[JUNK] space not junkspace

Lebbeus Woods, Projects for the reconstruction of Sarajevo, 1993–1996

Cool discussion this week. I kind of feel more confident about the potential of architecture now that I know a bunch of 21st century architects (this class) who have decided to take on the challenge to design more [JUNK] by somehow recycling architecture and making it more useful to the world. 

To be honest, I had to go on google to find the most straightforward definition that I could get, and here it is, "JUNKSPACE is what remains after modernization has run its course, or, more precisely, what coagulates while modernization is in progress, its fallout."

I had to process that definition because it is enlightening. So close to Rem Koolhaas explanation of junkspaces, I can now say that I believe in the potential of junkspaces to create a better architecture that will focus on human needs more by holding our capitalists ideals. Junkspaces are like a war zone between the millenials mind and the baby boomers in a way.  

I like to see architecture become a by-product of the things we do in our daily lives, and junkspaces in general are supposed to reflect that. By example, knowing that we have so many social needs that we want to see happen through architecture, we also understand that resources especially financial ones always have the bigger impact in the projects realization (it is not how it was before modernism happened, but it is how it is becoming). So again, considering that money is a big drive in this process, how do we rethink our positions as architects by making more junkspaces, not as a solution but as an approach for the betterment of our planet and people's way of life. Yes! more of it for the sake of helping the world be better. But wait, isn't that a fantasy, I guess it might be, in the 21st century. However, looking at cinema, music, fashion, and the arts, and how much they have transformed our way of thinking, making, surviving, and communicating, can't we reflect on the things that unite us in general as human and design something that reflect that?

Would be easier said than done, right?

But to me [JUNK]spaces can do it for architects, these spaces can help us design more consciously for human needs without limiting our abilities to keep up exploring, discovering, and being more creative. By example, thinking about how we can design homes and public spaces that allow the deaf and the blind to navigate, communicate, and do the same activities that people without physical or mental disability can do, can be achieved through junkspaces making. 

My thinking is passively based on the definition highlighted above, but the essence of junkspaces to me, remain in the ability of these spaces to create methods and lifestyles as well as moments, unforgettable ones for human beings. 

Rem Koolhaas approach to junkspace reminded me of the work of one of my favorite architect, Lebbeus Woods, who is a modernist. As stated by Woods," architecture truly has the power to change our lives and transform our way of living…but for some reason, many of today’s architects have forgotten that." Woods is a firm believer that if we only design what people already have or what they want, nothing new will ever emerges. “Architecture should be judged not only by the problems it solves, but by the problems it creates.” Junkspaces come out of that theory of creating as many problems as it solves. By looking at the spectrum of a critical architecture, we can see that architecture is neither static nor palpable, but it is fluid, flexible, adaptable, and reguvenative. It therefore becomes important to look at the different states and form that architecture can take. From there, we might be able to see the potential, benefits, and positive effects of creating spaces that are just [JUNK] and nothing else.

PS: Please check out the work of Lebbeus Wood, hope you like it Guys.