Author Archives: Vidhya Pushpanathan

Collaboration through looping conversations

DIAG1 DIAG2

A summary text diagram on the objective of the game in terms of authorship through looping conversations of collaboration that leads to readings and misreadings.

SWOOPBAGDIAG

 

There will be 6 game bags that consist of similar pieces with very specific ‘wild card pieces’ inside the bag the categories of the rounds will be printed. The outer layer of the bag will have the objective (summary text diagram) and the title of the game printed on it.

The categories for the rounds are as follows:

1.Oblique
2.Ronchamp
3.Maleparte House/ Eisenman House/ Gehry’s House/ Mobius House/ Domino House/ Adolf loos house
4.Sacred Space
5.Oblique build through collaboration

 

Looping

‘The function of the oblique’ is a utopian project that highlights why we are constantly looping in the ideas of another. Firstly, most readings about this project are that of others and only consist of one aspect of this project. Many architects then exhausted this one aspect and created multiple readings of it. Finally, this exhaustion of the idea has become the only understanding of the project.

 

Collaboration

What is usually missed out in this project is the key aspect that made the project. This is the fact that there were two very different men who were having an ongoing conversation about their opinions that lead them to no longer reference others but themselves. Through the mediation of their conversation and trying to resolve their conflicts they developed a utopian theory which neither one took sole authorship off. There was always duplicity in the readings of each word and form.

 

Conversation

This leads up to the question, what is the role that conversations play in architecture today? In most cases, architects have a one-sided conversation with the utopian project. It is one man’s reading on another’s. This one man’s reading is then transferred to another and so on and so forth. In the end, all that is left is a singular reading and experience of one man. So who is now the author of the theory? The first man who conceived the theory? The second man who has readapted the theory? The original theory is finally a layer of multiple quotations and readings.

 

Reading/ Mis-reading

The game is primarily designed to argue that there is no singular way to read or experience architecture and more importantly how one’s reading or experience of architecture evolves when the narrator changes or when the narrator no longer exists. It also allows for more that just a one-sided conversation to take place. Architecture is made up of multiple readings and drawings from many cultures that enter in a mutual dialogue. The dialogue may only exist if we allow the option of multiplicity in readings. What the game gives the audience is the freedom to question and read architecture through conversations with minimal restrictions, which may return architecture to its strongest position that is a profession of collaboration

 

Drawing catalogue to follow

Tags:
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Comments Off

Conversations, Collaboration, Looping and readings/ mis-readings

DIAG1 DIAG2

A summary text diagram on the objective of the game in terms of authorship through looping conversations of collaboration that leads to readings and misreadings.

SWOOPBAGDIAG

 

There will be 6 game bags that consist of similar pieces with very specific ‘wild card pieces’ inside the bag the categories of the rounds will be printed. The outer layer of the bag will have the objective (summary text diagram) and the title of the game printed on it.

The categories for the rounds are as follows:

1.Oblique
2.Ronchamp
3.Maleparte House/ Eisenman House/ Gehry’s House/ Mobius House/ Domino House/ Adolf loos house
4.Sacred Space
5.Oblique build through collaboration

 

Looping

‘The function of the oblique’ is a utopian project that highlights why we are constantly looping in the ideas of another. Firstly, most readings about this project are that of others and only consist of one aspect of this project. Many architects then exhausted this one aspect and created multiple readings of it. Finally, this exhaustion of the idea has become the only understanding of the project.

 

Collaboration

What is usually missed out in this project is the key aspect that made the project. This is the fact that there were two very different men who were having an ongoing conversation about their opinions that lead them to no longer reference others but themselves. Through the mediation of their conversation and trying to resolve their conflicts they developed a utopian theory which neither one took sole authorship off. There was always duplicity in the readings of each word and form.

 

Conversation

This leads up to the question, what is the role that conversations play in architecture today? In most cases, architects have a one-sided conversation with the utopian project. It is one man’s reading on another’s. This one man’s reading is then transferred to another and so on and so forth. In the end, all that is left is a singular reading and experience of one man. So who is now the author of the theory? The first man who conceived the theory? The second man who has readapted the theory? The original theory is finally a layer of multiple quotations and readings.

 

Reading/ Mis-reading

The game is primarily designed to argue that there is no singular way to read or experience architecture and more importantly how one’s reading or experience of architecture evolves when the narrator changes or when the narrator no longer exists. It also allows for more that just a one-sided conversation to take place. Architecture is made up of multiple readings and drawings from many cultures that enter in a mutual dialogue. The dialogue may only exist if we allow the option of multiplicity in readings. What the game gives the audience is the freedom to question and read architecture through conversations with minimal restrictions, which may return architecture to its strongest position that is a profession of collaboration

 

Drawing catalogue to follow

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off

Game Pieces Part Deux

photo 3 photo 5

photo 4 photo 1

New pieces from today. The silicone from yesterday did not fully set but I went ahead and casted it so we will see how the new stairs look like. Still working on some more 3d pieces and a project statement.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Game Pieces

 

 

photo 2 photo 3 photo 4 photo 5photo 1 photo 2 photo

More pieces to follow soon.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

To Disclaim or Not To Disclaim!

Warning: Partial disclaimer enclosed

photo 2 photo 3

I have worked out a partial part of the game board. Eleanor suggested adding color which does sound like a good idea right now. They finally have sent my file to be 3d printed which they say will be ready (hopefully) by tomorrow. Also, I was interested in possibly casting some of the game pieces in different material and color especially for the double curvature pieces so it won’t just be the flat color of the 3D printer.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Rules of Engagement

Modern_Architecture_Game_01_thumb

I worked out a preliminary set of rules for the Re-con game, images to follow shortly. This involved ongoing intensive research on http://www.boardgamegeek.com (I highly recommend that you click the link). Any comments or feedback would be great. I am now working out the preliminary design of the board and pieces. Also, just for kicks I came across a modern architecture game designed by NEXT architects http://www.dexigner.com/news/24568.

Game Format

1.Each player is given a game set complete with a kit of prefabricated parts (of different materiality) of the most basic architectural elements which are:

  • . Walls
  • . Floor Slabs
  • . Fenestration
  • . Structural Components (columns and beams)
  • . Roof
  • . Circulation (Stairs, Ramps and Lifts)
  • . A scaled person

2. The game master (who has the only kit with the actual components of the original church of Nevers) reads out the instructions of the basic ideas that the design of the church was based on.

3. Each Player is then required to follow the instruction of the game master and reconstruct the church with the kit of part he/she has been given.

4. At the end of the game each player will reveal his/her design of the church and the game master will reveal his/hers.

5. The winner is the design that is the furthest away from the original church.

 

Game Master’s Instructions (Like the Dungeon Master in Dungeon’s and Dragons)

1.Generate a basic layout for a church

2.Curate a circulation path that will offer the most dynamic form of movement for the users

3.The main circulation path must cut across the longest length of the church.

4. Define an ascent, a descent and a horizontal recovery threshold at a juncture.

5. The space must have an essence of what you feel is sacred.Try to be inspired by what you feel is natural.

6. Establish a link between the ground, the user and the façade.

7.Emphasize the boundary between the church and its context/surroundings. Try to be inspired by what you feel is artificial.

THE GAME MASTER WILL REVEAL THE IDEAS AND CONTROVERSIES BEHIND THE ORIGINAL DESIGN ONCE ALL THE DESIGNS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.

 

Game Goal

The goal of the game is to see if it is possible to redefine the function of the oblique so that we may be able to ‘totally reinvent the architectural vocabulary today’. It is also a game that emphasizes the idea of authorship and ‘misreading’ in architecture. It aims to illustrate the contradictory ways of looking at architecture that two very different people may have (For example, Paul Virilio and Claude Parent). It questions the idea that there is only a singular way to read/experience architecture. If there is no one narrating the way you should read architecture does this mean that your reading is erroneous and you do not understand it or does it just mean you have a found a new way to reinvent the architectural vocabulary? Finally in terms of authorship, the game tries to provide a medium that will try to prove how one theory may be illustrated in different physical forms as well as the strength of how we mediate and reinterpret conflicting points of views in order to generate a new dynamic form of architecture.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off

Inspirations

 

F4E68996-9904-4990-8443-9FF6DE96D17F copy 0CAD4F71-8D5A-443C-AE33-B3F1D70D2380 copy

A34F85D5-4BF6-4966-B505-7037DAEEF503  11A46494-79F1-4259-8773-37F554D0C841

“The parts do not determine the pattern but it is the pattern that determines the part.”

-Perec

Looking for inspirations on how to structure the rules and design my re-con game ‘the function of the _____: A view on angles and an angle on views. ‘ I came across a game designed by Madelon Vriesendorp called ‘Mind Game’.

My favorite parts of the game is that you have to analyze someone else’s stage set and then the person who has the most widely excepted interpretation wins. It plays off the theme that I am interested in between conversations, authorship and misreading.

I love how clear and simple her rules and the structure of the game is.

Such a great inspiration for designing this game board. Having said that, I am hoping that it ends up looking inspired and CLEAR!

 

 

“The only thing that counts is the ability to link this piece to other pieces.”

-Perec

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off

A view on angles and an angle on views

Pokergamecollagelow

At a junction where I find myself struggling to communicate my thoughts that are still in a stage of being a swarm of ants. I leave to find that can of bug spray, and find both Paul Virilio and Claude Parent sitting in front of a board game. So I kindly ask them is it possible to join them because I have a million questions I need desperately answered.

VP: What is the significance of the church in Nevers?

CP:  Sainte-Bernadette of Banlay is the work of two men of very different cultures, though closely linked by the embryonic developments of a theory in the making for which the church served as the first test: oblique architecture.

VP: How was it oblique architecture?

CP: After in-depth discussion, the v-shaped plan was chosen, in order to better illustrate the path for the congregation by distinguishing an ascent, a decent and the horizontal recovery threshold at the juncture. This organizational precisely fit the theoretical discussion of oblique architecture.

VP: Why were you interested in oblique architecture?

PV: The end of the vertical as an axis of elevation, the end of the horizontal as permanent plane, in favour of the oblique axis and the inclined plane makes it possible for the total reinvention of architectural vocabulary.

CP: As we both had two independent approaches to dynamic architecture, oblique architecture was the only form of architecture that would accommodate both our independent approaches.

VP: What made you give up on the function of the oblique and working with each other?

PV: After a few years the overwhelming difficulties of building an oblique habitat led me to abandon this work, which seemed to offer no practical benefit to young architects starting out in the working world.

CP:  As you already know, I did not give up on developing oblique architecture. I just gave up on working with Paul Virilio.  He became too involved in the ‘events’ of ’68 and we had to go our separate ways. Charles de Gaulle once said that the French were like cattle, I don’t like that mob – mentality, and I have no stomach for it.

VP: You both defined the theory the function of the oblique. Is it possible to misread the function of the oblique?

CP: It is not possible to mis-read the function of the oblique, as there was always to independent approaches to it. You would just have to pick the side you agreed with.

PV: It is a view on angles and it is an angle on views!

VP: As you know today, oblique architecture is very much a part of the architectural vocabulary. Do you think that if you were to redesign the Church of Nevers today, would it represent oblique architecture or would it take another form? I strongly believe that it might take on another shape.

There is a long pause of silence and then they ask me if I would like to join in the game they are playing.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off

Duality

Mod1 Model1

 

Exploring the concept of duality with the oblique to emphasize the two specific characters who had two very different personalities and design concepts.

Each side of the model will frame and tell a specific story/contradiction between PV and CP at the time that AP published its first manifesto.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off

“What is two plus two?” “Fish!”

photo 1

photo 3

photo 2

In figurative use, oblique means indirect or purposely misleading. “What is two plus two?” “Fish!” as an answer is completely oblique.

 

I finally picked up my (translated from French) Architecture Principe compilation of all 9 editions. It includes the original French publications, which I think might be helpful at our next group tutorial to help illustrate the direction I would like to go in.

 

I took a couple of photos of the two key things that I wanted to highlight from the feedback I received at the last tutorial.

 

One: PV and CP brought to the table two separate trains of thought by which they used the Architecture Principe as a tool that emphasizes it.  The never wrote together for the Architecture Principe. Each of the publications would have separate essays written by both of them independently. Many times you would be able to find contradictory statements.

 

After a conversation with Ioanna last night, she mentioned that in both the French and Romanian languages the definition of the Oblique is the connection between two different points in an angle

 

Two: The second image shows that they were experimenting with a formal medium that would connect their independent thoughts. It could have been any shape that would do that. So it could have very well been the function of the squiggly.

 

Therefore I think that the function of the oblique is anything but the formal aspect of the oblique.

 

‘In figurative use, oblique means indirect or purposely misleading. “What is two plus two?” “Fish!” as an answer is completely oblique.’

–       vocabulary.com

 

 

I just need to find a way of communicating this connection/ mediation between these two figures.

 

A little side note (which I think I will explore), after their split, Paul Virilio became co-director with Anatole Kopp of the Ecole Speciale d’Architecture in Paris. He focused on the development of technical research into the organization and the precise morphology of oblique volumes. He later abandoned this as he came to the conclusion that this research provided no practical benefit to young architects starting out in the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off

The Function of the Oblique is NOT Formalism?

To oblique or not to oblique?

CP- The method chosen is to ‘shock’ people by proposing and architecture that is incompatible with their tastes and habits.

PV- The oblique isn’t formalism. It is a culture of the body that plays on disequilibrium, that regards man not as static but in motion and takes the dancer as The model of the human being

So what is the Function of the Oblique? The Function of the Oblique is a theory that was developed by both Paul Virilio and Claude Parent and they published their Theory in a 9 publications that they co-edited called Architecture Principe.

The 9 editions are essays that illustrate how the oblique has brought together both their independent trains of thoughts on their issues on urbanism, architecture and the social condition in France at that point.

To simplify this PV was interested in bunkers and CP was interested in dynamic geometry.

My reading of this is that PV was far more interested in the notion of perception and visibility being a child or war, context was not as important to him as he has said, when he was growing up, he was used to cities disappearing (having been bombed). CP on the other hand, say that he is interested in dynamic geometry but I think that he is also interested in the idea of context as one of his main issues was that the French people were so used to living banal lives in banal spaces. He wanted to shock people in order to wake them up so they could start ‘living’ again. He was clearly dealing with an issue in France.

My current roadblock: How do I present the function of the Oblique without making it purely about the oblique as a form BUT to be about the relationship between PV and CP AND their theories in Architecture Principe

TFO GRID

Tags:
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Comments Off

What is the Oblique?

 

A swarm of ants

An image of my thoughts right now.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 2 Comments