karen shueh 2011

karen shueh infrathin

2/3

STATEMENT

I value architecture that heightens one’s spatial experience via fundamental architectural elements; such as the wall, the ceiling, the floor, the door and the window. I appreicate a simple manipulation and organization of the basic elements in a manner that reintroduces them to the user. Herzog & De Meuron and SANAA are both successful in this endeavor with their own signature styles. The former composes architecture that embodies distinctive dynamic spatial spaces; while the latter harmonizes spaces with a seemingly weightless quality.

I strive for “intentional” architecture – architecture that exudes the architect’s intentions and attention to composition and its affects. Spaces are planned and thought through to the extent that the architect’s own agenda and response to the building’s program transpires though the user’s spatial experience when transversing through the building. I am interested in the continuity of line; whether that line is three-dimensional (such as a column), the convergence of two surfaces (a corner), the contour of a surface; or the transpiration of a façade’s markings / perforations’ from a surface and enters the architecture’s space and structural elements. There is also the implication of the line – such as the outline/boundary of a void space. On the macro level, there is the boundary of the architecture – its contact with the ground and relationship to the pre-existing surroundings’ “lines”. I am interested in the manipulation of the multiples mediums for the lines to be read, continued, discontinued and imagined.

CONTENTS

1204

14

28

303236

38

42

44

DESIGN STUDIO

VISUAL STUDIES

APPLIED STUDIES

CULTURE STUDIES

01

08

09

0203

Drawing

Various

Various

Drawing

Drawing

Concrete

Prose (excerpt)

MEDIUM

BoundaryGround / Cantilever

Triangulation

Static Movement

Movement

Structure

Adaptation

DRIVER

Site / Sidewalk SpeculationUrban Farm

Library of Graphic Novels

Multi-Tool ToolingThrough the Whale

Hypar Belly

Yuanmingyuan

PROJECT PAGE

060504

07Exterior InteriorExterior Interior

RenderingModel

BoundaryPattern

10 ProseResponseKipnis Lectures

4|5

The site of Urban Farm is situated in Los Angeles’ downtown art district. It is a reconsideration towards the possibility of integrating the production of food in an increasingly populated urban landscape It is an investigation to integrate agricultural production and consumption within an urban landscape — to design a space that potentially allows for a symbiotic relationship between an urbanite and agricultural production.

The project’s design had two main principles — maximum exposure to sunlight (for crop production), and the act of viewing. The two drivers resulted in large cantilevers, a move that both exposes surface area to sunlight, and allows for overlooking others circulating through the building.

PROJECT urban farm DRIVER ground / cantilever

MEDIUM INSTRUCTOR DATE

2010Model Heather Flood Los Angeles, US

LOCATION

01

6|7



2010Rendering Heather Flood Los Angeles, US

LOCATION

01

PROGRAM

Restaurant Area 2500 sq ft25 tables [indoor and outdoor] 1500 sffood preparation and cooking 500 sfservice area 250 sfrestrooms 250 sf

Growth Area 5250 sq ftagriculture area 2500 sfapiculture area 1000 sffungiculture area 1500 sfcompost area 250 sf

Total 7750 sq ft

8|9

From the sidewalk access to the Urban Farm, one is immediately lead to two ramps — one going upward that leads to the upper floors, and one that slants downward to the basement that accom-modates the compost and fungiculture. The two ramps essentially disintegrate the “ground floor” to a middle ground for circulation.

Urban Farm accommodates the production, preparation and also consumption of food. On the second floor is a petit restaurant (equipped with a kitchen) with both indoor and outdoor seating areas.


Site plan

Transverse section

1 / 64” = 1’

1 / 16” = 1’

1 / 16” = 1’Ground floor plan 2nd floor plan

E. 3rd S

t

S. Garey St

The third floor houses an apiculture surrounded by daisies for the bees to harvest from.

The fourth floor is a market that facilitates the purchase of produce from the urban farm. The fourth floor also has an outdoor seating area with a view of the urban landscape.

The north side is in close proximity to its neighboring building, and has a regular stacked façade. The south façade, in comparison, makes space for the vegetation grown on the ground floor, and has an irregular stacking structure to maximize the exposure to sunlight.


2010Drawing / Model Heather Flood Los Angeles, US

LOCATION

01

3rd floor plan 4th floor plan

South FaçadeNorth FaçadeEast Façade

10|11


Basement floor plan

Longitudinal section

1 / 16” = 1’

1 / 16” = 1’


2010Drawing / Model Heather Flood Los Angeles, US

LOCATION

01

12|13

[ N,R ]

[ M05 ]

[ M103 ]

[ 4,6 ]

[ J ]

Whole Foods Market

Museum of Cartoon and Comic Art

New York Public Library

New Museum

Rice to RichesLombardi’s Pizza

Pinkberry

Bowery Ballroom

Lehman Maupin Gallery

Openhouse Gallery

Public School 130

The drawing is a preliminary site speculation for the Graphic Novel Library project. The site speculation placed special emphasis on New York City’s pedestrian access and pedestrian traffic — the sidewalk. The sidewalks of New York City form and frame the pedestrian’s view of the surroundings, thus hold significant influence over one’s first impression and experience of the architecture.

For example, the New Museum nearby has a sidewalk five feet wide, which actually makes the entrance of the building feel more spatious by physically occupying less space.

The drawing also demarcates two types of buildings in the surrounding area that is relevant to a library for the graphic novel; namely educational, cultural and community buildings.

PROJECT graphic novel library DRIVER sidewalk

[ N,R ]

[ M05 ]

[ M103 ]

[ 4,6 ]

[ J ]

Whole Foods Market



New Museum

Rice to RichesLombardi’s Pizza

Pinkberry

Bowery Ballroom

Lehman Maupin Gallery

Openhouse Gallery

Public School 130


2011Drawing Volkan Alkanoglu New York, US

LOCATION

02

Whole Foods Market



Lehman Maupin GalleryNew Museum

Pinkberry

Rice to RichesLombardi’s PizzaBowery BallroomOpenhouse Gallery

Public School 130

[M103]

[J]

[N,R] [4,6][M05]

14|15

The project is a library for graphic novels located in Manhattan’s lower east side neighborhood. I wanted the project to reflect the surrounding high pedestrian traffic, and a space that invited such density. In reference to the manga cafes popularity in Asia, I interpreted the library as a public congregation space where education, commerce and culture occur in the three pods with a central atrium that serves as circulation and boundary for the three spaces.

The three pods are chacterized as:Book store — multi-player interaction, high traffic volumeAuditorium — single-sided interaction, less movementReading area — graphic novel-to-reader interaction, static atmosphere

The roof design differs among the three pods in accordance to the space’s needs. For example, the pod that houses the book store has a roof design that allows for dynamic lighting to emit through; whereas the auditorium pod has a dome-like roof for acoustics; the reading area pod has large panels to allow for controlled sunlight; and the public circulation central atrium space has a glass pane as its rooftop.

PROJECT graphic novel library DRIVER boundary condition


2011Model Volkan Alkanoglu New York, US

LOCATION

03

16|17

PROGRAM

Lobby / Reception 1200 sq ftentry 400 sfcafe 200 sfmulti-purpose room 600 sf

Admin 1200 sq ftdirector’s office 150 sfwork area 800 sfcirculation desk 250 sf

Support 800 sq ftbathrooms 350 sfmech/elect 350 sfjanitorial 100 sf

Archives 1000 sq ftstacks 500 sfreading area 350 sfadmin 150 sf

Library 10800 sq ftstacks 6500 sfreading areas 3500 sfstudy rooms 800 sf

Total 15000 sq ft

PROJECT graphic novel library DRIVER boundary


2011Rendering Volkan Alkanoglu New York, US

LOCATION

03

18|19

PROJECT graphic novel library DRIVER triangulation

1

2

12

3

3


2011Model Volkan Alkanoglu New York, US

LOCATION

03

20|21


2nd floor plan at +18’Scale: 1/16”= 1’

Ground floor plan at +4’Scale: 1/8” = 1’

21

1

2

1 - Cafe2 - Reading Area3 - Auditorium4 - Automatic Storage and Retrieval System

1 - Entrance2 - Admin3 - Auditorium4 - Automatic Storage and Retrieval System5 - Mechanical Room

3

3

44

5

+15’

+15’

+15’

+7’+7’

+6.8’



LOCATION

03

2nd floor plan at +18’Scale: 1/16”= 1’

Ground floor plan at +4’Scale: 1/8” = 1’

21

1

2

1 - Cafe2 - Reading Area3 - Auditorium4 - Automatic Storage and Retrieval System

1 - Entrance2 - Admin3 - Auditorium4 - Automatic Storage and Retrieval System5 - Mechanical Room

3

3

44

5

+15’

+15’

+15’

+7’+7’

+6.8’

22|23

3rd floor plan at +26’Scale: 1/16”= 1’

1

2

1 - Book Store2 - Reading Area3 - Auditorium4 - Automatic Storage and Retrieval System

3

4

+23’




LOCATION

03

24|25

1 - Atrium2 - Cafe3 - Auditorium4 - Book Store

Longitudinal SectionScale: 3/64” = 1’

+ 41’

+ 34’

+ 22’ 6”

+ 4’ 6”

2

4

1

3




LOCATION

03

1 - Atrium2 - Reading Area3 - Auditorium4 - Automatic Storage and Retrieval System

Transverse SectionScale: 3/64” = 1’

+ 26’ 6”

+ 14’

+ 12’ 8”

- 14’

24

1

3

26|27



2011Rendering Volkan Alkanoglu New York, US

LOCATION

03

28|29

static movementAs an introduction to drawing as a representation, exploratory, generative and descriptive tool, the assignment revolved around analyzing, dissecting and re-broadcasting the object – a multi-tool. To further the drawing’s creative capacity, a toy acquired from a garage

sale was introduced to the multi-tool as a reconfigured hybrid model. Some of the qualities that were emphasized were: morphology, temporality, geometry formation, and kinetic movement.

PROJECT multi-tool tooling DRIVER

Santa Fe Avenue Installation


2010Drawing Dwayne Oyler Los Angeles, US

LOCATION

04

30|31

Through the use of Rhino and Grasshopper, the interpretive drawing records and catalogues the potential combinations between two distinct and otherwise irrelevant objects — the whale and the fortune cookie. The drawing captures and documents the movement of the fortune cookie through the whale. The combinations were generated

from the following criteria: Models that are subtractive / Models that are additiveModels that are deformed / Models that are planar (meshes and 1-degree NURB)Models that are curvilinear (3-degree NURB)

PROJECT through the whale DRIVER movement

difference1264 surfaces1785 points2007 edges

intersection17 surfaces1919 points60 edges

union7 surfaces27 points15 edges

cookie minus whale919 surfaces1326 points1433 edges


whale minus cookie6 surfaces414 points8 edges


31MEDIUM INSTRUCTOR DATE

2011Drawing Emily White N/A

LOCATION

05

difference636 surfaces958 points966 edges





95 surfaces135 points

u=3; v=16 surfaces50 points







whale minus cookie7 surfaces414 points22 edges

32|33

PROJECT exterior interior INTENT boundary

Exterior view

In continuation of the previous whale / fortune cookie combinations, the scale is now increased to an architectural environment scale. The Maxwell render is the organization of an architectural environment with special emphasis on material and depth. The drawing strives to achieve an ambiguity, in its environment and sense of reality.


2011Rendering Emily White N/A

LOCATION

06

Interior view

34|37

The exercise investigates the relationship between form and pattern. The emphasis is on the differentiation between the texture and contrast between interior / exterior, and how pattern transforms and changes as form changes. The whale / fortune cookie assignment is now into existence as an object. First modelled in Rhino then CNC mill foam. The object is then coated with a pattern that is conscious of the object’s own form.

PROJECT exterior interior DRIVER pattern


2011Model Emily White N/A

LOCATION

07

Test prints

1 /4 size modelStudy model

36|39

To understand and experience the physical nature and inherent qualities of concrete construction, the team set out to create a form that would challenge and define the limits the material. The double ruled hyperbolic parabola model connotes a system of two sets of points running along the U- V- direction connected along a straight line. This system results in a dynamice curvature surface that yields

structural sufficient conditions. With a 6’x6’x6’ grid as the base dimension the group built a structure that would showcase the material properties of ‘thinness’ and ‘weightlessness’. The form would cantilever from one corner approximately 7’ off the ground while the other three corners grounded.

PROJECT hypar belly DRIVER structure

Conceptual model


2010Concrete Rob Ley Los Angeles, US

LOCATION

08

2 x 4 top frame

plywood

concrete

plywood

bottom framework

38|43

The earliest building completed was the Symmetric and Amazing Pleasure [Xieqi Qu] (諧奇趣) (1747-1751), a semi-circle in plan. The three-story main building had two verandas that led to two octagonal balconies. The interior Western decoration included hanging mirrors, celestial instruments, armillary spheres, and various swords were hung on the walls. There were two outdoor arc staircases that led from the ground floor to a second floor balcony of the main building. The two sides of the balcony were ornamented with a pair of Western stone lions.

The Symmetric and Amazing Pleasure had two fountains on its north and south. The center of the larger southern fountain was a copper fish, surrounded by a pair of copper shrimp. The northern part of the fountain was six copper geese, whereas the southern section had pairs of copper goat, cat, and duck; each squirted water to the fountain center. The smaller northern fountain, 4.5m in diameter was composed of four copper fish and four small water towers to form a 3-tiered fountain. The water was supplied by the Chamber for Gathering Water [Xushui Lou] (蓄水樓) located northwest of the building.

North to the Symmetric and Amazing Pleasure was the Maze (花園/萬花陣) that spanned 15,000 m². The only entryway to the Maze was through a Western style door located in the south. Behind the front gate was a Western stone bridge that led to the actual labyrinth. The center of the labyrinth was a raised octagonal kiosk; immediately north to the kiosk was a white marble chamber that overlooked the maze. Within the maze were nine circles that signified the “six-sided world”: top, bottom, the four sides, and the past, present and future. Mid-Autumn Festival’s festivities were held at the labyrinth. The Mid-Autumn Festival is a major event in Chinese culture that happens on the fifteenth day of the eighth month of the lunar calendar – the night where the moon is at its roundest. A main event was ten-thousand female servants placing “yellow flower lanterns” on their heads rushing to the center of the maze where the emperor sat in the arbor – the first to reach the emperor was rewarded with gifts of candies and fruits.

The large cluster to the immediate east of the center axis is the Calm Sea Hall [Haiyan Tang] (海晏堂), most known for its fountain surrounded by bronze sculptures of human-bodied Chinese zodiac animals: rat, bull, tiger, hare, dragon, snake, horse, goat, monkey, rooster, dog, and boar. In consideration of propriety, the female

PROJECT yuanmingyuan DRIVER adaptation

The northern strip of Changchunyuan contained a section Western-style buildings, also known as the Chinese Versailles. The buildings and fountains were built in emulation of the European Baroque style. The Western section in Changchunyuan was definitely not the first attempt for China to build architecture in the Western style. Western commercial buildings and residences were already evident in the Canton region since the seventeenth century when Canton opened to the trade system and also notable were the Portuguese architecture in Macau since the sixteenth century. However, Qianlong was the first Chinese ruler to incorporate Western buildings in an imperial garden.

The project was built over a span of 13 years from 1747 to 1760, and has gained significant international recognition, although only a relatively small component of Yuanmingyuan. The Western section took up one-ninth of Chanchunyuan’s total area and less than 2% of the entire Yuanmingyuan. The Western section was organized along an east-west axis and fairly symmetrical in comparison to the rest of the imperial garden. It was composed of six buildings and three fountains. Fountains were a major component in the overall schema. Fountains were a major component in the overall schema, an architectural design component that gained much popularity in seventeenth-century France and Italy. The idea of building Western architecture in Yuanmingyuan happened when Qianlong Emperor came upon Western paintings, presumably by Guiseppe Castiglione (郎世寧) with the depiction of fountains. The center of the Western section was a large fountain, similar in the style of Le Nôtre.

The incorporation of fountain-design implied the necessity for gigantic Baroque-style palace buildings. The buildings were in essence designed by European missionaries and constructed by the Chinese, whose society at the time did not yet have the concept of the “architect”. The Europeans involved in the design included Italian painter Guiseppe Castiglione, and European missionaries including Jean-Denis Attiret (French), and Father Michel Benoit (蔣友仁), who was in charge of the fountain design with his knowledge in hydraulics and mathematics. For reference materials, they relied on engravings from the European books they brought from Europe or borrowed from the Christian institutes in Beijing. Castiglione’s engravings from 1786 of the finished buildings are currently what remain as the earliest complete record of the buildings.


2010Prose (excerpt) Dora Epstein-Jones Beijing, China

LOCATION

09

The Western buildings were constructed with dominant Western features. These included essential structural elements such as columns, marble balustrades, glass windows and walls to supportive elements – minor handrails, lawns and flower terraces. Interior decoration also adapted certain Western characteristics short glazed brick walls, clocks, hanging lamps, oil paintings among numerous others. Nevertheless, unmistakable oriental qualities remained transparent. The most dominant Chinese trait that permeated throughout the designs was the Chinese-tiled roofs, known as liuli. In addition, other prominent oriental ornamentation such as Taihu rocks and bamboo pavilions were widely used.

Even with the Emperor’s expansive knowledge in painting, calligraphy and poetry, Qianlong failed to make the connection between the importance of mechanization and mathematical precision that ultimately lead the Western countries to the industrial revolution. Qianlong appreciated the Western architecture primarily from an aesthetic standpoint, and treated the western section as another scenic feat in his imperial garden.

nude that usually ornamented European fountains were replaced by the twelve Chinese zodiac animals that also functioned as time-markers in Chinese culture. Every two hours the water rotated to a different animal, and at noon time all animals would simultaneously spouted water. The Calm Sea Hall’s main hall is immediately reminiscent of Versailles’ Court of Honor. From the façade stretched two symmetrical winding staircases from both sides of the building that produced a palatial impression. Outside the two staircases were two stone lions that spouted a fountain of water.

In vogue of the Western perspectival depictions, the larger part of the eastern section referenced the western’s perspective view. On the most eastern side was the Perspective Pictures [Xianfa Tu] (線法圖) where rows of brick walls were strategically placed to allow the oil paintings to produce illusions in perspective view. The interchangeable paintings were stored in the storage houses on the northern and southern sides east to the brick walls. The produced imageries ranged from Venetian streets to Xinjiang’s streetscapes for Qianlong’s Fragrant Concubine [Xiang Fei] (香妃) reminiscent of her hometown.

The construction of Yuanmingyuan’s Western section was a project of translations across geography, cultures and professions. A small group of Europeans who had taken residence in China were given the task to build in a “European” style that they have potentially become unfamiliar with, without much prior architecture experience. Also, the compromises and communication processes between the Europeans and Emperor Qianlong, resulted in further editing and alterations. In consideration of the distance, language and culture barriers, the Western Wing at Yuanmingyuan produced unique Baroque-style architecture.

WORKS CITEDChiu, Che Bing. Yuanming Yuan: le jardin de la claret parfait. Beijing: Zhongguo Lin Ye Chubanshe, 2002.

He Chongyi, and Zeng zhaofen. “Guyuan Qingshanzai, Lairi Qingchangchun: Changchunyuan Chutan.” Yuan Ming Cang Sang Editing Association. Yuan Ming Cang Sang. Beijing: Wenhua Yishu Chubanshe, 1991. 118-126.

Hou Ren Zhi. “Yuanmingyuan.” Yuan Ming Cang Sang Editing Association. Yuan Ming Cang Sang. Beijing: Wenhua Yishu Chubanshe, 1991. 99-102.

“Israël Silvestre: Château de Versailles seen from the forecourt (30.22-22_64)”. Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. Aug. 2009. Web. 5 Feb. 2011. <http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/30.22-22_64>

Liu Yang. Xi Ri de Xiagong Yuanmingyuan [The Old Summer Palace YuanmingYuan]. Beijing: Xueyuan Chu-banshe, 2005.

Shu Mu, Shen Wei, and He Naixian, eds. Yuan Ming Yuan Zi Liao Ji. Beijing: Shumu Wenxian Chubanshe, 1984.

Tung Yao. “Beijing Changchunyuan Western Architecture.” Preparatory Committee of the Chinese Yuan Ming Yuan Insitute. Yuan Ming Yuan. Vol. 1. Beijing: Xinhua Publishing. 1981. 71-80.

Wong, Young-tsu. A Paradise Lost: The Imperial Garden of Yuanming Yuan. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2001.

Yuanmingyuan, Dir. Jin Tiemu. Hua Xia Film Distribution Co., Ltd, 2006. DVD.

Zhang Enmeng, Duan Qinglin, Wang Baolin, Zhu Hong, Yang Laiyun, Wu Fengchun, Shen Chunli, Wang Shuang-zheng, and Li Yanyan. Yuanmingyuan Park: An Eternal Monument. Beijing: New World Press, 2002.

Zhou Weiquan. “Tianshang Renjian Zhujingbei/ Yitian Suodi zai Junhuai.” Yuan Ming Cang Sang Editing Associa-tion. Yuan Ming Cang Sang. Beijing: Wenhua Yishu Chubanshe, 1991. 103-111.

Zhu Jie. Yuanmingyuan Garden. Beijing: Foreign Language Press, 2000.

Maze (花園/萬花陣)Perspective Pictures (線法牆)

Versailles’ Court of Honor

Calm Sea Hall (海晏堂)

40|45

Re-origination + RepresentationA key component to Kipnis’ lecture is his idea that architecture performs two main things: re-origination + representation.

“Re-origination” in terms of architecture as a discipline borrows from other disciplines’ affects and imitates it to produce / regenerate the effect. One of the examples Kipnis used was the Möbius strip – a mathematical model that describes a single-sided surface where if a line were drawn from the seam in the middle of the surface would end at the same seam but on the opposite side. There are buildings that imitate the Möbius strip affect, most notably the Mercedes-Benz Museum by UN Studio. Whether or not it constitutes / reflects the original Möbius strip is secondary to whether or not the original affect of the Möbius strip is successfully manipulated for the particu-lar building.

There are numerous examples and incidents of architects looking and borrowing materials, or “affects” in Kipnis’ terms, from other disciplines. Frank Gehry’s influence by Richard Serra’s steel pieces is another well-known example.

Kipnis approved “representation” flatly stating “I like it”, itself a bold statement that most contemporary art people would refrain from stating. Representation has long been overhauled since the early 19th century when abstraction, expression, or impression was preferred over representation. But alas, it is part of his character to champion for a controversial idea that is in general out of vogue.

Kipnis’ bold declarations of approval or disapproval are in itself commendable and refreshing. “I like it” – a statement that is frowned upon in serious discourse because it connotes an ungrounded personal subjectivity, based less on objectivity or serious thought. Kipnis has the character to pull off the statement where instead of an immediate disapproval of such a sophomoric statement, one is intrigued and awaits for his reasoning as to why he “likes” it.

Kipnis’ statement about modernism’s attempt at changing architec-ture’s relationship to ground – to disestablish ground as land – is in itself a very modernist notion from two angles. Firstly, the elimina-tion of references to land and the strive to return land to ground, is a stand to the politics of zoning, ownership and boundaries. Not to simplify the issue into a figure/ground relationship, but art also attacked the sanctity of the wall at about the same time. Jackson Pollock took down the canvas and placed it on the ground – a move that revolutionized the long-standing figure/ground relationship in art. So in a certain sense, Pollock’s placement of the canvas from the wall to the ground is redefining the ground and the wall – equating the ground to the wall. In this aspect, perhaps Pollock has achieved the obliteration of the ground, and at the same time, of the wall. Admittedly, this analogy’s weakness is the omission of the political aspect (ground versus land) that according to Kipnis, Corbusier’s Villa Savoye was challenging.

PROJECT kipnis lectures DRIVER responseKipnis is the well-read, eloquent man that seems to know a bit about everything enough to make others feel like he knows a lot. But he also cleverly declares this façade and candidly states that he comes off knowing more than actuality. The potential negative feelings that may have conjured while listening to him belittle one’s knowledge of one’s supposedly specialized field, cannot help but somewhat disseminate under this confession.

If the 21st century is about being in the “know”, (about Wikipedia and dropping references and anecdotes and favorite New York Times authors casually and effortlessly during conversations) Jeffrey Kipnis is in the “know” – or at least he is brilliant at the pres-entation of in the “know”. Admittedly, Kipnis probably knows enough that even if he was less knowledgeable about a certain issue, he could tie it, string it and relate it to an arena within his fields of “know”. Hence his attraction in this century – he is a walking Wikipe-dia, but better – he is a walking eloquent Wikipedia that speaks with believable authenticity.

Interestingly enough, Kipnis’ second lecture was much less entic-ing and intriguing. Either because his ideas seemed less novel or he was under time-pressure [Hernan Diaz-Alonso keeping a tight watch on the sidelines] or his hormonal chi was misaligned. All jokes aside, the novelty of Kipnis, both in terms of lecture content and personal charm, wore off by the second lecture. He was still charismatic but the seductive mesmerizing affect lessened. A fact that he would probably applaud and relish in.

As a student at SCI-Arc, one very helpful token he passed on was to focus on a certain aspect and essentially expedite through the others as if it were a perfunctory procedure; but making sure that the aspect chosen is mobilized, enlivened and flushed out. It was liberating to be advised to rush through the rest to allow for more time and energy to a central node of interest.

To his credit, Kipnis contextualized architecture in this world; some-thing that being a student so deeply embedded in a school environ-ment can easily cloud. Kipnis argued that the inexpensive “how-to” books at Home Depot excel in practicality (New Ultimate Book of Home Plans, The Complete Guide to Bathrooms 3rd Edition with DVD), and it is only after practicalities are met or challenged does design happen, which differentiates architecture from art – architec-ture as a precept of conditions, where creativity and design deci-sions come only after the issues arise; whereas in art the precept of conditions seem malleable and broader, hence creativity comes before. As an example, Kipnis illustrated Steven Holl’s “Y” House in the Catskill Mountains, where Holl used Mondrian as an inspira-tion when it seemed necessary, due to monetary reasons, to divide up the oversized window pane. So in Kipnis’ argument, the design aspect occurred at the moment when the condition arose – the im-practicality of a single window pane at that size. On the flip side, it is also the architect’s discretion / creative genius to be able to create or recognize the opportune conditions of design.

Frank Gehry

Steven Holl’s “Y” House

Richard Serra


2011Prose Dora Epstein-Jones Los Angeles, US

LOCATION

10

relationships. Kipnis’ use of Bataille and phrasing Bataille’s attitude that architecture is “evil”, is most certainly also for its quality of provocation and boldness. If an architect is a person that designs / dictates a large space for multiple people, the power imbued in that is undeniable, but does not necessarily connote “evil”. If that rationality was followed through, any political governing body with power is evil and anarchy would be the least of the evils. Kipnis in most probability aimed to deliver architecture’s authority and affect, but his choice of using Bataille showcases his intention and desire to “shock”.

Kipnis lived up to his name and delivered two informational, enter-taining and unforgettable lectures. It is tempting to find faults in his arguments and character, but there is no question to his current success as an architecture critic, or simply a critic for that matter. He provokes thought and discussion, which is in itself a respectable achievement.

Secondly, a building’s relationship to ground also translates to an investigation about how an individual is grounded, placed, and in return, viewed in society. Kipnis stated in both lectures the fact that one’s age and mannerisms vary in context: a social age of a “child” in the presence of one’s Mother; the immediate age of a “parent” with the arrival of a first-born. The inevitability and necessity for an individual to possess multiple identities / roles in society is a notion that has been around. Kipnis is perhaps implying that context is existential and its application towards architecture.

In both lectures Kipnis referenced French philosopher Georges Bataille’s notion that architecture is intrinsically evil because of its power over the observer / experience-er. Kipnis’ mention of Bataille’s view that architecture is “evil” is evident to his provoca-tive intentions and inclinations. Kipnis is most likely fully aware that power does not imply evil, as Foucault has rationalized: power is relational and not necessarily negative, repressive, and limiting; it is a dynamic that naturally exists as the natural consequence between

karen shueh 2011

Documents

surface area

sfgrowth area

sfservice area

sfapiculture area

sq ftagriculture area

agricultural production

populated urban landscape

crop production