Good Architecture ? Bad Architecture ?

My manifesto is about good architecture and bad architecture. After I had study in this school for 3 years I had heard many teacher talk about GOOD architecture which they give us an example and tell us about BAD architecture which many of it will related to our work. Good architect for me is has 2 direction firat is good at programming or functional; I always wonder that which one is good architecture. Most of Great tect nowadays is famous from conceptual work so is that mean good architecture? And architect who work very good that is also not good?. Project dream house VI of Peter Eisenman is an example, Peter Eisenman is deconstruction style and he put his style in his work. In this project he tries to break out from the normally house which stand on same element is column, beam and wall. He twists, cut and move grid again and again until become final plan. But after built the owner found that the house is can't live with comfortable because he didn't concern about the programming inside and comfortable of people who living in that house. In this case Peter Eisenman can goal in the conceptual part but not goal in functional which he don't care about it. Is it meaning him bad? But because of this work is can make architectural moving forward but fact is it can't use. Is it meaning good? For me, this is about sacred and profane. Mostly, people think famous architect work good in every project because of people believe that they good. But in my opinion, everything is always having good and bad. Architecture too, famous architect work is should have bad thing be part of the work, it depend that we will let it go or speak out. I had read that architecture is have it era style it change from style to another style to make the character of them era, such as we know what the modernism style look like and after that is post modernism we also know what is it look like. But now we have only famous architect work which design by they own style, it is like they sign them signature. It is the question again that they have they style and character, then they use it in their work, is it good? But we have learn that every site have their own context but their didn't use that in their work. So that means it bad?
What about your opinion, what is good architecture?

technology = transformer !!

This week lecture is begin from the dreams house VI of Peter Isenman, the design criteria is he try to brack out from the normally house by use coloum, beam and structure same as the normally house but arrange it new for find the new approch and not look like house. Then after this example teacher have show us about the computer program for make architecture 3D model. For me it is the tool for transform the architect idea from relationship of many factor that related to the work and detail to be the Equations and become form which concern in every detail of the building, brack out from the old thing and more interesting

CITY & STATUS

Growing = more change to go more far = open your eyes = BIGGER CITY

CITY IS YOUR EXPERIENCE!!!

Profane!!

This week topic is quite hard to understand as teacher tells us before class. I catch up some point from lecture about the sacred and profane. From my understanding sacred is like the way that people do for show that they are respect that kind of god, person, place or things and profane is opposite, it is mean that not just respect but also depreciate that respected things. But in term of design profane is not only bad side, the good of it also have which is profaning is make something break out from the boundary of the traditional or culture and make the new things. I didn’t mean that depreciating is good but the effect after it make many question follow that might bad feedback but at less they begin to moving rather than stop and Praise what they had did before.

empty ?????

This week topic is “Empty form” the key point of this idea is like the CD and CD player, architecture is CD player, the program in side is CD, we can insert CD in CD player and let it play the song in that CD, when we bore that song we can take it out and insert new CD again. Empty form is design for the future so the architecture must flexible and can always change. For me, I think this theory is another way for green design because of the architecture must concern to future and it can useable in next 20 year by base on old structure. But for me it quite intangible because we can design for future is some part but we couldn’t know what is gonna be in future its not just the responsibility of first generation architect but also architect in the future that what program can put in this building and how to make it work is best quality too

IMAGINATION-Manifasto

Ask you guy what is she chewing? [Show video]
The answer may be right or wrong, but my point is that your answer needs to use your imagination to perceive it. This is an important concept for linking architecture and the user together.
Architecture is the record of people’s lifestyle, their thoughts, and perceptions in that period of time. Architect is like a book that has its own story but if people do not know how to read, it will be just plain papers. People’s imaginations are not the same, it depends on many factors. Firstly, the main factor is Age. Secondly of the main is a person’s experience. Lastly, will be their lifestyle. All these factors make people have different imagination and perception.
Age, experience and lifestyle effect perception and imagination in different ways. Age can make people living in different time periods, have different thinking methods and point of views that are related to their experiences. This also relates to people’s lifestyle in that time period too. For example, modernism approached the industrial revolution period, where people in this time period had different lifestyles and thinking methods from today, which quantity was important. This includes making money, so modernism architectures will get use to their work. After that, there were world wars 1 and 2, after the wars there were new thinking methods, which became post modernism. In this period, age, experience and lifestyle all have more esthetic. It makes post-modern have different style from modernism.
In conclusion, this class makes me see a more in depth view of the background of architecture and understand how the imagination and perception is important and how its work.

bigness!!

Ram Koolhass has his point of view that sees the architecture in now a day as junk space because they not respect to the context surrounding, community and local people lifestyle but their just build their own community, be land mark or out-standing and change people habit or lifestyle. Sadly, most of architecture which is “bigness” now a day is 99 percents are “junk space”. From that point make me realize that nowadays people have more stress so design are concern about the esthetic, user will fell relax inside space, convenient but they look past the relationship between architecture, people and environment like before. Finally in future out side will no more important. People will stuck on the building or architecture and no relation with ground and other building then they will realize that what they have done and have question that “is that the civilization?”