Form follow function

As a child, star gazing has always been a privilege as I have lived from far the city around the country sides. But now that I have moved into the main city, this privilege has been taken away by the pollution and bright lights of the city. When star gazing, I have always wondered what is there in the vast space of darkness. An endless emptiness/nothing at an infinity. But do these space hold any meaning beyond its emptiness. Reinhold Martin, writer of “empty form” talks about how we can define space beyond the emptiness. In our modern society, in the emptiness it is useless as in terms of architecture, the design is based on its function or its usefulness in event or program that cause the emptiness to be a failure in design. 

Abandoned parking lot

As illustrated in the picture, the space is left abandoned with its emptiness of flat ground tho seeing some hints of nature reclaiming back the land.

Taking this argument to another example is the Crown hall by Mies can der Rohe.

As Mies van der Rohe intended the space to be limited in his less is more approach. An empty hall yet still functional that clearly shows how empty space can go beyond its meaning of just empty. And last of all, another great example is of the jewish memorial by Eisenman in Berlin.

In its simplistic arrangement, it may appear meaningless  while behind its empty form, it still defines the space as a memory for people in the future about the death that jewish people had endured through. So really, empty form depends on perception and memory. Different people can perceive different things. Like as a child, you may think space is an endless emptiness of really it can also be perceived as an endless possibility or meaning.

Hyper-reality

Reality, can people actually tell the difference between what is actually real and what is not? It has seem to appear that society has evolved into different realities of alternate truth. Hyper reality is when the conscious mind is unable to distinguish reality from a simulation of reality where what is real and fiction are blended together with no clear distinction between one end or beginnings. When I think of hyper-reality, I relate it to fashion. What is that defines the trends of fashion we see today. How do we actually distinguish what is beautiful and what is not? Let us take two different time zones and compare.

Modern version of bikini

 

1950’s version of bikini

Now in the modern version of bikini is undoubtedly today’s preference of “sexy” while the 1950’s version is not. But if we were to think about it and take the perception of society during the 1950, people then would consider that the older version as sexy while the modern version as inappropriate. This undoubtedly due to the illusion that society has created for themselves of what is the actual truth, or as we can say, a hyper-reality.

Then what is it that influence people that creates this hyper-reality? Jean Baudrillard, writer of Simulacra and simulation defines that it was the link between reality and symbolism. In relation to our modern society, perception of things around us are influenced the media and the information that we receive from television, radios and so on. The fact that how much the media plays such an important role in influencing society clearly shows how fashion can be defined by what the media say is sexy and what is not. This act of symbolism(media) I would say is pushing society towards a hyper-reality, an illusion of what the truth really is. The things around us, what is sexy and what is not, or even what is cool and what is boring is really an illusion created by society that creates the media.

An example of this can be reflected on the movie “Borat”. A movie that is supposedly to portray they life style and culture of people in Kazakhstan. Truthfully, the movie does not actually portray the true sense of people on Kazakhstan, the movie was in fact a mockery of them. Many people may not really know the truth of what Kazakhstan is and actually accept symbolism created by the movie and perceive how Kazakhstan is portrayed in the movie. I have to admit myself that I once was ignorant and depended on movies and medias to show what places like Kazakhstan is like. I would say, majority or people are living in this illusion that they have created for themselves. A hyper reality of the truth like the movie Borat and the actual culture of Kazakhstan.

Borat version of people in Kazakhstan

Actual version of people in Kazakhstan (they are normal)

Design and Interpretation

Fact, it’s a sign design to represent a burger. But interpretation could be varied from one person to another. One person may say it’s a burger, another may say it’s a flying saucer. But in reality, it is a “sign of a burger”, not a burger. To truly understand what I am trying to describe here, we really need to understand what sign is. Sign in google is defined as, “an object, quality, or event whose presence or occurrence indicated the probable presence or occurrence of something else” in other words a representation or should we say an alternate reality. Meaning the sign itself is not what it represents but a representation itself.

In relation to design, we really have to know what design is all about. Design is defined as a plan for the construction or reconstruction of an object or a system. In reflection towards architecture, let us take the Vitrahaus by Herzog and de Meuron as an example. The building’s design orientation is to take in the surroundings with its organic configuration while using the simple form of a house.

Vitrahaus, Herzog and de Meuron

Vitrahaus design elements.

Design and interpretation are linked in one way or another, but they should be understood as two different processes all together. The design of the Vitahaus is the representation, but when the user begins to experience the space or the interpretation the signage, it is actually the process of de-sign breaking it down to their understanding of the meaning behind the design where the alternate reality is complete.

Phenomenology, Environment and Architecture

Every time when you receive the feeling from the space, everyone always be different because of the perceiving, but the word that use for describe them is only the language that try to bring us to be able to communicate to others. In the end I believe that we are all cannot to explain our phenomena in the word of the action to others, its more about the deep emotional that happen inside your heart. 

In my opinion, sometimes the successful projects from the famous architect didn't come from what they built but its came from how they interpret their experience to the space and their "Luck". Budha always say human mind is the hardest thing to understand. I believe that the things that we learn that we try to build these space to create these feeling to the users, choose these material or set the circulation and zone from your own mind. But in the end you never know that how does the users will perceiving and interpretation to the same way what are you thinking. The only things that people will always receive in the same way is how these building "function".