Week 5: Reserach

In this week's reading, Isozaki (1999) refers to Cedric Price, most commonly known for his unique and innovative approach to building entiies. The buidling Fun Palace designed by Cedric Price insuates the essential need for a structure that is adaptable and flexible. At the time, Price's concept was innovative developing a design that could be altered, rather than stagnant. Isozaki (1999) states historic norms ignore the importance of future adaption to cultural, practices and lifestyles.
This linked to our scenario, where we see a future need and demand for architecture that has the ability to adapt to change and even grow. Prefabricated box that could continuously grow, allowing flexibility and adaptiablity.

Eco pods by howeler yoon architecture and squared design lab

Isozaki (1999) states clear differences between archigram's programme and Price innovative concept of the Fun Palace includin the idea of "non design". Isozaki (1999) refers to the fun palace due to "unlimited" changes in design arrangement. Although Price did not build it shows steps toward a future vales and ideas

The other reading this week,  focused on the the work of Diller Scofidio + Renfro. Author, Kazi (2009) firstly refers to the distilled relationship between art and architecture. Seeing the project  for its installation purpose and entity of art. The Blur Building, design by Diller Scofidio + Renfro in 1992, develops a strong reinforcement of the firms philosophy, challenging  the perception of architecture. The building is covered in mist nozzles, hiding the building in an artificial cloud. Unlike many other firm, well or just mine, there is strong freedom and allowing the firm to focus on their aims to test the boundaries of architecture and cultural production.


"They position themselves vis-à-vis the discipline with ‘an understanding of its involvement, its networks, its complexities, its ties into the political, economic, social, into different disciplines within the arts, different modes of expression whether it’s writing or architectural installations, permanent/temporary, small/large." (Kazi 2009, 2)
 
Although, Diller Scofidio + Renfro could be categorised as a contemporary, with "money losing experiments" and detailed theortical theartre exploration (Kazi 2009, 4). The value of architectural as a theatre device is seen to be most important. Personally, this conceptual workplace philosphy is different to me, but it reminds of the arcitecture's ability to tested and explored. Architecture's ability grow is similar to other sciences, developing new platforms of research and impacts. Architecture in the future will strongly interlinked with technology, with its strong need to support 21st century human lifestyle.

Isozaki, A., 1999. Erasing architecture into the system. In H. U. Obrist, ed. Re: CP. Birkhäuser Architecture, pp. 24–47. 

Kazi, O., 2009. Architecture as a Dissident Practice: An Interview with Diller Scofidio + Renfro. Architectural Design, 79(1), pp.56–59