preoy-blog

[preoy-blog]

Eclectic Anachronism

When architecture took a step forward towards the end of 18th century and the start of 19th century, it was like the style were stepping onto half grounds, one foot stuck in the past of the classical language, of decorations and representations while one foot entered the realm of technological advancements after the industrial revolution, appealing to functionality and potential of new materials studied.

The Railway Station by William Powell Frith

This dilemma sparked the pattern of experimental steps taken throughout the period, a struggle towards establishing any clear identity within the society and therefore architecture. With the progress of the developing society, architecture was seen as an alternate medium of just trying to express the current political situation or religious motifs, they actually were assigned contemporary functions, whether as factories or transportation stations. So the buildings were built to accommodate these contemporary needs however in the same classical forms. Perhaps, this conflict between the anachronistic utilisation of opposing elements of developed function but primitive forms is what solely creates the confusion during this period in time.

18th and 19th century eclecticism were taking steps back to the past, even though the society was quickly developing and the involvement of technology became inevitable. One way was the urge to retreat back to the Gothic representation which were seen as more rich and exciting, representing the times when people were happy whilst commenting on the negative impacts that industrialisation brought upon the physical environment.

Contrasts Illustrations by A.W. Pugin

On the other hand, some were taking steps way back to the connotations of nature, resisting to accept the idea of industrialisation but wanting to focus more on inspirations from nature and organically abstracted forms. This was called the movement of the 'Art Nouveau' where architecture was lost in the society that was progressing too fast thus grasping onto nature, a consistent aspect in environment that remains the same through all changes in time.

Through the eclectic collage of styles chosen for each element within a collective building, the mixing of too many styles eliminates the capability to identify any collective idea. With numerous aspects fighting against each other within one space, it is impossible to distinguish any key motifs, it is to say that architecture was in a complete mess, failing to satisfy neither a clear functionality of the space or the aesthetic of an expressive portrayal of the society utilising the space.

[preoy-blog]

Baroque(n) Indentity

As its label suggests, the Baroque, broke what existed of the architectural identity, as did they break the renaissance identity and overwhelmed it with even more excessive elements, not conjuring any new aspects in defiance to opposition of the protestants but emphasising the catholic exuberance. Taking the simple shapes, and twisting it, reforming new forms amidst the act of deformation.

However complex it might seem, baroque architecture once derived are still compositions of the legibility and logical geometry, though challenges the human interpretation of the understanding and appreciation of those simplistic forms - circles and squares - crushing that stability, and in the distortion and overlaying of those geometric shape creates a puzzle for the visual interpretation, hence confusing the audience's observation of the architecture, evoking emotions beyond what previous architecture had done before, not only with the manipulation of monumentality and ornamentation overload. Perhaps, it could be more simply put that architecture of the Renaissance were made to convey relatable understanding though architecture during the Baroque aimed to create confusion and distortion of emotional feelings.

A take on present complexity, could be an example of many of Frank Gehry's architecture where a sense of array and disarray is conveyed at the same time. For instance, looking at Gehry's "Dancing house" you react to the conventional forms of surrounding context, as well as recognising the odd construction of the distorted building, recognising the typical elements of a building, where the windows and the doors are, being able to navigate within the space though not entirely being able to dissect it conceptually, so even though the form strays away from tradition and may no longer look its function we are still able define it to a certain extent. This could be easily comparable to the state of seeing a distorted form next to the original geometric, like the Baroque preference of broken forms, ovals instead of circles, and trapeze instead of squares.

[preoy-blog]

Renewal.

The Renaissance was the period of architectural rebirth, with the renewal of priorities and appreciated values, again the recognition of humanistic ideal exceeds the importance of godly teachings, stripping the religious predominance and returning to the secular teachings of the Greeks and Romans, deriving from excessive logic and rationality.

After the Black Plaque in Europe, evidence of poverty and suffering arose doubts on the potent of God, whether this figure everyone had been obsessing over was indeed as powerful, if he had really been protecting us and if the teachings of the church were actually aiding them towards success in life. Thus, raises people's beliefs in themselves, encouraging self-worth and shifting the perspective of how society saw themselves, not perfect or capable just because their creator was perfect therefore they were, but just as "we are".

Straying from the influence of religion, one obvious aspect denoting the movement of the renaissance was the architecture, its shift from the holy Gothic romanesque, to the style of the Renaissance taking its turn towards the alternative anthropocentrism where humans are at the core of defining the functionalities of the architecture. This concept is noticeable by the contrasting proportions to prior architecture constructed concerning visual monumentality in order to appeal to the gods, now buildings are built to satisfy the human scales, as well as the reduction of the usage of geometric simplicity, designing with uncomplicated shapes of basic polygons; squares and circles, following strict symmetrical proportions

However, the Renaissance did not embody at all a new kind of architecture but more of just going back to the roots of humanities and resurrecting old traditions, in this case mostly from the teachings of the Great Roman Empire. More of which emphasises on the fact that humans are capable beings on their own and not ruled by some higher power, which really makes more sense to me as the need for self worth is what is most important, as buildings should not be solely focused on the subject of design for someone or something that is beyond ourselves since it is us humans that really utilise the space itself.

[preoy-blog]

Modernism Modified.

Stripping away the limits of modernism identity where the architecture has already been specifically defined, post-modernism ambitions opens up to more alternatives of interpretations, allowing the people to define in their own ways the identities of the architecture constructing their own aspect of functionality within a space.

It is said that what creates architecture does not come from the physical of the building but the behaviours in which it takes place in some specific context, utilising the space in a certain way. For example, Prada's flagship store in New York interior transforms between, an ordinary stairway into a shopping platform and even a theatre. So, it is not the built architecture - only secondary - itself that describes brand but more the activities that identifies it.

- Prada New York Epicenter

Tying in with Rem Koolhaas' theory of 'BIGness', stating that when an architecture becomes too 'big' it eliminates the connection between the inhabited interior and the exterior context, disregarding what occurs beyond the space people are in, as if entering the architecture connotes the idea of entering a separate city. A great example for this is the design of shopping malls, installations of lighting and air-conditioning systems easily removes the people's acknowledgements of the outside, such as how hot and humid Bangkok is when inside. The complex provides, due to its 'BIGness' space for interpretation of the space, allowing multiple functionality within the architecture, the hallway or available space inside becomes not only walking paths but sitting area, selling areas and so on. However, what the architects can constrict are the range of 'BIGness' in which users can utilise, with less space for circulation, smaller interpretations thus less varied function could be establish.

- Villa VPRO by MVRDV

The constructed space in Villa VPRO allows for active interaction within the levels of the interior with the continuity between the floor plates, allowing people to be more aware of what occurs in their surroundings thus connecting the conflicting forms of activities hosted within the united space seamlessly.

Similarly, what I am trying to enact in my Flagship store is the idea of customisation done through the movable floor plates within the space, being able to transform in accordance to the hosted event. This allows for the shaping of the functions by the users themselves. However, the alterable floor plates does follow some restrictions, where some specific functions must be moved by a certain distance in order to activate a specific function. The volumes on the floor plates indicate shelvings that is separated in to half its height, the lower for one specific function and the higher for another, for instance one for product display and one for the storage of furnitures. So, to be able to access the table, the floor plates must bee pulled down to half its collective height in correspondence to the adjacent floor. This flexibility, with a certain extent of limitations creates distinct however changeable identity of Freitag.

[preoy-blog]

Quack Quack !

If I really have to choose, I guess my flagship store is more closely linked to the idea of being a duck, rather than a decorated shed.

In design studio, the brand I had chosen is Freitag, a swiss cult brand which very uniquely recycles materials such as tarpaulin, inner bicycle tubes and old car seat belts into fashionable yet very durable bags. So, although my flagship store design does not embody directly the shape of the bags nor the tarps, or the forms of a bicycle or cars in which the product is involved with, it indirectly conveys implicitly the principles in which Freitag as a brand stands for, dealing with the idea of "re-contextualising" which is to take an an object from one context, transforming it physically or functionally towards another context of purpose.

So, as an act of repurposing I decided to exploit the use of old, existing structures such as a working crane implemented away from its industrial site into the ground of Samyan, a newly developing area and also a house of potential market of materials. Hence, the creation of a supposedly new typology of shophouses, standing out from its surrounding context, thus emphasising the idea of individuality of each Freitag bag.

Similar to the tarps used for the bags, the function of the reused object is maintained, so in this case the capability of the crane for transferring hanging loads is maximised as the main system utilised in the space. The floors made from abandoned concrete casting formwork are suspended on cables from the top of the crane and is moveable thus transforming the spatial atmosphere inside the store to accommodate the hosted event, from the enclosed space to the usual selling day and an exhibition space. The facades are also alterable to act as shading devices, making the unconventional tarp shophouse more suited to the tropical climate in Thailand. The flexibility of the space contributes to strengthening the idea of Freitag, as a brand that purposes in very innovative ways there products or just simply being customisable to suit its targeted customers.

In addition, the material of the tarps itself are used to construct the skins of the facade, as a very honest and straightforward approach in showcasing the durability and sustainability of the material thus the bags themselves.

[preoy-blog]

Spirit in Architecture

Inspired by post-war advancements and the predominant roles in which technology had taken a place in the lives of people, invented to enhance the quality as well as making specific tasks easier or more efficient to carry out. Le Corbusier, aspired by the industrial success in which engineered machines brought, derives this aspect of the simple geometrics, rationality and functionality into his buildings, further defining a house even, to be just tool, a "machine for living" as expressed in this publication of 'Towards A New Architecture'.

His critical conclusion that "All men have the same needs", that all human beings, with typically similar compositions, agree on an element that it is aesthetically pleasing reducing the multitude of the elements in his architecture, for example reducing the number of windows implemented on the facade and mainly focusing on beautiful surfaces that to some might seem too mundane but I think that it actually becomes quite interesting, as forms were handled with objectively, acting as if canvases, ideal for showing or wearing light. Perhaps, 'Le Corbusier' as his own objectified identity draws from himself, as a module seeing what he views as 'beautiful' believing that all men thinks the same and therefore establishing his own perspective to be mutual for the public. 

One of Corbusier's urban planning work illustrates his perspectives on the vision of the utopian 'Plan Voisin in Paris' and the attempt of a mass produced city (in the same way machines and automobiles were mass produced) , of identical modular blocks of masses, totally organising both the physical streets and thus also manipulating a systematic routine of living. Personally, I do not see the absolute implementation of order as a ideal way of living or if this makes for a more healthy or clean atmosphere for the neighbourhood but rather a unfortunate elimination of the meaning of 'life' that should be defined by each and every difference, the clustering crowd and the varying typologies of buildings and streets that alternates and shapes each street to be unique and therefore attractive in its own ways. I guess Corbusier's works aimed to create houses, a modular machine part in architecture stating the obvious compositions of windows and doors, rather than homes, rather than the idea of domesticity and emotional belonging within the space.

Also modern, Eero Saarinen though illustrates his architecture very differently to Corbusier's, the post modernist exuberance displays instead of just functionality, the exceeded unencessity. Also inspired by the forms of machinery, still utilising the popular materiality of glass and steel, however what Saarinen created was a much more dynamic and expressive architecture as seen in the TWA terminal in New York where the form of the building itself replicates the motion of flight, physically shaped like a soaring bird via the construction of curvature both on the exterior and interior that communicates to the people the experience of flying amongst the fluid surface. This maybe 'unnecessary' act however seems suddenly absolutely necessary, that in branding activity, is not restricted to just selling or advertising the merchandise but to establish with utmost clarity what the brand actually stand for, to provoke feelings rather than provide efficiency through the architecture through the manipulation of the constructed, circulation,surfaces,and lighting, unable to be satisfied solely by the product alone.

[preoy-blog]

Mies' Modernism

Modernism, through Mies' architecture wanders between the realm of functionality and aesthetics. Specific elements such as materiality are showcased in their purest forms, eliminating the emphasis on ornamentation like prior times when the beauty of objects are seen through elaborate carvings or pattern done onto the surface, one example is the use of marbles, utilising the material's own texture and colour as decoration, focusing instead on the way it was cut and assembled, hence his principle of “god is in the detail”.

A particular building by Mies I am fascinated by and thinks expresses his ambitions very clearly, is the Seagram building with the exploitation of the i-beams, industrial and functional in appearance however actually truly and intentionally ornamental. The I-beams in this case provides no support for the building as its extrusion does not follow through to the ground however stops at a floating floor.  

The confusing question is, What is the purpose or even benefit in burdening the building structures with the load of the countless I beams made of bronze? If not functional, is it purely ornamental?

Personally, I think not as the I-beams are functional even if they are non-structural, they are structural in a way that they communicate a message of just being a structure. Similar to how the building expresses it identity via the colour of the bronze material representing the hue of scotch. Which I think for a building, it is crucial more than anything to express implicitly what it holds inside, the organisation, the brand, the image, the product. It is what will distinguish itself from the surrounding mass of other architecture. Altogether, the use of typical modernist elements such as materiality and simple structures convey very successfully a psychological image that will imprint onto observer's eyes not only the monumentality of the building but also the impression of the brand itself.

Conveniently, this links very directly into our current project in design studio, with the exploration of the selected brand, analysing its image and identity and how that influences attracted social groups as well as the construction of its flagship stores. The flagship store is not merely just a container of merchandised goods but it is the tangible facade on an intangible concept of any brand. So, what the architecture of the brand illustrates should be derived from what the smaller scale of the product itself communicates, both visually and functionally. Thus, elements added into a building, even if non-structural cannot be judged to be unnecessary as the necessity of an object is defined by the boundaries of what the brand is, it will not be ornamental, conflicting with the idea of modernism unless it exceeds beyond the brand. Likewise, the Seagram building, installed the I-beams not because it was supportive but more to earn people's recognition and create a lasting impression of the brand through its building that would stand for years and years onwards.

[preoy-blog]

How Modern?

To fully establish an exact description of something, particularly a style or in this case a movement in time concerning an architectural concept has always been difficult. If were to question, countless and contrasting opinions would be given in an attempt to clearly define what 'Modernism' is or what being modern signifies. To me, the word 'Modern' synonymises the word presence, being up to date or in trend. However, various conflicting conclusions has already been drawn on the identity of modernism, due to not only by the different contexts in which it has evolved from but the multiple movements and principles carried on by previous movements, from the 'Deutscher Werkbund' through to 'De Stijl.

One extract of Modernism deals with the essence of what is called 'organic architecture', as experimented by Frank Lloyd Wright. Being organic in this case does not deal with the term physically, however conceptually as Frank's designs evoke a sense of being organic in terms of its behavior, of how the architecture synchronizes with its context. The Coonley house in Illinois brilliantly expresses Frank's ambitions to incorporate the nature of the exterior into compatibility with the constructed interior, through the architect's signature style of the prairie house. The house exploits the use of passive ventilation and natural lighting systems and is composed of geometrical elements, not merely as an ornament however as an abstraction of the surrounding landscapes, for example the pattern of the windows, derived from the shapes of the trees outside the house. Frank's ideal of modernism is thus the act of going back to what's important, the landscape in which architecture situates, to harmonise the built architecture with the existing environment, rather than to obstruct and overpower it.

On the other hand, Walter Gropius elucidates dissimilarly on Modernism, regarding the ideology of functionality prior to form. His perspectives on Modernism instead demonstrates the reduced necessity of a building, providing no ornamental features but the more industrial aspect, pushing and revealing totally the structures of the architecture. This ideal was pushed to the extreme extent, where air condition vents were hanged on walls instead of paintings, conventionally. Perhaps this was the take of a post-war situation as the architecture itself was inspired by the industrial priorities and technological developments and also as a break away from old traditions and the urge to start new.

At first, Modernism personally translates for me a visual of simplistic sophistication, however once studied more profoundly, it is really fascinating as to how the style has came to be, not as simple as thought to be but had grown through series elaborately designed set of rules. In the end, it is hard to pinpoint exactly what Modernism should portray, but both Frank Lloyd Wright and Walter Gropius did show in common was a way of communicating, 'gesamtkunstwerk' or their work of total concept, staying strongly and true to their initiative.

These days, Modernism takes on a different route, much more open and diverse. As said before, I think that it defines a reduced version of what was important in society at that time. Current architecture we are able to observe nowadays in Bangkok might be one great example, as there is definitely a wide mix of styles as no one motive can only be valued but multiples appreciated by the diversity of people in our society.

[preoy-blog]

Ornament and Crime

"Ornament is wasted manpower and therefore wasted health,"quoted Adolf Loos. 'Is ornamentation truly not functional?' was what came to mind after my reading on Loos' readings on Ornament and Crime (1908). If ornamentation was really a degenerative act, what was to be thought of pre-existing history? Why did the Greeks and Romans spent such an immense amount of effort and time on decorating their architecture? There must obviously be a reason. Ornamentation was an indication of the historic civilization and social identity during the time, it is what differentiates each period from another, telling different tales and connoting different ambitions. Thus, with the stripping of ornamentation in Loos' perspective, what is to be portrayed during the 18th century?

To elaborate what Loos stated, that ornament was not only a waste of manpower, but also a waste if material and capital. It is undeniable that most ornamented objects costs more than simplistic objects, however I think that what lies in the labour and effort put into decorating and object pays off in the end, ornamentation gives people what is more important than functionality, by seeing innovative and creative ideas that may come in various shapes and forms it gives us excitement and pleasure that we humans need as creatures with feelings. However, the usage of ornamentation has a limit and when used too excessively it reaches the point of unencessity.

Moreover, I think that Adolf Loos' implication that “Ornament can no longer be borne by someone who exists at our level of culture” is rather extreme. I believe that there is no such thing as being totally stripped of ornaments. We, as humans or actually anything on earth are born different, ornamented by or slightly different facial features, of which makes it possible to differentiate individuals from one another. So, the act of implementing ornamentation as act of issuing identities and images for objects put there by man is somewhat possessed in human nature. Thus, to eradicate the total existence of ornamentation can be viewed as defying the nature of humanity. According to the text, Adolf Loos personified ornamentation as an 'it', which was interesting to me as it is in a way, for me suggesting that the act of applying ornaments is a variable, like human perspectives, saying that it can not be verified as necessary but people still chooses include it whether it was considered as an act of crime.

However, I do not object that the modern and simplistic lifestyle that Loos envisioned is at all unpleasing. I do think that it is rather reasonable to see things as he did and to promote functionality instead of forms as suited to the present context. Nowadays, people are exposed to more advanced technology and it is not surprising that minimal concepts are promoted. Especially in terms of architecture, I think that it is quite impractical to follow historic traditions with the construction of highly ornamented buildings as the context has evolved completely. The existing society has more to consider in terms of social and political views which are much too diverse to agree on one ideal, unlike earlier points in history when periods can be easily identifies such that pointing out the collective communities and different social priorities and virtues set. Thus, a simple design would be most ideal to satisfy and neutralise the multiple conflicting perspectives of individuals.

In the end, with the openness of society at the present, without judgement people are free to subject to their own preference, appreciating both simplicity and complexity as an expression of individual identity and personality.