Showing posts with label #4 - Flexibility. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #4 - Flexibility. Show all posts
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
All That You Can(t) Leave Behind
Today, in Vardø, there are several empty buildings. Vacant houses, old fishing factories no longer in use, abandoned sheds; spaces. An unknown amount of empty structures can be found all over town. After looking at photos from Vardø taken in April 2011, and explored the streets of Vardø, through the nauseating and sometimes confusing scope, of Google Street view, I could count roughly 65 empty buildings, maybe more.
Compared to the size of the population (2.100), the vacant structures are quite numerous. Their presence has become a constant reminder of the hardships Vardø has suffered, and the massive depopulation, cutting the inhabitant count in half. In Vardø, it’s common say, that half the houses are empty. Today, enthusiasts have begun the project of restoring some of the old houses. They are prominent - almost dominating - in the townscape. The population is still shrinking.
I see many different perspectives and aspects in approaching these empty spaces. What function did they serve in the past, what role do they have to day, and what part may they come to play in the future? Should they be preserved, teared down og transformed? Will Vardø ever again grow and attract new populations? If so, should the buildings be restored in order to accomodate these newcomers? Who do the buildings belong to - who stands to answer these questions?
What is a built structure when it is no longer in use. How do you move in an empty house. How do you move in empty street or in an empty town or inbetween many empty houses. What are these empty spaces in Vardø. To what limits can we expore the potential of empty homes, spaces, and structures?
Monday, November 21, 2011
Flexibility in Contradictory landscape
Sequence of investigations to see, find and understand
flexibility in the Contradictory landscape in Nikel, and how
to adapt flexibility in this landscape.
By looking closer into every landscape I make an attempt to
grasp all of them as systems of information exchange,
understand the landscapes character, find enough information
to see and identify spaces in the landscapes to keep
them alive.
Open publication - Free publishing - More contradictory
review #4 - Flexibility
Dear students. We will start the review of the assignment #4 - Flexibility tomorrow at 1300. Gisle and I will attend. Please post your assignments on the blog before we start the review.
Friday, November 18, 2011
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
#4 - Flexibility
Flexibility
A ‘high’ civilization shall contain whatever is necessary (…) to maintain the necessary wisdom in the human population and to give physical, aesthetic, and creative satisfaction to people. There shall be a matching between the flexibility of people and that of the civilization. There shall be diversity in the civilization, not only to accommodate the genetic and experimental diversity of persons, but also to provide the flexibility and ‘preadaptation’ necessary for unpredictable change. (Gregory Bateson, Ecology and Flexibility in Urban Civilization in Steps to an ecology of mind. 1972/2000, p.503)
Even though Bateson wrote this paper in 1970 it contains a strong prediction of the coming climate changes and a foreseeing of the challenges that planners and architects have to deal with concerning profound ecological matters. Bateson prescribe the survival of our civilization as closely linked to our understanding of natural processes; We are not outside the ecology for which we plan – we are inevitably a part of it. (IBID p. 512) The new invention gives elbow room or flexibility, but the using up for that flexibility is death. (IBID p. 503)
When global forces and global economical fluctuations influence even the most remote places, it seems more than ever necessary to build a flexibility outside the global consumer economy - to be resilient to economic alterations (of the kind that stifle the European economy – or the American economy) – to be prepared for devastating environmental impacts (of the kind that affects Bangkok these days) or to foresee future effects from expected climate changes (as e.g. rise of the sea level). The closer a society is related to nature the more awareness and understanding there often is towards shifting environmental conditions – such as prediction of alteration, planning for uncertain futures, adaptation to inevitable changes and improvisation for the unforeseen. The modern man’s turn away from nature (the lost contact or acceptance of the inevitable in the nature) has a long legacy, and from the Enlightenment it has developed an absolute belief in man as superior to nature.
In the northern regions flexibility and adaptation has historically been crucial for surviving in a notoriously harsh climate. A combined living from both fisheries and small scale farming (and for some: additional hunting) provided resilience towards fluctuations, and was a unique way of maintaining a renewal of the natural resources. The success of adaptation, sturdiness and change in the region, is dependent upon the will to develop open, cooperative structures, and on the collective esteem from people living there. Any system of nature and culture is in reality based on interaction and dynamic, and it is therefore easy to argue that a planning method that is going to handle such dynamic systems has to be elastic and dynamic too. This in opposition to a linear and hierarchical planning regime, that to a far extent is built up on simplification and limitation.
Bateson talks about survival not in resisting change, but in terms of accommodating change. It means that your thinking has to be every bit as fluent and adaptive as the kind of systems you are talking about. In other words you can not apply rigid or dogmatic principals to systems that are themselves fluent, adaptable, changing and always incorporating feedback. (…) It is a way of thinking that mirrors the dynamism of ecological systems themselves.
(Stan Allen in dialog with Florian Sauters, ‘Theory, practice and landscape in Natural metaphor’, architectural papers III, 2007)
In our concept Mosaïc::Region (competition about a future understanding of the Øresundsregion: www.mosaic-region.com) the mosaic-metaphor is used as a picture of complexity and ‘of everything that happens’, both on a physical and on a metaphysical level. A mosaic inspired planning must contain a strategy for seeing, finding, and adapting everything that goes on. If one piece of the mosaic is painted in a different colour, the picture changes, - not much, but the sum of many small pieces changed, eventually gives a totally new picture. The colours of the pieces are depending on political visions, local initiatives (spatial practices) and the collective will in the region.
The global society will soon lose the most essential elbow room for existence of a modern civilization in the way we have been accustomed to see it, namely oil and gas. The future planning has to take into account the consequences this will entail. On the background of contemporary global crisis and ecological disorders, planning has to become a continuous, interdisiplinary and integrated process in a search for new answers and systems of flexibility.
GL/MH
A ‘high’ civilization shall contain whatever is necessary (…) to maintain the necessary wisdom in the human population and to give physical, aesthetic, and creative satisfaction to people. There shall be a matching between the flexibility of people and that of the civilization. There shall be diversity in the civilization, not only to accommodate the genetic and experimental diversity of persons, but also to provide the flexibility and ‘preadaptation’ necessary for unpredictable change. (Gregory Bateson, Ecology and Flexibility in Urban Civilization in Steps to an ecology of mind. 1972/2000, p.503)
Even though Bateson wrote this paper in 1970 it contains a strong prediction of the coming climate changes and a foreseeing of the challenges that planners and architects have to deal with concerning profound ecological matters. Bateson prescribe the survival of our civilization as closely linked to our understanding of natural processes; We are not outside the ecology for which we plan – we are inevitably a part of it. (IBID p. 512) The new invention gives elbow room or flexibility, but the using up for that flexibility is death. (IBID p. 503)
When global forces and global economical fluctuations influence even the most remote places, it seems more than ever necessary to build a flexibility outside the global consumer economy - to be resilient to economic alterations (of the kind that stifle the European economy – or the American economy) – to be prepared for devastating environmental impacts (of the kind that affects Bangkok these days) or to foresee future effects from expected climate changes (as e.g. rise of the sea level). The closer a society is related to nature the more awareness and understanding there often is towards shifting environmental conditions – such as prediction of alteration, planning for uncertain futures, adaptation to inevitable changes and improvisation for the unforeseen. The modern man’s turn away from nature (the lost contact or acceptance of the inevitable in the nature) has a long legacy, and from the Enlightenment it has developed an absolute belief in man as superior to nature.
In the northern regions flexibility and adaptation has historically been crucial for surviving in a notoriously harsh climate. A combined living from both fisheries and small scale farming (and for some: additional hunting) provided resilience towards fluctuations, and was a unique way of maintaining a renewal of the natural resources. The success of adaptation, sturdiness and change in the region, is dependent upon the will to develop open, cooperative structures, and on the collective esteem from people living there. Any system of nature and culture is in reality based on interaction and dynamic, and it is therefore easy to argue that a planning method that is going to handle such dynamic systems has to be elastic and dynamic too. This in opposition to a linear and hierarchical planning regime, that to a far extent is built up on simplification and limitation.
Bateson talks about survival not in resisting change, but in terms of accommodating change. It means that your thinking has to be every bit as fluent and adaptive as the kind of systems you are talking about. In other words you can not apply rigid or dogmatic principals to systems that are themselves fluent, adaptable, changing and always incorporating feedback. (…) It is a way of thinking that mirrors the dynamism of ecological systems themselves.
(Stan Allen in dialog with Florian Sauters, ‘Theory, practice and landscape in Natural metaphor’, architectural papers III, 2007)
In our concept Mosaïc::Region (competition about a future understanding of the Øresundsregion: www.mosaic-region.com) the mosaic-metaphor is used as a picture of complexity and ‘of everything that happens’, both on a physical and on a metaphysical level. A mosaic inspired planning must contain a strategy for seeing, finding, and adapting everything that goes on. If one piece of the mosaic is painted in a different colour, the picture changes, - not much, but the sum of many small pieces changed, eventually gives a totally new picture. The colours of the pieces are depending on political visions, local initiatives (spatial practices) and the collective will in the region.
The global society will soon lose the most essential elbow room for existence of a modern civilization in the way we have been accustomed to see it, namely oil and gas. The future planning has to take into account the consequences this will entail. On the background of contemporary global crisis and ecological disorders, planning has to become a continuous, interdisiplinary and integrated process in a search for new answers and systems of flexibility.
GL/MH
Friday, October 28, 2011
review #3 - New Hierarchies / intro #4 - Flexibility
Thursday, August 11, 2011
studio intro
Master studio BAS autumn 2011
Emerging arctic landscapes
The objective of the studio is to create a platform for critical discussions on the changes currently taking place in the Arctic region. These are changes in climate, ecologies, landscapes, societies and cultures - changes that by all accounts can be expected to accelerate in the close future.
We see an increasing tendency within the field of landscape architecture to focus on the ‘design’ of landscapes: as the development of new uses for post-industrial land or as transformations of existing land into new park landscapes in connection with strong forces of urbanization. A common feature that may be observed is how nature becomes artificial, generic and is reduced to a design object simply through processes of medialization and conceptualization, and how physical transformations often are linked to consumption – visual or otherwise.
The major part of the Arctic may still be seen as ‘genuine’ nature and as cognitive landscapes, and demand a different approach and different means of investigation than those applied for already ‘domesticated’ landscapes. Global warming, environmental disturbances and political pressures combine to create a completely new physical ‘ground’ which puts great demands on the enfolding response of architects and landscape architects. The need to develop a critical awareness and alternative forms of knowledge in connection with this development transcends the traditional design focus. Serving as a backdrop, the intention is to use the master studio to emphasize the need to focus on the northern regions, a focus which to a large extent has been lacking until now.
The studio will arise along a road trip from Hammerfest to Murmansk - a slow journey in a cross section of remote arctic landscape and intrusive development:
From the oil-driven growth of Hammerfest (from fish to oil – and the resurrection of the city after WWII), via the new urbanization of Alta, the surviving sami culture in Kautokeino and Karasjok, the decaying and mythical city of Vardø, and the abandoned fishing village of Hamningberg. The trip takes us to the pending economy in Kirkenes, the destructed landscapes of Bjørnevatn – crossing the Russian border into the remote and desolated landscapes, cities and settlements on the Kola-peninsula - via the extremely heavy polluted nature in Nikkel, the trip will end in Murmansk – a city in transformation, from a soviet military stronghold – to a modern and emerging economy, waiting for the oil to arrive.
There are numbers of possible points of departure for the debate, and for the issues wished focused on. In this studio we want to investigate a broad span of examples of landscape occupations and arctic urbanizations - and study the forces of growth and decline that are working in the arctic. The studio will debate the position of an architect in vulnerable landscapes and the intersection between careful awareness and complete destruction.
Through textual studies, lectures and comparative examples we will gain new knowledge that enable us to approach a concrete situation for a profound understanding of the context and the forces at work. We want to use a blog to communicate the learning and collect the findings from the process, and also for the students to present their work as a continuous process. The studio will expect curiosity and an open-minded effort from the students to learn, and to experience knowledge that is not obvious - and that has to be carefully investigated to be operative for the planning process.
Emerging arctic landscapes
The objective of the studio is to create a platform for critical discussions on the changes currently taking place in the Arctic region. These are changes in climate, ecologies, landscapes, societies and cultures - changes that by all accounts can be expected to accelerate in the close future.
We see an increasing tendency within the field of landscape architecture to focus on the ‘design’ of landscapes: as the development of new uses for post-industrial land or as transformations of existing land into new park landscapes in connection with strong forces of urbanization. A common feature that may be observed is how nature becomes artificial, generic and is reduced to a design object simply through processes of medialization and conceptualization, and how physical transformations often are linked to consumption – visual or otherwise.
The major part of the Arctic may still be seen as ‘genuine’ nature and as cognitive landscapes, and demand a different approach and different means of investigation than those applied for already ‘domesticated’ landscapes. Global warming, environmental disturbances and political pressures combine to create a completely new physical ‘ground’ which puts great demands on the enfolding response of architects and landscape architects. The need to develop a critical awareness and alternative forms of knowledge in connection with this development transcends the traditional design focus. Serving as a backdrop, the intention is to use the master studio to emphasize the need to focus on the northern regions, a focus which to a large extent has been lacking until now.
The studio will arise along a road trip from Hammerfest to Murmansk - a slow journey in a cross section of remote arctic landscape and intrusive development:
From the oil-driven growth of Hammerfest (from fish to oil – and the resurrection of the city after WWII), via the new urbanization of Alta, the surviving sami culture in Kautokeino and Karasjok, the decaying and mythical city of Vardø, and the abandoned fishing village of Hamningberg. The trip takes us to the pending economy in Kirkenes, the destructed landscapes of Bjørnevatn – crossing the Russian border into the remote and desolated landscapes, cities and settlements on the Kola-peninsula - via the extremely heavy polluted nature in Nikkel, the trip will end in Murmansk – a city in transformation, from a soviet military stronghold – to a modern and emerging economy, waiting for the oil to arrive.
There are numbers of possible points of departure for the debate, and for the issues wished focused on. In this studio we want to investigate a broad span of examples of landscape occupations and arctic urbanizations - and study the forces of growth and decline that are working in the arctic. The studio will debate the position of an architect in vulnerable landscapes and the intersection between careful awareness and complete destruction.
Through textual studies, lectures and comparative examples we will gain new knowledge that enable us to approach a concrete situation for a profound understanding of the context and the forces at work. We want to use a blog to communicate the learning and collect the findings from the process, and also for the students to present their work as a continuous process. The studio will expect curiosity and an open-minded effort from the students to learn, and to experience knowledge that is not obvious - and that has to be carefully investigated to be operative for the planning process.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)