Heather Freeman - Games

Our conversation with Heather was interesting for the fact that it discussed technology in a way that I am not used to using it. Of course the pairing of gaming and an interest in computers is nothing new, coming from a architectural research standpoint, the idea of telling a story through technology is completely foreign. Without resorting to pictorial representation, how can we use technology, in an architectural setting to tell a story. I don’t think its a question that we can, or even should attempt to answer at this time.

Instead, our discussion focused primarily on the way in which games can tell stories. For the past decade or so, games have been driven by functional ideas. More pixels, bigger crashes, and figuring out how to design a controller. In any developing technology, pushing its technical capabilities is important to continued success, but it does little to redefine what a video game is. Now that these technical aspects are increasing in their developing cost, we are starting to see the arrival of smaller games, that, instead of focusing on technical development, pride themselves in the story they tell. In many of the games, this affects mechanics of the game, leading to varied navigation, and control techniques. It is in these instances, where the story telling method is tied directly to the way that you play the game, that the game is most successful.

Primitive Parametric

After attending a the opening and the roundtable discussion about the Primitive Parametric Exhibit, it seemed that most, if not all of the discussion revolved around the use of the word “primitive”. While a semantic discussion can be interesting, and allowed each field to contribute to the discussion, I think it avoided talking about the work that was produced. While semantic disputes are inevitable, there should be a point at which contradictory definitions can be accepted within the context of the discussion. If the exhibit were trying to make a radical point about biology, philosophy or anthropology, a debate about semantics would have been warranted but when the context of the discussion is architectural there has to be a line in the sand that forces the conversation forward.

That being said, I do not think that the exhibit was about a singular primitive parametric. Rather, it was about our primitive understanding of the parametric. A point of debate I remember was that the timeline in the back of the exhibit should have been a branching timeline that explored the historiography of the primitive, and that at no point was their a singular definition of a primitive parametric. By focusing the topic on the understanding of the parametric metaphor, a linear timeline makes sense. At every point in time, there was, from an architectural perspective, a singular, or limited definition of biological metaphors. Each piece of work that was created responded to the cultural understanding of biology at the time, and by charting the evolution of understanding the branching historiography can be reduced to a linear timeline. The timeline is not about biology, but the development of understanding, one that grew increasingly sophisticated over time. Looking back from the contemporary understanding of biologic complexity, it was inevitable that our understanding and our interpretation of the biologic metaphor would become more nuanced and responsive to a biologists understanding of the actual thing. Ultimately to keep the conversation moving forward, I think the exhibit needs to own up to a set of presumptions that end certain unproductive debates.

Design Build: John Nelson, Greg Snyder

Ideas Seminar: John Nelson, Greg Snyder

 

Professors John Nelson and Greg Snyder, each who have extensive experience leading design-build activities, talked about matters that facing design/build education today. Design/build is a prevailing component of the education of an architect.  But a recent survey of these programs suggests there are fundamental problems for the long-term sustainability of design/build.  While student interest is strong, most design/build programs are not well integrated in the curriculum, necessitate specialty pedagogy and skills, are prohibitively expensive and time-intensive, require costly labs and the faculty workload of running design/build programs are higher than other forms of teaching and research programs.  

I believe that as technology advances at high speed, digital design and fabrication methods become more affordable and available in architecture. But I also think, John and Greg’s approach also important. From architectural design process, regardless of how big the project is, students are possible to learn about real-world architecture, which means tight budgets and construction restraints introduce students to the rigors of design. I mean, design-build studio offer good experience of architectural education, in terms of skill building, understanding of building processes, and providing a fundamental underpinning for design.

Zachary Tate Porter

Ideas Seminar: Zachary Tate Porter

 

The architectural design is a complicated process, and there are many ways in the process for designers and design students to develop their projects. Since we are concentrated on the digital technologies and parametric architecture, Zac Poter’s approach of the way to develop ideas of architectural design process is quite different and intriguing to me. Zachary Tate Porter showed us about his works and exhibition “Groundwork: Tracings, Excavations and Burials”. His works seem like artistic rendering characterized by their use of topographic surveys, textual fragments and found artifacts, his drawings and models construct complex narratives that connect the viewer to imaginative landscapes. I felt he is more like artist rather than architect. Since the field of architecture would be designing and constructing a building or a structure. I think, however, art and architecture actually are very similar because the truth is that architecture requires as much of aesthetics and designing sense as any piece of art.

He talked about his research that seems related to the concept of narrative architecture. I personally believe that in order to create the best projects we can, there must be an element of storytelling worked into and throughout the design process. In design process, narrative can be used to facilitate the exploration of ideas pertaining to architecture but also can also be condensed to generating more specific ideas.

Design Build

Hearing John and Greg talk about the past significance of design build in the school turned into a revealing look at the basis behind the teaching philosophies throughout the first few years of this school. While these years do not seem incomplete now, their mode of instruction makes a lot more sense given a context of design build. Greg's fascination with do-dads and tangible, expressive details become infinitely more relevant when students are actually faced with a project that requires them to build it. Ultimately, the conversation about the place of design build in the program highlights the struggle for direction that the school faces. While I have seen attempts recently to bring design build back into the program, I think that the way we think about it should be fundamentally different than the large-scale aspirations of its previous incarnation.

John made an interesting comment towards the end of presentation, about doing a digital design build. While I think his idea of digital to physical translation is much different than ours, it may point to a way that we can reintegrate design build with the digital at the forefront of the drive. In our own sense this is already happening, most of the digital classes end with the construction of a installation scale piece. I highly doubt that these pieces, or even the works by other schools is close to what John was talking about, but with the limitations of current computational tools, this is what is possible. At this point, the technology that we have allows us to experiment with form within a previously tested contraction system. It does not deal with designing digital details, or making something that needs to stand up semi-permanently, but I have no doubt that we will get there, and the result will look radically different than the design build of the past.

Design Build in the SOA

10-25-13

After hearing Greg and John talk about the history of design build in Storrs, it became apparent that the goal of design-build within the SOA was something that was no longer a major presence as it had once been.  The school had a strong relationship with studios emphasizing the design build process, but one thing that John mentioned was that with this type of program, there isn’t much design practice.  It’s difficult to have that balance when a class can only dedicate a few weeks to designing a house then have to spend the rest of the semester building it.  This balance was reached with the introduction of smaller projects such as pavilions that would allow for a more equal split of building to designing.  However, even this ended with the school saying no to new building projects by the SOA.  As a result, the design build projects became smaller and smaller.  However, these projects can still retain their significance by ensuring that students put the same amount of attention to detail into these projects. 

            The nature of design build at an inhabitable scale is changing rapidly.  Construction methods are evolving as well as the design methods that go with them.  As a profession, we’re moving towards a more hands off way of thinking and practicing.  Tools such as CNC machines and 3D printers are giving us the ability to create things quickly and easily from our chairs.  The next step for the school could be in the direction of marrying the digital design with the hand craft.  The combination of the two elements can yield an environment that is beneficial to both design approaches.

ZTP1987

10-18-13

            I’ve known Zac for a few years, but have never heard him actually explain his work before.  It’s fascinating the way that he takes layering and collage to a new exploratory level of phenomenological expression.  Zac sees architecture as a narrative process, and literally translates that from his sketches and concepts into exquisitely crafted artifacts that range from paintings and books to shadow boxes.  He seems to be interested in what’s hidden within something and performs various operations to pull out that idea.  These operations may be layering with text, paint, or paper to cover and uncover different meanings that Zac laid into his piece.  The examination of an objects idea or potential is the groundwork for his art, and is the same way that he believes architecture should address a site observation. 

            Zac’s research into John Hejduk reveals a similar exploration into how architects treat the site.  Hejduk’s masques offer an exploration into their various settings and seek to reveal something that was previously unnoticed about the site. 

            It is this type of investigation that cannot be left behind as we progress into the future.  The digital tools that we have at our disposal can separate us from this connection.  We have to look at keeping our connection to the site in our design repertoire otherwise the interventions that we produce will become more and more disconnected.