I Have to Admit
I have to admit that when considering the building envelope, I almost immediately start thinking about that technical aspects of it. It's probably just my background in building sciences, but I just tend to drift more towards the make up of the wall that separates the interior from the exterior, how light penetrates the skin, and how the envelope addresses moisture and air control. Since starting my education in Architecture, I've been aware of the implications that the facade of a building has. How it addresses the street, the materiality, and the layers of space that it can create, without a doubt have an effect on people and the way they interact with each other and their surroundings (the politics). However, I've never really taken the time, or had the reason to address these two identities of the envelope simultaneously. I am a little hesitant though, how far can we take facade experimentation without sacrificing the technical efficiency? is there a definite line where one gains more importance (technical/political)? I do enjoy the idea of blurring these two identities, after all, as architects since when do abide by lines drawn by politics and science?
I really appreciate this post because I believe in a lot of our education the design is considered less important the technical and environmental efficiency of the envelope. I am definitely more on the design side of the problem, and it frustrates me when one takes precedence over the other.
ReplyDeletebreaking down the stigma of separation between these two sides is the first step in solving the problem of design against environment/technology/politics...if these are not the tools of your design belt...the colors on your pallet ...what are you designing with?
ReplyDeleteCommenting on your reference on "sacrificing the technical efficiency," I'm critical of the fact that facades have to be an air tight seal. Of course there are instances where this is necessary. But let's take the example of the mirrored train station we looked at in class. To what extent is that facade actually efficient in terms of air? Does this facade need to be air tight? No. The challenge to this idea is that the facade can be more than a an air tight space ship (you could say I'm criticizing the German Passivhaus strategy here). It can breath, reflect, draw in, push out, gain heat, or not gain heat. I think we should think about facades as the part of the building that can do all of the above and can be appropriate to the context, climate, and program.
ReplyDelete