By Shawna Hammon
Lecture –
“Temporary Architecture”
"It seems that perfection
is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing
left to take away". - Antoine de
St-Expurey
A few semesters
ago, I teamed up with NC State studio mate, Jessie Braverman, to produce a
prototype we lovingly dubbed the Folding Modular Retreat (FMR). We
envisioned that this piece of temporary architecture could be used as disaster
relief shelter, a child’s playhouse, a dog house, or a camping lodge. We sought a patent for it, and it is
currently being reviewed by NC State’s Office of Technology Transfer who is in
contact with industry partners to see if there is interest in development of
the invention. The design won first
place in its category at the Graduate Student Research Symposium last spring
for our research on the prototype – we built a full scale model and lived in it
24/7 for a full week. During this week
long occupation of FMR, we observed many issues, particularly with
waterproofing, that needed to be reviewed and developed in later iterations,
but there is certainly potential for this product.
 |
| FMR @ the Prototypes Show |
It was with this
experience on my plate that we began our lecture on temporary
architecture. I was quite excited to
learn more about its application throughout history and around the world. But I was not prepared for the sharp emotions
that overwhelmed me through the next three hours. I believe I felt everything from awe and
delight to disgust and revulsion with our profession. Please allow me tell you why.
To me,
architecture is not just about
designing something beautiful, but it must be functional. We do not want buildings that are as pointless
as tea pots with no bottom, no matter how aesthetically pleasing that tea pot
may be, we will eventually want some tea.
Buildings are no different – it could be fun to walk through a building
that exhibits the latest technology – for about 5 minutes, then we wonder, how
do I occupy this space? What is the
point? Especially during this economic
crisis, why do we continue to design and build temporary structures that serve
no function?
Perhaps the most
popular examples of temporary architecture are the German Pavilion in Barcelona
by Mies van der Rohe, the Venice Biennale, and the Eiffel Tower, to name a few. These are not disaster relief solutions and
yet we hold them up as architecture examples to follow.
“Less
is more.” – Mies van der Rohe
 |
| Barcelona Pavilion |
While I know
there is something to be learned from Mies’ Minimalist ideals, I feel like he
has taken away so much from his pavilion that he forgot to leave the program. Less is more, but what does it mean to create
a space with no function. If this exhibition
was about the relationship of architecture and intentionally served no
function, what kind of message is our profession conveying to the world? Are we excessive?
 |
| Less is More installation by Pravdo.com |
I had the
pleasure of seeing the Venice Biennale this year and it was one of my favorite
experiences, but I cannot help but feel like it was a vice that I should feel
guilty for indulging in. After all, we
are in one of the worst economic crisis of our time and yet, we built these
pavilions to show off our “mad skills” to other architects and the public. This hardly seems like a noble thing to do,
how many people could we have helped if we had put that money towards disaster
relief. How many houses could we have
built with Habitat for Humanity with that money? Did someone walk away with so much knowledge
from this exhibition that they will make a real difference in the future making
the capital invested truly worth it? I
have a hard time believing it is so.
And then there is
the Eiffel Tower, which was certainly a flex of the technological muscle of its
time that led to greater developments and technologies so that allowing it to
remain as a beacon to tourism seems acceptable.
This was meant to be a temporary structure, but it was so successful and
became an icon in Paris, that the city would hardly be the same without it.
What does
temporary architecture say to the general public about architecture? Does this stuff just fuel our egos or is it
helping us stay ahead? I stand by my
conviction that architecture should serve a purpose and do something to better
the communities in which we live, but I do wonder which exhibit at this years’
Biennale will be the next Barcelona Pavilion – which of these spectacles will
we put on a pedestal for all time?
“Keep
it simple stupid.” – Kelly Johnson
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment