Cause and Effect

 Crystal Lake, IL

///September 2014

 

With most of our motivations and most of the driving forces set into motion either past or present, there is typically a cause and effect. This cause and effect can be typically seen either in physical form or felt  by way of an emotional response. Take for example deforestation; a large portion of trees are torn down for some type of use or to make clear an area for development. The effect can be great and easily observed in the reaction of the wildlife and the petition of people against deforestation. In literature George Orwell's 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' we see the cause of atomic war and the emotional response of the people as 'big brother' is watching everything. This novel was written to alert the readers to the potential danger of a totalitarian government where the majority of the people are under complete control of the government, as well as several other emotionally grabbing themes. as well as several other emotionally provoking themes. In architecture as it is in literature and in daily life, pretty much all actions provoke a response. My question is what does that response look like when it concerns architecture. For example, when we place a building or a structure on a context, that effect, does it impact the users, the environment or all things. I believe that we can call that reaction a 'peel' or a 'tear'. As the earth is impacted there is a tearing process that pulls from the earth and is replaced with an object. Entomology. One component of our nature world are insects, when they decompose they cause a reaction to occur. We can deconstruct and re-associate the decaying parts as architectural elements and those elements can be very function or form depending on their association with how they are impacted with the context. For example lets look at a few components of an insect. We can say typically an insect has a head, body, appendages, and in some cases wings. In architecture we have the path (entrance and movement), the program spaces, the structure, the skin, and context. If we assign components of the insect to the elements of a building, I propose these relationships. The head of the insect is much like the entrance or the path for the users of the given structure. The body of the insect is the massing on which the building form is generated. The appendages; legs, arms, antenna etc, can be associated as the structure or the elements that directly tie the insect to the context, other than the form having a direct impact on the context. The shell and the wings form the skin of the structure, the curtain wall or the shading devices. While these elements of the insect may be directly associated with building components, one may ask why does the bug need to be decomposing or past its life. There can be two direct links to architecture with this thinking, the living insect would be a portable solution to architecture, and the dead insect would make the connection I aim to propose which has a direct relationship to a given context. 

In architecture one of the primary design idioms is the relationship of solid masses to void masses. When an insect dies and is planted on a context (the ground) theoretically the context has just gained some mass as well as a 'future void' The mass comes from the addition of matter to the surface and the void from the energy exerted from the decomposition process. When we decide to place a structure on the earth, we need to address a few things; the user (as well as the role of the user), the impact spatially on the context and the proximity to other structures. There are obviously several other impacts, some of which I will cover later, but for now, lets focus on the user, and not only  on the primary user but also secondary users. With the decay of insects, the users are the surrounding soil, other insects, and plant life. In architecture, the users are the occupants, the people in proximity and the casual observers/users. Clearly the hierarchy falls primarily to the occupants, then to the users in proximity, then to the casual pedestrian. In nature the hierarchy may vary case by case. The insect may become food for other insects, fertilizer for plant life, or even decompose into a pile of organic silt and eventually add mass to the soil. 

The function of the structure for the primary occupants needs to be several folds; passively emotional, functional, safe, and providing of a conducive experience for the desired function of the space. The user will engage with all components of the insect form; the head, body, appendages, and the shell/wings. Each of the components should be rooted in the theory of contextual conditioning to offer a direct connection to the local environment. For example the head of the insect as an entrance, as the insect decays, typically this is the first component to be hollowed out and providing a passageway from one location to another, leading the user from the exterior into the body or program space. This decay most likely occurs at surface or slightly sub surface level. This movement from the head to the body is along the datum or long axis reinforcing the idea of path. The head is usually the smallest, or smaller of the components forcing a reveal once the user moves from the head to the larger body. This thinking encourages the feeling of safety as the head provides a gate or a portal from the context into the occupied space. 

More to come. 

poecilocornis lotus

pentotomedea

'camellia stink bug'

ink on 60lb. strathmore paper 8x10

(click to enlarge image)