debate | infill housing by reza aliabadi
neighbourhoods context contrast
houses debate
an architecture of turbulence
Speed-dating: your allowance is 60 seconds to grab someone’s attention. To deserve a second chance, what would your effective, but ethical, move be?
problem We are drowning in an obsession with imagery and veneer which interprets our needs in a most fleeting way. With the schedule our economy has forced us into, we do not have time to give the deep meaning of design and architecture a chance. We haven’t time to focus, to explore or to delve too deeply, programmed as we are to accept the veneer, the façade and the thin exterior of almost every phenomenon. People want instant consumption rather than patiently waiting for a spark of chemistry. In the design world the façade is the ultimate representation of everything. discussion In housing, the repetition of an economic formula has become normal for many reasons, the greatest of which is that the public is rarely given an opportunity to explore, to experience or to be adventurous enough to try new things and to take risks. Architecturally Toronto as a multicultural city is not as diverse as it deserves to be and its residential areas are characterised by a homogenous flatness. As a result, more pressure is put on a designer if they choose to step outside convention, one of the reasons why we perceive residential urban fabrics as ordinary and overly-uniform. There is a certain negligence towards ingenuity in design. The general public is not accountable for this, it is also architects who comply with this monotony. We bear responsibility for not only design but also for an awareness of other ways in which to design houses. There is an ethical responsibility here; if architects believe deeply that design belongs to everyone, then their duty will naturally invite participation from the general public. However, many architects have become service providers rather than contributors to a public discourse. Market-oriented developers who make decisions for financial gain have put architects in an invidious position — when it comes to single-family houses, their contributions are almost invisible. Rarely do houses contribute much to the urban fabric, nor do they raise much curiosity in their viewers’ minds about the state of housing, urbanism, accommodation or culture. Regardless of personal taste, every project should be capable of pulling a trigger in the mind that deserves a response.
suggestion We feel accountable for such things and believe that while ‘ordinary’ is just a word — living it is a catastrophe. The most promising and ethical act would be to favour both the designer and the general public, since architecture is a social art form and anything social is in need of public interaction and requires participation. Usually there is minimal interaction in this matter, at least in the context of Toronto; obtaining audience interest is the first step. Creating a mise-en-scene for interaction needs an instigator to open the discussion which will surely expose many issues around the way that housing and houses are designed, occupied and evaluated. For us, this is a deliberative process. We introduce four steps: 1 Produce an unfamiliar building that will deliver a shock to a numb viewer. Similar to a cardiogram, turbulence is a must for an architect to move a viewer out of their comfort zone. 2 Make people to open their eyes and really notice it. 3 Raise questions and arguments that lead to discussions with the public. 4 Make difference visible, flatness and convention will disappear and all that is experienced is originality. Along these lines, if a building is made invisible through its predictability, the public will not be moved to interact or communicate. If they can’t communicate, they are absent, and if they are absent they will not be able to discuss anything, including architecture, cities or ethics. examples Every project should be obliged to verify its contribution to design rather than to solely provide service. Design belongs to everyone. Every commissioned project needs to be cost effective and affordable, and it must respect the client’s program in a manner that satisfies not only their personal needs but the surroundings of the house as well. Most importantly, the design of the project must raise design awareness. Our examples, Shaft House, Whale House and Totem House are a representation of a single pixel from our whole project to bring design and architectural recognition to the public domain. Investing time, money, energy, labour and resources on a project must have an extraordinary and atypical outcome. Just as the excitement of a roller coaster is meaningless without its rises and falls; the same goes for our cities; the same goes for Toronto. c
82
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator