thinking of the potential of interaction (whether violent collision or subtle assimilation) between architectural objects with a "sameness" quality (in identity [material] or intention [concept]) and and my fascination with the house as object, the typology of the duplex comes to mind.

1.

how does an external pressure effect the interior?

2.

how does that force then unify or alienate the two formerly separate entities?

3.

these two objects have sameness in identity, my interest is in what characteristics are emphasized when these objects are separated and what occurs when they unify. what operations give them unity?

intertwine: the objects remain as whole and separate, yet upon combine achieve a greater whole. such as threads of rope.

interlock: the objects start off incomplete (as the blurb on image 3. suggests) and achieve wholeness when they plug-in to each other's voided zones

key-in-hole: objects entirely lacking physical sameness, but have conceptual sameness in that the unification of the two brings about a new, third state that becomes the whole.

. . now see that i am fascinated with incomplete entities striving for wholeness; and the operations/evolutions facilitating that intent.

questionnaire cont'd: end

architecture is a collaboration with society

architecture is a collaboration with society and nature

architecture is a collaboration with society, nature and thus culture

12. architecture should have an argument that somehow involves society at large. architecture is a product of society whether it be congealed or remote so for me, to create anything has to consider society because that is who its for. society is the vessel for which art and architecture tests its capacity and capability against.

20. i am now realizing how much faith i have in space and spatial relationships. what types of impressions are made and do we make and how those impressions resonate between the object's form and its counterpart--the occupant. the maxim that i find potent truth in actually applies to my art of making architecture as well: that "the moment of intersection is the point of hybridity and thus the prime site for creation. my architecture desk is the intersection of me and peoples i long to know.. i attempt to learn them through the medium of space and its organization.

21. to advance that claim--the claim for "people i long to know," i would have to create a house for Self and a house for a Self that i long to know. an entity that i am trying to project my thoughts into as in effort to understand them and myself. architecture as a link communication that infers dialogue and indeed further facilitates it.

idea plate 1: object + collision

what is an object and how does it react to the pressures surrounding and within it?

these are a set of sketches looking at two similar objects colliding with one another to create a synthesis of the two or result in a third object that has taken properties of the former two, but gains its own character beyond them.

as a stab at giving form to my initial ideas for a relief refugee housing community, invasion of a field by a separate ("other") entity and how that infiltration alters the previous original state of the field became of interest to me. how is one set of ideas altered when they are infiltrated by another?

what is the reaction by the primary object when this infiltration is slow and quiet? such as assimilation..

how does the object respond when this collision is just that-- violent and sudden? such as war.

questionnaire cont'd

4. my work flows when i have my thoughts out (written). once they're out i take queu's from diction, syntax, overall rhythm etc. to manifest those ideas. this is esp. helpful for me when i do not have objects preconceived when i approach work.

i also work best when i am at ease, knowing that nothing else is requiring my attention.

i work best when i'm making decisions, esp. while drawing.

7. most of my ideas are generated from specifics of location/site as direct responses to the environments and conditions. i enjoy acting within these constraints because it gives me a datum or springboard to anchor my thoughts to.

8. most of my projects are about why i make them. i tend to conceive ideas and then make form that responds to those abstract ideas. it is seldom that i simply make without having intentions, and make honest discoveries.

9. i judge my project ideas in their ability to effectively respond to the conditions as well as resolve themselves efficiently and logically. i like it when my ideas take non-conventional form because i feel like i am not limiting myself to what i am used to seeing. these days, however, the non-conventional is becoming the norm.

10. i would not mind designing a building, but i feel a house-object would be more sincere to my personal exploration of the make-up of family; the ebb and flow required in all of the relationships; the intermingling of neighborhood nuclear family relations; and how the spaces we construct facilitate or stifle those interactions. i would like to build a house that senses and provides for the needs of the human spirit.(all this feels vague and needs grounding in form.)

11. i would like my work to become an imprint. on myself, for damn sure, but also upon each of my future conceptions. i would like it to exist as the prototype: completely finished in my hands and complete in its unfinished-ness in my mind.

the water bearer:the Self as aquarius;

as having dialogue with a vessel (object) outside of the body (the body being an object, too..), where specific interactions with it are key to fulfilling/completing/continuing said dialogue. is architecture the lock?

questionnaire: start

1. what i would like most out of my dp experience is to have a project or set of ideas that i can truly believe in and stand by as a concise and clear manifestation of my beliefs as an architect. a satisfying outcome would be that in 30 years i can say my thesis experience was the start of my exploration of space and life on my own terms.

2. i would like to make a house or community of houses that reveal a sincere nature about the people who make these objects their home. also, i would like these objects to express a truth of the needs they satisfy, responding to shifts in need, emotion and desire while maintaing its character in either structural organization (limitation) or mood.

3. this is for me.

the point of intersection between

two entities is the moment of hybridity

and site for creation

these is..

the act of "world theatre" is what we engage in every day. we exchange words, wisdom, and personal perspectives as a means of communication and understanding. using theatre as the catalyst for this public facade, i am attempting to re-construct the dialogue between actor and audience allowing individuals to change their positions/points of view in a type of ebb and flow of roles. this facade is designed to allow an exchange of views from either side of the wall so as to modify the normal perspectives of passersby and give them a means of re-contextualizing their environments. 

process

so, ive been trying to negotiate this form. its been..  f r u s t r a t i n g :0)

  

i moved on to wire to begin to think about the structure and mobility of the form for interaction with the user (i.e. the hand).

  

i'm using nylon to skin the form so as to allow it to rotate and i began by stitching the wire through the nylon and shoring up the form with thicker gauge wire, but . .

  

that was not working. i know it can work, but i have to figure out the proper limits of the nylon to balance the structural capacities of both materials.

as for the wall, i am using 6"-8"pieces of threaded rod with plastic tubing for the joints. the tubing allows for more flexibility, suggesting to the users that they can begin to take control of the wall and manipulate views at will.

  

below is an elevation of a portion of the wall ( the wire shape needs to be skinned). the last image is a close-up of the construction detail using washers to pinch the wires that i have wrapped around the rod to give it lateral support and also secure the form.. 

  

(i've gotta come up with a better term to refer to this tapering form as..)

explorations

here are a few images of my first exploration into a public face or façade. the aim was to begin to mediate the lack of exchange between the human body and the structures that surround them.

using theatre as the inspiration for this initial model, i began to perceive the sides of the wall as the dichotomy between actor and audience. understanding the interdependency between the two, it was necessary that actions that occur on one side of the wall affect actions allowable on the other side. 

the tapering form is to frame views to the individuals on the opposite side of the wall thereby re-constructing them as "actor" and the one viewing as a member of the greater "audience" in the play of life.

framing views allows one to focus on aspects of life that beforehand may have gone unnoticed. the wall allows for both the larger, expansive view to be appreciated as well as the minute details of life such as the swaying of hips, or the twitch of a nose, or a fly that needs zipping...

using an external structure to create a new dialogue between strangers on the street removes the anonymity and unease associated with being outside of one's comfort zone [home], creating new opportunities for exchange and interaction with the built environment and, more importantly, with each other.

how do i start? with questions.

yeah.. so this is going to be a fairly casual blog that aims to be an in-depth and honest exploration into what it means to create a socio-political architecture.

what is politics?

what is architecture?

how does the american political structure shape our country and the image of our country to outside nations? what of our image of them?

and, as for the catalyzing questions to this problem: how do these "external factors" shape and condition our own psyche and affect our perceptions of ourselves, our bodies and the interactions we have with the built environment?

are these factors truly external? or is it more accurate to say that there is a fair exchange between how we influence our society and how it "returns the favor."

how can we compose architecture to create a social space that facilitates an exchange between our bodies and the built environment?

more importantly, why am i already viewing them as disparate entities and not as similar elements of a larger societal structure that enhance each others inherent qualities through their interaction?