1. What is the role of emergence when it comes to the processes that create form?
2. What is the feasibility of using abstract and existing architectural models in the design process?
3. In Kwinter’s article we talk about new methods becoming available for design to make it easier, does that inhibit or enrich the possibilities for design?
1. The goal of emergence is slowly introducing parametricism to architecture. Parametric design introduces subtle patterns that emerges into someones mind looking at it that makes sense but it is hard to create.
2. Using abstract methods to design creates the possibility that designs created are based in unrealistic environments compared to Earth. While abstract methods are positive in coming up with form, it can only provide a basis for design, and not be the whole project.
3. A majority of the time, new technology such as being able to use parametrics enrich the possibilities for design, however one must always push themselves as if they were designing more manually, because even though it is easier, one must not have a halfhearted pursuit to find answers.
The presentation this week was very well done. Their slides were overly filled with text and they clearly explained the topics of parametricism at hand.
1. Parametricism is described by Schumacher as a much more rational and responsive response to urban design than the grid. In the U.S., the majority of city and towns are developed following this grid system, how are the parametric design techniques applied to an urban landscape that has been following this other system for so long and begin to change an existing urban plan? Schumacher begins to describe techniques to apply parametricism, is there an approach that is most effective and is there another approach that could have been missed.
2. In Kilian’s The question of the underlying model and its impact on design, the topic of computational design and the architect’s ability to model it physically and their limitations. Additionally, how can we understand these computational models? It is stated “the need for a certain scientific rigor in the creation and manipulation of models and at the same time threatening to prevent the shifts commonplace in the creative process”? Is it necessary to be able to reproduce the process, such in-depth understanding of the process could create insights that would otherwise be impossible, or is it more detrimental to the creative process than the potential benefits?
3. In Morphogenesis the Mathematics of Emergence by Weinstock, the argument for architectural design under the underlying mathematical geometries of nature. It is stated that whether or not this geometry is underlying genetic coding or the process self-generation within an environment that creates the emergent geometries is up for debate. Given that, how should architecture approach incorporating such mathematic principles, as part of its “genetic coding” that results in the form, or in the process of self-generation resulting in the form?
After listening to the presentations and discussions, I found the parametric design approach very intriguing while also finding a number of issues with the practice of parametricsism. I found that the ideology of considering the field rather than the object to be a good approach to design that strives to incorporate a plethora of site conditions. The issues I had, mainly with Schumacher, was the implementation. It seems like all that is considered in the urban designs created using the parametric approach creates vast highly enforced and regulated plans. As a result, I think that the goal of the parametric design is lost. Parametricism strives to find the most efficient forms, a top-down site plan seems to skip over the most important point. The ants weren’t told how to create a bridge using their bodies by one architect ant, just like urban design won’t be idealized by one human architect. It will likely be designed by informed and caring members of the urban areas who, through trial and error, discover the most efficient and pleasing urban plans.
1) Schumacher’s idea of parametricism praises the efficiency and logics revealed through various methods of modeling, but seems to repeat the mistakes of Modernist urbanism by ignoring the programmatic diversity of urban environments in favor of some overly abstracted logic. How can urban models, digital or analog, overcome the preoccupation with form as an urban organizational solution?
2)Kwinter argues for the necessity of exploring the “archaic world of natural intelligence” removed from human sensation. Is a system organized according to pure algorithms appropriate for a human condition? Are humans rational enough to operate in a rational system?
3)Killian’s models offer a diverse and incremental approach to form-finding and design, and as Stan Allen suggests, give up a degree of control in order to solve problems of greater magnitude. What level of risk is there in ceding control, and will it result in an object too full of uncertainties?
1.According to The Question of the Model and its Impact by Killian design output from computational geometry produce repetitive outputs. The resulting process ultimately outputs similar geometry? How does this affect creativity and innovation in architecture if the output is not intentional?
2.Since architecture is a response to social and environmental problems that emerges to resolve issues, how does architecture vary through parametric responsiveness, while requiring similar inputs? or have the ability to adapt and reconfigure to create individualized architecture? As parametric design isn’t always predictable.
3.As architecture continues to increase its reliance on technology, and parametric design minimize the importance of architects, as it takes control away from the architect. How could this influence the future of architecture?
1 In ‘the question of model and its impact on design’ Killian point out that when you design with parametric method it has to have model as metaphor and it also requires plenty of rigorous scientific. How do we really consider the science and model into architectural design given to the space, order, figuration, shape and fold?
2 In ‘Parametricism the new global style for architects’ Schumacher discussed the development of parametric design. Parametric design gets popular in recent year under high-tech computational technique and science boost. But parametric design has been used since ancient Greek era. In modern time, how can we create a new design that can combine the past intricate concept and explore a new perspective for modernism under the contemporary circumstance?
3 In ‘From object to field’ Allen discussed on field logics and their relationship with architecture and urbanism. He places ‘field conditions’ in opposition to Modernist ‘object’ approach to architecture, explaining it as a system responsive to the complexity and indeterminacy of the urban context. What part should we consider when we design in different scale and landscape modernism corresponding to the system Allen concluded?
In the class, the presentation shows the parametric design is in a developing phase and it is very trending in the current. Nature is always the inspiration for the architect. Many example of parametric design perfectly support this statement. The parametric design and computational technology give architect opportunities to start designing animated form. Also they take inspiration from mountain, water or beautiful shape of the animal or plant. Parametric design use some single elements and then repeat them in such order and eventually forms an unusual façade or shape. But is it actually giving people a different experience in the architecture that designed with parametric? Sometimes architect focus on the shape but miss the deeper elements of the design. Apparently parametric design is an attractive and potential methodology but it still has many parts worth considering and fixing.
1.In the reading “The question of the model and its impact on the design,” by Axel killian The author spoke about having conceptual designs and a certain logic and discipline to every architectural project. how do you think architecture in change how would it be different there was no logic and be current projects but just a conceptual design when it was built?
2.In the reading “A new Global Style for Architecture and Urbanism Design” by Schumacher, The discussion repeat touched upon the topic architecture and design for mass urban designs now in urban environments to get the most amount of space used the most efficient it would require very simple housing units. Think we could get a more interesting just as efficient design and style for are we locked into the basics?
3.In the reading “From object to Fields” by Allen the author speaks about stepping out of the cubism era but my question is when was the era created and who was the one the one that made it popular? As well as, do you think we actually left the cubism era?
Parametricism by definition is defined as, “a style within contemporary avant-garde architecture, promoted as a successor to post-modern architecture and modern architecture. The term was coined in 2008 by Patrik Schumacher, an architectural partner of Zaha Hadid (1950-2016).” But it is also a process where a computer can take over a natural design process. We create these dynamic, organic, and relatively relative non-repeating architectural designs as humans. But when computers do it there is always a program that is somewhat repeating and has a non- organic structure to it. But that brings up a question if a machine will be ever able to create organic designs and shapes without having to be programmed to do so. And since there has to be a code to be able to create anything organic, you then would have to have a person behind the idea and creation of said organic code making it non-organic.
1. Schumacher puts a large emphasis on the changes parametricism could make to the urban fabric of a city, but fails to address the social problems plaguing many modern cities. Is there a way parametricism can begin to address social issues, as well as architectural and urban?
2. Axel Kilian poses the parametric model as the near-total solution to any design problem. Are there any design problems that can’t be solved with a model?
3. Kwinter discusses the fact that all matter has some form of active intelligence. With the use of parametric modelling in architecture, we are surely close to a “smart architecture”. Would this fall within Kwinters request for “resistance”, or be seen as a “simple minded cliche”?
Combining the information from the readings, the lecture, and the presentation yesterday, my understanding of parametricism as both a science, and a method for architecture has increased. The many analogies, specifically the ones regarding parametrics in nature, sparked my interest in the subject as a whole. The future of architecture is one that will rely heavily on technology, if it doesn’t already, and parametric modelling and designing seem to be the perfect gateway into the future. However, the advent of parametricism should not result in a total reliance on the technology. As Kwinter discussed in his essay, we as designers should develop an understanding of how to use the technology to the benefit of the design process, rather than a crutch. If it were to become such a crutch, I would imagine the end of design as we know it would follow. As is the same with many other modern technologies, integration could prove extremely beneficial, but reliance could result in limited productivity.
1. If models are simply an abstraction of our designs, shouldn’t we be finding a better way to represent what has been resolved in the design process through our models, ultimately making them more concrete?
2. Is parametric design solely design centric or can this process be used to design buildings in a mindful manner?
3. Are we losing the adaptability of our designs through the use of parametric design?
This week’s lecture and presentation on “From Object to Field”, “The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design”, “The Computational Fallacy”, “Parametricism”, and “ Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of the Emergence” explored the emergence of architecture along with parametric design. Architecture, like most things, has evolved through time with the help of technology. Parametric design is just one of the emergences of architecture, which uses algorithms in order to respond to various factors at and for a specific program and site. While this way of deigning is efficient and also very interesting, does the specificity of each design in turn lose the adaptability that buildings are known to have? Designers must come up with a solution to both keep the parametric design process while also altering it so that the designs can become more generalized therefore allowing them to be recycled when the original use is no longer needed.
1. Within “A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design” the Parametericist design is described as a more natural form that meanders in comparison to the average architecture that moves in a straight line. I believe, however, that this sort of non-linear design is not only associated with Parametericism only. If there are, what other forms of architecture is designed non-linearly?
2.”From Object to Field” explains the importance of the field when it comes to architecture. Parametericism, however, shares a similar design to a field, as to when a building’s shape is in a single mass, the architecture could be seen as an inorganic field. Considering this, would it be possible to create a building that blends in with the field it is built on?
3. The reading “The Computational Fallacy” focuses on the idea of how electronic and mechanic are neither more complex than another. Each one is about something extremely different, one based on computers and the other closer to the creations of the industrial revolution. It is even stated that above these two, there is the natural design, which is more complex than anything a computer could process. If this is true, why is it possible for architects to copy the design of nature if it is too complex for even the most modern computers to comprehend?
When it comes to architecture, there can be inspiration found in almost any other aspect of life. From the complexities of life within nature, to geometrical patterns made through equations, there can be many things that can potentially be used to create architecture. There are many patterns found within nature that could be used. Some of these include: the section of a sea shell, the geometries of minerals, and even the branches of a tree. These examples do not have to be used as the layout of the entire building; the spiral shape of a shell is reminiscent of a massive spiral staircase. To implement these patterns into the architecture, however, a strategy known as parametricism has to be used. This idea involves finding out the similarities and interactions of different points within. By doing so, a base pattern can be identified for use within a building. By doing this, there can be designs that go beyond the standard geometries found in most cities.
Q1: According to Stan Allen’s essay, “Object to Field”, there is an argument that, “in the digital image, ‘background’ information must be as densely coded as the foreground image.” This leads into the question of representation and the limitations different media forms put on the creative process. As we move forward into the realm of the digital, are there any advantages to emerging technology, and how about disadvantages? Will there soon be a world where the digital is considered as primitive as the mechanical?
Q2: Within the same essay by Allen, he writes “we thrive in cities precisely because they are places of the unexpected, products of a complex order emerging over time.” The idea of order seems to be the underlying theme in architectural discourse. From the times of the Greeks, to the Modernists, and now those exploring the world of field conditions, architects have always tried to order the way we live. Is the role of the architect in master planning to design a base unit that serves as a framework for order to develop?
Q3: The following quote from Weinstock’s paper relates to the discussions from previous classes about the creation of the new. “Recombination is preferred to mutation, as it produces substantial diversity in each generation.” Based on this statement, it can be argued that the harvesting and grafting of ideas from past designs is preferred to completely mutating a new design from the old. As the field of architecture grows, there is a greater variety of ideas to choose from and add to the next generation. Do you agree with this statement, and please explain why or why not?
Within the discipline of architecture, we seek to order the world around us, whether that be within the building interiors, the building itself, or larger urban spaces. By introducing the concept of field conditions as a new organizational method, architects can begin to release some of the control they are exhibiting over the urban scale. Field conditions free up the architect to design around local conditions and allow the rest of the city to transform and fit around them. In this way, the growth of the city is limitless. As the field grows, the part to part connections drive the project. What is significant is not the design of the part, but how the part’s relationship to other parts influence the fabric of the field. In this way, this concept means that the individualism is being eliminated in favor of an adaptable whole.
1 According to Stan Allen in his article “From Object to Filed” He argues that while painting and sculpture have been developed farther from Cubism. To him, architecture is still strongly working and developing compositional principals taken from Cubism. in what way can architecture go far beyond from Cubism?
2 According to Alex Killian a model that does not follow the constraints of the project that is represented. It might still show other problems that the project may have. To what extent can this effect to project, since the model by itself won’t be representing the whole project?
3 It can be true that computers and its software can help us to design and develop a whole project. with the advantages of creating abstract designs and even place them in a digital environment that is supposed to represent real-life one. Could this be a disadvantage since computers are just showing us a digital world and pushing us away from the real problems in a real environment?
Architecture is such a broad and fascinating field, in which a design starts mainly either from a conceptual or abstract idea that is used as a point of departure. But this idea needs to develop and in some way represented so it can be studied and improved. This is when models come handy in this task since they are a reduction in scale of a design that can be a hundred times bigger. Not only models represent that. But also, they are made to represent the most relevant characteristic and concept of the design and how this blends in and/or adapt in the visionary environment in which it will be placed on. Furthermore, Parametricism is another tool or how Patrick Schumacher calls it “New Global Style”, that nowadays is used and has become very important to achieve the most amazing and incredible designs. Schumacher claims in his article called “PARAMETRICISM”, that this is possible by using digital animation techniques, parametric design systems that are constantly updating and scripting methods. He also highlights the influence that this style have had in the evolution of the architectural design over the past 15 years.
1. Patrik Schumacher in A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design explains parametricism and its current role in architecture as not only a tool for design but also a tool for the formation of a completely new style in the field. He quotes Le Corbusier, ”Man walks in a straight line because he has a goal and knows where he is going (…) he takes the line of least resistance.” – explaining (before his time) how parametricism is employed in modern architecture. The effort to compile all architectural variables into algorithms, that produce a unique solution to each problem, is a logical progression with the technology at hand, however, how feasible are these designs and is it pragmatic to attempt to create this architecture? Is the only constraint on this modern approach the financial burden of the proposed projects or are these designs flawed in other ways?
2. Axel Kilian in The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design examines how architecture as a physical skill has had to adapt to the technology that has become available. He continues to explain how model-making has changed from being purely a representative skill to an actual formulation of a smaller-scale version of the designed product due to our new abilities to construct and design these systems. Axel also touches upon how design itself has changed to better fit the technological capabilities of our time. Is it the role of architects to be more involved in the trades that bring schematics to actuality than what was previously expected? Will future architects become not only the designers of space but also become engineers of their systems and be the ones responsible for “teaching” workers on how to build it.
3. Weinstock in Emergence: Morphogenetic Design Strategies talks about how the natural world already tends to organize itself in algorithmic symmetry. He explains to some degree that this symmetry is not always readily apparent due to lack of perspective but nearly all natural phenomena stick to a symmetrical simplicity. Will future architecture “grow” itself? Is there a possibility that architecture will not be digitally designed by computing what would be considered a successful system for a particular environment but rather by genetically coding an organism to “grow” a successful system?
Parametricism in architecture is regarded as an emerging style that is to be applied throughout the entire world to create architecture that responds directly to all conditions of its environment with a universal system of algorithms. However, this perspective is ultimately flawed to the condition of architecture being regarded as an art form; parametricism is only the by-product of the current climate of new-age technology being seen as indispensable to the creation of the “new”. Axel Kilian argues that new technologies are indispensable not as producers of new styles and designs but are rather necessary modern tools that aid in the creation of intuitive design. Architecture’s role is to utilize tools not blindly but to use them in conjunction with their own knowledge and experiences in order to find an evolution to the orthodox.
1. In Weinstock reading, he uses philosopher and mathematician Whitehead’s quote that “process rather than substance was the fundamental constituent of the world, and that nature consists of patterns of activity interacting with each other.” To what end does this lend itself to the designing of parametric shape. While we tout that parametricism is the advent of contemporary design, is it more so just an extension of what is already present in nature, such as biomimicry? Or rather, is it an extrapolation of these ideas into something more concrete and human?
2. In Kwinter’s reading he argues two points for us as a society to consider in light of the “computational fallacy”. One of the points argues for a return to the deep-rootedness of computation. Doing so would allow us to return to a time much like when the telescope was invented, but at what cost? How would this regression bring us further into the future than we have already positioned ourselves?
3. While parametricism definitely is an impressive and novel technology, the question of authorship definitely comes into play. With the advent of new design technologies, we have to ask ourselves, who owns the idea? Is it the architect, who was able to program a software to create what they wanted? Or is the architect no longer the author of their own work, but rather a piece of the puzzle in helping the software come up with the design?
Having listened to the lecture and the various views on the merits and principles of parametricism, I think that there are many pros and cons that need to be taken into consideration. Parametricism is great for it’s breakthroughs in the way humans design. It has brought us into the 21st century and beyond, and I’m sure that our ancestors could’ve never dreamt of the day when an entire building concept is designed by using a coding software. That being said, one of it’s biggest drawbacks is it’s currently limited reach. Because parametric design tends to be very fluid and plastic in its shape, it limits the materials and actual designs that can be used. Parametric design, in many places simply won’t do, and it would be lost on us as a culture to applaud it as the only type of design moving forward. The human mind is still the most powerful tool we wield when it comes to design, and it would be foolish of us to neglect that for the sake of some software.
1- Does giving into the ease and the increasing reliance on computerized programs/ parametric algorithms take agency away from the architect? Or does it in a way give the subject more agency by opening up a simple way to design that yields complex outcomes?
2-In ‘Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence’ by Weinstock, it is argued that “process rather than substance was the fundamental constituent of the world, and that nature consists of patterns of activity interacting with each other”. Yet, can substance come from the process used to create an architecture? Or is substance no longer important in architecture and just the means of creation?
3-In ‘A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design’ by Schumacher, they write,” what confronts us is a new style rather than merely a new set of techniques”. How else have techniques become a style in architecture. Do some remain only has a technique or can one argue that each style formed from a new technique of building or from a new process of creation?
Parametric design is a technique that became a style as well as a way of working. Architects can create infinite layers of complexity at the click of a mouse. Does parametricism always work? Most certainly not, as was discussed about Zaha Hadid’s works. These models can become so complex that they can not be brought into reality with the means of building we currently have available to us. Yet in nature “parametricism” is used to respond to the environment. The idea of part to part vs part to whole and how these relationships allow flora and fauna to respond more quickly to survive better. They become a super organism that together has a higher level of reaction and intelligence than a singular unit. Can we then use parametricism at a simpler level to create superior landscapes of architecture and land already existing. The answer is of course, it has already been done by some . Grids and organization of bays and rows etc create a formal logic of repetitiveness that mimics the ideas of parametric design.
1: Why does Allen think that today’s real power of architecture has been eroded everywhere by a “swollen bureaucratic apparatus”?
2: What’s the difference between predictive reasoning and intuitive action?
3: Kwinter thinks that no computer on Earth can match the processing power of even the most simple natural systems. Can technology develop far enough to prove this wrong? Or is it unachievable?
The most interesting topic discussed this week in the readings and lecture was this idea that “minimalism represents a significant advance over pre-war compositional principles” (Allen). Basically , it’s trying to say how minimalism is the superior form of composing attributes when being compared to Cubism. That idea challenged what was often accepted at the time.
1. In “From Field to Object” the author writes about how the constraints of the field can actually work for the architect by giving opportunity to create something different based upon the effects of these obstacles. Do you think this is beneficial to the design and creativity of a project?
2. In “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design” Schumacher writes “Aesthetically, it is the elegance of ordered complexity and the sense of seamless fluidity” do you think parametricism focuses too much on the theoretical rather than the practical?
3. Based on “Morphogeneis and the Mathematics of Emergence” do you think that being an architect comes down to identifying a process of already existing emergence and using that to design?
The phases of architectural styles through the years change based on the newest processes becoming popular for design. Parametric design allows for design intent, process, and result to flow through each other creating ordered complexity throughout the design. Even though this process has only recently emerged through the evolution of technology the idea can be credited to what we see in nature. The algorithmic repetition is able to create complexity however this can take a lot of our control out of the design process. By just focusing on input and output we lose part of our flexibility to respond to obstacles. When this unique complexity takes over it inhibits the adaptability and hinders how we can address constraints such as field conditions.
1. In From Object to Field the author, Stan Allen, states that “…architectural theory does not arise in a vacuum, but always on a complex dialogue with ongoing practice”. At what point does the one architectural shape stop and another one begins when there is an interrelations between the two?
2. In the Question of the Model and it’s Impact on Design by Axel Kilian there is an image, Figure 2, that shows an angle of a cathedral that would be very difficult to mimic with a scaled model. With images such as this that can come from computer design programs and other methods of modeling like 3D printing, are there any benefits making physical models by hand?
3. With the emergence of Parametricism which uses script techniques and design systems to create interesting forms and combinations of geometries. Does this take the meaning and intent behind the design away?
Since the beginning of architecture, architects have always presented an intent and awareness behind their work. With the aid of technology our architectural capabilities have increased dramatically, but this could also be seen as dulling our intent and awareness of our work. Starting at a screen and working in only the digital world makes us sometimes lose touch with the real one allowing the architectural thought to get away from us. To impede this we must be aware of both the strengths and weakness of both worlds and possible find a medium between them both that allows for us to make architecture at the best of our abilities.
1. In Allen’s “From Object to Field” he mentions how working with, as opposed to against the site, allows for something new to be produced. With this in mind, do you think architects “cheat” when they reform the land of don’t use the topography for all it is worth? Or do you think there is space in architecture for buildings to not fully converse with the site in which they are located?
2. In the Kilian reading, they discuss how determining authorship over a model can be difficult because the concepts are often times borrowed from other disciplines. The question of authorship relates to a previous set of readings and brings up the interdisciplinary aspect of architecture. Once a concept leaves one discipline and enters into another, does it become a new idea or remain a recycled concept?
3. In last week’s readings, we discussed laziness and how sometimes when architecture becomes too complex it is no longer accessible to the masses. Do you think parametricism and parametric design is the happy medium between complexity and accessibility/understanding?
In one of the readings, it is briefly mentioned that parametric design is a mature design. But what exactly does that mean? This was one of the questions focused on during the class discussion. In my opinion, I think that means that parametricism is one of the few design/workflows that use all the modern technologies and mathematical advancements that are available. It is also mature in that it gives designers the ability to work with every parameter of design at once instead of having to deal with them as singular entities. Due to that parametric design works well when dealing with large scale designs, such as planning urban landscapes. Parametricism allows for greater unity at that large scale which can be clearly seen when comparing large scale site plans with and without the use of parametric design. However, once you get down to the smaller pieces the parametric design does not work as well. Not to say that it is not successful, but it is not as successful. This is a problem because people do not experience architecture at the scale in which the parametric design is operating at its best. All this is not to say that parametric design is not good, it is just to more deeply understand how it can be used in a more successful manner.
1 In “Parametricism: The New Global Style for Architects,” Schumacher discussed the development of parametric design. Parametric design has gained popularity in recent years in response to a technology boom, though this technique has been around for hundreds of years. A lot of emphasis is put on the changes the reintroduction of this system could make to the urban landscape. Have the effects of this technique been studied on the social scale? Is there a way this can be used to address social issues?
2 Kwinter presents the idea that all matter has some form of active intelligence. We are in an age marked with the increased use of parametric modeling. This can be seen as a form of “active intelligence” or “smart Architecture.” This can lend a question of representation and the limitations different media forms put on the creative process. As we continue forward into the realm of the digital, are we strongly considering the advantages and disadvantages? Could spending so much time in a digital world, push us away from the realities of our own environment?
3 In “The question of the model and its impact on design,” Killian shows the parametric model as a solution to almost any design problem. An argument made is that new forms and models are almost impossible to create. At this advanced level of development, ideas can only be reused or recycled. How much influence should we give these ideas when we are moving through the design process?
“Form matters, but not so much the forms of things as the forms between things” (Allen, p.24) on Field configurations and their compositions. If the relationships are more critical than the forms they’re comprised of, can we assume that field configurations begin at those connections subsequently resulting in its form or does it play a role that doesn’t affect it and isn’t considered a developmental factor?
As we may already know and what we come to find in Kilian’s piece is architects live within a realm of representation, articulations, perhaps unrealistic concepts, and so on. Where would both architecture and architects be if modeling or diagraming could not be the primary mode of communication?
In Kwinter’s Computational Fallacy, we discuss the two modalities of the mechanical and electronic. What is, if there is any, the arithmetic or rule system that backs how the mechanical supposedly evolve?
1. As Kilian describes, the architect’s role in parametric design is “contextualizing the outcome and interpreting it in its use”. Because of the shifting process of architectural design, architects involved in parametric architecture are letting the technology and digital scripts take the lead for the design of their projects. Thus, as the role of the architect shifts, will we become more and more responsible in terms of the engineering and building as technology further increases and we have less and less control over our designs?
2. Schumacher describes parametricism as “the elegance or ordered complexity and the sense of seamless fluidity” specifically in large-scale urbanism. However, is this scale discouraging architects from thinking about the individual in their designs? How can we as architects incorporate parametric design into smaller scale projects or projects focused on the individual scale (instead of focusing primarily on the large urban scale)?
3. In “From Object to Field”, Allen discusses the challenge of incorporating the site into designs when computer script provides the main output of geometries. Instead of simply forcing parametric architecture to fit into particular sites, how can parametric architecture actually aid in incorporating the surrounding environment into architectural design?
Growing advances in technology have led to the increasing use of parametric design within architecture. In simple terms, this is the reliance of the architect on digital script to formulate geometry based on a series of algorithms. As stated in one of the readings, it is “the elegance of ordered complexity and the sense of seamless fluidity.” While parametric design can produce some complex and interesting forms, the presentation presented the idea that it may not be the perfect solution to solving problems of design within the architectural field. The presentation gave the example of the Grotto Project by Aranda/Lasch, and criticized its ignorance of the setting and context it was in. This is becoming an increasingly important realization; algorithmic design is purely mathematical and there is not a script that can be used to incorporate the setting. We cannot simply rely on machines to do all of our designs for us. It is valid to use a computer to generate a visual language, but as architects we must take this language and incorporate the geometries into the location of which we are building, and learn how to use the generative forms in a way that solves problems in society and does not disregard the surrounding environment. In fact, we must find ways to use parametric design to better our use of incorporating the site into our designs.
1. “In the case of inventing new models it is the ability to abstract and to formalize an idea into a model of design. Ideally the model is rigorous enough to all for implementation in a digital environment.” So first question, should we be designing stuff that can’t be easily assembled or modeled by our own abilities? Sure I can understand using algorithms to do a study on form finding (as long as it is in the realm of being assembled by hand and not 3D printed), but I believe some designers take it too far, where the design is so complex that it doesn’t even have the possibility of being made in the real world. Second question, to what point can you still call yourself a designer if the algorithm is doing all the work?
2. “No computer on earth can match the processing power of even the most simple natural system.” The computer wasn’t designed for such a task, the computer is a medium to help expand the human intelligence whether for the good or the bad. Which could be understood when Kwinter said “The most powerful and challenging use of the computer is in learning how to make a simple organization model that is intrinsic about a more complex, infinitely entailed organization.” So when creating such a complex system is it better to look at it through a set of rational eyes or does one have to step outside of the realm of rationality to create such a system?
3. With the urban fabric always changing how can we use the logic of emergence? Each building has a life span, each building is different, but we still have to read it in a coherent environment.
1. Can design be considered successfully receptive if it is aesthetically and parametrically innovative at the expense of responding to context? Do the negative design impacts come from the hand of the architect or computation?
2. Weinstock insists that forms “exist in varied populations, and where communication between forms is effective, collective structured behavior and intelligence emerges. The systems from which form emerges, and the systems within individual complex forms themselves, are maintained by the flow of energy and information through the system.”
Do you think a parametric form “maintained by the flow of energy” can adequately respond to its surrounding contextual needs if it only provides a mathematical mechanism without cultural research?
3. The American/Jeffersonian Grid is a means of reaching towards democratic equality; an “attempt to impose measure on the unmeasurable,” according to Stan Allen. Do you believe that this grid is indeed factual, overly pragmatic at the expense of the universal? How would Schumacher’s parametricism scale to the size of a Jeffersonian grid, or the size of the city? What would any disconnect or mathematical relationship mean?
The closing remarks of the lecture mulled over the philosophy of designing for specific views. Although several views of a parametric (or any type of) architecture may be beautiful, the entire buildings are often leading towards and/or coming away from the points or sections, leading the rest of the structure to be unimpressive, especially when coupled with its likely lack of contextual response. The presentations were strong in their understandings and interpretations of the readings, leading the discussions to be lively and topical in relation to our own school’s design process. Computational architecture was put under the microscope with plenty of dissent, the critique of current times and practices as rich as the praise nestled within its strengths. That being said, the discourse of authorship that has haunted every week thus far still looms large and ghostly. Not that it is a tired one, or any less intriguing when framed across styles and times, but the opposite.
1. In The Question of the Underlying Model, Kilian describes how the increasingly frequent use of computational designs will lead to more computational literacy, making “designer authored models” that have little novelty and lack ingenuity. He also mentioned how these computer generated models are more and more about aesthetics rather than a deeper meaning. Additionally, he states that there seems to be an absence of control by the designer when using computational generative design methods. In this digital, technology-dependent world, is it possible for an architect to have full control over a parametric design, while incorporating an intentional deeper value in addition to being visually pleasing?
2. Le Corbusier’s preference for straight lines and right angles over curved ones are discussed in Parametricism by Schumacher. According to Le Corbusier, straight lines and curves can be compared to a man and a pack-donkey. The former has a clear goal, and therefore walks in a straight path, while the latter meanders and zig-zags around, favoring the path of least resistance. Schumacher argues that though the donkey’s path is seemingly disorganized and random, upon further inspection, these too have a sense of “underlying logic and rationality” that has been hidden. How has this preference of straight lines, right angles, and grid systems over randomized, disorganized elements switch/flip over time as this style of parametricism continues to grow?
3. In From Object to Field by Stan Allen, “field condition” is defined as something that unites different elements while still letting them be unique. By this definition, can the label of movements and/or styles be considered to be a field condition as it unites various projects under a single category, while still embracing their individuality?
In one of the readings, parametric architecture is stated to be a mature design. During the panel discussion, the question of the standard of maturity was brought up. What makes a project mature? Some answered that parametricism is mature due to the use of high technology and new softwares and methods of designing a building. I concur, and would add that there is a level of complexity and intricacy that cannot be met without computational design systems. However, one of the great flaws with the use of parametrics in architecture is that in some cases the model can be too dense/complex/abstract to be physically built in the world we live in right now. Another shortcoming that we as architects should be concerned with is the seemingly lack of control there is with complicated codes/scripts.
1. In “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design,” the author claims that parametricism is able to design better than people because it accentuates the correlation of multiple urban systems. However, when relying on this calculated way of designing, the design might fail to consider how users will experience the design/space. When human experience is not being considered in the design, will it still be as successful?
2. In “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” Weinstock argues that mathematical techniques that create collective behavior from simple local responses have the ability to alter architectural environments and their systems. How can non-living systems become self-organizing to create this change?
3. In “Digital Models for Design Exploration,” the author argues for the use of computational models to go beyond the scope of simple generative models in architecture. In what way can these models be used to replace generative models if these computational models are not be mistaken as formal suggestions for design?
Parametric design allows architects to design within very specific parameters. These designs are able to consider many different systems. Architects today are beginning to use this design strategy more and more because it generates interesting and thorough designs quickly. However, most of these computer-generated designs are rather complex. This makes the fabrication of such structures difficult. Zaha Hadid’s buildings that use parametric design have not withstood the test of time due to poor building techniques. Marc Fornes with THEVERYMANY has advanced fabrication in the field of parametric design. He does this by fabricating his designs in panels. Parametric design is a good design strategy if the architect wants to speed up the design process, but architects and makers need to experiment with fabrication techniques for this type of design to be successful.
1.) Axel Kilian’s “The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design,” talks about the relevancy of models and that they are “attempts to reproduce something that takes place in reality in an abstract way that can serve as the basis for instance for a simulation.” In some cases, though, are models so abstract because of the program used to create them that they become unrealistic, and less likely to physically be built?
2.) In Sanford Kwinter’s “The Computational Fallacy,” he states, “no computer on earth can match the processing power of even the most simple natural system” along with discussing the need for studying nature and incorporating that systematic ease into future computational systems. Would it be possible for all mechanics to gain some sort of relationship to nature and its processes, allowing for extremely complex processes to be done with as much as ease leaves blow in the wind?
3.) Discussing the shift from modernism to parametricism, Patrick Schumacher discusses the open spaces created in different master plans in urban environments and how they act less as unused space, and are more so thought of as filled up, spaces for circulation. Could it be possible that the addition of these open spaces are due to unsuccessful plans in the past that had lacked green space and places of rest inside of newly urbanized areas? He refers to them as “filled as with fluid,” but could that just be a place of potential environmental interaction?
Architects who have begun developing more in the area of parametric design seem to have grasped a better understand of a new interpretation of integrating architecture into the landscape, basing their geometries and schemes off of things found in nature. The forms developed by some, the most commonly known being Zaha Hadid Architects, are intricate in the sense that the strange curvature and formations put together in specific pieces look almost alien, although maintaining a sense of fluidity found only in natural occurrences. Concurrent with parametric design is the advancement of new technologies that help create those strange structures and designs, providing a new way to discover even the possibilities of design. The construction of most, if not all, sorts of parametric architecture has certainly become that of wonder in that without the use of advanced computational programs and technologies, there would be no way to build structures with such radical forms.
1. According to morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence, it mentioned that the pattern of energy flow is subject to many small variations but occasionally there is such an amplification that the system must reorganise or collapse. How can such an amplification happen? And why?
2. In Parametricism, A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design, Schumacher mentioned that Parametricism is a style rather than a new technique. Then he said that Parametricism is a mature style. Since it is mature, why there is still a global network of design researchers working on fixing the systematically connected design problems? is it still about the issue on technique?
3. In The Question of the Model and its impact on Design, Kilian mentioned that ideally the model is rigorous enough to allow for implementation in a digital environment. Is the implementation in a digital environment equal to implementation in a real environment? How can model designers figure out the differences between reality and digital?
From the lecture, there are some points arousing my interest most. First is the relationship between modernism and architecture. Modernism gives us benefits of many new strategies to create architecture.
In Morphogenesis and the mathematics of emergence, mathematics is introduced, so does chemistry and biology.
Process, not substance, is the fundamental constituent of the world. The building, site, context, people, and informational movement are part of a singular unit.
Mechanical relations are being dramatically transferred to new and different level. Being aware of the tools at our disposal but blindly taking convention and technology as gospel indesign should be kept in our mind as resistance during Parametricism.
The result of circulation is overall continuity and height correlation with parcel area size. Implementation-strict regulations; collective value; ordered complexity. From urbanism to architecture, systematic modulation of tectonics is required. It also requires coordination of landscape and public space, and Correlation between path system & internal navigation system.
1. Schumacher states that “there has been talk of ‘continuous differentiation’, versioning, iteration and mass customization among other things… within architectural avant-garde discourse.” Are we moving forward to apply parametricism on all buildings? If so, how are we supposed to create “new” architecture (within parametricism, similar versions, different iterations of parametricism)? Is it intended to stand out amongst all of the other existing buildings?
2. In The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design, Kilian states “The ideal model is like a veil, lightweight and flexible, thin but capable to adapt to the contours of a problem…New models need to be developed to respond to the design specific challenges” In school, so far, the models that we have produced are just a final representation of a massing and/or building. Do you think we could benefit from producing models that are able to be manipulated and adjusted to respond the challenges?
3. In Allen’s From Object to Field, flocks of boids were formed when 3 behavioral rules were set. However, once one boid was too far, it diverged and created a new path. In some cases, it rejoins to a group, but not always the same one. Could this relate to an architect’s path? One is introduced into architecture and starts to follow another. At some point he/she will separate to create a new path. He/she could start their own study or follow a different one.
Two weeks ago, the game Go was incorporated into a writing in order to draw out the importance of the relationship between part and whole. This is similar to Marc Fornes’ work, in which the parts, individually, are insignificant, but it is necessary to create the overall form. In this case, the self-similar units are important to produce the more significant whole form. With today’s technology, architects are able to produce forms that were unimaginable. One can input the components and get the output of the whole. However, this week, another writing also brings out that part to part is better than whole to whole. In flocks, swarms, etc. when the components change, they are more successful than when the whole changes. When one part changes due to a reaction, the whole quickly follows. Another topic that was brought up in discussion was hacking. Hack could also cause changes in the overall form because the space range can be changed.
1| Sanford Kwinter emphasizes that “all matter, even totally disorganized matter possesses some degree of active intelligence”. Is this characteristic active intelligence actually inherent to the existence of the material? Or is it rather an impression of human organizational understanding existing only between the human and the material worlds?
2| Axel Kilian mentions that scientific rigor in parametric modeling “can provide a much deeper insight and more complex relationships in the generative process than possible through abstraction and introspection alone”. This may very well be true, however because of this complexity, is this rigor applicable in architecture relevant to those who occupy it? Essentially, is the implementation of parametric modeling actually useful in generating understandable, practical designs?
3| Patrik Schumacher addresses the fact that “the mass society that was characterised by a universal consumption standard has evolved into the heterogeneous society of the multitude”, is parametric design, which generates often repetitive forms possibly ignorant to individual discrepancies, really practical in terms of urban reorganization within this heterogeneous group?
Patrik Schumacher’s postulation that parametricism offers the world the next generation of architectural study following a somewhat desultory few decades ending with the emergence of deconstructivism is both daunting and possibly unfounded. According to projects employing parametric formal strategies, built and unbuilt, repetition tends to overpower the designer’s inborn creative ideals which are otherwise inherently complex and practical. This aspect of practical design seems to have been confused, temporarily at least, with efficiency within the architect’s office. Functional aspects of the building as a living organism are being pushed aside for hastiness in the workplace. In order to both avoid needless and even cavalier repetition within parametric scripts more research must be done as to how a building is to emerge from a particular scheme. A scheme should be able to anticipate perfunctory basic human needs such as circulation; of people, goods, information, as well as waste. If bottom-up processing is the course of action for future architects, then they should take into account the fact that architecture cannot exist without the subject, the inhabitant; thus rendering this subject, rather than a formal module, as the true first step in this bottom-up process.
1. Parametricism is not a new concept, and its roots go back to the 90’s. In his essay “Parametricism” Patrik Schumacher explains that the movement has only recently gained traction in the word of architecture despite it having existed for multiple years already. Why was this movement not adopted at a quicker rate once it came out? Is Parametricism so reliable on technology that without technological advances it could not be a possibility? Where will future technologies lead this avant-garde architecture form?
2. Axel Kilian in his essay ”The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design” raises important questions about the future direction of parametricism as a movement that is technology dependent despite it computer modeling being a relatively new concept in the field of architecture. How will the field of architecture evolve in years to come? Will it maintain a dependence on other fields as a helping hand, or will it once again become a standalone field? Has Technology impacted architecture in a. way that it will always depend on others as a way of helping the rapidly changing technological world?
3. “The Computational Fallacy” by Sanford Kwinter is primarily concerned with technologies actual contribution to the world, and to architecture as a field of study. Kwinter seems to believe that the machine is not one of the greatest tools humanity has produced, yet potentially humanities greatest downfall. Keeping in mind this belief, how can “old fashioned” ways of design and new technological design patterns merge in the future to stop a complete divergence from what architecture has rooted itself from?
The idea of Parametricism is an interesting one in regards to modern twenty-first-century architecture. It is even more so when it is taken into consideration that this avant-garde form of architecture isn’t completely new and is around 30 years old. It has recently gained traction due to the growth in the computational potential that technology is able to process. Without an increase in technological advances, this architectural technique could’ve been a failure but instead became a modern success making architecture become more organic in the way in which it interacts with its surroundings. Computers allow for the unimaginable to be achieved and that is exactly the strong arm that parametricism exerts. Many architectural masterpieces like those of Pritzker Prize winner Zaha Hadid used technology as more of an additive and less of a detractor to her design. The idea of Parametricism is own that will continue to grow as technology advances along with it. Even with the slow start Parametricism experienced, it has the potential to become of the most influential architectural techniques to have existed.
1. In “Parametricism-A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design”, the author pointed out that parametric design as a cutting-edge technology is widely applied in architecture and urban design, and it does help us to design better, then how are we supposed to know whether we are abusing parametric design and losing the sharpness as architects?
2. In “computational Fallacy”, Kwinter said: “Every unit of intelligible matter in our technical or cultural
world, regardless how simple, is refined or organized to a degree sufficient at least to distinguish it from the random and disordered background flux or noise of the natural world.” So, does the unintelligible matter really exist? How do we define intelligible matter?
3. In “From Object to Field”, Allen said: “The conventions of classical architecture dictate not only the proportions of individual elements but also the relationship between individual elements.” I agree with this statement, then in what case should we apply traditional approach or parametric design? If we could apply both, what is the standard to examine which method is better?
Parametric architecture brings a special spatial experience and visual impact to users and visitors. As the result of the parametric design is often accompanied by gradual change, streamline shape, interactive function and so on, these elements are associated with the traditional geometric shape, so that we experience completely different psychological feelings, so dynamic, unstable and even puzzled are different feelings brought by parametric design. Parametric architecture is efficient:
it can accurately complete the design of complex shape, it can quickly generate multiple scenarios, and it is easy for modification of the projects. The advantages of parametric design are significant, but the constraints are multifaceted, mainly because the parametric design is still immature，it is still a cutting-edge design technology. It is precisely because of this immatureness and pioneering nature: more and more architects obsess with it; parametric architecture will also be the trend that will lead the future of architectural design.
Patrick Schumacher describes Parametricism as a “mature style.” Assuming for the moment that he is right, what aspects of other architectural styles might categorize them as “mature” or “immature?”
Stanford kwinter claims there can be no order or shape without matter, even if that matter is something as insubstantial as a small laser, or projected light. If non-material systems cannot have order, what is a fitting description of their organizations?
Michael Weinstock argues for the use of mathematics in architecture, but mathematics has been a core part of the practice dating back to the geometries of Ancient greeks. The evolution of math and geometry has continually shaped architectural development, in the era of mass information transfer and digital computations, what role does math have in the contemporary of today and what might it look like in the future?
Ultimately, the key factors that make up the difference between mechanical and electrical, between urbanism and Parametricism, is matter. Matter, and the relationship of that matter to itself and its surroundings. A Mechanical outlook believes in the strength of presence, the power and emotion that can be delivered through physical identity and work. It pairs well with urbanism, which treats architecture relatively similarly to how society treats individuals. It recognizes that every building is its own entity, and can be developed as such, but that ultimately it is still considered as something that is a piece of something larger. Parametricism and the electronic work similarly, but with an important key difference. The difference lies in that the emphasis is no longer on the matter itself, but rather the connections between matter. Like Urbanism, Parametricism makes up a whole using many smaller entities, but it differentiates in that the individual entities need only to connect to the immediate, rather than to comply with the big picture. This creates a more seamless movement, making the part so unique that it ends up blending into the other unique parts and creating the whole. The whole can not then be broken down into its individual parts, as it is reliant not on the parts themselves, but the ability for the parts to connect to each other.
1. Particular emphasis is placed on the role of the model in the reading by Kilian, how does the model dictate our lives as students of architecture and practitioners of design? Do you feel as though you put particular emphasis on the model and detach it from the overall project?
2.In the readings by Allen, do you feel as though the set behavioral rules were necessary, and if so, would you question the validity of these rules as they pertain to the architect?
3. In a Post-Modernist Era, could mathematical techniques and computations be the sole means of creation in the coming years? Does this in some way take the integrity out of design?
Parametric Modeling has been at the forefront of architecture and integrated design related practices for at least a decade. It seems as though there is a strong possibility that parametric modeling will continue to play an even larger role in the look as well as the workflow of the architecture of the future. In this post-modernist era, one can only hope that the role of the architect is not entirely terminated. Parametrics can in many ways, lead to the demise of the architect as we know it. They could essentially lead to the demise of the architect’s existence. In some ways, parametric modeling has drastically changed the limitations of what was thought to be designed. But, when critically analyzed, in other ways parametric modeling can arguably be deemed as an existential crisis of sorts. It would indeed be quite the uncanny enigma.
1) From the reading, “From Object to Field”, is Stan Allen implying that new architecture should be designed with respect to the city? He talks about “field condition” and how it’s a unification of elements, especially the relationship between buildings, cities, and the environment.
2) The reading Emergence made me wonder about the discipline of architecture itself. The reading said that “Mathematics has always played a critical role in architecture”, yet in our school curriculum, we’re only required to take two math classes. Science can also relate to architecture, if we’re interested in research and innovating new materials. However, architecture is its own school, its own degree, not part of the school of science or math. We’ll graduate with a Bachelor’s of Architecture degree, and not a Bachelor’s of Science degree. How can the architecture curriculum evolve and emerge with other disciplines?
3) In the reading “Computational Fallacy”, Kwinter talks about needing “twofold: resistance and productive affirmation”. Are there architects out there that have designed with these two ideas in mind?
Architecture shouldn’t be designed without a reason. There should be a reason for every move an architect makes. There should be relationships, problems, and solutions, between what the architecture and its surrounding context. Parametric design is not simply manipulation of an equation or system. If used thoughtfully, it can create spatial experiences and aesthetically pleasing moments. It’s efficient. First, you set guidelines and rules, and then let technology compute away. There’s mathematics involved and science. Parameters are set. How big is the site, how many holes or edges you want in the model? The program has commands and can create commands for the computer to follow. As a result, an accurate and stable model is generated. Maybe this is the answer to creating architecture with twofold. One can set resistance and productive affirmation factors for the model to follow, a parametric design can be formed.
1. Stan Allen presents the possibilities of designing based on the field and the process instead of explicit focus on the object itself. When buildings are constructed, they join the field itself and are considered as such when new buildings are constructed. In this line of thought, was it ever possible to escape the field in the first place?
2. Parametric modeling has enjoyed a lot of exploration by artists and architects over the recent decades. By designing through uncontrolled processes, will architecture eventually lose its own agency as these processes and scripts become increasingly more complex?
3. In “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design,” the procedure is described as more powerful and capable than its creator. In the face of the inevitable technological singularity, where will the artist and architect go if technology can explore fields and forms faster and more capable than humans? Will there be a point where we even lose our jobs as interpreters?
Parametricism appears to be the third and, so far, the most democratic approach in the postmodern and digital era. As Stan Allen tries to redirect the conversation away from the object and more focused on the field itself, parametricism offers a plethora of methods to explore such a route since it itself is derived from the bottom up. Individually, each unit itself can exist, if only meekly, but together the parts create something greater than themselves. It is in this way that defines the great democratic potential in parametric designs. In modernism, the form imposed by the architect is forced upon the field and each part is forced to conform to the overarching whole. The blob and the shape do not free themselves away from this idea, they merely alter the way they look. By relying solely on local conditions to build up piece by piece, parametricism truly escapes the dictatorial nature of modernism.
1. If, as Weinstock describes, the future of architecture exists in letting buildings “evolve” from certain processes, how will the role of the designer change?
2. Kwintner seems to believe that if computers can model complex, chaotic interactions, such understanding will revolutionize humanity. What are some concrete ways that such a change would impact our “linear, numerical world”?
3. Schumacher describes how parametricism allows architects to design large spaces while accounting for the patterns already in their environment. How can such designs become socially and ecologically integrated into their urban environment, and avoid the authoritarianism of Le Corbusier under a different formal logic?
1. In “From Object to Field” by Stan Allen, he follows Frampton’s refusal of representation and describes the field of architecture as a material condition, not a discursive practice. If this is true, does this mean architecture should not represent anything? Then what about culture and religion?
2. In ”The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design” by Axel Kilian he says that there is a crisis of models in computational design. He thinks that models are abstractions, reductions of an observed phenomenon and this is how design is created. But if a design is purely presented by sophisticated and accurate graphs and diagrams, is it really necessary to have a model that might be just a combination and representation of the diagrams in a 3D environment?
3. Patrik Schumacher uses multiple examples from Zaha Hadid Architect in “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design” to describe the style of Parametricism, which is asserted to be the great new style after Modernism. Since technology is developing and today digital rendering and graphing is like pen and pencil in the past, using digital representation is the ordinary. In this case, is Parametricism really a style or a merely a design method?
This week’s presentation mainly focused on the readings and provided less information and detailed analyses compare to the previous presentations. A few topics were discussed in fine details like Morphogenesis and Mathematics of Emergence, and Parametricism. Morphogenesis defines the creation of forms that evolve in space and over time. It is closely tied to evolution, and evolution is more than adaptation, it creates differentiation. Architecture constantly recycles. Design is one environment. Emergence ensures that there exists one system. We need a new strategy to creating architecture, not repeat the same mistakes as modernism. Modernism is fault in neglecting the links to people and context, and disregards setting, context and cultural implications. Parametricism commonly uses the employment of animation, simulation and form-finding tools, as well as parametric modelling and scripting. Modernism was founded on the concept of universal space. Parametricism differentiates fields. Parametric is a dominant, single style for avant-garde practice.
1) In our society, we have already seen our personal information being utilized and sold by companies to further their agenda. Could it be a possibility that such information might one day be given to parametric designers in order to optimize urban environments? would this be a good or bad thing?
2) What is the goal of parametric or computational design? to have full control over the system or to let the system make its own executive decisions? or does this differ from project to project?
3) Generally, strange forms are produced from new parametric design. fabrication of such objects seems to be the primary hurdle of making the designs a reality. once this is over come, what might be the next biggest design challenge in parametrics? aesthetics? authorship? politics?
1. Based on “Parametricism a new Global style for Architecture and Urban Design” Parametricism seems to be a synthetic form of mimicking nature. Why does parametric architecture feel natural yet synthetic, but also what is missing that makes certain elements of. Parametricism feel artificial?
2. Based on From Object to field, specific proportions of objects are dictated by classical form. This philosophy holds true, but is it possible for a form to be truly original
3. Based on Morphogenesis, How can we “evolve” the process of creating architecture that is evolutionary? Is it possible to create architecture that is a living form?
Parametricism creates an underlying order to a project, and when it was first used, it introduced geometries that could not have been imagined before it’s conception. But now as this practice has become widespread,, there is a certain quality that is lost due to the dilution of the same type of order. It has become boring, repetitive, and predictable. This it not completely our fault though; the human mind has its limit. To combat this we have created artificial intelligence that can further our research and interpretation of parametricism. More basic parametric forms should act as a foundation to order rather than a final product. an example on how this can be used is through incorporating order into blob architecture, which has been known to fail due to its lack of order. Overall I believe parametric forms can act as a complex “skeleton” that leads to a much more complex “organism”.
1. In “Parametric: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design” On Zaha Hadid master we can see how the layering systems became a tectonic articulation that implies the fabric modulation. Do you think that the parametric design can be more articulate as practical design tool then theorical tool?
2. In Killian “The question of the underlying model and its impact on design” Emphasize that in the scripting programs are eventually creating similarly computational geometry, why do you think the computational geometry are looking similarly in CAD programs or in parametric modeling eventually?
3. In Allen’s “From Object to Field” He mentions how these cities are prototypical with smooth topography and these are connected with a larger network of organizations, why in digital design environments a lot people forgot about the topography or property line during the object process?
Parametricism as style, it relies on programs, algorithms, and computers to manipulate equations for design purpose, which the employment of animation, simulation and form-finding tools as well parametric modelling and scripting. Parametricism has create a good controversy within the overlapping or underlying different architectural systems. But on the down side the parametric design could reduce the employees at the different architecture firm, by minimizing the staff members because the y could generate and produce more drawings and design strategies in less time. Some of the articulations by scripting programs are normally used to imply different and innovating layering systems to generate a tectonic articulation that implies the fabric modulation which reflected a systematic modulation of tectonic in a Master Plan design by Zaha Hadid
1. From our very earliest lessons in architecture, we are taught the creation of form and design through the means of the boolean of objects. In Stan Allen’s “Object to Field”, the concept of field conditions is discussed in context of form saying that, “Field conditions are bottom-up phenomena: defined not by the overarching geometrical schemas but by intricate local connections. Form matters, but not so much the forms of things as the forms between things”. How is architecture redefined by the consideration that it occurs between space, rather than formed by an object?
2. Schumacher discusses five agendas in order to achieve a new style in terms of parametric paradigm, in short: differentiation in terms of object vs void, integration in order to deviate amplification rather than adaption, figuration in terms of parametric variations, capacity to respond and reconfigure, and the total integration of the built environment and the interior tectonics. Must all of these agendas be present in the design and adaption of style, or can the change occur with only parts of the paradigm?
3. Weinstock appears to place a significant amount of importance on time in relationship to the morphogenesis of form and its subsequent evolution. How dependent on tie is the ability of architecture to change and evolve, and what does this dependence mean, an object’s tectonic form and adaptability in a very physical and literal way, or the evolution of technology and improvements that occur as research develops?
The discussion that occurred as a result of the presentations in class today emphasized certain key ideas that were present in the readings and the topic; emergence, evolution, and centralization. Emergence is explained through math, science, and geometry, and their subsequent organization. Evolution was discussed as a process rather than a substance, which makes up the world. The components of said world continuously evolve and adapt in terms of differentiation. Centralization of design processes and aesthetics create a distinction between style and type of the architecture, subsequently defining the evolution of said architecture. Additionally the lecture opened up to the idea that our ability to think about and control matter is rapidly changing and evolving, and in turn changing the methods in which the change occurs.
1. Schumacher’s description of “parametricism’s superior capacity to articulate programmatic complexity” as parametricisim’s greatest gift to urbanism seems to ignore the site. How can parametrics, with all their design efficiencies, react with the site?
2. Can parametric design account for materiality in design?
3. In the example of Reynold’s artificial flock of birds, the program to simulate the flock required three simple rules, none of which said “form a flock”. It’s important for the designer to understand why , in this case, the birds form a flock in the first place. How can we ensure that designers are going to be responsible in remembering the why of what they are doing when they design parametrically?
Parametricism disengages from the more modernist view of architecture as objects in a field, rather choosing to engage the field itself as the architecture. This is a social and political move away from capitalistic societies where hierarchy rules. There is a notion of equality that runs through the concept of parametricism. Yet there is still a sense of individuality. Rather than part-to-whole relationships, parametric design functions on part-to-part relationships. Individual parts come together to form a larger intelligence in the design. However, no concept comes without its flaws. The largest is the way parametric architecture reacts with the site and its surrounding urban context. It seems for some, this is solved by expanding the field farther than it should, causing even more problems such as scale and materiality. Although elegant in design, Zaha Hadid’s architectural works compare poorly to precedent work. I think parametricism is a fair conceptual theory, but when applied, issues of scale and materiality damage its appeal societally.
1. In Stan Allen’s “From Object to Field”, he states that “Field conditions moves from the one toward the many: from individuals to collectives , from objects to fields.” This term states he variety of work that an architect has to do. When designing on a site, what type of field conditions/constraints can make or break your design?
2. In “A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design”, Schumacher says that there is two heuristics of parametric, taboos and dogmas. Heuristic is defined as “enabling a person to discover or learn something for themselves”. Are these “set and stone” characteristics of this new style of architecture or are they just personal preferences of Schumacher for him to assume certain values/characteristics ?
3. Based off of “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence”, Weinstock states how architecture has to evolve in order to become new. Things like technology acceleration can clearly make a building evolve faster, but what other factors could cause this evolution to occur quicker?
1. Allen discusses the organization of classical architecture and the grid/geometries they derive from. In many cases, classical architecture is aided by preexisting orders derived from nature and shape. Can we define classical architecture by simply dividing it into parts?
2. Kilian discusses the impact of computer based architectural design on architecture. He feels as though architects with modern technology forfeit aspects of creative freedom to a program on a screen. Is architecture being harmed or assisted by computers? Is technology helping or hindering our creative freedom?
3. Schumacher discusses the idea of parametric design and how it is a set of flexible components which has infinite variations. Can any of these infinite variations lead be considered new architecture? How will parametric design influence the future of architecture, especially in technology where formulas and patterns can easily be coded?
Parametric design imitates the perfection of natural formations. Repeatable codes, geometries, and simple shapes using programs such as grasshopper, is comparable to the formulas nature uses to create life. Some examples are the Fibonacci Sequence or the formation of the nautilus shell. The most complex forms can be created from the most basic of shapes or cells. Although parametric design can be very aesthetically pleasing, architects must be careful when overusing formulas and sequences in design. Very often, practicality is lost when designing for visual perfection. Zaha Hadid is a prime example of this. She is seen as a genius of design, using parametric techniques in many of her projects. However, she is often criticized for overlooking functionality for beauty. Modern technology and programs have given architects a new realm of creative freedom. However, before indulging in the effortlessness of repeatable commands like copy, paste, and array, we must first study nature the origin of parametric design.
1. In ” From Object to Field,” Stan Allen talks about the transformation of classical buildings over time and the effect these transformations, such as additions and repeated parts, have on the identity of the overall structure. He argues that these additions take away from the general identity of the original structure while the repeated parts keep it since they are just the building copied over. To what extent is this true and where doesn’t it apply?
2. In “The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design,” Axel Kilian writes that the ability a model has to capture a design problem comes down to whether the design of the model is computable or just computation itself. If a model is just computation itself, is it just a replica of the computed design?
3. In “Parametricism: a New Global Style for Architecture,” Patrik Schumacher explains how Parametricism is the new and current architectural movement. What qualities set it apart from modernism and post-modernism?
Today’s group presented a number of topics from this week’s readings, based on Parametricism. They drew a comparison between Parametricism and modernism, in that Parametricism doesn’t repeat the mistakes of modernism, such as how modernism neglects the link between people and context to a setting and culture. From “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” they mention how the Fibonacci Sequence and Golden Ratio are natural processes. They also mention how processes, not substance, is the fundamental constituent of the world. On the basis that rather than adaptation, evolution is differentiation, they say that the components of the world constantly evolve. From “The Computational Fallacy,” they derive the argument between Mechanical and Electronic. Thy argue that mechanical is primitive to electronic and that electronic offers complete control, as well as vast resources of intelligence. The drawback to this is that it makes it easier to forget things when we won’t have to with technology.
1. Sanford Kwinter wrote in his “The Computational Fallacy” that “the ‘mechanical’ and ‘electronic’, are by themselves not paradigms and do not represent distinct, successive, agonistic ‘age’ or irreducible worlds in collision”. He then points out that the order and chaotic can both exist in a matter in the same period. How can this exist theoretically and physically? How can the theory of different orientation of matter influence the theory of “spatial matrix”?
2. Zaha Hadid is a famous architect who greatly influenced the tendency of modern architecture. She widely uses parametricism in her architecture. We know from the article “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture” by Schumacher that the idea of parametricism was firstly raised in the ancient Greek period as an advancing concept but soon abandoned because of the technical problem. Some avant-garde architects like Le Corbusier also show great interesting in parametricism but they are also constricted because of technology. Why parametricism is so important for avant-garde architecture? How does it evolve from ancient to contemporary?
3. Field logic is one of the themes in the book named “From Object to Field” wrote by Stain Allen. In his belief, “field conditions” are opposite to modernism, geometric are combined with algebra, and “background information must be as densely coded as the foreground image” in the digital image. How does the technology advance lead to the field system raised by Allen? Will it make urbanism more complex and uncertain, or simpler and more determinable?
Parametric Architecture is the name of a style of contemporary avant-garde architecture. This idea of parametric relies greatly on new technologies and modern techniques, converting the ancient ideal theories of automatic architecture design to a new operable process for architects in this era. Developed from Le Corbusier to Zaha Hadid, parametric architecture turning increasingly systematic, detailed while becoming more friendly to green hands. However, this structure of creating buildings raise one big issue that the method of “automatism” makes many new architects loss the ability of thinking, creating and design. They will easily immerse in the pleasant of automatic creating boxes with fantastic facades, magnificent appearance, and strong structure. Personally, I hold the thought that the designer is a job could never be replaced by artificial intelligent or new technology. Because the favor of human is unpredictable and undetectable, the architecture created by parametricism in this decades many be appealed to people today but not be attracted to people in the future. Only the building with history and thought will last long.
1. According to Kilian, the main contribution of the architect in computational design is in contextualizing the outcome and interpreting it in its use. What impacts might this have on the design process, and why is it becoming an increasingly popular practice?
2. Is the practice of borrowing models from other fields too common in architecture? What actions need to be taken for the user to overcome its origin (such as creative use and interpretation)?
3. In parametrics, how can we direct ourselves away from what Kwinter calls “simple-minded cliches”?
The field of parametric architecture shares many characteristics with a collage. A common practice in parametrics is to borrow from other computational disciplines, as well as looking for models to rehash for architectural design. In addition to this, parametric design uses repetition of single elements in order to form a new and unconventional facade/shape, making it a method that is not as novel to architecture as it appears. Parametric design is often inspired by nature, and although this is not unusual, it is the first to do so through the use of digital models . Unlike many previous methods of imitating nature, parametric architecture is able to do so in a truly organic way, with its algorithms generating as independently as nature itself. This characteristic of parametricism is applicable even to a discipline as unlikely as urbanism, which has been considered in the past to be the enemy of landscape/nature. Urban variables such as mass, spacing and directionality may be choreographed by scripted functions (Schumacher), generating modulation unable to be produced by an architect themselves.
1. In “The question of the Model and Its Impact on Design” the role for the designer is questioned. With computations increasing presence in design and model creation is it the designer’s responsibility to be aware of the limitations and benefits when creating models in a digital environment that need to translated to the physical?
2. In “The Computational Fallacy”, the embedded intelligence describes a continually reactivated memory for materials to transform their shapes, and other qualities and processes. Where does the fallacy lay, in the computer or the designer?
3. In “Parametricism”, we learn how urban typologies are bring imagined in a parametric lens. Will designers run the risk of over designing to the point of no uniqueness? In creating an entire urban fabric with the same technique, will things become bland and indifferent?
Bird murmurations are beautiful awe-inspiring sights to see. Their beauty which stems from coordinated instantaneous mass changes, where the entire flock moves faster than any individual birds reflexes. The scientific explanation of the murmuration is a scale-free correlation, with every shift being a critical translation. “The change in the behavioral state of one animal affects and is affected by that of all other animals in the group, no matter how large the group is. Scale-free correlations provide each animal with an effective perception range much larger than the direct interindividual interaction range, thus enhancing global response to perturbations (Giorgio Parisi)”. Relating to architecture, one thinks of the part to part vs. the part to whole relationships created in parametric vs conventional design techniques. Architecture is generally more aesthetically pleasing when these relationships are present and prevalent. Building components need to work together in harmony as the birds do while murmurating.
1) In Allen’s ‘From Object to Field’ the Mosque at Cordoba is championed for its spacial quality in that, despite additions and changes in purpose over the past eight centuries, the space has been able to endure. Given the current trend in the United States for repurposing land to mixed use, must new architectures hold repurposing their buildings in high regard during the design process?
2) Schumacher’s ‘Parametricism’ touches on the idea that man, or the architect knows too much. Can architects remove bias from their design without help from a set of parameters defined within a digital space?
3) Weinstock demands a more mathematically based emergence tectonic for better legibility in the construction and engineering process. Which other forms of gratuitous/pseudoscientific forms of design tectonics are being used and what can we do to change them?
Parametricism breaks down the hierarchy (and symmetry) of design in that one geometry is not derived from some “master form.” It treats each input part as having an effect on the whole in ways that typical design couldn’t hope to achieve. Parametrically designed buildings by design are more generic than literary/geometrically focused ones, thus allowing them to be flexible in their reuse; a sustainable practice architects should hone in on. Some might say the designs that result are too generic and are nothing more than an ego trip for the architect. Parametrics respect the natural forces that govern the world (emergence, etc.) and have a place next to the golden ratio when concerning whether a building is objectively beautiful or not. While the architect is further removed from the design process, they must exercise great care in which parameters govern the affected result.
1. In Schumacher’s article, he mentioned “Parametricism can only exist via the continuous advancement and sophisticated appropriation of computational geometry. ” If algorithms don’t l deliver as some parametric enthusiasts hope or expect, will there be mileage in elevating parametric discourse to suitably mysterious realms?
2. According to Schumacher, he said that “what confronts us is a new style rather than merely a new set of techniques.”Does parametric modeling provide us with the ability to create architectures for specific climates and contexts, or is it limited to deriving interesting geometry?
4. According to Kilian, when we constantly capture external phenomena through models and research, the beauty of external phenomena disappears. So during the design process, does it make us feel closer or further away from the abstract concept? When buildings are completely abstract or state of the art, how to make our buildings become more interesting?
After listening to the presentation, I have a better understanding on parametricism, which is currently a popular trend in regards to modern twenty-first-century architecture. In my opinion, the key to parameterization is to establish associations, and the form of the skin is associated with internal mechanisms or the external environment. The differentiation of the facade reflects the internal differentiation, such as functional space, mechanical mode or external light environment. Considering the domain rather than the ideology of the object is a decent design approach, and it strives to incorporate a large number of site conditions.
Contemporary Design Approaches 
1. What is the role of emergence when it comes to the processes that create form?
2. What is the feasibility of using abstract and existing architectural models in the design process?
3. In Kwinter’s article we talk about new methods becoming available for design to make it easier, does that inhibit or enrich the possibilities for design?
LikeLike
1. The goal of emergence is slowly introducing parametricism to architecture. Parametric design introduces subtle patterns that emerges into someones mind looking at it that makes sense but it is hard to create.
2. Using abstract methods to design creates the possibility that designs created are based in unrealistic environments compared to Earth. While abstract methods are positive in coming up with form, it can only provide a basis for design, and not be the whole project.
3. A majority of the time, new technology such as being able to use parametrics enrich the possibilities for design, however one must always push themselves as if they were designing more manually, because even though it is easier, one must not have a halfhearted pursuit to find answers.
The presentation this week was very well done. Their slides were overly filled with text and they clearly explained the topics of parametricism at hand.
LikeLike
1. Parametricism is described by Schumacher as a much more rational and responsive response to urban design than the grid. In the U.S., the majority of city and towns are developed following this grid system, how are the parametric design techniques applied to an urban landscape that has been following this other system for so long and begin to change an existing urban plan? Schumacher begins to describe techniques to apply parametricism, is there an approach that is most effective and is there another approach that could have been missed.
2. In Kilian’s The question of the underlying model and its impact on design, the topic of computational design and the architect’s ability to model it physically and their limitations. Additionally, how can we understand these computational models? It is stated “the need for a certain scientific rigor in the creation and manipulation of models and at the same time threatening to prevent the shifts commonplace in the creative process”? Is it necessary to be able to reproduce the process, such in-depth understanding of the process could create insights that would otherwise be impossible, or is it more detrimental to the creative process than the potential benefits?
3. In Morphogenesis the Mathematics of Emergence by Weinstock, the argument for architectural design under the underlying mathematical geometries of nature. It is stated that whether or not this geometry is underlying genetic coding or the process self-generation within an environment that creates the emergent geometries is up for debate. Given that, how should architecture approach incorporating such mathematic principles, as part of its “genetic coding” that results in the form, or in the process of self-generation resulting in the form?
LikeLike
After listening to the presentations and discussions, I found the parametric design approach very intriguing while also finding a number of issues with the practice of parametricsism. I found that the ideology of considering the field rather than the object to be a good approach to design that strives to incorporate a plethora of site conditions. The issues I had, mainly with Schumacher, was the implementation. It seems like all that is considered in the urban designs created using the parametric approach creates vast highly enforced and regulated plans. As a result, I think that the goal of the parametric design is lost. Parametricism strives to find the most efficient forms, a top-down site plan seems to skip over the most important point. The ants weren’t told how to create a bridge using their bodies by one architect ant, just like urban design won’t be idealized by one human architect. It will likely be designed by informed and caring members of the urban areas who, through trial and error, discover the most efficient and pleasing urban plans.
LikeLike
1) Schumacher’s idea of parametricism praises the efficiency and logics revealed through various methods of modeling, but seems to repeat the mistakes of Modernist urbanism by ignoring the programmatic diversity of urban environments in favor of some overly abstracted logic. How can urban models, digital or analog, overcome the preoccupation with form as an urban organizational solution?
2)Kwinter argues for the necessity of exploring the “archaic world of natural intelligence” removed from human sensation. Is a system organized according to pure algorithms appropriate for a human condition? Are humans rational enough to operate in a rational system?
3)Killian’s models offer a diverse and incremental approach to form-finding and design, and as Stan Allen suggests, give up a degree of control in order to solve problems of greater magnitude. What level of risk is there in ceding control, and will it result in an object too full of uncertainties?
LikeLike
1.According to The Question of the Model and its Impact by Killian design output from computational geometry produce repetitive outputs. The resulting process ultimately outputs similar geometry? How does this affect creativity and innovation in architecture if the output is not intentional?
2.Since architecture is a response to social and environmental problems that emerges to resolve issues, how does architecture vary through parametric responsiveness, while requiring similar inputs? or have the ability to adapt and reconfigure to create individualized architecture? As parametric design isn’t always predictable.
3.As architecture continues to increase its reliance on technology, and parametric design minimize the importance of architects, as it takes control away from the architect. How could this influence the future of architecture?
LikeLike
1 In ‘the question of model and its impact on design’ Killian point out that when you design with parametric method it has to have model as metaphor and it also requires plenty of rigorous scientific. How do we really consider the science and model into architectural design given to the space, order, figuration, shape and fold?
2 In ‘Parametricism the new global style for architects’ Schumacher discussed the development of parametric design. Parametric design gets popular in recent year under high-tech computational technique and science boost. But parametric design has been used since ancient Greek era. In modern time, how can we create a new design that can combine the past intricate concept and explore a new perspective for modernism under the contemporary circumstance?
3 In ‘From object to field’ Allen discussed on field logics and their relationship with architecture and urbanism. He places ‘field conditions’ in opposition to Modernist ‘object’ approach to architecture, explaining it as a system responsive to the complexity and indeterminacy of the urban context. What part should we consider when we design in different scale and landscape modernism corresponding to the system Allen concluded?
LikeLike
In the class, the presentation shows the parametric design is in a developing phase and it is very trending in the current. Nature is always the inspiration for the architect. Many example of parametric design perfectly support this statement. The parametric design and computational technology give architect opportunities to start designing animated form. Also they take inspiration from mountain, water or beautiful shape of the animal or plant. Parametric design use some single elements and then repeat them in such order and eventually forms an unusual façade or shape. But is it actually giving people a different experience in the architecture that designed with parametric? Sometimes architect focus on the shape but miss the deeper elements of the design. Apparently parametric design is an attractive and potential methodology but it still has many parts worth considering and fixing.
LikeLike
1.In the reading “The question of the model and its impact on the design,” by Axel killian The author spoke about having conceptual designs and a certain logic and discipline to every architectural project. how do you think architecture in change how would it be different there was no logic and be current projects but just a conceptual design when it was built?
2.In the reading “A new Global Style for Architecture and Urbanism Design” by Schumacher, The discussion repeat touched upon the topic architecture and design for mass urban designs now in urban environments to get the most amount of space used the most efficient it would require very simple housing units. Think we could get a more interesting just as efficient design and style for are we locked into the basics?
3.In the reading “From object to Fields” by Allen the author speaks about stepping out of the cubism era but my question is when was the era created and who was the one the one that made it popular? As well as, do you think we actually left the cubism era?
LikeLike
Parametricism by definition is defined as, “a style within contemporary avant-garde architecture, promoted as a successor to post-modern architecture and modern architecture. The term was coined in 2008 by Patrik Schumacher, an architectural partner of Zaha Hadid (1950-2016).” But it is also a process where a computer can take over a natural design process. We create these dynamic, organic, and relatively relative non-repeating architectural designs as humans. But when computers do it there is always a program that is somewhat repeating and has a non- organic structure to it. But that brings up a question if a machine will be ever able to create organic designs and shapes without having to be programmed to do so. And since there has to be a code to be able to create anything organic, you then would have to have a person behind the idea and creation of said organic code making it non-organic.
LikeLike
1. Schumacher puts a large emphasis on the changes parametricism could make to the urban fabric of a city, but fails to address the social problems plaguing many modern cities. Is there a way parametricism can begin to address social issues, as well as architectural and urban?
2. Axel Kilian poses the parametric model as the near-total solution to any design problem. Are there any design problems that can’t be solved with a model?
3. Kwinter discusses the fact that all matter has some form of active intelligence. With the use of parametric modelling in architecture, we are surely close to a “smart architecture”. Would this fall within Kwinters request for “resistance”, or be seen as a “simple minded cliche”?
LikeLike
Combining the information from the readings, the lecture, and the presentation yesterday, my understanding of parametricism as both a science, and a method for architecture has increased. The many analogies, specifically the ones regarding parametrics in nature, sparked my interest in the subject as a whole. The future of architecture is one that will rely heavily on technology, if it doesn’t already, and parametric modelling and designing seem to be the perfect gateway into the future. However, the advent of parametricism should not result in a total reliance on the technology. As Kwinter discussed in his essay, we as designers should develop an understanding of how to use the technology to the benefit of the design process, rather than a crutch. If it were to become such a crutch, I would imagine the end of design as we know it would follow. As is the same with many other modern technologies, integration could prove extremely beneficial, but reliance could result in limited productivity.
LikeLike
1. If models are simply an abstraction of our designs, shouldn’t we be finding a better way to represent what has been resolved in the design process through our models, ultimately making them more concrete?
2. Is parametric design solely design centric or can this process be used to design buildings in a mindful manner?
3. Are we losing the adaptability of our designs through the use of parametric design?
LikeLike
This week’s lecture and presentation on “From Object to Field”, “The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design”, “The Computational Fallacy”, “Parametricism”, and “ Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of the Emergence” explored the emergence of architecture along with parametric design. Architecture, like most things, has evolved through time with the help of technology. Parametric design is just one of the emergences of architecture, which uses algorithms in order to respond to various factors at and for a specific program and site. While this way of deigning is efficient and also very interesting, does the specificity of each design in turn lose the adaptability that buildings are known to have? Designers must come up with a solution to both keep the parametric design process while also altering it so that the designs can become more generalized therefore allowing them to be recycled when the original use is no longer needed.
LikeLike
1. Within “A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design” the Parametericist design is described as a more natural form that meanders in comparison to the average architecture that moves in a straight line. I believe, however, that this sort of non-linear design is not only associated with Parametericism only. If there are, what other forms of architecture is designed non-linearly?
2.”From Object to Field” explains the importance of the field when it comes to architecture. Parametericism, however, shares a similar design to a field, as to when a building’s shape is in a single mass, the architecture could be seen as an inorganic field. Considering this, would it be possible to create a building that blends in with the field it is built on?
3. The reading “The Computational Fallacy” focuses on the idea of how electronic and mechanic are neither more complex than another. Each one is about something extremely different, one based on computers and the other closer to the creations of the industrial revolution. It is even stated that above these two, there is the natural design, which is more complex than anything a computer could process. If this is true, why is it possible for architects to copy the design of nature if it is too complex for even the most modern computers to comprehend?
LikeLike
When it comes to architecture, there can be inspiration found in almost any other aspect of life. From the complexities of life within nature, to geometrical patterns made through equations, there can be many things that can potentially be used to create architecture. There are many patterns found within nature that could be used. Some of these include: the section of a sea shell, the geometries of minerals, and even the branches of a tree. These examples do not have to be used as the layout of the entire building; the spiral shape of a shell is reminiscent of a massive spiral staircase. To implement these patterns into the architecture, however, a strategy known as parametricism has to be used. This idea involves finding out the similarities and interactions of different points within. By doing so, a base pattern can be identified for use within a building. By doing this, there can be designs that go beyond the standard geometries found in most cities.
LikeLike
Q1: According to Stan Allen’s essay, “Object to Field”, there is an argument that, “in the digital image, ‘background’ information must be as densely coded as the foreground image.” This leads into the question of representation and the limitations different media forms put on the creative process. As we move forward into the realm of the digital, are there any advantages to emerging technology, and how about disadvantages? Will there soon be a world where the digital is considered as primitive as the mechanical?
Q2: Within the same essay by Allen, he writes “we thrive in cities precisely because they are places of the unexpected, products of a complex order emerging over time.” The idea of order seems to be the underlying theme in architectural discourse. From the times of the Greeks, to the Modernists, and now those exploring the world of field conditions, architects have always tried to order the way we live. Is the role of the architect in master planning to design a base unit that serves as a framework for order to develop?
Q3: The following quote from Weinstock’s paper relates to the discussions from previous classes about the creation of the new. “Recombination is preferred to mutation, as it produces substantial diversity in each generation.” Based on this statement, it can be argued that the harvesting and grafting of ideas from past designs is preferred to completely mutating a new design from the old. As the field of architecture grows, there is a greater variety of ideas to choose from and add to the next generation. Do you agree with this statement, and please explain why or why not?
LikeLike
Within the discipline of architecture, we seek to order the world around us, whether that be within the building interiors, the building itself, or larger urban spaces. By introducing the concept of field conditions as a new organizational method, architects can begin to release some of the control they are exhibiting over the urban scale. Field conditions free up the architect to design around local conditions and allow the rest of the city to transform and fit around them. In this way, the growth of the city is limitless. As the field grows, the part to part connections drive the project. What is significant is not the design of the part, but how the part’s relationship to other parts influence the fabric of the field. In this way, this concept means that the individualism is being eliminated in favor of an adaptable whole.
LikeLike
1 According to Stan Allen in his article “From Object to Filed” He argues that while painting and sculpture have been developed farther from Cubism. To him, architecture is still strongly working and developing compositional principals taken from Cubism. in what way can architecture go far beyond from Cubism?
2 According to Alex Killian a model that does not follow the constraints of the project that is represented. It might still show other problems that the project may have. To what extent can this effect to project, since the model by itself won’t be representing the whole project?
3 It can be true that computers and its software can help us to design and develop a whole project. with the advantages of creating abstract designs and even place them in a digital environment that is supposed to represent real-life one. Could this be a disadvantage since computers are just showing us a digital world and pushing us away from the real problems in a real environment?
LikeLike
Architecture is such a broad and fascinating field, in which a design starts mainly either from a conceptual or abstract idea that is used as a point of departure. But this idea needs to develop and in some way represented so it can be studied and improved. This is when models come handy in this task since they are a reduction in scale of a design that can be a hundred times bigger. Not only models represent that. But also, they are made to represent the most relevant characteristic and concept of the design and how this blends in and/or adapt in the visionary environment in which it will be placed on. Furthermore, Parametricism is another tool or how Patrick Schumacher calls it “New Global Style”, that nowadays is used and has become very important to achieve the most amazing and incredible designs. Schumacher claims in his article called “PARAMETRICISM”, that this is possible by using digital animation techniques, parametric design systems that are constantly updating and scripting methods. He also highlights the influence that this style have had in the evolution of the architectural design over the past 15 years.
LikeLike
1. Patrik Schumacher in A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design explains parametricism and its current role in architecture as not only a tool for design but also a tool for the formation of a completely new style in the field. He quotes Le Corbusier, ”Man walks in a straight line because he has a goal and knows where he is going (…) he takes the line of least resistance.” – explaining (before his time) how parametricism is employed in modern architecture. The effort to compile all architectural variables into algorithms, that produce a unique solution to each problem, is a logical progression with the technology at hand, however, how feasible are these designs and is it pragmatic to attempt to create this architecture? Is the only constraint on this modern approach the financial burden of the proposed projects or are these designs flawed in other ways?
2. Axel Kilian in The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design examines how architecture as a physical skill has had to adapt to the technology that has become available. He continues to explain how model-making has changed from being purely a representative skill to an actual formulation of a smaller-scale version of the designed product due to our new abilities to construct and design these systems. Axel also touches upon how design itself has changed to better fit the technological capabilities of our time. Is it the role of architects to be more involved in the trades that bring schematics to actuality than what was previously expected? Will future architects become not only the designers of space but also become engineers of their systems and be the ones responsible for “teaching” workers on how to build it.
3. Weinstock in Emergence: Morphogenetic Design Strategies talks about how the natural world already tends to organize itself in algorithmic symmetry. He explains to some degree that this symmetry is not always readily apparent due to lack of perspective but nearly all natural phenomena stick to a symmetrical simplicity. Will future architecture “grow” itself? Is there a possibility that architecture will not be digitally designed by computing what would be considered a successful system for a particular environment but rather by genetically coding an organism to “grow” a successful system?
LikeLike
Parametricism in architecture is regarded as an emerging style that is to be applied throughout the entire world to create architecture that responds directly to all conditions of its environment with a universal system of algorithms. However, this perspective is ultimately flawed to the condition of architecture being regarded as an art form; parametricism is only the by-product of the current climate of new-age technology being seen as indispensable to the creation of the “new”. Axel Kilian argues that new technologies are indispensable not as producers of new styles and designs but are rather necessary modern tools that aid in the creation of intuitive design. Architecture’s role is to utilize tools not blindly but to use them in conjunction with their own knowledge and experiences in order to find an evolution to the orthodox.
LikeLike
1. In Weinstock reading, he uses philosopher and mathematician Whitehead’s quote that “process rather than substance was the fundamental constituent of the world, and that nature consists of patterns of activity interacting with each other.” To what end does this lend itself to the designing of parametric shape. While we tout that parametricism is the advent of contemporary design, is it more so just an extension of what is already present in nature, such as biomimicry? Or rather, is it an extrapolation of these ideas into something more concrete and human?
2. In Kwinter’s reading he argues two points for us as a society to consider in light of the “computational fallacy”. One of the points argues for a return to the deep-rootedness of computation. Doing so would allow us to return to a time much like when the telescope was invented, but at what cost? How would this regression bring us further into the future than we have already positioned ourselves?
3. While parametricism definitely is an impressive and novel technology, the question of authorship definitely comes into play. With the advent of new design technologies, we have to ask ourselves, who owns the idea? Is it the architect, who was able to program a software to create what they wanted? Or is the architect no longer the author of their own work, but rather a piece of the puzzle in helping the software come up with the design?
LikeLike
Having listened to the lecture and the various views on the merits and principles of parametricism, I think that there are many pros and cons that need to be taken into consideration. Parametricism is great for it’s breakthroughs in the way humans design. It has brought us into the 21st century and beyond, and I’m sure that our ancestors could’ve never dreamt of the day when an entire building concept is designed by using a coding software. That being said, one of it’s biggest drawbacks is it’s currently limited reach. Because parametric design tends to be very fluid and plastic in its shape, it limits the materials and actual designs that can be used. Parametric design, in many places simply won’t do, and it would be lost on us as a culture to applaud it as the only type of design moving forward. The human mind is still the most powerful tool we wield when it comes to design, and it would be foolish of us to neglect that for the sake of some software.
LikeLike
1- Does giving into the ease and the increasing reliance on computerized programs/ parametric algorithms take agency away from the architect? Or does it in a way give the subject more agency by opening up a simple way to design that yields complex outcomes?
2-In ‘Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence’ by Weinstock, it is argued that “process rather than substance was the fundamental constituent of the world, and that nature consists of patterns of activity interacting with each other”. Yet, can substance come from the process used to create an architecture? Or is substance no longer important in architecture and just the means of creation?
3-In ‘A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design’ by Schumacher, they write,” what confronts us is a new style rather than merely a new set of techniques”. How else have techniques become a style in architecture. Do some remain only has a technique or can one argue that each style formed from a new technique of building or from a new process of creation?
LikeLike
Parametric design is a technique that became a style as well as a way of working. Architects can create infinite layers of complexity at the click of a mouse. Does parametricism always work? Most certainly not, as was discussed about Zaha Hadid’s works. These models can become so complex that they can not be brought into reality with the means of building we currently have available to us. Yet in nature “parametricism” is used to respond to the environment. The idea of part to part vs part to whole and how these relationships allow flora and fauna to respond more quickly to survive better. They become a super organism that together has a higher level of reaction and intelligence than a singular unit. Can we then use parametricism at a simpler level to create superior landscapes of architecture and land already existing. The answer is of course, it has already been done by some . Grids and organization of bays and rows etc create a formal logic of repetitiveness that mimics the ideas of parametric design.
LikeLike
1: Why does Allen think that today’s real power of architecture has been eroded everywhere by a “swollen bureaucratic apparatus”?
2: What’s the difference between predictive reasoning and intuitive action?
3: Kwinter thinks that no computer on Earth can match the processing power of even the most simple natural systems. Can technology develop far enough to prove this wrong? Or is it unachievable?
LikeLike
The most interesting topic discussed this week in the readings and lecture was this idea that “minimalism represents a significant advance over pre-war compositional principles” (Allen). Basically , it’s trying to say how minimalism is the superior form of composing attributes when being compared to Cubism. That idea challenged what was often accepted at the time.
LikeLike
1. In “From Field to Object” the author writes about how the constraints of the field can actually work for the architect by giving opportunity to create something different based upon the effects of these obstacles. Do you think this is beneficial to the design and creativity of a project?
2. In “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design” Schumacher writes “Aesthetically, it is the elegance of ordered complexity and the sense of seamless fluidity” do you think parametricism focuses too much on the theoretical rather than the practical?
3. Based on “Morphogeneis and the Mathematics of Emergence” do you think that being an architect comes down to identifying a process of already existing emergence and using that to design?
LikeLike
The phases of architectural styles through the years change based on the newest processes becoming popular for design. Parametric design allows for design intent, process, and result to flow through each other creating ordered complexity throughout the design. Even though this process has only recently emerged through the evolution of technology the idea can be credited to what we see in nature. The algorithmic repetition is able to create complexity however this can take a lot of our control out of the design process. By just focusing on input and output we lose part of our flexibility to respond to obstacles. When this unique complexity takes over it inhibits the adaptability and hinders how we can address constraints such as field conditions.
LikeLike
1. In From Object to Field the author, Stan Allen, states that “…architectural theory does not arise in a vacuum, but always on a complex dialogue with ongoing practice”. At what point does the one architectural shape stop and another one begins when there is an interrelations between the two?
2. In the Question of the Model and it’s Impact on Design by Axel Kilian there is an image, Figure 2, that shows an angle of a cathedral that would be very difficult to mimic with a scaled model. With images such as this that can come from computer design programs and other methods of modeling like 3D printing, are there any benefits making physical models by hand?
3. With the emergence of Parametricism which uses script techniques and design systems to create interesting forms and combinations of geometries. Does this take the meaning and intent behind the design away?
LikeLike
Since the beginning of architecture, architects have always presented an intent and awareness behind their work. With the aid of technology our architectural capabilities have increased dramatically, but this could also be seen as dulling our intent and awareness of our work. Starting at a screen and working in only the digital world makes us sometimes lose touch with the real one allowing the architectural thought to get away from us. To impede this we must be aware of both the strengths and weakness of both worlds and possible find a medium between them both that allows for us to make architecture at the best of our abilities.
LikeLike
1. In Allen’s “From Object to Field” he mentions how working with, as opposed to against the site, allows for something new to be produced. With this in mind, do you think architects “cheat” when they reform the land of don’t use the topography for all it is worth? Or do you think there is space in architecture for buildings to not fully converse with the site in which they are located?
2. In the Kilian reading, they discuss how determining authorship over a model can be difficult because the concepts are often times borrowed from other disciplines. The question of authorship relates to a previous set of readings and brings up the interdisciplinary aspect of architecture. Once a concept leaves one discipline and enters into another, does it become a new idea or remain a recycled concept?
3. In last week’s readings, we discussed laziness and how sometimes when architecture becomes too complex it is no longer accessible to the masses. Do you think parametricism and parametric design is the happy medium between complexity and accessibility/understanding?
LikeLike
In one of the readings, it is briefly mentioned that parametric design is a mature design. But what exactly does that mean? This was one of the questions focused on during the class discussion. In my opinion, I think that means that parametricism is one of the few design/workflows that use all the modern technologies and mathematical advancements that are available. It is also mature in that it gives designers the ability to work with every parameter of design at once instead of having to deal with them as singular entities. Due to that parametric design works well when dealing with large scale designs, such as planning urban landscapes. Parametricism allows for greater unity at that large scale which can be clearly seen when comparing large scale site plans with and without the use of parametric design. However, once you get down to the smaller pieces the parametric design does not work as well. Not to say that it is not successful, but it is not as successful. This is a problem because people do not experience architecture at the scale in which the parametric design is operating at its best. All this is not to say that parametric design is not good, it is just to more deeply understand how it can be used in a more successful manner.
LikeLike
1 In “Parametricism: The New Global Style for Architects,” Schumacher discussed the development of parametric design. Parametric design has gained popularity in recent years in response to a technology boom, though this technique has been around for hundreds of years. A lot of emphasis is put on the changes the reintroduction of this system could make to the urban landscape. Have the effects of this technique been studied on the social scale? Is there a way this can be used to address social issues?
2 Kwinter presents the idea that all matter has some form of active intelligence. We are in an age marked with the increased use of parametric modeling. This can be seen as a form of “active intelligence” or “smart Architecture.” This can lend a question of representation and the limitations different media forms put on the creative process. As we continue forward into the realm of the digital, are we strongly considering the advantages and disadvantages? Could spending so much time in a digital world, push us away from the realities of our own environment?
3 In “The question of the model and its impact on design,” Killian shows the parametric model as a solution to almost any design problem. An argument made is that new forms and models are almost impossible to create. At this advanced level of development, ideas can only be reused or recycled. How much influence should we give these ideas when we are moving through the design process?
LikeLike
“Form matters, but not so much the forms of things as the forms between things” (Allen, p.24) on Field configurations and their compositions. If the relationships are more critical than the forms they’re comprised of, can we assume that field configurations begin at those connections subsequently resulting in its form or does it play a role that doesn’t affect it and isn’t considered a developmental factor?
As we may already know and what we come to find in Kilian’s piece is architects live within a realm of representation, articulations, perhaps unrealistic concepts, and so on. Where would both architecture and architects be if modeling or diagraming could not be the primary mode of communication?
In Kwinter’s Computational Fallacy, we discuss the two modalities of the mechanical and electronic. What is, if there is any, the arithmetic or rule system that backs how the mechanical supposedly evolve?
LikeLike
1. As Kilian describes, the architect’s role in parametric design is “contextualizing the outcome and interpreting it in its use”. Because of the shifting process of architectural design, architects involved in parametric architecture are letting the technology and digital scripts take the lead for the design of their projects. Thus, as the role of the architect shifts, will we become more and more responsible in terms of the engineering and building as technology further increases and we have less and less control over our designs?
2. Schumacher describes parametricism as “the elegance or ordered complexity and the sense of seamless fluidity” specifically in large-scale urbanism. However, is this scale discouraging architects from thinking about the individual in their designs? How can we as architects incorporate parametric design into smaller scale projects or projects focused on the individual scale (instead of focusing primarily on the large urban scale)?
3. In “From Object to Field”, Allen discusses the challenge of incorporating the site into designs when computer script provides the main output of geometries. Instead of simply forcing parametric architecture to fit into particular sites, how can parametric architecture actually aid in incorporating the surrounding environment into architectural design?
LikeLike
Growing advances in technology have led to the increasing use of parametric design within architecture. In simple terms, this is the reliance of the architect on digital script to formulate geometry based on a series of algorithms. As stated in one of the readings, it is “the elegance of ordered complexity and the sense of seamless fluidity.” While parametric design can produce some complex and interesting forms, the presentation presented the idea that it may not be the perfect solution to solving problems of design within the architectural field. The presentation gave the example of the Grotto Project by Aranda/Lasch, and criticized its ignorance of the setting and context it was in. This is becoming an increasingly important realization; algorithmic design is purely mathematical and there is not a script that can be used to incorporate the setting. We cannot simply rely on machines to do all of our designs for us. It is valid to use a computer to generate a visual language, but as architects we must take this language and incorporate the geometries into the location of which we are building, and learn how to use the generative forms in a way that solves problems in society and does not disregard the surrounding environment. In fact, we must find ways to use parametric design to better our use of incorporating the site into our designs.
LikeLike
1. “In the case of inventing new models it is the ability to abstract and to formalize an idea into a model of design. Ideally the model is rigorous enough to all for implementation in a digital environment.” So first question, should we be designing stuff that can’t be easily assembled or modeled by our own abilities? Sure I can understand using algorithms to do a study on form finding (as long as it is in the realm of being assembled by hand and not 3D printed), but I believe some designers take it too far, where the design is so complex that it doesn’t even have the possibility of being made in the real world. Second question, to what point can you still call yourself a designer if the algorithm is doing all the work?
2. “No computer on earth can match the processing power of even the most simple natural system.” The computer wasn’t designed for such a task, the computer is a medium to help expand the human intelligence whether for the good or the bad. Which could be understood when Kwinter said “The most powerful and challenging use of the computer is in learning how to make a simple organization model that is intrinsic about a more complex, infinitely entailed organization.” So when creating such a complex system is it better to look at it through a set of rational eyes or does one have to step outside of the realm of rationality to create such a system?
3. With the urban fabric always changing how can we use the logic of emergence? Each building has a life span, each building is different, but we still have to read it in a coherent environment.
LikeLike
1. Can design be considered successfully receptive if it is aesthetically and parametrically innovative at the expense of responding to context? Do the negative design impacts come from the hand of the architect or computation?
2. Weinstock insists that forms “exist in varied populations, and where communication between forms is effective, collective structured behavior and intelligence emerges. The systems from which form emerges, and the systems within individual complex forms themselves, are maintained by the flow of energy and information through the system.”
Do you think a parametric form “maintained by the flow of energy” can adequately respond to its surrounding contextual needs if it only provides a mathematical mechanism without cultural research?
3. The American/Jeffersonian Grid is a means of reaching towards democratic equality; an “attempt to impose measure on the unmeasurable,” according to Stan Allen. Do you believe that this grid is indeed factual, overly pragmatic at the expense of the universal? How would Schumacher’s parametricism scale to the size of a Jeffersonian grid, or the size of the city? What would any disconnect or mathematical relationship mean?
LikeLike
The closing remarks of the lecture mulled over the philosophy of designing for specific views. Although several views of a parametric (or any type of) architecture may be beautiful, the entire buildings are often leading towards and/or coming away from the points or sections, leading the rest of the structure to be unimpressive, especially when coupled with its likely lack of contextual response. The presentations were strong in their understandings and interpretations of the readings, leading the discussions to be lively and topical in relation to our own school’s design process. Computational architecture was put under the microscope with plenty of dissent, the critique of current times and practices as rich as the praise nestled within its strengths. That being said, the discourse of authorship that has haunted every week thus far still looms large and ghostly. Not that it is a tired one, or any less intriguing when framed across styles and times, but the opposite.
LikeLike
1. In The Question of the Underlying Model, Kilian describes how the increasingly frequent use of computational designs will lead to more computational literacy, making “designer authored models” that have little novelty and lack ingenuity. He also mentioned how these computer generated models are more and more about aesthetics rather than a deeper meaning. Additionally, he states that there seems to be an absence of control by the designer when using computational generative design methods. In this digital, technology-dependent world, is it possible for an architect to have full control over a parametric design, while incorporating an intentional deeper value in addition to being visually pleasing?
2. Le Corbusier’s preference for straight lines and right angles over curved ones are discussed in Parametricism by Schumacher. According to Le Corbusier, straight lines and curves can be compared to a man and a pack-donkey. The former has a clear goal, and therefore walks in a straight path, while the latter meanders and zig-zags around, favoring the path of least resistance. Schumacher argues that though the donkey’s path is seemingly disorganized and random, upon further inspection, these too have a sense of “underlying logic and rationality” that has been hidden. How has this preference of straight lines, right angles, and grid systems over randomized, disorganized elements switch/flip over time as this style of parametricism continues to grow?
3. In From Object to Field by Stan Allen, “field condition” is defined as something that unites different elements while still letting them be unique. By this definition, can the label of movements and/or styles be considered to be a field condition as it unites various projects under a single category, while still embracing their individuality?
LikeLike
In one of the readings, parametric architecture is stated to be a mature design. During the panel discussion, the question of the standard of maturity was brought up. What makes a project mature? Some answered that parametricism is mature due to the use of high technology and new softwares and methods of designing a building. I concur, and would add that there is a level of complexity and intricacy that cannot be met without computational design systems. However, one of the great flaws with the use of parametrics in architecture is that in some cases the model can be too dense/complex/abstract to be physically built in the world we live in right now. Another shortcoming that we as architects should be concerned with is the seemingly lack of control there is with complicated codes/scripts.
LikeLike
1. In “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design,” the author claims that parametricism is able to design better than people because it accentuates the correlation of multiple urban systems. However, when relying on this calculated way of designing, the design might fail to consider how users will experience the design/space. When human experience is not being considered in the design, will it still be as successful?
2. In “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” Weinstock argues that mathematical techniques that create collective behavior from simple local responses have the ability to alter architectural environments and their systems. How can non-living systems become self-organizing to create this change?
3. In “Digital Models for Design Exploration,” the author argues for the use of computational models to go beyond the scope of simple generative models in architecture. In what way can these models be used to replace generative models if these computational models are not be mistaken as formal suggestions for design?
LikeLike
Parametric design allows architects to design within very specific parameters. These designs are able to consider many different systems. Architects today are beginning to use this design strategy more and more because it generates interesting and thorough designs quickly. However, most of these computer-generated designs are rather complex. This makes the fabrication of such structures difficult. Zaha Hadid’s buildings that use parametric design have not withstood the test of time due to poor building techniques. Marc Fornes with THEVERYMANY has advanced fabrication in the field of parametric design. He does this by fabricating his designs in panels. Parametric design is a good design strategy if the architect wants to speed up the design process, but architects and makers need to experiment with fabrication techniques for this type of design to be successful.
LikeLike
1.) Axel Kilian’s “The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design,” talks about the relevancy of models and that they are “attempts to reproduce something that takes place in reality in an abstract way that can serve as the basis for instance for a simulation.” In some cases, though, are models so abstract because of the program used to create them that they become unrealistic, and less likely to physically be built?
2.) In Sanford Kwinter’s “The Computational Fallacy,” he states, “no computer on earth can match the processing power of even the most simple natural system” along with discussing the need for studying nature and incorporating that systematic ease into future computational systems. Would it be possible for all mechanics to gain some sort of relationship to nature and its processes, allowing for extremely complex processes to be done with as much as ease leaves blow in the wind?
3.) Discussing the shift from modernism to parametricism, Patrick Schumacher discusses the open spaces created in different master plans in urban environments and how they act less as unused space, and are more so thought of as filled up, spaces for circulation. Could it be possible that the addition of these open spaces are due to unsuccessful plans in the past that had lacked green space and places of rest inside of newly urbanized areas? He refers to them as “filled as with fluid,” but could that just be a place of potential environmental interaction?
LikeLike
Architects who have begun developing more in the area of parametric design seem to have grasped a better understand of a new interpretation of integrating architecture into the landscape, basing their geometries and schemes off of things found in nature. The forms developed by some, the most commonly known being Zaha Hadid Architects, are intricate in the sense that the strange curvature and formations put together in specific pieces look almost alien, although maintaining a sense of fluidity found only in natural occurrences. Concurrent with parametric design is the advancement of new technologies that help create those strange structures and designs, providing a new way to discover even the possibilities of design. The construction of most, if not all, sorts of parametric architecture has certainly become that of wonder in that without the use of advanced computational programs and technologies, there would be no way to build structures with such radical forms.
LikeLike
1. According to morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence, it mentioned that the pattern of energy flow is subject to many small variations but occasionally there is such an amplification that the system must reorganise or collapse. How can such an amplification happen? And why?
2. In Parametricism, A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design, Schumacher mentioned that Parametricism is a style rather than a new technique. Then he said that Parametricism is a mature style. Since it is mature, why there is still a global network of design researchers working on fixing the systematically connected design problems? is it still about the issue on technique?
3. In The Question of the Model and its impact on Design, Kilian mentioned that ideally the model is rigorous enough to allow for implementation in a digital environment. Is the implementation in a digital environment equal to implementation in a real environment? How can model designers figure out the differences between reality and digital?
LikeLike
From the lecture, there are some points arousing my interest most. First is the relationship between modernism and architecture. Modernism gives us benefits of many new strategies to create architecture.
In Morphogenesis and the mathematics of emergence, mathematics is introduced, so does chemistry and biology.
Process, not substance, is the fundamental constituent of the world. The building, site, context, people, and informational movement are part of a singular unit.
Mechanical relations are being dramatically transferred to new and different level. Being aware of the tools at our disposal but blindly taking convention and technology as gospel indesign should be kept in our mind as resistance during Parametricism.
The result of circulation is overall continuity and height correlation with parcel area size. Implementation-strict regulations; collective value; ordered complexity. From urbanism to architecture, systematic modulation of tectonics is required. It also requires coordination of landscape and public space, and Correlation between path system & internal navigation system.
LikeLike
1. Schumacher states that “there has been talk of ‘continuous differentiation’, versioning, iteration and mass customization among other things… within architectural avant-garde discourse.” Are we moving forward to apply parametricism on all buildings? If so, how are we supposed to create “new” architecture (within parametricism, similar versions, different iterations of parametricism)? Is it intended to stand out amongst all of the other existing buildings?
2. In The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design, Kilian states “The ideal model is like a veil, lightweight and flexible, thin but capable to adapt to the contours of a problem…New models need to be developed to respond to the design specific challenges” In school, so far, the models that we have produced are just a final representation of a massing and/or building. Do you think we could benefit from producing models that are able to be manipulated and adjusted to respond the challenges?
3. In Allen’s From Object to Field, flocks of boids were formed when 3 behavioral rules were set. However, once one boid was too far, it diverged and created a new path. In some cases, it rejoins to a group, but not always the same one. Could this relate to an architect’s path? One is introduced into architecture and starts to follow another. At some point he/she will separate to create a new path. He/she could start their own study or follow a different one.
LikeLike
Two weeks ago, the game Go was incorporated into a writing in order to draw out the importance of the relationship between part and whole. This is similar to Marc Fornes’ work, in which the parts, individually, are insignificant, but it is necessary to create the overall form. In this case, the self-similar units are important to produce the more significant whole form. With today’s technology, architects are able to produce forms that were unimaginable. One can input the components and get the output of the whole. However, this week, another writing also brings out that part to part is better than whole to whole. In flocks, swarms, etc. when the components change, they are more successful than when the whole changes. When one part changes due to a reaction, the whole quickly follows. Another topic that was brought up in discussion was hacking. Hack could also cause changes in the overall form because the space range can be changed.
LikeLike
1| Sanford Kwinter emphasizes that “all matter, even totally disorganized matter possesses some degree of active intelligence”. Is this characteristic active intelligence actually inherent to the existence of the material? Or is it rather an impression of human organizational understanding existing only between the human and the material worlds?
2| Axel Kilian mentions that scientific rigor in parametric modeling “can provide a much deeper insight and more complex relationships in the generative process than possible through abstraction and introspection alone”. This may very well be true, however because of this complexity, is this rigor applicable in architecture relevant to those who occupy it? Essentially, is the implementation of parametric modeling actually useful in generating understandable, practical designs?
3| Patrik Schumacher addresses the fact that “the mass society that was characterised by a universal consumption standard has evolved into the heterogeneous society of the multitude”, is parametric design, which generates often repetitive forms possibly ignorant to individual discrepancies, really practical in terms of urban reorganization within this heterogeneous group?
LikeLike
Patrik Schumacher’s postulation that parametricism offers the world the next generation of architectural study following a somewhat desultory few decades ending with the emergence of deconstructivism is both daunting and possibly unfounded. According to projects employing parametric formal strategies, built and unbuilt, repetition tends to overpower the designer’s inborn creative ideals which are otherwise inherently complex and practical. This aspect of practical design seems to have been confused, temporarily at least, with efficiency within the architect’s office. Functional aspects of the building as a living organism are being pushed aside for hastiness in the workplace. In order to both avoid needless and even cavalier repetition within parametric scripts more research must be done as to how a building is to emerge from a particular scheme. A scheme should be able to anticipate perfunctory basic human needs such as circulation; of people, goods, information, as well as waste. If bottom-up processing is the course of action for future architects, then they should take into account the fact that architecture cannot exist without the subject, the inhabitant; thus rendering this subject, rather than a formal module, as the true first step in this bottom-up process.
LikeLike
1. Parametricism is not a new concept, and its roots go back to the 90’s. In his essay “Parametricism” Patrik Schumacher explains that the movement has only recently gained traction in the word of architecture despite it having existed for multiple years already. Why was this movement not adopted at a quicker rate once it came out? Is Parametricism so reliable on technology that without technological advances it could not be a possibility? Where will future technologies lead this avant-garde architecture form?
2. Axel Kilian in his essay ”The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design” raises important questions about the future direction of parametricism as a movement that is technology dependent despite it computer modeling being a relatively new concept in the field of architecture. How will the field of architecture evolve in years to come? Will it maintain a dependence on other fields as a helping hand, or will it once again become a standalone field? Has Technology impacted architecture in a. way that it will always depend on others as a way of helping the rapidly changing technological world?
3. “The Computational Fallacy” by Sanford Kwinter is primarily concerned with technologies actual contribution to the world, and to architecture as a field of study. Kwinter seems to believe that the machine is not one of the greatest tools humanity has produced, yet potentially humanities greatest downfall. Keeping in mind this belief, how can “old fashioned” ways of design and new technological design patterns merge in the future to stop a complete divergence from what architecture has rooted itself from?
LikeLike
The idea of Parametricism is an interesting one in regards to modern twenty-first-century architecture. It is even more so when it is taken into consideration that this avant-garde form of architecture isn’t completely new and is around 30 years old. It has recently gained traction due to the growth in the computational potential that technology is able to process. Without an increase in technological advances, this architectural technique could’ve been a failure but instead became a modern success making architecture become more organic in the way in which it interacts with its surroundings. Computers allow for the unimaginable to be achieved and that is exactly the strong arm that parametricism exerts. Many architectural masterpieces like those of Pritzker Prize winner Zaha Hadid used technology as more of an additive and less of a detractor to her design. The idea of Parametricism is own that will continue to grow as technology advances along with it. Even with the slow start Parametricism experienced, it has the potential to become of the most influential architectural techniques to have existed.
LikeLike
1. In “Parametricism-A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design”, the author pointed out that parametric design as a cutting-edge technology is widely applied in architecture and urban design, and it does help us to design better, then how are we supposed to know whether we are abusing parametric design and losing the sharpness as architects?
2. In “computational Fallacy”, Kwinter said: “Every unit of intelligible matter in our technical or cultural
world, regardless how simple, is refined or organized to a degree sufficient at least to distinguish it from the random and disordered background flux or noise of the natural world.” So, does the unintelligible matter really exist? How do we define intelligible matter?
3. In “From Object to Field”, Allen said: “The conventions of classical architecture dictate not only the proportions of individual elements but also the relationship between individual elements.” I agree with this statement, then in what case should we apply traditional approach or parametric design? If we could apply both, what is the standard to examine which method is better?
LikeLike
Parametric architecture brings a special spatial experience and visual impact to users and visitors. As the result of the parametric design is often accompanied by gradual change, streamline shape, interactive function and so on, these elements are associated with the traditional geometric shape, so that we experience completely different psychological feelings, so dynamic, unstable and even puzzled are different feelings brought by parametric design. Parametric architecture is efficient:
it can accurately complete the design of complex shape, it can quickly generate multiple scenarios, and it is easy for modification of the projects. The advantages of parametric design are significant, but the constraints are multifaceted, mainly because the parametric design is still immature，it is still a cutting-edge design technology. It is precisely because of this immatureness and pioneering nature: more and more architects obsess with it; parametric architecture will also be the trend that will lead the future of architectural design.
LikeLike
Patrick Schumacher describes Parametricism as a “mature style.” Assuming for the moment that he is right, what aspects of other architectural styles might categorize them as “mature” or “immature?”
Stanford kwinter claims there can be no order or shape without matter, even if that matter is something as insubstantial as a small laser, or projected light. If non-material systems cannot have order, what is a fitting description of their organizations?
Michael Weinstock argues for the use of mathematics in architecture, but mathematics has been a core part of the practice dating back to the geometries of Ancient greeks. The evolution of math and geometry has continually shaped architectural development, in the era of mass information transfer and digital computations, what role does math have in the contemporary of today and what might it look like in the future?
LikeLike
Ultimately, the key factors that make up the difference between mechanical and electrical, between urbanism and Parametricism, is matter. Matter, and the relationship of that matter to itself and its surroundings. A Mechanical outlook believes in the strength of presence, the power and emotion that can be delivered through physical identity and work. It pairs well with urbanism, which treats architecture relatively similarly to how society treats individuals. It recognizes that every building is its own entity, and can be developed as such, but that ultimately it is still considered as something that is a piece of something larger. Parametricism and the electronic work similarly, but with an important key difference. The difference lies in that the emphasis is no longer on the matter itself, but rather the connections between matter. Like Urbanism, Parametricism makes up a whole using many smaller entities, but it differentiates in that the individual entities need only to connect to the immediate, rather than to comply with the big picture. This creates a more seamless movement, making the part so unique that it ends up blending into the other unique parts and creating the whole. The whole can not then be broken down into its individual parts, as it is reliant not on the parts themselves, but the ability for the parts to connect to each other.
LikeLike
1. Particular emphasis is placed on the role of the model in the reading by Kilian, how does the model dictate our lives as students of architecture and practitioners of design? Do you feel as though you put particular emphasis on the model and detach it from the overall project?
2.In the readings by Allen, do you feel as though the set behavioral rules were necessary, and if so, would you question the validity of these rules as they pertain to the architect?
3. In a Post-Modernist Era, could mathematical techniques and computations be the sole means of creation in the coming years? Does this in some way take the integrity out of design?
LikeLike
Parametric Modeling has been at the forefront of architecture and integrated design related practices for at least a decade. It seems as though there is a strong possibility that parametric modeling will continue to play an even larger role in the look as well as the workflow of the architecture of the future. In this post-modernist era, one can only hope that the role of the architect is not entirely terminated. Parametrics can in many ways, lead to the demise of the architect as we know it. They could essentially lead to the demise of the architect’s existence. In some ways, parametric modeling has drastically changed the limitations of what was thought to be designed. But, when critically analyzed, in other ways parametric modeling can arguably be deemed as an existential crisis of sorts. It would indeed be quite the uncanny enigma.
LikeLike
1) From the reading, “From Object to Field”, is Stan Allen implying that new architecture should be designed with respect to the city? He talks about “field condition” and how it’s a unification of elements, especially the relationship between buildings, cities, and the environment.
2) The reading Emergence made me wonder about the discipline of architecture itself. The reading said that “Mathematics has always played a critical role in architecture”, yet in our school curriculum, we’re only required to take two math classes. Science can also relate to architecture, if we’re interested in research and innovating new materials. However, architecture is its own school, its own degree, not part of the school of science or math. We’ll graduate with a Bachelor’s of Architecture degree, and not a Bachelor’s of Science degree. How can the architecture curriculum evolve and emerge with other disciplines?
3) In the reading “Computational Fallacy”, Kwinter talks about needing “twofold: resistance and productive affirmation”. Are there architects out there that have designed with these two ideas in mind?
LikeLike
Architecture shouldn’t be designed without a reason. There should be a reason for every move an architect makes. There should be relationships, problems, and solutions, between what the architecture and its surrounding context. Parametric design is not simply manipulation of an equation or system. If used thoughtfully, it can create spatial experiences and aesthetically pleasing moments. It’s efficient. First, you set guidelines and rules, and then let technology compute away. There’s mathematics involved and science. Parameters are set. How big is the site, how many holes or edges you want in the model? The program has commands and can create commands for the computer to follow. As a result, an accurate and stable model is generated. Maybe this is the answer to creating architecture with twofold. One can set resistance and productive affirmation factors for the model to follow, a parametric design can be formed.
LikeLike
1. Stan Allen presents the possibilities of designing based on the field and the process instead of explicit focus on the object itself. When buildings are constructed, they join the field itself and are considered as such when new buildings are constructed. In this line of thought, was it ever possible to escape the field in the first place?
2. Parametric modeling has enjoyed a lot of exploration by artists and architects over the recent decades. By designing through uncontrolled processes, will architecture eventually lose its own agency as these processes and scripts become increasingly more complex?
3. In “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design,” the procedure is described as more powerful and capable than its creator. In the face of the inevitable technological singularity, where will the artist and architect go if technology can explore fields and forms faster and more capable than humans? Will there be a point where we even lose our jobs as interpreters?
LikeLike
Parametricism appears to be the third and, so far, the most democratic approach in the postmodern and digital era. As Stan Allen tries to redirect the conversation away from the object and more focused on the field itself, parametricism offers a plethora of methods to explore such a route since it itself is derived from the bottom up. Individually, each unit itself can exist, if only meekly, but together the parts create something greater than themselves. It is in this way that defines the great democratic potential in parametric designs. In modernism, the form imposed by the architect is forced upon the field and each part is forced to conform to the overarching whole. The blob and the shape do not free themselves away from this idea, they merely alter the way they look. By relying solely on local conditions to build up piece by piece, parametricism truly escapes the dictatorial nature of modernism.
LikeLike
1. If, as Weinstock describes, the future of architecture exists in letting buildings “evolve” from certain processes, how will the role of the designer change?
2. Kwintner seems to believe that if computers can model complex, chaotic interactions, such understanding will revolutionize humanity. What are some concrete ways that such a change would impact our “linear, numerical world”?
3. Schumacher describes how parametricism allows architects to design large spaces while accounting for the patterns already in their environment. How can such designs become socially and ecologically integrated into their urban environment, and avoid the authoritarianism of Le Corbusier under a different formal logic?
LikeLike
1. In “From Object to Field” by Stan Allen, he follows Frampton’s refusal of representation and describes the field of architecture as a material condition, not a discursive practice. If this is true, does this mean architecture should not represent anything? Then what about culture and religion?
2. In ”The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design” by Axel Kilian he says that there is a crisis of models in computational design. He thinks that models are abstractions, reductions of an observed phenomenon and this is how design is created. But if a design is purely presented by sophisticated and accurate graphs and diagrams, is it really necessary to have a model that might be just a combination and representation of the diagrams in a 3D environment?
3. Patrik Schumacher uses multiple examples from Zaha Hadid Architect in “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design” to describe the style of Parametricism, which is asserted to be the great new style after Modernism. Since technology is developing and today digital rendering and graphing is like pen and pencil in the past, using digital representation is the ordinary. In this case, is Parametricism really a style or a merely a design method?
LikeLike
This week’s presentation mainly focused on the readings and provided less information and detailed analyses compare to the previous presentations. A few topics were discussed in fine details like Morphogenesis and Mathematics of Emergence, and Parametricism. Morphogenesis defines the creation of forms that evolve in space and over time. It is closely tied to evolution, and evolution is more than adaptation, it creates differentiation. Architecture constantly recycles. Design is one environment. Emergence ensures that there exists one system. We need a new strategy to creating architecture, not repeat the same mistakes as modernism. Modernism is fault in neglecting the links to people and context, and disregards setting, context and cultural implications. Parametricism commonly uses the employment of animation, simulation and form-finding tools, as well as parametric modelling and scripting. Modernism was founded on the concept of universal space. Parametricism differentiates fields. Parametric is a dominant, single style for avant-garde practice.
LikeLike
1) In our society, we have already seen our personal information being utilized and sold by companies to further their agenda. Could it be a possibility that such information might one day be given to parametric designers in order to optimize urban environments? would this be a good or bad thing?
2) What is the goal of parametric or computational design? to have full control over the system or to let the system make its own executive decisions? or does this differ from project to project?
3) Generally, strange forms are produced from new parametric design. fabrication of such objects seems to be the primary hurdle of making the designs a reality. once this is over come, what might be the next biggest design challenge in parametrics? aesthetics? authorship? politics?
LikeLike
1. Based on “Parametricism a new Global style for Architecture and Urban Design” Parametricism seems to be a synthetic form of mimicking nature. Why does parametric architecture feel natural yet synthetic, but also what is missing that makes certain elements of. Parametricism feel artificial?
2. Based on From Object to field, specific proportions of objects are dictated by classical form. This philosophy holds true, but is it possible for a form to be truly original
3. Based on Morphogenesis, How can we “evolve” the process of creating architecture that is evolutionary? Is it possible to create architecture that is a living form?
LikeLike
Parametricism creates an underlying order to a project, and when it was first used, it introduced geometries that could not have been imagined before it’s conception. But now as this practice has become widespread,, there is a certain quality that is lost due to the dilution of the same type of order. It has become boring, repetitive, and predictable. This it not completely our fault though; the human mind has its limit. To combat this we have created artificial intelligence that can further our research and interpretation of parametricism. More basic parametric forms should act as a foundation to order rather than a final product. an example on how this can be used is through incorporating order into blob architecture, which has been known to fail due to its lack of order. Overall I believe parametric forms can act as a complex “skeleton” that leads to a much more complex “organism”.
LikeLike
1. In “Parametric: A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design” On Zaha Hadid master we can see how the layering systems became a tectonic articulation that implies the fabric modulation. Do you think that the parametric design can be more articulate as practical design tool then theorical tool?
2. In Killian “The question of the underlying model and its impact on design” Emphasize that in the scripting programs are eventually creating similarly computational geometry, why do you think the computational geometry are looking similarly in CAD programs or in parametric modeling eventually?
3. In Allen’s “From Object to Field” He mentions how these cities are prototypical with smooth topography and these are connected with a larger network of organizations, why in digital design environments a lot people forgot about the topography or property line during the object process?
LikeLike
Parametricism as style, it relies on programs, algorithms, and computers to manipulate equations for design purpose, which the employment of animation, simulation and form-finding tools as well parametric modelling and scripting. Parametricism has create a good controversy within the overlapping or underlying different architectural systems. But on the down side the parametric design could reduce the employees at the different architecture firm, by minimizing the staff members because the y could generate and produce more drawings and design strategies in less time. Some of the articulations by scripting programs are normally used to imply different and innovating layering systems to generate a tectonic articulation that implies the fabric modulation which reflected a systematic modulation of tectonic in a Master Plan design by Zaha Hadid
LikeLike
1. From our very earliest lessons in architecture, we are taught the creation of form and design through the means of the boolean of objects. In Stan Allen’s “Object to Field”, the concept of field conditions is discussed in context of form saying that, “Field conditions are bottom-up phenomena: defined not by the overarching geometrical schemas but by intricate local connections. Form matters, but not so much the forms of things as the forms between things”. How is architecture redefined by the consideration that it occurs between space, rather than formed by an object?
2. Schumacher discusses five agendas in order to achieve a new style in terms of parametric paradigm, in short: differentiation in terms of object vs void, integration in order to deviate amplification rather than adaption, figuration in terms of parametric variations, capacity to respond and reconfigure, and the total integration of the built environment and the interior tectonics. Must all of these agendas be present in the design and adaption of style, or can the change occur with only parts of the paradigm?
3. Weinstock appears to place a significant amount of importance on time in relationship to the morphogenesis of form and its subsequent evolution. How dependent on tie is the ability of architecture to change and evolve, and what does this dependence mean, an object’s tectonic form and adaptability in a very physical and literal way, or the evolution of technology and improvements that occur as research develops?
LikeLike
The discussion that occurred as a result of the presentations in class today emphasized certain key ideas that were present in the readings and the topic; emergence, evolution, and centralization. Emergence is explained through math, science, and geometry, and their subsequent organization. Evolution was discussed as a process rather than a substance, which makes up the world. The components of said world continuously evolve and adapt in terms of differentiation. Centralization of design processes and aesthetics create a distinction between style and type of the architecture, subsequently defining the evolution of said architecture. Additionally the lecture opened up to the idea that our ability to think about and control matter is rapidly changing and evolving, and in turn changing the methods in which the change occurs.
LikeLike
1. Schumacher’s description of “parametricism’s superior capacity to articulate programmatic complexity” as parametricisim’s greatest gift to urbanism seems to ignore the site. How can parametrics, with all their design efficiencies, react with the site?
2. Can parametric design account for materiality in design?
3. In the example of Reynold’s artificial flock of birds, the program to simulate the flock required three simple rules, none of which said “form a flock”. It’s important for the designer to understand why , in this case, the birds form a flock in the first place. How can we ensure that designers are going to be responsible in remembering the why of what they are doing when they design parametrically?
LikeLike
Parametricism disengages from the more modernist view of architecture as objects in a field, rather choosing to engage the field itself as the architecture. This is a social and political move away from capitalistic societies where hierarchy rules. There is a notion of equality that runs through the concept of parametricism. Yet there is still a sense of individuality. Rather than part-to-whole relationships, parametric design functions on part-to-part relationships. Individual parts come together to form a larger intelligence in the design. However, no concept comes without its flaws. The largest is the way parametric architecture reacts with the site and its surrounding urban context. It seems for some, this is solved by expanding the field farther than it should, causing even more problems such as scale and materiality. Although elegant in design, Zaha Hadid’s architectural works compare poorly to precedent work. I think parametricism is a fair conceptual theory, but when applied, issues of scale and materiality damage its appeal societally.
LikeLike
1. In Stan Allen’s “From Object to Field”, he states that “Field conditions moves from the one toward the many: from individuals to collectives , from objects to fields.” This term states he variety of work that an architect has to do. When designing on a site, what type of field conditions/constraints can make or break your design?
2. In “A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design”, Schumacher says that there is two heuristics of parametric, taboos and dogmas. Heuristic is defined as “enabling a person to discover or learn something for themselves”. Are these “set and stone” characteristics of this new style of architecture or are they just personal preferences of Schumacher for him to assume certain values/characteristics ?
3. Based off of “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence”, Weinstock states how architecture has to evolve in order to become new. Things like technology acceleration can clearly make a building evolve faster, but what other factors could cause this evolution to occur quicker?
LikeLike
1. Allen discusses the organization of classical architecture and the grid/geometries they derive from. In many cases, classical architecture is aided by preexisting orders derived from nature and shape. Can we define classical architecture by simply dividing it into parts?
2. Kilian discusses the impact of computer based architectural design on architecture. He feels as though architects with modern technology forfeit aspects of creative freedom to a program on a screen. Is architecture being harmed or assisted by computers? Is technology helping or hindering our creative freedom?
3. Schumacher discusses the idea of parametric design and how it is a set of flexible components which has infinite variations. Can any of these infinite variations lead be considered new architecture? How will parametric design influence the future of architecture, especially in technology where formulas and patterns can easily be coded?
LikeLike
Parametric design imitates the perfection of natural formations. Repeatable codes, geometries, and simple shapes using programs such as grasshopper, is comparable to the formulas nature uses to create life. Some examples are the Fibonacci Sequence or the formation of the nautilus shell. The most complex forms can be created from the most basic of shapes or cells. Although parametric design can be very aesthetically pleasing, architects must be careful when overusing formulas and sequences in design. Very often, practicality is lost when designing for visual perfection. Zaha Hadid is a prime example of this. She is seen as a genius of design, using parametric techniques in many of her projects. However, she is often criticized for overlooking functionality for beauty. Modern technology and programs have given architects a new realm of creative freedom. However, before indulging in the effortlessness of repeatable commands like copy, paste, and array, we must first study nature the origin of parametric design.
LikeLike
1. In ” From Object to Field,” Stan Allen talks about the transformation of classical buildings over time and the effect these transformations, such as additions and repeated parts, have on the identity of the overall structure. He argues that these additions take away from the general identity of the original structure while the repeated parts keep it since they are just the building copied over. To what extent is this true and where doesn’t it apply?
2. In “The Question of the Model and Its Impact on Design,” Axel Kilian writes that the ability a model has to capture a design problem comes down to whether the design of the model is computable or just computation itself. If a model is just computation itself, is it just a replica of the computed design?
3. In “Parametricism: a New Global Style for Architecture,” Patrik Schumacher explains how Parametricism is the new and current architectural movement. What qualities set it apart from modernism and post-modernism?
LikeLike
Today’s group presented a number of topics from this week’s readings, based on Parametricism. They drew a comparison between Parametricism and modernism, in that Parametricism doesn’t repeat the mistakes of modernism, such as how modernism neglects the link between people and context to a setting and culture. From “Morphogenesis and the Mathematics of Emergence,” they mention how the Fibonacci Sequence and Golden Ratio are natural processes. They also mention how processes, not substance, is the fundamental constituent of the world. On the basis that rather than adaptation, evolution is differentiation, they say that the components of the world constantly evolve. From “The Computational Fallacy,” they derive the argument between Mechanical and Electronic. Thy argue that mechanical is primitive to electronic and that electronic offers complete control, as well as vast resources of intelligence. The drawback to this is that it makes it easier to forget things when we won’t have to with technology.
LikeLike
1. Sanford Kwinter wrote in his “The Computational Fallacy” that “the ‘mechanical’ and ‘electronic’, are by themselves not paradigms and do not represent distinct, successive, agonistic ‘age’ or irreducible worlds in collision”. He then points out that the order and chaotic can both exist in a matter in the same period. How can this exist theoretically and physically? How can the theory of different orientation of matter influence the theory of “spatial matrix”?
2. Zaha Hadid is a famous architect who greatly influenced the tendency of modern architecture. She widely uses parametricism in her architecture. We know from the article “Parametricism: A New Global Style for Architecture” by Schumacher that the idea of parametricism was firstly raised in the ancient Greek period as an advancing concept but soon abandoned because of the technical problem. Some avant-garde architects like Le Corbusier also show great interesting in parametricism but they are also constricted because of technology. Why parametricism is so important for avant-garde architecture? How does it evolve from ancient to contemporary?
3. Field logic is one of the themes in the book named “From Object to Field” wrote by Stain Allen. In his belief, “field conditions” are opposite to modernism, geometric are combined with algebra, and “background information must be as densely coded as the foreground image” in the digital image. How does the technology advance lead to the field system raised by Allen? Will it make urbanism more complex and uncertain, or simpler and more determinable?
LikeLike
Parametric Architecture is the name of a style of contemporary avant-garde architecture. This idea of parametric relies greatly on new technologies and modern techniques, converting the ancient ideal theories of automatic architecture design to a new operable process for architects in this era. Developed from Le Corbusier to Zaha Hadid, parametric architecture turning increasingly systematic, detailed while becoming more friendly to green hands. However, this structure of creating buildings raise one big issue that the method of “automatism” makes many new architects loss the ability of thinking, creating and design. They will easily immerse in the pleasant of automatic creating boxes with fantastic facades, magnificent appearance, and strong structure. Personally, I hold the thought that the designer is a job could never be replaced by artificial intelligent or new technology. Because the favor of human is unpredictable and undetectable, the architecture created by parametricism in this decades many be appealed to people today but not be attracted to people in the future. Only the building with history and thought will last long.
LikeLike
1. According to Kilian, the main contribution of the architect in computational design is in contextualizing the outcome and interpreting it in its use. What impacts might this have on the design process, and why is it becoming an increasingly popular practice?
2. Is the practice of borrowing models from other fields too common in architecture? What actions need to be taken for the user to overcome its origin (such as creative use and interpretation)?
3. In parametrics, how can we direct ourselves away from what Kwinter calls “simple-minded cliches”?
LikeLike
The field of parametric architecture shares many characteristics with a collage. A common practice in parametrics is to borrow from other computational disciplines, as well as looking for models to rehash for architectural design. In addition to this, parametric design uses repetition of single elements in order to form a new and unconventional facade/shape, making it a method that is not as novel to architecture as it appears. Parametric design is often inspired by nature, and although this is not unusual, it is the first to do so through the use of digital models . Unlike many previous methods of imitating nature, parametric architecture is able to do so in a truly organic way, with its algorithms generating as independently as nature itself. This characteristic of parametricism is applicable even to a discipline as unlikely as urbanism, which has been considered in the past to be the enemy of landscape/nature. Urban variables such as mass, spacing and directionality may be choreographed by scripted functions (Schumacher), generating modulation unable to be produced by an architect themselves.
LikeLike
1. In “The question of the Model and Its Impact on Design” the role for the designer is questioned. With computations increasing presence in design and model creation is it the designer’s responsibility to be aware of the limitations and benefits when creating models in a digital environment that need to translated to the physical?
2. In “The Computational Fallacy”, the embedded intelligence describes a continually reactivated memory for materials to transform their shapes, and other qualities and processes. Where does the fallacy lay, in the computer or the designer?
3. In “Parametricism”, we learn how urban typologies are bring imagined in a parametric lens. Will designers run the risk of over designing to the point of no uniqueness? In creating an entire urban fabric with the same technique, will things become bland and indifferent?
LikeLike
Bird murmurations are beautiful awe-inspiring sights to see. Their beauty which stems from coordinated instantaneous mass changes, where the entire flock moves faster than any individual birds reflexes. The scientific explanation of the murmuration is a scale-free correlation, with every shift being a critical translation. “The change in the behavioral state of one animal affects and is affected by that of all other animals in the group, no matter how large the group is. Scale-free correlations provide each animal with an effective perception range much larger than the direct interindividual interaction range, thus enhancing global response to perturbations (Giorgio Parisi)”. Relating to architecture, one thinks of the part to part vs. the part to whole relationships created in parametric vs conventional design techniques. Architecture is generally more aesthetically pleasing when these relationships are present and prevalent. Building components need to work together in harmony as the birds do while murmurating.
LikeLike
1) In Allen’s ‘From Object to Field’ the Mosque at Cordoba is championed for its spacial quality in that, despite additions and changes in purpose over the past eight centuries, the space has been able to endure. Given the current trend in the United States for repurposing land to mixed use, must new architectures hold repurposing their buildings in high regard during the design process?
2) Schumacher’s ‘Parametricism’ touches on the idea that man, or the architect knows too much. Can architects remove bias from their design without help from a set of parameters defined within a digital space?
3) Weinstock demands a more mathematically based emergence tectonic for better legibility in the construction and engineering process. Which other forms of gratuitous/pseudoscientific forms of design tectonics are being used and what can we do to change them?
LikeLike
Parametricism breaks down the hierarchy (and symmetry) of design in that one geometry is not derived from some “master form.” It treats each input part as having an effect on the whole in ways that typical design couldn’t hope to achieve. Parametrically designed buildings by design are more generic than literary/geometrically focused ones, thus allowing them to be flexible in their reuse; a sustainable practice architects should hone in on. Some might say the designs that result are too generic and are nothing more than an ego trip for the architect. Parametrics respect the natural forces that govern the world (emergence, etc.) and have a place next to the golden ratio when concerning whether a building is objectively beautiful or not. While the architect is further removed from the design process, they must exercise great care in which parameters govern the affected result.
LikeLike
1. In Schumacher’s article, he mentioned “Parametricism can only exist via the continuous advancement and sophisticated appropriation of computational geometry. ” If algorithms don’t l deliver as some parametric enthusiasts hope or expect, will there be mileage in elevating parametric discourse to suitably mysterious realms?
2. According to Schumacher, he said that “what confronts us is a new style rather than merely a new set of techniques.”Does parametric modeling provide us with the ability to create architectures for specific climates and contexts, or is it limited to deriving interesting geometry?
4. According to Kilian, when we constantly capture external phenomena through models and research, the beauty of external phenomena disappears. So during the design process, does it make us feel closer or further away from the abstract concept? When buildings are completely abstract or state of the art, how to make our buildings become more interesting?
LikeLike
After listening to the presentation, I have a better understanding on parametricism, which is currently a popular trend in regards to modern twenty-first-century architecture. In my opinion, the key to parameterization is to establish associations, and the form of the skin is associated with internal mechanisms or the external environment. The differentiation of the facade reflects the internal differentiation, such as functional space, mechanical mode or external light environment. Considering the domain rather than the ideology of the object is a decent design approach, and it strives to incorporate a large number of site conditions.
LikeLike