So.....here's my revised thesis statement. Hopefully I am starting to narrow it down and get more focused on my problem and what I want to achieve through my strategies:
Problem:
The lack of sensitivity of architecture for displaced and marginalized populations has resulted in homogeneous, standardized and inadequate buildings that barely meets the minimum needs of the populations, let alone carry any meaning that connects these populations to the architecture. These current practices and architectural "solutions" are environmentally, socially and culturally unsustainable, as they fail to create any sense of identity, may it be at the level of the community or level of the individual, and fail to establish a connection between people, building, and place.
Strategies:
In order to address this problem, architecture should:
1 - Paraphrase vernacular building methods and cultural values through subtle design gestures in order to establish connections to the past and create meaning in the design for its users.
2 - Create both static and dynamic permanence through the design in order to maintain relevance to users as culture and needs evolve and to create integrity for both the building and its users.
3 - Reinforce an intimate and reciprocal relationship between nature, the building and the user to generate a sense of identity and place rooted in the surrounding natural environment.
I think the last one in particular needs a little more work in order for me to clarify my intention with that strategy better.
I'm starting to design and scribble ideas down and I am starting to wonder if i should be considering the reality of economic feasibility of the design or if i should just be exploring these three strategies? Cause, in reality, these populations wont be given proper funds. Sooo....I don't know what to do.
- M
No comments:
Post a Comment