Inhabit

a

Playing with the idea of technological aspects of architecture, I began by exploring the environmental architectural techniques we learnt from ARCHTECH 106 as to relate back to the reading: Designing in Techno-Social Landscapes. It was to look beyond the notion of function in technology, the green gardens, as merely just 'green' technology but to explore the social aspect of integrating such things. It was about reacting to the building's empty interior atrium space - the almost dead and still space - by adding life into the stairs. 

This project produced the following thoughts: 

Mapping

Trashold Project Final

Following on from the reading on the Medieval Carnival, I was immediately drawn to the purely egaliterian society that the carnival induced, albeit it being temporary. Such events revealed a celebration of equality of all kinds of people and that people are inherently more inclined to laughter and festivity when freed from strict rules and principles. This contrasting sharply to the segregation that existed outside the festival was a model in which I thought design to should follow: like the carnival, architecture should show through design glimpses of the possibility of an equality and its associations, even if the world was different outside. While sounding overly grandiose, and thus, excessively indulging in romanticism for while I was reading I was spell-bound by the literature; and if such things are possible with words, I pondered, why cannot it not with architecture?

Diverging away from the main threshold project a bit, and talking about the team-work process of collectively building a site model I began to realise one very important thing. The political and implicit ideologies of an act that on the surface may possibly be nice, but if it were on a different scale it could lead to disaster is one thing we learnt in team-working. A one person leading team may seem like a logical step at times, however, such acts are not what we in a democratic society practise; that is, even our design processes when working with others should strictly be founded on what we believe is right. While it may have led to well co-ordinated design - it would have meant less thoughts and inputs from each individual member in the class, therefore, not captivating the potential assets we have. This would also not have gone well with  the overall theme of 'classlessness' and fairshare vision that the reading provided. Of course, it does not mean that we should all act as individuals inconsiderate of others but it does mean that we should all be contributing equally in cooperation - one of the very reasons why I believed the site replica of the School of Architecture and Planning building to have been so successful.

Carrying on with the idea of team-work, I decided to work with Kim Hyunh and Patrisha - people I have never worked with. Naturally, the situation was both a challenge and an opportunity. Working togehter enabled an expanded vision of the possibilities and finer details of the project. It made us feel down together when we were constantly questioned, criticised and openly disliked, but it also made us tackle the design problem and when we succeeded it meant our happiness and satisfaction quadrupled. Such experiences are well-worth having and I am glad to have had such great thoughts from Judy to have allowed me to think of the greater political dimensions in the design cooperation process. We all came to share our ideas - the best aspect of working in a group.

One more thing I have learnt from Mark was this: always approach things with justification and sound reasoning. Define the concepts that are critical in the designs, question, observe and restate and reobserve and redefine and requestion. Such rigourous questioning will lead to a greater learning experience of realising with greater clarity the extent of what you have designed. It is also a rational and empirical approach - such philosophical reasoning that demonstrate the highest of critical thinking which all good designs must have. The thoroughness of such reasoning have led me to not only devise a better understanding of 'threshold' (note: devise - it was partly organised, partly created and partly from observation) and also an approach to things I will have on my mind, always.

Threshold?!!

A threshold is spatially designed as a method of giving the impression of what is beyond from either of the two linked spaces. We feel the space of the threshold through the moments of transition when the transitory space can be experienced, thus, indicating that of the newly entered space. For example, castle gates impart a strong sense of boldness and grandiose, the entrance to a security door looks visually guarded, an arch expresses emotions related to nationalism... In short, the threshold is a way of activating the space that is beyond.

The act of passing is relevant in terms of time. It is important to include the factor of time as it gives the real relative perspective of the 'threshold' which is a moment of transition towards permanent spaces where moments are measured through greater quantities of time. We spend small moments in thresholds and greater amounts in rooms.

The threshold's passage is selectively permeable in that it is able to exclude and include things related to its function. This exclusion and inclusion factor also influences the connected spaces because people's occupation is the ultimate influence of a built design - how they use it, how they feel inside it thus must be considered through the threshold. The act of passing, thus, allows a phenomenon or functional transition to occur...

Collecting opinions

"how a treshold point is ranged, either short or long, that implies time and communication. I like the theory of how such boundary expands and eventually becomes one "functional" space. It is the phyical tranformation of moment to period.. For me, it is little bit difficult to understand the "terms" that you have used. Door is a physical and funcational object. And space is dematerialised, and conceptual volume that we experience. Two things cannot be compared directly to each other. My advice is that you use the specific moment of transition, rather than a word, door. It's more like a study on relationships bettwen the temporal (transitory) and permanent spaces.

People generally come up with an idea of physically splitting the building in two several pieces, when they face the concept of treshold, boundary, barrier, etc. But I think architecture requires and wants more depth. And the depth comes from how one understands and compose the space: experience. Form is a mere appearance. How can human-beings live without organs." - Ikje Cheon

Threshold?

My current definition of the threshold:
A sharp point of difference spatially between two spaces - that can either be different, opposing or the same - which contains a certain mechanised access or ritual of activation allowing it to be selectively-permeable (i.e. access designed for certain people or designed to exclude certain people) but requiring a physical 'crossing' of the connection to result in a condition, transition or phemenon to occur or simply to 'enter' the second space. The threshold in architectural terms could be significantly 'different' for example the gate into the Taj Mahal, or simply a line dividing two spaces.

Few things that do puzzle me are the reasons why these connections are required i.e. when does a room require a door, what functional roles do they play, are there any alternatives to connecting things, what kind of passage is required... From research:

Doors - is used to control the physical atmosphere within a space by enclosing it; that is, it is a process of screening what is inside the door but also giving the impression of an entrance to it. It allows the differentiation from in to out, controls the conditions (e.g. when the door is opened, light and air enter).

Cells - selectively permeable to allow only certain things in, made from protein, segregation of biological interior to exterior things. It keeps things inside...

Perhaps, the connection is a mutual point between inside and outside which requires some sort of segregation, such that the purpose is to allow limited access... The threshold influences the two spaces by imparting an impression of entrance/exit/passage... E.g. a cell membrane exerts influence onto the inside by allowing only a few things in and a few things out... That boundary kind of influences it, allows us to identify whats in and whats out? A factor of movement between two spaces? A factor of occupation (i.e. it should be used)? 


The doors locked in archi building can be considered as walls because they dont allow passage through it, though, have the potential to.

Secondlife Project: Trash-hold [sic]