Diagram Shift the fraudulent nature of a new diagram.
Lisa A Cumming
Abstract A recent, notable shift in the use of the diagram has been seen within architectural discourse, presenting a condition of fraudulent diagram activity. This new diagram disobeys certain conditions of performative diagramming, rendering their practice outside of process yet, in their presentation and reading, firmly stuck within the discourse of design process as a means of justifying and augmenting the perception of intellectual construct for an architectural proposal. The Deleuzian sense of performative diagramming has been successfully employed as a generative design tool by several contemporary practices but is being undermined by such rogue diagrams, whose intentions lie outside of the generative process. This paper firstly seeks to critically compare new diagram practices with that of the abstract process of diagramming that deal with the flows and forces upon a project. Secondly, new terminology is proposed in order to eliminate the confusion that currently surrounds the terms diagram and diagramming and thus, propose an appropriate place for the new diagram within current practice and assert the integrity of current authentic diagramming processes.
PROCESS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | ||
Contents Introduction
6
Process Phantasmal Projection Indexical Families 10 Decoding 12
7
Product The Brand Diagram 15 The nature of the new diagram 17 The new diagram’s purpose 18 Redefinitions 21
Conclusion 23 Endnotes 24 Bibliography 26 Images List and Construct 28
|| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|PRODUCT
Diagram Shift: the fraudulent nature of a new diagram
The diagram is a fraud. Falsifying authentic research, it has been recently seen to serve agendas that are counter to the authentic use of diagramming for novel and intellectually sound architecture and more toward self-justifying, intellect-augmenting purposes, succumbing to the desire to provide marketable eye-candy in a media driven environ. A ‘diagram shift’ has been observed over the last decade, where certain conditions of the Deleuzian sense of performative diagramming have been disobeyed, resulting in a new type of ‘diagram’. In this critically comparative process, alternative terminology for such falsifications of the diagram will be provided in a way that clearly determines the purpose of both performative diagramming and diagrammatic illustration. …the discourse of the diagram has become so confused given its near-universal use and abuse…i
The diagram has long played an important role in the discourse of architecture, used as a means to investigate and develop specific research agendas, the diagram reads both as a tool to, and evidence of such a process being undertaken. Commissioned with the task of communicating his architecture’s intentions to an audience in a way that secures active interest in his agenda, the architect has often employed the diagram for its simplicity yet efficacy in presenting varying levels and natures of information. However, in hot pursuit of also acquiring a client’s commission, the diagram has recently become engendered with brand-type iconography, in order to develop an image for a project, much like any other product available in today’s competitive market. Acknowledging that architectural discourse relies very heavily on two semantics that constitute the larger architectural language, visual media (diagrams inclusive) and terminology, this paper argues that the term diagram is currently all too often misused, detrimentally entrusting many diagrammatic (but not diagram) images with more meaning and authenticity than they in fact hold. These images are being used to provide a marketable image for a project without declaring that this is in fact their agenda. This paper will argue for the importance of establishing differentiation between performative diagrams and those diagrams that are simply diagrammatic by identifying the key conditions that diagramming contributes to- phantasmal projection, families of development and theoretical decodification. These conditions, compared against the new diagrams’ agendas of iconography and marker-making explicitly differentiate the purposes and place of diagramming and the diagrammatic.
6PROCESS
DiagramShift
Whether diagrams are tasked with the Deleuzian reassembly of matter and function or conceptual development of forces within a project brief, common conditions of process are evident in performative diagrams
Phantasmal Projection A diagram, in the performative sense projects a condition that is not realised, an ideal or reality that is yet to beii. In the true sense of diagramming where new methods or avenues of exploration arise, van Berkel testifies that existing conditions cannot be represented: The diagram is not a metaphor or paradigm, but an ‘abstract machine’ that is both content and expression. This distinguishes diagrams from indexes, icons and symbols…it does not represent an existing object or situation, but it is instrumental in the production of new ones.iii Impostor diagrams might propose an unbuilt condition but represent (metaphorically or symbolically) something that is manifest in the final proposal and is far from the phantasmal ideals a performative diagramming process would seek to encapsulate. For example, the
8 House by Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) proposes a new way of mixed programme living in peripheral Copenhagen however, the formal architecture is entirely evident within the presented diagrams, literally informing (or retrospectively informed by) the building’s form. In an array of comic style images, Ingels is shown to have heroic Master Architect command over the manipulation of the housing proposal’s form and arrangement all in a bid, one might argue, to convey an absolute aptitude for the task. A similar diagrammatic language is employed for the
Ren Tower, also attributed to BIG’s portfolio, only the agenda is more candidly professed. Originally proposed for a Swedish housing competition, the Ren Building, having been unsuccessful, was quickly translated into a hotel, sports and cultural centre for the Shanghai World Expo 2010 upon discovering that in elevation, the form was in fact the Chinese symbol for “people”. Devoid of any contextual or programmatic elements, the diagram literally speaks to the form (an excessively upscaled Ren character) of the building, the audience unaware as to how a bizarre new form in fact arrived in either Sweden or China. LisaCumming
PRODUCT7
Contrastingly,
OMA’s CCTV Tower exemplifies an architectural form derived from a deep
programmatic exploration via a more descriptive and developmental diagram. A similar technique to 8 House has been used, where colours are representative of various programmatic components and a diagrammatic exoskeleton envelops the graphic indications of programmatic placement however, this reductive diagram condenses information regarding programmatic hierarchies, intensities and relationships where the 8 House diagram reduces the information to a single statement of formal processes, counter intuitive to the nature of diagramming where “an image is a diagram when it is stronger than its interpretations�.iv
8PROCESS
DiagramShift
LisaCumming
PRODUCT9
Indexical Families Diagramming used as a tool to pursue the development of an idea implies the rendering and reading of graphically collated information to then re-render and re-read its various perceptions, thus developing families of diagrams. Such families are collections of genetically similar constituents differentiated by generational development, indexing their process of development.
Such an idea is presented in
Eisenman’s House VI from his house series, where the resulting
structures are seen to be bookmarks within the diagramming exploration The ‘final’ built structures are merely indexical signs that point to a larger process of which they are only a part.v Whether the house itself is a diagram or not is an argument tangential to this paper’s inquiry. What is however, fundamental to the case, is that each house does not and cannot (theoretically) stand alone. Instead, they belong to a larger collection of diagrams that rigorously pursue the evolution of an architectural condition, in this case, the manipulation of a grid of structural elements until they bear no conventional structural value.
Contrastingly, the collection of development diagrams for 8 House are markers of an idea’s narrative rather than of idea development. Conditions being explored within the diagram itself do not challenge the image before it but refer to it as an index. A touchstone example of where diagrammatic processes were truly integrated as design process is OMA’s Seattle Central Library; a family of generative diagrams posing formative investigations of technological and programmatic distribution and hierarchy. Prince-Rasmus talks of the project’s development, “I’m going to build up the Seattle Central Library in this way before your eyes in about five or six diagrams, and I truly mean this is the design process that you’ll see.”vi And these diagrams are entirely pre-building, at no time are they used to discuss post-occupancy they are instead presented in pre-building discussions, articulating the vocation of these diagrams as generative tools, as opposed to post-occupancy branding. The success of the library, though initially requiring defence against public criticism by the clientvii, has seen explosive appropriation of Seattle-style diagramming. Whether this is because of the diagram’s strength in communicating and convincing the client of the architectural intent, the aesthetic novelty or because it is one of the first projects to successfully create architecture from diagramming seems almost subordinate to the fact that there now exist several practices generating diagrams of Remstyle with little regard for the process behind them. 10PROCESS
DiagramShift
PLOT’s Harbour Bath, a comparably successful cultral project in its positive contribution to public space is contrarily presented in diagrams codifying programme by colour and circulation flow by arrow.
Similarly codified, the diagrams for the unbuilt
CPAS Low Energy Housing Project (JDS)
are superficially informative only when viewed against the final proposal, thus reducing them to a symbolic rendering of resultant conditions.
LisaCumming
PRODUCT11
Seattle Central Library
Decoding The diagram in retrospective reading should decode conceptual or spatial conditions within the built architecture as, if it is performative diagramming, it is the precursor to those conditions existing. If the presented diagram simply presents the same information graphically as is evident in the proposal or adduces nothing new at all, it cannot be a diagram in the performative sense. It is simply an icon or image for the condition- a marker signifying, or reminding us that it exists. “Diagrams are best known and understood as reductive machines for the compression of information”viii and if these machines are abstract in the Deleuzian sense, they are representative of a yet to be condition and would therefore represent the process or premise for which this condition now exists within the architecture. The prolific diagrammatic practice, UN Studio has often used mathematical models such as the Klein bottle, Möbius strip and the trefoil. Developed diagramming of these phenomena, embedded with programmatic forces has generated projects such as
Möbius House and the Mercedes
Benz Museum.
These diagrams however offer retrospective value as much as they do generative. The early diagram of the programmatic trefoil provides the decoding of the geometric condition and manipulation of movement that is otherwise not experienced explicitly by a user nor read from the resulting formal language of the Mercedes Benz museum. 12PROCESS
DiagramShift
National Library Prague (BIG)
Stylistic similarities between SCL and NLP are evident
This in contrast to Sanaa’s New Museum of Modern Art, New York where the diagrammatic model simply points out where shifts in volumetric positioning have occurred, with little clue as to what contextual or conceptual forces have required such moves- moves that are read from the architecture itself so the model has provided a simple platform for a form modelling device, rather than for a process of diagramming. LisaCumming
PRODUCT13
Mรถbius House
14PROCESS
DiagramShift
Ambassador: this diagram is more prolific on the Internet than explicit design drawings of the SCL.
The Brand Diagram We are witnessing as much of a transformation of the notion of the ‘diagram’ itself as we are eliciting some transformation of architectural practice via diagramming.ix
A shift in use of the diagram is nothing new to architecture. Where Charles Sanders Peirce first talks of the diagram as a presentation device where it is “mainly an icon, and an icon of intelligible relations in the constitution of its Object”and recognising it for its fantastical qualities and nonreal nature he further declares, “...it is for the moment a pure dream.”x A notable shift from the diagram as a presentation tool during the 1980s was pioneered by Deleuze and Guattari1 who plunge the diagram deeper into the field of non-reality, claiming the diagram to be an abstract machinexi, producing diagrams that are “nonrepresentative, nonillustrative and, non narrative”xii denoting for the first time, the diagram’s function as entirely process based. The notion of the abstract machine and its subsistence on and reassembling of matter and functionxiii is still very much embedded in contemporary practice of diagramming. Diagrammatic architects such as Rem Koolhaas employ such a process however, his diagrams have also become ambassadors for his projects because of their successful, fundamental role in bringing about the architectural product and therefore are, at times, as identifiable as the built architecture, placing his work somewhere between process and product2. The stylistic exploitation of the ambassadorial nature of these diagrams has given rise to a new generation of diagram, the brand diagram; an illustration entirely retrospective to the project, it is a fabricated ambassador engendered with project crystallisation and marketability.
1
Whose work is also largely influenced by that of fellow French philosopher and sociologist, Michel
Foucoult (1926-1984).
Such recognition is noted with the diagrams of Seattle Central Library, generating as much critical discourse on the diagram as much as the library itself. 2
LisaCumming
PRODUCT15
3
16PROCESS
4
DiagramShift
The nature of the new diagram So if the diagram has failed as an instrument for the organization of the project above and beyond the fixity of form, it should come as no surprise that today it is merely an illustration, or even worse a typographical decoration, that accompanies the communicative hypertrophy of architects…xiv The new diagram is: Self-referential Self-representative Illustrative not informative Self-referential: A graphic that diagrammatically illustrates a completely self-referential narrative, indifferent to the external forces upon the project, it presents a narrative of its own formal development process disassociated with an authentic diagramming process of abstraction. While it may be diagrammatic, in that it is a simplified illustration conveying information about the design process that occurred it is not a precursory process of diagramming where forces and flows upon the proposal are reduced to their matter and functions to inform generative process unique to the project. Self-representative: A superficial graphic, rendering a caricature of the proposal, reduces the diagram to an easily recognisable symbol. This new diagram serves solely as a brand for the project that signifies a key concept or formal characteristic of the project itself, irrelevant to the process by which the architectural solution was formed. This brand icon typically, and prolifically, adorns all associated media with the project3. This performs several functions. Firstly, harkening back to the glorified cursory sketches4 of prominent modernists that were precursory to every good proposal, it associates itself with the idealistic, notional stroke of genius. Secondly, these brands become an emblematic army of marketing fortitude, illustrating a practice’s manifesto and portfolio in stylised icons. Illustrative not informative: When a diagram’s level of information is reduced to illustration; an inability to reveal any theoretical or process grounds disqualifies it from being a diagram. The image instead provides an aesthetic graphic to superfluously (and at times, irrelevantly) accompany what is already described by the architect or worse, already exhibited by the architecture, diminishing the diagram’s role to graphic support to entertain the audience’s eye.
The broad use of media utilised within the architectural discipline to educate a client of a project is undisputedly similar to that of any other professional, economically bound discipline; website, public presentations (such as TED talks), publicly accessed video and animation, and print publication. 3
image: Zhang, Y., 2009. R0017658 [photograph] private collection.
Such sketches are typical of modernist heroes Philip Johnson, Mies van der Rohe and Le Corbusier, all architects who are engagingly familiar with the notion of marketing both their professional personalities and portfolios. 4
image (left): Rohe, M V., c.1928-29. German Pavilion, International Exposition, Barcelona, Spain, Interior perspective [Graphite on illustration board] Available at: http://www.moma.org/collection/object.php?object_id=87528 [15 December 2010]. image (right): Le Corbusier., Modulor. Available at: http://wiki.uelceca.net/20072008/published/Christian+Derix+II [15 December 2010].
LisaCumming
PRODUCT17
programme
programme
programme
shift
formalised
The new diagram’s purpose Architecture is a discipline that straddles a dichotomy of the fantastical and the palpable. While on the one-hand architecture projects idyllically phantasmal constructs, it is also situated in and must respond to very real conditions, including those economic and the necessity of acquiring commission. Ben van Berkel notes that an architect’s strategies for work selection are highly devised and not to be underestimated.xv Similarly, an architect’s ego is a force not to be reckoned with as authorship and recognition are as contentiously sought after as the commission. “Architects are obsessed with authorship.”xvi, diagrams are now engendered with marketing, representatives of not only the project but also the architect himself.xvii It could be contended that diagrammatic practices are in fact practices that are less obsessed with authorship and more with the project itself, developing deep diagramming processes to explore latent design potential such as is evident in Seattle’s Central Library, The second [point] is that this process does not have a signature. There is no authorship. xviii
Secondly, the diagram has historically been used to secure trust in the architect’s skill and aptitude for the task: The design and use of diagrams in architectural texts and treatises was a display of authority and qualification to design, build and/or theorise architecture. Diagrams demonstrated that an architect or writer had the necessary skills and knowledge.xix
18PROCESS
DiagramShift
Contemporarily, this is no different except where diagrams now solely serve this purpose. Lacking entirely in process, the employment of a diagrammatic language associated with the synthesising of complex relationships is used to suggest the demonstration of, in fact nonexistent, underlying intellect. Similarly, augmented project intelligence can be implied by hypertrophic diagrammatic representation of compositions and connections that are in fact very simple in nature,
programme
programme
programme navigation
such as
The Battery (JDS), suggesting a greater conceptual construct developed through
generative diagramming than exists in the project- both process and product.
LisaCumming
PRODUCT19
20PROCESS
DiagramShift
Redefinitions The word and the concept of the diagram have evolved in a variety of different disciplinary, professional and functional contexts, complicating its understanding.xx The term ‘diagram’, even when understood against its Greek etymology is vague and all encompassingxxi. This paper calls for a redefinition of the term. If diagrams are “the matter of architecture”xxii as Somol suggests, then the ambiguity that surrounds the terms diagram and diagramming, can no longer be permitted to exist. Whilst the place for ‘brand’ illustrations within media and publication is recognised, specifically as a means to competitively position a practice within an economic environment, to suggest however, that they are born of a diagramming process is a lie. Instead, to reaffirm their specific value, dedicated terminology that reflects their product like nature is proposed so as not to undermine the significance of diagramming processes and make bastardchildren of diagrammatic illustrations.
Icon; the reduction of a project to a recognisable image or symbol. BIG has made successful use of this, as illustrated by their website. Every single project that is attributed to their portfolio is represented by a euphorically neon icon. Pragmatically, this makes for novel and successful navigation of their plethora of utopian proposals, addressing an audience all too familiar with navigating their world with icons. More importantly however, it reduces the project to a single idea- such as the 8 House, as represented by a figure eight, the continuous circulation and fluid integration of programme. But it is not a diagram. It is not informative to the design, it does not reveal a greater theory nor belong to a developmental series of diagrams that are not self-referential; they are instead narratives of formal processes. Which leads to Markers.
Marker; are a collection of self-referential illustrations of narrative. The narrative might regard a project’s formal process, a contextual condition or a built architectural condition (such as circulation, volumetric etc); anything that speaks of a series of events relevant to the architectural outcome but are not related to the precursory process that enabled them. Illustrative of this is the CPAS Low Energy Housing markers, presenting issues that relate entirely to the architectural outcome, contextual forces and thus, formal developments of the housing proposal.
LisaCumming
PRODUCT21
22PROCESS
DiagramShift
Conclusion The term diagram has been fraudulently used for means of securing an audience’s trust, interest and the post justification of a project’s intellectual grounds. This paper argued that when certain conditions are disobeyed then a ‘diagram’ is disqualified from in fact being called such and proposed a new terminological definition for such images. A diagram cannot be of a diagramming process and subsequently fundamental to the development of a project if it presents an already existing condition, does not belong to an indexical family of abstracted developmental processes that are precursory to the resultant architecture or, if it does not provide insight or is de-codifying of existing conditions and their theoretical grounds. The explosion of images accredited as ‘diagrams’ that in fact disobey these conditions signifies a contemporary diagram shift within architectural practice that needs to be addressed. The importance of recognising and remedying such terminological misuse lies in the belittling of authentic processes of diagramming and the consequent condemnation of these new diagrams. Discussion of the purpose and content of the new diagram proposed two new terms in order to differentiate them from the realm of performative diagramming and place them in a discourse of media. The Icon is a symbol that signifies the project, retrospectively signally a key characteristic as the paramount idea of project. The Icon’s purpose is to communicate a key idea in a language that is familiar to its audience and portray a stylistic sense of flair. The Marker is more commonly confused (or intentionally posed as) being of diagramming process as it often belongs to a collection of illustrations that pose a narrative but this narrative is entirely self-referential. A marker is a reductive representation of existing contextual or formal conditions that relate directly to the architectural outcome but are not abstracted precursory investigations that developed the intellectual grounds for the project. As a communicative tool, a marker has the potential to successfully transfer knowledge of a project from architect to client/audience when the intention is just that however, the ambiguity of definition has meant such illustrations have posed as holding a fundamentality and thus derived from a more sophisticated intellectual construct than they in fact have been. The contemporary diagram must cease to delude its audience and henceforth testify to the true nature of its agenda, shifting diagrammatic discourse from vague dissertations of narrative to candidly engendered discussions of process, product or pride.
LisaCumming
PRODUCT23
(Endnotes) 1
Somol, R E., 1999, Dummy Text. In: Diagram Diaries. London: Thames & Hudson. p.7
2
Deleuze, G., Guattari, F., 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism & Schizophrenia. Translated from French by Massumi, B., London: The Athlone Press. p141.
3
Garcia, M., ed, 2010. The Diagrams of Architecture. Manchester: John Wiley & Sons. p224.
4
Berkel, B V., cited in Garcia, M., ed, 2010. The Diagrams of Architecture. Manchester: John Wiley & Sons. p224
5
Somol, R E., 1999, Dummy Text. In: Diagram Diaries. London: Thames & Hudson. p16
6
Prince-Rasmus, 2006. Joshua Prince-Rasmus on Seattle’s Library. TED Talks. [video online] Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/joshua_prince_ramus_on_seattle_s_library.html [8 December 2010].
7 Ibid 8
Berkel, B V., Bos, C., 1998. Diagram Work Any. No.23, p.20
9
Ednie-Brown, P., 2000, The Texture of Diagrams, Diagrammania, Daidalos, Issue 74, p.73
10
Vidler, A.,2000. Diagrams of Utopia. Daidalos, n74, p.6
11
Deleuze, G., Guattari, F., 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism & Schizophrenia. Translated from French by Massumi, B., London: The Athlone Press. p.142
12
Bacon, F. cited in Ednie-Brown, P., 2000, The Texture of Diagrams, Diagrammania, Daidalos, Issue 74, p.73
13 Ibid, 141 14
Aureli, P.V., 2006, Architecture After the Diagram, Lotus International, n127, p.104
15
Berkel, B V., Bos, C., 1998. Diagram Work. Any. No.23, p.19
16
Prince-Rasmus, 2006. Joshua Prince-Rasmus on Seattle’s Library. TED Talks. [video online] Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/joshua_prince_ramus_on_seattle_s_library.html [8 December 2010].
17
“The architect is established by representation of his or her works as an author within the institution.”, Godber, B., 1998. The Knowing and Subverting Reader In: J. Hill, ed. 1998. Occupying Architecture: between the architect and the user. London: Routledge. Ch 10. p.110
18
Prince-Rasmus, 2006. Joshua Prince-Rasmus on Seattle’s Library. TED Talks. [video online] Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/joshua_prince_ramus_on_seattle_s_library.html [8 December 2010].
19
Garcia, M., ed, 2010. The Diagrams of Architecture. Manchester: John Wiley & Sons. p19
20
Garcia, M., ed, 2010. The Diagrams of Architecture. Manchester: John Wiley & Sons. p22
21 Ibid 22
Somol, R E., 1999, Dummy Text. In: Diagram Diaries. London: Thames & Hudson. p7
Bibliography Amo/Rem Koolhaas., 2006. Post-Occupancy, Domus, n1. Aureli, P.V., 2006, Architecture After the Diagram, Lotus International, n127, p.96-105 Berkel, B V., Bos, C., 1998. Diagram Work Any. No.23, p.19-22. Berkel, B V., Bos, C., 1999 Move: Imagination, techniques, effects. Amsterdam: UN Studio & Goose Press. Deleuze, G., Guattari, F., 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism & Schizophrenia. Translated from French by Massumi, B., London: The Athlone Press. Ednie-Brown, P., 2000, The Texture of Diagrams, Diagrammania, Daidalos, Issue 74, p.72-79. Eisenman, P., (2010) Eisenman Architects. Available at: www.eisenmanarchitects.com [12 December 2010]. Garcia, M., ed, 2010. The Diagrams of Architecture. Manchester: John Wiley & Sons. Godber, B., 1998. The Knowing and Subverting Reader In: J. Hill, ed. 1998. Occupying Architecture: between the architect and the user. London: Routledge. Ch 10. Hyungmin, P., 2002. Epilogue: The Instrument of Modern Architecture, The Portfolio and the Diagram, Cambridge Mass: MIT Press, p.278-290 Ingels, B., (2010) BIG- Bjarke Ingels Group. Available at: www.big.dk [12 December 2010]. Ingels, B., 2009. Bjarke Ingels: 3 warp-speed architecture tales. TED Talks. [video online] Available at: http:// www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/bjarke_ingels_3_warp_speed_architecture_tales.html [7 December 2010] Ingels, B., 2009. Q & A With Bjarke Ingels: On architectural alchemy. TED Talks. [interview online] Available at: http://blog.ted.com/2009/10/30/qa_with_bjarke/ [8 December 2010] Ingels, B., 2009. Yes is More. Koln: Evergreen. Kubo, M., 2005. Seattle Public Library : OMA/LMN. Barcelona: Actar. OMA., (2010) OMA. Available at: www.oma.eu [12 December 2010]. Prince-Rasmus, 2006. Joshua Prince-Rasmus on Seattle’s Library. TED Talks. [video online] Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/joshua_prince_ramus_on_seattle_s_library.html [8 December 2010]. Smedt, J D., (2010) JDS- Julien de Smedt Architects. Available at: www.jdsarchitects.com [12 December 2010]. Somol, R E., 1999, Dummy Text. In: Diagram Diaries. London: Thames & Hudson. Vidler, A.,2000. Diagrams of Utopia. Daidalos, n74, p.6-13 26PROCESS
DiagramShift
Images List PROCESS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | ||
1. OMA, 2002. Axo Complete. [diagram] Available at: http://www.oma.eu/index.php?option=com_pr ojects&view=portal&id=55&Itemid=10 [14 December 2010]. 2.t 3. Eisneman, P. eisenman-house-XI. [diagram] Available at: http://jingqiuzhu.blogspot.com/2009_03_01_
1
archive.html [14 December 2010]. 4. OMA, 1999. New Equalities. [diagram] Available at: http://www.spl.org/lfa/central/oma/OMAbook1299/page16. htm [14 December 2010] 5. OMA, 1999. Social Role. [diagram] Available at: http://www.spl.org/lfa/central/oma/OMAbook1299/page16. htm [14 December 2010]
2
3
6. OMA, 1999. Flexibility. [diagram] Available at:
4
http://www.spl.org/lfa/central/oma/OMAbook1299/page16.
5
htm [14 December 2010]
38 cropped
7 & 8 OMA, 1999. Platforms. [diagram] Available at: http://www.spl.org/lfa/central/oma/OMAbook1299/page16. htm [14 December 2010] 9 & 10 UN Studio, 1998. Mobius House Image 4. [diagram] Available at: http://www.unstudio.com/nl/unstudio/projects/ name/7/0/3179/mobius-house#img4 [14 December 2010] 11 UN Studio, 2000. Image 7, Mercedes Benz Museum. [diagram]
6
7
8
Available at: http://formness.com/architecture/articles/ architecture-projects/mercedes-benz-museum-stuttgart [14 December 2010] 12 UN Studio, 1998. Mobius House. [diagram]
9
10
11
Available at: http://formness.com/architecture/articles/ architecture-projects/m-bius-house-t-gooi [14 December 2010] 13 UN Studio, 1998. Mobius Concept. [diagram] Available at: http://www.archinect.com/gallery/
12
displayimage.php?album=22&pos=13 [14 December 2010]
13 28PROCESS
DiagramShift
|| | | 14
15
16
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|PRODUCT
14-21 BIG, 2010. 8 Tallet. [diagram] Available at: http://www.big.dk/projects/8/ [14 December 2010]
18
19
20
22-27 BIG, 2004. People’s Building Shanghai.
21
[diagram] Available at: http://www.big.dk/projects/ren/ [14 December 2010]
22
23
24
25
28-33 JDS, 2008. CPAS Low Energy Housing. [diagram] Available at: http://www.jdsarchitects.com/index_
26
27
28
29
30
31
34
35
36
37
scroll.html [14 December 2010]
32
33
34-37 BIG, 2003. Copenhagen Harbour Bath.
38
[diagram] Available at: http://www.big.dk/projects/bad/ [14 December 2010] 38 OMA, 1999. Image 1. [diagram] http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums/showthread.
39
40
41
php?1772-Seattle-Seattle-Public-Library-Rem-
42
Koolhaas/page2 39-42 BIG, 2010. National Library Prague. [diagram] Available at: http://www.big.dk/projects/nlp/ [14 December 2010]
43 43 SANAA. SANAA New Museum Models. [diagram] Available at: http://www.gclass.org/node/380 [14 December 2010]
44
44 JDS, 2005. The Battery. [diagram] Available at: http://www.jdsarchitects.com/index_ scroll.html [14 December 2010]
LisaCumming
PRODUCT29