TYPOLOGIES OR TOPOLOGIES_on the Typological Forms in Architecture (original) (raw)
Related papers
Changing building typologies: The typological question and the formal basis of architecture
The call for this themed issue formulates an interesting proposition, one that is a common conception – that people’s behaviour and, accordingly, the use of buildings is changing – and that this leads to the emer- gence of new building typologies. More specifically, it claims that ‘the reality of what is happening inside buildings nowadays is much more complex, diverse and multi-layered than a single word can describe.’ This paper intends to challenge the word ‘nowadays’, which places this situation as something historically unique and special. It will do this in order to conclude with a discussion of theory of analysing architecture. The first question to be examined is historical. While it may be true that building use is currently changing rapidly, it is equally true that this has happened before. Some of the most common ‘types’ are in fact under constant change, and this will be illustrated through the ‘shop’ and the ‘home’, concluded by a discussion on the perception of rapid change and historical stability as such. It will be suggested that this is partially embedded in a typological process. The second question is theoretical. It will be argued that the very idea of changing and more flexible use is tied to an idea of architecture with its roots in modernity, where ‘use’ became a central question to plan for, along with the development of a specific notion of function that was intimately connected to the notion of type. Many earlier ‘types’ were not as much use-adapted as ‘appropriate types’ for a range of reasons, sometimes even contrary to ‘use’. This discussion will explore the interdependency between conceptions of type and perceptions of the theoretical, disciplinary, and practical bases of architecture. Following this, the paper will conclude by drawing the strands together to discuss architectural analysis and the risks and potentials of typology as an analytical operation.
Situational theory of architectural typology
2008
In his book The Practice of Everyday Life Michel de Certeau makes a distinction between ‘space’ and ‘place’. He defines a ‘place’ as: ‘L’ordre (quel qu’il soit) selon lequel des elements sont distribues dans des rapports de coexistence […] Un lieu est donc une configuration instantanee de positions. Il implique une indication de stabilite‘ Whereas ‘space’ is defined as ‘l’effet produit par les operations qui l’orientent, le circonstancient, le temporalisent et l’amenent a fonction en unite polyvalente de programmes conflictuels ou de proximites contractuelles […] A la difference du lieu, il n’a donc ni l’univocite ni la stabilite’ In this paper, I would like to use Michel de Certeau’s conceptual apparatus to reflect on the relationship between ‘politics’ and ‘design’. The designer mainly works on the material qualities of the built artefact. When a designer works on the composition of the plan, on the distribution and dimension of the different rooms in the building, when he invents...
From Typology to Topology: Social, Spatial, and Structural
Structural engineering science radically transformed its ontology and methodology from a typological to a topological paradigm. This implies a radical reset of the categories that guide engineering practice. The modern forms of engineering rationality based on system types are now exposed as inefficient while the rationality of older structural forms based on slowly evolved traditions is now revealed by the new paradigm. These forms – like the Gothic Cathedrals - often offer higher degrees of efficiency that were not verifiable via calculations before the advent of the computational revolution in engineering science. Beyond this revelation and recuperation of premodern more differentiated and integrated solutions we witness the proliferation of radically new forms that the new paradigm makes possible. This radical expansion of structural possibilities – mirroring the endless forms of nature - is congenial with the requirements of contemporary architectural design where a much higher degree of versatility is required to meet the challenges of a much more complex society.
2017
As digital technologies revolutionise the ways in which buildings are produced there is a growing risk for architecture to become a practice without a theory. Space syntax has contributed to architectural research, through the description of systematic relationships between patterns of use and spatial phenomena. Yet, in the last three decades it has primarily leaned towards a theory of the city 1. These are studied as the collective products of society that are either self-organising (cities), or operate independently of the agency of their architects (buildings). Yet, from the viewpoint of architecture as a social discipline, there is a need to describe buildings and their relationship to the city not simply as the emergent products of society but also as products of design. This type of study requires theories and tools that describe topo-geometric properties, or the interaction of spatial with geometrical patterns. It also needs to combine historical research with morphological analysis. In this paper I explore the relationship between topology and geometry through three key periods of Western architectural production: first, the classical invention of geometric notations in architectural drawings; second, the shift of emphasis by modern architects to movement and visual information, freeing architecture from constraints of axial geometrical planning; finally, the end of geometric and notational limitations on the variability of forms with the rise of digital technology. Rather than providing a comprehensive account of architectural design, this paper aims to understand the morphological traditions from which contemporary architectural spaces and forms derive. I argue that as much as space has been a silent instrument in architectural discourse, so has geometry been a silent conductor in Hillier and Hanson's theory of spatial configuration. Aside to tools for topo-geometric analysis, we need theoretical accounts of the ideas we 'think with', bringing space syntax and contemporary architecture into the historical and morphological tradition. 1 Buildings are also studied using space syntax theory and tools but no systemic understanding of buildings exists across a wide range of building types. Further to this, the study of buildings has moved away from the early attempts to build an internal theory of architecture through a clear understanding of the difference between architecture and building. As such, seen from the perspective of architecture, most building studies using space syntax fall into the realm of the normative, recycling old concepts and methods of analysing.
Genres of ‘Architectural Theory Now?’
Architectural Research Quarterly, 2019
would have prompted me to answer 'Theory'. But after a moment's reflection I would have also doubted the suitability of that answer. Although the three presenters talked explicitly about theory, it was from three divergent positions. Juan Heredia's 'theory' was a discussion of the etymological origins of 'architecture' as a word, and as a conception, from Vitruvius to the present. David Solomon, on the other hand, presented 'a theory' of architectural symmetry, closer to an instrument to both unpack and practise architecture. Finally, Jonathan Hale presented three 1 'Architectural Theory Now?'
2014
The notion of building type defines the rational basis of any process of western civilization. As such it is a project, whose collective intentionality is integrally political, social, economical and cultural. 2. The building type is a set of rules which establishes power relations and a corresponding system of obligations. Therefore, the definition of the type as an unconscious act is a contradiction in re ipsa. 3. To fully develop its potential, the building type needs to come into existence. Building practice is instrumental to this purpose. To obtain it, the building activity needs to share conventional values. An architectural language is therefore required. 4. If the building type remains implicit, or not performed by the architectural language, it cannot effectively contribute to the process of civilization. It remains as a simple image, or eidos, of its possibility. 5. There is a clear connection between the crisis of the typological discourse and the crisis of Institutions. The crisis occurs whenever there is not anymore consensus upon the building type and its implicit project. 6. During the type vacancy, the architectural struggle increases in order to reestablish a new order. The vacancy duration is unpredictable and it is instrumental to the achievement of a new stable configuration. 7. Within the western process of civilization, the stability of the type configuration is conventional and depends upon the dynamics internal to society. The typological change can occur within an existing configuration, by critically undermining its set of rules, or drastically proposing its integral substitution. The former approach is that of tradition, while the latter claims for radicalism. 8. Sometimes it occurs that, in order to hide power vacancy, the practice of the architectural language aims at artificially prolonging a Foretold Death. In addition, a minority practice can coexist within an highly shared one. Outside the practice, no other typological counteraction is possible. 9. Individual practice, eventually encouraging emulation, can perform as an architectural language premise, aspiring to contribute to the civilization process. This implies that the construction of the social reality does not necessarily correspond to a top down relation, but also a bottom up one is possible. In this case it is acceptable to say that the type concept arose from an unconscious process of trials and errors. 10. If typology is the discourse on the building type, developed through space and time, this is a first attempt to define the philosophy upon which typology is grounded. A new discipline is required. We call it Type Ontology. These propositions are regarded as opposable and defendable, and have been approved as such by the Supervisor: Prof. ir. S.U. Barbieri I'm sincerely grateful to Professor Umberto Barbieri. He offered me the chance, I still considers unique at the age of 40, when you are commonly expected to be already an intellectually mature individual, to completely challenge my mindset through a systematic research activity. Being he fully aware of my personal fascinations, and acting according to maieutics, he discreetly guided me into fascinating discussions on related subject matters, combining real life, he shared together with the protagonists of a glorious season, with his broad spectrum knowledge on the city and its architecture. I will never forget it. I'm also in debt to my family. Elena supported my throughout exhausting discussions on reflection principles and categories. She shared the drama of my rationality self-undermining and continuous upside-down. When I was about to get lost, she was always there to rescue me. My Mather, with her strong presence and positive attitude, gave me the strength to resist a tiring "nomadism" between Italy and The Netherlans, transmitting to me that kind of willpower which is the secret key of any successful undertaking. My Father, unfortunately, will not attend my PhD defence. He deserves some special words. A mio Padre La tua voce, che è tutte le voci, mi ha condotto qui. Hai visto prima, un giorno, la tua destinazione, Oriente. Non ti ho potuto dare, un giorno, ciò che ti consegno oggi, un dono.
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN METHODOLOGY BY TYPOLOGY
Architecture is a result of the neighborhood content, the importance of the frame originates from single or multi setting and culture, similar to this can clarify the history since antiquated time. Presently our reality is growing quickly, urban arrangement and compositional frame has experienced awesome changes, it is important to get through the tight perspective, remaining at another position to reconsider the engineering and urban practice. In spite of the fact that, there is no truth fitting all on the planet, typology outlines technique for outline that gives us new disclosure. Individuals can reestablish (unique) chronicled display and get sort from them, then join and organization new model rely on upon the sort with particular scenes. This plan procedure, shape-sort-(new) frame, is a particularly appearance of the typology application in frame creation.
2018
ions that are too easily being ascribed the label in architecture today. Here, the diagram is understood as: problematising an always already emergent (human) subjectivity; one that is generated at the shifting intersection of the object of the human sciences and the subject of a governmental reason that cultivates the aptitude for political and moral action. Thus, we might think of the diagram as an abstracted strategic tension that operates through a plurality of media (including, but not limited to, drawings, texts, schedules, tabular arrangements, institutional settings, implemented buildings, etc.), sifting and structuring a series of potentialities for the subject in accordance with a promise of the latter’s reformation. As a socio-political machine, the
Journal of Geography and Earth Sciences
After a XX century largely devoted to the avant-garde and an explicit will for the modern, the stern rationalism, the functionalism, and the minimalist spirit of modern architecture was finally questioned. By the mid-sixties, a new spirit moved towards a re-valorization of the historical precedent and the fundamental (millenary) values of architecture as a discipline. The Postmodern proposal (along with the neo-rationalists, their European counterpart) recognized the importance of tradition, historical precedents, and fundamental principles of architecture as a discipline, ruling over both building design and urban design alike. A faction of the postmodern theorist, led by Alexander Tzonis and Liane Lefaivre postulated theories on critical regionalism, promoted an intelligent approach for the appropriation of valuable traditional methods and their possible adaptation into a contemporary proposal. A most instrumental discourse on the proper handling of typical procedures was developed based on essential values of design such as convenience, efficiency and pertinence to the problem at hand.