Fudal_Max222s20_1.1a
The relationship between part and whole is in some ways analogous to the age-old question of “what came first…the chicken or the egg?” Both can inform the other’s system, as Judd explains that part can be derived from whole and vice versa. Geometric proportion is a way in which a whole can be divided or constructed. The construction of wholes in these geometric parts can also allow for easy expansion and manipulation over time.
While some classical architects opted to use a set of proportions to inform their design, others believed that these constraints were “inadequate [for] their larger ambitions” (Judd 95). This broader approach shifted the focus to encompass the viewer’s perspective of the object rather than just the object itself. This is contrasted by minimalism, in which the object is the singular focus.
Materials can redirect the focus of the design. Minimalism relinquishes the constraints of complexity to create solid and unified areas that place the focus solely on form. The introduction of postminimalism allowed for the integration of textures and materials that enhanced its visibility.
A gridded plane reflects the more stringent constraints of minimalism or architectural syntax, whereas an open field reflects the ideals of the anti-cubist movement. Grids suggestively create more patterns and minimize potential irregularities. A field, while ambiguous, can be defined by various characteristics created in the area it encompasses.
The order with which buildings of particular purposes are designed changes with the needs of the public. For example, the syntax of a government building may be changed to be made more inviting in an attempt to mediate growing distrust and tensions. Columns and stone, once used to represent strength and power, may be exchanged for glass and green space, relinquishing control to the citizen that inhabits the building.
1. I think thinking about either the chicken or the egg is not as productive as the chicken will lay the egg and the egg will become the chicken – these are the rule between the two which dictate their final form. If you think of it this way the order between chicken and egg are less important than the select the species of bird that will lay that specific egg, or to find egg that will morph into a chicken. The analogy has good intention, but may not communicate the point…
2. proportion is a system that control the organization of unit in a scale factor – thus all part relates interm of scale, while each part can be wildly different. Its falshood is to think that proportion is the only system out there; hence restricting. What then if architecture follow flow of pedestrian, or wind path, or the judging eyes of the neighbor next door… Minimalism (art not minimalism the style; the former speaks methodlogy, the latter an aesthetic option) marks this move away from the object and instead study object as a system. Thus it studies not the objects but the relationship between objects. – Im not sure about the drawing on communicating this idea.
3. think of it this way, if minimalism is the study of the system, hence an abstraction, then post-modernism pull it back to the human dimension and emotion by expanding the language of the unit that the system can be applied on. This selection can then be thought of as a system in itself – the rule – select only units that are culturally accepted – to then the evaluation of the degree of cultural acceptance become the measurement that generate a collection – a field of different units that follow this parameter. The rule is not the texture but those which can generate different degrees of human response. — your drawing in this case is a representation and not a diagram.
4. the grid follows a very clear rule or logic or system of contrained dimension and repetition and is too a field. To expand this notion is a grid that does not follows the system of contrained dimension, but, say, of lateral forces, of wind, of social distancing…each will generates its own respective field. Different types of grid. Your drawing is close on using the logic of the slanted line to create a differet field, but it is 3 systems contrained dimension, repetition and slanted. If you remove one rule you may find yourself a very different grid. The rule or system is thus more important than the unit in a field.
5. yes, it’s then the language of the system. In this case the rule for the material is political sensitivity which leads to the selection of various degree of response — say I choose trust as a measurement – depending on the public social rating of various degree of trust response to certain material one may make selection of various stones or even metal should the measure lean in that direction. The material – the unit is thus less relavant than the rule (system) and the measurement that lead to its selection. You have more freedom this way. Again the drawing you have here is only a representation and not a diagram.