Tuesday, 15 September 2009

forming platforms

There was a wonderful lecture I attended during CONNECTdeleuze conference at Cologne University last month by Luciana Parisi entitled "Abstract Spatium: Deleuze and Whitehead via Algorithmic Architecture" in which she referred to algorithmic art and architecture to be a valid example on the relation between both philosophers in their search to the pre-individual virtualities or eternal objects because they enfold incomputable reality.

"....this reality can be experienced as the recording of a sensation, in Deleuze's terms, or, according to Whitehead, as a conceptual prehension: the feeling of having a feeling."

this approach to architecture has been always an intrigue to me for it works very structurally, and morphs fluently yet I never understood its relation to humans or its social value. Algorithmic approach to architecture -as I see it- is more of a representation than a collective creation. It represents continuity, affordability and the ever existing relation between parts and whole which are all descriptions of reality -just like the Cartesian basic representation of reality through the coordinate system-, yet it does not refer to an initial state or initiation as a form conception of space_which is more relevant to human existence and re-existence.

Thus can parametric space be seen as the weather of architectural forms? and are algorithmic calculations set to create 'platforms' rather than 'forms' in space? Because if so, I really do think that binary (finite) computations should overlap at the algorithmic (infinite) computations so that we can create a full perspective of architectural perceptions and experiences.

this experiment would lead us to a temporal-periodical occurrence of form, because form here is no longer directly related to an invisible infinite space -static and eternal like pyramids of Egypt built on the desert?- but rather anchored to another layer of visible infinity. So the architectural creation in such sense is expressed alertly, alien, veiled or under disguise so that each character stores a desire to reappear.



Amenah said...

Hi Deema,
I like your post, you ask a few plausible questions. I think we should look at algorithmic design as a tool of creation rather than a style in architecture. In my research at mayation.wordpress.com, I simply explore possibilities by creating tools (scripts) which can be used to create new designs. Parametric design is very complex as it does not encompass one method of creation but rather multiple ways that have algorithms as a common feature. Parametric design could remain as a script or a tool in a drawing program (Maya, Autocad) or it can be developed further and used as a major player in a project.
Maybe in a few years algorithmic architecture will become a field or a style, but it's still new, still under development.

keep posting, I'm following your blog :)

Deema said...


thanks for your comment I really appreciate it, for I needed a feedback on my understanding.

I agree with you, the problem is that designers seek a style through algorithms while I see it more as a platform that can be measured with many scales, not only on the programs computations level but also on the communal, natural or construction knowledge scale factors

thanks for the link I love it! :)