radically revised architectural praxis mandated by digital technologies

[frame]

Of interest:
I'll be there, perhaps you will too:

http://architecture.mit.edu/project/nsp/

The exhibition unfolds as a lineage of ‘topological tendency’, traced across a variety of cultural domains throughout the 20th century - art, architecture, mathematics. Implicitly, such lineage posits digital technologies as being fundamentally opposed to the standardizing norms that typify current architectural production, and the conference will look to developing this critique as a prospective mandate.

Most crucially the conference will involve three ‘waves’ of digital absorption in architecture that progressively extends the research work of digital pioneers (Bill Mitchell, John Frazer, Bernard Cache) and applies it to new modes of working practice. This offers a radical revision of the techno-rationalism that legitimates most current digital practice and the narrow appropriation of digital technique that it implies (Foster, Gehry, etc).

To highlight this absorption of digital technologies, historical underpinning will be given by Bill Mitchell (Media Lab, MIT), Frederic Migayrou (Centre Pompidou) and Mark Burry (SIAL, RMIT), offering a perspective on the first-wave uptake of digital technologies. The central platform of the conference will be given to 8 second wave digital practices to foreground the latent principles of their research/practice, from creative process, formal potential, to fabrication technique. Surrounding this central debate will be minor platforms given to a third wave of digital research from MIT, Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Penn and Sci Arc that will deepen the critique of extant modes of practice.

[SkiSouth]

"radically revised architectural praxis mandated by digital technologies"

Man, somebody got a hold to PeterJ's architectural lingo chart before they titled this seminar.

[Roger Evans]

I think I'll be emigrating to the Great State of Confusion ~ been visiting off and on for years ~ but now it's time to set up shop there.

[PeterJ]

"radically revised architectural praxis mandated by digital technologies"

Man, somebody got a hold to PeterJ's architectural lingo chart before they titled this seminar.

That's a slur, Sir, and a particularly damning one given I have no idea what the phrase refers to.....

[SkiSouth]

That's a slur, Sir, and a particularly damning one given I have no idea what the phrase refers to.....

My humblest apologies Mr. Peter. I inadvertently credited you with a most unique formula for discussing architecture. The link is here:

http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?t=6131

Please forgive the slur, it was meant as a complement

The originator of the post was none other than Mr. Paul P.

[PeterJ]

Then I'll take the compliment the way it was intended as I think Paul is away on honeymoon right now

[Steve_Stafford]

Of interest:
I'll be there, perhaps you will too...

Greg, I won't be...so would you be kind enough to provide us with your view after attending? Thanks!

[ejburrell67787]

Sounds interesting... Mark Burry was one of my lecturers in NZ before he left for Australia... He was always great value. I'd be interested to know what you think of it too.

I had to look it up so here are the meanings of 'praxis':

prax·is
n. pl. prax·es (prksz)
1.Practical application or exercise of a branch of learning.
2.Habitual or established practice; custom.

praxis
\Prax"is\, n. [NL., fr. Gr. ?, fr. ? to do. See Practice.]
1. Use; practice; especially, exercise or discipline for a specific purpose or object. ``The praxis and theory of music.'' --Wood.
2. An example or form of exercise, or a collection of such examples, for practice.

praxis
n : translating an idea into action; "a hard theory to put into practice"; "differences between theory and praxis of communism" [syn: practice]

[Wes Macaulay]

Cool - Bentley's Generative Components people will be there!

[frame]

Non Standard Praxis
http://architecture.mit.edu/project/nsp/

Here is a brief summary of notes/analysis from the conference I attended this weekend.
Notes:

Scale + Complexity are allowed to exist in the context of robust parametric modeling. In the modern mode, complexity is sacrificed to achieve scale where production is based on standardized parts, which in turn influences design practice (praxis). In a post-industrial mode, non-standard parts and relationships can be made because computer can manage information better, and even drive production tools directly. Non-standard parts can be created without a loss in efficiency and are increasingly present in the world around us.

CAD tends to follow practice.

Modern Industrial influenced the cad environment, where grids, lines, planes, and stock components are provided.

New formal explorations, in this case discoverable by use of computer, will influence CAD systems.
The curve will be introduced into design vocabulary.
Hyperbolic curves
Redundant vs. efficient systems will be explored.
The virtual body is spatial, generative

New strategies for generating form are being pursued:
Appropriation of non-discipline tools
maya, rhino, catia, surface scanners, mathematic code, fluid dynamic simulations, cad/cam production
Appropriation of non-architectural forms
airplane fuselage, wings, fractals, muscles, body parts, cells, pods, car sahpes, a-6 intruders, amorphic forms

Emergent, ambiguous space that is not programmatically explicit---Suggestion of new social behaviors/interactions as users attempt to interpret the ambiguity.

Parametric inflection/tweaking
Animation vs. simulation to expose formal objectives.
Real-time data streams affecting form vs. pre-defined modifications to form.
Real-time manipulation of parameters by dragging/pushing pulling control points.
Rapid development of complex surfaces that can be explored iteratively.
Virtual vs. Real architectural expressions
Need tools to morph to particular design, rather than use standard tools to achieve non-standard forms.
Architecture is technology
P*V>R+D+S

Initial Analysis/thoughts:

Architects are looking for new methods and processes for generating forms. Many of the forms are less tied to programmatic constraints than mathematical constraints. It seems that form generating algorithms and rules are being used in an experimental way to explore a wide range of design options that are loosely tied to programmatic requirements. There is a polemic tied to these forms that essentially states that architecture needs to respond and reflect changing cultural, technological and aesthetic conditions. Thus, changes in production and style that might influence the design of a shoe, or car, or the use of new materials and colors in the larger cultural context, will, and should effect the spaces we inhabit.
The ability to craft space entirely in a virtual universe using the computer has the effect of dislocating the design from a real-world location or user experience. A virtual environment is created that can be inhabited abstractly as a free-floating camera that is free to move around and interactively edit the environment. At some level, this flexibility wants to be a permanent aspect of the architecture, where it can be mutated over time. However, in the built world, parametric flexibility must ultimately be abandoned, and a static structure erected.
With such design freedom, the choice of one iteration over the next becomes nearly arbitrary, and perhaps confusing to decipher. How does one critique the form? Do you critique the space, or the algorithm?

The use of geometric manipulations to generate form is perhaps reaching a necessary limit. I wonder if new methods of generating form are on the horizon, where instead of directly pushing/pulling forms, you simply turn dials, hook up distortion fields, apply filters, and feedback loops, and let the form evolve through a richer set of criteria. The analogy I am imagining is more akin to how music can be manipulated through various devices that exist independently of the actual instrument, but cause sound to be transformed in real-time. The parametes used to construct/change form shift from raw numeric dimensions to progamatic, cultural, site-specific, and global specific inflections.