Paradox of Envelope

Envelopes are seen as a dividing space, making a clear border between two worlds of the interior and the exterior. They are seen as divisive, oppressive and an area that keeps things apart. 

Reflecting on the problem of envelope, I believe the opposite: that borders and divisions are healthy. In fact, they are the catalyst of life and activity in nature. 

Look at any country fence and you will see weeds in abundance or at the edge of any forest and you will encounter the most biological diversity of plants and animals. These areas are the most dynamic and provide the most opportunities. 

We can also look at this in human society and see a similar pattern, that areas of division provide the most dynamic of cultures. I reflect on my dad's region in France that borders Germany and Switzerland. It maintains a rich cultural heritage and has more cultural diversity than areas deep within the country. This happens all over the world. 

Turning back to buildings, this same phenomena seems present. This small space that the building occupies is in fact the most dynamic area of the building. It is where air, light and the elements are kept out but also allowed in. 

In older buildings, this threshold space was much deeper and was marked as an area of social interaction (e.g. arcades). This grey area provides the most opportunities for design. Doors, windows, walls, louvers and countless other technical elements are dealt within this small area. 

 

Facades should, like in nature, be a meeting ground for all facets of life and help support activities, linking the interior and exterior worlds together. The definition it creates does not need to be a decisive boundary, but allow for a whole range of interactions and exchanges, making the architecture not a world onto itself, but an intrinsic part of the place that it inhabits. This is the paradox of the envelope, that through its divisive action it can act as a mediator, benefiting and bringing together a multiplicities of elements and spaces.