This is a booklet for our project during college in architecture department...
EXPERIMENTAL ARCHITECTURE Experimental Architecture by Peter Cook | Lebbeus Wood | Architecture without Architecture by Simon Sadler
Dosen Mentor: Endy Yudho Prasetyo ST, MT |Adinda Smaradhana 3211100055 | Ibnu Surya Ramadhan 3211100012| |Anggita Triastari 3211100044|
WHY DOES EXPERIMENTAL ARCHITECTURE EXIST ? It all started in modernism movement (when actually just about time, where this writings most are written on modernism era), where people become too 'serious'
(statement) everything must be seen to be useful and everything must be seen to be consistent
The Walking City Definition of experiment itself, which is based on problem and effort then experiment was define as a product of the problem. (what people need /industrialized) -- production
And then architecture will define as an operational (which is bring us back to the definition of architecture as a physical object and talking a b o u t b u i l d i n g ' s c o m p o n e n t )
Sadly, it has been growth into powerful culture. People nowadays still discuss about clever structure and new forms when they see an exepriment on architecture (this is why experimental architecture and do an experiment on architecture are t w o d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s )
And those people (e.g :Archigram, Lebbeus Wood, Academician – student) got an increasing feeling of dissastification with the role, the constraints, and the formal mythology of most architecture And then, come the experiment activities. But... we are already in a paradoxical situation. The principles is when we want to do an experimental architecture we have to experiment out of architecture.
How ? Well, we have to latch this all back to the fix of nationality or heritage, or orthodoxy, or an identifiable starting point.
Innovators have three choices · Place their work in the extra architecture context · Forge gradual evolution out of mainstream · Set up a cradle of reference for their work and concerned only with its own values (values upon object is traditional and it is non-experimental)
Experiment seeks to supplant one kind of value by another it seeks to improve one kind of object by substituting another in fact it seeks to redefine, re-expose, to extend. The starting point was, architecture is not a physical object. When we see its form, it is just a logic consequence from ideas.
DOES EXPERIMENT = INNOVATION ? Why it is not an object ?Because, any experiment that goes beyond more technical investigation may incorporate motives that are potentially more dynamic than physical result.
“are we to consider only things which are physically experimental or programmatically exeprimental, or can there be an experimental made up from the underlying argument even though to the man in the street the building looks very ordinary ?” ---ABSOLUTELY!
Like when we're talking about glass house or Buckminster Fuller's dome, it is more than just a physical result. There is still something to work out about transparency: the idea that it is there and then not there. For some of us, dome is just too plain but as an idea (reason and argument behind its physical result) it is extraordinary.
Buckminster Fuller EXPERIMENTAL ARCHITECTURE
“reality is a lovely place but I wouldn't live there” – The Real World by Owl City
We are interest in some lost movements against current movement in architecture that days.They all got similar statement which is perhaps their true values (to do an experimental architecture) was only as an outburst against the greater wave of rational economicand componented building. It may also be that to build in these ways was too expensive. They were experimental in that, despite some historical origin, they needed extreme inventiviness to make them possible and they all looked unlike anything done before .
When we are talking about its build ability, technology advancement make it possible enough. But then, here comes the conflict; reality.
The Exodus - Rem Koolhaas
So that is why in an experimental architecture's word, they made their own rules. There was nothing wrong to define architecture as an event (plug-in city). Or architecture as a gold cage (exodus – rem koolhas). And valid rules were based on their concept and argument of architecture itself .
What is the purpose of this experiment ? What is the real use of it ?
THEN WHY SOME OF IT ARE UNBUILDABLE ?
They made it valid because they did study and research activities (and yes it is happen in reality nowadays, like some issue come from a social change; but it is not a necessarily part of its avant-garde) that combine with a logic assumption in the future. Without it, experimental architecture is inconsequential .
SO MAYBE SOME REASON WHY EXPERIMENTAL ARCHITECTURE EXIST ?
It contented that architecture should not create fixed volumes of space, but must provide the equipment for “living”, for “being”
Or, as simple as make a better quality of life. Not make architecture better behaved, but to make architecture change life. And in the progress, they did it radically by imagining an utopian situation where architecture is just for architecture's sake.