The main ideas behind our latest lecture concerned the principles of mixed medium, and how the application of various mediums can be combined creating visual works of art. In this context, a medium represents any tool used to convey a concept. The forms these medias can take include acrylic paint, chalk, charcoal, sand, watercolor, and tempera. It remains vital that we are successful in translating architecture through mixing media. All of these remain methods of representation that help us as designers articulate what we are thinking. Mixing media offers different perspectives all at once, and is able to tell a story through its live identity.

As we often times find ourselves developing series upon series of drawings, mixed media is able to tie everything together. In fact, it stresses the importance of thinking of your work in various perspectives simultaneously. This means of conveying concepts breaks conventional boundaries of size as well, manipulating the world in the way we perceive it. Relating this focus to our previous discussions, we find it evident once again how everything is in layers, whether it is physically or digitally.

Our latest lecture targeted the concept of layering in architecture, and the mechanics behind time, space and material. As architects, the layering of information becomes an increasingly important step in the design process, especially in places such as the city where changes over time are accelerated. Layering also concerns the physical and virtual networks of modernism, effectively moving planes and axes to manipulate space. In the presentation, three types of layering were discussed, each with their own unique characteristics and focuses. Thus includes temporal layering, spatial layering, and material layering. While temporal layering is geared more towards sedimentation, spatial and material layering concerns the contrast of monolithic work and additive configurations. Based on each architect’s unique design style, it is vital that we used each of these layering techniques to a degree within the confines of our work. 

The topic of discussion in this week’s presentation targeted the New England Conservatory of Music, and the proposal that parallels the work we’ve been advancing thus far. The lecture began with establishing the adaptive reuse of buildings, and how additions influence the context of a space. If it’s one concept I took away from the speaker, it’s that architecture takes a lot of patience. You have to be willing to make adjustments, and familiarize yourself with not knowing exactly what you are doing at all times. In fact, this provokes creativity that can’t be matched by a definite and linear mentality. Other important aspects to consider that were assessed with their proposal include budget, existing context, and connecting to where the design is implemented. Through the organization of a building, architects can work to establish a dialogue that appeals to any and every audience.

Focusing on the design phase and the process behind their train of thought, their proposal consists of three main phases. Phase I concerned student life and the performance center, linking directly to Phase IA with temporary and interim renovations. The final part that was revealed to us involved integrating the learning center. While the exterior design remained ambiguous, the texture and materials of its structure added acoustical partitions. In conclusion, this design intervention lecture proved to be an extremely informative and beneficial resource that I will look to utilize in times to come.

The center of this week’s lecture considered the various relationships between motion versus static, and static versus dynamic. We viewed these points from the perspective that static is not just the standstill position in the physics sense, but brings and takes on a completely different realm within architecture. The fact of the matter is that our entire window of vision is controlled by our ability to view, and how we ascend through a structure directly parallels this. Progressing and extending this notion of circulation even further, we transitioned to discuss trajectory with an effective visual detailing the folding and refolding of a building on top of itself. It became blatantly evident that having simple diagrams to describe exactly what you are talking about is paramount for fluently communicating concepts.

Analyzing the influence of time and how we have evolved as a collective civilization proved to be another intense focal point of the lecture. The most interesting idea that was displayed was the assessment of synthesizing vast ranges of time within structure, and how modern responds to classical buildings. Our ability to orient ourselves and find where we are in space is a concept that stems from the way we design as well, thinking about movement and stability all at the same time. Via studies of structure and the transitions of architecture over time, we can begin to define relationships and establish work that is just as dynamic as it is harmonic.