Parametrics & Virtuality

Parametrics architecture to me seems like an architecture of the future, with its futuristic morphing forms. Although it seems boundlessly unorthogonal, almost like the architects are just drawing them up from random curves, they are fundamentally systematic and ordered. Following the modernist era and fordism, which are strictly defined, thus pertaining to mass production and standardization, parametrics is the opposite. It is an interrelation of micro-subsystems, flowing, specialized, flexible and divert. Everyone is different, therefore should be treated to what suits them best. One clear example showing this parametric era is the internet, when the whole class was asked to search the same world in google from their smartphones, the result shows a list of different web links but in different orders on different people's screen because the web engine is specialized to its owner, which looked back into the phone's history of searches before generating a list of desirable results in a duration of one click so the owner does not have to search for the best web but the best web finds the owner instead. Technologies through time has adapted the world to a swift flow of information and data. Architecture has also adapted to the trend of the world. Parametricism presents architecture of fluent, dynamic forms, that is simulated by computer. Like how our phone is adapted its owner, parametric architecture is adapted to where its inhabited. Not only is it interrelated to its surrounding but also from building to building within the site, hence the term "articulation" meaning an organization of individual parts into a coherent and meaningful whole. Like many works of Zaha Hadid, the buildings morph into each other and fluently merge into the surrounding context. Building of four will look like one. You won't see the architecture as a separate element but as a virtual extension and articulation of its context.

Everything is Neutral

"Nothing is either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."

Dialogue Submission

EVERYTHING IS NEUTRAL

THINGS

When you look up in a thesaurus you might find the words "thing" and "object" as a synonym of one another. However, they are slightly different when it comes to the contemporary theory of humans and nonhumans. Objects are associated with 'physicality', whereas things are used to express 'value'. Like when we used the word "something" as an expression because you cannot find words to describe nor explain what you are trying to say, so the word some-thing becomes a "translation" of the feelings or values you hold for the particular object that is being described.

Human Evolution and Things - Alternative to Charles Darwin's Theory

We, humans are defined by the nonhumans that exist around us. The evolution of humans is actually parallel to the evolution of things, and are associated with one another. Although "things" might not seem like a word that concerns any social interactions or interpretation it does so without anyone's notice. Though it shouldn't be a surprise since its the humans that invented those things themselves. Things are intimately involved in our everyday lives. If I were to ask you to make a list of things you cannot live without, we'd be here forever. They are not just required for their functionality but because everyone has the things they are attached to, things also become signifiers, of how two individuals are associated to one another. For example, a cage (thing) shows the relationship/status/hierarchy of the person inside the cage compared to the person outside. It translates or delegates the "effort" in which one needs to point out, i.e. how they are related to the person next to them. In the same way, things signify its owner, the things we possess tells people who we are because of our relationship to that thing. A clear example is fashion, an interpretation of what style of clothing one wears tells more about the wearer than one might realize, it could tell if the wearer is rich or poor, what is their social background, what lifestyle they might pursue, and where they stand in comparison to you. Again, those "things" give us "value" for judgement, as it delegates the effort in need for other people to get to know you by giving them an impression through things you possess.

In "Objectifier" designers put this theory to practice. They go by 'a general descriptive rule' Jim Johnson mentioned in his text Mixing Humans and Non Humans together that "every time you want to know what a human does, simply imagine what other humans or other non humans would have to do were this character not present". By this rule of "imaginary substitution" it sums up for designers what functions they need to put into the character they are designing. Like if they were to design a chair they would list the things we need to do to find a sitting position and come up with a design that delegates that list of efforts, only then will you get a successful design.

Systems and Deep Ecology

What does it mean by deep ecology? When we think of ecology, of course what comes to our mind is organisms and the natural environment. It is in fact the relations between the two, and in contemporary theory it is their "holistic" relations that makes up the word 'deep ecology', it is a deeper phenomenon once looked as a bigger whole than the meaning of each separate parts.

Nothing is orthogonal because nothing is created independently. Every form comes from a system and as a relation of another, i.e. its surrounding context. Take Frank Lloyd Wright for example, in his works like the Prairie House, is a reflection of its context. One interesting detail is the stained glass that projects the trees outside, on the opposite side of the window, in geometrical simplification. The stained glass then becomes a symbol of transition between the outside and inside that is smoothly put together. The house is trying to relate to and communicate to its natural surrounding, which results in a wonderful continuity in the aesthetics.

Stained glass with tree-like pattern in Frank Lloyd Wright's Prairie House

Deep ecology can also be applied to other matters as well because everything is created in relation of something, there is always something, a reason, that influence our thinking and consequently the product of our thinking, which is what makes the world we live in now and it is bound to change over the course of time. It is not only applicable to physical implications but also theoretical and ideological concepts like the topic of topos and the variations; utopia, heterotopia, and dystopia. Each variation doesn't and couldn't just exist on itself. Like Michel Foucault has mentioned in his text, he chose to explain the relations of the different types of places and no-places as a relationship of an object, its reflection and the mirror in which the reflection is reflected upon. Obviously, all three things have to exist as a whole system, a reflection couldn't exist if there's no mirror or object. So in the same manner, the idea of a utopia wouldn't exist without the perception of the actual place and hence a heteropic ideal. The idea of dystopia, a bad-no-place, is not so clear and understandable if there is no clarification of what is a good-no-place or utopia, therefore dystopias cannot exist independently without a utopic vision well because they are created in relation of one another.

Man, reflection, mirror protrays the idea of topos, utopia, heterotopia respectively

TOPOS

"Topos" means place. Everyone of us live in a "place", which exist by relationships of space. A place in this case is not locational, but a set of relations. Like Galileo has said 'everything is relational'.
Topos has many variations to it, the utopias, dystopias and heterotopias. These topos or places are not physical but can be viewed as more of an ideology. Utopia meaning 'no-place' says for itself that it does not exist physically, it is a reflection of a place, often interpreted as a 'good-no-place'. But as Michel Foucoult has mentioned in his text that in fact 'our lives are still ruled by a certain number of unrelenting opposites', meaning we don't just live in a type of topos but a mixture. Not only are there utopias but there are dystopias, the opposite of utopia, translating to a 'bad-no-place'. Moreover there is also a heterotopia, a different place, is utopia is the reflection of the mirror heterotopia can be seen as the mirror itself.

The movie Hunger Games is an exploration of topos and its variations. In the movie there are two different ranks of people, the rich which lives in the Capitol, and the poor who lives in the twelve districts, a heterotopic existence. Though as an overview Panem might seem like a dystopia, but if you put yourselves in the characters shoes, the Capitol of the rich to the rich it's a utopia because they are of the highest rank in their world, even though they are torturing the people of the poor districts.

Making place

How do you "make a place"?
There are four elements that makes up the world we live in called the Four Folds, consistig of the earth, the sky, people and the divine (or the transcendent). To make a place or dwelling is a process of taming the elements of the fold and shaping them into forms of domesticity. One example os the mud house in USA which is made from mudbrick, the earth element, processed by the sun, baked with natural heat only and no external heating device. Not only that, but once the dwelling disinegrates it becomes dirt, turn to dust meaning a return to its progonal earth form. The architecture is if not itself part of constructed or deformed version of the four folds it is a reflection of the surrounding asset.
The film Pawaqqatsi to me is an exploration of the four folds. It really shows the coexistence of the different elements, working together in a particular context. The ethnic group of men carrying sack of dirt, which is earth extracted from a bigger portion of earth, over a landscape of the earth, its horizon defining the edges of the sky. The ethnic is, I assume, transporting these small portions of earth for purposes of domesticity, supporting theirway of life. So it's a clear and swift integration of the four folds, people, sky, earth and the divine.

Erotics of experience

By dictionary definition erotics means 'something of, relating to, or tending to arouse sexual desire or excitement'. However, by theoretical approach it is slightly different, it is not in sexual terms but is the excitement or even something beyond, in our experience. Nevertheless, the erotics pertains to the theories of semiotics, phenomenology, aesthetics and hyperreality that we have learnt in our previous classes. It is said that erotics is 'the not the excess of pleasure but the pleasure of excess'. It is the delight in perceiving something that is overwhelming, infinite, to the point of intimidation or horror. It is the "sublime", the wow sensation, a satisfaction so much that you could die.

The film 'Fight Club' is an example of erotics in theoretical claims. It is a story of a guy who's bored of his own life so much that he faked at being cancer to join cancer consultations intending to experience true feelings of the near-death or the sublime. It was experience received second-handedly until he was involved in fight club, a club that people literally come to fight. They really get hurt and really get an adrenalin rush at the hint of almost dying. The film's catch phrase was "if you haven't fight, you haven't lived". The aesthetics of fight club was that no one else knows about fight club, people are attracted by this ambiguity. The rules of fight club is 'Do not talk about fight club'. It implies that the club only exist between the few members, a perception that they are breaking away from the aesthetics of normal people (outside of fight club), that they are different, so the main character had achieved his will in living a more exciting life. But eventually, fight club grew and the increase in its members caused it to lose its 'aesthetics' in being unique. To break away from the norm again, fight club started picking fight with other people instead. Thus, they have gone further in the 'sublime', an even more dangerous activity, at the verge of fatality.

From this example we can see clearly that erotics, as a theory of experience, is a mix of studies and understandings of different theories of perception.

Aesthetics and Ideology

When we talk about aesthetics we would normally think of it as something that is very flexible, malleable and that no two persons would have the same aesthetic preferences. However, from the study of the aesthetics I had to redefine my meaning of aesthetics. Aesthetics, in many ways, is very subjective but it if something that is constructed.

Aesthetics by dictionary meaning is a' set of principles governing the idea of beauty at a given time and place'.

The use of the words 'principles' and 'governing' implies a sense of control, meaning that the idea of aesthetics is forced or developed with certain boundaries or is unconsciously restricted. And the specification of 'time' and 'place' means that particular variables are involved in one's decision of what's beautiful and what's not, and is somewhat very political.

In the past, aesthetics might be generated in coercion but in the present days we live in hegemony, we are free of choice and are open to give ideas. But to say that it is completely personal isn't true. Humans are a race that lives in a pack, if you're the odd one out then you risk being kicked out. This causes the emergence of trends, generated by major group of people with similar aesthetic perceptions. This creates a standardized set of perceptions on beauty or ideology. The minor group then has follow that trend, because people are manipulated to think that the ideal is the better.

Designers also use this to an advantage and design according to trends. According to the Kritik of Judgement (1790), designs are preconditioned by what's going to sell (the ideal). This means there are only a number of types of products manufactured, restricting visions of aesthetic qualities and decreasing diversity in perceptions. A lot of trend setters are people who are commonly known. This also pertains to architectural influences, like Mies van der Rohe and his modern aesthetics that is also known as The International Style, suggesting it is a style that is accepted internationally. At the time, it was 'the' style and many modern buildings rose, overshadowing Frank Lloyd Wright, a genius we respect today, but was the black sheep of that era.

Playing with Architecture

Meaning is contingent. As well as our perception of things, it is impermanent. There is nothing that can actually be identified as 'forever'. Something that is sacred now, might become mundane tomorrow or in the next hundred years. These instances occurs a lot in art and architectural fields where artists and designers are always finding ways to surprise their audiences. Andy Warhol is one example of someone playing with this contingency with "profanity". His famous work, such as the Marilyn Monroe Pop Art was a sensation bringing someone who was a national star onto an ordinary canvas and exhibiting it so everyone, anyone, can have access to this celebrity. You will also have seen many of his works displaying very basic, mundane, and ordinary objects that you witness everyday. But because Warhol had established them as artworks it costs a lot more than what the real object sample originally cost and became a phenomenon with countless number of people crowded to have a look at a painting of what can be seen in the supermarket closest to your home, like campbell food cans. Another example is Jeff Koons' vacuum cleaners, again very banal objects placed inside a glass box, named a piece of art and the price of the vacuum cleaner rose to over ten million dollars. It is a sort of mockery in bringing people to pay attention on something that can even be seen in their houses or that they might use everyday. Both artists play with the meaning and perception of these common objects by embracing the absurdity of contemporary material art.

Profanity is even a more provocative issue in architecture, because of the cultural or religious values that a place or building possess, signs that evokes certain connections for people of that local area, for example a Wat or temple is a sign of sacredness for most Thais and Buddhists. Therefore, it is difficult to play with architecture without being offensive. A resort in Chiangmai that was designed and constructed with temple features and forms had raise an issue of appropriateness. Architecture can be 'played' with over its functions and meaning that exists over time. Most cases architects establish an unexpected or contradictory choice of design. The new Milstein Hall in Cornell has a contradictory function shift by putting the dome beneath its cantilevering structure. It is both a contrast and a blending of the new and old buildings. Dome is an architectural element placed at the highest point of the architecture it dwells on and is a visual prominence, that usually house sacred cultural and religious acts in the past, from Romans to Christians and the Byzantine period. Though situated underground and is understated than its usual signage quality, the dome is a sacred open space for critiques.

EMPTY FORMS

What is empty form? By empty, it means no specific function to that particular form. Therefore is an object of many functions, thus encourages translation of uses. It is an architecture of multiple functions, however not pre-determined. But we have learnt is that meaning is contingent, unstable, never the same for any two persons because the way we perceive things are different. Though architecture is a bit different, usually conveying a 'function', empty form is the contingency of architecture.

Empty forms could be created intentionally or otherwise, because I think every object is fundamentally an empty form. The functions that we associate with each specific form, shape or volume are merely our perception and conventional thoughts. For example, when you see a chair, you immediately think of the act of sitting down as a function that fits to that form, but if you never knew what a chair and its associated function is you might use it to perform a different function like putting things on it or using it to elevate yourself to change a light bulb. Likewise, there are probably many other objects that you have sat on that is not considered a chair. Though the designer have pre-determined it to be a chair - a sign of sitting - so the dimensions of the object are created in coherence to our body scale.

The "Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe" by Peter Eisenman is empty form. Its minimal, cubicle, rectangular form suggest no specific function, so it is used for fashion shoots, picnic, seats, etc.

I think a shophouse is another clear example of empty form, as there various utilization of a shophouse. Especially, after last semester that we have thoroughly study this form of architecture, and how the third year members were able to turn the same initial structural format of shophouse into over 70 different designs of different functional space of their own.

BORAT

The movie Borat is a demonstration of Simulation and Hyperreality, where the boundary between reality and fiction is fairly vague. Most of the time the two are blended together and it's hard to distinguish which is which. The only fictional characters in the movie are roles of Borat, Azamat Luenell and Pamela Anderson. Even though those invented personalities were very fictional, once put in a real or true context it suddenly becomes part of reality. As most scenes were unscripted, everything was spontaneous and intuitive, turning the movie into a real experiment of human reactions. Therefore, the movie is both real and unreal. The actor, Sacha Baron Cohen, was able to portray his fictional character very well that people believed he was real, that they were his true behaviours. This is where the stimulation or representation created the real. Then how do we distinguish the truth and what's not, and who's to say that what has been created is real? Moreover, the use of a Kazakh persona that is quite obscure and is not widely known made it more believable to the audience because they have no knowledge or expectancies of what a real Kazakh should be like. What made Borat funny was the questionable thought throughout the movie thinking is it real or unreal. The character of Borat still had a very old-fashioned set of mind, being surprised by gay traditions and women rights. The way the movie was filmed was also convincing because it seemed like a reality TV show, a real documentary and real interviews being conducted.

DE/SIGN

Everything is a "sign".

There is a parallel connection to what we see or heard and what we "think of", but they are usually two different things. This is because everything we perceive is a sign, representation, or reference of something: a pre-perception. Even the words that come out of our mouths are signs, a clear example being onomatopoeias like 'BANG!' or 'POW!' that give an automatic feedback of a gun or a punch being fired. One other good example from the lecture was were given this picture and were asked "what is it?"

A lot of people mentioned a house. But it is not actually a house, in front of our eyes is a "pentagon" and "is" nothing else. But because it has become an iconic association of a house, therefore we "think of" a house when we see this polygon. Artist, Rene Magritte has shown this understanding through "Ceci n'est pas une pipe (this is not a pipe)", where he denote that it is not a pipe but a painting of a pipe. This painting is "sign".

In a profession like designer we are "DE-signing". We are trying to generate a new sign, to be different to the pre-perception, to surprise clients (as said in my response to the Lethal Theory below). Though in architecture it's a little different because not everything necessarily communicate "meaning", they are made to "function". If you look at this stair design, it doesn't visualize the usual 'pre-perception' of a stair, it has been DEsigned so that it's still able to function as a stair, allowing one to ascend/descend with movements of stepping left and right like normal stairs does.

Staircase in Samitivej

This particular stair i found in Samitivej Hospital. With an additional design decoration, this stair has become a "sign" of fitness.

Phenomenology in Design

My design studio project is to make a proposal of a pavilion, to house a selection of sculptures from the Bangkok Sculpture Centre. I chose a sculpture called "Meditation" as my centre piece and my concept, the direction of my design process is developed from the essence and the meaning of the sculpture, which then leads me to designing an "experience" of "Meditation" that I want to convey to visitors of the pavilion. Because the sculpture is a study of a sequential progression of the body and mind during an act of meditation, the pavilion design will create space that will allow visitors to see the sculptures in a continuous sequence and has a form that tends to compel visitors to walk or progress forward.

The site for this project is at Parc Paragon but I specifically chose where there are steps to emphasize progression, not only making the visitors experience conceptually but physically as well, because "Meditation" is not achieved easily. In Buddhism, meditation is the train to nothingness, which is the ultimate achievement, where there is no suffering, therefore later on the pavilion will offer a phenomenon of nothingness. The emptiness is created the threshold and boundary of the form of the pavilion. The project offers this phenomenon of an experience to convey to visitors of Buddhism and that it is not something impossible and anyone can achieve, you just need the effort.

Walking through walls

The reading of "Walking through Walls" by Eyal Weizman has lead me to question the existing conventional features around me. A door is a door, a window is a window, a door is no window, and the same goes for a window otherwise. These are the rules of architecture that we were taught since we were young. However, these rules are merely rules created by our perception. In reality there are no such rules. Who is to say you "cannot" exit through a window, it is just we are taught that we "should not", after all they are both just holes created in the walls. For ghosts, these conventional boundaries mean nothing. They move through walls, floors, or doors if they "want" to, because they have a different perception of space.

The soldiers that lead the attack of the city of Nablus in April 2002 used this same idea and took advantage of it. The literally "walked through walls", knocking and breaking their way through palestinian homes, "smoothing out" space to carve out their pathways. It was unexpected of anyone because it was against the existing tradition. Nobody knows on which wall or at which moment will the soldiers pop out, and anyone on the streets (conventional grounds) were shot dead. This methodology is called "inverse geometry", meaning an reorganization of the urban syntax (the way things are ordered). Likewise, there are also applicants of this method of inverse geometry, such as parkour which uses walls, stairs and railings quite differently from normal pedestrians. There's also a resemblance in the architecture field. You can replace the word in the text clients for enemies, and it can still be well-understood. The book stated, "the enemy interprets space in a traditional, classical manner, and I do not want to obey this interpretation and fall intro his traps. Not only do I not want to fall intro his traps, I want to surprise him!" Similarly architects want to exceed the clients' expectations and their interpretation of what space looks like. Therefore we seek for a wider perception. The meaning of space is contingent, individual, never the same, and always changing - the client, or anyone or anything in the world is seeing the world differently.

Actually if you observe and take a look around again you will see that a lot of things follow this concept of inverse geometry and defying the basic rules of perception. As you can see through movies, a media a representation of human perception, burglars or boyfriends entering/exiting in/out of windows is a common sight. In the series, Prison Break, about a man and his friends in jail trying to break out of prison, also use the same idea knocking through grounds and walls. Nowadays, everyone wants to be new, innovative, do things nobody has every done or seen before.

We are in an era of "no walls". Shift the convention, think outside the walls.

BILDUNG BLOG

on Contemporary Theory

19th CENTURY

Along with the alteration of social structure, the replacement of royal patrons by public authorities, new typologies of buildings such as government offices, banks, hospitals, museums have emerged. Though it was a revolutionary period, not all was new. 19^th century is the century of eclecticism and revival. Therefore, many of the architecture in the previous historic scene would reappear, beyond their original borders or otherwise brought together.

While there’s a positive progression in the advancement of machinery and new energy, continuing from the Industrial Revolution of the 18^th century, I would say that there’s a negative progression in architectural innovation. Instead of simulating new architecture it revives the old, existing structures. However it wasn’t a direct imitation, it was an application of the new into the old. I view it almost like a trial run, for them to test their qualities, so they start from the ancient, the very basic, aiming to challenge and overcome what were architectural achievements and successes of the preceding periods. Consequently, the architecture of the century was an experiment used to explore the integration of newly invented materials of steel and glass, firstly into the existing architecture of the past. Therefore, it is a period of time that eventually becomes a mark of the transition of architecture into the modern world, before the big leap in the face of architecture.

BAROQUE: EROTIC OR NOT?

Baroque is a period of expression. In contrary to the previous Renaissance era, which is all about perfection.

I personally find Baroque art and architecture erotic. It contains the elements of expressiveness and exuberance. It is its “pleasure if excess” that correlates with the idea of eroticism, which is a stimulation of feelings and emotions; never fixed, uncontrollable and most of the time overwhelms our logical thought. So Baroque architecture is erotic, evidently in Bernini’s left transept of Santa Maria della Vittoria, where the painting of clouds spills over the corner onto the sculptures expressing the uncontrollable nature of clouds. Moreover, the blending of the two is also erotic in a way that it demonstrate a certain ambiguity because it cannot be defined as solely a painting or purely a sculpture, it is where painting becomes sculpture and the sculpture becomes part of the painting. One other element that is both Baroque and erotic is the layering of things, which occurs mainly on the pediments, its repetitiveness shows an emphasis and an excess of an components which makes the architecture much more dramatic and unconfined. Another ingredient of illicitness is the use of oval plan, as it exceeds the boundaries of perfection defined in the Renaissance period by using a deformed circle that has a directional quality to it. Likewise, the curvature that is nature to Baroque architecture also contributes to bringing out an erotic effect as a breakout from the norm of straight and confined outlines to a morphing and free form that is again expressive and affective. Especially in Sant Andrea al Quirinale where there is a use of layering and curving in the pediment, and a curving cut that breaks the convention of a triangular pediment completely, so it explored curvature, illicitness, repetition, excessive, all in which corresponds with the ideal of eroticism.

Painting in the left transept of Santa Maria della Vittoria - Bernini

Sant Andrea al Quirinale - Bernini

Early Renaissance

The Renaissance is the rebirth of the Classical, the Roman and the Greek elements and the derivation of Gothic style, a period of faith and strong belief in God. Concurrently is the emergence of many intellectuals, along with the establishment of the first university. Interestingly, I think it can be said that it is a period where people begin to gain more confidence in themselves even though it follows the style which express a lot of reliance on God, since the arrival of ancient texts from the east and the successful trades result from the Crusades, and influence of the bourgeoisie of strong secular thoughts in art and architecture. Hence, the belief of “humanism” initiated. This is the belief in the potentials and capabilities of humans, thus the gain of confidence of one’s individuality. Consequently, this confidence is expressed in their ideologies; the idea of “anthropomorphism”, referring to humans as perfect and thus derived from the human figure is a perfect geometry, shown in the drawing of the Vitruvius man. Which then creates the sacred cut – the overlapping of two squares, one rotated to 45 degrees that is applied to many architecture like the Renaissance City Plan.

The Vitruvius Man - Leonardo Da Vinci

The Renaissance City Plan

“Perfect” was the adjective of the period. Even though there is a lot of reference from Roman ruins, they use the theory of perfect proportions to conduct the design of the building. For example, the Pazzi Chapel at Santa Croce with its façade inspired by the Roman Triumphal Arch, perfected to geometrical proportions of squares and circles, squares within circles and circles with squares – balanced and symmetrical.

The Renaissance could mark the transition from European medieval era to the early modern age. This is evident in the approach to anthropomorphism of Le Corbusier’s modular man and the ideas of pure geometry and forms of order, balance, and symmetry. On the other hand, there are elements which appeal to Post modernists like Robert Venturi, for example the application of classical Greek orders on the façade as ornamentation rather than columns, which can be interpret as an idea of a decorated shed.

Post-Fordism

Is modernism as truthful as it claims to be? Is it accurate to say that an object has only one meaning? Meaning is unstable, because there is no ‘one’ truth; everyone sees things differently, and that realization sparks the era of specialization, uniqueness and differentiation. Post-fordism opened up new ways of interpreting mass production and consumption. The prominent ideologies of standardization and regulations were replaced by increasing individualists systems. No two person are exactly the same, even twins, everyone is engraved with different DNAs, we look different, we act differently, and we obviously think differently. Therefore everyone has his or her own individual characteristic, and even though we are bind with rules and restraints there’s always the need to express that distinction, which is much of what is seen in today’s society. For example, even students contained within the same regulations, under the same school uniforms are able to articulate their own individual personality by customization. The idea of differentiation is evidently seen in parametric designs of fluid forms. Those animated forms represents a ‘process’, captured in time, the ‘in between’ of two (beginning and end), emphasizing the idea of multiple truths. Hence, the form changes and morphs every step of the way, calculated by computer, the adaptation in reaction to different stimuli. So even though it is seemingly spontaneous and flexible, simultaneously it is very controlled, as seen in Zaha Hadid’s urban carpet that merges the wall and sidewalk floor into one surface, so it looks like the city flows into the building, using the environment to design.

Zaha Hadid's Urban Carpet

Not only that, the idea of structuring of ‘process’ is relevant to contemporary society more than the past. For instance, grading systems in schools are mainly evaluated from the ‘process’ rather than the final, complete work.

Postmodernism - the DUCK and Decorated Shed

Robert Venturi was the architect who redefined the renowned phrase “less is more” into “less is a bore”. I think it is a refreshing breakout from the era of modernist praise of repetitive glass boxes. His theory of the duck and decorated shed is very valid. The duck form does its function well, very straightforwardly tells you that the construction involves ducks or more frankly sells ducks. Whereas, in the case of the decorated shed, we cannot visualize its function from looking at the building alone. The function of the building is defined by the activity inside but indistinguishable from the outside, so there’s a sign that directly states its function, e.g. eatery. Venturi seemed to be declaring war against modernism; his works all seemed to contradict the rules of modernism. This was clearly visible in the Vanna Venturi House, a house he made for his mother, with elements such as the arch and beam situated above the entrance, which structurally doesn’t support any load but functions as a symbol that signifies an opening, or a chimney that is not in the centre but shifted to the left, or a cut through the gable arch and beam, or windows that are not on the same horizontal plane. Venturi adores ambiguity and I agree with him that everything doesn’t have to be functional structurally; an element can be “both” an ornament “and” be functional, unlike modernist buildings that can only be “either/or”.

Big Donut Drive-in sign in a "decorated shed" - without the sign is it impossible to figure out that the building is a donut drive-through from the exterior

Airspace, Tokyo - "decorated shed"

 Buildings nowadays are mostly decorated shed, containing complicated facades that contradict with simple and factory-like interior because they are built economically, therefore follows Venturi’s idea in being both complicated and contradictory. For example, Airspace in Tokyo, the exterior is a spectacular, complicated, voronoi system of façade, but the inside is a cheap and mundane structure that is used in every building, therefore it is emblematic of Venturi’s decorated shed idea.

In my opinion, his ideas do resonate the idea of ‘erotic’ architecture, because the notion of contradiction teases people with expectancies and luring them in with the attraction of beautiful facades.

Expressionism VS the International Style

As witnessed from the film Playtime by Jacques Tati, modernism had issued the problem of mass-production and an ignorance of traditions and monuments (neo-classicism). A result is a cultural shock, as seen Monsieur Hulot in Playtime, a befuddled Frenchman lost in the new modernity of Paris, which is more repetitive, boring and duller than ever. 

However, the expressionists depart from the International Style. As its name implies it is the art of “expressing”, its form and architecture are very expressive, not static but contains movement and momentum, created by deep voids and curvature. It’s a compromise, containing the essence of pure and simplified modernist forms, but also embraces the past (as a ruin). Unlike the International Style it is ‘not’ starting from zero, rather recreates the architecture of the past, the making of new ‘old’ buildings. For example, the recreation of the Pyramids in the Trenton Bath House in 1954. Not only are they expressive but they can also be functional. Like the auditorium of Alvar Aalto’s Vyborg Library with its waved wood ceiling, both expressionistic and functional, constructed from the woods from the forest seen through the windows of the auditorium, in angulation which serves its acoustics. At times, expressionism might even be more functional than the modernist deals of glass boxes, especially in India where Louis Kahn had built the National Assembly Building. The climate in India really allowed for those simplified buildings with no windows, it was clearly functional. Additionally, the cut sphere was able to express the function of the staircase. On the contrary, the glass box Crown Hall of Mies van der Rohe’s wasn’t suited to the cold climate of Chicago, which created an ice laminated granite floor that is too slippery to walk on. 

Expressionists have a smart approach to functionality and can simultaneously preserve the simplicity and traditions (not denying the past). While in the process they are able to create a more energetic and dynamic architecture than that of the modernists, which is also aesthetically beautiful.

Trenton Bath House in 1954

Alvar Aalto's Vyborg Library auditorium

Mies van der Rohe's Crown Hall, Chicago

Louis Kahn's National Assembly Building, Dhaka, India