It's supposed to be FUN

I think I get it now.  I think I know where my disconnect has been in the program through a lot of the process—and in particular my first year.  I’m a projective who’s had autonomous architects trying to hammer their ideals into me.

Don’t get me wrong: I get the idea of continuing important lines of circulation/sight/whatever.  But to have that geometry dictate your design seems very… limiting, to me at least.  “There’s a major line of the city that generally goes like this and so we’re going to cut our roof line straight along that line!”  Personally, I don’t like that purely geometric idea.  A perfect rectangle with a perfect sphere that intersects it and a perfect square cutout in this corner… it seems a little boring to me.  Maybe I’m just not a fan of autonomous modernism that couldn’t give less of a damn for what’s around it.  It smacks of egotism—“I don’t care what’s around it, my building will be noticed!”  To go with the analogy we worked with, I think you should be a Mitchum and not a DeNiro: understated presence is always more powerful than loud obnoxiousness.  The strong, silent type is always more intriguing than someone who acts like a 5-year-old with a fistful of Pixi Stiks.  That hyperactive attention-grabbing is only fun in a vacuum.

Image result for robert mitchum

I think one of the things I appreciated from the talk with Bjark Ingles was his emphasis on play and fun.  It amazed me that he actually mentioned Minecraft.  I’ll admit it: I play Minecraft.  Actually, I design in Minecraft; the actual “gameplay” of Minecraft—fighting monsters, setting up a farm and exploring into the Nether and, eventually, the End (yes, it’s literally called that… there’s a dragon there!) isn’t really in my bag.  I have a lot more fun designing, working with the materials and making interesting structures.



I’ve improved our starting houses by expanding and designing rooms (including the floors) and I’ve built a large stable that was capable of housing 10 horses (or 20 if there were two in a ‘stall’).  My current project in the Realm I have with my sister and friend is, no lie, a castle.  And it’s been so much fun.  Working on plans to overcome ravines and rivers and caves has been such a joy… and it’s a joy that I’d like to bring into my projects.  Maybe that’s why I keep Legos and Play-Doh…



Comments

  1. I cant help but smile as I'm reading this, and I agree wholeheartedly, though I would say that the constant disagreement between my own ideals and those of my professors has pushed me to figure out exactly where it is I stand in the Architectural world, and that is a world of reason, and logic. I too play minecraft, however I prefer to build houses to expand villages rather than horse stables, and as such I'm sure that my builds look significantly different from yours, and of course they would, i would expect nothing less

    ReplyDelete
  2. Your experience with Minecraft reminds me of when I was a kid and I played The Sims. I cannot stress how much I loved that game, but like you, I poured so much thought and effort into building the houses stuff, then once I was done I'd get bored with that family and make a new house.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ....but that is to say, design is so much better when it's fun. My undergrad professor told me that you're only going to put in your best effort if you feel truly excited about your project, so, you need to be intentional about your design decisions to make your project fun.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. "... I think you should be a Mitchum and not a DeNiro: understated presence is always more powerful than loud obnoxiousness. The strong, silent type is always more intriguing... hyperactive attention-grabbing is only fun in a vacuum."

      As I considered Kari’s comments above, it occurred to me that we need appropriate measures of both Mitchums and DeNiros.

      As we compared the autonomous and projective movements in Tuesday’s class, I thought of a city tourist map that exaggerates the size of "must-see" landmarks, but erases nearly everything in between. Autonomous architecture is one way to produce more of those landmarks, which might attract interest to a city. Whether an autonomous structure—built to glorify geometry without consideration to setting or stakeholders—succeeds or fails, it is likely to demand attention… at least for a while. We need an occasional DeNiro, but not so many that they saturate our towns and cities.

      On the other hand, the spaces omitted from the tourist map are essential, too. There, we need Mitchums in abundance. Most people live and work, not in destination spots, but in the spaces in between. For cities to thrive, people need authentic spaces. Unlike Junkspace, this means thoughtfully designed structures that offer good quality, program, and design and honor the needs and identities of people who will use them. When we can accomplish this level of quality, our cities will become more livable.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts