i would like to take the time to write what i have to say about my own work and a kind of suggestion for next year's thesis seminar by the end so please read on.
as for the booklet, i have not received any comments from anyone though Dan B. did mention to me that i should include my thoughts on Plato's Allegory of the Cave in my precis.
i'm actually very worried to a certain degree now that i really think of it. not because of handing in a final booklet based on what i think is missing in the thesis, but quite honestly, i agree very much so with the critics from yesterday: what i say and what i've written in my booklet are all a given. as aspiring architects, it is simply the vision to become responsible in all of what i find a concern - even sustainable or green design. at this rate, i don't have a thesis - it isn't one to be maintained against any objection and it certainly doesn't bring in a new dimension of meaning. what i have done are all essays. at this point, i don't even see my work passing by the thesis assessment committee for approval.
having said that, i find myself caught in what i think personally, is a good situation for my learning and really narrowing down into a thesis for good research that can carry to what i think i can have a good project by the end of next semester with enough investment of time into my work, upon hearing someone really tell me at face-value, that this is all a given which is why i was quite upset at midterm knowing what i got out of it was something more like, that i have a good film.
sure i may have a statement in my midterm film. the power of light and darkness over our unconscious and the shadow to reveal our position in space to allow us to ponder about ourselves for self-awareness.
now i find myself really looking into what it means to live in the absence of light - even more specific, considering what it really is to be living in manhattan with all those skyscrapers and tall buildings and how they affect people's lives - looking into day light studies in nyc and zoning laws - urban issues.
this can come from ideas of looking at what it is about shadows that are perceived differently in many cultures around the world as an example that marc had mentioned - in reading Tanizaki's In Praise of Shadows - considering i have lived in japan all my life before coming here for college, i understand exactly what he is talking about and it makes me think of the regulations that are set in the city of kyoto on heights of buildings in the small towns with old temples so that the emphasis of these older shelters and their richness are not to be lost in the shadows of the taller and newer buildings as an example.
i had chosen the mixing of programs to allow me the flexibility for exploration of shadow techniques and areas where i can learn to understand the positions of light and form in space or light as form by being sensitive to shadows. the mixing of programs is also my critique on our cultural values in our social living conditions where the elders are always left behind and shoved out of society even by our own families because there are others who will do the job to take care of them. but who am i to be saying what is right or wrong in this kind of context? like one of the critics mentioned, that i am targetting at our sympathy for these values, these are all decisions i should make in my design and not to be brought to attention as thesis. i had a gut feeling about this from the beginning of the semester. my ambitious drive for what i find will be a long long future into the practice of architecture for the long run is to constantly critique my own ability to find if space can be moral than to take the given that it is not, and obviously no matter how hard i work in this one year to explore shapes and materials and their qualities of the senses and how we live and inhabit in them to create what i find to be good values, it doesn't give me a thesis because in the end, all of this is subjective.
at this point i find that perhaps i should have brought some provocative ideas to both of you prior to taking thesis or at the beginning where i could have interjected what i wanted to do from exploring what would be considered a performative technique in one that i have a good understanding of and can perform. i had this very idea of taking the turntable device and through the new art of music and technique employed in music of deejaying by scratching the needle onto the record, i could explore the notations of scratching onto an already notated and designed layering of digitized and natural sounds as music. these drawings would be generative because for one, there are no notes of a musical scale to scratching meaning all is done to rhythm and what intuitively sounds good like poetry which is interesting because what is being produced then is constantly something new and can't be traced into notes but mere pitches, volumes, etc and secondly, i have been practicing this art of music since i was 13 years old and am pretty competent in it knowing i have been in competitions of this type of music. it is further more interesting, because i would be exploring the relationship between sound, music, space, and the turntable as an instrument much like (Matt finds the piano) and really using the instrument to be generative of my ideas. now having said this, i find it a missed opportunity on my part to have not brought this to attention.
but this is my one critique to the seminar and having thesis as a class guided with a performative technique coming out of our research and sketch problem. but i stuck to it, and made a film and even have gained a broader knowledge to an area i have never explored and most certainly, the film is a great technique but i find the area of researching into a film and the installation was way too dominate in playing the role as thesis when really, some students don't even find much interest in. i found what a lot of students including myself to be drawn to this seminar specifically was the idea of synaesthesia and looking at installations because it employs the real experience of being in space. this is probably why many of the projects lean towards memory than anything else because designing from inside out requires that kind of understanding and being aware to the memory rather than building great facades or things from the outside to inside by techniques that students especially in first and second year are much better at. i won't go into what my colleagues and i find on a critique of our education here at Pratt or any of that kind, but i am saying that there are reasons why we had chosen the two of you professors as our guides knowing we find the two of you to be very knowledgeable and both demanding and understanding. but mainly we had taken it thinking we would be building and making and the first part of watching film and installation and making a film as a kind of first exercise to be apple to employ the film as another way to show an intention as gaining another ability for performing. but this kind of undermines the creativeness and skills that students already have and have been practicing whether in college or prior to it. what i am saying is we should play to our strengths and apply the film as the technique to further demonstrate the strength of skills to become generative for a thesis. for example, i for one cannot draw well but with enough practice or investing time into it, i can definitely make something well. therefore, i liked the idea of the film because it leaned more towards cutting and editing much like i have always been doing with my own music in deejaying through scratching.
having said this, i find it to be an appropriate time to be bringing this up to the both of you since guiding a class is always experimental in the first place but perhaps my suggestion can be of use from a student's point of view. thus, i found some students who wanted to raise a voice during our class time through the semester about desk critiques and so on to be very important. there are always those that have had ideas prior to coming to thesis as a seminar and haven't said anything about their ideas. for one, i hadn't mentioned it because at some point during the beginning of the thesis, i began to think that what i was exploring into was something way too big of a scale which i was worried about, but then now that i am able to look back, i find that i really would have had more research than anything else which was the main critique that was coming out of every presentation - where is the STUFF? the one line during mike toste's critique said it best, “where is the bucket of water? and cracked pipes in frozen water. “
the class needs to be about material and having taken Prof.Bucsescu for summer design, i have to say i thought it was maybe this investigation into the joint with materials i did in his class that may be carried into a building of an installation but found that what we had done was make film. obviously it was further emphasized that we must make drawings constantly, but even that needs to be considered because seriously, how would we draw anything to experience if we don't even know where to bring about our sources from besides our memory and reading of experience. what i am saying is that, if we had just explored hands-on, we could really have put something back into the film where we can really intervene into the sites.
i will end here by saying that at this point, my vision of anything i have covered is something i will carry onto next semester so that in the end, i will have a film to show which will be about an experience. but in terms of the research, i just had to tell you from a first experience of being in this seminar as i find it appropriate now on what i hope the seminar can address next year. the synaesthesia is great. but it is only a statement. And lastly, I write on this blog the very thing students find it difficult or sometimes timid to express their ideas.
2 comments:
Dear KJ:
Thank you for your thoughtful comments and self evaluation. I will try to be brief and organize my response around the three main points you made.
First, this was a research seminar not a design studio; the goal was immerse ourselves into theory, examples of precedents, method and definition of a project. The degree project coordinating committee has chosen(notice it is not named a "thesis") , based on the experience of the last 10 years, to have each studio undertake "directed research" (directed by faculty teaching it). To balance that input towards the student's individual initiative, the site and program, as well as individual interpretation of the directed research was left to the student.
You and the entire class deserve a full explanation of our pedagogical strategy again. I say again, because, although, we have explained ourselves all along the semester, you seem to undervalue the role of investing time in looking at and learning how to make and edit a film. That seems to you as not "making staff" (which is a bit vague as a requirement if that is what you heard) and working to "our strengths" (what we know what to do-that is to make drawings, models, work in the wood shop etc.).
Making a beautiful film related and based on the readings and precedents seemed to you not enough . OK. We, Mark and I, feel that this is important, meaning, it is a tangible product and useful to our interest in capturing cross-modal sensorial experience of architecture. Does it capture the whole totality of direct experience. Of course not. But based on our experience of last year we chose this way of expanding the student's ability to communicate their project. You underestimate it's value. Let's review the success of this at the end of next semester.
Again, this was a theoretical research seminar !!!! The end product should be a well argued proposal for a degree project that incorporate both the theme of the directed theme of the studio as well as your own take on it. In spite of all the imperfections, that goal was achieved in various degrees with plenty of time to improve and build on what we have. In the end you seem confident of that.
There is plenty of freedom for each of you to express your selves.
Total freedom does not exist in school or in life. In that sense the balance between external givens (studio theme and guided research) and internal freedom of interpretation is, I think, appropriate reflection of how life as an architect is.
While I also agree with the very accurate comment by the bearded juror, that more hands on material investigations would have been useful , the class time was short and we invested a good deal of time in learning how to make and edit a film. That was a strategic priority. Some of you have done just what the he suggested. For example Liz in her watercolor blurred edges , Alanna in the silk screen drawings both of which got good responses from the critics, and Mi with her moulds, etc. While that was , of course not enough, it did communicate the orientation of the class towards hands on materiality. I think the film also can be seen as a material product.
I am sorry that somehow you did not get any response to your booklet. For my part I somehow left you at the bottom of the pile thinking that others were in need for urgent comments and in any case you had several private and public crits by us and others along the way.
I feel, that in spite of the sense of uncertainty about where you are with your project, you have more than you realize at this point. The full content of your research ( and all others) , in all its disjointed parts may appear for the moment loose and not yet formalized in to a clear project outline. In time they will prove to be useful, even if you don't see it now. That is true for all.
In fact you have a project that is clear; focused on shadows ,both as a material fact of architectural experience in all its aspects as well as a metaphor. You also have a clear mixed program (old age home and kindergarten) and a good site. I thought the external critics appreciated that.
The only point of general criticism (my own included) was about the very large
social and cultural goals (teaching morality and responsibility) as goals for your thesis. Because you got some mild cautionary comments, from me and others on that you say that, if that is taken away you don't have a "thesis". Not so! Those remain your goals, but stated indirectly by a more architecturally specific set of decisions. The very fact of an architecture sensitive to shadows (presentness, live aware of the here and now) and the bringing together of old and young communicates operationally your goals towards a better, more sensitive and responsible world. But this is done through the means of architecture. This point is applicable to the whole class.
I hope this answers some of your questions. Again thank you for your comments.
Dan
I am really interested in the small bits of some notions you spoke of.. Light and culture. There is one quote by Kahn, i always have it on the back of my head, he says' even the darkest room needs a little bit of light to understand how dark it is'. I don't know how much i can enter your dialogue, not seeing wht you made, but, the idea of looking at sound and light together within a cultural context and how much they follow each other. I want to tell you some recent thing i have seen, this since you are interested in playing with sound and materials, tools, machines.. turntable etc.. There was a guy playing the typewriter, almost like a diologue to the conversation his friends were having around him. And in this crowd you could hear the type writer constantly getting sort of abused in a good way.In the chaos of sounds and people, it became a point of departure by itself within the scale of things and how we could be controlled by suh instances.. I don't even know if iam telling you something helpful, but your thoughts made me wanted to share a few..
Post a Comment