The final critique for this project revealed that Professor Sofranko's adage is true: "It's never done; it's only due."
The critics brought fresh eyes and fresh ideas to my project. Though we spent quite some time discussing solutions to the "access issue" for my studios (for which I had never found a satisfying answer), we also discussed a number of other important issues. Among those issues were the design of my entry ramps and their relationship with the outdoor patio space, the roof surface, and experiential sequence from the roof surface to the studios in general.
It became apparent that more attention should be paid to the roof surface (which was to also double as a communal outdoor space.) This space was far too large to function as an outdoor space and designing studio entries could help inform the use of this space as a communal area. We further wrestled with the idea of condensing my vertical composition and bringing my studios closer to the roof surface (perhaps even becoming part of the surface-- an idea I had scrapped early on, but might prove worth investigating.)
In all, the final critiques were an enjoyable learning experience for all of us. As I listened to the critics discuss our projects, it occurred to me that there were some common ideas that we were all struggling to understand and implement. Among them were: truthful vs. willful, good composition, the actual experience of the building, addressing the whole site, and creating place. I can't say that I have it all figured out- these are ideas I will continue to investigate as I grow as a designer.
No comments:
Post a Comment