garethace
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
It shows in many ways not least their communication skills both print and verbal.
Architects and mental stimulation.
Speaking honestly, having studied and listened to a large number of experts in Economics, computing and IT over the past few years, (some of these people were in their 60s and 70s) I got used to stimulating my brain a lot and reading/listening to debates and arguments which were interesting, made by people who were interesting. Maybe, those people can all be classified as specialising in academics more – but I was just shocked by how dull, mahogony-like, ‘brain-dead’ and almost hollow by comparison some of the more notable architects here in Ireland sound when they try to speak in public.
Of course, some of these architects were greatly helped by their shere level of charisma and one-to-one personal charm. By their excellent command over the English Language and enormous capacities for drinking beer. But the almost non-existent content of academic stimulation was mostly too apparent. I happen to know personally some of these individuals and like them a lot as people, I do greatly value their talent and experience in working as designers. But one thing is certain – that architects brains are allowed to go ‘out to grass’ far too early in life. By the time you are mid-20s, it seems in a lot of ways, your learning and mental stimulation days are over – and it is just one big sea of Guinness and hang overs stretching in front of you, for miles in all directions.
Which is why I wonder about making the AAI part of the colleges of architecture here in Dublin, and having exhibition space, not in the basement of 8 Merrion Square, but perhaps in the entrance route to an architectural school, or someplace. I wonder why planning and geography etc, could not all be part of the one campus with architecture. Probably a complete and absolute pipe dream of mine, but still. . . we need those dreams too I think.
I mean, Bolton Street or Richview Institutes of architecture, couldn’t possibly be more ‘cut-off’ from daily life in many ways. I.e. No young architect is ever going to bother dropping back in there to look at a book or to read a thesis ever again. Yet courses like Law, economics, business, computing – all the things driving the celtic tiger – they all depended upon older experienced people constantly updating their knowledge and bringing things constantly up to a next level. You simply cannot do that stuck in a pub of a Friday evening talking about Corb. The initial education in college is very challenging and intense, very educational and stimulating, but after that…. ? I mean, places like Angier Street, specialising in all kinds of Law, business and computing subjects seems to be as much geared for the older student coming back, as it is for the new one starting out.
On the topic of development in America – these are interesting: http://www.openrangeimaging.com/images/
Very once off, very remote, very car oriented. Lots of different ‘Americas’ me thinks.
Originally posted by Paul Clerkin
I love the Phoenix Park. Lived on Parkgate Street for a year and we used the park all the time. It was a great spot for a Sunday morning walk, nice and early when the mist was lifting. The better half used to go for a run a lot of mornings in it too. Better use could indeed be made of it, to allow parts of it to be used after dark by people other than TDs.Urbanism
Three names Paul, O’Deveaney, Drumalee and Dunard. Any one of which would have been ‘bad’ for any area, but together formed a kind of ‘ring of terror’ around that part of Dublin city. Projects which had been a dumping ground for problems for generations now. They cleared out the slums in Dublin’s city centre and created the “Park end of the North Circular Road” as a result.
Using the Manor Street/Stoney Batter guise to pretend that things were nice and ‘community’ oriented. The people who came from the three above ‘projects’ were never accepted into the local existing community around there. Oxmantown and Arbour Hill were existing communities who were horrified by the problems those three ‘projects’ created.
The other problem, is things like the Phoenix park, which create massive walls inside of which the chaos can just continue.
Other great massive unresolved areas like Grange Gorman, Broadstone, Kings Inns, Guinesses across the River, Heuston Station, Phoenix Park, River Liffey, Chapelizod by pass, numerous Defense forces institutions, urban decay like Smithfield, Blackhall place.
The area there is caught between far too many ‘unresolved’ areas of poorly used real estate in my humble opinion. The whole place never stood a chance, compared to other parts of the city. Given its central location and value as an area to put larger denser populations of mixed classes, it should never have been allowed to slip so far down the tubes.
The Phoenix Park is nice ‘pasing through’, nice to know it is there. But really nobody ever stays around that part of town long enough to realise it has real problems.
I am comparing to areas like the Miltown Road in south side of Dublin, which is much less central and convenient, yet has managed to attract all kinds of nice high density residential development down through the past few years. The recent development around the old convent there being a very good example.
Similarly around places like Herbert Park, Bushy Park and Dartry. But the area you are refering to Paul, has only served two real purposes down through the years:
1) Defense Forces.
2) Dumping ground for ‘problems’.
Yeah, but america have got a great TV series out of it, in the west wing. 🙂
Maybe this need to control vast sum of wealth appropriately is the very reason, why the planning profession in the USA seems to be a way different to what it is here in Europe?
I mean, I have talked to some of those guys at Cyburbia, and they all have gone to ‘dedicated planning school’ doing studio and all kinds of subjects just as architects would do here.
I was introduced to a lot of things concerning architects, over at cyburbia. I think Archiseek does it best…. but the planners in Ireland aren’t anywhere near as vocal or savy as some Cyburbia posters.
If you are lucky in architectural school you can just drift through the years, doing no urban sites at all practically in fourth year, and even picking to do a nice ‘rural’ project for the thesis.
I think they have even dropped the town study from fifth year.
Presentation requirements are for 1:100 or 1:200 drawings mainly. In practice, employers like architects would ‘know’ something about 1:20 scale junctions and details, to get stuck built.
I mean, some architects have never ever set foot in the places like Rathfarnham – nor would they even bother to distinguish those places in terms of density from the Liberties for instance.
But it is interesting how quickly planners grab onto these concepts:
http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?p=124851#post124851
I like the RIAI housing book, which at least divided itself up into the various environments, inner city, inner suburban and outer suburban. And at least made the attempt to deal with those as separate design problems.
That is what is so nice about the Fluid Space publication by UCD too, which goes along LUAS, which would have stations, or junction points, in all kinds of spatial urban, suburban situations.
Tatoo’s have actually enjoyed a huge revival amongst the young people in dublin these days – how are they received over there?
I will reduce this list as I can, and perhaps try to add a one line comment on certain ones. Note I don’t think all of these are my cup of tea, but I have included some presentations in this list, because they may contain just one diagram or drawing which in my opinion works, or gets across its point very well, with economy of means.
I haven’t read any of the verbal descriptions, just looked at the visuals. Some of these presenations have specific problems, I think which are worth noticing.
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089023.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089028.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089034.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089057.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089100.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089103.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089129.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089136.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089137.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089148.html
Problem, Looks a different scale in each view:
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089154.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089155.html
I Like:
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089159.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089172.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089181.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089206.html
Like what eventually one, the idea of two actual ‘buildings’ which people visit/use:
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089214.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089225.html
Vast subterranean room with glass ceiling:
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089243.html
Incorporates some kind of sunken exhibition experience again:
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089249.html
Seems to be trying to establish some diagonal route across site:
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089264.html
Landscape idea, greenery:
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089272.html
Quite aggresive, forceful use of architectural statement:
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089282.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089286.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089287.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089306.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089315.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089317.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089317.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089327.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089348.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089363.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089382.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089388.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089398.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089411.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089419.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089436.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089455.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089463.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089464.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089533.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089545.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089558.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089562.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089573.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089583.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089594.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089595.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089600.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089615.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089617.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089690.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089702.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089756.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089760.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089770.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089794.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=089812.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122071.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122111.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122127.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122135.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122136.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122173.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122213.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122259.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122272.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122371.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122393.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122411.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122457.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122519.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122542.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122591.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122592.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122680.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122683.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122781.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122826.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122861.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122863.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122891.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122897.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122899.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122900.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122929.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122944.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=122977.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=278085.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=278203.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=278252.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=278759.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=350089.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=350095.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=350105.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=350136.html
http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/ent/entI=350252.html
There are some strong architectural concepts there, it is just that sifting through all the debris, takes some much mental machinery, that you are probably going to be exhausted by the time you find anything worth actually looking at.
Alot of sculptors etc, entered and their efforts really wouldn’t always come across best in architectural presentation board methods. A bit like my own efforts in Bolton Street. But that is why I like spending a couple of hours last sunday looking through the entries and picking out ones, which made sense from an architectural presentation point of view.
Imagine the job of picking out a suitable competition entry to replace Parnell Square memorial?
No, as I said, there was loads and loads more to ‘wring’ out of this concept of architecture than Mies or his imatators here in this country ever managed to do in years and years of practice.
There starting point, was a one, which would suit my intellect and design awareness/approach to a T.
But that still doesn’t mean, there limited experiment and interpretation of this approach to architectural design is the total end of the matter, as far as I am concerned.
So, in the beginning you had this Mies guy, who used this approach, and brough it so far.
This Mies guy used this approach in a way, which was never designed to grow longer term, and it didn’t grow longer term without a suitable father figure to keep the concept alive and constantly growing.
But that doesn’t mean the original aspiration was flawed – it just means, that the world of architecture found other areas and approachs to get interested in, that is all.
A bit like the Renaissance guys understood classicism and re-invented after that ‘whole middle ages thing’ had happened inbetween.
Or Mies took parts of architecture from Arabia and China and sucessfully re-interpreted that in the Europe of early 20c.
I think ‘Less is more’ got used less, because it wasn’t used enough, after key figures like Mies who could have breathed new life into it, just passed away.
I once heard a very true statement about Wright – that the Le Corbusier imatators in Europe are much better than the Wright imatators in USA – so the legacy of Kahn has been limited to just a few people today.
I mean, Kahn even borrowed parts of his architecture from Wright, while merging its organicism and earthiness with Beaux Art cosmic ideas.
Architecture is all about sucessful re-interpretations of pre-existing architecture – there are only a few good rules, the rest is only temporary distraction.
Yes, exactly, but not how Bolton Street defined that statement. Less is more, doesn’t have to necessairly mean cold, featureless, boring architecture like a STW building.
It could have an event of two to redeem it from going totally down that road – that event would be what is most important – be it a nice window in a small structure or an open space in a large institution. Like a lot of small houses have a nice window, which separates it as a design from something really banal.
Or an institutional building could have a nice forecourt or interior space, like Kahn’s architecture too.
The problem with architectural education in my vast experience has been that students are encouraged to look for some really ‘radio-friendly’ jiggle or concept, whose only purpose is to grab staff’s attention and thereby gain more marks, credit over other competing students work.
I would like in my own student work, to just work within the boundaries of simple design device – strong architectural devices – I would also like the criticism of my student work to bear in mind that approach and respect it.
In order to distinguish it from the student submission right beside mine, which probably used many more colours and went for some ‘chart-topping’ jiggle simply to attract attention.
As I said, in almost every case the budget for design elements is very finite and it is more about the potential architect learning to use a very few simple devices well, rather than searching for a whole new ‘idea’ every time one goes to design something.
It is a great pity that STW etc, have been allowed to monopolise this ‘less is more’ thing, as there is a way more in ‘less is more’ than STW have ever managed to wringe out of it in 50 years.
I think over his life time, the architect James Stirling developed his notion of space and the pedestrian route very well, over a couple of nice realised works. These buildings being built, must have had finite budgets and clients who were willing to go only so far.
I don’t think that our current education really encourages the potential young architect to learn to manipulate and become a master in using a couple of very distinct, architectural devices – to cope with a huge variety of different circumstances.
Or even to appreciate and recognise that quality in other architects work – paper or built.
I am going to get accused here for making up a ‘formula’ or receipe for designing good architecture – but that is really not my attention – all of the good architects I know, bring that a stage further and develop a fond relationship with whatever few simple ideas they use and learn more about as they get older.
That process should in my humble opinion begin somehow at college level. I have never heard a thesis project, being criticised from this point of view, which says a lot in my opinion – i.e. what the given student managed to do within the confines of what design concepts he/she had grown to know, appreciate and develop a fond relationship with.
Well for a young architect starting out we can just say, I am going to wait for Getty to come along and give me a blank canvas to design on – which is basically what architects doing a lot of competitions are looking for.
On the other hand, the sucessful interpretation of a small house project, or other small building, could just hinge around the careful manipulation of one or two colours used effectively – and still squeeze itself within a restrictive budget.
The Bolton Street approach on the other hand, was I think to use the cynical view – that most buildings in Ireland are very ordinary kinds of affairs – cheap buildings – but those cheap buildings don’t have to look cheap.
There is a certain deep pragmatism about the Bolton Street approach to ‘design’. Like the way Mies van der Rohe would reduce everything do in its statement until eventually, it couldn’t go far wrong. Of course, to follow the Mies van der Rohe route even takes a decent budget, just to get those details with clean lines and cool looking junctions/joints.
I am thinking here about Glenn Murcutt too, how did simple buildings, but spent the money well. Still I don’t think the young designer starting off can hope for even a Glenn Murcutt house budget – I think Louis Kahn is an architect who is much more adaptable in this situation – since he built many small buildings, which with a little bit of careful consideration and pig-headedness in the right places, arrives at a design which does gain its strength from some very straightforward and basic architectural devices.
Light, view, space. . . things which never tend to wear out and never go totally out of fashion. The ‘cringe’ factor in certain 1970s work here in Dublin now is quite tangible – promoting a lot of message boards like this one, where the style police can go to work.
But I would much rather spend my time noticing and pointing out design attempts which have aged quite gracefully and style are enjoyed by all those you use them. I mean what is a window or an opening to a space – it is really intangible, but so strong and powerful all the same. Like those big circular openings in Chinesse Temple architecture which are centuries old.
I just use the example of openings, as they are very appropriate to the young architect starting out in life, just trying to do some architecture while having to deal with some very simple clients, with simple ideas and simple pockets. 🙂
I could go into other concepts – like the way the open spaces in Trinity are timeless and still every bit as functional and emotionally uplifting now as they were 50 years ago. It is great to see Abbey Street cleaned up today too, after being covered with LUAS crap for so long, It really makes you appreciate the fine architecture and streets we enjoy in this capital city.
Yet the larger element of the architectural student population has been based in Bolton Street for years, in their ‘version’ of a faculty for the built environment Phil. I mean, no student in BS ever benefits in any way from that development out in Richview. I don’t know what politics is involved here, but it sure as s*** doesn’t benefit the end user.
Just a side note, as professionals architects can be compared to women buying their wardrobe. A woman with a keen dress sense, will probably make here most expensive purchases in a very few ‘timeless’ kinds of items – long black coats, black skirts, shoes and hand bags. The thing about an architect is knowing were to put that little bit extra into some part of the design which will be timeless and repay the users every day of their lives.
While I think the BSt. emphasis has been very good at showing a potential architect how to identify areas of mis-expenditure and ‘over’ design, . . . . its sucess has not been matched, in identifying areas of a design where ‘it is worth spending the money’. . . and standing by your instincts in such matters.
The ‘budget’ for the ‘architectural’ parts of a building or scheme is always finite, no matter what client you have got. But the architect has the responsibility to put funds in the right places. For example, a new speaker system or aircon system will become redundant, out-of-date or just wear out. Good architecture doesn’t.
The problem with the Bolton Street course, is it is able to pin point areas of poor expenditure very well indeed, but not as good in suggesting ways money can be put to good use in architectural design terms. I dunno, how you coming from the geography background would respond to that, but I said I would scribble it down anyhow.
An example of money well spent in architectural terms can be observed by looking at any shop – sure it costs more to do a plate glass window – but potentially would will make more sales. But the same could be true of a very simple residential structure, which may have a nice garden which could be appreciated by the occupant more, if the opening was treated/handled as such – yes a bit more expenditure than ‘an off the shelf window component’ but money put in the right place, and it would be timeless.
I have to laugh now, when I see the way even commercial enterprise has grabbed onto this idea, in the form of conservatories and patio doors etc, etc. I just the Bolton Street course had been as enthuasiastic as these vellux’s and so forth, in promoting ways to spend ‘design money’ more wisely. As well as highlighting ways it can be squandered – architectural education in this country still awaits it ying and yang perfect balance.
I like the way in which O’Donnell and Tuomey and others have understood the value of external patios or spaces in their designs. Derek Tynan Printworks apartments etc, etc will still be excellent pieces of design in 100 years time.
Brian O’ Hanlon.
