Taking into consideration the method previously explored by the Constructivists and Koolhaas, in order to deal with an identical problem, we will closely follow in their footsteps as long as this is to the benefit of the project.
Firstly we will start by posing the question of the programmatic indeterminacy. Not quite as the previous counterparts did, we will attempt to map out the programmatic formations of the soviet condenser, the La Villete Park and lastly as far as we can the “American Skyscraper”. This is been done by keeping in mind the fact that we are talking about spatial solutions aging from nearly a century back to 20 years old. It is necessary to investigate what types of programmatic elements could be further needed, or on the other hand would be considered obsolete.
Of course the goal of this project is not to act as a fortuneteller or even more as a anthropologic study, so the investigations are only valid under the scope of creating the strategy needed to address the specific problem.
After referencing the programmatic elements, the next step would be to assess the requirements of each and every one. Different needs of light availability, volume, structure o even situational issues that need to be dealt with. The multiple nature of the elements, makes it necessary for us to map out these relationships in order to be able to pre calculate them later on.
Following the requirements investigation, we believe that we should take a deeper look into the circulation diagrams. Firstly by investigating the available circulation modes, or even search for additional ones, and then proceed to cross examine them with the already set up programmatic formation. Through this process, the conditional state of the provisional neighbors or clusters will become much clearer and easily articulated.
Parallel with the previous research, it will also be crucial to state some kind of hierarchy between the different elements of the program. That will give the necessary weight lists in order to result in a direct and adjustable result.
An additional important element of the strategic implementation, although not in first glance functional, is the division of space between the smooth and the striated. This also can be considered as a succession on Koolhaas theory of the void, in his infamous Berlin Wall project.
The main idea behind this duality, apart from the obvious interconnection procedure, is the ability to host and serve even wider forms of program. When G. Deleuze talks about striated and smooth space, he masterfully uses the example of the nomadic and the sedentary. This distinction coincides also with the one between the war machine and the state apparatus.
If we suppose here that the ribbon structure, the “real” element upon which everything else is projected, can constitute the idea of striated space, then it is easily admittable that the void could take the role of the war machine.
Neither the roles, nor the names are coincidental. On the one hand, the condenser, being a structure and furthermore using a completely pre striated space as its emerging realm, will absolutely be a striated space. Even more it needs this kind of striation in order to further implement Leonidov’s multi subdivision tactic. So it is a striated space, emerging from striated elements aiming to further striate it.
The above action although at first glance looks like an extremity, in reality it is something that helps a lot with the definition of its oppositional space; the smooth space. In this case the smooth space can be traced as the void created between the slabs, or the habitable space all over. Someone may also argue that taken into section view, the Seagram – as every American Skyscraper – is an absolutely striated space that engulfs multiple voids.
The idea here is to reformulate these voids, and set them free to cluster, disperse and ultimately to be able to serve our basic programmatic formalities. This is the real war machine, the ever changing element. The war is between the continuous re institutionalization of the society as a whole. Here is where the prominent, the expected (the law) meets the unforeseen, the unexpected (the logos). In order to visualize this struggle we would have to use another part of Deleuzian terminology and talk about the primacy of the line (striated) and the primacy of the point (smooth).
These voids, with nothing in particular to add to the structure, but the whole point of the structure would be to accommodate them, can also act in another level of physicality. The ribbon, posing as the striated and rigid structure can only formulate itself by means of Euclidean space, after all it has to be capable of continuous registry and expected behavior. On the other hand, the void can be the host of Riemann space. That can be an experimental procedure, solely part of minor science, which awaits its turn to become part of the striation. After all as Deleuze argued, between the state and the nomad, the state always wins, so why not try to change the state from within by influencing its own formulations on the strategic perceptions of the state.
The last thing to be added to this strategic list of actions is the idea of circulation methodology. One of the things that Leonidov and OMA share in common, under different reasoning, is the strict set up of the basic moving axis. Although once off these axis, the movement is more or less set free, before this it completely appropriated. The Seagram due to its medium size provides us with the unique opportunity not to pre appropriate the circulation routes and therefore try to predict the movement of the people. The plaza gives us the ideal starting point for the diffusion process that can actually be transformed into the element that inserts the incoming population. Another advantage gained from using this method is that we can completely eradicate the centrality of the axis, once the entry point becomes a multiplicity.
[The void strategy]
As we mentioned before, the voids are incorporated into the condenser in order to act as the experimental forefront of the given structure. In reality, the soviets did not have the luxury of establishing something of the kind, so they used the open plan arrangement instead.
In our case we would like to take this notion a step further and add the third and fourth dimension into it. Not all of the empty space between the ribbon elements can be appropriated as void, but also no space can be excluded from this functionality. The idea would be for them (the voids) to be occupied by short lived experimental structures, test the institutional framework to its limits and beyond. There will be no specificity for the form, function and goal of these occupancies, after all there is no possible way to predict now the spatial formations of tomorrow, but you can provide the space for it to evolve from.
No comments:
Post a Comment