FORM AND FUNCTION 2

FORM AND FUNCTION

To quote Richard Hill, he once stated that the actual use of a space involves a distinct kind of architectural experience, a kind that that is different from the experience of simply being a spectator of buildings.

This paves open the way for those who deem buildings have the potential to live past their projected lifetime and transcend their original purpose, for instance, adaptive reuse.

It is said so because a space whom is created in the past for a allocated purpose, only provides so much in the experience of the space for those who are utilizing it every day, while for those who seldom occupy the spaces, will feel otherwise.

This are the words of Richard Hill, where he is stood by his quote by implying the aesthetic experience of architecture, properly considered, is therefore only open to the users of the building. This certainly points out that the pleasure of looking at buildings, as a tourist or as an enthusiast of architecture, are now deemed strictly un-aesthetic. It means where they, (tourist, enthusiast of architecture alike) can theoretically experience the space, they are still way off in terms of experiencing the space as distinct and as pure as the daily occupants are. Though, we can assist them by allowing them to imagine to an extend what it’s like.

The previous statement of Richard Hill was bold, in the sense that the lines between function and form of a building are blurred quite brilliantly. For a simple solution to the statement is, a factory was built 20 years ago, to occupy the needs of a businessman to run a local foundry and produce goods to be put on the market. It’s clear what the hired architect are to be asked to produce, a factory. Forward 20 years on, the foundry served it’s lifespan and original purpose, and soon find itself without an occupant. It soon become covered in nature and green earth.

With that scenario set, it does pave the way for us now to dwell on the topic discussed beforehand. Richard Hill sees the ultimate potential in every building to live it’s life beyond the original lifespan and purpose, where he also stresses that the term “purpose” only runs as far as the notion of human activity central to it.

Having put that aside, here is a prime example of a contemporary adaptive reuse case study.

The Barberi Laboratory, which is named by the current occupants of the building, RCR Arquitectes, the newly crowned winner of the prestigious Pritzker Prize.

The Barberi Laboratory are originally a foundry which is acquired by RCR Arquitectes in 2004 and find a huge success in converting it into their firm and studio and other purposes.

The studio space for RCR Arquitectes Firm. Shows the old foundry's masonry wall and column is finely blended in with modern and minimalist materials like steel and glass.

A picture from a workshop that RCR Arquitectes ran at their firm. The exterior and existing structure of the old foundry is still able to be seen .

The renovated firm from the old foundry as seen from the outside. Visible usage of glass as cover material is obvious.

The previous building had smoke-laden walls, ceilings and floors from previous fires. The materials, colors and smells of the old furnace and chimneys provided the powerful starting point for the new project. There are three main parts to the office, the double-height library which runs along the length of the building, a second building opening onto the courtyard with workstations, and a new glass enclosed pavilion supported by iron columns.

The original materials – wood, stone, and ceramics – are in contrast and dialogue with the new steel and glass, which were added to make highly functional and inspirational spaces. The trees and ferns in the interior courtyard spaces make both a divergence and a connection between architecture and nature.