CBI Showroom - Midterm Critique

Robert and John Critique...

Your “beacon of light” concept still needs work. How does a beacon of light relate to the purpose of CBI? You’ve defined it before, but I think you need to keep exploring. In other words, should you take a literal interpretation of a beacon of light and shed light beams throughout the whole space? If you think you should, how does that benefit the employees of CBI and its clients. How will the beams be interpreted by visitors and users of the space? Will it really be interpreted as a symbol for CBI being a “beacon of light” to it’s community? How does the bringing of “beams of light” into the space help the quality, function, and aesthetics of the space.
I don’t know the answer to these questions. Only you two do; therefore, you should explore them more to answer these questions. I understand your concept, but think realistically about the implications of the literal interpretation of this concept into the design of your space.
You guys have explored mostly with form and structure, and you’re doing well. But I would encourage you to explore more in the zoning/programming needs of your space. How the space will be used (programming) will determine the necessity of the structure in which you’ve explored so far. In other words, are beams of light necessary to the program of the space? Keep exploring.

Good work thus far in elaborating your concept into physical forms. Your light box is great for showcasing furniture, it is a wonderful idea. But again, think abou the necessity of this as it relates to CBI and its clients, and how it will be percieved.

Micah

IARC 411 Project 1 - Pinecone

IARC 411 Project 1 - leaf

Wright Brothers Precedent Analysis - Final Draft

The research of the Wright Brothers and their goal of achieving sustained flight introduced the world to a new technology that would forever change travel and warfare. The desire of human flight had fascinated scientist for centuries; but it wasn’t until the momentum of scientific establishment by the end of the 19th century that determined the cause of flight. It was the German scientist Otto Lilienthal’s principal innovation of the translation of the shape of bird’s wings into glider wings that directly influenced the brother’s work. The gentle parabolic curve across the upper surface gave his gliders the necessary lift.

After moving to Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, and years of seasonal experiments, the Wright Brothers finally built the “Flyer” in 1903 with a wing warping mechanism and rudder design. The Flyer reach an elevation of about 10 feet and a distance of about hundred feet before the shift in the rudder caused it to go downward. Orville expressed the 12 second flight as, “the first time in history of the world, in which a machine carrying a man had raised itself by its own power into the air in full flight, had sailed forward without reduction of speed, and had finally landed at a point as high as that from which it started.” During the years after the first recognized flight, they first developed a truly practical aircraft; a plane that completed a 38 minute flight in 1905. The historical impact changed military potential forever as air machines became a part of military operations for the U.S. government in 1909.

It wasn’t until the 1927 Congressional act initiated the construction of the principle granite monument perched on the 90-foot Kill Devil’s hill on the memorial site. There was a call for something grand and artistic that would worthily mark the public recognition of the achievement signified as stated by Congressman Warren. But president Herbert Hoover expressed he was reluctant to dump a quarter million dollars of public money on a sand dune where only a few neighborhood natives would see it. So the other suggestion was something more utilitarian with a marine light to further the monument’s utility. The goal became to combine utility with memory; though, utility ultimately won out. The final design was to be a memorial tower that carried a powerful light to air flyers and a landing place for planes. The final design included a beacon, though as one of the architects recorded, it was more of a memorial with a beacon than a beacon glorified as a memorial.

The New York architectural firm of Rodgers and Poor were selected the winners of the design competition. The Rodgers and Poor design was anything but traditional and showed strong ties to the Art Deco movement; a popular movement of the time. The design gave expression to the aesthetics of the machine and was sculpted with highly stylized wings on each side. The wings symbolized the idea of flight and motion. The 60-foot high granite monument implied Egyptian motifs and resulted in a unique memorial, fused with appropriate symbolism and majesty, properly marking the site.

Considering the particular shape of the monument, I personally considered the design, shape, and purpose of a plane's rudder or tail fin. A rudder controls the back rear of the plane giving stability and cleanness to the flight. One of the major difficulties the Wright brothers had was stability, long enough to achieve sustained flight. The rudder became a crucial ingredient to achieving sustained flight.

The monument was designed in 1927 after World War I, a while after the modern airplane had been furthered. Looking closely at the monument, one could easily recognize an airplane rudder. Within my precedent analysis, I propose the monument has been shaped to resemble a plane's rudder. This packs in a lot of symbolism and meaning. Let me explain.

The major contributions of the Wright Brothers to America were changed war fare and travel. This allowed for America to gain ground as a world power, especially after WWII. I believe that the rudder not only stabilized the Wright Brother's air plane for sustained flight, it also symbolizes the stabilization our nation as a world power and continued success.

While the monument, through its dramatic visual forms of a wing, displays flight and speed, grace and power so well; it is the shape of the rudder that guides our experience. The monument represents freedom and the rudder guides and controls our nation through the storms.

Explorations Unit Summary

Stonehenge (image from www.fairmontstate.edu)

Acropolis (image from www.flyparsons.org)

Egyptian Pyramids (image from http://cybertraveltips.com)




Robie House (image from http://forum.arts-crafts.com)




Wright Brother's Memorial (image from http://farm2.static.flickr.com)




Chrysler Building (image from http://www.cambridge2000.com)




Unity Temple Interior (image from http://i.pbase.com)




Acoustic Guitar (image from http://www.extremeguitartutor.co.uk)




Holy Bible (image from http://www.epassoc.org)



American Flag (image from http://www.ideachampions.com)


Common Themes:

Freedom, Expression, Speed, Power, Mystery, Technology, Value, Morals, Texture, Form, Light, Rythm, Symbolism

Meaning of this unit to me: Exploring = Value those who came before + Embrace the Freedom of the Future

OPUS entry Week 14 (Last one!!!)

Mario Botta - House (image from media2.moma.org)

“Latent Classicism... a kind of erased classical language, in which the traces, outlines, and impressions of the constructionally based forms remain, but the ornamental detail, whether in the decorative system of an order or in idiosyncratic nuance, is eliminated.” Roth 586 (Stern, Modern Classicism, 62, 131)

The push for technologically driven aesthetic of modernism married with the principles of Classicism resulted in an attempt to create a more timeless quality. I believe this push for timeless is the true meaning of the current “sustainable” design trend. Within the Classicism movement, the idea of “timeless” resulted in blending past and historical design trends with modern technology. My idea of timeless is much more about preparing and sustaining for the future. I’ll explain later within this blog.


Aldoo Rossi - Hotel II, Palazzo (image from http://static.panoramio.com)

“...more of an abstracted form, “Seeking to reduce buildings to the purest geometrical constructs, in an effort to achieve ‘natural’ essential truths.” Roth 587 (Stern, Modern Classicism, 62, 131)

The fundamental approach to this new Classicism was more about minimalism, resulting in pure geometric forms, clean lines, and abstracted references to elemental classical forms. Classical column forms lost their elaborate decoration from the past and gained a new industrial look. With this new look, timeless attributes begin to form with the blending of technological modernism and simple classical forms.



Langdon and Wilson, with Dr. Norman Neuerberg - J. Paul Getty Museum(image from members.tripod.com)

“Classicism is not a style; it transcends the vicissitudes of time and fashion as an enduring set of principles and in those things we call classical we recognize a kind of timeless present that is contemporaneous and at ease with every historical period... Classical order makes us see the immutable laws of nature by means of tectonic fiction.” Roth 589 (Demetri Porphyrios, Classical Architecture, as quoted in Steele, Architecture Today, 142, 157)

With this quote from Demtetri Porphyrios, we see a new set of rules being applied to modern architecture. Classicism though, in its own right, brought on principles that were to be interpreted, not followed. The 18th century neoclassicism of western architecture helped to establish standards of forms and details, while introducing only minimal modern functions.



The Rasin Building - Frank Gehry (image from www.achievement.org)

“Traditionally, architecture strove for such formal vales as harmony, unity, and stability, but Deconstructivist architecture, wrote Philip Johnson and Mark Wigley, is an architecture of disruption, dislocation, deflection, deviation, and distortion; intended to promote a feeling of unease, of disquiet, and of disorientation.” Roth 600 (Philip Johnson and Mark Wigley, Deconstructivist Architecture, 17)

Learning about Deconstructivist work this week, I am shocked at the amount (or lack of) value that is placed on human life. So here is where I bring my point about timeless and how it relates to sustainability. Classicism’s approach was to create a timeless value to modern architecture; the problem is their timeless appeal came through aesthetics. My claim is that timeless should come through people and how people relate to architecture and design. Deconstructivist have no approach to timeless and how people relate to their environment.


University of Cincinnati Peter Eisenman (image from http://www.magazine.uc.ed)

“As Robert Stern noted, architects traditionally operating in the public realm had considered their task the making of buildings fulfilling grand public purposes, to create an environment that was safe, secure, orderly, friendly, functional, providing some measure of comfort in an otherwise disquieting world.” Roth 601 (Miriam Horn, A New Twist on Architecture, U.S. News and World Report, 40-42)

I believe the Deconstructivist mentality towards architecture or the design world in general, is completely harmful to the purpose of a designer. As designers we are to (as Roth points out) provide an environment that benefits the user. We should design to create a better life. I don’t care how much of a statement someone like Frank Gehry makes with his bright, metallic buildings and unusual, rather ugly forms; designers must take into consideration the life of people. Every decision a designer makes effects everything around it like a chain of events. Designers shape our world, ever since the beginning of time; therefore designers should serve the public and create better design.

Deconstructivist want people to dig into their unconscious premise to understand what a building should be. For instance, place the entrance where people can’t find it so they think about the world they live in. Peter Eisenmen is a prime example as well as Frank Gehry. The timeless theory that came from the Classicism realm of design was approached the wrong way. Designers should focus on appropriateness and relate on ideas that work to serve the public. Good design means that design helps life. It sustain life, which is my argument for timeless as it relates to sustainability. When we design for that purpose, people will use and reuse buildings. Who will re-use Gehry’s work when their original functions have left? And why should we be conscious of our surroundings? As Bill Stumpf put in his book The Ice Palace that Melted Away, “If your shoes are truly comfortable, you aren’t aware that you have them on.” (Stumpf, xii) And this is not comfort in a materialistic sense, it is a comfort that is about the lack of awareness. I believe that good design is comfortable and unnoticeable to a certain extent. People shouldn’t have to think about the space they’re in; they should be comfortable, like a pair of tennis shoes. We should be compassionate about what we design and compassionate about the people we design for. It’s a matter of opinion, but yet it’s about exploration, innovation, community, stewardship, and authenticity. That is true timelessness!