Technological Emergence

Nour Awni Farah

Outline – Technological Emergence

Mission Statement:

Our current generation has allowed for access and continuous technological developments in the digital and industrial worlds that can potentially make design opportunities and inspire endless visions. In the early 20th century, the futurist architecture movement was a powerful force that has a big role in initiating the technological developments we have now. Futurist drawings and manifestos in relation to executed structures make it evident that industrial and construction limitations were present. With current digital process and technique, architects have the opportunity to push the boundaries with design. People like Michael Hensel, Achim Menges and Neri Oxman are experimenting with the potential and success this technology has to offer taking into account structure, material capabilities and sustainability. Their practice leans toward “emerging architecture”, where all components are foreseen as one component rather than multiple parts that have to be put together. With that said, artificial intelligence systems can help emerge design solutions that might have been unpredicted. This paper will help manifest the importance and the potential of these modern technological techniques and how it is the leading way of practice for future design. Comment by Phillip Crosby: “Emergent” might be a better term here. Comment by Phillip Crosby: Needs different terminology. The individual components add up to become what? Or maybe just say that they are “foreseen as one interrelated whole.”

1) Futurist ideas – all seeking for the domination and advancement of technology Comment by Phillip Crosby: Would it be worth commenting on the disjunction between the ideas of the Futurists as expressed in the various manifestoes and the forms that Sant’Elia produced in his drawings? The manifestoes expressed a need for lightness, but the forms in his drawings are very heavy? Was he struggling with the realities of architecture as something that must stand up and be stable?

· Umbortto Boccini – Art work that implies unique curvilinear forms of continuity and space. His sculptural work implied engine driven civilizations with complex forms and surfaces. Boccini’s role as a futurist and manifesto helped visualize the future of modern art and literature.

· Antonio Sant’Elia – An architect whose sketches and drawings were not executed due to technological limitations. His manifesto also included the dominance of technology.

References:

Adamowicz, Elza, and Simona Storchi. Back to the Futurists: The Avant-garde and Its Legacy.

Meyer, Esther Da Costa. The Work of Antonio Sant’Elia: Retreat into the Future. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.

2) Frank Gehry – Work over time – With Gehry’s interest in curvilinear forms, execution at a large scale was difficult through part of his career due to industrial and construction limitations. This stance evident in the projects below.

· Compare

· Snake Lamp 1983 & Lewis house Lyndhurst Model 1985-1995

· American entre Paris 1988-94

References: Abel, Chris. Architecture, Technology, and Process. Boston: Elsevier, 2004.

3) Emergence Technologies in Architecture

· Michael Hensel, Michael Weinstock and Achim Menges introduce a new means of architectural practice through advanced technology. They conclude that emergent morphogenetic design is responsive to structural, environmental and architectural elements. The process includes all components of the digital model shift due to external forces.

· The idea of emergence with the use of artificial intelligence has potential to generate valid solutions that could not have been taken into account by the designer.

· This new way of practice is the future of architecture – however, designers are using it as a means of experimentation, generating small-scale physical models.

References:

Hensel, Michael, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock. Emergent Technologies and Design: Towards a Biological Paradigm for Architecture. Oxon: Routledge, 2010.

Hensel, Michael, Achim Menges, and Michael Weinstock. Techniques and Technologies in Morphogenetic Design. London: Wiley-Academy, 2006.

4) The Digital Turn in Architecture – Mario Carpo

· Mario Carpo – supports the theory of success and potential in artificial intelligence softwares and systems.

· Deleuze theory on the fold in relation to Peter Eisenman’s theory on modern parametric design. Eisenman describes Deleuzes theory of the fold as “deconstructive”. In this current era, the idea of the fold is still valid only it should be “deconstructive through digital means”.

“Rise of electronics is seen here as a general techno-cultural shift that should inspire architects to engage with an unprecedented cultural environment and with a new view of the world.”

· Successful Project example: Paper-strip system (physical model) – the outcome of a parametrically derived model. Which embeds material characteristics, structural integrity and manufacturing constrains. (Chapter 11 – from the work of Hensel and Menges)

Reference:

Carpo, Mario. The Digital Turn in Architecture: 1992-2012. Hoboken: Wiley, 2013.

5) Neri Oxman – Different take on how to use this advanced technology.

Experimental models are more about sustainability – Creating new ways of construction with newly developed synthetic materials. Merging structural elements and biology into architecture with means of advanced technology

· As Hensel and Menges are focused on computational morphogenesis, Oxman interested in the natural morphogenesis of certain materials that structure matter by being synthetically multifunctional.

· Silk pavilion – robotic swarm printing

“Material limitations could be overcome by enabling automated construction of structural materials; gantry limitations by enabling the construction of large components made of a collective of cooperative small robots; and, finally, method limitations by enabling digital construction methods that are not limited to layered manufacturing, but also support free-form, woven and aggregate constructions.”

· Compare Silk Pavilion with a normal dome –

· In terms of:

· Characteristics

· Sustainability

· Durability

· Structure and manufacturing

References:

Oxman, Neri. “Structuring Materiality: Design Fabrication of Heterogeneous Materials.” Architectural Design Archit Design 80, no. 4 (2010): 78-85.

Oxman, Neri, Jorge Duro-Royo, Steven Keating, Ben Peters, and Elizabeth Tsai. “Towards Robotic Swarm Printing.” Architectural Design Archit Design 84, no. 3 (2014): 108-15.

6) Political and economical aspects of Parametricisim

· Parametricisim is not to be mistaken for parametric design. Schumacher defines this as a movement.

· Parametric design continues to improve over time; this is key to a 21st century style, or movement due to technology of this sort.

· Modern construction make statements that speak for the region and it’s modernized economical, political and social status

“Because architecture is always at the service of politics and economics, its styles can be understood as a corresponding to specific models of society and socio-economic epochs”

Reference:

Poole, Matthew, and Manuel Shvartzerg. The Politics of Parametricism: Digital Technologies in Architecture.

7) Structuralism in cognitive development – metaphorical theory that can relate back to the idea of emergence in technology.

· “Structuralism” – A theory that embodies the changing mindset of a human brain due to the changing environment over time. It attempts to change the typical way of thinking and encourages the idea of several complex elements coming together to make one, not necessarily physically or literally. In this case, it is then a way of life over time.

· Complex Elements:

· Human Brain

· Environment

· External forces

· This ties directly into architecture and its relationship with advanced technology. Emergence is when two different elements are combined and work together, but the idea of them working together and not being literally defined as one thing, keeps the essence of architectural ideas alive, rather than having it be a machine generated model. In this case, the architectural element can be metaphorically seen as the human brain, technology is the developing environment that is constantly changing and the parametric design process is the external force that has a strong influence on the final product.

Reference:

Case, Robbie, and Wolfgang Edelstein. The New Structuralism in Cognitive Development: Theory and Research on Individual Pathways. Basel: Karger, 1993.

Teachers comment:

Your “mission statement” is pretty clear and sets up the argument that you are going to try to make in the paper. The “outline”, if we can call it that, is a bit of a mess. It is difficult to understand how the paper is going to be structured. The various sections don’t seem to have a logical order to them at this point. To go from the Futurists, to Gehry, to “emergence”, to Carpo, to Oxman, to the politics of Parametricism, to cognitive structuralism, seems rather random. You will need to develop a logical structure for the paper that constructs your argument in a coherent fashion. One possibility for this would be something like: 1) Introduction; 2) Theoretical Background (Carpo, cognitive structuralism, etc.); 3) Critique/Examination of Existing Works/Case Studies; 4) Extrapolation of the Case Studies into your own theoretical argument; 5) Conclusions. In addition, I think that you’re probably trying to cram too much into a relatively short paper. Don’t be afraid to let go of some of the information in order to streamline the argument of the paper. The section on Gehry seems particularly extraneous, and I’d only include the Futurists as a brief mention in the introduction that ties your argument to the historic argument of how technological change should drive changes in how we understand architecture.

PAPER STRUCTURE IN ORDER!!

1) Introduction;

2) Theoretical Background (Carpo, cognitive structuralism, etc.);

3) Critique/Examination of Existing Works/Case Studies;

4) Extrapolation of the Case Studies into your own theoretical argument;

5) Conclusions