14 June
Villa Savoye/Maison l'Homme combination
Villa Savoye/Maison l'Homme compare/contrast
Le Corbusier
plans and elevations
perspectives
1996.06.14
saintly woman architect
1999.06.14 15:24
compromise - from lauf - 6.9.99
1999.06.14 19:00
interview 2.6
1999.06.14 12:21
1999.06.14 12:26
1999.06.14 12:31
interview - catching up
1999.06.14 12:27
1999.06.14 12:28
1999.06.14 12:29
99061401.db Palace of Ottopia, plan
99061402.db Chronosomatics, female body, partial elevation
99061403.db Chronosomatics, digestive organs, elevations
school of architecture
reaching 1000
casa (vague) S.
letter from/to India
engraving and inversion - Piranesi
contemplating the navel
[Otto] writes
reënactment architectures
1999.06.14
Re: The suburb within
2002.06.14 13:21
Re: abandoned places
2004.06.14 08:30
Re: bad behaviorism...
2004.06.14 12:08
Gordon Matta-Clark
2004.06.14
Brideshead Revisited
2005.06.14 14:36
seven years ago
2006.06.14 18:18
07061401.db Acropolis Q, roof studies, model, perspectives
please comment or destroy, thank you
2009.06.14 15:36
| |
Villa Savoye/Maison l'Homme compare/contrast
1996.06.14
In seeing the Villa Savoye and the Maison l'Homme side-by-side, it is interesting to note the comparisons and contrasts of the two buildings. It is almost as if the Maison l'Homme is like the Villa Savoye inside-out. That may not be the best description, but there are a series of reversals going from the Villa Savoye to the Maison l'Homme:
1. the raised box of the Villa Savoye is placed flattly on the ground at the Maison l'Homme.
2. the roof garden open to the sky at the Villa Savoye is placed under a roof at the Maison l'Homme; also the terrace at the Villa Savoye is moved to the roof at the Maison l'Homme.
3. the interior ramp at the Villa Savoye is on the outside at the Maison l'Homme.
4. the pilotis that symbolically raise the upper building at the Villa Savoye, only raise the detached roof at the Maison l'Homme.
08050502.db HQ of DATA
seven years ago
2006.06.14 18:18
compromise - from lauf - 6.9.99
1999.06.14
One of the things I've lately realized is that design-l and letters with some members of design-l are where most of my writing about (my take on) architectural theory occurs. What I write has a way of ultimately providing focus on what I do next. I never expected to be communicating about architecture electronically / globally like this.
I'm learning a major lesson about the 'writing' of history in doing my Helena/early Christian architecture research, and it is sometimes so clear that 'history's' occasional omission of seemingly insignificant details effectively changes the awareness of what really happened. What I like about the architectural portion of our interview in its raw email form is how it records all of our respective (architectural) thought movements.
interview 2.6
1999.06.14
bc: do you have a particular favorite author or architect who you base some of your more general, foundational architectural ideas on? or do you feel some equivalence with the whole of architecture, past, present, and future..?
lauf-s: Throughout most of my adult life I have looked at the works of many architects and likewise read many books about architects and on architecture. All of this input has/had an effect on me, and because of this constant input, (which is only becoming denser as I get older), architecture has become the most facile subject within my mind/brain, meaning there are whole areas within my mind/brain that now automatically organize architectural data into a fine-tuned system of storage and retrieval. For example, I have always had a tremendous building plan recognition capability, and now my mind also immediately tells me which other building plans are similar to the plan presently in front of my eyes. Because so much architectural data is now stored in my mind/brain, even the group of favorites is extensive.
When I began constructing 3D cad models of unbuilt architectural designs in the mid 1980s, I started studying architecture in a whole new way, specifically the study of built or buildable form through 3-dimensional drawing. In creating the models, I was simultaneously enacting an architectural self-education, and since I was specifically constructing buildings that were never built, I was (self) learning lessons that did not even exist in the real world, yet, nonetheless, the lessons were purely about architecture. So besides all the buildings I've looked at and all the books I've read, I've also been influenced by some buildings that do not even exist. At this point, Quondam in all that it offers is probably the best overall reflection of my "architectural" mind, i.e., Quondam discloses a large portion of my architectural dispositions. Quondam is not a complete reflection of my architectural mind/brain, however.
interview 2.6
1999.06.14
[lauf-s: Upon further reflection, it appears that my manipulative CAD work represents two intertwined truths: the tools I use influence the way I think AND the way I think influences the way I use tools. I use ARRIS CAD software and my thinking is that to use an unprecedented tool to its most potential requires an unprecedented exploitation of the tool.]
bc: are there any particular influences you could name.. such as, when you look at a building, do you think of grabbing its end-points and stretching it, or, collaging it with another building, like what is evident in your online work..?
lauf-s: I suppose what is most evident in my manipulative cad work is that virtually anything can be rendered graphically, and my personal inclination is to explore manipulations whose potentials are overlooked because of traditional design (training and) conditioning. I also like (and therefore practice) the notion that it is easier to design by breaking "rules" than it is to design by following "rules".
bc: what are the potentials and pitfalls of Computer Aided Design in your eyes (and hands)?
lauf-s: The potentials of Computer Aided Design are extremely vast, too vast for any individual to comprehend alone. The vastness of CAD's potential is indeed its greatest potential.
There are two current 'pitfalls' regarding CAD: 1) there is so much that needs to be learned before architects are able to use CAD effectively, 2) since CAD is a commodity, each new version of a specific CAD software is hailed as the best ever, and thus architects are forced into believing themselves insufficient unless they utilize the very latest.
bc: how have you changed your view/purview of architecture since learning CAD..
lauf-s: Constructing 3D cad models of unbuilt architectural designs added significantly to my architectural education. Cad has also allowed me to 'reenact' Piranesi's drawing of the Campo Marzio. Because of my 'experimentations' with cad, I was able to found Quondam.
bc: ..and, do you have anything to say about it as a technology.. such as new versions and new softwares.. how do you deal with the nature of software and hardware.. do you constantly learn new softwares, do you specialize in ARRIS CAD, or integrate with other packages as is needed?
lauf-s: I do not constantly learn new CAD softwares. I've been using ARRIS for over 12 years, and I still haven't exhausted its drawing and data manipulating potential.
interview - catching up
1999.06.14
bc: do you think a 'master architect' of the present or future will be a master of both actual and virtual buildings? or will there be separate traditional masters and digital master architects?
lauf-s: I see no reason for there to be a divide between master architects of the real realm and master architects of the virtual/digital realm because both such architects create architecture(s).
interview - catching up
1999.06.14
bc: do you think all buildings are architecture?
lauf-s: All buildings are not architecture, but all buildings have the potential of being architecture.
bc: what would you say is the distinction between the two?
lauf-s: Buildings become architecture once they exhibit artistic presence.
interview - catching up
1999.06.14
bc: would you be willing to share what your goals are for Quondam?
do you have plans for other people to contribute to the museum?
lauf-s: My two main goals for Quondam is/was to create an audience (for my work) and then eventually position Quondam as an architectural publishing nucleus.
Quondam began with the idea of it being a collaborative effort. Mainly due to issues of ownership, the idea of Quondam as a collaborative effort did not develop easily. Hence, Quondam at present is a one man operation.
interview 2.6
1999.06.14
bc: if you were the dean of an architecture school, how would you be approaching the use of multimedia and computers in an educational environment.. would you retain the studio-system model.. would you do everything in CAD?
what new or old courses, topics, and ideas would you propose for teaching 'digital architecture..'
have you thought of any particular courses you might teach, based upon your extensive research and digital practice?
lauf-s: If I am ever to direct a school of architecture, it will be within the realm of Quondam. [In many ways, Quondam is already an ur-presentation of my school of architecture.]
|