Greg Lynn writes about blobs form an angle no reading we have done yet even touched- the uncomfortable and rather frightening prospect that architects are actually designing globs of goo from 50's horror films. Yes, he does go beyond this, but that in essence is what he's saying.
Lynn mentions 3 regards of "blobiness" which are horror films, scientific viscous composite, and contemporary construction techniques. Its as though silly putty is overtaking the built environment.
He does give some credit to the theories behind blob-itecture and how it will ultimately add to the world architectural language. Blobs go directly against the past visions of architecture as an erection of vertical and horizontal pieces, which go directly against gravity. Structures and the feasibility of height, weight, and load distribution have irked architects' visions since the beginning of time. Thanks, gravity. The blob, on the other hand, compliments gravity and allows for alternative strategies of structural organization. Lynn also discusses how blobs are contextually intensive. They are detached from the architectural tradition, yet can meld with context- filling in gaps and spaces in new ways.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Therese Tierney, Generative Systems
Therese Tierney's writings on digital design again deal with how we as designers have to deal with still retaining the human design element. Computers, she says, can be over restrictive and seriously undermine the architect's role.
The computer thinks linearly- if they were to design, it would be a parts-to-whole design process with no intuitive knowledge about the site, project, surroundings, historical setting, etc. Computers can only deal with the numbers and facts given to them. It is the architect who needs to actually design the buildings, using the digital medias as only tools.
One phrase she uses a lot is the "generation of form" and how new technologies informs it. She says it is constrained randomness. There is a set of constraints- numbers for the computer, although we as humans have the same restraints, we just call them something different- that inform designs. A computer can read this in relation to the form, and "randomly" generates form. But the subjectivity of the designer meets with the computers' systematic approach to bring new things into being, new solutions into emergence.
The computer thinks linearly- if they were to design, it would be a parts-to-whole design process with no intuitive knowledge about the site, project, surroundings, historical setting, etc. Computers can only deal with the numbers and facts given to them. It is the architect who needs to actually design the buildings, using the digital medias as only tools.
One phrase she uses a lot is the "generation of form" and how new technologies informs it. She says it is constrained randomness. There is a set of constraints- numbers for the computer, although we as humans have the same restraints, we just call them something different- that inform designs. A computer can read this in relation to the form, and "randomly" generates form. But the subjectivity of the designer meets with the computers' systematic approach to bring new things into being, new solutions into emergence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)