I finally managed to get a for me satisfying strategy with a sort of campus masterplan which would really work well and regenerate new life in an completely unused area of London.....
BUT! What's my connection to the first term? I just analyzed the whole first term again.
____ floating in different directions on different layers
____ bridging one side with the other
____ unclear but then obvious connections,
____ precipitate and unexpected changes
____ spaces where just the different direction of surfaces define the function
until the section and it's materialization
____ rough inside smooth outside
- london I would say is most of the time more
rough outside and soft inside
So what's the best way to improve my project with these metaphors?
I need to find a way to give my project a massive improvement through that otherwise it will get a normal TU Graz project where I got really nice projects through well done site researches but never had time to do experiments like we did in the first term.
I'm not satisfied with just putting a scaled up version of the laminated model on the site.
For me there has to be a connection with the program, with the surrounding and with the first terms work otherwise it will get what Rem Koolhaas would call Junkspace.
Any ideas how I can avoid that?
How's everyone else dealing with the first terms work?
3 comments:
I totally understand your concerns, because at this stage of the year its very easy to think only about form (simply scaling up a first term model). But at this stage you need to make your program, circulation ideas, or even structural ideas inform how you use the first term models and language. So for example the bridging elements you are talking about or the floating elements could start to apply only to circulation. So these metaphors could start to deal with issues within your proposal. Furthermore, I think that a campus as a program is so rich, and it needs a wide variety of spaces, which you can derive from your first term work and develop.
TS could also drive the project. So some of the things that we did may have been possible only at the scale that we were working on then, but not for KX which means it would be modified or changed somehow.
I hope this was helpful. I am also trying not to let my project become 'junkspace'.
Thanks Tamim, it was helpful, I was in a very grumpy mood yesterday so hopefully you didn't take my comment personally.
The whole purpose of the second half of the first term was to assess the analogies and processes in ways that are beyond the form- inhabitation (collage, section), construction (construct) and scalability (tokyo). Reflect on the latter part of the first term as ways to extend the scope and ambition of the urban project- nobody is suggesting placing the first term's work into the site.
Post a Comment