in architecture, we’re often assigned to particular site to provide a context for further engagement in our design. it’s always good to apply architecture in real world practice but what bothers us most is that these sites are normally, unless the lecturers gone crazy, just green flat ground with beautiful landscape occasionally as an extra. it actually depends on the way you view this thing, some people might comment that the site has no characteristic, thus limiting its potential, as opposed to the site being a white canvas which will be later filled with all your creativity.
so one day during studio class, this guy, confident and wild looking guy, started his presentation by discussing his site analysis with decent maps. people were confused then as nobody seemed to be familiar with the maps shown on screen because he was talking about a site totally different from everyone else’s. however, he continued to talk in depth about his design leaving people puzzled behind. and it’s pretty much a manners that when we don’t interrupt speaker while he/she’s talking.
at the end of his presentation, upon requested to justify the rationale for deciding on another site, his reply was “simply because i don’t fancy the given site.” now, this is what we call kid too cool for school.
i’ve no idea what happened to him later but he certainly won some applause there. just to deliver the message of that even not conforming assignment requirements, thing could be trickily, as should i say, smartly done. rule? isn’t it meant to be broken?
XD you see why this requirement-thingy is actually helping us students to stay focused (and easily drive up the right path to score points) AND doing something that gives you the freedom can be tough (and lose a whole lot of focus and precious marks!) as it covers every other entity in the entire world…?
Mann… suruh buat ini, dia kasi itu (smarty pants la)… bila kasi freedom, I bet all the students will start grumbling and all lol cos they don’t know where to start…!
ahahaha .. u know what joyce .. i guess the first one to comment on this post would be you even before i posted this up .. especially piece like this that challenges our thinking ..
ya true .. most of the time the rules or requirements work as a guideline for student .. but if you can justify yourself and supported by a clever design.. in this case .. i would say “why not?”
don forget that we are actually learning .. and the process weighs more than the result itself .. by choosing to neglect the rules .. you actually learning something .. like how to survive in the real world .. it can be quite harsh sometimes u know .. and the same designing as well ..
btw sometimes our assignment brief is only “we have a location and we want to spend an amount of xxxx. tell us how should we use it.” lol
erm….let me summary ur post…
ang mo VS asian
who and who? that kid ang mo
Well… critical thinking is one humungous part of the assessment but if guidelines are given, then it should be followed FOR THE SAKE OF THE MARKS la
… If the requirements are not met, marks can be lost very easily…! Cos when any assignments are marked/assessed, the only thing they are looking for are your mistakes and flaws…
But looking from an architecture’s point of view, designs are very scientific based… if you’ve got the scientific theories and proofs to back it up, that’s be great! Arguments for designs can be raised from a socio-cultural point of view though…
Both assessments with or without requirements have their pros and cons… My team got this very hmm how should I put it… very out of this world (like literally) question for our Anthropology research paper… It was about building an ideal community on a space settlement… mahai btul! We were like everywhere and we nearly choked each other’s life off to agree on so many things!
Oh yeah… Have you heard of this guy called Danny Foster on DISCOVERY?
lol.. joyce, i like your “mahai btul” comment, it’s so not you.. LOL
for me, RULES ARE TO BE BROKEN, WISELY.. so yes, rules can be broken under certain circumstances.
given a lemma or rules proven to be correct, just and suitable for a certain group of person in question, one should never be a smart alec and go against the odd; simply put, stupid.
what i said is very much applicable to scientist or engineers who, upon following guidelines, will bring good not to himself but to everyone around him – the colleagues and society.
but i have to agree with you that in architecture, some rules are inevitably broken because RULES LIMIT SUBJECTIVE IMAGINATIONS and hence the quality of an architecture.
joyce, may be breaking rules by impossible means today could mean a miracle tomorrow. if you know what i mean
lol…i think when you see him presenting…u keep scratching ur head and in ur thought,’omgwtfbbq’
i understand that virginity is meant to be broken..
typo.. *virginity of the rule.. keke..