PART1: Points of Influence - Conversation with Irma and Devyn

ME: “Architectural drawings can be understood as a kind of geography”. How can the drawings that we make to study something become relevant in the way that the production of a form is created?

IRMA: Most of the drawings that are created when we want to analyze something become mirrors of what we percept. It doesn't necessarily mean that by looking at one or even a few, we'll be able to come up with an explanation of what we want to do or design or depict. I think it takes many drawings to investigate the meanings or forms that are latent within our perceptions; therefore drawings are not merely related to the production of the form but are influences to the entire design as a whole.

ME: So that a city becomes a “montage” over time, how do we relate to an old, existing city fabric without copying what is there so that the city still maintains an opportunity for growth and change?

IRMA: One of the discussion points that the reading mentioned was that "form matters, but not so much the form of things but the forms between things". I'm not entirely sure what it means when it says between things but it makes me think of how the surrounding architecture should have an influence on the form of the thing being built. Sometimes some people can't even tell the similarities between new architecture and the old fabric it sits in and then that building is criticized for not being conventional. Projects become accepted into the city overtime maybe because instead of resisting the "unreal likeness", they make it "function as the real".

ME: Is there a possibility that any construction could be inserted into a place and be considered a harmonious relationship between the building and the fabric?

DEVYN: There are many opportunities for constructions to integrate harmoniously into an existing fabric. I think it is achieved more often in the urban context, but it can be very challenging. When interventions are placed in open fields rather than dense urban fabrics, the building has a tendency to become a monument that distracts the flow of space. Today, New York City blocks are a mixture of old and new; and they seem to integrate together nicely because the new constructions relate to the forms and materials of the older existing context.

ME: Remember Corbusier’s plan for a house that was drawn out first and then sited? Does the density of the city fabric dictate how much freedom we have to create without the boundaries of referring to the site forces?

DEVYN: In many ways the site dictates the boundaries for a construction, but I think this is only truly restricted on the ground floor of the building. The space and levels above the base floor can be more freely determined by the architect with the use of elements such as sky bridges, openings in the façade, and fragmentation. Today we always look at site restrictions first, but Corbusier never designed with a specific site in mind, so his options were more limited in the urban fabric.  He had to search for the perfect site that would accommodate his building. He flipped the order, but most architects today do not have that option.