GRASS ROOTS
GRASSROOTS
Architecture is an ever-present form of visual storytelling, displaying a history of the past, an identity for the present, and a story for the future. The built environment has the ability to capture the history of a place and to tell that story through space. The Grassroots Exhibit, celebrating Clemson University School of Architecture’s Centennial, forms a visual, spatial link between the past, present, and future, becoming a point in the timeline of a unique place and its culture. In order for visual storytelling to occur in the form of architecture, a multi-layered, sequential language must be developed. A spatial language is
needed to tell the story of a particular place. When a spatial language is developed, it is possible to tell the appropriate stories - stories of the people who inhabit or have inhabited a place, the cultural history of a site, and an evolution of use. Buildings and installations are instruments and museums of time. They enable us to see and understand the passing of history, and to participate in time cycles that surpass individual life. In order for Grassroots to tell the appropriate stories, interactive architecture must be created, that is, architecture that engages with the history of a site, respects existing conditions of a place,
relates to present needs, and provides the potential for future use and adaptation. Architectural installation is our primary instrument in relating us with space and time, and giving these dimensions a human measure. Ultimately, the goal was to create a new architecture to enhance the sense of being part of the Clemson story, and thus part of the past, present, and future.
CONTENTS 01
idea
02
site
03
construction
04
interaction
05
stories
06
memory + afterlife
07
hindsight
01 “
IDEA
one of the most impressive things about the music of Johann Sebastian Bach is its “architecture.” Its construction seems clear and transparent. It is possible to pursue the details of the melodic, harmonic, and rhythmical elements without losing the feeling for the composition as a whole-the whole that makes sense of the details.” - Peter Zumthor, 2006
Translating the concept of storytelling into form involves a spatial language that reveres the past, fits present needs, and is adaptable to future use. The story of Clemson is always evolving, always growing, always changing. Likewise, the exhibit needed to be able to grow and change to relate to conditions of the place and its participants. The form of the exhibit constantly mediates between reality and perception, between individual and collective memory. When experiencing a work of art, a curious exchange takes place; the work projects its aura, and we project our own emotions and percepts on the work. Enigmatically, we encounter ourselves in the work. Architecture relates, mediates and projects meanings. The ultimate meaning of any work is beyond architecture; it directs
our consciousness back to the world and towards our own sense of self and being. In memorable experiences of architecture, space, matter and time fuse into one singular dimension, into the basic substance of being, that penetrates our conscious. This sensibility has emerged as a distinct feature of the Grassroots installation: a juxtaposition of the most basic of construction materials to conjure their innate beauty, within the context of time. The timeless task of architecture is to create embodied and lived existential metaphors that concretize and structure our being in the world. Architecture reflects, materializes and eternalizes ideas and images of ideal life. The Grassroots installation enables us to structure, understand and remember the shapeless flow of reality and, ultimately,
to recognize and remember who we are in relation to our individual and collective experience at Clemson. Grassroots enables us to perceive and understand the dialectics of permanence and change, to settle ourselves in the world, and place ourselves in the continuum of culture and time.
grass seed
a Matrix of individual names resembles the seeds of our history. the grass reveals our story.
In response to the Centennial celebration of Clemson’s School of architecture, the Grassroots exhibit seeks to engage those who defined the program’s unique history and simultaneously project that history to current faculty and students.
2 The matrix of individuals who make up the whole of Clemson University’s School of Architecture resemble the seeds of its history. The Grass story lines reveal both the individual’s experience and then, when story lines amass, a larger context of various eras within the schools history.
A unique moment occurs for those participants whose paths have made numerous intersections with the School of Architecture. These individuals have received degrees, joined the faculty, and likewise made major contributions and played significant roles in shaping the ever-evolving history of Clemson architecture.
02 “
SITE
‘LEE HALL...IS A TESTAMENT TO DETERMINATION, CREATIVITY AND COLLABORATION. WE CELEBRATE THOSE WHO EACH DAY FILL THIS BUILDING WITH IDEAS, ENERGY, INSPIRATION AND ENGAGEMENT” - RICHARD GOODSTEIN, 2012
2
2
2
2
2
2
131 132 133 134 135
LEE I 1
1
171
1
169
2
2
2
M
1
172
1
2
126
2
124
2
2
141 142 143 W
2
127 128
2
100
M
2
2
136 137 138 139 140
2
129
2
2
2
112E
112D
2
123
LEE II
2
122 2
1
121
101
2
120 2
119 1
101A 1
168
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
118
118B
2
2
118A
100A
1W
165 163 161 159 157 155 166 164 162 160 158
M 1W
152
1
151
1
150
2
113
2
111
The predetermined site for this installation was the bridge between Lee 2 and Lee 3, which is essentially a connector between the undergraduate and graduate architecture schools. This bridge brings together the older architecture facilities with the newer facilities, which provided the perfect space for this project to the past, present, and future of the Clemson architecture program. The site, which is 25 feet long by 14.5 feet wide, is also a space of change. Being a connector between the two buildings, people are constantly moving through the space. The variety of people coming and going through the bridge ensures that there is continually a change of occupancy and activity. Essentially being a glass box, the visual qualities in this space change throughout the
day. From sunrise to sunset and through the changes of the seasons, the varying amounts of natural light coming in are always altering the space. Along with the constant changes occurring, this glass box also forges a connection with the outdoors, allowing individuals in the space to view the activities occurring outside. When creating the installation, the team felt it was vital not to obstruct the natural movement and changes within the bridge. For this reason, we kept a six-foot corridor clear to allow the free flow of people through the space. We also felt it was important not to impede any natural light coming into the space or block views to the outdoors. Therefore, our team kept the height of the installation under three feet, excluding the
LEE III
grass roots. Finally, we chose to design our time line in a sort of backwards fashion. Instead of reading the time line from left to right, we designed it to be read from right to left. This is done to tie in the aspect of old and new, as the “old” end of the time line is fixed towards Lee 2 and the “new” end is facing Lee 3. Overall, the site served as an organizational piece for the installation. We took all of these aspects of the site into account and began the design process from there.
JOHN JACQUES
“A CONNECTED STRUCTURE THAT IS LIGHT, OPEN & WELL ORDERED”
1
3’-0” 4’-0”
4’-0” 6’-0”
2
Renovated bridge connecting Lee II to the new Lee III.
1
Joint between Lee II (brick) and the bridge space (white) where the exhibit was installed.
2
Daylighting in the bridge allows for natural lighting of the exhibit space. Mechanical ventillation and passerbyers also assisted in the dynamics of the exhibit by encouraging the grass to flow. Because of the bridge’s transitional nature, the exhibit space was designed to be engaged on both sides of the flow of traffic. By purposefully interrupting this path with the participant’s assembly process onlookers engage the piece as well - and potentially interact with the piece themselves.
3
3
4
4
03 “
CONSTRUCTION Scarpa...wedded history and the present in joinery details that unify artifacts with interventions, across materials and across times. His materials engage one another - at the same time that they engage us.� - Ojeda; Pasnik
When determining the materials and assembly of the Grassroots exhibit, it seemed deserved to design a platform where participants engage with the tools of their trade. By simultaneously celebrating the elements and the composition of their experience in the School the participant gains a sense of themselves and also their part in the whole enterprises of Clemson University’s School of Architecture and the profession abroad. This platform included basic materials such as timber, steel, and even foam insulation to obtain basic structural and functional features. Two basic elements, the exhibit table and assembly area, needed to supply very different functions. The assembly area must display the materials, tools and instructions by which participants would build their grass piece stories. The table,
conversely, must allow the composition of stories to speak to those who view it. While both celebrate process, they digress into the two very individual experiences of the individual and the whole. David Pye wrote that “the quality of workmanship is judged...by reference to the designer’s intention,” and, furthermore, that “all workmanship is approximation.” The table, a bed of foam set under a dense matrix of points designating where each Grass pieces would be placed resembled the garden bed within which the grass roots were sewn; and this consequently supported the endeavor to place the exhibit within the small and accessible bridge between Lee II and Lee III. While its craft required a sure attention to detail, the precise bed design was met
with a rough and natural system of roots. These roots, made by welding steel rods in variegated tripod configurations, each held one single constraint and this was to engage the table and the floor within a strict vertical dimension. The assembly station made use of these same roots to support a shelving system for displaying and holding the elements with which the individual would recreate their story. While each individual engaged the same tools for building their Grass piece, their processes involved varying arrangements of materials whereby the participant could spend time reflecting on those pieces that defined their history at the school. Once they completed the assembly they then placed their root within the greater garden bed and reflect on their part in the whole of the school’s history, and even the whole of the profession.
design-build team Sara Ashley Hawkins Danielle Jakubowski Amanda Seligman Kimberly Bandy George Hughes Scott Abernethy Sean Morrisey
Daniel Harding
Students
Professor
Degree(s) received
Story line (piano wire)
Certificate achieved
CUPS
Abroad Programs
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS OTHER ICONS
CUPS
M.S.
Architecture + Health
OTHER ICONS
+
CUPS
M.Arch
OTHER ICONS
CUPS
+
Digital Ecologies
Barcelona, Spain
+
Genoa, Italy
B.Arch
OTHER ICONS
B.A. + B.S.
grass
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
Architecture + Community Build
Charleston, SC
OTHER ICONS
1
Piano wires serve as the story line upon which each participant assembled their unique part in the story of Clemson University’s School of Architecture.
2
Assembly boards use magnet touch-points to hold the wires into place. A metric on the board helps participants to assemble their story such that the grass may begin to reveal patterns within the stories.
3
Vinyl die-cut stickers depicting the various DEGREES, CERTIFICATES, and ABROAD PROGRAMS offered within Clemson University’s School of Architecture allow individuals to define their experience at the school.
1
2
3
C A B
THREE LEGS
C B
A
CROSS SADDLE
B
C
A
TRI POD
roots
4
A sketch model of the tripod legs for the table was made to ensure appropriate leg lengths and angles.
4
A jig was made to set a consistent height for each of the leg combinations. By setting a consistent height, variation in the leg assemblies allowed for a truly unique family of leg “roots.�
5
Once welded together, each of the root units were cleaned and finished with rubber caps.
6
5
6
1/4” foam core 3/4” insulation foam
3/4” plywood 1/2” primed MDF panels
1/2” hot rolled steel rod
bed materials 1
3/4” plywood panels make up the 17’ x 4’ base of the bed.
2
An inscribed edge of 1” x 2” plywood strips were glued and nailed to create a 3” high lip.
3
The new edge condition left a 16’-6” x 3’-6” bed in which layered insulation foam board will sit.
1
2
3
1/16” piano wire
1/4” foam core 3/4” insulation foam 3/4” plywood
1/2” hot rolled steel rod
bed design + assembly
4
3 layers of insulation foam of varying widths stack up to create 2.5 inches of foam base for the table.
4
White MDF siding is mounted to create a continuous and smooth table profile.
5
All seams are puttied and sanded before a final coat of paint is applied to the table’s edges.
6
5
6
04 “
INTERACTION ARCHITECTURE AROUSES SENTIMENTS IN MAN. THE ARCHITECT’S TASK THEREFORE, IS TO MAKE THOSE SENTIMENTS MORE PRECISE.” - Adolf Loos
GRASS ROOTS
1
2
ASSEMBLE YOUR STORY
BY WRAPPING THE DEGREES, CAMPUSES AND CERTIFICATES YOU COMPLETED AT CLEMSON AROUND YOUR STORY LINE
AN HISTORICAL LANDSCAPE OF CLEMSON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE STUDENTS
CERTIFICATES
CERTIFICATES
DIGITAL ECOLOGIES
FIND YOUR NICHE
UNDER THE YEAR OF YOUR MOST RECENT CLEMSON DEGREE
3
PLANT YOUR STORY
INTO THE CLEMSON BIO-SCAPE
1970
COMMUNITY+DESIGNBUILD A+H
STUDY ABROAD
A+H
STUDY ABROAD
BARCELONA CHARLESTON
Jeffrey R. Abrams
GENOA
James F. Barker
DEGREES
DEGREES
Wallace D. Beaman
M.S. M.ARCH B.ARCH
Emma J. Carson Steade R. Craigo
B.A. + B.S.
During the design process of our project, we knew our goal was to achieve the maximum amount of user interaction as possible while still achieving a fully designed project. The challenge was to design a project with a certain image in mind while allowing the unsupervised users to build most of the piece. We ended up designing a physical piece, and choreographed “dance.” The first step is for the participant to gather a piece of wire that represents their “blade of grass” from the Work Station that sits right in front of the instruction boards. The participant takes their wire and places it on the designed hanging magnetic Work Station. It is designed to indicate where to place each sticker on the wire. From the Work Station, the user gathers the stickers that represent
their story at Clemson and attach them to their wire. Once their Grassroot is complete, they grab the “hole punching” tool, take it to the table where their name is located and punch a hole by their name. This is where their Grassroot is added to the piece and becomes a representation of the 1oo Years of Clemson Architecture. We quickly learned that as much as we tried to design the exhibit, physically and interactively, our participants surprised us with their creative interpretations of how to interact with the project. While noticing that whether or not the participants read instructions or did not, the majority would place their stickers anywhere on their blade of grass. By doing so, the user makes the blade of grass their unique contribution within the bio-scape of the piece. We also
observed many visitors take photos while they were completing their blade of grass, solidifying the importance of the piece to the school and its alumni and current students. Users also became interested in completing blades of grass for those who were unable to visit the installation whether it be a representation of those who have passed, or of those who could not make it to Clemson University. We also noticed that even after users completed their Grassroot, they would come back to the installation to see whom else, including friends, family and colleagues, has completed their Grassroot. These interactions have proven to us how deeply rooted the Grassroots installation has become to Clemson University and the School of Architecture.
JUHANI PALLASMAA
“
A curious exchange takes place; the work projects its aura, and we project our own emotions and percepts on the work.”
grass
story
place
TABLE GRAPHIC
TABLE DATA
b.arch m.arch
278 240 54
83 154 85
6
40
2
participant volumes
05 “
STORIES ‘the past’ exists as both individual and collective construct, with shared values and experiences being important within cultural groups. Group identity is thus closely linked with the form and history of place, creating a sense of place or genius loci...” - Lowenthal, 1979
The storytelling, as a visual art piece, represents a meaningful connectivity among the students and alumni in the architectural installation. However, as each individual engages in the art of telling their story at Clemson University, there happens to be a more profound impact on Grassroots and its visual art. The storytelling develops from its action into moments of reflection in a person’s time spent at Clemson University. It becomes more personal, allowing individuals to share recollections of their experiences, connections with peers and faculty, and also what they were able to take out into the world to share. A current professor, Clarissa Mendez, stopped by Grassroots one afternoon asking if she
could place a root into the bioscape on behalf of a close family friend. As we already encourage anyone to place a blade of grass on someone’s behalf to tell their story, she began to express the full meaning of her interaction. The alumni Mendez was honoring, Edward U. Rios, was an architect who had much positive impact on Puerto Rico, and also provided much inspiration for the professor as well. The underlying fundamentals that were placed on the bioscape that day impacted us as students, providing much more than simple storytelling, but a memory implanted in us as well. Robert Morgan, a CAF Board of Trustees member visited Grassroots during the Symposium to tell his story. Like him, two other family members graduated from the
architecture program. By implanting the Grassroot for his grandfather, George E. Lafaye (1935) and his uncle, William Lafaye (1939), Morgan tells not only his story, but also a story of legacy representing two generations here at Clemson University. William Ameen, a graduate and a great benefactor to the school of architecture was not able to travel to Clemson to place his Grassroot. However, as he has had much influence on the the program, we were asked by Robert Porter, the Director of Development from the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities, to create a video of placing Ameen’s Grassroot on his behalf as a warm thank you for his impact on the school.
R ICONS
PAW PRINTS
R ICONS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
James Barker, 1970 Clemson University, president clemson soa, faculty + dean student + athlete
OTHER ICONS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
john jacques, 1970 caf, executive director clemson soa, faculty + CHAIR student
ER ICONS
CUPS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
mark carrolL, 1978
renzo piano building workshop
student
OTHER ICONS
CUPS
CUPS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
rOBERT L. MORGAN, 1997 WILLIAM LAFAYE, 1939 gEORGE LAFAYE, 1935
CUPS
DAVID ALLISON, ‘78 B.S., ‘82 M.ARCH CUPS
WILLIAM PELHAM, ‘77 B.A., ‘81 M.ARCH CUPS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
ROBERT SILANCE, ‘73 B.A., ‘81 M.ARCH
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
CUPS
CUPS
CUPS
CUPS
CUPS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
CUPS OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
ELIZABETH BOOKER KNIGHT, 1961 KIMBERLY STANLEY, 1982 CUPS
OTHER ICONS
NICK BARRETT, ‘11 B.A., ‘13 M.ARCH
CUPS
CUPS
CUPS CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS OTHER ICONS
CUPS
CUPS
CUPS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
DINA BATTISTO, ‘83 M.ARCH
OTHER ICONS
DANIEL HARDING, ‘94 M.ARCH
CLARISSA MENDEZ ON BEHALF OF EDWARD U. RIOS, ‘75 B.A. CUPS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
CUPS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
ANDREW PAYNE, ‘02 B.A.
DONALD GOLIGHTLY, ‘65 B.A.
SALLIE HAMBRIGHT, ‘02 B.A.
CUPS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
CUPS
CUPS
CUPS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
OTHER ICONS
06 “
MEMORY + AFTERLIFE TRUE TIME IS FOURDIMENSIONAL” - Martin Heidegger
PAST, PRESENT + FUTURE
PRESENCE
UNFOLDING + FOLDS ROOTS + BRANCHES
Martin Heidegger once said, “True time is four-dimensional.”
What does “Presence” mean and where does it fall in the hierarchy?
What Heidegger meant by this was referencing his own concept of time. According to Heidegger, time is made up of 4 dimensions: Past Present Future Presence
What it means: The unfolding of the first three dimensions into one dimension – one big snapshot. It is not a timeline, it is more than a timeline. It is seeing the big picture all at once, which allows us to see all the relationships and patterns amongst the phenomena therein.
Therefore, we can understand time in these terms of unfolding and root, folds and branches:
The first three dimensions should come to no surprise to us. What comes to our surprise is the fourth.
Where it falls: The root of the first 3 dimensions. Without the root, the branches of Past, Present, & Future cannot exist.
What is unfolding & folds: Heidegger’s way of depicting time – unfolding being the still-life of Past, Present, & Future, and folds being the separation of Past, Present, & Future. What is root & branches: Clemson’s way of depicting time – root being the commonality between Past, Present, & Future, and branches being the differences between Past, Present, & Future.
TIME + PHENOMENON
4TH DIMENSION
Therefore, we can understand our installation in these terms of Time and Phenomenon:
What is notable from point “I.” is that because the installation was designed to read as a freeze-frame of time, we are compelled to see how all graduates are more similar than different, despite the notion of past, present & future. And it is this aspect of the installation that makes it a timeless story of the School of Architecture. As such, it exists in the fourth dimension, which compels graduates to interact with it in the fourth dimension. It is this fourth dimension that makes this installation such a powerful piece for graduates to engage. This is a Heidegger table. This is a Clemson table.
What is the Time: The span from 1912 to 2031. What is the Phenomenon: The graduates themselves, and their stories.
Heidegger helps us understand how to design a higher order of Memory and Afterlife for this installation, by translating his philosophical depiction of time into design directives. If Memory alludes to past, and Afterlife alludes to future, then the design solution is to carry on the School of Architecture’s story in the
same unified way as the original installation does. Therefore, this installation will carry on in 2 phases: 1. Awaiting the remaining years to be filled. 2. Up-cycling the 3 elements of the installation into a future installation for the School of Architecture: • Legs • Table • Grassroots What is so meaningful about the 3 building elements of the original installation is how they were designed to depict the School of Architecture’s story. And if the story is the gestalt of the installation, then the three building elements are the parts of the installation – the same as the logic that explains Heidegger’s depiction of time: 1. Legs = Foundation, or past 2. Table = Interface, or present
AFTERLIFE 3. Grassroots = Interaction, or future Now we see two axes of the installation where the gestalt of time is represented: 1. The chronological layout of the table’s surface. 2. The chronological stacking of the three building elements: Legs, Table & Grassroots.
Phase two of the installation’s Afterlife poses the question: how could each of the three elements be up-cycled? Ultimately, according to Heidegger, “The possible ranks higher than the actual.” In other words, the generation to follow should be left with unlimited options. It is not our obligation to script a concrete future for this piece. All we can give is ideas: 1. Legs: Convert into café tables. 2. Table: Convert into a conference table. 3. Grassroots: Up-cycle into the next installation to carry on the Grassroots legacy. The impression of these ideas conveys our stewardship for timeless elements. Heidegger confirms, “Being and time determine each other reciprocally, but in such a manner that neither can the former – Being – be addressed as something temporal nor can the latter – time – be addressed as a being.”
Here Heidegger is saying that all things are “beings,” and that the very nature of Being conveys that all things want to “be.” In this same light, the three building elements we provide you will never want to be discarded. So by all means, repurpose them … But let them be.
07 “
REFLECTION ‘IT TOOK 100 YEARS AND MORE THAN 5,000 STUDENTS TO MAKE CLEMSON WHAT IT IS, AND THIS EXHIBIT SHOWS THIS IS TRUE...” - DANIEL HARDING, 2013
Reflecting on our installation, Grassroots, it is amazing to see the breadth of knowledge we’ve gained just from the people who have interacted with the piece. After documenting the data provided by those users, we compiled information from approximately five hundred alumni and students. In doing so, we have realized there are some things we would alter after seeing the piece grow and progress through the last three months. One of our goals was to be able to differentiate visually when each program began throughout the first hundred years
of Clemson Architecture. Given that our installation is user-built, the height of the stickers was not always accurate due to user inaccuracy or not following directions. Therefore the stickers were difficult to document precisely to determine exactly which program started when or which degree each individual received. If color were added to the three categories of stickers, visual determination of each key category would be more easily defined. In addition, providing clear work-stations to the user as a fundamental piece of the installation would aid in the use of all components associated
with Grassroots. Although this may take away from the overall visual impact of the piece, the team would be able to more accurately represent the participants within the installation when compiling the necessary information. This would also allow for an easy graphic understanding of how the program has grown and developed over the hundred years it has existed. Minor changes to the piece would allow participants to better understand not only how to engage the table properly but also how others participated in the installation.
JULIE WILKERSON
“
PERHAPS THE MOST CREATIVE AND INTELLECTUALLY DERIVED INSTALLATION THAT I HAVE SEEN...”
CHANGES 1. Added stickers to ground with feet for each step of process & from both entrances to guide to installation 2. Make it more obvious for magnetic work station-color differentiation, interactive display
PROS + CONS 1. User interaction both bad & good-no use of work stations so stickers are hard to count & visualize if at wrong height • Color on stickers to better see when programs started 2. Foam boards indented by users, new table would have to built to accommodate past current boards 3. Use of space is not permanent, multidisciplinary location 4. User creates piece & can see others in class who have come & participated
TAKE-AWAYS 1. Construction-welding, assembly of over 5,000 pieces (wire) 2. Opening-stories of those who came to school, first woman architect, 3 generations of architects at Clemson
SOCIAL MEDIA OUTREACH 967 views 237 cities 82 LIKES 33 countries
vimeo
FALL 2013
thank you to clemson school of architecture, community research + design center, daniel harding & alumni for providing a great opportunity. we appreciate particpants interacting & visiting our piece - grassroots team
GRASS ROOTS
AN HISTORICAL LANDSCAPE OF CLEMSON UNIVERSITY’S SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE STUDENTS