Article 15, Moving Through Time and Space

Viewing as always is optional but pretty cool....

     

Think back to the moment when you stepped out of bed and when you got of bed you were a mime and like a mime you were constantly stretching out your arms in all directions touching an invisible wall everywhere you went up until this moment. Now let's assume we can mathematically add up all that volume of space you defined as a mime, which should be quite a bit. You will see that the space that you "used"  let's say borrowed since getting out of bed, amounts to lots of space, tons of it, which you are no longer using. If we set up a ratio of your personal space (the space you are currently occupying) to the total space "borrowed", we should get some telling numbers. These computations will show us exactly what space we used, how frequently and how much of it was used. This in turn could be compared to the total volume of enclosed space compared to the total time spent in that space giving us some interesting numbers, possibly showing us where and when to allocate expensive space that needs to be built and conditioned.

Note:Intelligentsia working on formula, coming soon-will add when ready -check back soon!!!

 How we perceive space also plays an important part in how we should design space. Pitching a camping tent for example is time lapsed space creating, it's borrowed space, utilized, then given back in short order as if you were never there. I don't get this, this makes no sense, OK I hear you but I'm not writing a thesis so just go with it. Do you have love for a table? I bet you do. What? Yes a table. When going out to dinner you are shown to a table, that table quickly becomes your personal table and the space around it your personal space and you become connected to "Your Table" space, albeit it for a short duration. Even though you know these spaces are temporary you none the less become attached to them at least for the moment. When you look at place, or "space"  from this perspective, you start to realize that it's not the actual space itself that you are attached to but the reality that you are occupying that space which gives importance to the space. Architects are cursing me now! You mean the space I carved out for you through hard work and training is not the importance of the space? Well the aesthetics and function plays into it of course, but I must point out other factors that make a space a space. So getting back to our discussion on space, it is clear that we are only "borrowing" space and we do not own it and the perception of space is more important than the actual space.  In reality even more permanent spaces like your home are just decorated borrowed places that you "borrow"  although for longer periods of time. Go ahead and catch a handful of space, did you grab it? How much did you get? How much is it worth? OK open up that clenched fist and give it back. The illusion of owning space, embellishing it, celebrating it, placing objects in it is much more important than actually containing it, which from a mechanical point of view is extremely energy consumptive. If we really considered the functions we perform in our work space, home, shopping, we would find we need a lot less space then we think we do. Not so for the mind however! The unseen function of imagination needs a lot more space than anything else as we shall see. So let's take a trip into the future to see how future architects have dealt with this realization. Oh Gazoo, please give us this science fiction glimpse into the future!

Since space isn't really "owned" by anyone, future architects realized you need to borrow it temporarily and only when needed. Oh so you are telling me the kitchen space I use on a daily basis I am only borrowing? Well what if I need it again and again as is the reality of my life style? (and what about all of my nick knacks, where do they go?) Good point, in the future, space will collapse and open again to solve some of these pesky problems. OK Gazoo, let's stop the BS right now, I'm serious, so am I. A field, some call it a force field, that gives the appearance and strength of what you are accustomed to, floors, walls, a roof and do the same job of containing space but differently and only for the time that is required. When it's no longer needed it's returned to it's original form like in our camping tent example. I don't get it Gazoo, that makes no sense, my kitchen disappears and reappears as needed along with my cabinets and food?  Of course that makes no sense to your undeveloped mind but it will one day. Right now with your current technology you will have to learn how to mechanically shrink space when not in use. Well what about air conditioning, heating, water, waste how do you borrow or return that? Well you are borrowing those things as well you just don't currently see it that way. Scary stuff Gazoo, let's get back to, "how can you help with me today stuff."

OK so for all of you analyzing this future scene I just described and want to call me out on it, I'm beating you to it. Of course it's science fiction but it's also another way of looking at things. If you consider what is space, specifically interior space, in it's most simplistic base form a different paradigm begins to appear, one that totally redefines how we look at, use and perceive the space we live and work in. Does this hypothetical future insight help me design a structure today or was I just writing science fiction entertainment?  Maybe there is something to be learned here, even as a mere earthling and not a future space architect.  Although we do not have the advanced technology to enclose space then give it back or collapse it we can do other things. The basic lessons we should learn from the mime example are that we really need less livable space then we think we need. The mime also points out we really don't take up much space at all but yet we condition and enclose a vast amount of space that is typically never used. A huge hotel lobby, the soaring ceilings of a Grand Central Station; The space you really need, and you need plenty of it, is psychological space, the kind that soars from thinking to infinity.  How Much Space Do We Really Need?


So we have conflicting realities: we need space but we really don't need it, we can live in much smaller structures but we live in expansive structures (unless you live in Tokyo or Paris, now that's tight!). How do we bridge this gap between what the mind requires and what we need for actual function? It is my belief  the space we enclose or define is more of an expression rather than a function. Take the interior soaring space of a cathedral trying to reach for the heavens. If you were a bird that maybe a practical use of enclosed space but not to us humans. The space is more of a message, a statement, a representation of ideas that's all. No one needs a hundred foot ceiling over their head to pray. So we need to balance these opposing "uses". Maybe one day architects and engineers can develop spaces into "physical" and "non-physical" . The "physical space" is the space we actually need to function in and condition. The "non physical" is the soaring space of the mind, both being equally necessary for good practical and mental health but both should be treated differently. Possibly an invisible field (or even glass perhaps) could be created that bridges and connects the two different spaces fooling the mind into believing it is one space but yet most of the space is divided out. See Image below.

Hypothetical section of used space vs non usable space
author's collection

Another important factor we need to consider when designing enclosures of space are the dynamics of space. What in the hell does that mean? Well many books have been written on the subject, some pretty awesome, so I will try to be original in my views; why else would you be here? We need to go back to science to explain this one. Space time can be bent as Einstein's suggests. Forgive me if I over simplify the science but we are considering things at this point that are currently being developed by the best of minds, so bear with me. We as architects work no where near the scale that Einstein's theories would apply but that should not stop us from acting as if they do, for if he is right than they really are effecting "our space"

no matter how small a scale (take gravity, that effects everything does it not?). So according to Einstein matter is bending the space time fabric (see image) which explains the force of gravity. We of course as architects could never build anything large enough that bends the space time fabric but what if we imagined it did even with the small structures we build? So let's take a wall and imagine it mechanically effects the matter around it. Don't look at the wall as an element to enclose space but rather to direct space. This is the basic theory of the open floor plan concept versus the traditional 4 wall defines a space, which in my example would block the bending of energy.

An example of this dynamic bending of space was introduced by Ludwig Mies van der Rohe in the early 20th century in the Barcelona Pavilion- (German Pavilion) built for the 1929 International Exposition, Barcelona, Spain. Unlike conventional architecture which dictates you get a defined space for defined function, the Barcelona Pavilion shatters that concept. If you study the pavilion you will see the science of bending space in "architectural action." The spaces are not "confined" but flow and are dynamic...Ah ha! You just described the open plan concept haven't you! Yes that is true but it is much more sophisticated than that. As in my explanation of energy flow inspired by Einstein's space time fabric we get a dynamic movement that more resembles how mass influences energy which resembles the natural phenomena below:

The aurora borealis or the Northern Lights courtesy of:NOAA, Kidztimez.com

The flow of the aurora is similar to how the flow of the Barcelona Pavilion works. I know what your thinking, "you must be on acid or something" Timothy Leary would be proud of you but no. The pavilion expresses it's architecture unlike any conventional architecture before it. I'm not referring to it's artistic expression or how "pretty" it looks, I'm talking about its use of energy and the symbiotic relationship of energy and seemingly dead matter. If you're not following this no worries. I'm only trying to point out extreme nuanced elements so lacking in most typical home and building design. In conventional architecture we are trained to create spacial relationships and flow but we don't consider the dynamics of time, energy and space. Realistically, except for theoretical projects, we cannot even contemplate such elements in our day to day practice for many obvious reasons. The trick is to condition your sub conscious mind so your architectural thinking will be guided by a deeper sense of purpose without having to add to your work load. (read this article over and over again) Your design will express a hidden or deeper meaning that others will sense but not know exactly what it is; this is the trans-formative architecture we should aspire to.

Barcelona Pavilion, 1929    Ludwig Meis van der Rohe

Photo by: Ashley Pomeroy

In yet what may seem like another esoteric discussion on architecture, I understand many will not get it. I'm not saying people are intellectually challenged but rather priority challenged. In the grand scheme of things you do not need to incorporate any of this alternative information into your daily work to earn your pay check. Nor will these revelations (if I may be so bold) pay your bills, save your marriage or do any thing else that helps you in your day to day survival, I get it. I'm down on the list of priorities but I'm banking on one thing and one thing only; the mind needs more nourishment than the body. As you may have deduced from this article people need space not so much for function but for imagination. The green movement does not want to hear or understand this as it is mostly focused on resource efficiency (among many other noble pursuits!), but the mind requires more. The imagination needs more space than any house or building or sports arena could ever contain. How do we bridge the gap between imagination and function and make it so we satisfy both in an efficient green manner? Perhaps invisible fields that can be turned on or off in the future or maybe mechanically movable walls which shrink spaces not in use is an immediate possibility.  So if you find yourself shaking your head at these outlandish writings, try to dream, you just may solve some critical issues in engineering and architecture, who knows maybe even Gazoo will appear to you as well.

Futuristic Pavilion?