Thursday, March 1, 2007

Materials

Olang made the point in my midterm presentation that while hybridization of form may create ambiguity in the short term, in the long term users become accustomed to the new forms and use them in prescribed ways: they become the new norm. He suggested I think about how to make the surfaces preform in unexpected ways to maintain ambiguity. One way to do this is through material use.

While I think that materials are really important, I'm not sure if this ambiguity is something the project wants or needs. I'm wondering if it's a good thing that users become accustomed to the new forms. What advantage is there in a second layer of ambiguity? I don't want the project to get bogged down in material studies.

Right now I see the project as part landscape/part furniture in concrete and wood, possibly with some grass areas. I want most of the seating to be wood because it dries quickly and is not cold to sit on, but I'm interested in the thermal effect of masses of concrete adjacent to seating. It's definately going to be inside/outside and I'm going to start with the stair that connects the transit hub to the main plaza area.

Since it's an inside/outside space, all the materials should be able to weather. I'm concerned about different materials because every material carries associations, and if I choose to make a seat out of wood instead of concrete it begins to direct use. I think I'm going to check out some books on materials and look at what I could use.

No comments: