Clocktowerfun

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Rhythm in Architecture

Unfortunately, I won’t be making it to class tomorrow. There is an opportunity to see Stan Allen, (dean of Architecture Princeton) speak at CCA tomorrow evening for free. I would recommend it to the rest of the class as well if there were a method to do so.

In regards to the latest chapter in Experiencing Architecture, a new concept has been brought up. RHYTHM, a characteristic usually associated with music, is examined within the realm of Architecture and building. Examined were the ways in which rhythm has been incorporated into building techniques throughout history. The easiest example of this being the 1, 2, 1, 2 beat of solid, void, solid, void. By implementing an alternation of solid and void, a visual rhythm is established and though very subtle, can be experienced through the senses.

Rasmussen explains how although we cannot hear a beat to the rhythm of constructions, we can still sense it somehow, and thereby experience the harmony that a good rhythm creates. Each piece of architecture has its own way of expressing a rhythm that tends to express something that reflects its purpose.

But what can a rhythm of 1, 2, 1, 2 possibly express beyond the monotony of its infinite procession of simplicity? In the book, Rasmussen speaks of our (human beings’) insatiable appetite for making order out of chaos. A building, no matter how mundane, is a clear expression of order and uniformity amongst the chaotic uncertainty of the nature that surrounds it. He says, “It represents a regularity and precision found nowhere in Nature but only in the order man seeks to create.”

Interesting.

There is another idea here that provides a great explanation of why Rhythm works in our world. Rasmussen talks about the physical act of performing work and how developing a rhythm makes work more efficient and also require less effort. In the act of swinging a hammer for instance, one uses the muscles of the arm to move it towards its point of impact. On the downswing, or the rebound momentum carries the hammer back to its original position ready to strike again. Any other combination of forces would throw off the rhythm of this act of work and thus make it less efficient/more difficult etc. So, I thought that was an interesting way to observe a pragmatic reason for rhythm.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Theater of the World

Some quotes/paraphrases from Ch. 6 of Maps of the Imagination:

"We live in the world that our mental maps create."

"Ultimately, the route to the greatest knowledge of all that's around us combines an awareness of infinite possibility and the close examination of the individual."

"We can never truly escape the confines of the self."

"The point is not to prohibit the personal, but to examine it with utter ruthlessness."

"The writer has to judge himself with a strangers' eye and a strangers' severity...No art is sunk in the self, but rather, in the art the self becomes self-forgetful in order to meet the demands of the thing being seen and the thing being made."

-Flannery O'Connor

"A neighborhood, like a home, is a state of mind."

"We live in the world that our mental maps create."

"What we call our train of thought is more like a tornado of thought."

"We don't always want objective information-we want to understand how others see the world, and so grow beyond the confines of out own perspective."

"To truly speak our mind-to give voice to all our thoughts-would be to risk sounding out of our mind."

Monday, October 4, 2010

Hold Steadfast to Dreams

I find the reading material for this class to be multifaceted and undoubtedly fascinating. I feel the same way about architecture.

Although I haven't yet contributed a substantial amount of insight to the class discussions, my mind is most definitely processing statements and formulating many thoughts for the entire 2 hours. The time goes by pretty quickly, and though at first I was skeptical about the subject matter, I've come to realize that it is quite valuable.

In the beginning it seemed to me as if we were waxing philosophic, but sort of running in mental circles...so to speak. But what's certain is that I was always thinking, and questioning and struggling. Though the questions and subject matter was basic, I think the sheer ambiguity of it all made it difficult to grasp one concrete thought. I've found it hard to chime in thus far mostly because I haven't really been able to sum up my thoughts, as there are so many, and they're disorganized.

That being said,

I've enjoyed just listening, reading, and thinking. And I can understand and relate to much of what is written in the texts, though some are denser than others. I'll point out a few things I've thought about up to now.

On a sidenote, I found an interesting connection to our class in a recent MARK Magazine interview featuring South African-born, Melbourne-based Architect Leon Van Schaik. Posted next to his interview was a list of books he deemed invaluable. All three of our books were included, which I thought was kind of cool. Nevertheless, what I've found most refreshing about Architects is that they are Philosophers, and this rings true in every interview I've read or heard.

Some quotes from the books that stuck out to me (not in any particular order):

"Well-determined centers of revery are means of communication between men who dream as surely as well-defined concepts are means of communication between men who think."

"I will be an inhabitant of the world, in spite of the world."

-Gaston Bachelard from The Poetics of Space

"I believe fundamentally in a non-linear world."

-Cecil Balmond interviewed in MARK about his beliefs in structure, his love of geometry and using technology to further the possibilities of modern architecture.

In Maps of the Imagination, Peter Turchi spends a great deal of time analyzing the intention and perception of the mapped world. He has a great deal to say about the subjectivity of the truths of the world we live in, and explains how different groups of people may view the same reality completely different from one another.

He uses a map of the world as it is currently produced in Australia, with the southern hemisphere being on top and the north, at the bottom. Though I find this interesting, I think that it delineates the distinct differences between ultimate truth and subjective truth. And I do believe that both exist, or at least I do up to this point in time. Here is why:

The subjectivity of which way a map should be oriented is up for debate. A gentleman in Australia may see the world completely differently geographically than I do here in the States. However, both of us can agree that certain countries exist and cover X amount of land area. These facts are undeniable and are products of what we determine to be reality. Just because we "see" these things differently does not mean that they are inherently different things altogether. It just means we have different shades of sunglasses on.

I will keep this post short and add just a few more thoughts.

The last book I'd like to point out is another unassigned reading but one that caught my eye at the bookstore: "Gnostic Architecture."

The introduction does a great job of laying out the ideas found in this book with this:

"Gnostic Architecture is autobiographical...it comes from a definition of Gnosis as a way of knowing that subsumes the contradiction of empirical knowledge-- a (tenuously) complete knowing, arrived at personally. Internally. Person by person, one person at a time."

There is this contradictory feel to architecture, like a 'lost foundness,' a 'defined ambiguity,' or a 'structured art', 'freeform rigidity.' I've found this contrasting juxtaposition of values inherent in architecture and I think it's absolutely brilliant. I'm in love with it, and as calculated and engineered as it can be, there is an unprecedented amount of mystery to it, and personal "Gnostic" insight.

So excited.