"adaptability"
After reading "Questions That Will Not Go Away" I was began to think what adaptability actually meant and what it means to architecture in the future. Adaptability is simply defined as, the quality of being able to adjust to new conditions. The key notion there is the idea of "new conditions", but what does that actually mean for architecture? Much of architecture's standards in the modern era for new conditions strongly relates a new style, if we design for adaptability it relates much closer to the inside experience for the user with barely any exterior change.
My thought is that, for architecture to become "adaptable" it needs to be able to change not only the inside, but on the outside as well. The exterior facade, especially for a multi-family infrastructure, says alot about its users just from the outside. This idea stems from what a "front porch" says about an individual, for a city, the "front porch" is the facade facing the street potentially with an extending balcony. In many cities in on the eastern hemisphere, street facing facades have character in the form of utility from clothes hanging to dry to porches that reflect each individual person's beliefs from sports to religion. Looking to the States, a multi family "front porch" concept typically contained to a few patio chairs that are pushed so far to the wall they cannot be seen from the street, giving them a sense of extreme privacy. This problem strongly relates to the social issues we face today in society where you keep your head down or glued to your phone, more than you look up and see where you are and who you are around. I am extremely guilty of this issue and many of us are, but I also feel that this problem does not start with the architect, but it can easily be influenced by one.
My thought is that, for architecture to become "adaptable" it needs to be able to change not only the inside, but on the outside as well. The exterior facade, especially for a multi-family infrastructure, says alot about its users just from the outside. This idea stems from what a "front porch" says about an individual, for a city, the "front porch" is the facade facing the street potentially with an extending balcony. In many cities in on the eastern hemisphere, street facing facades have character in the form of utility from clothes hanging to dry to porches that reflect each individual person's beliefs from sports to religion. Looking to the States, a multi family "front porch" concept typically contained to a few patio chairs that are pushed so far to the wall they cannot be seen from the street, giving them a sense of extreme privacy. This problem strongly relates to the social issues we face today in society where you keep your head down or glued to your phone, more than you look up and see where you are and who you are around. I am extremely guilty of this issue and many of us are, but I also feel that this problem does not start with the architect, but it can easily be influenced by one.
This is true that in today's society we as a people tend to be glued to our technology rather than living in the moment... but saying that an architect can influence a change in that social issue is a bit of a stretch. I think the adaptability of a building's interior and exterior is important, but architect's are already influencing experiential moments, but consciously choosing to not alter the exterior of some buildings. By not changing the facades, I believe architects are choosing to draw in people's attention by exposing them to something out of the norm and hoping to spark some interest. Not every exterior needs a facelift to gain attention, the age and architectural details alone should create interest for what could possibly be in the interior. Studying and working in Charleston for a year, can truly speak to this. I worked with my principal on several projects where the exterior was primarily left untouched, mainly with the exception of a fresh coat of paint. People would walk past and inquiry what was in this old, historical shell and that simply left the mystery of what could possibly be inside that building. Just because today's society choose not to look from their phones, doesn't mean the architect's conscious decision to only adapt the interior is a faulty option.
ReplyDelete