Assessment Step 4

Much better!

We must say the Individual Models for our site were obviously much more interesting, suggestive and creative than the re-programming proposals. To some extent perhaps we should say that this enormous difference is understandable: We, architects, deal with form. So might be we feel more confortable when we just work with our specific field of responsability. On the other hand, we produce more simplistic statements when we have to develop arguments related to other disciplines or activities. 

Anyway, congratulations to the whole Unit, in first place.

We had 27 models presented. It isn't difficult to recognise a series of different morphological families among them. But it can be stated that we have 6-8 very good ideas to develop our Unit Project for the site.

Here you have our brief assessment of your models, regarding both, concept and execution:

- 5 _ excelent. Excelent work in progress. Strong approaches and clean and accurate execution of your models.

( David, M.José R., Bárbara, J.Antonio, Enrique and Arian)

- 7 _ very good work. Well done. Sometimes your approach is simple better developped by some other student; or the execution of the model is not as precise as it should be. But they are very good work.

( Sergio F., Laura R., Daniela, Dimitra, Antolín, Luis and Sergio L.)

- 7 _ Enough, but we feel you could have done better both in conception and execution. Many of them are good ideas that may very well be selected for futher development, but you should have made things easier for the rest of the Unit making a better model of your ideas. 

(Carlos, Rafael, Ínigo, Francisco, Laura A., Cristina, Miguel)

- 8 _ Your models are insufficiently developped due to either a too quick execution or an improper series of arguments and decisions regarding sites' morphological conditions and your expressed intentions. We know some of you have had different problems, but, anyway, you could have done much better. We advise you to have a look at the rest of the models done within the Unit.

(Andrés, M.José G., Lavinia, Michele, Panagiotis, Aikaterini, Arturo, Martha)

- 5 _ Non presented. Nothing to say about them.

That's it. I repeat my congratulations to the whole Unit as a team (even those who haven't achieved a better individual result), because the everyones' participation has been important. Now we have to continue. 

See you on Thursday 4 April to make our final initial decisions to complete our projects for the site.

Step 5: Connecting Programs & Models

Our next step consists in connencting the Re-Programming Proposals we were able to present a couple of weeks ago with the Individual Models you've just handed in.

Methodology for this step will be the following:

- Students will work in couples, exactly the same ones we made for the reprogramming step.

- Each couple must choose a Reprogramming Proposal of those presented to the Unit, and a Model developped by any of the students.

- You may choose your own proposal in both cases (model or programatic proposal), or any other. But each couple must present only ONE connection between a model and a program. Therefore we should finally have 16 connection proposals' for the site.

- In their final proposal, each couple may complete or modify a more precise functional and programatic program approach. 

- Each couple may also select a combination of two or more models, presenting an quick global image of their intentions.

- Entries for this step will be a printed on a single DIN-A4, with an image of the Model selected (or collage if neccesary) and a brief description of the way the couple intends to implant their selected Reprogramming proposal on the model.

- All entries should be ready for Thursday 4 April, at 12.00 in normal class timetable, so we have enough time to present and discuss all proposals. After discussion, we'll select a group of tandems (Program-Model) which will the the final projects the Unit will develop until the end of the semester, with students sorted out in different large teams.

A few advices:

- Of course you should choose the model according to your particular opinions about the ideas presented by all the rest of the Unit. Try to have a calm look at all models, trying to understand others intentions and to get a glimpse of their possibilities. You can also select your own model (just one in the couple) but I must tell you we have 7 or 8 really good and different ideas in your models. Try to locate them.

- It is possible to combine two models. It even may be a good idea in some cases. But you must be able to make a good collage of the two models, so we can have a clear idea of your intentions.

- Presented models are part of a work in progress. So they are not the final proposal. Try to look at them in this way. They are not deffinitive, and they'll certainly along the rest of the semester. So you must search for their possibilities rather than their apperance (although we know well done models suggest much many possibilies).

- It could be a good strategy to gather the 28 models in morphological families in order to understand more clearly the different values of each one.

- Regarding the Re-programming Step, proposals are less strong. It's a good moment to reconsider what has been said and done during last lectures.

- And finally, each team must consider the indivudual values of both the program and the model they wish to select. But most of all you must study the possibilies and capacities of the morphological solution to embrace the functional activity. Study the tandem capacities rather than individual values.

That's about it. Good Luck, have a wonderful Easter Holiday and see you on Thursday 4 April at 12.00 sharp.

Entrega maqueta · María José Ruiz

Cuelgo aquí las fotos de mi maqueta debido a un error con Dropbox. La informática y yo no somos buenas amigas, de modo que no sé a qué se debe dicho error ni cómo solucionarlo, pero no me permite subirlas a la carpeta de la entrega. Lamento las molestias.

Reminding the most absent-minded...

A couple of reminders for the most absent-minded:

1. Tomorrow, 16 March at 10.00 a.m. we all meet at the FUCOAM (Antigua Sede Fundación Colegio de Arquitectos). Sharp! We'll start the workshop immediately, because we need some time to re-make our video proposals after listening to Spiros' lecture. It should be interesting and fun.

Adress: C/ Piamonte 23, 28004 Madrid

2. Next Thursday 21 March, at 12.00 you'll be handing in your Individual Models. Again, Sharp! We must have enough time to have a look at your proposals and to present and sort out students for next step. So, at 12.00 in our usual classroom, everyone with his/her Model. By that time everyone of you should have also uploaded at least one picture of the model to our Dropbox folder.

See you all tomorrow morning!

TaA: Ambasz y el MAADU, otro "regalito" para Madrid

MAADU, otro “regalito” para Madrid

¡Qué será lo que tiene Madrid, que algunos afamados arquitectos sienten la irrefrenable necesidad de regalarle sus más excelsos proyectos! Hace algunos años el inimitable Calatrava nos regaló su monolito de la Castellana (tristemente, ya no se mueve; dicen que por falta de pilas, como algunos agoreros vaticinamos en su momento). Ahora, nada menos que D. Emilio Ambasz, nos va a regalar el MAADU (el Museo de Arte, Arquitectura, Diseño y Urbanismo, toma ya. Si le sobra espacio que ponga alguna otra cosa…). Y yo, como Mouriño me pregunto, ¿Por qué?... Pues no lo sé, oiga.

Si a D. Santiago le cedimos nuestra confusa Plaza Castilla para que nos la ordenara con su talento sin igual, con D. Emilio hemos estado algo más rácanos: le hemos prestado (durante 75 años nada más) una esquina de una callecita de la capital, el Paseo del Prado. Además de su coexistencia en el singular eje madrileño, hay otra curiosa coincidencia entre los dos presentes: parece ser que D. Emilio también barajó la posibilidad de regalar su genio a los norteamericanos antes que a nosotros, a Nueva York concretamente. No conocemos muy bien el motivo, pero finalmente, se ha decidido por lo castizo. ¡Qué rarito!

En cualquier caso, para nuestra denostada profesión, que se plantee la instalación de un Museo de Arquitectura (si les parece voy a omitir el resto del rimbombante nombrecito) es una buena noticia. Personalmente hubiera preferido que la iniciativa fuese pública en lugar de privada, y que reflejara un interés real de los poderes públicos por hacer entender un poco más la relevancia de nuestra actividad a una sociedad que parece darnos la espalda. Pero, abandonada la posibilidad de esa quimera, bien está que la Fundación Ambasz acometa en la medida que pueda ese objetivo. Y agradecemos que lo haga con sus propios recursos. Pero eso tampoco debe entenderse como carta blanca para toda la jugada. Dado que la va a realizar sobre un suelo que nos pertenece a todos y que trata de una disciplina que nos es tan querida, creo que el proyecto en si mismo merece un comentario.

Como diría aquel, de Ambasz, nunca he sido muy partidario. Puedo reconocer un cierto interés de algunos de sus proyectos iniciales, en los que la arquitectura luchaba por desaparecer, por hacerse invisible escondiéndose o fundiéndose con idílicas topografías vegetales. Si quieren incluso, como un precursor de una cierta manera de entender la manida sostenibilidad en arquitectura, casi siempre desde el recurso del enterramiento. Lo que ocurre es que sus proyectos siempre han estado planteados desde dos premisas con las que me he sentido muy incómodo desde mi época de estudiante:

-        Por una parte, el constante recurso a una cierta condición mágica, hermética e iniciática de la arquitectura, explicada en exclusiva desde los imprecisos y resbaladizos terrenos de lo artístico. Ante sus proyectos más interesantes, como la Casa de Retiro Espiritual, se tiene la sensación de estar ante enormes instalaciones artísticas sacadas de escala de manera más o menos afortunada. Todo el proyecto se supedita a una voluntad primigenia y única de producir una determinada sensación en el espectador (no me atrevo siquiera a decir habitante o mucho menos usuario). Esa máxima intensidad emocional conseguida en algunos casos, lleva aparejada como es lógico, la eliminación de toda la complejidad que rodea la arquitectura obligada por definición a conseguir simultáneamente unos objetivos mucho más diversos. La pintura y la escultura tienen un grado de libertad mucho mayor que la arquitectura; tienen menos ligaduras; pueden y deben enfocar con intensidad una temática muy parcial, sujetándose en exclusiva a sus propias leyes creativas. Para la arquitectura, el problema es más complejo. Puede y debe existir desde luego esta misma vocación autorreferencial. Pero su valor genuino está en la manera en que consigue hacerlo coexistir con otro enorme abanico de obligaciones y responsabilidades. No es extraño que  en la producción de Ambasz escaseen los proyectos urbanos. La ciudad exponente máximo de la complejidad contemporánea, no es el entorno más  apropiado para sus unívocas instalaciones.

-        Por otra parte y entrando en el terreno de lo meramente plástico, para la obtención de esos escuetos objetivos, Ambasz recurre sistemáticamente a unas geometrías rabiosamente elementales. Sus proyectos/instalaciones resuelven la materialización de sus ideas con las formas más simples y obvias. Es posible que esta actitud sea intencionada para evitar perturbaciones en el objetivo sensitivo/conceptual único de sus proyectos. Le he oído decir que quiere que sus proyectos los entienda un niño. Sin embargo, yo creo que los niños son capaces de entender geometrías mucho más ricas. Otra cosa es que esos niños y otros no tan niños no tengan la destreza necesaria para manejarse y proyectar con universos formales más ricos y más complejos.

La documentación del proyecto del museo para el Paseo del Prado que se ha hecho pública, sigue rigurosamente estas constantes de la producción de Ambasz. Las explicaciones que ha dado de las intenciones del proyecto se enmarcan todas en ese lenguaje voluntarioso y críptico que suele rodear las argumentaciones “artísticas” de tercera división. Por supuesto ni una palabra de función, técnica, entorno urbano, el programa museístico, lo social, etc… Mover nuestros corazones, eso el lo único que nos propone D. Emilio.

Y su materialización, rigurosamente simétrica en planta por supuesto, con dos fachadas idénticas a dos calles tan similares como el Paseo del Prado y la Calle Gobernador, y con una sección invariable y anodina en todo su desarrollo, está muy en la línea de trabajo habitual del arquitecto. Eso sí: todo cubiertito de verde un poco inclinadito para darle un toque (no como el jardín vertical del Caixa Forum, dice el autor. Tampoco entiendo ni a que se refiere ni lo que tiene de malo su vecino, que me encanta).

En fin, ¿qué quieren que les diga? Otro regalito envenenado para la capital. No lo entiendo. Por algún motivo no me consigo sacarme de la cabeza la melodía de la canción “Mami , ¿qué será lo que quiere el negro?...”

Señor Ambasz, si de verdad tanto quiere a la Arquitectura, si su Fundación está tan deseosa de construir su Museo en Madrid, se lo agradecemos de corazón. Pero contemple la posibilidad de conseguir un proyecto a la altura de sus intenciones, por favor. Ya se lo dicen a mis hijos con toda la razón en la Campaña de Navidad del Colegio cuando piden regalos para llevar a los más necesitados (a lo mejor en eso nos hemos convertido los madrileños): absténgase de traer juguetes rotos o defectuosos. El regalo se convierte en un insulto. Pues eso.

Video Workshop, Schedule

Here you have our schedule and some other important facts for Saturdays' Workshop.

Taller Video, Spiros Papadopoulus

Next Saturday we have our Video Workshop with Spiros Papadopoulus. 
We expect to see all of you over there...

Assessment Step 3

It's been terrible. 

After our Mondays' session I imagine you agree with me. It was most discouraging.

We know it's difficult but I must say, if we were really an Architectural Office, and this had been a real Competition, after the brain storming, we would have all gone back to our seats, to our computers, knowing we still didn't have an strong idea on which we could support our proposal. None of the 16 re-programming ideas was suggestive and creative enough to allow us to continue with any garantee of success.

Some of them were quite interesting; others collages where well developed; a few hibrids seemed to be properly studied...; but there wasn't  clear, strong, suggestive and new idea for such a particular site.

Of course there were some differences between the work of the different groups. We may say that  proposals presented by groups 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 13, 14 and 16, were just a little better than the others, due to either the strengh of their ideas or the effort they had put in their presentations. But, anyway, all of them insufficient to configure a final design.

As I said, dissapointing. Yet, not unusual. We architect don't always follow the rigid logical sequence site-program-design. There are other multiple ways of completing and excellent project. So don't hesitate, work hard on your models and I'm sure the re´programming proposal will clearly appear along the proccess.

As they say, it's easier to learn from our mistakes and failures than from our successes.

Easter is right here!

I've liked todays' class. Well done.

Joaquín and I wanted to remind all of you Easter Holidays are right here. We've programmed Steps' 4 Entry, on Thursday the 21 of March. That is the day before holidays. As on Monday the 18, there are no classes at all,  it means until final entry we have just two days of class (Monday 11 and Thursday 14) and the Video Workshop (Saturday 16). 

We strongly suggest that you start your models quickly so that, at least, we can have a look at them either next Monday or Thursday. Even if don't yet have a clear idea about your proposal, you have plenty of work to start with, introducing all the context, urban and natural environment, topoghraphy and the zombie structure on the site. Probably while working on these collateral issues, your own proposal will come to your minds...

Good Luck, and we'll start checking your ideas and models next Monday. 

Hello people!

Tomorrow thursday 7, around 14:00 pm, we will receive in our classroom a visit from some people of the  SIKA company. They will give us a brief talk about their products, will introduce the 2013 SIKA student competition sponsored by the brand, with very interesting prizes and they will for sure give us some merchandising, brand stuff, surely useful for us all.

See You!

Hola a todos!!

Mañana jueves 7, alrededor de las 14,00h, recibiremos en clase la visita de unos personajes de la marca SIKA, que nos darán una breve charla sobre sus productos, nos presentarán el concurso para estudiantes promovido por la marca, con premios muy suculentos y además, nos obsequiarán con cosillas de la marca, que seguro que nos vienen muy bien a todos.

See You!

Step 4: Individual Models

We have not found an entirely convincing proposal for re-programming our selected built environment. I suppose you agree with us.

This has been quite disappointing and discouraging, but yet, it's not unususal at all in the proccess of design. Sometimes ideas appear when dealing with functional, program or urban issues. But some other times they appear when we concentrate on just plastical o formal aspects of our design. Or even when we reconsider some constructive o technical procedures. Or ... whenever. The important matter is that ideas HAVE to appear sometime along the process of design.

Therefore, we are now going to approach the material and physical appearance of our design. If someone feels very uncomfortable not having a specific use program for the proposal, he/she can consider any of the multiple proposals presented along step 3. But the real aim of this stage is to work, reason and design attending to different contraints and inputs than those used in previous stages. Now, we want you to primary consider the materiality of built environment in which design will appear: topography, roads, the river, nature, built housing in surroundings, solar orientation, etc... Everything that may affect in any sense the appearance, the noise, the texture, the form, the shape of your proposal.

This step deals with the physical context of Architecture. An to be more precise, with the external physical context. We want you to propose is a new volume that completes, modifies or/and alterarates the existing zombie. As always, we should try to profit the existing building efforts of the site as much as possible. But any type of modification is acceptable. Of course, if it's adecuately reasonned.

Regarding the urbanistic normative of the site, the only presciption we would like you to consider with your designs, is this kind of double possible situation we have within the site, with the limit of the natural park of the Guadarrama, slicing the site in two. You may understand and propose with absolute freedom in your proposal, but we think it would be most challenging to regard this double type of legal situation in your designs.

The format for this step will be a physical model of your proposed design. Surrounding and general suburban context y extremely relevant in this step so we suggest a scale 1/300, which should allow you to introduce sufficient amount of detail in your volumetric proposal as well as presenting sites' context, trees, river, topography, other constructions, roads, etc... Deadline for this models will be Thursday 21, at noon, in our normal class. That day, everyone should come with his/her model. This following dates  we have until then, we'll see some examples, some prototype strategies and we'll discuss your work in progress.

Desaguisado

En fin, se consumó es desaguisado. Escribiré en español, para que no exista la posibilidad de confusión: La persona que borró lo archivos de la carpeta no puede recuperarlos. ¡Vaya cagada!

La única opción que nos queda es volver a subirlos individualmente. Lo siento porque es un poco pesadito, pero no queda otra. De manera que, por favor, uno a uno y lo antes posible id volviendo a subir a la carpeta compartida toda la documentación eliminada correspondiente a la Fase 2, Análisis. Los documentos de entrega (Planta, Seción, Catalogo, etc.... hasta 10) cada uno en su carpetita independiente y dentro de una principal que se llame por ejemplo Entrega Fase 2. También había gente que había subido más información en la carpeta de Toma de Datos. Por favor volvedla a subir.

Gracias y disculpas a todos.

Al culpable, el más sonoro y unánime abucheo, y a todos, extremad las precauciones por favor. No es tan difícil.

Nos vemos el jueves espero que con todo de vuelta a la normalidad.

Danger: Careful with our Dropbox Folder!!!!

All information concerning Step 2 entry has been removed from our Dropbox folder. I understand it must have been a mistake someone has made... That one who's made the mistake, please do upload all files inmmediately. We all need them to continue our proposal.

And for all of you, please be very, very careful with files uploaded!!!

Please, a bit of optimism...

Here you have a link to the video I told you about during yesterdays' class with a brief optimistic presentation Jose María Churtichaga about the future of architects. Interesting, optimictic, unusual but extremely useful in this dark context that's consuming all our energies.
And, in my opinion, pretty accurate.

http://vimeo.com/45080616