Spaced Out...

I really like the emphasis on the idea of space in these readings. I definitely agree that reducing a building to a bunch of plans, elevations, and sections, sucks out the essence of the design. Architects sometimes forget that these are merely design tools to help aid the process of design and construction, and should not be the basis of a design. In today’s money driven world, a major chunk of the firms use the ‘copy-paste’ technique of designing buildings – draw a section in Autocad, and simply repeat the units throughout the height of the building. The idea of forming space that is more user/activity specific seems to be lost. We seem to live in an illusion that architecture is just about shelter, when it’s obviously much more than that. The space formed by four walls can have radical effects on the users - their behavior, mood, health etc.

What I really like about ‘space’ is it’s really lose, fluid character. A mere door forms the seam between my bedroom space and my living room space. A small step (grade change) can create an entirely different space and evoke a different response. Even light and dark can define spaces. This very character of space has always intrigued me.

Following up on our intense discussion about the decontructivists, I would like to throw some light on the topic from a spatial perspective. I feel that those architects are definitely examples of people who sometimes forget the value of the interior space in order to enhance the exterior, aka ‘architecture’ of the building. We as future architects need to understand the idea of complexity in simplicity, and make sure that the spaces we generate are responsive to their users.