Instinct.
fragment #4 of master degree project.
spring 2017 (14 weeks)
Project.
Made from existing materials on site. Not following any style, merely acting on impulse and seeing it’s outcome.
Pattern.
Recreating these spatial interventions generates recurring characteristics regardless of location. Further similarities can be seen in simple construction, minimal spatial impact and design techniques.
These structures have a strong temporal nature, construction time is short, there is little to no need for planning.
The life span of the interventions depends on the collective connections created during their existence. They are generated from similar contexts / conditions and can be described as organic growths within the urban fabric, sharing similar composition principles.
Definition.
The small projects of my thesis fall into categories of rebel / guerilla / grass root architecture.
Projects of this nature are often critique against social and political issues and are aimed at animating public spaces. Challenging the established architectural hierarchy by creating interventions in a very non-conformist way.
These projects become a critique against programmed space. Questioning the architectural instinct for finding function and programming in all available spaces. Revelling instead in spatial value and how to create collective connections.
Contemplation.
I struggle with the issue that the true potential of these types of interactions is creating lingering value that survives spatial redevelopment (dangerously close to artificial gentrification).
However these places have no value in seclusion, we have to engage them to create that value. Therein lies the problem, with the balancing act and how to approach the butterfly effect created, that undoubtedly change the spaces that gain collective value.
