In our Theories of Architecture class, we were made to read about the different theories and manifestoes of BIG architects. As I began reading, I was dumbfounded. I couldn’t go through with reading the next manifesto unless I read the previous one 1245678910times. I admit, there were a lot of times I got lost in reading thus made me want to give up and just do away with the Xerox copy. But I knew I had to continue cause who knows what great things I can extract from it. And I was right. It opened my eyes to the different aspects of architecture today. And here’s what I think…
Upon reading the different manifestoes I have been introduced to new ideas and points of views that helped broaden my understanding of today’s modern architecture. Today, there are a lot of architects competing and striving to show the world who they really are through the structures they design. Different philosophies, different ideas that stir to create the society we now live in. These structures reflect their soul, which makes them unique and noteworthy. 20th century architects seek to create something unconventional and have a constant need to step away from the norm. They never settle for ‘ok’, instead work hard and struggle for the ‘wow’. Safe is a term they never consider for it’s like they’re being contained in a box thus confines their output. I‘ve realized that sometimes I tend to limit my ideas because of me thinking ‘this one cannot be, it’s impossible’. But I learned through these manifestoes that every design, as long as it satisfies you is indeed possible. Many of these architects want us to see architecture in a different perspective. To view their works not just as a structure but to delve into its substance, not only to see but to feel its soul. How I wish these kinds of architects exist here in our country. Structures I see around the metro aren’t very impressive and lack the modern touch I admire in structures overseas. Maybe Filipino architects play it safe when it comes to the design process. This makes me wonder, when will our structures start to evolve?
Among the different manifestoes of these architects, my favorite is Coop Himmelblau’s Architecture Must Blaze and The Future of Splendid Desolation. I like Himmelblau’s ‘hate for the old’ letting the past be past and his constant want for something new. Modern architects like him inspire me to always create something different far from the norm. I quote him, “We want architecture to have more. Architecture that bleeds, that exhausts, that whirls and even breaks.”, “Expressions like ‘safe and sound’ are no longer applicable to architecture.” Architecture is very broad, and it is up to you how you want it to be, whether it has a function or not. Will Alsop’s Towards an Architecture of Practical Delight was also striking to me. “Rely on your own experience. Look to yourself.”The design process involves you and your inspiration. We get our inspiration from our past experiences, good or bad, and this influences our final outcome. A single idea, a concept evolves and becomes more complicated as you progress; leaving others to decode its essence themselves thus making it open to criticisms. It is never right to solely consider others in the design process, there must always be the YOU in it. I have been a fan of Daniel Libeskind the moment his work The Jewish Museum in Berlin was introduced to me. Learning more about the soul of this building made me love architecture even more. The power we architects (future architect, for me) have on people amazes me. Yes, architects are paid to create beautiful structures but it is never limited to just that, we’re free to play with the form as long as it serves the function. What differentiates this particular work of Libeskind to other’s is how it is able to affect people emotionally. Also, Libeskind always explores geometry-the random forms that can be contructed/deconstructed which is truly translated in his structures. Peter Eisenman and Mark Wigley’s manifestoes defines what deconstructivism really is-how our original ideas can be fragmented and turned into a bigger, broader idea. Deconstructivists do not simply demolish/fragment but delve into the deeper sense of the structure and then distort it. A truly successful deconstructed structure is able to expose what is hidden and unfamiliar to the accustomed one people have been used to seeing. Zaha Hadid being known as an avant-garde architect, discussed Randomness and Arbitrariness which resulted to her very unique and sensational works. “It is that revision and the absolute need for inventiveness, imagination and interpretation that makes our role in architecture more valid.”
Each of these architects discussed how they think architecture is to be practiced which to me when compared is very different from each other and that makes each of them exceptional. We architects are expected to have our own views during our design process; to be unique. As a student new to all of these, I am striving to define what architecture really is for me. And my philosophy is yet to be finalized. Right now my ideas are very random and are very dependent on my emotions. Yes, I do have my preferences when it comes to forms but its definition still isn't clear to me. So as I go through this process of discovering myself, I hope to come up with a very unique one, just like the aforementioned.
No comments:
Post a Comment