HA 213 Section 2

[ha213-section2-blog]

I think back to the first day of class and Prof. Zimmerman asked, "Why are you all taking this class?"

A repetitive answer I remember hearing is "I want to know why some strip malls are ugly-looking?" Or "Why can't every building look nice?" Now, after one semester of studying architecture, I am not an expert, but I can say that this class had made me realize that architecture is not just about the look of buildings. Exterior design is only a fraction of the architect's job. Sure, maybe Wal-Mart looks like hell from the outside, but the inside of the building may be laid out in such a way that no customer is ever confused as to where a product is located, or the freight department can easily unload shipments and store excess products out of the view of customers.

The design of strip malls, Wal-Mart, etc. is incredibly functional. These buildings were never supposed to be "pretty," but rather serve a more Marxian purpose of maximizing economic efficiency.

[ha213-section2-blog]

Most of you should be familiar with the show "American Pickers" on the History Channel. Anyways, Buckminster Fuller's name flashed across the screen. It instantly piqued my interest because of our architecture discussions. The main characters Mike and Frank visited a man that lived in what is called a "geodesic dome". The inhabitant explained that all his house consists of is a hub with arms radiating out which attach to more hubs. I looked into the geodesic dome to find out that Bucky Fuller constructed the Montreal Biosphere which is strongly represented by "SpaceShip Earth" at Epcot. I found this interesting because without taking this architecture class, I would not have been able to associate Bucky Fuller, geodesic domes, and appreciating architecture. It's amazing where such architectural terms can "pop" up, such as "American Pickers" If I hadn't taken this class, Fuller's name would have just been another name on the screen.

[ha213-section2-blog]

Response to Techno Utopia at Michigan

Zane, really great post. I liked how you brought the university into what we have been discussing these past few lectures. I found it very interesting, but are there other buildings like it on campus? How did you discover this? I think that the idea of techno utopia at our university is cool, but at the same time having it is a bit worrisome because the connotation of Utopia. There is no way that this building could achieve any sense of utopia especially on a college campus. But regardless, very interesting post and a great find. I'd be interested to see if there are other buildings like that on campus. 

[ha213-section2-blog]

Since we don't really have a central theme for this week other than to recap what we've learned over the semester, I just wanted to throw in my two cents. Before this class I used to walk around places not really noticing buildings as I moved past. I thought of myself as a future architect because on a rare occasion I would look at a building and saw "wow" but now I know what it really takes. Thanks to this class, I can never look at a building the same way again. I recognize different styles, different materials and different designs and how they relate to each other and the city or town in which they lie. It is very distracting but also ver interesting and makes me want to consider a career in architecture again. The aerial we covered in class was abstract at times, but all very interesting and most importantly, enlightening. 

[ha213-section2-blog]

This post doesn't really relate to anything about this class in particular but rather relates to the history of architecture and what the future may have in store.  The growth of our civilization has not been a smooth uphill advancement.  Our growth has been more of a staircase model.  As a species we work on constantly refining our techniques and abilities with the resources we currently have.  Then we experience a major breakthrough and we are catapulted to a new level and all of the innovation starts from a new base point.  Personally I feel as though mankind is approaching the end of our current era.  We seem to be pushing on the upper constraints of our current technology and a drastic leap forward may not be out of the question.  In the past when we have taken huge leaps the first thing to change was infrastructure; buildings, bridges, roads, ect.  I really think this makes sense because infrastructure is the base that we build the rest of our civilization upon.  I think we are living in an exciting time because I really do feel like the next big breakthrough is right around the corner.  The world of the near future is going to be greatly different from the world we live in today.  It is very intriguing to imagine what the next huge evolution of building will be that HA 213 students will learn about 20 years from now.

[ha213-section2-blog]

Brasilia and Chandigarh

While looking retrospectively at cities like Brasilia and Chandigarh one can see how inspiring and disappointing architecture can be. Although these cities did not become the utopias they were supposed to be, they still remain as grand symbols of beautiful architecture. Le Corbusier and Oscar Niemeyer certainly have left their marks as amazing architects who defined schemes for buildings and cities that defined the people within them as well. Though not perfect, these two cities do thrive today, maybe not in the way originally intended but the inhabitants make do with what they have. The people of Chandigarh may not have needed the big roads that were supposed to accomodate large amounts of traffic but they use the other concrete nooks and crannies Le Corbusier had created in ways he hadn't intended. Many use them for shade from the hot sun, or to set up shops. Perhaps the perfect city cannot be designed but must grow from the advancements of the people occupying it. 

http://www.fastcodesign.com/1671306/bras-lia-and-chandigarh-symbols-of-modernist-hope-and-failure#1

[ha213-section2-blog]

Throughout the course of this class, I have realized that pieces of architecture haven't really changed as much as I thought they had.  The materials used, the methods to construct the pieces of architecture , and the overall size have changed, but buildings as a form of space have not.  For instance, in the lecture on The Metropolis, we learned about the Paris Opera.  The Paris Opera is an opera building that takes up an enormous amount of space within the city of Paris.  Likewise, during section 11, we talked about the Sydney Opera House.  The Sydney Opera House, just like the Paris Opera, is an opera building located in a very large city.  In addition, the Sydney Opera House is an extremely large building, just like the Paris Opera.  The Paris Opera was built in 1862-1875, while the Sydney Opera House was built in 1959-1973, yet both are extremely large buildings.  When talking about space in architecture, it is important to note that it deals with how a particular structure is used.  Both the Paris Opera and the Sydney Opera House are public buildings that house opera performances and must hold thousands of people at one time.  For this reason, they need to be huge buildings.  These two buildings are just one example of many of how buildings as a form of space continue to serve the same function that they did in the past as they do in the present and share the same general design.  

http://www.essortment.com/information-paris-opera-house-64019.html

http://www.sydneyoperahouse.com/the_building_history_heritage.aspx

[ha213-section2-blog]

For architects, smaller scale projects like the private home are often utilized as a 'testing grounds' of sorts for new, visionary ideas. Looking around at James Stirling's work on the private home, I stumbled upon his unbuilt model of a "House for the Architect." In this small home, various elements can be seen that he later incorporated into his most famous works. The most clear example in this model is the small entry roof that is essentially hanging from a pipe bolted to the house. This is seen again in his renowned expansion of the Stuttgart City Museum, just on a much larger scale. The use of bright, vibrant colors scattered throughout the house are also used in much the same way as they are in the museum, except the museum features pieces that are relatively larger in scale, showing the way Stirling adapted his style to make those colors pop even more. 

Source: 

http://freeartlondon.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/the-archive-of-an-architect-james-stirling-at-tate-britain/

http://www.mimoa.eu/projects/Germany/Stuttgart/State%20Gallery%20Stuttgart

[ha213-section2-blog]

The lecture on postmodernism and all the signs on the Vegas Strip, (Pictured top) reminded me of something I have seen many times in New York. Vegas isn't the only big city that has 'decorated sheds.' New York also has a multitude of ordinary looking structures that are only differentiated based on the signs either bolted to them or placed near them. Two examples for this is the pizza shop, pictured bottom right, or the stores at street level of the bottom left picture.

[ha213-section2-blog]

I'm a factory

    Peter Behrens AEG Turbine Factory seems to be able to fit into Venturi's categorization and research of signs in Las Vegas portraying a buildings functions. Venturi was basically saying that any ordinary building or shed could be turned into a monument, or specific form of architecture simply by stating its function on a sign somewhere on or near the building. This sign effectively transforms an unmarked building into a five star restaurant or world class casino. We can draw a parallel between this theory and the AEG Turbine Factory. The AEG Turbine Factory isn't designed like a factory, without prior knowledge of the building or the sign carved into the front, most people would have no idea what the buildings function was. However, with the carving of the buildings name on the front, a large building becomes a factory.

[ha213-section2-blog]

Techno Utopia

One thing that I felt was really interesting about the techno utopian and postmodernism section was in the reading about Japanese metabolism movement. The Marine City that was proposed was really neat, with how it was able to be above the water and once it became inhabitable, it could be sunk on the ocean ridge and turned into a reef underwater.

[ha213-section2-blog]

~Techno Utopia at Michigan~ I believe many buildings at the University of Michigan fulfill the idea of Techno Utopia. One example I see everyday is the Bob & Betty Beyster Building on North Campus (interior seen in the picture). It features almost all glass with metal supports and also displays some of the Computer Aided Engineering Network (CAEN). To me, this building is very clean cut, sharp appearance, and the interior is practically transparent. To me, this use of glass and metal and the interior workings of the building being in the open is exactly what Techno Utopia is, and I would expect nothing less at our technologically advanced University.

[ha213-section2-blog]

The Next Utopian City? I found this video interesting because it includes talking about China's plans for an eco-friendly city that doesn't burn fossil fuels. The video also includes General Motors and how they plan to provide electric cars for the city. Considering it involves a somewhat techno utopia feel with General Motors embedded into the scheme, I thought it would be interesting to share! 

[ha213-section2-blog]

Techno Utopia

When people consider the idea of techno utopia, they seem to be drawn to images of streamlined structures and simplicity. Sterile white buildings with little ornamentation. This seems to be a strange idea of progress, striping down to the simplest forms. But in reality, it seems to be juxtaposing the old grandiose cathedrals and chapels, covered in exorbitant amounts of decoration and careful detail. This makes me wonder if we imagine the techno utopia as the opposite of the past or truly desire this shift to simplistic design elements, or if we can even ever achieve the techno utopia if it remains as the opposite of the recent future: a constantly moving point on the horizon that causes us to circle through cycles of different architecture types in its pursuit.

[ha213-section2-blog]

When I was reading about Techno-Utopia and how this movement centered around technology and how an egalitarian society could be born out of the power of the machine, I was really intrigued by the idea. I don't see why the proliferation of technology can't eventually help us create a better global society. I was interested in the generation of 'starchitects' that exist today and I was a little confused as to what category they fit into. In my mind I see them as parts of Techno-Utopia, many of them seem to highlight mechanical systems and services that can help us in our daily lives and their designs look futuristic and even hopeful to me. Renzo Piano's Shard Tower seems to represent the advances of modern technology and how awe-inspiring it is that we can create such magnificent things that it almost seems like a monument to technology. Is today's generation of architect a mix between a Techno-utopian and a Post-Modernist that also grounds his ideas in past models? The Shard, as futuristic as it is does not look unfamiliar as a skyscraper. Where is the future of architecture headed?

[ha213-section2-blog]

What I found most interesting in the readings for lecture 23, were the ideas of the techno-utopian cities introduced by Yona Friedman and Constant Nieuwenhuis. Both Yona's Villa Spatiale, pictured above and Constant's New Babylon appear to be extremely similar to each other. Both are raised on slender supports up above the earth and are independent structures suspended over the old cities and the landscape. The idea of a city suspended above another city was very intriguing to me. Although, very far fetched and almost unimaginable at the time, Yona's and Constant's techno-utopian ideas are interesting to think about. I believe it's very likely that the idea of a sky city will once again resurface and be re investigated later down the road.

[ha213-section2-blog]

When I think of Techno-Utopia, I think of very modern looking buildings with white walls, and high tech computers all over the place like touch screen computers without keyboards. It also makes me think of buildings like the Villa Savoye or the building that I posted earlier in relation to Montage, buildings with sharp yet irregular shapes and features, and ribbon windows. This ideology makes me think about movies that are placed in the future where they have computers without monitors like the kind that Tony Stark has in the Iron Man movies. This kind of ideology makes me excited for the future of technology and architecture and how the two will work together.