I’m slowly working towards our first review this Friday. I’ve come up with what I feel to be a solid core idea. I feel like this base, which is not significantly dissimilar to the nebulous idea I have had since thesis prep, is specific enough to direct my future actions, but general enough to allow for some interpretation. Right now, I’m trying to work out a few different interpretations to present in a sketchy, diagrammatic way at the review on Friday. Hopefully, they will end up being less like form partis and more like structural and metaphorical frameworks for my future investigations.
I’m still working towards the “micro” study. We have been pushed towards a material focus. I believe that any material in itself wouldn’t be particularly useful for my project, as I envision the designed space to be a skeleton that the users can help to design themselves, including creating and changing partitions which could be artwork, panels created by users, art installations, and so on. I would like to see the spaces evolve and change with each new user group, artist, function (and so on) that comes through, and with that comes a change in material.
My question for the next week: What is the most appropriate structurally metaphorical framework to build upon when coming up with the form for my building?
Caitlyn, the collaged images and diagrammatic models have a lot of energy and visual richness. Your challenge is to figure out how to translate that into something architectural. I like your idea that there will be detachable, shiftable pieces – perhaps Audrey’s explorations into kinetic architecture could give ideas. Robert Kronenburg has published a series of books on Transportable Environments that includes modular construction, mutable buildings.