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.
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:
3.Maleparte House/ Eisenman House/ Gehry’s House/ Mobius House/ Domino House/ Adolf loos house
5.Oblique build through collaboration
‘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.
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.
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.
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