the artificial animation of architecture

Yo peeps sorry for the non-participation but trust me I still do check this blog out often and am pleased it's still engaging and active. For the past months I've been doing a lot of moving, flying, resting, partying and drinking. Good fun seeing you guys back in jan!

I just had my first pre-major studio yesterday. Before that I spent a bit of time reflecting and thinking about what I might wanna do for my major project; what really drives my passionate investigations. I suppose the past two semesters in rmit, whereby I had the chance to unleash and unbound myself, have really been gearing me towards a couple of discourses loosely tied together. The other studio that really impacted me was definately david thomas's whereby I was introduced to the relationship between the materiality of objects and human senses through the exploration of kinesthesia and heterotopia.

For my first semester in rmit I designed a prosthetic factory and clinic with a simple idea of using the building to bring about body-machine interface awareness. This was done by allowing part of the building's skin to become an landscaped thoroughfare and park at certain points above the factory. In a way it was contextually sensitive to return most of the huge site to the public and the use of ramps of cos was apt for the program. A series of investigation thus led to understanding how the surrounding site and building impacts the human body not just visually but through sound and touch.

The second semester touched on emergence and the field, ethicoaesthetics (especially with regards to future design and responsibilities of the architect), plasticity and plasticology, organic and non organic life in terms of behaviour etc. We were given the task to develop a site with child and age care facilities for the year 2050 and my project evolved into an eco village with incubation and birthing centres such that the ovaries of the people in aged care might be incubated, born and bred on site. Most interestingly this studio was part of my tutor's research such that we were observed every class and we had to work on the site as a whole studio and the brief had no end expectation - the behavior of the studio resulted in the emergence of a final brief.

In both studios, though on different scales, my studies have centered around the relationship between objects in a field (static or not) and the immanance of forces that causes a series of effects. Castle's 'Emergence in Architecture' suggests the viewing of buildings as structures 'evolved through morphegenesis to the point of attaining an ecology of performance'. Like Piccinini's plasticology, the idea is such that we live in the middle of artificial and natural and that buildings could to be seen as organisms with behavioural tendencies. It is like the chemical clock effect whereby systems ultimately reach a dynamic equilibrium instead of a static one due to 'fluctuations in the environment'. This in turn produces a more adaptable and flexible system of functional advantage. The study of these parameters is currently flourishing especially in digital practice. The computer has allowed the reworking of relationships, making it more complex and indirect but also provides more opportunities to new structural possibilities of ecological performance.

Having said all that, I am not in an 'all for it' stance. My interests specifically lie in the determination of the current phenomenon as a means to an end or and end in itself. If the obsession of combining computer science and biology with architecture is to inspire future solutions then to what extent can it be justified aside from structural performance which can be attained through other means? What is the stake in this artificial animation of architecture? Also, if buildings are to be seen as 'living' with behavioural tendencies that directly affect and changes systems in our society then ethical questions must be asked. What is then the role of the architect and where will he fit in this equation? Also, how do pressing contemporary issues apply or be applied to this type of architectural expression in a post digital age?

I had a little chat with my tutor and she has done similar research with respect to the above. She is also interested in the socio-politics of space and place in the contemporary society. I asked her if I could, instead of designing a building, write a thesis for my major project cos I might wanna go into research thereafter. She said there are people who do that and that she was willing to supervise my major project if I decide to do that but she also suggested that I follow the studio brief at least til mid crit before making the decision..

What do you guys think?

P.s: There is a reason why I haven't been posting and that's cos nobody seems to comment. Please comment. Doesn't have to be relevant, more so to just show that I haven't wasted my time and/or the post is worthy. Cheers.