An agenda for me is always an ideal situation. However, when it comes to Architecture, having an ideal to begin with is always a noble thing to do. Judging from the impact that it will eventually have on the environment and the greater public.
Ultimately, Architects are slaves to function. The site, program, economy, and especially bodies other than the architect's own, build up a kind of tension. This tension is either a positive or a negative one. A negative outcome would be that of risk and anxiety, which may result in an architecture that is not responsive to the brief, lacking any obvious principle of organization or not contributing to an urban context. A positive outcome is an object of play. Having a concept may be crucial to a successful outcome, however, it is not always necessary. Accidental experimentation could also yield a positive outcome.
The race for a positive outcome is always ongoing, especially in Architecture school. Moreover, it is set against a strict time line of events. My agenda is to create a socially viable public space that will sit comfortably within a greater urban context. A public library is a dramatic enclosure of knowledge dissemination, research and learning. Also, it is a community library, which will host public events and proceedings. A new generation library in a contemporary style, that its shape, might be formulated by accident, nevertheless, will represent this changing nature of library Architecture.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
What is your ideal in the context in which we are now working? Or what do you mean by a socially viable space? How will I asses your work in respect to this? Is the positive outcome of tension just play; are there other possible effects? What exactly is the changing nature of the library?
Post a Comment