The Detached Future
The envelope of a building is the most dynamic element when considering its change over time. “The envelope is, and returns as, a vehicle for the discipline of architecture to use and exploit to define political, social, and cultural terms” (Zaera-Pollo, 106). Zaera-Pollo articulates the building envelope with four categories that reflect the “permeability to both the social and environmental flows” (98). As this reading broke down traditional forms of the building’s façade, I was reminded of a former professor (Raphael Beneytez-Duran). About his lecture on the envelope, alongside the context of this week’s readings, I began to understand the potential for architecture to act as a fifth façade: one that has a fluidity of change with the resources we already have. The introduction of an envelope’s “multinaturalization of the human process” (101) indicates that the technology has evolved so quickly that architecture that accurately and positively negotiates the socio and ergonomics from private to public now lays to that of resourceful architects.
The building envelope allows a wide variety of questions to be posed:
When does the use of everyday materials in a unique fashion differentiate from “junkspace” and become a prevalent moment for integrative and refined architecture?
How does the skin of the building have an active role in the building's narrative?
What will students in the future infer about our society from architecture of our generation?
Sarah,
ReplyDeleteI am very interested in the questions you proposed. The "skin" of a building is the first aspect of a building the public will judge. This reminds me of the Spaulding Paloozi building we studied in depth in Ray's studio because even though the design had a beautiful intention, the public dismissed it based on pure aesthetic and no theory. It is hard not to separate the viewpoint of an architect with the public eye when it comes to how a facade fits into context.
Sarah,
ReplyDeleteI think that your blog post hits on some of the thoughts that I'd had while reading this week. How does the human process the façade of a building? and this is ultimately the thing that our buildings are going to be judged upon. I think this goes back to a lot of what we were talking about in class because it becomes a direct argument between does the interior or exterior of a building matter more? I obviously don't know the answer to that but it will be interesting to see how architecture evolves with us and the generations to come.
Sarah,
ReplyDeleteI think your reference back to the issue of junkspace is very interesting. If a facade should engage its context through unique spatial elements and materiality, creating a moment in which people are encouraged to interact with it, at what point does this come across as faux? Will facades of the future seem disingenuous – and therefore junkspace? It becomes a question of how do we advance our building envelopes while remaining true to the vernacular of a given place.