Materials

For this assignment I had to represent four different materials in three different scales in maker rendering, pen, and pencil.

Case Study House no. 9 | Entenza House | Eames & Sarinaan

So You Think You Can('t) Draw

For this assignment each of us had to draw a camera with some sense of scale and render the drawing digitally. The feeling of a drawing is completely different in photoshop than is one done by hand. One advantage of digital rendering is that you can very quickly try out color options- however- they might not print out or view on other monitors like you are seeing at the time!

Photoshop Fun!

I think that Photoshop is the best thing since sliced bread. While I'm against processing every photo you take, it can take blemishes off of faces and shave a few pounds of of you in that photo your friend took. And of course, it can correct blemishes in your drawings too- as well as allow you to quickly see more color options in the drawing.


For this drawing, I manipulated some colors and used the dodge and burn tools.


On this one I made the stairs white as well as some other color adjustments and tried to add more light and shadows through dodge and burn.


For this drawing, I did something a little different. I change the scan to completely black and white, then put the brush tool on multiply and colored in from scratch.

Illustrated Comparison

For this Illustrated Comparison I chose marquetry as an interior detail. Though having the same name, Intarisa marquetry and Boulle marquetry have different processes and very different effects.

Book Fair

Greg Hickman, Clairissa Anderson, and I read the book Eat Where You Live, which explains how to find local food, as well as store it and enjoy it!

During the bookfair I was reminded just how many harmful things, or things that we don't know how they will effect us, are put in our food. Antibiotics in food are making us sicker, and immune to them when we need them in times of illness. Steroids are changing the shape of the human form. Even organic-labeled foods often come with a hefty pricetag for the environment- hundreds, or even thousands, of miles burning fossil fuels. These concerns underline the manifesto of the slow food movement- to know where your food comes from and to involve yourself in the process of making it.

Perspective

second year blog headers

JOINT: So You Think You Can't Draw: 1

New York City

This summer I had the opportunity to study in New York City at the Parsons School of Design. I took a class in Interior Design. As it turns out, the class was pretty much exactly what I had done in my previous two semesters as a first year student at UNCG, but it was a very good experience overall. The class lasted four weeks, in which we built models, drafted, drew, and went on field trips- of course the best part! Getting to see the city was the best part of it all, honestly- it was incredibly inspiring and exciting, especially since I had never been there before. Though as the end of the four weeks neared I was ready to return home, I was still sad to leave.

I absolutely love city life- not to say I don't get a huge smile on my face when I am home, driving through the country side, the smell of manure creeping up my nose- and green all around. In somewhere like New York City, you never know what you're going to see and what could happen next. While there, I felt independent. I took this adventure completely on my own- something I am not used to doing.

In the class, I became a tutor of sorts. Many of my classmates and I found the way the class was taught and structured to be awkward. For the few of us with previous education and experience, the class taught us no new technical skills- though there is always something to learn. For the rest of the students, who had no experience in model making and drafting- it was incredibly difficult. It felt like an entire semester crammed into four weeks, but with a whole bunch left out. I was constantly devoting my time to explaining an architectural scale, sections, plans, axonometric drawings, how to cut foam board, what adhesives worked well, and trying to warn them that you should never give away extra materials- you WILL need them later! But don't get me wrong- I enjoyed this. It often made me ask questions about things I thought I knew well. There is always more to learn!

I was pleased to find the classroom diverse. There were students from all over the United States as well as the world- India, Sweden, China, England, and Russia, just to name a few.

But enough of my chatter! A photo is worth a thousand words...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/myartificialsunshine/sets/72157621668251839/

Drafting

Top 10: Design Autobiography

It is really hard for me to narrow everything that inspires me down to ten things. Through this semester, the already many things grew into even more things, as they were introduced to me and I learned more about things I already knew about. However, throughout my life and this semester, here are ten things that have really stuck with me.



image courtesy Spyros_Tav__"Smile : it's contagious" on Flickr

The Acropolis is soaked in history, and I have always been a history buff. It blends so many things- history, mythology, symbolism, architectural genius- together. It also became the basis for so much of architecture to come.


image courtesy Saskya on Flickr

I find it hard not to be enchanted with Versailles. I have always believed that each of us should infuse our own homes with some sort of opulence- not to this extent perhaps- but enough to have surrounded yourself in things you love.


image courtesy Flyian on Flickr

I have always found this building breathtaking, but never noticed some things about it pointed out in this class- for example- just how much it resembles flight. This summer, when I fly into New York, I will be flying in right beside this building. Please believe, I am super excited.


image courtesy Michael Finley on Flickr

I have always been enchanted with this house, and baffled by it at the same time. I adore the transparency of it, yet realize it's utterly impossible to live in such exposure- for me at least.



image courtesy cgc0202 on Flickr

Boston is definitely my favorite US city I have visited, and I try to make it there at least once a year. I love it for so many reasons.



image courtesy John Marton on Flickr

Bern, Switzerland really enchanted me when I was on a trip there. I also nearly got hit by one of those red trains that speed through the city.



image courtesy fulhenry on Flickr

Barcelona chair = amazing.



image courtesy tablewareforsale on flickr

My family has a history with Fenton glass. A lot of my family on my mother's side worked for them, creating beautiful pieces.



image courtesy Steve W Lee on Flickr

National Gallery of Art, East Building. The building I'm doing my precedent analysis on.



The house I grew up in. I don't really have a good photo of it. I always found it quirky and strange- the way it is shaped and the fact that it has brick walls inside and out, due to the fact that it was the Cunningham Brick lake house.

coming full circle

Innovations in technology and society lead to innovations in architecture. As computer programs allowed architects to model their ideas on them, the shape of buildings began to change dramatically. This lead to the deconstructivist movement, in which buildings looked as though they were falling apart, or were unstable, but indeed, were stable- in some cases.

Another innovation was the beginning of interior design as a profession. It took a while for interior design to gain any sort of recognition. At first there was interior decoration- a women's profession aided by community, and looked at as a branch of fashion, not of architecture. Perhaps this was true- changing the pillows and curtains of rooms depending on the current style. Later came interior design, more of a profession in which degrees from universities and colleges could be earned. It was then that "the rise in status of the interior decorator was...aided by the emergence of the new profession of 'interior designer'" (Massey).

In design there is a constant dialogue of what is authentic and what is not. Is something copied? Should something be copied? If you are building a classical building, should it be an authentic copy of that building? The canonical classicists "insisted that eighteenth-century Neoclassicism is the true and proper language of Western modern architecture" (Roth 2007). Thus, the buildings they built copied those of the eighteenth century. However, some modernists believed in creating an authentically new style, such as the International Style.

The International style produced some pretty cool looking buildings, but they did not fit into their community context, thus not being very efficient. A building should fit into its community context. Quickly-built houses in cul-de-sac communities of the suburbs often do not fit into their context. They are communities in some sort of "international style"- one that dictates that these houses can be plopped down anywhere and quickly multiplied, like the modules of Le Corbusier. These are unsuccessful. Often, their tenants are unhappy with their homes, yet live in them for the sake of having a home and because that is what is available to them and what our society has told them to live in.

As designers, we should be stewards of good design. Through historical examples, we must understand what works and what does not. In my opinion, classical buildings are of the past and do not stand for the modern needs and lifestyle (though elements can certainly be integrated), and the International Style is too vague. There needs to be something else, and there is emerging something else. And it is true, there is something else emerging, but is it the right thing? Striving for sustainability is a must, but is the whole thing becoming a farce? Too many products are marketing themselves as sustainable and green on one singular quality. People are buying into it not because they believe it is what is right, but rather because it is a fad, and will soon discard this fad as all the others have been.

Massey, A (2001). Interior Design of the 20th Century. London: Thames & Hudson.

Roth, Leland, M. (2007). Understanding Architecture: Its Elements, History, and Meaning. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

[Pair]ing Down

Many modern buildings are a monologue. They do not respond to their context, environment, client, or even use. An outstanding example of this is Farnsworth House. It is inefficient in its environment, it is too exposed to serve a function as a house, and thus, along with other issues found within this structure, it does not please its client. There is no commodity and little delight to be found. Good architecture and design, that which fulfills commodity, firmness, and delight, is a dialogue with many factors, the most important of which is its context.

Mies van der Rohe believed one single form could transcend use and environment. “Virtually all of the buildings Mies van der Rohe designed after coming to the United States were prototypes, a few models adaptable to a wide range of uses. In essence, his buildings from this point onward were either tall vertical shafts of stacked levels or single horizontal boxes, most often containing a single universal space” (Roth 2007). These structures juxtaposed not only all before them and all around them, but also many functions a building should serve.

These buildings took a look at what a structure should be in the very literal sense. It was there only to function (though they did not always do this properly) and have form, not to be dressed up with the heavy surface decoration often seen before them. They had “connotations of egalitarianism, dynamism and technological expertise” (Massey 2001). They were machines for living within.

Near the end of his career, Le Corbusier abandoned much of his previous doctrine and returned to architecture having more of an abstraction of its use—therefore a concept related to its site more strongly seen by the visitor. The cathedral at Ronchamp, France, was a place of meditation, yet with its sweeping curves and colored glass also gives an air of celebration. Much of religion is both celebration and meditation, and this building captures that essence. For Corbusier, “Ronchamp was a symbol of the sacral element of life and not a specific creed” (Roth 2007) Here, light and shadow play a tremendous role, as “the brilliant whiteness of the rough stucco exterior is in the sharpest contrast to the dark interior” (Roth 2007). Here also, the duality of compression and release is used, as “When seen from outside, the curves seem to open out toward the landscape, but when experienced from within, they give a sense of compression and containment” (Roth 2007).

Modern architects at the time were concerned with the link between inside and outside. This is seen in the amount of glass utilized. “Philip Johnson… designed his own house… labeled the ‘Glass House’, as simple cube with four glass curtain-walls. The integration of inside and outside is complete” (Massey 2001). Le Corbusier found the outdoors to be important in the design of the cathedral at Ronchamp, as he “spent several days on the site in the ruins of the old chapel, sketching the profile of the surrounding forested hills” (Roth 2007), and in the design integrated “an outdoor chancel that faces a hillside sanctuary where large crowds can gather for worship” (Roth 2007).

Opposites often work together instead of against one another, as is assumed at first glance. They often enhance one another, and make the other better understood. They can coexist. Why cannot something be about both celebration and meditation at the same time—is not meditation, in some sense, celebrating the self? Is not a monologue a part of a dialogue? Without light there can be no shadow. So many times things are found to be literally abstract. It is when we look at these pairs of opposites as systems instead of forces against one another that they become important and fully understood.




Massey, A (2001). Interior Design of the 20th Century. London: Thames & Hudson.

Roth, Leland, M. (2007). Understanding Architecture: Its Elements, History, and Meaning. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.



.

Action Verbs

Every design movement is energized by something to become a movement. There must be a catalyst to expand its concept wide enough to be seen as a movement. For Art Deco, this catalyst was not only the Exposition Internationale des Arts Decoratifs et Industriels Modernes from which its name is derived, but also, especially in the United States, Hollywood. Massey states, “The sleek surfaces of the Moderne and Streamlining were fully exploited by the American motion picture industry, for the Moderne style matched the buoyantly confident mood of inter-war Hollywood” (Massey 2001).

The lines, shapes, and motifs of the Art Deco were often shaped by the energized notion of machinery. Machinery also shaped the modern, “Inspired by a new machine aesthetic, the Modern Movement stripped away unnecessary ornament from the interior” (Massey 2001). The movement also embraced machinery shaping their products, hoping “to change society for the better… design for all” (Massey 2001).



Many modern pieces, thus, rejected the notion put forth by the Arts and Crafts movement—instead embracing the machine, which would allow what the Arts and Crafts had failed—good design reaching the masses. Interiors were composed of furniture composed by a machine. Also, the compositions of art pieces from different artistic movements had enormous impact upon architectural movements and ideas. One example is that of the De Stijl movement, which’s “emphasis on horizontals and verticals and the restricted color-scheme give visual unity to the exterior and interior of the house” (Massey 2001); “Rietveld’s Red/Blue chair of 1918 was one of the first expressions of this new aesthetic” (Massey 2001).



However, what is modern? To some degree, this can only be speculated. Is modern found in the technology of the building, or is it found in the aesthetics? Must it be a mixture of these? Is it really up to the individual viewing it, or the people utilizing it, or the architect designing it, or the builder building it? There are two moderns. There is the modern in the general sense and Modern as a distinct movement. Weston clears up the confusion well, stating, “Being modern means being up to date but being a Modernist is an affirmation of faith in the tradition of the new, which emerged as the creative credo of progressive artists in the early years of the twentieth century” (Weston).



Modern, in both senses, stretches over many styles and disciplines, Modernism being “the umbrella name for a bewildering array of movements—Cubism, Expressionism, Futurism, Dadaism, Serialism, Surrealism—and ideas—abstraction, functionalism, atonality, free verse…. It affected all the arts and blossomed in different fields” (Weston).


quotes from Modernism by Richard Weston
and
Massey, A (2001). Interior Design of the 20th Century. London: Thames & Hudson.

Reflections | Unit Summary

Every change that occurs, politically or technologically, reflects upon architecture and design. As things were rapidly changing, what is good design became an important question. A revolution meant a shift in the Roman style to the Greek. New technologies, specifically machines, allowed products to be quickly mass-produced. This also contributed to a mass immigration into cities from the surrounding rural areas.

Revolution yields revolution. When there are political changes, design also changes. This can be seen after the American Revolution, when our young country began changing the style of architecture and furniture. This was due to a desire to be different from England in every way possible and make a new mark on the world. Because the classical style still reigned, there was a shift from the Roman style adopted by England to Greek style buildings and furniture- going as far as to duplicate the furniture from images and pottery. One interesting thing that began to occur was that sacred-style buildings were used for secular purposes- including the mundane. A water treatment facility took the shape of a Greek temple complex. The classical style was manifesting itself everywhere, yet new technologies meant it was time for a change.

The development of iron changed things dramatically for architecture. Suddenly, structures could be built quickly. They also could be built with larger open expanses than ever before. New buildings types apart from the classical began to show up. These included conservatories, meant as another party place for the very wealthy to show off their goods; arcades, which provided the growing middle class with entertainment; and other structures such as train sheds. The development of trains and other information technology meant information and goods traveling much faster than they ever had in the past. As this revolution occurred, new exotic products were imported, and once again a revolution changes design. Most of the products were not, however, what the people of that nation or region would have, but would be Westernized. Eventually the question would arise whether or not it was right to place surface decoration from any culture but your own onto furniture and other goods. What was, then, good design?

Some people, such as William Morris, believed that good design constituted that projects should be handmade by skilled craftsmen, and that their products should be available to everyone. However, the products could not be made quickly and this mass-produced, meaning the price was high enough that only the wealthy could afford them. Thus, the Arts and Crafts movement in its true form never made its way to the common people—the ones for whom it was intended.

As technology evolved, the classical style structures no longer were appropriate—they neither reflected the technologies, nor could they contain them. While glass and iron helped with this, there was a need for a new style altogether—something not seen in the past. The burning of Chicago allowed a chance for this to happen. As the city was rebuilt, structures that looked unlike anything before arose—definitely apart from the classical structures found in New York. Between these two cities, there arose a race for height with the skyscraper, which was definitely different from anything found in architecture before.

Roadtrip

The main focus of this post will be on the trip to Monticello and Fallingwater, which was informational, inspiring, and loads of fun—just what a road trip should be.




Both Monticello and Fallingwater were based on strong concepts, as good designs are. The concepts at Fallingwater were clear—there was a strong sense of compression and release, which supports the concept of public and private space by making a visitor not want to travel through the dark hallways with their low ceilings; it was a house for relaxation, thus the low ceilings were appropriate; and the focus was to be on the outdoors, not the inside. As a matter of fact, perhaps the overarching concept was to make the house one with its natural surroundings, if not improve upon them. The interior of the house has a great amount of stone, some of which, such as that around the fireplace, is actually a part of what was there when the house was built on the site. This also creates a sort of breaking of the boundary between inside and outside, since not only does most of the house have windows, which open to the outdoors, but also incorporates it into the interior carefully and distinctly. The concept of Monticello was to create a place of learning, relaxation, and entertainment. The concept of the architecture itself was to create a classical, Palladian structure.



The concepts for both structures tie into their roots. The root of Fallingwater is the landscape into which it is intently placed. For Monticello, clearly “a fine example of Roman neoclassicism” (Monticello), the roots are in classical European architecture and design, with American touches carefully throughout. American artifacts became a large part of the design, especially in the entrance hall. Also, Monticello was built from what was available on site as much as possible, making it seem more rooted into the place. Both Monticello and Fallingwater are placed firmly on their respective landscapes. Fallingwater interestingly seems both more and less to be so, since it is so well integrated into the landscape, yet juts out from it so daringly, and doesn’t even appear to stand on solid ground, but instead stretches out over a 30’ waterfall” (Fallingwater).



As has already been mentioned, compression and release were a major part of Fallingwater. This has its roots in Roman house structure. Monticello also roots itself in Roman house structure, having “a symmetrical floor plan where possible” (Roth 2007).

Fallingwater exhibits a specific congruence with its context. Also, its architect, Frank Lloyd Wright, was careful to insure there was congruence in design throughout the structure, designing not only the building, but also all furniture inside. Congruence is obtained from an acute attention to detail, which is true not only of Fallingwater, but also of Monticello, where there is a feeling that everything has a place, no matter how many things there are.



The materiality of these structures, as with any structure, is what makes them what they are, both literally and figuratively. Monticello was built from it surroundings and by the people there as much as possible. The website for the house states, “The bricks were made at Monticello, as were the nails for the remodeled house. Most of the structural timber came from Jefferson's own land, while most of the window sashes were made in Philadelphia of imported mahogany. The window glass came from Europe. Stone for the cellars and the East Front columns, and limestone for making mortar, were quarried on Jefferson's land.” (Monticello). (Interestingly, today we are trying to make a return to this approach with a movement toward sustainability). Fallingwater also utilized the natural materials of its surroundings, specifically stone, and added to this concrete, glass, and metal. The use of glass and metal together to create open spaces had created a great impact on architecture.


In regard to the reading for this week and what was learned in class, the architecture and design of the 19th century showed little congruence in comparison to the past. There was a search going on to try to find what was right and what was new. New technologies that allowed information and goods to travel faster over greater expanses of space meant a bombardment of “new” ideas into, out of, and around the Western world. In the words of Eugene-Emanuel Violeet-le-Duc in Entertains sur l’architecture (2863-1872), “Must the nineteenth century, then, come to a close without ever possessing an architecgture of its own? Is this epoch, so fertile in discoveries, so abounding in vital force, to transmit to posterity nothing better in art than imitations, hybrid words without character and impossible to classify?” (Roth 2007).



Retrieved April 15, 2009, from Thomas Jefferson's Monticello Web site: http://www.monticello.org/

(2008). Retrieved April 15, 2009, from Fallingwater Web site: http://www.fallingwater.org/

Roth, Leland, M. (2007). Understanding Architecture: Its Elements, History, and Meaning. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

3 Materials

between silence + light

Out of the 19th and 20th centuries came many new technologies, leading to new techniques in building. New technologies mean new techniques. Among the most important developments is iron, which allows for grander, larger, more expansive buildings to be built. These structures could also be built more quickly. An example of this is London’s Crystal Palace, which was built quickly and later taken down, since the materials allowed for this. These buildings showcased and were inspired by new information, traveling quickly with goods and people on trains. In addition, “Items of household decoration, such as wallpaper, textiles and carpets were now being mass produced and purchased for the first time by a bourgeoisie who emulated their superiors with the furnishing of the formal drawing room” (Massey 2001).



Out of the growing industrialism and thus mass production of goods rose the question of craft. Many of these quickly mass produced products had a cheap look and feel to them, often making a space seem garish. Soon, the “aesthetic standard of the interior disturbed contemporary critics” (Massey 2001), and architects/ designers such as Ruskin and Morris developed a strong “rejection of mass produced furniture” (Massey 2001). Out of their desire for a return to hand-crafted goods came the Arts and Crafts, “The most important reform movement to affect the interior in the nineteenth century” (Massey 2001).



However, Arts and Crafts in its truest form was a language that could not translate to the masses. It was not because they did not wish to have the pieces, but simply that “good design… produced by men and women working creatively with their hands” (Massey 2001) was too expensive for anyone outside of the very wealthy. Therefore, well-made products were not for the general public, but instead kept relatively private in the homes of those who could afford them.

There are also the languages of the different design styles during this time. While some attempted to find a new way of saying things, others returned to the relative safety of Classicism, Roman and Greek Revival, as well as Gothic Revival. They were sometimes translated into the new materials and techniques available to suit new technologies, however, it was eventually found that old building types were often ill-suited to new technologies. In the various revival styles, the buildings were often copied and plopped into a new landscape, creating a somewhat virtual copy of an actual historical building.



There was also a growing separation between public and private. For those working in the new factories in the quickly growing cities, privacy in the slums they often lived in was scarce. For the wealthy, privacy became more integrated.

In regard to the trip taken this past weekend and the homes visited, the craft on both was of the highest degree, especially the time period of each taken into account. Fallingwater is stunningly crafted into its landscape, becoming part of it and perhaps improving up on it. Monticello took advantage of new crafts and inventions, including a crafty double door that closes both doors simotaneously. Also at Monticello, the building technique was that as much of the house be built from what was immediately available from the surrounding landscape as was possible. Fallingwater uses the technology of concrete reinforced with steel, creating daunting cantilevers. At Monticello, virtuality was achieved by the utilization of mirrors, skylights, and windows to achieve space and light. An outstanding example of a virtual effect from Fallingwater was the mirror effect in the guest house. At Monticello, there was on one level a very specific separation of public and private when it came to slaves and visitors, however, for the most part, privacy was a relatively new concept, though Jefferson took something like 1/3 of the house for himself. Fallingwater clearly divides public and private with dark hallways, as well as by having a guest house and by being so far from the city of Pittsburgh. Both structures use the vocabulary of their locale, speaking its language and adding some words to its dictionary. More on all of this next week!



Massey, A (2001). Interior Design of the 20th Century. London: Thames & Hudson.