another page missing here
next: layering of areas
this is just the material emperiment. the big model is at school waiting for more layers to be added. this material is fiberglass but feels like silk and it becomes completely transparent when the resin is applied. It's so thin that it does not have structural properties but helps a lot in keeping the shape. So the transitions from opaque (carbon-fiber/resin or metallic spoge/resin or chrome) to translucent (fiberglass at different densities) to transparent (extremely thin fiberglass with flexible resin) are getting materially sorted. and here a couple of bad pics...
sample model of the generic main site. all cardboard to lasercut tomorrow and sphere in another material (probably wood as, for now, is just a volumetric exploration). scale 1-2000, which means the sphere is 5cm diam. block size = manhattan average = 275x80mts (or half length)
Buildings are physical and so, defined by form. But, often, buildings are also functional and so, defined by function. My interest relies on the hierarchy established in between these two; specially on the prioritization of one over the other: of form over function.
Firstly, I focused my attention on three buildings: the Guggenheim of NY by F L Wright, the curch of Firminy by LC; and the Cenotaph for Newton by Boullee; in order to explore the statement (assertion?). The three buildings can be defined as categorical volumes and comprise a single space inside. They are not identified or characterized by their function but absolutely by their appearance as objects and presence within a site. I read them as the result of an obsession in which a certain formal sensibility has taken command dictating the resolution and consequential reinvention of every other architectural aspect (including function). Once reason is moved aside we can find room for imagination.
Cities are the result of the dictations made by an assumed reason that we misunderstand as our only needs. Thus, improving and refining communications, minimizing spatial needs, optimizing construction methods, etc. we have managed to end up with the regularity of the bits a pieces, the homogeneity given by the very many in which we cannot identify, distill or simply like anything. There is no form to fall in love with. So, may I introduce you now to Serafina?
Serafina is a form in response to the city's formlessness. (to explain: categorical form and spatial "uniqueness" against the forms and spaces made by bits and pieces)
Serafina is a building in response to the city exhaustions and rejections. (to explain: spatial vastness and sky-scope against the extenuation of space and sky; and, circulatory wandering and color-scopes against the rejection of color and the disregard of any sort of ineffective walk)
Serafina is an event in response to the city's assigned/assumed routine. (points to explain: fabrication and construction issues becoming enjoyable happenings instead of something that just "has to be done")
Serafina is a fiction because the city creates the conditions for it. (need to elaborate this further)
Firstly, I focused my attention on three buildings: the Guggenheim of NY by F L Wright, the curch of Firminy by LC; and the Cenotaph for Newton by Boullee; in order to explore the statement (assertion?). The three buildings can be defined as categorical volumes and comprise a single space inside. They are not identified or characterized by their function but absolutely by their appearance as objects and presence within a site. I read them as the result of an obsession in which a certain formal sensibility has taken command dictating the resolution and consequential reinvention of every other architectural aspect (including function). Once reason is moved aside we can find room for imagination.
Cities are the result of the dictations made by an assumed reason that we misunderstand as our only needs. Thus, improving and refining communications, minimizing spatial needs, optimizing construction methods, etc. we have managed to end up with the regularity of the bits a pieces, the homogeneity given by the very many in which we cannot identify, distill or simply like anything. There is no form to fall in love with. So, may I introduce you now to Serafina?
Serafina is a form in response to the city's formlessness. (to explain: categorical form and spatial "uniqueness" against the forms and spaces made by bits and pieces)
Serafina is a building in response to the city exhaustions and rejections. (to explain: spatial vastness and sky-scope against the extenuation of space and sky; and, circulatory wandering and color-scopes against the rejection of color and the disregard of any sort of ineffective walk)
Serafina is an event in response to the city's assigned/assumed routine. (points to explain: fabrication and construction issues becoming enjoyable happenings instead of something that just "has to be done")
Serafina is a fiction because the city creates the conditions for it. (need to elaborate this further)
