goedemorgen

Molding clay into a vessel, we find utility in its hollowness;

Cutting doors and windows for a house, we find the utility in its empty space.

Therefore, the being of things is profitable; the non-being of things is serviceable.

-Lao-Tzu[1]

A puddle is something too often overlooked. No more than a void in the ground that allows water in, it modestly reflects something greater than itself, the surrounding context. Like the puddle, all empty space has this quality. Humans move towards these particular places of emptiness just as water gravitates towards low elevations. It is the space between the solid forms where humans inhabit and life occurs. In turn, this space has more of an ability to give people deeper insights into their environment than solid mass does.

I propose an architecture that emphasizes the void over solid mass. We see ourselves in this space, not in walls and buildings surrounding it; therefore it is beneficial to human affairs to take the fullest advantage of this space. It is defined by its context just as bronze is defined within its cast. Hence, space is contingent upon this context’s presence in order to mold itself. This space emerges from its context.

The founder of Taoism, Lao-Tzu, proposes a paradoxical approach to life in his 81 verses, The Tao Te Ching. He recognized that a contradiction existed in the world between being and non-being: they are the contrary to each other. Yet, the majority of people within the world seem to find the physical being of things more relevant to everyday life. Lao Tzu found power in the subtle things in life. His emphasis on the importance of space or nothingness as opposed to the reverence of materiality and solid matter is certainly intriguing. There must be space in order for matter to be present. Physical objects exist in and are surrounded by nothingness.

Contrary to this notion, society has continued to consciously regard space as secondary to buildings and objects within the environment. Kenneth Frampton’s concept of critical regionalism praises these notions of materiality because they give identity to a certain place and distinguishes it from any universally understood characteristics. He states, “It finds its governing inspiration in such things as the range and quality of the local light, or in a tectonic derived from a peculiar structural mode, or in the topography of a given site.” [2] Even though these peculiarities that Frampton describes give character to a city or place, it is the space between that connects them to the world around. This architecture promotes connectivity between spaces as opposed to an emphasis on individual objects.

The investigation of these buildings or objects tends to lead to a further study of the history of them. History is so prominently revered because of its nostalgic connections with the past and because it solidifies cities as places of tried and true value. It is long gone but remembered through monuments and materializations within the environment. The past must always be kept in mind when pondering contemporary environments because of its significance and relevance to the development of that place. Just like a scar on a person’s body, buildings and places within a city tells the story of a previous time and place. In Histories of the Immediate Present, Anthony Vidler articulates how architectural historians tend to revert back and allude to present day conditions when speaking of the past. We only take from the past what is relevant and most useful to us in our current day environment. While buildings and objects tell of the history of a place, the space between them speaks of the present and potential futures of that place.

Le Corbusier was focused on an architecture that was solely geared towards the future and revolutionizing the past. He claims that early twentieth century society did not sufficiently comprehend the enormous cultural leap between their present era and earlier periods.[3] Contemporaries of himself were not seeing the practical ingenuity of his work because they were too caught up with nostalgic notions of the past. Therefore, Corbusier disregarded a great deal of history and designed his architecture serve only the present and future. This was significant because he was abandoning notions of style and focusing mainly on human affairs and activities to generate the architecture. He recognized that humans had a direct connection with space, not physical architecture. Walls and floors create space, and in turn, humans inhabit this space.

Corbusier also speaks of how humans experience architecture at various scales. There is a considerable difference between a small domestic scale and a large urban one. All humans act accordingly. When a person is in their home, they move about it with leisurely purpose. There are no surprises. However, when a person enters a city, an infinite amount of possibilities enters their mind. People explore cities by meandering throughout them and discovering what they have to reveal. Unconsciously, they search and move to areas of high density. Corbusier noticed that especially while in these urban environments people eyes are always on the move and their bodies are constantly shifting about. He remarks how people are interested in everything and are attracted towards the centre of gravity of the whole site.[4] Even though each individual’s experience may differ greatly, humans instinctively follow similar paths of least resistance. Like water molecules, each individual will gravitate towards an area of density. These areas tend to lie at a low elevation; thus, they are accessible to the masses.

The entire experience of a city or architecture in general is contingent upon individual experience. In his book, Image of the City, it becomes clear that Kevin Lynch is attempting to dictate ways of how to comprehend a city from the point of view of an individual city dweller. By using these unique varying points of view, he is able to extract a similar pattern of how people describe cities. As a result, these key factors can be used to understand the essence of what a city means to people. After analyzing several cities, it becomes evident that the most important places within cities are not necessarily buildings, but the streets and public spaces that connect them. The ebb and flow of these spaces give character to a city and heavily influence how people perceive the overall city.

These connective paths tend to lead to destinations within cities. Lynch refers to these nodes as places of great importance to the individual observer. Once within these spaces, whether it is a public square or a major traffic intersection, people need to make decisions at these places. Thus, they heighten their attention and awareness of that particular place.[5] These public realms have the ability to enhance one’s perception of a space and give them a greater understanding of the city as a whole.

The understanding of a city or culture as a single entity is another matter of individual perception; yet it seems to be a generally tangible and an easily understood notion by the majority of people. According to Frampton’s ideas of critical regionalism, cities metaphorically wear their hearts on their sleeves[6]; therefore, it can sometimes be easier for people to generalize and make broad notions about the identity of a city. Most of the time these stereotypes are somewhat accurate and speak more about the culture or society as a whole.

In his article, Metaphoric Architecture, Douglas Wu argues that culture and society as a whole plays perhaps one of the most important and tangible approaches to thinking about architecture at an urban scale.[7] As a primary example, Herzog and de Meuron’s Bird’s Nest in Beijing was built for the 2008 Summer Olympics, and served as a symbol for China’s emerging position as a world power. Although it’s massive form boasted a certain commanding presence, the design was quite sensitive to cultural heritage. The bird’s nest is a common Chinese metaphor for weaving, family and connectivity. Herzog and de Meuron’s design responds to this metaphor formally and are quite successful in doing so.

By referencing cultural metaphors and other things beyond itself, architecture can become a microcosm of an entire city and culture. Just like all things in nature refer to things both greater and lesser than themselves, a single building or space possesses these qualities and acts as a microcosm. It is a singular piece of the overall composition of the city. This notion brings about the idea that a place, building or city must be understood at various scales in order to fully understand its true nature. This notion of scale perception comes back to the presence of context and its role in the formation of space.

Above all else, the context of a place must be regarded and considered. It is this physical presence of mass that shapes and dictates the emptiness that humans can occupy. Hundreds of years of architecture have shown us that idealism and fantasy have been preferred over the natural or existing landscape. Emphasis had previously been placed on an austere conformity to classical form and aesthetic. In his book, Architecture Depends, Jeremy till describes how architects had essentially blocked themselves off from the everyday aspects of society in order to legitimize their role as ‘mastermind’ over the built environment. There was a genuine disgust for all things mundane, and they insisted that architecture should transcend this world. Their neglect for the everyday realities of architecture was a mistake and gave them an extremely skewed view of design and the architectural profession in general.[8] On the contrary, Till proposes a new theory: mess is the law. For architecture to be successful within our contemporary age, it must always consider and be contingent upon natural factors and existing conditions of a particular place.

In his retroactive manifesto, Delirious New York, Rem Koolhaas continually discusses the concept of growth and city development. The focus is on Manhattan because it is such an extreme example of modern development. It is a shoot first; ask questions later case of a city. However, much can be learned from its qualities. Whether these are good or bad are a matter of opinion, but it definitely brings about the topic of the built environment versus the non-built environment. The city had become a sort of urban laboratory where buildings were constantly gauged against themselves. The city has literally competed with itself to the point where it began to reach for the sky in search for new places to build.[9] Solid mass and empty space similarly compete with one another. People are constantly investigating and finding new ways to develop and augment cities. They are looking for new voids to fill to continue to add the masses and allow the city to compete with itself.

Contrary to these impulses of augmentation, I propose an architecture that seeks to utilize the emptiness in new ways. It will use void space as a means to strengthen a cities identity while maintaining an equally significant relationship with individuals experiencing that place. Because people will naturally circulate towards these areas of great density and gather there, this architecture should be extroverted and give something back to the people as a grand gesture. This gesture will come in the form of space as opposed to an ostentatious built manifestation. Although built architectural form will be integrated into the design, it is not the primary constituent within the hierarchy of elements. Overall, this space that emerges from its context will revitalize nodes and reestablish vital connections within a built environment by referencing things, places and concepts beyond itself. Lao-Tzu was famously quoted as saying, “Great acts are made up small deeds.”[10] In this case there are no small deeds, only emptiness.

[1] Chang, Amos Ih Tiao. The Tao of Architecture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981. Pg. 7

[2] Foster, Hal. Postmodern Culture. London: Pluto Press, 1985. Pg. 21

[3] Le Corbusier. Towards a New Architecture. New York: Dover Publications, 1986. Pg.171

[4] Le Corbusier. Towards a New Architecture. New York: Dover Publications, 1986. Pg.191

[5] Lynch, Kevin. The Image of the City. Cambridge [Mass.: Technology Press, 1960. Pg. 72

[6] Foster, Hal. Postmodern Culture. London: Pluto Press, 1985. Pg. 21

[7] Choi, Esther, and Marrikka Trotter. Architecture at the Edge of Everything Else. Cambridge, MA: Work Books, 2010. Pg. 44-59

[8] Till, Jeremy. Architecture Depends. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2009.

[9] Koolhaas, Rem. Delirious New York: a Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.

[10] Chang, Amos Ih Tiao. The Tao of Architecture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981.