Monday night Washington University in
St. Louis honored Peter Eisenman as a guest lecturer. This lecture was one that
really made a difference in my understanding of architecture and theoretical
thinking. He had many wise words, but most of which raised questions to us as
students. He spoke about generational differences that he went through and what
he sees us going through as the future of the profession. That discussion, and
much of the rest of the lecture, was deep and made us really think about design
in the new age. His 2nd half of the lecture was a display of his
project in Spain. Much of the project was impressive, but there was one thing
that really took my attention, mostly about what he said and the thought behind
his discovery.
Within
the project are these features that come up and meet the building in a ramp sort
of manor. He referred to these as noses of the buildings. It wasn’t till after
that Peter saw people climbing up these artificial hills and sitting, while
kids rolled down them. But what really made me perk up was he mentioned
skateboarding. Now after seeing the different features of similar form, this
campus that he created is a skateboard heaven. But as a skater I look for that
stuff in architecture, something no other person in the world will ever see.
But after peter experienced these phenomena, his eyes seemed to be open to what
he actually designed. I'm not saying he designed a skate park but what he
designed invited more than is expectations of a typical pedestrian. Now I don’t
want to say that Peter Eisenman backs skateboard and invited skaters to ride
around on his building. In many ways that is ridiculous to say, but it’s the
recognition that makes a difference.
So
here is my point to all of this. As a skateboarder and student in architecture,
I find that these two relationships are important. The word pedestrian means
one thing to a majority of architects. It is a simple word and doesn’t account
for the unexpected. Now people such as skateboarders, bikers, kids, and anyone
else, are unexpected pedestrians. We create behavioral traits that require certain
spaces and other needs in order for a program of such nature to be successful.
What I mean by this is, designing a piece of architecture, you must be mindful
of whatever and whoever. We can’t always design for
skateboarders and other people who are different than an average pedestrian,
but really it is being mindful of how you design the space. You must ask
yourself if it can be skate able or if it can’t. It is all in your intent of
the space but as architects we have the control to attempt to guide people to
go or do certain things. So to finish up, architects like Peter Eisenman may
not have designed his building for skateboarders or rolling kids, but in a way
that feature became successful. One thing became another un-expectantly it
became a new notion and a new idea. So maybe should design be mindful or should
it be a surprise.
No comments:
Post a Comment