seem to me to be examples of mini-architecture...designed exclusively for people of a certain size...and they don't have to be in the shape of anything resembling architecture. They just create environments.
it would be cool to design playground structures
or, to design a building based on the idea of a playground. playgrounds for big people!
just don't design playgrounds like morphosis... at the Science Center Elementary, the whole playground is gray - equipment, that rubber flooring, everything.
It's ironic that the vast majority of 'designed' playground structures create environments that are as creative and as well designed as the surrounding 300 acres of identical McMansions and cul-de-sacs are.
i remember being fascinated by treehouses, interesting playgrounds, any sort of alternative environment that moved past your template roof, walls, ceiling...i know it's idealistic and maybe stupid but it seems that many "groundbreaking" designers could learn something from the way children experience their own environments
I always used to want to walk on the cieling - I thought all the soffits and doorways and such would be much more interesting to walk on than they were floating above my head. I've heard other arch people express this same idea, and wonder if it's a common thing, like the lego obsession seems to be.
playgrounds
seem to me to be examples of mini-architecture...designed exclusively for people of a certain size...and they don't have to be in the shape of anything resembling architecture. They just create environments.
it would be cool to design playground structures
or, to design a building based on the idea of a playground. playgrounds for big people!
anyone been to the city museum in st louis?
$ .02
just don't design playgrounds like morphosis... at the Science Center Elementary, the whole playground is gray - equipment, that rubber flooring, everything.
It's ironic that the vast majority of 'designed' playground structures create environments that are as creative and as well designed as the surrounding 300 acres of identical McMansions and cul-de-sacs are.
And they're about as much fun, too!
Never been to St. Louis, though.
ew definitely not what i had in mind
i remember being fascinated by treehouses, interesting playgrounds, any sort of alternative environment that moved past your template roof, walls, ceiling...i know it's idealistic and maybe stupid but it seems that many "groundbreaking" designers could learn something from the way children experience their own environments
I always used to want to walk on the cieling - I thought all the soffits and doorways and such would be much more interesting to walk on than they were floating above my head. I've heard other arch people express this same idea, and wonder if it's a common thing, like the lego obsession seems to be.
yeah i did that too...maybe architecture is meant to be
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.