Four (+1) Studios
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 FOUR (+1) STUDIOS 7 PAPERS and an EPILOGUE Ann Pendleton-Jullian Architect 1 PRAISE FOR FOUR (+1) STUDIOS Given the fact that over the past two decades intellection and technology have conspired to subject the architectural design studio to so profound a sea change, one would imagine that the discipline’s discourse would roil with debate on the transformations of the studio and their consequences. Yet where one expects a tumult, one instead finds a casual indifference. There are of course endless writings about how architecture as a final product should respond to these changes, and admiring accounts aplenty of this or that studio academic and professional. But few writings consider the effects of that sea change on the fundamental assumptions, means and methods of the studio itself, even though it is those machinations above all that endow architecture with its place in the world. For all of our prattle about how different is today, it seems we still take for granted that the conventional model of the studio is magically endowed with the ability to address any and every cultural, scientific and economic environment no matter how exotic. In her collection of essays, Four (+1) Studios, Ann Pendleton-Jullian takes a decisive step toward correcting such indefensible nonchalance. Smart, provocative, and personal, her considered argument portrays the architecture studio as an agile event space that has evolved rapidly over time and speculates on how it might better adapt to the new and strange world it finds itself in today. More for the inquiry it launches than for the certainty of its conclusions, Four (+1) Studios is a must. Jeff Kipnis Award winning critic, urban designer, film-maker, theorist, curator and professor of architecture, Ohio State University, Princeton University, and the Southern California Institute of Architecture. 2 FOUR (+1) STUDIOS Four (+1) Studios is a thoughtful and elegant exploration of what the design studio has been, is, and—most importantly—can become. It makes its appearance at a crucial moment, when designers increasingly face the challenge of pursuing technologically sophisticated—but not technocratic —solutions to complex problems that engage many disciplines. It will be of immense value to anyone who cares about design, design learning and teaching. William J. Mitchell, A. W. Dreyfoos Professor and Director, Media Lab Smart Cities Group, MIT. Noted author and teacher. Former dean, School of Architecture, MIT In this book, Ann Pendleton-Jullian sets off to examine the intellectual and operational frameworks, which have supplied the most relevant design- studio models over recent decades… Her understanding of the studio as “profoundly social”—both in nature and in structure—is an original and fundamental insight. Pendleton Jullian endorses Play as a mechanism and a sensibility for a renovated studio. In her words, Play “collapses space between reality and utopia” It is a method for discovering, inventing, and constructing meaning, an intention that represents in my view a prime— cultural and professional—challenge for architects today. This is her most valuable proposition, so be it, let us all play. Rodrigo Perez de Arce, Professor, Catholic University Santiago Chile and the Architectural Association, London. Award winning architect and author. 3 Four Studios (+1) provides a priceless unfolding of the coupling of thought and action, vision and agency and two critical concepts for our age of flux —resiliency and resonance—which, when coupled together, show how to have impact in a highly complex and constantly changing world. This masterpiece will be of great interest not just to designers and architects but also to educators grappling with re-imagining what education could be in today’s world. I highly recommend this path breaking book. John Seely Brown, Former Chief Scientist Xerox Corp and Director of its Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), Independent co-chair Deloitte Center for the Edge. Noted author, speaker, innovator. 4 FOUR (+1) STUDIOS 5 FOUR (+1) STUDIOS 7 PAPERS and an EPILOGUE Ann Pendleton-Jullian Architect 1 READING THE CONTEXT: WE ARE 5 FOUR STUDIOS (PART II) 89 MATTER, TOO 9 6 VISION AND AGENCY 105 2 DESIGN/THE DESIGN CONVERSATION 25 7 STUDIO (+1): A CASE STUDY 145 3 AN ARCHITECTURAL STUDIO 47 EPILOGUE: RESILIENCE AND RESONANCE 201 4 FOUR STUDIOS (PART I) 69 ENDNOTES 217 © 2010 Ann Pendleton-Jullian / Design: Soulellis Studio 6 FOUR (+1) STUDIOS FOUR (+1) STUDIOS Written from the perspective of an architect, these papers talk about design and design thinking, the social environment of practice of the studio, and how the architectural design studio and its methodologies have evolved over time to respond to evolving social environments and practices. It takes a look at the relationship between design and agency. And then proposes a re-imagining of the design studio within the shifting context of the 21st century, which it defines as one which digital technologies, abundant and pervasive information exchange, and a complex multi-cultural interna- tional environment create new and unprecedented challenges for agency, while they simultaneously re-invigorate activity associated with the imagi- nation. This last part is framed through the lens of experience as opposed to being presented as an abstract theoretical construct. PAPER 1 / PAPER 2 / PAPER 3 / AN READING THE DESIGN: THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT: DESIGN STUDIO IS … WE ARE MATTER CONVERSATION This paper TOO. This paper talks discusses, in depth, This paper discusses about design and the architectural the context in which the design process, studio as a social we find ourselves and the interplay learning and making and the possibilities between cognitive environment: how it associated with and heuristic works, why it works, design’s role in this operations. the role of critique, context. the role of risk and failure for progress… 7 PAPERS 4 AND 5 / PAPER 6 / VISION PAPER 7 / STUDIO EPILOGUE: FOUR STUDIOS AND AGENCY (+1): A CASE RESILIENCE AND (PART I AND II) This paper looks STUDY RESONANCE These two papers at the relationship Paper 7 presents a The epilogue present the different between design personal story of proposes two types of studios vision and agency— evolving thoughts defining concepts that have emerged agency to operate about design and of the 21st century over time, their within and on the design studio and discusses how relationships to complex contexts. relative to context design literacy their socio-cultural It proposes a series and agency, and nurtures and sustains contexts, and of diagrams of how especially context to these foundational how the different this works within a agency in complex capacities. It also components of the framing of agency and dynamic discusses how this studio evolve with that is temporally environments. It design literacy can these changes. situated. introduces the use lead to a tri-partite of strategic game dispositional stance analysis, game (woman as thinker, design and game maker and player) play as a direct which may be critical analogy for working for resilience and in these kinds of resonance—for environments. It then evolution and maps this story on to impact—in the 21st reflections about how century. to think about design, learning and acting in the context of the 21st century as it was framed in Paper 1. READING THE CONTEXT: WE ARE MATTER, TOO 1 10 FOUR (+1) STUDIOS In the past beauty was conditioned by aspects of purity, fixed symmetries and pared minimal structure being accepted as norms. As long as our brain kept to tramlines of reasoning the model persisted. Now that the world is be- ing accepted as not simple, the complex and oblique and the intertwining of logic strands gain favour. Reason itself is finally being understood as nascent structure, non-linear and dependent on feedback procedures. Beauty may lie in the actual processes of engagement and be more abstract than the aesthetic of objecthood. Ultimately it may really be a constructive process. Cecil Balmond, London, January 20021 From the perspective of an architect,2 I want to talk about design and design thinking. I define design as the ‘constructive process’ by which the imagination takes on problems, frames them, models them, and creates a response through the distribution of material—real or virtual material— in space. And design thinking as the same process, but where the product may be thought itself—conceptual, strategic, structural, or systemic in nature. The beauty of the design process is its non-linearity. Instead, reason as nascent structure, dependent on feedback procedures creates a way of engaging complexity, richness, and the seemingly paradoxical or irresolvable, even, so as to build material stories or conceptual systems in which these are given meaning and form. Design has always been non-linear, but the dynamics have shifted in the contemporary context. Fifteen years ago my image of design was like navigating the course of a sailboat—determining the basic trajectory, finding the north, setting sail and tacking with the wind and currents to keep on course. In this image, the winds and currents are analogous to the parameters of the problem, including the questions, responses, and READING THE CONTEXT: WE ARE MATTER, TOO 11 discoveries made along the way. This analogy allowed for unexpected deviations, whether minor, major or even when completely blown off course. Navigating the process, the richness of making new discoveries, and arriving relatively undamaged were all dependent upon the designer’s tactical openness while steadily moving through the process with consistent intentions. But today, the sailboat has been replaced with the image of a kayak in white water moving through changing topologies. Designers now operate in an environment in which major epistemological and cultural shifts are challenging territorialized ideologies and identities at an increasing pace. And in which accelerated change, complex problems, and significant scientific innovations are leading to rather significant shifts in our current cultural, social, and political structures and their practices, as well as a promisingly productive elasticity of professional and disciplinary barriers.