardly legible to read, it makes the piece of work unappealing, and makes someone turn the other way. One thing I learned from the lecture is that it doesn’t have to be perfect. There’s no such thing as perfect. Theres always going to be something better or something flashier, but the best way to approach something is to make it unique. Make it special. Make it your own. Make it something that you would want to read or look at. Something that’s pleasant to the eye. It doesn’t and shouldn’t be something that is so colorful that it makes your head want to explode. Sometimes simplicity is best. Format is everything. Make it count.
https://bufferblog-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/upworthy-headline-rules.png
The first lecture I attended was from the RRM design Group. Coincidentally enough, they also reside in San Luis Obispo (but probably not a coincidence). One thing I found interesting from this group is that they also share another thing in common with Cal Poly. They focus on can poly’s philosophy of learning by doing. From listening to many of their people lecture, I learned that with this group, their experience leads to success, and they also take an interdisciplinary approach in their style of work. RRM has taken many people from Cal Poly’s 16,000 CAED Alumni (at least 200). Their business started in 1974, when it was originally named after Priest, Richmond, Wolf and Rossi. In 1979, they changed their name to RRM, with their founders’ names of Richmond, Rossi, and Montgomery. Through 40 years of history, they have seven market sectors, which are Urban Planning and Design, Residential Projects, Commercial Projects, Land Planning, Recreation, Infrastructure Projects, and Civil and Industrial Projects. One thing I found interesting from hearing one of them speak is that even though they are employed, they are still learning every single day. Even after graduating, they still learn from their peers and from the projects that they have to do. Every day is a new and exciting day because they know that they have a new challenge to take on and they get a thrill from it. It was inspiring seeing as how these guys all seem to have such a great chemistry and how they work together so well to create such great projects. The RRM Design Group was really inspiring because it showed me the other side of the world of Architecture and one that I have yet to be a part of: the job life of Architecture. It helped me realize what a great major I was in and helped me expand on my thinking of what to do next, and I am really grateful that I attended this lecture. The second Hearst Lecture I attended was by Chris Luebkeman, who is a Arup Director. The main reason he was speaking was to tell us of innovation. He told us that change is constant and that the future is already here, and prepared us that participation is what shapes our world. At first, what he was saying was really basic, but when he started getting into it, I realized the truth in his words and I realized what he was saying. He talked about the changes in the world and about how fast that this earth is rapidly changing because of all the innovation and technology around us. His mission was to facilitate conversations to us about how to embrace this change in the world and its effect on the built environment. It was really interesting to me listening to his approach on life, and how he sees future change in the world as a way to reach out to people and tell them about how to gain a better understanding on how to approach new things. I’m glad I attended this essay because it taught be so much more about the future of architecture and technology, some things that I look forward to in the future.
7
When I first chose the major of Architecture at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, I never imagined it how broad the topic would be, and how many factors go in to making it so great. The information I learned about Architecture throughout the course of this class really expanded my ways of thinking, and positively changed my views on how I saw Architecture. From this class during Fall Quarter, I really gained an interest in Architecture, and it gave me a respect for it that I’ve never felt before. I hope the knowledge I gained from this class can help future students, just as it has helped me.