Thoughts on ‘The Politics of the Envelope’
The envelope as a technical question or social construct…for
me it has always seemed to be a technical question. That seems to be the way it
is most commonly presented in school. However, Zaera in his text “The
Politics of the Envelope: A political Critique of Materialism,”
explains the historic political role of the envelope as the distinct separator between
territories. For me, this reference made it clear that architecture, no matter
its form, is communicating some form of boundary, presence, or power.
While I am not sure that I could be as bold as Zaera in his
belief that Architectural projects are envelopes—and the architect’s
sole focus should be that of the envelope—I
realize the potential power that the envelope has to communicate to the
world, as it is simultaneously an image and threshold between the collision of
two spaces.
I think that there is something incredibly superficial about placing sole power on the envelope of a building. Even so, I can understand how this idea is significant in the way that the building communicates itself. Perhaps if we think about the envelope as a layer it implies its more significant role to the inner functions, too?
ReplyDelete