In this article, Greg Lynn discusses “the blob” which is the type of form that digital software enables architects to make now. Because there are infinite variations on the “blob” form, since it is inherently neither singular nor multiple, general or specific, it introduces a multitude of challenges to the tectonics of actually making the form, and making it structurally sound.
Because blob forms have no definite shape or resting point, they imply movement and change, and their specific geometries are not defined by the kind of properties that make spheres, prisms, or any of the “conventional” polysurfaces. Rather, blob properties are dependent on its relationship to other objects or conditions. This means that there are many components that dictate the form of any given “blob” so the forms are complex and not necessarily stable. Blobs can move through both space and time, defined by their environment and their movement.
Lynn also describes blobs in terms of their properties in horror films. They can absorb other objects, incorporate them into their own mass, and make them part of the greater whole. This quality, Lynn says, is what makes them so disturbing in films like “The Thing”. They do not absorb or eat their victims in a human way, by injesting them into an internal cavity, but rather swallow them and make them part of the blob.
But how to construct these blob forms? Contemporary ideas of construction dictate that perpendicular loads and upright structures are the only way to construct real forms, but in reality, there are other methods of thought than the Cartesian method of gravity that would allow blob forms to be constructed in different ways. Instead of Cartesian volumes, topological surfaces could be organized to construct these forms. This kind of construction is still in very early stages of development, so blob construction is still highly criticized especially in regard to the roof condition. Because no effective method has been developed to enclose buildings with a continuous surface that becomes a roof, traditional methods are still being used to top blob forms. Currently, the most successful architectural explorations of this problem have been conducted by Shoei Yoh. His recent work tends to have all parts of the program organized under a continuous roof form that utilizes repetitious fabrication but still adjusts to the specific needs of each area of the building.
Though the technology is not quite advanced enough to seamlessly construct blob architecture en masse, I am sure that soon methods will be developed to allow it. However, is that in fact the direction that we want architecture to move in? Just because we can construct a landscape of blob buildings, does that mean we should? Will cities of skyscrapers and towers and traditional, orthogonal buildings eventually be replaced by urban gel? These are the questions that we must ask ourselves critically before we, as architects of the future, must ask critically before proceeding with the technology that will enable this to happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment