Big City Blog Boy

For the make-up I was asked to find 5 main points and expand on them.

In "Architecture as Space" by Bruno Zevi, the first point that I will talk about is learning to grasp space. The article says you have to know how to see it and understand space in a building. This makes a TON of sence, especially after our community service projects. In almost every organization, the main thing that we, as students, were asked to focus on was the space and how to make it flow better and more efficient for the building and program.

The second point is the understanding of what architecture is. The article talks about how architects have to understand what the space (building) will contain. Basically the article talks about how the space inside of a church is and should be different than the space inside an office building. Also, the space inside a house should be different than the space inside a factory. Without this understanding, you cannot be an architect.

The third point is perspective. The article talks about how you have to understand the 3 demensions...height, width, and depth. It then talks about how Renaissance artists finally began to understand perspective in paintings. This also makes perfect sence. I can't imagine a drawing of a building and only being able to see it one dementially. Obviously the understanding of perspective has help very much in being able to give contractors a clear understanding of what the architect wants.

The forth point is the history of architecture. The article talks about how the history of architecture is also the history of spacial concepts. The article also talks about how the interior space is the basis for the judgement of buildings and determines whether or not it is an improtant building in history. As Lance LaVine said in his lecture, "architects often look to old, great buildings to understand architecture...mainly gothic cathiedrals." This shows that there much be an understanding of the history of architecture in order to understand modern architecture.

The fifth, and final, point is the methods of representation of space in buildings. The article talks about three of these methods...Plans, Facades, and Photographs. The plan is how we evaluate a building and experience it from above. The facades are a line of reason and is where an architect deals with the elevations. Lastly, the photographs are what gives us a three dementional view of the building, however in most cases it is everything about the building but the interior space. These methods make sence and have improved with time. All three of the methods are still very important for architecture and now, with the help of computers and technology, are even more helpful to architecture.

Posted by Kristopher Kornovich at 10:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

In the article by Gershenfeld, he talks about a personal fabricator, which is "a machine that makes machines." He talks about a class that he tought called "How to make Almost Anything" and how he observed four surprises from his students, which were:
1. The amount of interest from students
2. How they were motivated to take the class in order to make things they always wanted
3. What the students acomplished
4. How the students learned
He also talks about how he believes the personal fabricator will be in almost every home in the near future. He then talks about how engineering in Space and Time is becoming cheap.

The article by Kahn talks about Silence and Light. He says that "Silence is a void, not a place but the desire." He also talks about how "light allows people to see and experience a structure and without light, there is no architecture." He goes on to talk about how cities are measured by their Universities and how things are expressed.

The two articles are alike the Kahn articles talks about how How cities are measured by their universities and the whole point of the Gershenfeld article is the class, "How to Make Almost Anything" and how things change as technologies change. Another thing that links the two articlse is the article by Kahn talks about how without light there would be no depth or architecture. So basically without light, there would be no need for the personal fabricator that Gershenfeld talks about in his article because humans wouldn't be able to see anything.

Posted by Kristopher Kornovich at 9:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)