Sensing Spaces:A Body-oriented Architectural Design Education

The contemporary dominance of visuality has turned our understanding of space into a mode of unidirectional experience that externalizes other sensual capacities of the body while perceiving the built environment. This affects not only architectural practice but also architectural education when an introduction to the concept of space is often challenging, especially for the students who have limited spatial and sensual training. Considering that an architectural work is not perceived as a series of retinal pictures but as a repeated multi-sensory experience, the problem definitions in the design studio need to be disengaged from the dominance of a ‘focused vision’ and be re-constructed in a holistic manner. A method to address this approach is to enable the students to refer to their own sensual experiences of the built environment as a part of their design processes. This paper focuses on a particular approach to the second year architectural design teaching which has been followed in the Department of Architecture at Izmir University of Economics for the last three years. The very first architectural project of the studio and the program, entitled ‘Sensing Spaces’, is conducted as a multi-staged design process including ‘sense games, analyses of organs and their interpretations into space’. The objectives of this four-week project are to explore the sense of space through the design of a three-dimensional assembly, to create an awareness of the significance of the senses in the design process and to experiment with re-interpreted forms of bodily parts. Hence, the students are encouraged to explore architectural space through their ‘tactile, olfactory, auditory, gustative and visual stimuli’. In this paper, based on a series of examples, architectural space is examined beyond its boundaries of structure, form and function, and spatial design is considered as an activity of re-constructing the built environment through the awareness of bodily senses.

Fabrication and Ms Conduct: Scrutinising Practice Through Feminist Theory

This paper describes a collaborative practice, between an architect (the author) and a textile designer; its outcomes and the critical theoretical and feminist contexts from which the practice evolved and to which it still responds. The practice advocates the interweaving of more than the yarns, material and cultures on which it is physically based, but also the intertwining of theory and technology as a means to advance architectural practice. This is done in response to Ahrentzen’s charge to feminist scholars and practitioners to ‘embrace not only the abstract conceptual nature of much postmodernist theorizing but also that derived from the serious “hanging out”, looking at, listening to, scrutinising and theorizing lived experiences of the everyday’, in this instance the everyday practice of combining concrete and textiles.

An Ethical Production of Place:A Case for Economy in Architectural Design

Architects typically interpret Heidegger to mean that dwelling in the Black Forest, was more authentic than living in an industrialised society however we cannot turn back the clock so we are confronted with the reality of modernisation. Since the Second World War production has shifted from material to immaterial assets. Increasingly place is believed to offer resistance to this fluidity, but this belief can conversely be viewed as expressing a sublimated anxiety about our role in the world – the need to create buildings that are self-consciously contextual suggests that we may no longer be rooted in material places, but in immaterial relations.
This issue has been pondered by David Harvey in his paper From Place to Space and Back Again where he argues that the role of place in legitimising identity is ultimately a political process, as the interpretation of its meaning is dependent on whose interpretation it is. Doreen Massey has found that different classes of people are more or less mobile and that mobility is related to class and education rather than to nationality or geography. These thinkers point to a different set of questions than the usual space/place divide – how can we begin to address the economic mediation of spatial production to develop an ethical production of place? Part of the answer is provided by the French architectural practice Lacaton Vassal in their book Plus. They ask themselves how to produce more space for the same cost so that people can enjoy a better quality of life. Another French practitioner, Patrick Bouchain, has argued that architect’s fees should be inversely proportional to the amount of material resources that they consume. These approaches use economics as a starting point for generating architectural form and point to more ethical possibilities for architectural practice

Beyond the shadow space: architecture as a professional and creative process; during and post-conflict.

Introduction

Much has been written about the impact of conflict on the physical nature of cities; most obviously perhaps the damage, destruction, defensive construction and spatial reconfigurations that evolve in times of conflict. Set within the context of Belfast, Northern Ireland, this paper will focus on three areas. First, a closer reading of the long-term physical impact of conflict, in particular, the spatial forms and practices that persist conceptually and culturally, and/or resist re-conceptualisation. Secondly, the effect of conflict on the nature of architectural practice itself, considering whether issues such as appointment and procurement impacted on architectural expectation and the context of operation. Thirdly, the effect of conflict on people, in particular in relation to creativity and hence the psyche of practice itself. This section will also identify the conditions that undermine or support design quality and creativity not only within times of conflict but also as society evolves out of the shadow space. 1
Twelve years on from the Peace Agreement,2 it may seem remarkable from an external perspective that Northern Ireland still needs to be reflecting on its troubled past. But the immediate post-conflict phase offered the communities of Northern Ireland place and time to experience ‘normal life’, begin to reconcile themselves to the hurt they experienced and start to reconfigure their relationships to one another. Indeed, it has often been expressed that probing the issues too much, at too early a phase, might in fact ‘Open old wounds without resolving anything’ and/or ‘Destabilise the already fragile political system.’3 This tendency not to deliberate or be too probing is therefore understandable and might be the reason why, for example, Northern Ireland's first Architecture and Built Environment policy, published in June, 2006, contains only one routine reference to ‘the Troubles’.

Clearly, however, there is a time in the development of a healthy, functioning society, when in order effectively to plan its future, it must also carry out a closer reading and deeper understanding of its past. As Maya Angelou puts it, ‘History, despite its wrenching pain/ Cannot be unlived, and if faced/ With courage, need not be lived again.’4

Increasingly, those within the creative arts sector and the built environment professions are showing interest in carrying out that closer reading, teasing out issues around conflict. This was led in part by the recent publication of the Troubles Archive by the Arts Council of Northern Ireland.5 Those involved in the academic or professional development of future generations of architects are also concerned about the relevance of a post-conflict condition. As a profession, if architects purport to be concerned with context, then the almost tangible socio-political circumstances and legacy of Northern Ireland does inevitably require direct eye contact. This paper therefore aims to bring the relationship between conflict and architectural practice in Northern Ireland into sharp focus, not to constrain or dull creative practice but to heighten its potential.

Odile Decq'i Anlamak

This is an interview with the well-known French architect Odile Decq.

Architecture from the dogs …

In this chapter Morrow talks of her return to Northern Ireland to 2003 and how her involvement in establishing a new school of architecture and a recent suite of interdisciplinary masters has led her to consider the relationship between the post-conflict context, architectural practice and its education. She examines the consequences of not facing the effects of conflict; the impact on societal and architectural creativity; and the potential for live project pedagogy to evolve effective models of socio-spatial rehearsals. She concludes with some strategies for schools of architecture that wish to feed and be fed by their context. This is a personalized commentary that teeters somewhere between deep-seated frustration with a blind-folded profession and sustained belief in architectural education’s potential to offer more than built solutions.

Dublin’s ephemeral and imaginary architectures

In 1989, the Irish architectural practice O’Donnell and Tuomey were commissioned to build a temporary pavilion to represent Ireland at the 11 Cities/11 Nations exhibition at Leeuwarden in the Netherlands. Citing Peter Smithson, John Tuomey suggested the pavilion, which drew inspirations from the forms and materials of the modern Irish barn, embodied an intention ‘not just to build but to communicate’. Its subsequent reassembly for the inauguration of the Irish Museum of Modern Art in the courtyard of the seventeenth-century Royal Hospital Kilmainham in Dublin in 1991, drew comparisons between the urban sophistication of this colonial building, its svelte new refit, and the rural expression of O’Donnell + Tuomey’s barn. It was, one critic recently noted, as if ‘a wedding had been crashed by a country cousin who had forgotten to clean his boots’.
It has been argued that temporary or ephemeral pieces of architecture, unburdened by the traditional constraints of firmitas or utilitas, have the ability to offer a concise distillation of meaning and intention. Approaching the qualities of rhetoric, such architectures share similarities with the monument and yet differ in fundamental ways. Their rapid construction in lightweight materials can allow for an almost instantaneous negotiation of zeitgeist. And, unlike the monument, from the outset the space and form of these installations is designed to disappear.
This paper analyses the ephemeral architectures of Dublin in the modern period contextualising their qualities and intentions as they manifest themselves across colonial, post-colonial and contemporary epochs. It finds origins in the theatrical sets of the late eighteenth century and traces their movements into the semi-public sphere of the pleasure garden and finally into the theatre of the streets. It is here that temporary architecture in the city has been at its most potent, allowing the amplification or subversion of the meanings of much larger spaces. Historically, much of Dublin’s most conspicuous instances of ephemeral architecture have been realised as a means of articulating mass spectacle in political, religious or nationalistic events. And while much of this has sought to confirm dominant ideologies, it has also been possible to discern moments of opposition.
The contemporary period, however, has arguably witnessed a shift in ephemeral architectures from explicitly representing ‘positive ideologies’ towards something more oblique or nebulous. This turn towards abstraction in form and space has rendered an especially communicative form of architecture particularly elusive. By examining continuities within the apparent disjuncture between historical and contemporary examples, this paper begins to unpick the language of recent ephemeral architecture in Dublin and situate it within wider global trends where political and economic imperatives are often simultaneously obscured and expressed in public space by a vocabulary of universality. As Jurgen Habermas has suggested, the contemporary value given to the transitory and the ephemeral ‘discloses a longing for an undefiled, immaculate and stable present’.

Architecture as Pedagogy: Alive and Kicking

This workshop draws on an emerging collaborative body of research by Lovett, Morrow and McClean that aims to understand architecture and its processes as a form of pedagogical practice: a civic pedagogy.

Architectural education can be valued not only as a process that delivers architecture-specific skills and knowledges, but also as a process that transforms people into critically active contributors to society. We are keen to examine how and where those skills are developed in architectural education and trace their existence and/or application within practice. We intend to examine whether some architectural and spatial practices are intrinsically pedagogical in their nature and how the level of involvement of clients, users and communities can mimic the project-based learning of architectural education – in particularly in the context of ‘live project learning’

1. This workshop begins with a brief discussion paper from Morrow that sets out the arguments behind why and how architecture can be understood as pedagogy. It will do so by presenting firstly the relationship between architectural practice and pedagogy, drawing out both contemporary and historical examples of architecture and architects acting pedagogically. It will also consider some other forms of creative practice that explicitly frame themselves pedagogically, and focus on participatory approaches in architectural practice that overlap with inclusive and live pedagogies, concluding with a draft and tentative abstracted pedagogical framework for architectural practice.

2. Lovett will examine practices of architectural operation that have a pedagogical approach, or which recognise within themselves an educational subtext/current. He is most interested in a 'liveness' beyond the 'Architectural Education' of university institutions. The presentation will question the scope for both spatial empowerment / agency and a greater understanding and awareness of the value of good design when operating as architects with participant-clients younger than 18, older than 25 or across varied parts of society. Positing that the learning might be greatest when there are no prescribed 'Learning Outcomes' and that such work might depend on risk-taking and playfulness, the presentation will be a curated showcase drawing on his own ongoing work.

Both brief presentations will inform the basis of the workshop’s discussion which hopes to draw on participants views and expereinces to enrich the research process. The intention is that the overall workshop will lead to a call for contributors and respondents to a forthcoming publication on ‘Architecture as Pedagogy’.

Design and Practice in Architectural Theory Education

Benefiting from design in theory learning is not common in architecture schools. The general practice is to design in studio and to theorise in lectures. In the undergraduate module History and Theory in Architecture II at Queen’s University Belfast, students attend interactive lectures, participate in reading group discussions, design TextObjects, and write essays. TextObjects contain textual, audio and/or graphic representations that highlight a single concept or a complex set of issues derived from readings. Students experiment with diverse media, such as filmmaking, photography, and graphic design, some of which they experience for the first time. Lectures and readings revolve around theories of architectural representation, media and communication, which are practiced through TextObjects. This is a new way to link theory and practice in architectural education. Through action research, this study analyses this innovative teaching method called TextObject, which brings design and practice into architectural theory education to stimulate students towards critical thinking. The pedagogical research of architectural theoretician Necdet Teymur (1992, 1996, 2002) underlies the study.