event_space

ASSIGNMENT 3: EVENT_SPACE – PHASE TWO – “Zoom In – Pan out”

ASSIGNED: Monday 11 April 2011
DUE: Monday 18 April 2011
DELIVERABLES: Topo model, Scale study models (1”=2’) white board/Strathmore, Journey Section Drawing (40”)

“The skin of the earth (is) a dynamic materiality, and the inhabited space the second skin.” -Raoul Bunschoten

Introduction:
For this final assignment, students for Phase Two are asked to complete the following exercises:
-Topo model of journey: A topographic model out of chipboard that roughly corresponds to the underlay used in the Phase one analytical drawing.
-Scale study models at ½”=1’ of 3 monuments: choose from the monuments you defined and explored in your analytical drawing and identify those 3 that have the most spatial potential – how can you now think architecturally to translate a moment in your journey to a more general spatial/landscape condition? Think about the nature of the site you are translating – is it an object in the landscape? Is it a moment where the ground plane or infrastructure changes? As with your drawing, what moments of tectonic change, overlap and boundary are evoked in these spaces? What are the relationships between 2d surfaces (field condition) and 3d space (site) ?
-Journey section drawing: Using your topo models, take elevation photographs of your models. Upload the images into Photoshop/Illustrator and scale them such that your 3 monuments correspond roughly to ½”=1’ of your paper studies. You will need to shrink/distort your path in order for the drawing not to exceed 40” in length. Once you have established a horizon line for your section, import images from your journeys to collage into the section as views/context. Finally, do CAD based drawings over the 3 monuments, thinking about them in section. How can these moments be now viewed as spatial projections that anticipate other programs and functions such as projection, seating, circulation, viewing etc.? Think of the spaces in terms of both their structural and surface properties. This drawing will serve as the basis for your installation proposal in the Queen Theater.

Evaluation Criteria
In addition to the general grading rubric and criteria outlined in your syllabus, this assignment will be evaluated using the following guidelines:
-Use of the tools.
-Development of the models from initial studies to final version.
-Degree of completion of the assignment.

A Note About Time Management:
As with all of your design studios, there is an understanding that a certain number of hours need to be committed to your projects outside of studio. Please work with your partners to schedule the most effective times when you can work together outside studio hours.

Timeline Through the End of the Semester:
· Monday, April 11th: Finish Crit of Drawings, Begin Topo and Monument models.
· Wednesday, April 13th: Work in Studio – Continue work on Topo and Monument models.
· Friday, April 15th: Work in Studio /Photo models /work on Journey section drawing <<JB out>>
· Monday, April 18th: Phase Two / Enter Final Phase / Work in Studio
· Wednesday, April 20th: Work in Studio
· Friday, April 22nd: Reading Day – NO CLASSES
· Monday, April 25th: Work in Studio
· Wednesday, April 27th: Work in Studio / Final Presentation Boards
· Friday, April 29th: Final Presentation Boards
· Monday, May 2nd: FINAL REVIEW
. Friday, May 6th: CD of all assignments due in my mailbox.

Assignments

April 13, 2011

Leave a comment

ASSIGNMENT 3: EVENT_SPACE – PART ONE: “Monuments of Bryan” (script +mapping)

ASSIGNED: Friday 25 March
DUE: Friday 8 April
DELIVERABLES: One 30” x40” Board

Robert Smithson, “Monuments of Passaic,” 1967

“By drawing a diagram, a ground plan of a house, a street plan to the location of a site, or a topographic map, one draws a “logical two dimensional picture.” A “logical picture” differs from a natural or realistic picture in that it rarely looks like the thing it stands for. It is a two dimensional analogy or metaphor – A is Z. The Non-Site is a three dimensional logical picture that is abstract, yet it represents an actual site. It is by this dimensional metaphor that one site can represent another site, which does not resemble it – this The Non-Site… Between the actual site …and The Non-Site itself exists a space of metaphoric significance. It could be that “travel” in this space is a vast metaphor.”

Robert Smithson, “A Provisional Theory of Non-Sites,” (1968)

Robert Smithson, “Monuments of Passaic,” 1967

“Range Of Convergence: The range of convergence between Site and Non-Site consists of a course of hazards, a double path made up of signs, photographs, and maps that belong to both sides of the dialectic at once.”

Robert Smithson, “Dialectic of Site and Non-Site” (1968)

Introduction:
For this final assignment, students for Phase One are asked to do a site documentation and visual analysis of a journey from College Station to the Queen Theater in Bryan TX. Using Robert Smithson’s essay as a guide, teams are to develop their own “script,” – a narrative tour of their journeys. The stories should be based upon observations gathered from the trip and incorporated into an analytical map. This script will form the basis of an analytical drawing that incorporates text (script) photographs, site (topo) analysis and notation, and diagramming of selected “monuments” along the way. You are asked to use a combination of tools to complete your drawing: video, photography, drawing, Photoshop and Illustrator. Keep in mind the advantages and limits of each tool. This drawing should reflect a synthesis of your data and observations, but also extrapolate a spatial understanding of the site. Be both documentary and speculative.

Some thoughts to keep in mind:

use existing topographic maps as your underlay and consider the following operations as you manipulate it: superimposition, montage, scaling, splicing, re-combination, overlap, cutting, tracing.
identify and interrogate areas of material and historical ambiguity – zones that cannot be simply defined a either man made or natural, but some hybrid of both.
If tectonics is defined in relation to structure and material, what are the moments of tectonic change, overlap and boundary on the site? Where does nature end and building begin?
What parts of the site are you choosing to represent? What parts are you omitting or editing out?

Evaluation Criteria
In addition to the general grading rubric and criteria outlined in your syllabus, this assignment will be evaluated
using the following guidelines:

Evidence (documentation) of time spent “in the field.”
Use of the tools (photography, video, hand and computer drawing, Illustrator).
Development of the drawings from initial studies to final version.
Degree of completion of the assignment.

A Note About Time Management:
As with all of your design studios, there is an understanding that a certain number of hours need to be committed to
your projects outside of studio. At a minimum, it is expected that you will spend roughly 14 hours for combined in
and out of class work.

Projected Timeline:
· Friday, March 25th: Site Visit – Introduction of Assignment 3
Reading: Robert Smithson, “A Tour of the Monuments of Passaic,” (1967)
Reading: Giuliana Bruno Atlas of Emotion Journeys in Art, Architecture and Film, pp. 234-245
· Monday, March 28th: Work in Studio – Discuss Reading. <<Architecture Lecture Series, Jose Oubrerie>>
· Wednesday, March 30th: Work in Studio
· Friday, April 1st: Work in Studio
· Monday, April 4th: Work in Studio <<Architecture Lecture Series, Benjamin Ball>>
· Wednesday, April 6th: Work in Studio
· Friday, April 8th: PROJECT DUE –pin up

Assignments

April 8, 2011

Leave a comment

ASSIGNMENT 1.3: DIAGRAM DIARY

Texas A&M University Spring 2011
ARCH 206 – 501 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN II
Professor Jasmine Benyamin
ASSIGNMENT 1.3: DIAGRAM DIARY
DUE: Friday 4 March 2011
DELIVERABLES: One 11”x17” Board

Bernard Tschumi, Fireworks at the Parc de la Villette, 1992

Introduction:
In Assignment 1.2, you were asked to develop a 5-minute video that captured the complex relationships of
human inhabitation. In pairs of two, you were designated a “typical user” of Langford A. Your task was to
create a space/time sequence that addressed their experiences of the building.
For assignment 1.3 – as with your first assignment – you are asked to generate a series of diagrams that
address organizational issues related to the physical building itself. However, in the case of this exercise,
you will need to understand and convey these issues from the particular perspective of the user. In addition,
you will need to address non-physical issues related to the environmental conditions relative to each user’s
interface with the building. Remember that the emphasis here is to understand the building beyond its
functional capacity, and more as a narrative in space-time.
Your drawings will develop an abstract visual narrative through drawing, just as your previous assignment
did through filming. As with Assignment 1.1, you are asked here to develop a drawing that addresses both
mental and optical phenomena….USE/OCCUPATION, STRUCTURE/INFRASTRUCTURE,
SPACE/EVENT, SIGHT/SOUND, MOVEMENT /FLOW, ACTUAL /VIRTUAL. Draw from the
knowledge you acquired from your previous research to develop your drawings.

Evaluation Criteria
In addition to the general grading rubric and criteria outlined in your syllabus, this assignment will be
evaluated using the following guidelines:
-Incorporation of knowledge gained from previous assignments.
-Development of the drawings from the videos.
-Degree of completion of the assignment, relative to feedback given in desk crits.
A Note About Time Management:
As with all of your design studios, there is an understanding that a certain number of hours need to be
committed to your projects outside of studio. At a minimum, it is expected that you will spend 14 hours for
combined in and out of class work.

Projected Timeline:
Monday 21 February: Introduction of Assignment 1.3
Wednesday 23 February: Work in Studio
Friday 25 February: Work in Studio/portfolios
Monday 28 February: Ila Beka and Louise Lemoine visit / work on portfolios
Tuesday 1 March: Portfolios Due
Wednesday 2 March: Work in Studio
Friday 4 March: Assignment 1.3 Due – -Screening “The International”/Introduction of Assignment 2.

Assignments

February 21, 2011

Leave a comment

ASSIGNMENT 1.2: VIDEO DIARY

ASSIGNED: Monday 7 February

DUE: Wednesday 16 February 2011

DELIVERABLES: One 5-minute video of Langford A

Bernard Tschumi, Advertisements for Architecture (1979)

“Can one attempt to make a contribution to architectural discourse by relentlessly stating that there is no space without event, no architecture without program?”

-Bernard Tschumi, “Spaces and Events”(1983)

“Architecture is defined by the actions it witnesses as much as by the enclosure of its walls.”

-Bernard Tschumi, “Advertisements for Architecture,”(1979)

Introduction:

A recurring theme in the writings of Bernard Tschumi is the association of “spaces” with “events.” Tschumi consistently argues that space and event – while they may be mutually exclusive terms – are nevertheless interdependent. Spaces are always qualified by the events that occur in them, and events are always qualified by the spaces they occupy.

As previously noted in your syllabus, the overall aim of the studio is to develop an understanding of architecture as a dialogue between people and space – as a story or narrative about built space. In your first exercise, you were asked to think about architecture in a diagrammatic way; using this methodology, you generated an abstract visual narrative that addressed types of organization – spatial, programmatic, structural etc.

For this second exercise, you are asked to think about these organizational types within the context of an individual building – this time using video as your narrative tool. By incorporating video into your thinking about architectural space, you are encouraged to capture and convey Langford A as a building in time.

In teams of two and using the video editing software Adobe Premier, you are asked to develop a 5-minute video that captures the complex relationship of humans to their inhabited space. Using Langford A as your site, you are asked to explore the relationships “typical” users have with the building. Specifically, you are asked to shoot your video from the perspective of the following nine “characters”:

Jorge Vanegas, Dean of the College of Architecture
Ward Wells, Interim Head, Department of Architecture
“Bob,” an undergraduate B.E.D. student.
“Jane,” a Master of Architecture degree candidate.
Kevin Lutkenhaus, ITS Helpdesk supervisor.
Hala Gibson, Administrative Assistant, Department of Architecture
Paula Bender, Coordinator of Learning Resources, TRC
Peter Lang, Associate Professor, Department of Architecture
“M” from housekeeping/maintenance.

All the named individuals involved have been notified of the project. Keep in mind that, while the project may involve a certain degree of “shadowing” and surveillance, please do not pester your characters and impinge on their privacy. Please introduce yourselves and explain that you are doing a project for your design studio. They may or may not allow you to shoot them – this is ok. You don’t need your characters in the video in order to capturing their experience of the space. Also, you can ask basic questions, but do not interview your users. Your videos will speak to quality of the spaces they inhabit.

As you embark on your video project, please keep in mind the following:

-Think about sound (ambient and recorded) light (natural and artificial) and time of day.

-Think about both daily routines as well as less regular or unexpected activities. Is there a kind of rhythm established by these activities?

-Think about your own position in the video – what is your relationship to the character?

-How can Langford A be understood via the 9 different space/event narratives?

-Consider the relative engagement / non-engagement with the building that typical users have.

-What is shown and not shown? Do these users have access or lack of access to particular parts of the building?

-Finally, think about the building’s program beyond its stated functional capacity. Do users make up or improvise spaces for uses that the building’s architects did not address or foresee?

Evaluation Criteria

In addition to the general grading rubric and criteria outlined in your syllabus, this assignment will be evaluated using the following guidelines:

-Use of the tool (zooming, long shots, panning, still vs. continuous shots, dissolve, jump cuts, color, sound, movement vs. stillness, other editing through cutting and montage).

-Incorporation and utilization of the Premier software.

-Development of the videos from raw footage to final version.

-Degree of completion of the assignment.

A Note About Time Management:

As with all of your design studios, there is an understanding that a certain number of hours need to be committed to your projects outside of studio. At a minimum, it is expected that you will spend roughly 14 hours for combined in and out of class work.

Projected Timeline:

Monday 7 February: Introduction of Assignment 1.2

Tuesday 8 February: begin shooting videos

Wednesday 9 February: Meet in studio with Vahid and continue video work. <<JB out>>

Thursday 10 February: continue video work

Friday 11 February: In studio workshop: Adobe Premier, begin editing videos. Vahid to lead. <<JB out>>

Saturday and Sunday 12/13 February: Continue work on editing video

Monday 14 February: Desk crits of videos in studio

Tuesday 15 February: continue work on videos.

Wednesday 16 February: Final videos due

Assignments

February 14, 2011

Leave a comment

Syllabus

Oskar Schlemmer, stage diagram for gesture dance, Bauhaus 1926

To download the syllabus, click on the image above.

Assignments

January 24, 2011

Leave a comment

Histories and Theories of the Diagrams

The Diagrams of Architecure

Garcia, M. 2010. The Diagrams of Architecture. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Click on the image to download the introduction entitled: “Histories and Theories of the Diagrams of Architecture.” You are required to read till page 8 of the pdf.

Readings

January 21, 2011

Leave a comment

Diagrams Matter

Stan Allen describes the diagram as “not a thing in itself but a description of potential relationships among elements, not only an abstract model of the way things behave in the world but a map of many worlds.”

To learn more about Allen’s view on diagrams, you may read his article entitled “diagrams matter” here.

Readings

January 19, 2011

Leave a comment