The interview also mentions that the original contest required a public library, an art gallery, a film and media center, and an information center. These are several of the uses I would like to incorporate into my program, which ties in nicely with the science and health aspects that the surrounding environs contribute. Lastly, I found it refreshing to hear Ito mention that he changed part of his concept after seeing the building under construction and realizing how integral steel and iron were to his design.
In reading the Perrault excerpt, I felt more vindicated in my choice of site. I think many of us, especially on the new wave of sustainable design, feel that we need to ameliorate our design with the surrounding landscape, sometimes at the expense of the overall concept. I like Perrault's choice of "violent" as a description of architecture. I think in my current site I need to embrace the challenge of the traffic congestion and difficult pedestrian access in light of the fact that this site, for me, presents unending possibilities and really rich potential to link to some other centers of human exploration and knowledge (the Science Museum and hospital).
After reading Laura's post, I had to go back and re-read the interview with Perrault to refresh my memory about his reference to violence in architecture. I understand what he means but I wouldn't consider architecture to be violent in general. Additionally, I don't think I would choose the analogy of building a wall when describing architecture.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, it was interesting to see that more than one of the interviewees regarded contemporary libraries and those of the future as "flexible, approachable, and multi-functional" versions of a traditional library. in other words, they weren't suggesting a reinvention of the library as a typology. Those of us who appreciate the traditional library may find this comforting. This is helpful insight to me when considering how the technology of the future engages the library typology of the past.
In my experience a lot of the green space along the South side of the Charles is largely unused except maybe as an exercise route. In the summer people congregate to play frisbee or to tan, but thats really only in the sunny areas. As the site you have chosen is heavily wooded. I think building something there is a fantastic way to activate this piece of land. Do it up!
ReplyDelete