|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
usarender
millennium club
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:11 pm Post subject: Organic Architecture - in need of definitions |
    |
|
It would be interesting to define and discuss what is "ORGANIC ARCHITECTURE".
Organic architecture, one could say, is one which responds directly to the functional aesthetics of man and nature in such a way that it's corresponding form translates a sense of spatial and material connection to the organic properties as seen in nature.
This need not be a direct translation into organic forms as we see in nature.
But it precludes the need to allow the inherent functions to be an integral part of the form, and these two to respond to the natural environment and it's elements in such a way that the architecture creates a dialog with nature.
This dialog can be achieved by responding to a stream, to the sounds of nature, to the forms, shapes and colors around it, in such a way that the architecture embodies some sense of place in the environment that is connected in a sense to the timeless forms and orders of nature.
Our architecture being inserted in a completely natural surrounds can respond in a less conflicting manner then in the city. It can create a more direct connection and respond in a more direct way.
In the city and in urban centers, our architecture must respond to the built environment, to urban issues, to other buildings blocking or allowing light, to human corridors and paths of movement, to the views and winds of the city and the operating mechanisms set in place to provide the mechanical environments we so learn to live with on a daily basis. Thus, in a convoluted world of tensions and conflicting sources beaconing attention, there is less space for a direct harmonious link, as the crowded world of urban design brings in the age of the machine, the materials of the city and the aesthetics of the iconic architecture and "keash" architectural designs that evoke a sense of competitive expression. Thus, the architecture must compete with signs, billboards, the urban tissue and movement, with other architecture and becomes lost in a sea of expression and commercial messages.
In my view, to enable an understanding of "organic" architecture, one must study oriental society, philosophy and means of living and also the relationship between Western and Eastern values and culture.
It would be interesting to see alternate points of view on this subject and how we can better define "organic architecture" and how it applies to the modern concepts of design and architecture.
Last edited by usarender on Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:22 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I just wonder. that indicate architecture can be programmed, A lot of condisions, if's and then's structured with a core of recursive delivery. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
millennium club
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:43 pm Post subject: The are roads and means |
|
|
It is the programming of our mind and mode of reflective direction of energy that inspires our creative side to produce the forms that match our creative mental experience. Thus, a certain programming of the mind is needed, and of the thought process, in order to reach a level of mental conditioning and thus what you call a "recursive delivery". This can be recursive, if not combined with proper creativity, and need not be based completely on external conditions, but rather on mental conditioning.
This precludes the need for a greater sense of spatial notions of integrity, as shown previously, so lacking in our modern mental conditioning and programming.
Now architecture is not programed with "if" and "then" or "go to" as in the computer language, but some programming certainly will benefit the creative process and perhaps one day we can unite this creative intelligent design with computer programming, so that the two can work in unity, if this is what you are seeking. There are roads and means to achieve this that you are aspiring to obtain. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Architecture as such, the houses roads and contryside , is newer the less ,ade of a lot of bricks, masses of concrete and a small piece of thinking, not just how it make most profit, but also truth to the real issue, make it cheap.
Now if you want to do god a faviour, build god a house , for architects that ought to be an issue, atlease architects shuld install cheap nice houses, fit for their times, that mean method, material and technology.
Programming allready is a great deal about it, --- it's difficult fo me not to reconise a lot of programming allready, building houses in the old fasion way, acting it by computer. Recursive computing easily could compute and create the ´data, to cut for you the most smooth assembled building structure --- my argument that you maybe didn't realise was, that we been there, done that, I myself as boatsbuilder had to master all these assembly methods, cut them on a bandsaw ---- but the grains the very sad Pine , or is it even Pine, the chip wood sheets and the stupid universal fitting, could be , could be today, not the highly profesional craftsmanship , and then, then what about making it all to sheets material, form the curved beam the very woods assembly, timbers works, in 3dh, ---- or do you brag about a high degree of mastering the middleage woods crafters technikes , all full core Oak Super quality Timbers ?
I don't think so, so why not think about this new way to put things together, using the computer generate the actural buildable framework in skilled details, and forget about why everything obviously isn't heading that direction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
millennium club
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:47 am Post subject: A Higher Order of Thinking? |
|
|
So boat building is a higher order and precludes the need for good architecture? Or boat building speaks of an order higher then architecture, or even god for that matter?
Is this doing the greater favor, to build cheap houses? A greater favor for man then a god could do? Are houses eternal? Do they solve the mystery of the Ages? Can they save our soul?
Architecture a small piece of thinking, a pile of bricks?
I have built my own houses, don't know about others. I am not into building boats, by the way. And if boats are a higher order then architecture, and building cheap houses are a higher order then god, then I don't know what is left of how we think.
Now how is computing cutting a structure more related to architecture then designing and building done by an architect? How are structural systems more relevant then architecture? Architecture a small piece of thinking in comparison?
Does mastery of the craft of wood preclude the need for a greater solution that can replace sheet metal? Can the greatest understanding of sheet metal liberate us truly from the craftsmanship of wood?
Can using the computer to assemble our sheet cut assemblies of structural systems be a higher order then architecture, or anything else for that matter? I don't think so.
So, now why should a belief in creative intelligence be the road of departure for agreement up to this point?
Can technology solve all our ills and better humanize our thinking, make us better citizens of the world? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think boatsbuilding is a good platform --- you must know and pracis all the known assembling methods, know the rules for overlap allowance , yes some of the examples above is not allowed in ships as the assembly piece weaken the beam , but in boatsbuilding remember, there the planks and timbers are not allway's strait, even then you must master these, have a further knowleage of the materials, the structure forces , the design and how it behave , how it could be made to go faster what the most stable form are compared the chaotic forces that decide the stability curve beside, the drafting parts of it gone 3D since the 17' century.
Try ask a house do what a boat are capable of. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
millennium club
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 5:01 pm Post subject: Why not boats? |
|
|
Then why don't you design boats, using the same design system we have been developing? 3dh made with foam and over this, layers of high strength carbon fiber reinforced epoxies or other materials?
Why are you wasting time? It could be an excellent platform for it to be applied then to construction technology. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
millennium club
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:32 am Post subject: Good Job |
|
|
Great job on the boat building post!
All we need to do now is translate the new construction technique we have been exploring to this system. STEP 1.
STEP 2
Translate this to the building industry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just as a note to ;
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cyber-Boat/
There are several of these Cyber-Boat Yahoo groups , some deal with a few of the more tradisional lapstrake designs ,even these are new "old" designs , that mean designs I build and tested and drawn not as copies of other existing boats, but within the design concept of particular boat types. Then think about it --- a lapstrake hull is where the planks don't meet edge to edge but overlap , and then emagine how you must maneage to get the exact measures from the unfolded planks that form a zig-zag or sawteeth profile in front view --- not the useal smooth polymesh surface but a surface that follow none of the useal rules ; now how to unfold that ???
But they are, this trivial problem was solved with Cyber-Boat beside one small issue you need to check the pictures to reconise ; I also experimentes and succesed with an idear to replace the intire aft or front end of a boat, with a gross metal fitting that replaced the aft or front end of the hull in a way , so all you had to do to build a dinghie, was to screw the ready unfolded planks unto a ready made metal end --- the front and aft end of a hull, is allway's the greatest challance, the most difficult job, the most time comsuming, and now all that was solved with a small but hands-on very practic solution ----- look at the Aluminium metal ends, now you also know why I had to teach myself how to weld Aluminium.
Anyway in the files section you will find the unfolded panels and a 3dh structural system for two of the designs, in fact there are a 17 meter highly advanced combined sail/motor design that you are welcome to scale up or down, and at the same time the framework are scaled up or down, ready to build and a very attractive design that made an impac on the other designs of it's time ----- see these designs to was offered free, while boats building realy is not that good a buisness as you mighe think, but I gurantie these design are new thought, the methods advanced and the use of computer cutting edge also back then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
millennium club
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:09 pm Post subject: Lessons to learn |
|
|
Thanks for the explanation on the boats forum pc. Not that it is my field, to the contrary. But I could learn a lesson or two from this boat building and maybe see a greater connection to architecture as the ideas progress.
Now, about organic architecture, I love to hear new thoughts on this, ideas, visions, and definitions, examples. I plan to post some on this myself eventually. I see you did post some thoughts on this in the other topic, and I posted a few comments on the same. It would be interesting to see other view points as well. Any comments are appreciated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes I seen that, and offcaurse I will give my thought of this, acturly I think I has allready, but then let's see if it's the same when I come to that.
Just remember I left boatsbuilding many year ago , there simply is no bread in building nice small wooden boats, and design programs for them --- well I guess it is easier to torture an allready existing drawing into something that don't violate copyright, --- but all in all there simply are no calls for these anymore, and today they would also be expensive to expensive compared their petrochemical counterpars. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ---- let me please add, that I think it would have worked , with this metal ends concept ; to build a hull then all required would be the wooden planks and these metal ends, ends that would survive to build several new boats when the wood been vorn out , it was like the plans was contained in the boat ends, but still then it wouldn't be "real" wooden boats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TLWalkerAIA
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
Posts: 129
Location: Seattle Washington, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:56 pm Post subject: What's wrong? |
|
|
Bluntly, nothing important is being discussed here at the present. Look out at the world, at what is happening and bring it in here, let us hold it up to examination. Light the torches, challenge the intellect, summon the spirit and celebrate with passion. We have important work to do here.
_________________
Terry L. Walker, AIA
Terry L. Walker, Architects
terry.walker20@verizon.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
usarender
millennium club
Joined: 01 May 2004
Posts: 1258
Location: San Diego, Ca
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:37 pm Post subject: ...lost in a sea of issues... |
|
|
There were some interesting points being made..
| Richard Haut wrote: | there is a difference between architecture for the military and defensive structures.
historically the power of defensive structures did represent a display of power, a representation of local strength - and it resulted in some wonderful structures. One of France's favourite architects was not an architect at all, but a military engineer: Vauban.
interesting to see the development down this way from the 10th. Century Merovingian defences (like the Keep at Roquebrune), the very pretty 16th. Century Fort on Mont Alban, through to Vauban's work (17th. Century) the late 19th. Century defensive curtain system of Serré de Rivière (hardly known today), through to the 20th. Century Maginot Line (http://monsite.orange.fr/richardhaut/page5.html).
All are defensive structures.
Buildings for the military on the other hand had a distinctive and standardized pattern, reflecting what MX says about cost considerations, and many are being re-used or demolished, such as the large area of the Diables Bleues which has been mostly knocked down to extend the university campus in east Nice.
My experience of British architecture for the military of the mid to late 20th. Century was that most of it was dreary as anything. The bean-can Nissan huts were still being used by the RAF years after WWII, and the only time that I saw a major munitions store (400 acres) it consisted primarily of earthworks with blast-doors. (It also had no munitions in it which I suspect is why it was so secret).
The only exceptions that I can think of are the Knightsbridge Barracks (designed by Sir Basil Spence) and the Royal Horse Artillery Barracks in St. Johns Wood. |
...lost in a sea of various issues... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
