THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE DESIGN

The project I would like to discuss today is my first year, second semester final project. From first glance it looks to be made up of complex elements, and with good reason. It all rooted from the criteria’s being set for the final project, whereby we are tasked with tailoring a structure that is phobia friendly, coupled with a tightly knitted community circulation which are to be promoted by us.

 

Therefore, my project started out to design an enforcers’ dwelling. As he needed privacy, shading elements are added along with green roof for dining, scouting and planting purposes.  It could be further simplified in designs, but the conditions and landscape of the village made it more complex to work with. At last the design was derived in many forms to accommodate and adapt to the site.

 

The summarization above to points to a conclusion where my design approach and final result illustrates more towards complexity.

 

It could be put into the words of Robert Venturi, where he preferred to have elements which are hybrid rather than “pure”, compromising rather than “clean”, distorted rather than “straightforward”, ambiguous rather than “articulated”, redundant rather than simple and equivocal rather than direct and clear.

 

In my own words, I agree much of the views of Robert Venturi, similar to those views who disagree with an “International” style. What is simplicity and conventional when it comes to design? As an architecture student, I think we should ponder further than what is put on a plate to us, especially in the form of “New Architecture”. Just like how I like elements to be hybrid rather than “pure” and ambiguous rather than “articulated”. Furthermore, a complex design approach always results in a newer outcome of designs, which gives off a boost in personal experience and improving the field of work.

 

So, what’s not to go for in a complex approach to design ?