Cacciatore Music Library - Mid Term Evaluation

Combine sketched drawings with rendered images.  Add secondary and tertiary structure for harmony.  Increase the rhythmic elements within the landscape and building.  Where did the wickets go?...  Visit the Kahn building. (I did on Saturday)  How can the facade and rigid grid read like a piece of sheet music?  Bring your models in.  Keep working on your wall section.  Elaborate on the secondary structure..  How can your curtain wall increase your rhythm?

These were all of the basic critiques that were given to me.  I have some good work ahead of me.  I've started sketching ideas and will elaborate tonight at class.

My presentation was not nearly as good as it could/should have been both graphically and verbally. Unfortunately the comments were (mostly) not helpful in terms of the final push because there wasn't much for them to comment on. Overall, people do not seem to have issues with my project, my concept or my form, but they hate my drawings. So do I; time to change that.  Some very good points were made and this poor showing will help motivate me to make the final push.

This looks like week 3 work:

                Not a very helpful comment, but I'll be the first to say it is somewhat legitimate. Switching programs from sketchup last semester, into Microstation, and now into Revit2d definitely set me back time-wise in terms of what I had to show for my efforts. However, I have learned a lot about my project through the switch, and I think I am set up to make real progress in the next couple weeks. Regardless of life issues or software issues, we all have to overcome the obstacles that are in our way, and I am no exception. While I disagree that I am at week 3 work, I realize that what was up there sucked and looked much less developed than what I have shown before. I think that I need to stop trying to make the computer graphics work for me and use more of my hand. 

Scuba or No Scuba that is the question:
                This is probably THE issue that I have been struggling with ever since the final review last semester. I have been tentative about the scuba aspect of the program because explaining it the way that I have been explaining it has felt disingenuous to me. I need to express the scuba program correctly and take ownership of it. It’s a cool idea that will get the kids excited, and I need to stop being afraid of it. Embrace Scuba Steve is my new motto from here on out. It is the crux of the whole project and I have been tentative. This has also made me tentative in my drawings and figuring out the plans to the fullest extent. I was hesitant to even draw the scuba portion and it hurt me.

Not buying the ramp to the top:

                This is another item that has frequently come up in reviews. I have struggled with making the series of ramps physically work and actually be an enjoyable experience. I think that the initial idea of the ramp has been polluted and I am rethinking this aspect. My intention of the “Ramped” form of the building was to present an inviting green plaza to the city, and to provide outdoor spaces to enjoy a book or study. As this project has evolved, I have decided to make the outdoor spaces more about being able to access the outside from the inside, rather than the visa versa. I think this also helps strengthen the library program. While previously I was focused on making the whole roof accessible by wheelchair, I realized that this is not necessary and probably not desirable for a person in the wheelchair to begin with. I can’t imagine that a handicapped person would want to traverse hundreds of feet of vertical ramps when they could access them through the elevator and then enjoy the space inside and out. The new approach will give me the freedom to make the green roof the way I want it and not necessarily be restricted by an accessible sloped ramp. The different levels of the interior will all connect to the exterior so that on any level, one can choose to be indoors or out to enjoy their book. This also helps the issue of security and books being checked in and out.

Watch water rise:

This is one of the strong points of the decision not to float the building, but rather anchor it beneath the water. I have not shown some of these important moments in a drawing. This is vital to truthfully explain my concept for the two buildings.

Thesis Thesis Thesis:

Not sure I made a coherent sentence in my entire review. I need to strengthen my thesis statement and get it down to three sentences that I can explain the project and then step away. I think that I have a much better time explaining a project once the thesis part is out of the way, but by then I have lost the attention of reviewers if the first few sentences are gibberish. Every Friday from here till the end, I will rewrite the thesis statement in order to refine and remind myself. I think that last semester I was more diligent about this, and the reviews seemed to go more smoothly as a result.

Differentiate water and land components: Stilts?

                Not sure I want to add stilts to the project at this point. I think that my parti is stronger with the mass in the earth as opposed to above it, but I may do an exercise or two to see if I can gain anything from it.

DISCLAIMER OF RIGHTS

These statements cannot be used against me in a court of grading  in accordance with the Geneva Convention, Article 22984, section 3, paragraph 12.

Sincerely, The Law Firm

Bold=Reviewer thoughts
No Bold=My Responding Thoughts

-Don't buy the program of the building. 
 I need to explain what the program is more clearly. I think part of the problem is that the reviewers are not very familiar with shared work-spaces and innovation centers, which are new types of programs. I think they get the concept, but have a hard time understanding why people would want to use these spaces. I don't have a hard time with this because I am familiar with these and know that they have become very successful around the world and in Boston. I need to show this, and that this site is an ideal location for another one.

Stone wall concept can be stronger
Tie the structure of the building into the stone wall as it emerges from the water.

Hard to visually walk through the plans
Connect my renderings to the interiors. Complete a series of interior renderings with active people. This will help to explain the plans and also the program.

Pedestrian tunnel is hard for people to understand and visualize
Diagram the procession of people and add a photo.

Confused about the parti diagram (shouldn't it be more like my conversation/innovation/ creation  diagram?)
Explore how the formal decisions of the design should support my parti. Perhaps it is time to explore more of a mixing of formal languages. I think this can be done by exploring the materiality of the different parts of the building. Look at the cross pollination of conversation and creation.

Presentation hard to comprehend as a whole (too long, cant see all the work from one place)
I think there were a few problems here. I do think some of the diagrams and drawings and renderings were simply not seen. While I was describing some things, I noticed some reviewers were not even paying attention to what I was saying but instead looking at other drawings, and then asking questions about things I had already explained. Despite my frustration with that, ultimately it is on me to keep their attention. I may produce a digital presentation to focus reviewers attention, and then supplemental, for conversations sake, with drawings and boards.

Don't really understand the buildings interaction with the surrounding area (innovation district)
Not sure what to do here. I thought my whole project was about that, but somehow it was missed.

I think that I am close to having what I want to have in the design. There are some small formal and material decision that may change in my design, but mostly I have to work on the presentation and representation of the building and the concept.  I want reviewers to confidently believe that the program is perfect of that locations, so we don't have to discuss that at the final review.I feel strongly that it is the perfect program for the site, and have struggled from the beginning to get reviewers to understand this. My decisions are based in a lot of matrices, research and analysis, which I no longer feel confident that reviewers will be able to understand without me explaining it to them. However, I can not take the time out of my 5 minute presentation to do so, so ultimately I have to explain it in a new simplified way. I have yet to figure out exactly what this way actually is.

Mid Review

The general impression that I got from the review, is that I need to express in my presentation the story behind my building; the process i went through to develop my building, the bigger idea that brought me to choose this program, and how it connects to the urban context. This information, as I see it, should not only be represented seperetly from the drawings but as part of it. my next steps is to overly this into my presentation and plans and make sure the ideas and intentions come out. I also intend to find a graphical way to represent my form, so it is clearer.

I am skipping the nit-picky comments and the general presentation concerns of the crits.  I will certainly keep these in mind for the final.  As to the meaty points:

Crit: I must be careful of making too much path and not enough place
I think this is a valid concern although something I have gone down the route of addressing already.  The challenge I think will be in not making path where the building wants path, but rather letting the the needs of the program be more determinant of path/place divisions.

Crit:  How does this building change you? (related) What is the moment of reemergence? How are you resensitized once you leave?
This question is huge, and my approach to this was not represented at all in the project.  This is something I must spend time vetting out since the architectural translation of the concept may be a bit weak now.  What I am doing is offering two different experiences to exit the building: you are either on a long, slow, ascent through the section of the the city culminating at the channel and a contemplative view of Boston, or you are up a flight of stairs, through two sets of doors and back on a bustling city street.  More to come on the specific resensitizative qualities of each.

Crit:  Taking the site diagram as a plan may have been a disservice.
I honestly think this is BS.  The diagram balances both the conceptual idea of inverting a city condition as well as the inevitable constraints of an underground building.  Perhaps incorporating a sense of depth to the image would make it clear that this is more than just a site diagram whose geometry I shoe-horned into a building.  A sectional counter part is most likely also necessary to explain the building's parti.

Crit:  This building would be exhausting.  Give the user something they recognize as a means to measure their depth or understand the space.
I think this is valid to a certain degree.  Some organizing element will most certainly make the use of my building easier - I think a circulation element rather than an arbitrary brick wall that goes from top to bottom would be a smart approach.  However, when someone leaves this building they need to see the city anew - I think a person could potentially spend the entire day inside this library and the first orthogonal thing he or she sees is the geometry of Necco St. as they exit and that experience could be rather powerful.  If I give them recognizable bits of the city within the building then this becomes an aberration of the city condition, not an inversion.  The inversion is still the resensitizing mechanism: up to down, light to dark (and dark to light), hidden to revealed, perpendicular to acute and obtuse, marginalized to primary.


Over the next month I will need to do a few things very well.  I must first make the drawings or models which show the user through the entire process of resentization.  I must go through a process of really mapping the light within the spaces and having the interior program elements determine the lighting mechanisms.  I must get specific with my above ground programming and design.  I must continue to refine my building systems.  Each of these topics incorporate all drawings types as well as models.  I think if I address these things I will have developed my building to point of "comprehensiveness" as well as fully presented the architectural reaction to the conceptual thesis.

Midterm Review - Arlen Stawasz

Rising Tides - The Climate Change Research Library

I think I may need a new title for the project. I felt the reviewers feedback was helpful, spot on, and critical for the next phases in the production process in order to fine tune my argument. 

The general comments I received were in regards to "what's next". The reviewers focused on some of the missing gaps from my presentation such as:

• "How does the building change over time?" 
• "What does the building mean socially or culturally as the city floods? 
• "Who still comes to the building after the city has flooded?"
• "What will it be connected to after the city has flooded?"
• "Because it could be by itself, could it have future uses?"

In general, I agree that all of these questions can be addressed in diagrams, model making, and narrative. 

My plan is to further develop the narrative, not only literary, but graphically. If I am to produce a series of diagrams that graphically describe the changes of sea level rise over time, then I can build the argument for this evolution. I plan to address the narrative describing the connections to the land, water, and sky on multiple scales in multiple drawings. I also plan to clean up the details of my plans, sections, details and diagrams for a succinct quick and clear presentation.

Mid-Term Hot Wash

Which of the following words were used to describe the Makers' Atheneaum?

"fussy"
"generically specific"
"exact"
"vague"
"clear"
"personal"
"disconnected"
"engaged"

Answer - All of the above, of course.

This presents both the strength and weakness of my design as well as presentation style/format.  There is an important distinction from someone "agreeing" versus someone "understanding" what my intentions are and more importantly how I am proposing to satisfy those intentions.  If I am able, and of course I am trying, to go through the notes and separate what comments address understanding and what comments address agreement then, and only then, I am able to make best use of the comments.  Though, it's rather tricky. 

So, I will go through the comments, look at the work myself, find what they were referring to, look back at their comments, and repeat.

That's all for now.

Grand Master B

Summer Readings - In Praise of Shadows, Thermal Delight, and The Craftsman

In Praise of Shadows: Junichiro Tanizaki

In this essay Tanizaki goes into great detail regarding the differences between Western Architecture (and culture) and that of the Far East. The theme of the essay seemed to be comparing the modern movements search for clarity and light, with the Eastern philosophy he described as having a more tranquil effect. This is a difficult essay to digest, and the version I am reading appears to be a translated version, so some of the word usage may just be wonky translations. I find myself agreeing with much of what is described in the essay in theory, though maybe not in practice. And in all honesty, I think the major reason is just cultural differences. I love the use of wood and the ability of wood to give character to a space or object. I also sympathize with his struggles when doing projects in his own house (which I am assuming is in Japan). He faced many of the same issues that I faced recently in my own renovation. The essay to me was a little too focused on Japanese architecture, but I was able to peel some ideas from it. He describes the balancing act in much the same way I would have described my talks with the contractor doing the work on my house. There were some very elegant details which I wanted to include, similar to Tanizaki’s yearning for a wooden toilet (elegant? Maybe). In order to get the visual representation he would have wanted, he would need to spend a large amount of money on the high quality wood and  to make it work, or he would have to customize the standard toilet so much as to cheapen the original idea. In architecture this is always the balancing game that we play. How much of our personal ego/culture can we reasonably put into the work without it being pretentious? The title “In Praise of Shadows” seems to turn a cold shoulder to the modern trend of providing light and clarity at first glance. However, as I read into it more, I felt that the author was more or less struggling with the fact that the easily available methods and materials of today were so westernized that they did not mend well with his own culture. For example he needed to make so many compromises on materiality and aesthetics simply because it wasn’t available at “home depot”. His focus seems to me to try and celebrate some of the lesser perceived experiences and how sometimes lack of light (or maybe more so, abundance of shade) may actually create a better space than an arbitrary abundance of light provided just for the sake of light. Take for instance his explanation of how the restroom is experienced. It is always in a separate building, and is usually open to the sky and surrounded by greenery and wood grained walls. This is a stark contrast to how western restrooms are. Typically everything is shiny tile so that it is easy to clean. Everything is white and bright so that the room appears clean and dirtiness is immediately apparent. He compares this contrast in an interesting way. He explains how it would be indecent for a woman to show her bare buttocks or feet in the presence of others, yet we “expose the toilet to such execessive illumination” He goes on to explain that some things are better left hazy. In that light, he seems to have a point…

Thermal Delight In Architecture: Lisa Heschong

This article describes the conundrum that is the human need to alter the temperature of our dwellings to be almost opposite what the actual temperature outdoors is. Liking the cool weather myself, I have always been intrigued by this practice. We very closely try to make the summer time feel like winter, and the winter time feel like summer. It is absolutely fascinating and weird, and also extremely expensive and complex. The article starts off describing the sense of touch and how it is really different from the other senses as it pertains to the feeling of warmth or cooling. The example of two objects both at the same room temperature is relevant to our designs because take for instance a piece of wood and a piece of metal.  Both are the same temperature, but when you pick them both up at the same time the metal feels cooler because you are aware of the transfer of heat from your hand to the metal. This is an interesting concept, and helps explain why architects will describe wood as warmer than metal, even in a visual sense. I wonder if this is an underlying internal concept we have come to learn from our sensory perception of the world around us, and now as a result we express those materials in our designs differently.

The Craftsmen – Arousing Tools: Richard Sennett

I read the chapter on Arousing Tools. In this chapter Sennet describes tools in two ways; difficult tools that are not good enough (ie the lens) and tools that work well, but which people have a problem inferring the best use (ie the scalpel). The lens was a huge jump in science and as we perfected our techniques and invented the micro and tele-scopes we learned how inadequate the lenses of the times were. As you were able to magnify the image, it became harder to discern the difference between a distant star and a pit in the glass lens. So the tool that we transformed the use for (from eyeglass lenses to telescope lenses) now was inadequate to perform the new task. The concept of the tool was not changing, but the tool itself was not right. So the methods of creating the lens got better and we learned to make them for the correct task.  The other example given was of the scalpel. This is a tool that works well, but needs expertise to use. A layperson off the street would have a difficult time performing the same quality of surgery that a doctor with years of precision training would do. The surgeons training would teach him to use the tool, and rather than using the arm and shoulder muscles to apply force, more attention was focused on the fingers. This is a long way of introducing his over arching idea in the book regarding the hand. This debate is interesting and has manifested it in our class last semester with the restriction of the use of Revit for designing. His concept in the book is that our minds have evolved for such a long time based on the use of our digits and our hands. There is something different about using your hand and fingers to create in the same way that our bodies have been doing for eons. The act of grasping an object, feeling its weight and applying pressure in very precise and specific amounts to achieve a certain line weight or type on a drawing arouses certain areas of the brain that aren’t aroused in the same way if you were drawing the same lines but using a mouse.  This concept was clearly explained to all of us during design principles. The idea of getting in the Right-Brained mode took time to kick in. When you first begin drawing, you are not in the mode. It takes time for the mind to catch up to the task at hand and once you begin to focus, your brain switches into the creative mode and you generally experience the “in the zone” concept where you can lose complete track of time, surroundings, and other tasks. While I do agree that this concept is valid, I would also like to submit a counter point for discussion. I have noticed a shift in that type of mentality in my writing. As a younger student I used to love creative writing, and always hand wrote stories. With the introduction of the computer into my life, my writing style changed. As I began to use the computer every day and typing being the main thing it was used for, my writing ability shifted from being able to hand write out stories to needing the computer to get my creativity flowing. Anyone else feel similarly that writing using the computer seems to flow much better than when trying to hand write out thoughts or concepts? 

The Eyes of the Skin - Pallasmaa

"Sight isolates, whereas sound incorporates; vision is directional, wheras sound is omni-directional."(p.49)  That makes me wonder how your architecture would sound.  Pallasmaa expresses how a building must also be understood as a speaker to its people.  How does your building sound?  Like a "drip of water in a cavern.." or like "a siren in the city".  How does your building sound?  I would like to think that different spaces would voice differently.  Lobbies would be drenched in reverb and echoing materials.  Libraries would need to be soft, padded tones that limit noise.  Theatres would be a middle ground of warm tones with hints of reverb.  But my question should go deeper than what your building actually sounds like, rather, how does your building make you feel through sound?  What if you switched your idea of having a loud lobby to a vacuum and the sound was absorbed so much you could barely even hear your footsteps?  That would cause a very different reaction.

Pallasmaa also expresses that a visual connection is an act of your eye "reaching" (p.49) where your ear "receives" sound.  I feel like sound does and can consume you.  How does your building sound?

Sun, Wind and Light - Brown

Talk about a book that would have been great to read 5 years ago.  It is broken into three parts: analysis techniques ,design strategies and strategies for supplementing passive systems.  (i rented it, so good luck checking it out.)  I am focusing on what brown refers to as the ".balance point.  This is defined as the outdoor temperature at which the heat generated inside the building balances the buildings heat loss, to maintain a desired inside temperature." (p.52)  In other words, once a building has a desired temperature, the amount of energy used to heat and cool the building can be measured.  This would be essential technique in the amount of energy your building consumes.

Summer Readings - Arlen

The Architecture of the Well-tempered Environment – Reyner Banham

Chapter 1 – Unwarranted apology: I only read a few chapters of this book, but the highlights that interested me were the chronicled moments of history where human responsibility transformed due to technology and its effect on architecture. For example; the chimney, which is described as the body of the home was one of the most important elements of a house in the 1700’s due to its heating capabilities. Even though this was extremely necessary during crude winters, the design of a house did not usually reflect on the mechanics or operations of this system. The chimney’s design reflected the “grand room” tailoring towards impressing people with large spaces with extremely well crafted trim work.

It surprises me that the mentality of our society (and profession) hasn’t really changed much. We still tend to ignore the back of the house spaces. For example; in design presentations, the mechanical equipment space is often ignored. Most clients are not interested in this and “leave it up to the professionals”. The mechanical space is often shoved into a small corner. As architects we have an opportunity to exemplify the MEP systems and highlight their natural beauty.

I am intrigued by projects that question the aesthetics and function of MEP. This summer I was able to visit the Pompidou Centre in Paris, which is a project that exemplifies and glorifies the MEP work as the exterior skin. This was my second time visiting the museum, and I was much more impressed the second time having worked with this type of equipment in the office.

In Praise of Shadows – Junichiro Tanizaki

This essay, although short was very enjoyable to read. The focus on identifying architecture, drama, food, and many other aspects of Japanese culture was very descriptive and allowed my imagination to visualize the reading. His comparison of westernized culture to eastern culture inspires me to travel to Japan to see and fully understand it.

I feel that Japanese architecture considers space on a completely different level when compared to westernized architecture. Space is much more valuable in Japan, and therefore must be more flexible.

“Smaller rooms are more are the fashion now, and even if one were to use candles in them, one would not get the color of darkness; but in an old palace and an old house where the ceilings were high the darkness is pressed in like fog.” People have forgotten what the darkness feels like; this was the darkness where ghosts and monsters lived. Smaller rooms reflect on the light, the darkness is non-existent.

The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture of the Senses – Juhani Pallasmaa

Junhani Pallasmaa is one of my favorite writers of architectural theory. In Part 2, Silence, Time and Solitude, Juhani describes the auditory experience and its connection to memory, form, light and space. People remember spaces more with sounds than the actual visual response. Sound triggers parts of our brain that can sooth our soul (music). Yes, John, you should read this stuff.

“Architecture connects us with the dead; through buildings we are able to imagine the bustle of the mediaeval street, and picture a solemn procession approaching a cathedral. The time of architecture is detained time; in the greatest of buildings time stands firmly still. Time and space are eternally locked into each other in the silent spaces between these immense columns; matter, space and time fuse into one singular elemental experience, the sense of being.”

This makes me believe that design is static, it is this ever evolving process that will never end (our degree projects will always be static)!

Thinking Architecture - Peter Zumthor

Thinking Architecture - Peter Zumthor

Chapter 7

Zumthor discussed the things that evoked emotion out of him.  He used music to describe how a melody can be expressed through the instruments being played together and thus, evokes some kind of emotion.  This is what we perceive as 'beautiful'. 

I think that, yes, there is something beautiful when different instruments come together to create a piece of music that can move someone's emotion to different states.  He then portrays this 'beauty' in the physical world around us.  Just like a piece of music, our surroundings move us.  Whether outside on busy square or in the woods on a cranberry bog.

He goes on to what I believe as the main function of being an architect.  "..there is an intimate relationship between our emotions and the things around us.  That thought is related to me as an architect."  He means that, as an architect, it is his duty to bridge the gap between the people perceiving what is beautiful, and what is beautiful.  In other words, just as a composer evokes an emotional sense of beauty, the architect must evokes beauty from his design.

In Praise of Shadows - Tanizaki

I enjoy the very idea of considering materials that we generally consider modest and rustic to form an elegant shape and space.  The idea that rough fibers can be pressed into a beautifully translucent plane says something about what is and what can be.  At least I like to think so.

We do not always need to praise the obvious.  We do not always need to exploit the resources common suggested to us.  And most importantly, we do not need to remain in our comfort zone simply because it hard shell already remains.

After all, high praise should be earned.  Resources should be valued and conserved.  And norms should be studied, questioned, and when well called for should be broken and rebuilt.  This exercise provides us with great promise - or do you envision something else?

Thinking Architecture - Zumthor

"My task as a designer is difficult - by definition.  Its is related to artistry and achievement, intuition, and craftsmanship. But also to commitment, authenticity, and a deep interest in subject matter."

This interest me. 

Zumthor list these rather abstract concepts such as "craftsmanship" and pairs it with other abstract ideas claiming some sort of fundamental relationship to design.  Or perhaps the designer himself?  In any case I have deep interest in the reason why this nexus of ideas and concepts present such a tough task.  Why is it difficult?

Does the subjectivity of art weigh to heavy on our minds?  Does the weight of decisions to be made block our intuition?  Or should we direct out attention to the craftsmanship?  After all, considering the execution of most designs is separate from the hands of the designer?

My take - the difficulty does not lie in any one challenge or rather the burden of managing yet another abstract agent.  Instead, the difficulty is having good sea legs as one sails through the design process directly in the heart of an incredible storm made up of the very ideas Zumthor names.  And keeping one's head above water is not enough - rather one must achieve some for of success through the journey of design.

Summer Readings - mik

Here is an overview for two books that I have read over the summer:

- In Praise of Shaddows”  by Edwin McCellan

The first book that I have read and enjoyed is called  “ In Praise of Shaddows”  by Edwin McCellan.
This book had compared the relationship between the design as a product of social conditions that is seen and valued in context. he had exposed the Japanese tradition and cultural values which shaped the material form. He had also explained how forcing it out of context may change it’s essence allowing it to loose it’s originality and intent. His examples of comparing the cultural value of the Japanese and the European influences that slowly dissolved the cultural significant and the value of traditional form.

- The Thinking Hand: Existential and Embodied Wisdom in Architecture” by Juhani Pallasmaa

The second book is called “The Thinking Hand: Existential and Embodied Wisdom in Architecture” by Juhani Pallasmaa. It described somewhat similar concept of the ‘before and after’ focusing on the architects ability to record and express meaning through built form further emphasizing the fact that the current means of teaching and making form is separating the architects  mind from ability and craftsmanship. 

Summer Readings - Maya

THE CRAFTSMAN - RICHARD SENNET

Reading some of Sennet's ideas about focussing on the work of the craft rather than on ourself, made me think of how of a selfish society we have become, where the main goal is no longer 'How can my work benefit society', to 'How much can I benefit from society, with the least amount of work'. We are slowly losing the appreciation of making, we are becoming more and more detached from the things that surround us, but somehow society still makes us want more. We are developing a wrong and probably unhealthy relationship with physical things, where they become only of media to represent our social 'worth'. 

We have to change our relationship with our work, and what it produces. Our work will represent ourself inevitably, and so we don't have to be so mindful of trying to figure out how to represent ourself through our work. Nowadays, it has become where the product is no longer about the use or need or purpose of it, but more of an iconic representation of what we believe we are, or wish we were, or a set of values which we associate ourself with, a great example of this is our overly recognized and adored starcitects.

True craftsmanship should be more modest, and more anonymous. not that we shouldn't get recognition for our work, but the recognition should come from a work well done, for the sake of itself. we as architects should not be known for the ability to reproduce a concept over and over again, but, the opposite, for the ability to reevaluate the problem in hand, and find the write solution for it. 

I agree with Declan, that I love that Sennet is talking about the importance of the process of doing, and rethinking new ways of doing, it is through theses explorations that humans evolve and develop. 

IN PRAISE OF SHADOWS - JUNICHIRO TANIZAK 

I started reading this one, since I really liked the visual descriptiveness of spaces in the reading, and the emphasis of the connection between nature, views, light, materials and details to design, and the experience of design. 

Although as I got more into it I found the author to be very imbedded in a particular cultural mind set, almost ethnocentric where only true traditional Japanese design is good enough to evaluate and describe, he was dismissing any western design thought, and so I found it to be really  subjective. 

THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL - EDWARD R. FORD

I find myself quickly disinterested since the book is mostly about looking at the definition of the word and the concept of detail through out history. Ford is defining detail by placing the word in historical / cultural context, showing viewpoints of people through history, particularly mostly looking at modernists and the anti-detail movement.

He was trying to express how does it exist in society, and how it evolved as an idea, but mostly it felt like a history book to me, which I find hard to keep awake for...

I do however think that detail is an extremely important and fundamental part of architecture, and deserves the attention and analysis theory has giving it. 

The Craftsman

The Craftsman by Richard Sennette embodied a lot of what I am passionate about in my professional work, and managed to also shed light on some new ideas for my degree project.


Though the book takes many tangents to reveal one fascinating story after another, ultimately Sennette was using examples from all over the world, at all different times in history to explain the nature behind the Craftsman. Sennette believes that the work of the hand can inform the work of the mind, and that one who utilizes this unique human traite of doing and thinking to produce some product, is a Craftsman. The concept of the craftsman spans all fields of study and craft. Sennette discribes being a craftsman as a way of living and an active/ physical lens in which one can see and interact with the world. For a craftsman there is a an inherant objective to be and make things better for the sake of doing it the best one can. It is in this mind set that innovation is born. Sennette takes it one step farther and argue that there should be a re-imagining of the Enlightenment, from the perpective of how craftsman made innovation and piece by piece changed the who outlook on the developing world.

He writes on a few occasions about the structures of various workshops, including that of Antonio Stradivari's violin workshop, and that even if one tries to reproduce the exact conditions and make of his violins they  never sounds as good as the orginaly by the craftsman. There are things learned in the hand and mind that can be expressed in the making of an object that we may not have the language (either verbal or visual) to express. And so in the apprentise based model a true craftsman may try to teach other by immersing them into the a whole way of life. In this experience a craftsman will learn to find the balance between autonomy and authority.

A craftsman will also learn to find challenges and resistance and turn those into areas of opportunity. Others less passionate will stop in the face of a challenge, but a craftsman will think and create a solution resulting in solution never explored before by others. Sennette uses an example of engineers drilling the first tunnels beneath the Thames, to explain that an obstacle can lead to innovation, and dos not have to stop forward progress. However, it is also the case that the solution must be smart instead of heavy handed. As chefs chop vegetables, they use minimum force, and the right tool to do the job right.

An interesting point that Sennette makes about craftsman, which I didn't expect to come up in this book is about the importance of play. He says that in play a craftsman can find the  true and ernest interaction with their medium, whether it be coding for linux or sculpting with clay.

He goes on explaining what a craftsman is and what traits one has, and how this way of working is something we all ought to strive for.

I do strive for this in my Design Build business, and I hope to create a design for my Innovation center/ Library of Conversation/ Workshop that would help to facilitate the development of craftsman, and then have them collaborate. Sounds pretty sweet to me.

The final review comments were very helpful and allowed me to take a step back. I over edited my presentation at the end and this was not helpful.     Much of the early design sketches and diagrams were not represented in my presentation and questions were asked that would have related well to some early studies.    In terms of program, my concept was convincing and generally well received but my representation fell short of what could have been the more powerful part of the presentation. The massing was also convincing and representative of what I was trying to express with the path. I will look to really get into the plan layout of the spaces to determine rational adjacencies and ways to display the cycle.    In the next semester I will look to improve on the presentations and be more rigorous in what I show and how I show it.   Main items to focus on next semester: Structural systems of the two masses Program layout and adjacencies What is a curating program? What spaces contain this program? How can the exterior exhibit spaces be more powerful Presentation preparation

The Next Steps

Sorry for the delay, I've been trying to catch up on family, friend, and makeup time at the office.

Overall, I was pleased with the constructive feedback from the reviewers on my project, and I am confident that the next phases will allow me to develop a deeper approach to constructing an argument that is self satisfying, fruitful and rich with stimulation.

I felt my presentation needs some finer tuning, and the feedback I received to clarify my argument was something that I have been trying to absorb. The delineation of stilted vs. flooded is an architectural language/parti I plan on carrying throughout the development of the site and interior mechanics of the building. I want my project to be thought of as one with the landscape, and as one that does not fight the climate change, but accepts it for what it is. My project is about the change, its projection, and the potential long term solutions. Climate mediation is a global concern, and I want my project to serve as a catalyst for discussion for the resilence of waterfront cities. 

In efforts to refine my analysis, I must take a more rigorous approach in researching the projected sea level rise (in other words, lets get real with the numbers). What does 1 - 2 meters really look like in section? How does the spaces and activities change as the water is rising? When does it start to become a problem and where/ what does it immediately effect? What does a site model of rising currents look like? Does the model change over time? I feel this will help me with my narrative and analytical thinking of the site.

I also want to investigate the library program much further. What really happens in this building? What specific research occurs and how is it different than a typical research library? I plan to develop my narrative, and start to realize potential client(s). Recently I have attended a conference hosted by the BSA and Urban Land Institute "Preparing Boston for Climage Change and Sea Rise". The conference led me to develop connections and establish repores with people in Boston also concerned with this issue. Perhaps some of these people can become my potential clients.

The attached image is one of my renderings from the presentation on May 17th, 2012. Although it was a bold move, I plan to use it as a reference in the next steps.

Integration

I’m attaching this sketch I did half way into the semester, when I was still very concept oriented, I think that at some point, with rush for reviews, I have neglected the concept of integration of nature into the building, my initial thoughts of bridging and looking at the larger scale connections have not been expressed enough in the current design, and so, I want to take a step back, to reevaluate how my building integrates with its urban environment, and how I create an environmental impact. Taking inspiration from ecotones, as examples of connecting districts and reaching out to make a better biodiversified system, with my building as the seed from where it grows. 

Final Review

The Final review gave feedback to three key points of project:

   

    1.  How is tempo/rhythm portrayed inside the library?  Are there differences between the patterns of program both aesthetically and use?

    2.  How does sound manipulate the spaces within the library?  Can you incorporate tempo changes to the layout of programmatic spaces using the differences of sound?

    3.  The facade of the Library was very simple.  Very different from the way you expressed 'rhythm' on the facade at the mid-term.  You should try and find a middle ground between your expressions.

In moving forward, I am still sketching interior tempo concepts of program layout and rhythmic changes in material, light, visual connection and sound.  I understand that we are not to redesign our projects but I do believe change is going to come in a progressive state of evolvement.  I am pleased with the concept of my program of a library that catalogues the city's musicians to make them available for browsing/collaboration.  Although there is an abundance of musicians n the city, I find that t is still difficult to locate people to jam with, and this is unfortunate.  My musicians resource library will provide the community and appropriate attitude to allow musicians to come out of the wood work and express their creativity on a platform to the city.

I thought the review did well to push back on my formal exploration this semester.  The decisions I made to logistically solve my building began to stray from the initial intent of the project.  The building is a grand move to expose the urban section but only does so through minor glass slits that show layers of dirt.  I basically need to be more aggressive.  I need to actively address the elements of infrastructure, history, and expression.  Each element needs its own space to make the statement I hope will resensitize the use.  Rather than a library of expression with some exposed duct work and pipes, fringed with windows to dirt (trying to hit expression, infrastructure, and history respectively) I need to explore what it would mean to inhabit, adjacentize [new awesome architectural word I invented], and mix the spaces within the urban section I find most important.

The above sketch is an exploration of how each of these urban elements can become part of the same architectural intervention.  My next steps are to do some mappings of site infrastructure (man holes, gas, electric lines, etc.), expressive spaces (what other forms of city expression are there around the site/greater boston), and get specific geological data (so I have something to inform the depth of my building/specific conditions to expose within.)  In addition, I need to put some thought into the kind of library this is.  I have been ruminating on the idea of 'a library of the city.'  I think this has potential but needs organization.  Anybody let me know what you think.

p.s. Everyone lets get Arlen to not cut his hair until the final review.  20 bucks a person...it will be worth it to watch Fabio present a library on climate change.  Trust me.

Arlen...thats 160 dollars, think about all the zap a gap you could buy.                 

Next steps:

-See if the spaces are sized appropriately to do what I want them too. If not, re-size appropriately.

-Determine more specifically the way in which the conversation of  the form of the building manifests itself. Is the conversation balanced? Should it be?

-Think more specifically about the environmental forces and how that will impact the building. (ie. sun, wind, ventilation, etc.

I feel like the image posted represents well our studios approach this semester. For a given Library program there was very little traditional "Library" going on. I even innovatively misspelled innovation in the sketch.

Next steps:

I have found this review to be most constructive as the critics had proposed many interesting suggestions for me to move forward. To summarize, I believe that I can work on the presentation and the graphics as these were not very clear depicting the user as he/she moves through the space as these spaces allow and limit the precession. Mapping the actual sequence of spaces and its relation would be my next diagram;  it would lay out the program spaces, illuminating/ separating  circulation as it should differ for every user group. Second point was to question the site edges and the relationship my building may react to it. This , in turn may reposition my structure, allowing me to have a better connection to the ground and water.

Semester I Final Review - BP

What I find most exciting about taking our designs to the next level is not just in reaching a greater technical depth but also the experiential depth we have the opportunity to explore.  In previous studios, I have always felts that only 20% of what I was thinking made it up on the board. Granted, the fast pace and pressure of this last semester definitely allowed me to produce more "evidence" of design than usual, I still feel there is a lot left in the tank. 

Next semester is where we can truly burn the rest of the tank and see what our designs are made of.  Because, when I look at these renderings...I want better than that!

Final [Mid] Review!

We had our final review on Monday, which was actually our midreview - since we have all of next semester to keep working on these projects! There was a lot of great discussion, and lots of great work up on the walls. Congrats, guys!