Concepts to Forms
A continuation of the Framework for Architectural Design series
Introduction
The previous essay A Framework for Architectural Design began a search for a design methodology focused on generating a spatial experience with impact. The investigation began by identifying the requirements for a well understood origins which would set a design trajectory that applies three different elements: theme, atmosphere, and narrative, to converge towards a desired emotionally charged architecture. In this essay, it was identified that the theme unifies the project through a single design language; atmospheres extract emotional reactions through scripted moments; and the narrative tells a story by acknowledging the site’s history while also giving meaning to the architecture by building a relationship to the occupant. Through deliberate design, architecture is focused on creating the spatial experience for an emotional response.
This essay continues the previous methodological approach further along the design process to examine ways to transform the concept, which is an abstract idea, into in a physical form. The conversion of an abstract idea into the physical world is literally the birth of an idea. The intention to create an architecture that can extract an emotional reaction through a specific sense of place remains the focus. Here we contemplate issues in the modern approach to form finding and suggest three alternatives to the typical form generation method. It should be noted that the contemplation for a methodology and approach to architecture design is intended to serve as a series of guiding principles and lighthouses along an uneven coastline. Design is not a straightforward process and there are often detours and challenges along the way. These detours can bog down a project and cause the project to lose momentum; however, they can also be valuable bursts of creativity. Understandably, there is no single way to sail an ocean nor walk through a forest and the investigation into methodologies of the architectural process are likewise not intended to serve as a singular road. Rather, it is intended that the following examination gives a perspective as a series of guiding beacons which first reduces the amount of struggle found in developing a design; second, improves the design process to proceed in ebbs and flows rather than a convoluted pathway of backtracking and dead-end detours; third, proceeds away from a modern approach to architectural design based on boxy forms serving a functional program; and finally, examines preconceived notions of how we think so that we can open our minds to new possibilities, opportunities, and creativity which will impact how we design and what we design.
Form and Order
Modernism developed during the 20th century and approached form generation as an organization of rectilinear geometry. The use of straight lines for horizontal and vertical planes was radically different from what came before and became a distinguishing feature. Modernism further defined itself through new materials, such as steel, concrete, and glass which resulted in a reductionism of “form follows function” coined by Louis Sullivan. This meant that the purpose of a building should be the starting point for the design. Along with the automobile and the explosive growth of suburb living for the “American dream”, form and order in architecture became more about economics and efficiencies than about livability. Cities were designed for moving cars and buildings for bylaws rather than people.
In the latter half of the 20th century, post-modern architecture emerged as a reaction to the ignorance of context attributed to modernism by suggesting that architecture consider existing architecture rather than impose a visionary utopia of the international style.[i] Although post-modernism incorporates principles of design that focus on the local people and landscape, many modern ideas persist within the design process. The notion of using “form finding” and “massing studies” to generate the shape of the building is a decidedly modern approach to suit the architecture to the program that results in a blocky architecture and a notion of solid buildings.[ii] This global vernacular is in friction with an overwhelming interest in deconstructing the barriers between inside and outside and semi-outdoor as well as year-round exterior living. Design can have a critical influence on a person’s well-being, but we continue to design buildings based on our precursor’s methods as a basis for form generation.
Buildings designed to meet code by-laws and organized around functional use instead of livability and the improvement of well-being is further bolstered by technological advancements in computer simulation and artificial intelligence. Parametric design and optimization threaten to turn a creative endeavour into a black box machine where all we do is feed a computer with raw data and the system determines a building based on “optimal” criteria.[iii] This is largely in response to sustainability initiatives but architecture as a profession is fundamentally about creating spaces that improve people’s lives. It is therefore important that we find ways to engage with others and the human dimension, even if it is less than perfect.
The Empty Place and Narrative
Emptiness is an important element in creating a sense of place both for the body and mind. A previous essay emptiness discussed the struggle between balancing liveliness of a scene and allowing enough room for the imagination to roam. Regarding form generation, emptiness is important to avoid rigid programming and provide flexibility for the user to decide how the space is use as well as to give a sense of openness and lightness to the structure. Emptiness in architecture can be traced back more than 300 years to the Muromachi period in Japan when several historic figures began refining towards a simple aesthetic. Ultimate simplicity with the inclusion of emptiness became a prevalent aesthetic affecting tea ceremonies, flower displays, paintings, theater art, and architecture.[iv]
The Japanese notion of emptiness is strongly connected to the notion of ma (間) which is an interval of space and time that gives shape to the whole. Beyond the three dimensions of space, it also includes time in the fourth dimension. This notion to associate space and time together for a continuity of spatial and temporal flows enables empty spaces to be filled with possibilities but cannot be experienced without acknowledging the passing of time. Empty space can often be identified as a courtyard, atrium, sky well or double height space which can be external, internal or an intermediate space. As opposed to the western ideology, these empty places are not designed to give a sense of grandeur nor solely as lighting devices, but to provide openness for possibilities and fundamentally a space for the mind.
The generation of concept and form should consider emptiness as the heart of the project that connects pathways and narratives, provides a resting place for the mind, and making connections across it. The empty space can often be identified as a courtyard, atrium, sky well or double height space that is external, internal or an intermediate space but is better considered as just simply a designated empty void space; however, the empty place does not necessarily need to be a central but can also exist and be successful on the peripheral.
To design the empty space, it may be prudent to consider two narrative pathways in the project. The first is the human pathway and describes how one enters the site and proceeds towards, but not necessarily through, the void. The pathway should have several framed views, changing scenery, and points of interest along the way so that the entirety of the story cannot be read from the beginning but is revealed in chapters. When arriving at the empty place, the pathway may end in a framed view for contemplation or may continue around the void to other inhabited spaces with their own views and sense of place. The intention of this path is to set out the narrative for the occupant through the architecture ensuring a connection to the empty space both physically and mentally. The second narrative is for the mind. It can be drawn analogously to the flow of air through the project beginning at the edge of the site and moving through the void to another edge of the site. The air movement both opens the architecture to natural ventilation but more importantly provides openness for the mind to enter and fill the emptiness. These two narratives may share similar pathways or may be distinctly separate but should be conceptually and diagrammatically distinct enough to satisfy both physical and non-physical narratives.
A Top-Down Approach
In architecture, the physical manifestation and form finding often begins with the programming layout. Done in plan, the blocking out of space delineates rooms with the position of walls serving to delineate use. Program layout often begins at the entrance and follows the same movement of the occupant through the building and from the ground up. It is an interesting detail that while construction of any building also proceeds from the ground up, the structural design is from the top-down. The reason structural engineers design this way is that they need to follow the force of gravity. It would be impossible to accurately size, detail, and design a column without knowing how heavy the load it is required to support. Similarly, there is no way to size a foundation without knowing the weight of the building. This is why structural engineers begin at the top and work their way down.
Is there a possibility to design architectural form from the top-down? The roof line is one of the most defining attributes to the character of architecture. Whether it is a pitched roof, a shed roof, or sweeps along a gentle curve, the shape of the roof impacts every elevation and determines the total shape of the building. It can transform a mundane box into an expressive structure or give character to and otherwise lifeless building. The roofline’s importance to the character of the building cannot be understated.
Suppose that the design began by applying theme and concept to the roofline first to ensure the proper architectural expression. Subsequently the building can be sculpted below. Certainly, the designer must be cognisant of the program to ensure certain functions have adequate head room and that the economics are not disassociated, but such a methodology would allow the theme to directly inform the outcome of the architecture through a thematic approach and reduce the proliferation of boxy architecture. The program is demoted from the primary driver to a supporting constraint and the roof becomes a canopy which drapes or is suspended over the landscape providing a light and temporal sheltered space. It also further removes the formalities of modernism found in symmetry, form, and efficiency, and perhaps opens possibilities to create a stronger narrative for the occupant. A top-down approach is perhaps best begun with the creation of sketch models as an exploration of design ideas. Sketch modeling allows the design to proceed in the three dimensions and generally inherits a lightness due to the commonly used modeling materials being paper, cardstock, or foam core. Unlike program layout which is a formal ordering of spaces largely completed through plan, sketch modeling is somewhat of a sculptural process with results that can be directly compared to the intended theme.
Light as an Operator
Historically form generation is the formal organization of program delineated by walls. This makes characteristically enclosed spaces due to the large number of walls and partitions which must subsequently be dissected with incisions to reopen the structure for entry and to re-connect with the outside light through windows, doorways, patios, balconies, terraces, and gardens. The re-opening of an enclosed form to allow light in is the common practice; however, it is also possible to consider a reverse methodology. Instead of beginning with a dark building box and cutting holes to introduce light we could begin with an open structure where light is omnipresent and then add elements that cast shadows and subsequently begin to provide shelter.
Suppose that the site is enclosed in light box. The sides of the box illuminate the interior and the site with a soft glow from the perimeter, but the top is completely black and no light shines from above. In such a scenario, light is introduced only from the sides and there are no shadows cast on the ground because there is no overhead light. Although not required, it is possible that the site includes consideration of an empty place as well as a roof canopy created through the top-down approach. The task of laying out spaces and program then becomes an exercise in introducing diffusers, reflectors, or solid screens to control but not eliminate the amount of light and shadow entering different regions. The control of light through diffused surfaces, scattering surfaces, and opaque surfaces is different from solely walls which are solid partitions. Instead, semi-transparent screens aid in creating different atmospheres and reacts to changing daylight conditions. “Beauty lies not in the thing itself, but in the interaction between light and shadow created by the object.”[v] By considering light only from the side we are consciously directing openness and closure through light and shadow to vary in gradients and along various pathways from the exterior into the interior. This places a stronger emphasis on form generation that responds to lighting and making connections between the outside and the interior. As well, this methodology promotes a freer plan with greater flexibility and less defined program, suggests to a higher degree of natural ventilation, and alludes to a relationship between public and private spaces through light.
Final Thoughts
The transformation of a concept into form generation can proceed through various methodologies. These three possible methodologies: The empty place and narrative, a top-down approach, and light as an operator, are three different processes that can also be considered as sequential steps of a single scheme. The intention is to explore possible design methods which minimizes the amount of struggle found in developing a concept into a form. This is to improve the design process to proceed in ebbs and flows, to move away from a modern approach to architectural design based on boxy forms serving a functional program and instead create an architecture of emotional impact. How we think opens our minds to new possibilities, opportunities, and creativity which will impact how we design and what we design.
References
[i] Venturi, Robert, Scott Denise Brown, and Steven Izenour. Learning from Las Vegas. The MIT Press, 1972.
[ii] Mari, Anthony Di, and Nora Yoo. Operative Design: A Catalogue of Spatial Verbs. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: BIS Publishers, 2018.
[iii] Gibson, Eleanor. “Sidewalk Labs CREATES Machine-Learning Tool for Designing Cities.” Dezeen, October 20, 2020. https://www.dezeen.com/2020/10/20/delve-sidewalk-labs-machine-learning-tool-cities/.
[iv] Menegazzo, Rossella, and Stefania Piotti. WA the Essence of Japanese Design. London: Phaidon, 2014.
[v] Tanizaki Junichirō, Harper, T. J., & Seidensticker, E. (2019). In praise of shadows. London: Vintage Classics.
