Week9: prefabrication and craft

Two texts:

Scheurer, Fabian. 2008 Size Matters: Digital Manufacturing in Architecture in Emily Abruzzo, Jonathan D. Solomon, editors Dimension, 306090 Books, Volume 12. September 2008

Sennett, Richard, 2008 The Craftsman. Allen Lane, Penguin Imprint. Prologue pp6- 14 and chapter 8: Resistance and Ambiguity pp 214- 231

And the following websites:

http://www.dfab.arch.ethz.ch/web/e/forschung/142.html

http://www.dfab.arch.ethz.ch/

Prefabrication & Craft

A pile of bricks does not contain any information?

Is this true?

Would you say that bricks are prefabricated, the sweedish architect Sigurd Leverwentz. Is prefabrication craft ?

Each brick has it’s own characteristics.   Kholers work utilises the properties of robotics, usually used in the car manufacturing industry which makes a curved wall and has crafted charateristics.

Would you use a CNC router at Queens, there has been one purchased over the summer. Go check it out!

You can use it in two different ways, as a final presentation or as part of the process.

The discussion turns too the difference between Animal Laborens and Homer Faber. The discussion about if you get involved in the making you can lose your ethos and position, the extreme version of this manifest itself through Nazism.

This is worth thinking about, craftsman completly invest in the product whereas prefabricated just gets on with it.  The other arguement manaints that the object made through craft generates culture.  Artists disowns craft as it come out of indiginous materials, its not a either or situations and is a very relevent architectural discussion.

Looking at the car industry, which promotes servicing of the product, its really important that as architects we think about the parallels with regard to workflow and mantainence.

We’re living in a throw away society at the minute, “tescos toasters”.  Have you heard of the term design obselence? Ford motors worked out that consumers where happy to purchase a car after seven years, designer givng obejects a shelf life.  In printers today, are they designed to die?

It would interesting to see if people who work within the  prefabrication industry have knowledge of  the material.   Back to the  Swiss  group, the notion where the all the effort  is made in the production phase and the product  is a representation of this effort.  There is something very enjoyable about manual craft, theres a kind of mundanety about it, but its also a release.

Craftsmen are critical about there work during the process.  Looking at digital patterns in concrete,  some look architectural or at molecular.  During this process comments are being made on the nature of the textile and concrete, which allows for this sense of craft.

Within practice, should the architect concentrate on a special subject or organise crafts within building.  The great thing about architecture connects philosophical thinking with the material.  The work of Senate is worthwhile knowing, having indepth knowledge of the material is fulfiling as an architect.  Knowing the right questions to ask and being able to move through different scales from the philospical through to making is useful.

Having knowledge of the material allows you to ask relevent questions onsite, improving architecture.

What did you think of the  Senate text?  The interpretation of resistance as a design tool.

Engineering might been seen as a problem solving, is it a right and wrong profession?  Bad engineers tend to over compensate where as good engineers know that there is a tolerence.  The path of least resistance is problematic, there are multiple ways of coming up with a solution. If there is a right or wrong, then why is there research being carried out.

As human beings we tend to simplify our environment so that we can understand and interpret the world.  Engineers have a set of mathematical principles to refer to.  John Chris Jones, wrote  a book saying that design could be taught methodically arguing that designers make buildings but never touch them.

The misconception in architecture with regard to subjectivity, essentially what we do is to rationalise.  We bring our signiature, new students think that tutors want them to be orignal, its not about pursing originality, its about pursuing authenticity.  As a designer you will bring subjectivity, but trying to be original it only serves one thing.  There is a fundenmental debate in architecture that we are not artists, building design is based in reality and needs to be  rationalised.

With in architectural education is there an opportunity for students to become involved with materials. Looking at car design, what do you think of the idea that volkswagon employed 15 scientists to make a door that closes with a ‘clunk’ followed by a ‘click’.  Students in first year are designing a door, within craft there still is the ‘trace of the hand’.  The point for architects is that there is a sense of care that has gone into this component, which prefabrication allows.

99% of cars begin with a lump of clay, like  a Frank Gehry building beginnig from a scultural position.  How can link creativity with process.  As a project for students to work on , what might be feasible.  It was interesting to design and make a door during a  year  and see the processes inherent in its consrtuction.

Back to the text. An interesting point arises about obsessing over the understanding of the problem.  Talking about doors again, there is alot more potential about how we might design one element of the buildings, ie the doors.  The space might just be about the quality and time invested in the doors, the rest of the space might be low-spec.

With in architectural education at Queens, there is an emphasis of building design with regard to position and building volume, should there be more focus on specifics of materiality.

Senate talks about the ritual of the craft.  Is there a similarity between craft as a process or does there have to be a product to qualify.  Beatriz Colomina, an  American  feminist.

Look at the Swiss architects in sent in the email, they are working at the bounderies of pre fabrication and craft.  Also look at ETH who wrote the book Constructing Architecture.  Juhani Pallasma also has a book, The Thinking Hand.

For next week, think specifically about the last year in the building industry, looking at BD.  It would also be useful to talk about the difference between fees in the South and North.

New in the QUB library

Here’s a shameless plug for one of my favourite (and most influential) recent reads. A brand new shiny copy is in the brand new shiny College Park Library and is on display on the new acquisitions shelf. It’ll be available for loan from next week (NA2543.S6/STEV). Alternatively try clicking on the image above and Google will tell you where to buy your own copy.

Blurb:

The popular view of architecture focuses on individual creative geniuses, those who have designed the most “significant” works. According to Garry Stevens, however, successful architects owe their success not so much to genius as to social background and a host of other factors that have very little to do with native talent. To concentrate only on the profession of architecture is to ignore the much larger field of architecture, which structures the entire social universe of the architect and of which architects are only one part. This book critically surveys that field, exposing many myths and debunking a number of heroes in the process.

Using the conceptual apparatus of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, Stevens describes the field of architecture on two levels. First, he provides a detailed account of the field as it is at any given point in time, describing the different components and their relationships. Second, he analyzes the dynamics of the field through time, from the Renaissance to the present. He discusses the system of architectural education, as well as everyday aspects such as the competition for reputation. He concludes that throughout history, the most eminent architects have been connected to each other by master-pupil and collegiate relations. These networks, which still exist, provide a mechanism for architectural influence that runs parallel to that of the university-based schools.

architecture / people

Texts for discussion

• CARPENTER, M. 1991. Can architects be socially responsible? in Ghirardo, D. Out of Site. Seattle: Bay Press. 27-45
• Morrow, R et al 2003. cc Final Report on Inclusive Design for Centre for Education in the Built Environment.
• De Carlo, Giancarlo. Architecture’s public in Blundell Jones, P., Petrescu, D., Till, J., Architecture and Participation. 2005 Spon Press

Notes on Group discussion

Who Architects design for!

Building and Sustaining a learning environment for inclusive design.:

Fundamental right for all humans to be designed for….

Design for everyone and have a broader spectrum of people using your building, increase profits etc..

Does Queen’s promote inclusive design? Hypothetical clients never really have other social problems etc.

CARPENTER, M. Can architects be socially responsible?:

In uni, we have idealogical clients but in the real world, architecture is dictated by money, politics etc.

We chould be designing with Clients rather than for them

Advantages of thinking of the individual?

More specific, responding to their specific needs which leads to a more inclusive design. If designing for masses, you are more inclined to design aesthetically and put your own statement on it as you don’t have as many specifics.

But if designing for indiviual and specifics, does that rule out many others from using your building

Adv for some, may be disadv for others.

Designing specifically for an individual that suits everyone is more of a process than a product(?)

Participant design – get the users involved, Look at Berlin for example. Why is that? Cultural differences, in the East very creative, cheap housing, rental market – get an empty flat/ shell and up to you to do what you want with it, free to design it to suit you. Don’t assign ownership with ownership. Here it’s different. Only when we own it, can we change it.

Interesting point – How do you get people to take ownership of a space?

Year out experiences, were the clients as involved in the design process compared to University projects?

De Carlo, Giancarlo. Architecture’s public:

Revolutionary idea about Housing. Why cant we make the biggest amount of space or luxury space (?)

Architects develop a business model for Architecture.

Architects have all these ideas but we need people to pay for all of them and they don’t very often.

We are an instrument of power, can we change that role?

Economic factor more important than user needs – should reverse this and it will hence change the architects role.

Capitalism in Berlin – cramming the most amount of people into the smallest space.

Architects don’t have the skills to design for people.

Universal design 24 hour challenge run by the RCA. Design brief – people with disabilities but no one really asked the user about his disability, too respectful of him, afraid nearly to ask him about his disability.

At one point the user takes over and it becomes theirs, what happens then?

Inclusive design is also about being absolutely confident with your skills, who you are as a designer, your design process and the interface between you and the user.

Most students go into an existing office, but consider not doing that and going on your own so that you can develop your own design skills rather than complying with those already set within the office.

To be effective as a designer you need to switch off as a designer, go into a niave state and then apply your design skills.

Places of conflict good places to think about architecture, we can only manage it and not resolve it.

Irish culture is still a grey area and not urban.

To claim space and use/design it is societal development. Ireland is slowly getting there.

For many architects, the only solution is a building but that is not what architecture is about. Think about the why aswell as the how and result may not be 100% building. Taking ownership and manipulation of space important for urban development and architects can assist in that process. It is important for architects to know how to manage the client and materialise space. There is a need for student to learn to think from political, cultural, economic idea right down to how a material sits beside the other.

‘Good architecture comes from good clients’

Gather information and use as appropriate.

By really knowing your user group, it regenerates architecture, the design comes from a profound set of principles.

The unendiness of the disability/ disadvantage!

The idea of planning around time!

From the texts, can get the idea that we zone people out.

design/critique

Design / Critique

Texts for Discussion

1. TILL, J., (2005) Lost Judgement. In: E. HARDER, ed, EAAE Prize 2003-2005 Writings in architectural education. 1st edn. Copenhagen: EAAE, 164-181.

2. Kathryn H. Anthony (1987) Private Reactions to Public Criticism: Students, Faculty, and Practicing Architects State Their Views on Design Juries in Architectural EducationJournal of Architectural Education (1984-), Vol. 40, No. 3 (Spring, 1987), pp. 2-11

EITHER

3a Thomson, Sheona A. (2007) Sharing understanding of assessment criteria in design project tutorials: Some observations of, and implications for, practice, IDEA Journal, 2007. pp. 38-50.

OR (OR IF YOU ARE KEEN and let’s hope so – BOTH!)

3b Ahrentzen, S and Groat, L (1996) Reconceptualising architecture for a more diverse future: perceptions and visions of architectural students Journal of Architectural Education Vol 49 No 3 pp. 166-178

Notes on session: 4th November 2009

Lost Judgement-Till

Architects using black as uniform- seperate entity within university- trying to divorce themselves from everybody else. -black easier then colour,pragmatic,

Is architecture seen as seperate entity?- Socializing within course,

Student as a ‘receptable’- as you move through student elvolves own style,

How to Crit?- Should try to be objective, interim crit more useful than final, not as much presure at interm crit. Interm crit should be work in progress. Tutor opening up discussion, final crit critiqued against value and interm about discussion. Divergent vs judgemental critique. Start of project about direct answer, direct answer down the line can have bigger consequences.

Assessment- what do you need to do to get an A? Requisite drawings-target for project. Erasmus quiet useful to expose to other cultures – some places students are less focused on product and more on positioning of their work, more thought in work.

How do you want to be marked/ assessed? Aims and goal. 5 yr plan, what signifies achivement? Do you want to be assessed on buildability or conceptualisation?

Goals- How to set your work apart? Try and do as little as possible to explain scheme. Aiming to do as little as possible -right way to go, more sustainable and focused. One drawing, think how you might look at 10 drawings in 30 minutes, can you map that through to tutors expereince of tutoring, will they get to know your work in detail? What do you want people to look at? Don’t follow what other people are doing, make your own goals.

Private reactions to public criticism- Anthony

Is criticism exaggerated, do people over-react? Focus on positives, should crits be taken personally? Various methods of assessment- anonomous feedback?

Prefer to talk and explain you work. Architecture exist in the mind, 70s buildings considered ‘cool’, 80’s building still naff. Architecture part of collective narrative. Part of job of designer is to spread narrative. Alsop uses videos/ animations to convey narrative to user. They buy building and ‘concept’ of living and design style. Narrative requires change of language, if you can sucessfully pass on ideas people will go with you, if they understand what is driving idea. Prefering to debate the narrative in university, struggling with lack of narrative. Gender dimension to dialogue-monologue. Giving training.

Comments on Optional texts:

Reconceptualizing architectural education- 1984

14% of practice is female, recession stat now at 11%, female mostly holding part time work, university female currently at 34%, big drop off in practice post university,

Progression and achivement- pay of architect 50% less than law, not good payback after 7 yrs uni. Female opinion ‘is a job in practice worth it?’, after 1st child, not a very suitable job for parent. Little sympathy for people who want to do architecture part time, do it 50 hour week or dont do it at all. Other cultures different , a lot of part time culture in Germany. Not a lot of understanding for women who want time off. Discrimination. Biggest crisis -lack of part time culture. No time for thinking with high work load,.

2nd Optional paper-

Assessment detremental to project- 10% of project marked every week, more about process than final product, studio more of design ethos and understanding, crits more of educational value. Talking though sketch book, sitting down assessing. Subjectivity, always personal bias, how would personal user respond to presenation/scheme.

User input- not seeing anything than seeing your scheme, not involved in process, gives them a clearer view. Get involved with ‘real ppeople users’. We preume how people would use building? Critique of phenomenology-abstract romanticism. Dispise of romantic gene, phemonenologist have gene in abundance, so unreal uncreative, restrictive dead. Pallasma-phenomenology- trained to like- writings so removed from life. Heidegger is where it comes from, fantastic ideas for individual, not to be copied spread, for the elite. Subjective opinion. Does H relate to provincial people, get stuck with it and dosent move on. Not an architecture that moves forward, an architecture that is becoming more and more irrelevant.

Fundementally- lack of critical framework. Till talk at a meta level, do critque at critical level, Something beautiful in production of product, Till is trying to open our eyes and look at what we are working. Pg7 – media tech, notion of poverty vs media centre, political act of architecture, critical framework for where we make our work, not understood by students, critical framework – building subjective position, lets you position yourself against them. Friction a good thing, your position will become explicit. Say here is framework I am working within. Critique- divergant vs judgemental, education more about training. Good critique about opening you up, pushing you, but must be judgemental. Difficulties- defining judgemental part of critique? How are you going to judge me and how I will respond to that?

Ask staff, how are we going to be reviewed- final yr students- bring into portfolio review, eye into viewing work, working on other side of the line, portfolio assessment free to be opened up -1st yr student

Video: Dr. Jonathan Charley on an alternative, ethical architectural practice

I was in London recently for the 2009 RIBA Research Symposium, a day-long event at which various speakers from architectural practice, academia and associated disciplines presented papers around the theme of Changing Practices, including the evolution of practice, the organisation of practice, the politics of practice and the future of practice. A highlight for me was the video offered by an absent Dr. Jonathan Charley of Strathclyde University, who couldn’t attend in person.

Coming weeks

PLEASE LOOK AT QOL FOR ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT COMING WEEKS

Week 2 (7 Oct): tutor / student (RM, JB)

Week 3 (14 Oct): abstract creativity / live creativity (RM, JB) Catriona Toner & Petrina Tierney

Week 6 (4 Nov): design / critique (RM) Mark Anderson & Stephen McClatchey & Joan Kerr

Week 7 (11 Nov): architecture / people (RM) William Pakenham & Catherine Blaney

Week 8 (18 Nov): architecture / building (RM, JB) Ben McSharry & …

Week 9 (25 Nov): prefabrication / craft (RM, JB) Grace Kealey & Orla Young

Week 10 (2 Dec): architecture / money (RM, JB) Declan Smith & Gerard Tohill

Week 11 (9 Dec): practice / practice (RM, JB) Ollie Chapman & Jamie Gibson

Week 12 (16 Dec): assimilation and critique session (RM, JB) Elaine Hawthorne & Laura Puls

Week 3 Architecture and Creativity

Spontaneity and Originality: Keith Johnson

Ideas picked up from the assigned texts show that students can lose a lot of creativity by spending too much time trying to be original.

We then disscussed at what stage in our education did we feel confident enough to not be original and then to develop our own creativity.

Authenticity is maybe more of the key word than originality. Being true to your own personality, rather than trying to do what you think your tutors want you to do.

Ruth discussed how we need to know our limits but at the same time our limits must be permeable and negiable and be willing to discuss them.

Are the there any similarities between the text describing exchanges in a drama school and the architecture studio, where often the most original architect/actor does not try very hard to be different or out there.

Text 2: Architecture and Education

Amos: What is taught? and How it is taught?

Catriona and Petrina agree with some points amos made but also disagree with his thoughts that the studio should be secondary.

Literature is very important and relevent but at the same time not everyone will find the relevance in that particular text. Very current ideas within the article even though it has been written in 1982.

Could we erly design something or get motivated about a design if “detest or dislike” what we are designing?

How can we apply our own personality into a design? But then does this personality relate to the rest of the world ie typically white middle class and disconnected from the the rest of society. How can this “elite” group possibly really design for all people? an answer to this could that we all feel emotions and therefore can relate to everyone if we design with these emotions in mind.

People find their source of creativity form different places even from negativity.

There source of creativity is about how we design a building rather than the end product which then could be unsuitable for the users and therefore isolate the architect from society if the ideas behind the building are too abstract.

Amos is be provocative, he may not fully support or agree with the points that he is making but is putting them out there for disscussion.

Every school of architecture cannot be totally pluralistic, not ervy idea or personallity can be catered for, there are not the resources for this. Schools must express their personality and interests and therefoer potential students can see this and pick a school that suits them best.

Archicture practises, organisations and bodies do not make use of the massive sources of resources and knowledge that universities can provide.

Amos’ article came out around the same time as Schun’s article discussed last week that claimed the studio was the pinnacle of learning.

Reality versus Creativity?

Bringing some form of reality into a studio project clearly motivates students and therefore increasing their own creativity. Design does not have to be based on ideas first and technical issues later.

How have we observed the way in which the pieces have been written?

Reality vrs Creativity maybe more accessible to more readers due to the use of examples and scenarios.

Johnson’s book is very enjoyable and relevant but it is hard for architecture students to branch off from their own section of the library to other subjects such as drama that can be very usefull to their course.

Has creativity educated out of us through our schools or was it already in us? Can it really be taught?

Some feel the course should include more reading while others do not and feel that reading does not feel as natural.

Q: how do we teach creativity in schools of architecture?

“My four year old nephew is one of the most creative people I know”

Creative side is always there. It is a matter of re-discovering it.

RM: Interest in sustained creativity, esp. later in life when the bubble is burst.

Reality can sustain creativity.

It’s very hard to design a hospital without a site, context, constraints. Restrictions promote creativity.

Don’t rely on the booze.

Giving the space to be creative, because everyone is creative, it’s just inhibited.

Enjoyment leads to motivation, and that leads to creativity.

…to reframe the question:

Q: do we teach creativity in schools of architecture?

What would architecture be like without creativity? Just building?

Do we feel more creative now than at age 12?

Less space is given in different years of architecture school.

In first year we were mostly aware of other sources, but had too much free time.

Perhaps there should be a continuous strand through the course… what are you as a designer?

What other terms for creativity do we have / prefer?

What are the conditions for creativity?

When do you feel most creative?

When you’re not trying. When you have time and space to think.

Time out from architecture feeds back into it.

The studio feels very very competitive. It can make you feel worse.

Constructed time out, space to think, space to reflect.

Competitive sport. Having the skills supports creativity. Try and remember the moments that we felt most creative and reconstruct that scenario.

What is the relationship between creativity and reality in the design studio?

List the differences between a ‘real’ project in practice and a typical ‘design’ project in college.

Discuss the role of pace, pressure, lack of resources / time on creativity in practice.

Video: Ken Robinson – ’schools kill creativity’

This short talk – given at a TED (‘Technology, Entertainment, Design’) conference in 2006 – might be of interest ahead of Wednesday’s seminar.

Session 2: creativity (14.10.2009)

In case you didn’t receive the email, here are the references and pdf files for next Wednesday’s session.

• JOHNSTONE, K., 1981. Impro: improvisation and the theatre. London: Eyre Methuen. 87-93. (PDF)
• MORROW, R.. PARNELL, R., TORRINGTON, J., Reality versus Creativity? CEBE Transactions, 1(2), 91-99 (PDF)
• RAPOPORT, A., 1984. Architectural Education: There is an urgent need to reduce or eliminate the dominance of the studio. Architectural Record, 172(10), 100-103. (PDF)

See you on Wednesday.

first post

lots of nervous silence, how do you get people to open up in a group discussion?

James is not a feminist!

Discussion began with the relationship between tutor, Quist  and quiet architecture student Petra.

As a young student of architecture its difficult to make a constructive arguemnt against the weight of knowledge from an experienced tutor.

Is Queens over relient on one to one tutoring?

Is group discussion a better than one to one?

Part of being  a student of is to be able to position yourself and be distinctive.

Worst case scenareos for tutorials!

With a one to one tutoring model, differences of opinions from tutors can give conflicting criticism.

A show of hands finds that about half the group has learnt more on their year out.

A successful critique should be about the work itself, and leave the student feeling motivated.

Discussion turns to experinces of learning in the year out and examples of  experience with  professional architects.

What would happen if the student Petra grows up into Quist?

Is it be better to learn architecture through the working environment alone?

What is the ideal utopian tutorial?

Not against the wall, preferably on the table.

A desk crit is put on the table, pour everything on the table. Have both students and tutors, not too many no more than ten. Is eighteen too many?, it would have to be arranged around a big drawings, it’s easier to have a discussion around a table. Personally i wouldn’t like alot of people. Most agree with group tutorials. Somebodyelse likes one to one tutoring.

I like one to one tutoring, they give their opinon and it’s more personal, they tell you something and they question that. In the Bartlett they have students from the year above and mix them with the year below. They use the unit system, there are disadvantages though.

Having come from Liverpool, how does it differ? Liverpool is similar, they’re quite comparble, the one on one tutorials have parallels with discussions between architect and client.

Going back to the utopian tutorial, who shold be in control? What are the tatics you use as a student to controll the tutorial. Are you are of time limits? Are you aware of how you manage the time in a turtorial? Is it possible to do that?

There is something happening in universtiy’s today. Tutors have more time on their hands. Full time staff have less time.  To be a good tutor you have to be a good learner. The staff who come in maybe underperforming in terms of research. The student should get into the concept of being concise with the tutor.

The role of the university is too research and also to produce students. Each department has to fight to get money to buy computers, students may not be aware of the other roles of tutors.

Back to Quist, if a student wanted to go to the ateilleir(a model on which todays schools of architecture is based) students would setup their own workshop/ school, with it’s own set of rules to join..much like an american ‘frat’ house.

Back to the Utopian School.

Do you fell that you’ve had a really good tutorial on serives? You’ve never designed a building starting from services? If you’re designing a hospital the starting poin might be services. Have you ever had a review that talks about the cost of building? It would make a big differnce to get involved in actual building.

Going into practice being able to see ‘normal’ people being  architects is a relief. Research is about defing the problem, in real practice the notion is to simplify the problem. It’s about editing, simplfiying the problem  and getting it built is the goal. Researching lends itself to over complicating the problem.

It’s important to vocalise opinions and please use this blog!!

Think about what is the utopian seminar.