beauty within the mess
The standout conversation from our recent classes was the one describing the Sorayama house by SANNA. This house isn't extravagant, it isn't aesthetic, and it isn't one you find on a magazine cover but, to me, it is a great example of what architecture really is.
It's so easy for architects to get caught up in the look of a building and how visually appealing it can be but the spaces within are the whole point. This house creates an experience like no other just by pulling apart the average houses program and separating them which in turn creates in-between spaces. Not only did SANNA design in this way but the way the ideas were represented in drawings as being "lived in" through clothes on the ground and pots outside is the perfect example of bringing the experience to life through drawings.
This idea presented in SANNA's work becomes very evident in Everyday Urbanism. I have visited many buildings that we learn about in architecture books and study in school just to be disappointed by the lack of life within them. Don't get me wrong, they're beautiful and experiential pieces of work but the fact that many of them dont feel used makes me uneasy. I want to see these buildings being used for what they were made to be used for not just as museums of its architecture. I want to see water marks on the tables, I want to see some cracks on the floorboards, I want to see people living their everyday lives inside its spaces rather than just admiring the lighting conditions. Buildings arn't meant to be admired, they're meant to be habitats and that is everyday urbanism to me.
Daniel,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you. I think that as a profession we have such an obsession with *the aesthetics* and there is such a defensive tone when you try to say that *the aesthetics* shouldn't matter as much. For me, the imagery of everyday lives and the aging process of something is more beautiful than whatever is the new, insta-worthy aesthetic. I think thats because for a space to become something worn-in and everyday, like this project or the Seven Sisters House by Frank Harmon, that means that the project was successful. Your imagery of water marks and cracked floorboards reminds me of a favorite sweater, one thats a little faded and it might have a small hole in it, but one that brings you comfort and happy memories.
Daniel,
ReplyDelete“Buildings aren’t meant to be admired; they’re meant to be inhabited”. I think this statement perfectly sums up this week’s readings. Of course, someone could always argue that the right answer is somewhere in the middle – shouldn’t a building be beautiful and functional? Well, duh. But our primary focus should be the success of the space created – as you’ve stated above. A building’s true beauty is its ability to respond to what its users need. The imagery you’ve described – water marks and cracked floorboards – perfectly captures a space that has been successfully brought to life.