Vigorous Environments - Reading Notes

Reading Notes:

prescribed meaning and functionality of design forms is no longer practical, pushing towards a design product more focused on process, qualities of spatial relationships, and development of dynamic surface forms. 

ecological design paradigm shifts from one of stable alignments and characteristics to "temporal regulation of generative processes"

spatiotemporal design processes attempt to address the problem of installing more permanent structure in an environment that is temporal and changes over time

"synergy and feedback as core functions of performativity"; the ability of structure and architecture to converse with its environment, and for technology to enable architecture to facilitate an adaptive response 

Umberto Eco states that the ambiguity of a work is what allows its openness to afford flexibility in response to external condition, "deliberate ambiguity"

proposes a field of possible orders, instead of one prescriptive type

multiple arrangements of the constituent parts, based on the user's preference

avoid conventional forms of expression and prescribed interpretation

in an effort to detach geometrical forms and associated interpretations, Ocean North attempts to fragment familiar geometries and form new spatial relationships that are not associated with a particular preconception or preconceived interpretation, "unfamiliar geometric composites"

Extraterrain furniture project - simple material surface with varied potential, but evades an "indication of proper use"

destabilized spaces and the heterogeneity of the material surface prompted the users to perceive its qualities differently in different environments at different times, with varying amounts of company. "territorial negotiation between simultaneous users."

contemporary solutions that seek to provide individualized products are still working with a mix and match technique of a finite set of choices; the goal is to break away from this method further, and instead move to a "dynamically evolving production of nonprescribed possibilities." 

Reaction:

My interpretation of the reading takes the generative process of the relationship between object and user as analogous to the neurons of the brain and the human adaptive response. Just as the brain learns new things and consequently creates neural connections that bridge the interaction between the new thing learned and previous knowledge, the architecture being described here is one where the preexisting condition or perception is not the foundation upon which relationships are derived; rather, an ambiguity or openness of interpretation and use creates new types of relationships that are detached from familiar forms or conventions. This is similar to the brain's ability to create new relationships of the phenomena that it observes through our senses and experiences.

Another statement I'm sensing is that the goal is now to create an architecture whose ambiguity is its redeeming feature, a sort of precise ambiguity, that allows it to perform a wide variety of functions, but also over a course of time in which environment changes. I'm a bit skeptical about this stance, though I understand the rationale. I wonder where the balance is struck between prescriptive form and complex, unexplainable geometries so that both practicality and intuition directed towards the possible functions and performances of built forms can be understood.