Ornament
and function go together. There is no structure in nature that can be
classified as pure ornament without function. In traditional architecture,
which was more tied to nature, such a separation never existed.
It is
only in 20th-century architectural discourse that people began to think of
ornament as separate from function
“Of all things that are man-made,
bridges are, with dams, the most “structural,” single-minded, and imposing. As
connectors at a breaking point, they have a heroic force that is aided by a
challenging structuralism
Any
influence the object or place has on the user is part of its function. But any
ornament will certainly also impact the user, so the actual experience cannot
separate any particular aspect as pure function
multi-functional
bridges incorporate various functions in multi-levelled structures that also
work as a physical and cultural bridge.
Soleri
submitted proposal, “Cosmic Potentials,” to Massachusetts Institute of
Technology in 1950, incorporating alternative energy sources, such as, solar,
wind, tide and hydraulic, into the design for human habitats.
In
this picture of how successful objects and places are built by paying attention
to systemic coherence, ornament and function are inseparable. It doesn’t make
any sense to talk about one and not the other — just as in natural forms.
Therefore, we need to learn how to design things that have the quality of life,
that possess wholeness. And in doing so, function and ornament develop
together, without our having to pay any particular attention to either category
separately.
daylight is not just poetic—it’s also practical. Most spaces
have lighting requirements
tied to the functions we perform in them. Is there enough light in my classroom
for reading and writing? Is there enough light in my office to work—but not so
much that my computer screen is washed out? And how much of these lighting requirements can be met through
daylighting alone?
Until recently, renderings were the architect’s primary tool for
understanding daylight in their designs—renderings, and a healthy dose of
intuition. But a new generation of daylighting analysis tools, which is emerging alongside a
new generation of daylighting metrics, are enabling architects to look at
daylight in new ways—with important implications for design.
New benefits of daylight are constantly being uncovered:
daylight improves learning in school, improves recovery rates in hospitals,
improves productivity in workplaces, and improves psychological wellbeing
nearly everywhere. And there are energy benefits as well: when daylight can
replace electric lighting, we can save the energy consumed by the electric
lights; but we also eliminate the heat emitted by those lights and therefore
reduce the need for cooling. It’s not enough for daylight to be poetic—it also
needs to work. And this is where daylight analysis comes in.
Nikos
Salingaros. "Unified Architectural Theory, Chapter 12" 16 May
2015. ArchDaily.
Accessed 19 May 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=632062>BURGUNDY
Lopez,
Oscar. "Paolo Soleri’s Bridge Design Collection: Connecting Metaphor"
11 Sep 2011. ArchDaily.
Accessed 20 May 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=163889> BLUE
Carl
S. Sterner. "Taking Daylight to the Next Level: How Daylighting Analysis
is Changing Design" 14 May 2015. ArchDaily. Accessed 19 May 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=631256>ORANGE
No comments:
Post a Comment