My first funny but also most stressful and difficult semester of my architecture is nearly over. Because of these difficulties we have learnt to solve problems that we face both in our life and on our project. Now I want to explain my whole project and my design ideas by associating my Introduction to Architecture lectures.
We started our project by documenting process of a production to come with a storyboard that present the sequential stage of the production process. By considering the repetitions in my storyboard, I produced some operational groups by using some operations given to us which are rotation, addition and branching. I prepared a flowchart by using my operational groups then I did a model by using stick form elements. I change it a few time because it had more linear parts so I increased the number of operations and chanced direction of rotation. By using just my flowchart I did new variation of my model by using planar elements. While I was doing my model I did some changes on my flowchart to reveal rhythms, repetitions and especially group of volume. When I merged my both model, I consider and reveal some essential parts and while I was merging them, I put the essential parts of both models against to each other to emphasize their hierarchy and I also created which is density and fragmented part because this part has more smaller volume when I compared the other two part so it is also creates hierarchy in the relation of my there parts. Now different themes are given to all of us and my theme is ‘shrink’ and now I’m applying this theme to my model and without losing the hierarchy level of essential part I have been creating more homogeneous model by likening our essential volumes to each other. And still I have been working on my project.
This week, Rasmussen’s Experiencing Architecture book’s first chapter assigned to us. I have read some parts of this book before I started my architectural education. I must say that Rasmussen tells architecture and concepts of architecture simply, fluently and by giving explanatory examples so a person who is not an architect can easily read and perceive this book.
At the beginning of the chapter he defines architect and architect’s arts by comparing the sculptor and painter with architect. He says that the architect works with form and mass like a sculptor and works with colour like a painter but the architect’s work is more functional and utile for people and he also defines architecture, he says that it borders the space to live in and it creates the framework that surround our lives. He also says that architects have some difficulties in their works and permanence is one of these difficulties so he advises that the architect’s building should keep ahead of its time so that it will not lose validity as long as it stands. He also tells architects as nameless heroes, as anonymous and he draws an analogy between architect and composer who compose the music which others will play. In other words, the architect has own plan drawings and typewritten specifications that there will be no doubt for the craftsmen who construct his buildings. Also he clarifies and exemplifies that some concepts have not their real meaning in architecture and he says that by using pear-shaped cup by Wedgwood example, after firing, the cup is hard but we also know that while it was shaping, it is soft so we can say that it is an example of a soft form in a hard material.
Rasmussen’s examples from cup to tennis racquets related to our life and experiences, these are some kinds of observation such as lightness, softness, roughness, hardness etc. He suggests that some observations come from childhood. These observations and the child’s play are continued in the grown-up’s creation just as man proceeds from simple blocks to the most refined implements, he proceeds from the cave game to more and more refined methods of enclosing space. This is what architects do.
This week, we have read Le Corbusier’s writing which is Three Reminders to Architects, Mass and Surface. In the beginning of the text Le Corbusier says that architecture show itself over mass and surface and he defines the architecture as a pulling, truth and dexterous play of mass that aggregate in light and he suggests that light and shade show up the most important basic of geometric forms such as pyramids, cubes, cones, spheres, cylinders and when he evaluates Gotic architecture, it doesn’t use spheres, cylinders, cones as base. However Egyptian, Greek or Roman architecture is the opposite of the Gotic architecture. Le Corbusier also explains that engineers’ works don’t based on an architectural aspect but these works can remind architectural sense because they use outcome of calculations and basic elements.
Surfaces create mass and they personalize the mass and Le Corbusier says that if the architecture’s basis is spheres, cones and cylinders, lines that reveal and create these forms shold use pure geometry as base but he criticises 1920’s architects in this term, he says that this geometry startles the architecture. However Le Corbusier supports engineers who not internalize a specific architectural thought and find some forms that create mass by proceeding with the necessities of obligatory demand.
This week, I have read a text ( Regulating Lines )that had written by Le Corbusier. In the text Le Corbusier diagnosed regulating lines as an indispensable element of architecture and he told that it is necessary to constitute in order. Also he clarified how the regulating lines enhance the fine proportions and add sense of coherence to the building. In qther words, regulating lines submit us the chase of harmonious relations with one another and the quality of rhythm on the work. In the text Le Corbusier exemplified the utilization of the regulating lines in the past to make tasks easier, to correct their works and for the satisfaction of their sense. Also Le Corbusier listed off several structures that are used regulating lines, a primitive temple, Notre – Dame de Paris, the Capitol in Rome, the Petit Trianon and his work in Paris.
In this week, we should write a report about a part (Architecture, Pure Creation of the Mind) of Towards a New Architecture, Le Corbusier that we read and a video of Bernstein (What Does Music Mean ? ) that we watched two weeks ago to prepare a digital poster.
In this text, Le Corbusier reflects his exact manner and thoughts about architecture. In the beginning of the text he expresses that profile and contour are the touchstone of Architect (When I have done a quick research about touchstone, I understand that touchstone uses a gauge to specify the quality of a thing.) because they reveal either an artist or absolute engineer and when the art enters in, architecture is formed, he mentions that in work of art, there must be a unity of aim, clear statement and its own special character and all this associate to us a pure creation of mind.
He draws attention to axis of organization and he clarifies it like that, this axis leads us to presume a unity of affairs in the universe and he says that the reason of appearing the results of mathematical calculation satisfying and harmonious to us is proceeding from the axis.
Le Corbusier approach critically a topic that certain writers’ exposition. This topic is inspiring from nature. Certain writers have predicated that Doric column was inspired by a tree springing from the earth. However, Le Corbusier expresses that it is false and he exemplifies this thought with columns in Greece.
In the video Bernstein talked that notes are not like words at all, a word has got a specific meaning or when we say a word spontaneously its image comes to our minds but if a note is played, we have not an idea about its meaning because it doesn’t have a meaning. In other words, nothing has no meaning by itself but when some things come together with rhythms, combination and at the same time with a unity and also within the tramework of a plan, they create a whole.
This one again a poster about text and video. Our instructors gave us chance to reorganize our poster because our first poster didn’t involve what is desired to us and this is my new poster. I watched out angular alignment and I divided into two groups by using two different color. One is keywords from text and the other is keywords from the video and I used textural background to avoid figurative reference.
I study with a text ‘ Pure Creation of the Mind ‘ that written by LE CORBUSIER and a video ‘ What does Music Mean? ‘ by BERNSTEIN to make a digital poster. My poster should be in size of 27×27 cm and I should derive some key-words from the text and video and the poster should have an alternative single title. While I was creating this poster, I have used lots of reference line to decide how the words should place on the poster and I want to draw attention some words by using different point size and the reason why I have used three different colors key-words is emphasizing the key-words from video, the key-words from text and the most common key-word that is used both in text and video and the reason why I chose this background is an object that help me with its reference line rather than a figurative mean while I was arranging my poster.
This week we analyzed a reading that had written by Jane ANDERSON. Firstly, I must say that this text is a guide book for students who start off this architectural life as there are doubts whether architectural design can be taught and also most of architectural schools and design studios use their own techniques but sometimes some students and also I may feel as if get stuck on the beginning of this education system because architectural education has not strict rules so what architecture students’ need is learning by doing on design studio and architectural education.
I also accept this text as a guide book so I find some keywords to lead me such as practice, sketch books, sketch models, analysis, diagrams and discussion. I have perfectionist and partly hasty character and when the assignments was given, I just begun to think how to do it. I can say that design studio is a place where you can gain experiences so based on my small but influential experiences sketch books have huge place instead of thinking invariably in architects’ life because as the author’s say in Zaha Hadid part sketches may not always be project specific, they express ideas and possibilities rather than certainties and solutions and as my instructors’ says sketches are not trashes, we can bring them together and we can reveal beneficial and effective result because learning by doing gives us instant feedback in terms of the visual result thusly we can do it better the next time.
It is not mentioned in the text but inspiration is required on the design studio. This can be even a hair as used Bad Hair Pavilion but we shouldn’t wait for it, should we? J Thus in this moment analysis and practice come into play. The more we practice, the better we get. On design studio, also design studio projects have important place. Design studio projects target that students should explore multiple ideas and potential solutions to the design problem so again analysis, sketches and diagrams become more of an issue and learning new skills and how to use new tools help support and develop the design work. This kind of project can help us in our professional life because projects in a professional life follow the same stage to student projects.
In this week, which is my first week in my architectural life, I analyze two different text about the relation between architecture and language and in fact the quotation in the beginning of the Adrian FORTY’s text describe the importance of words and the importance of whether making different things with words.
First of all, I must say that BRAWNE’s text is more fluent than the other. Although his examples and explanations are superficial, I understand what he want to describe and more interesting in this text is that we use unwittingly architectural words in our everyday speech as a simile like windows and doors. ‘Opening windows of opportunity and closing doors on undesirable activities.
Secondly, I completely agree the quote of Tom Markus, architectural theorist, ‘Language is at the core of making, using and understanding buildings.’ because language is vital to architects to tell their projects successfully and to be successful while they are presenting their projects so language helps verbal presentation and persuasiveness when architects use right words at the right time.
In the BRAWNE’s text, it seems more important the relation between nature and architecture. In my opinion, architecture shape with people’s needs. If I give an example from the text, this can be definitely the pediment because it made because of hunters needing shelters so they used the opportunities of nature and they made a tent from an animal skin and branches of trees. When I conduct a small research about the pediment, this word is used for placed above the horizontal structure of the entablature in architecture.
Not completely but partly, there is an arguable part in Language and Languages part in FORTY’s text. Sometimes, some words cannot be translated language to another but nowadays there is a huge interaction between two or more than two languages. Although there is no mean some words that have used since the past while translating the words. However, for some words that are used recently such as design and form have same meaning or similar spelling in other languages.