Notes and Reactions to "Machine Language" by Greg Lynn

NOTES

-"How does one work in a visionary way today that is neither utopian nor avant-garde, but in the present?"-GL

-"Participating in the moment is the toughest task for architecture."-GL

-The film industry is restless to get into architecture


REACTION

-Greg Lynn says that "architecture defines the contemporary more than any other field..." and that "architecture has never been stronger in the public realm and the cultural imagination than it is right now, but the discourse that architects provide for their discipline has probably never been weaker."
     -If "participating in the moment is the toughest task for architecture," then how can architecture "define the contemporary" more than any other field? Is it the images/renderings that are the most influential in contemporary culture, or is it the architectural space itself that defines the contemporary?

-I like that Lynn talks about his experience with crossing over into other design related professions or endeavors. I'm attracted to this idea because hybridizing adapting techniques ultimately leads to fresh design generating or fabricating ideas. Intermingling these tools and techniques also helps architects and designers convey their message much more clearly to a wider range of audiences.

Notes and Reactions to "Hair and Makeup" by Jason Payne

NOTES

-Glam

-The "superficial" contains power

-Technique to tactics is an important shift

-"The 'superficial' is not superfluous."
     -if the superficial is fundamentally instrumental to its project's success.
     -tactical device to move project forward
     -operative device which plays a role in the life of a form

-Hairstyles suggest a "palatability" and "appeal"
     -design decision

-"Emotive Evocations"

REACTION

-I like the comparison of rock and roll hair and makeup to architecture

-I also like the fact that it's ok to think of a design or elements of a design because we like it. Using the superficial as a tactical device is an interesting one because the "superficial" appeals to human senses and it seems to make sense to want to harness this type of influence in a design profession where we aim to influence an occupant's experience or perception of a space. But, I also think that the "superficial" has the potential to become an out-dated.

-As students we are taught to never design based on just what we like, so does this mean that a designer can start with a form they like or even add details simple because we like the way it makes the project look vs. what it does or what it means for the project's concept?

-At what point in the design process is the "superficial" allowed to show up?

My Collection

I'm interested in the provocative and engaging notions of design and will be curating a Collection which will explore themes of "movement" within architectural design and other design related fields. I'm excited about the possibility to research this theme and look forward to compiling an interesting series of media that displays it either as an "implied" or "actual" condition. My inspiration for this investigation of dynamics is rooted in music videos and their cinematic techniques which are used to capture a viewer's interest with a series of quick, provocative images that coincide with sound, lighting, proportion, color, texture, etc.

2 Lineages

I will be tracing the lineage of two separate topics which have had an influence on architectural design: 

I'd like to trace the lineage of living walls and organic elements in architecture as well as examples of the notion of "gradient" and its impact on architectural design.

Marine Research Center Floor Plan Sketches



quick rendering of piece intended for 3 d print. skin components becoming structural (surfaces not extruded in this view)



slightly sloping floor plate on second floor (responding to roof undulations)

Test Renderings