Click here to edit title


Designer's Thoughts

The process of designing architectural space begins with points. In order to explain the process of Design in architecture, we have the start with the basic Design step-by-step layout: points, lines, planes, volume, and lastly space. In order to create space that can be occupied, we have to create volumes with voids. In order to create volumes of that nature, we have to create planes. In order to create planes, we have to create lines. And lastly, in order to design lines, we have to plot points. As a result, throughout my design process in architecture, the elements of space created from the volume I designed followed the process systematically and successfully.

            After going through the entire process from beginning to end of creating space that can be occupied which I described above, much geometry and voids came about in my design. Many of the shapes that arise from my design concept were cones and pyramids because of the specific theme/program I chose. The theme I chose was “battle”. To be more specific, the theme of “battle” is presented though curved geometry and angled geometry in conflict. Cones act as curved geometry while the opposing side, pyramids, act as sharp angled geometry. This setting creates the foundation for the volume that will eventually develop voids through another process, which I will explain, creating occupiable space.

            When we create voids, they become space, but how do you make that space occupiable for people. One of the many actions that can accomplish this task is through intersections of geometries. Using cones and pyramids, I organize them in three horizontal columns: the left column purely with cone geometry, the right column purely with pyramid geometry, and the middle column with both geometries combined. The organized geometries form into a volume. With that volume, it is then intersected into a simple cube volume which creates the voids of my design. The voids of the new volume become the occupiable space.

            In the space I designed, many sensual qualities arise from the many geometries such as sight, sound, and touch. Through sight, you experience the varied textures of the space. In the left section, you see dynamic curved textures from looking up, down, and left to right. To be more specific, as one enters the left section from the entrance, the walls curve dynamically through space which makes one feel loose and vivid like a dashing gazelle tramping in the wilderness of the wild to soft and warm surroundings like a melting candle. To the right (the opposing section), you see sharp pointed textures. As one travels from the left section to the right section, the walls become angular and disheveled which one feels shocked, awake, and tense from the hard and cold surroundings like a shattered plate. With these two types of textures we experience with our sight, we see how these textures are opposites of each other. Now we see how the theme/program becomes “battle” because of the conflict between curved and angular geometry. Lastly, from the center section of the designed space, you see both kinds of textures combine into one hybrid texture. Here the design becomes more elaborate. As one moves from the left or right section to the center section, the walls have curving and angular texture which makes one feel sharp and tense, but also loose and vivid from the hard and soft surroundings like a chaotic battle between angles and curves.

            Throughout this particular space, we do not just see, but we feel. What do we feel? What does this design cause us to feel? Here is where we find irony. This is when we feel both opposite feelings at the same time. This designed space gives us mixed feelings: from loose and vivid to awake and tense. It is clear that the conceptual ideas put into this design process are solid. However, within the design process, we also need to find what inspires us or drives us to design what we create. With my design, I was deeply inspired by one particular architect, Antonio Gaudi.  In many of his designs, varied geometries are bundled together and form new geometries, resulting in very beautiful structures. Because of Gaudi’s taste in aesthetics, I also wanted to imply his process within my design process.

            When the process of design comes to an end, it ends with a final model. Throughout the construction of my model of occupiable space, I learned to not only conceptualize my ideas in design, but also develop them into a reality. We also see the difference between “what is built on the computer” and “what is built in reality” , meaning that how ideas are drawn in the computer compared to drawn by hand. With my design, I used both the computer as well as my hands as tools to develop my architectural space through creative thoughts and ideas. As a result, we can see the major difference between the computer and the “the hand”. With the computer, I see my design being perfected, accurate, and exact. With my final model built with my own hands, I see my design as not being accurate, but more organic meaning that the imperfections of my final model actually enhanced the flow and circulation of my occupiable space. It came to a shock to me to see how different the end product looked between the computer and in reality. Therefore, there is reason why architects today still produce models and still draw by hand. The qualities of drawing by hand or building a model with just your hands, knife, and glue develop how our mind directs every move we make as designers and as architects. It is with our mind, computer processing, analog processing, and craftsmanship that makes up the whole of what an architect stands for.