This project has been, in truth, a struggle, with issues including defining a suitable scope, let alone an anchor of interest. Despite that, we’re here, at the final critical review of the second year of the masters course, and quite possibly the last academic critical review that I’ll be facing (as a student). Frankly, if the last project of the M.Arch didn’t try to break you, as my classmates in undergrad would say (with perhaps an admittedly sardonic undertone) “are you even trying?”.
I settled on imagining how my particular stretch of Thames could develop in the next century, with a nod to the research I developed during the first semester’s work of existing R/C/I zoning, demographics, climate and political realities, and then through a bit of low-key sci-fi whimsy into the mix as far as aesthetic goes. At the end of this process, in pure post-rationalisation style, I settled on a project title of “Towards a New Babylon” for the simple reason that I believe I was wishing to (re)create a version of a district that would encourage civil civic engagement centred around a district typology that would put truly public realm at the forefront of commercial, civil and cultural interaction. How much of this comes across in the work I will be presenting tomorrow will be up for my tutors and guest(s) to discern, and for the external examiner to probe when the time comes.
What this project has also demonstrated for me were two significant hurdles to overcome: lack of self-confidence and willpower in the face of an unknown and potentially uninteresting site leading to the reflex of overstretching in an attempt assuage any fears of incompetence in design or creative impotence. The second hurdle being purely computational, which in this instance was in part brought on by the former desire to assuage any fears of incompetence. If any students (I think of any discipline) happen to be reading this blog, take note of how fears can amplify adjacent concerns leading to causing those very concerns that you were attempting to avoid and coming very close to executing a cascade failure. I feel that this is a lesson I keep needing to remind myself, as I have a sneaky suspicion that I may have been here before, or perhaps nearby. On the flipside, hopefully this will be one of the last times I’ll have to remind myself of this, as shortly I will not longer be in the relative ‘comfort’ of any failures being purely academic (yes, pun totally intended).
Despite all of the above, one of the causes of overstretching has been incredibly interesting (along with infuriating, and as mentioned previously, I am acutely aware that I have barely scratched the surface of the discipline) - the cause being investigating what graphic statics is when applied via computational methods to the field of architectural study. My intention is to also upload the slides from this particular module after submission, and if any happen to have a passing, or devoted interest in the subject, then I hope they will be of some curiosity. There will no doubt be errors in my understanding (and I am fully aware that I am admitting this before I even hand the document in for marking…) I stress again however that I am barely scratching the surface of the discipline, and if you want to learn it properly, I would strongly urge you to seek out the Block Research Group of ETH Zurich, and the Polyhedral Structures Laboratory of the University of Pennsylvania, both of whom are pioneers in this field.
Finally, as usual, the slides below are what I will be presenting for the crit tomorrow. I have included a filmstrip of WIPs of the perspectives and two additional isometrics I wish to include which haven’t been completed for the crit, but all being will, should be with the rest of the portfolio for hand-in next week. I have also consolidated the slides from the interim crit. I don’t think I’ve ever felt this unprepared for a crit, maybe it is because I had such high hopes, and all I can see is what I am missing from the overarching idea.