I have created a collaborative video/performance based art practice with my twin brother that involves issues of the body, space and architecture. I have had the opportunity to collaborate with some architects in the past, but I wanted to get a broader perspective of how other architects view the role of the body in architecture. What role does it play? How does architecture define bodily movement, group activities, etc.? How does the design of spaces restrict or liberate physical expression and exploration? I would like other people to pose questions they see fit as well, to get a lively discussion started. I look forward to hearing from everyone. My artwork can be viewed at www.spatialinterventions.com to get a better sense of the kind of work I am interested in.
here is a provocative - somewhat known - poster from bernard tschumi, which came to mind...i hope it can start a discussion on how we are people(bodies) interact with space and architecture...
Valie Export's "Body Configuration Series" (1972- 82) approached the issue of "the relationship between a constructed body language and the surrounding urban space." I wonder how physicality and an embodied architecture practice might spark more engaging structures. Or how an emphasis on bodily relationships to a site might change the way it is conceptualized and fully realized. I'm sure there is already some architecture out there like this, so if anyone has any links or names I would greatly appreciate it.
This is the subject of my Studio this year, although I'm taking it in a slightly different direction.
I haven't reached any conclusions, and mind you, it's basically art school at this point since I have no previous architectural training.
I started with looking at the history of anatomical texts. We all did this as a class. I chose, for whatever reason, a specific French anatomical treatise dating from the 1820's. What I noticed what that this specific text treats the body in a much different way than previous texts. Long story short, the doctor and author separates the body into systems, both in terms of description, and the way he's dissected and illustrated the body itself.
Where is this all going? I don't know. I have an idea, though. I see parallels between dissecting bodies into parts, and the way architects treat buildings: ventilation system, sewage system, mechanical and electrical systems, structure, facade/skin/envelope, etc. I think there's a direct comparison to be made.
I won't give away the ending (because I'm just getting started and everything is subject to change) but I think it's a fairly exciting and novel way of looking at architecture: through the body. It relates to phenomenology, etc.
Next week we're supposed to go watch some dissections at the university health sciences centre. I hope I don't get sick!
I was just about to post..."Hey, you sound like those guys from the video in the art building," but then I realized you *are* those guys from the video in the art building. I stood there forever and watched what I guess must have been your BFA project. Glad to see someone putting that echo-chamber of an atrium in TBH to good use.
But it's not just your body, is it? Aren't you also manipulating space (and aesthetics) with your clothes? I mean, I know you can't run around in the architecture building (or in front of the UGL) with no clothes on, but part of the draw of the photographs is that you coordinate with the space rather than clash with it. How do you see/understand your bodies in the buildings on campus?
I'm also interested in the body as an archive (of history), and how the body is compelled or restricted in space (by architecture, by violence, etc.). I think I originally started thinking about it after reading _Bodies in Contact_ (eds. Burton and Ballantyne) and how the body occupies/troubles colonial space (including buildings).
does it matter whether somone hang themselves from a sturdy tree branch or a ceiling beam? in comparison, "performance art" seems like a rehearsal rife with !knowing! suspension of disbelief. if i hang myself, if throw myself off a cliff or a building roof....it might dawn upon me that the world is nothing more than a worldly utility to end the world for me. nature and artifice are one, they fall into their proper place as objects with the dormant potential of assassinating the subject of me. and "space" ...well that seems just as rehearsed a term as is performance art. before space is claustrophobia, agrophobia...the ugly and painful impingement of others' animal presence, their spilling over their outlines and blotting out the distance between them and ur person. by comparison, a building, like an apple, can kill but can never harm harm harm and ur poses are pretty and i respect you for your gymanstics but i just don't believe u. perhaps, its ur way of rejecting the world whilst thinking you're discovering it....and that, i can feel 100/100
I have recently become interested in fashion, both the theory and the physical product. I think the parallels between clothing and building could be a relevant point of discussion in this thread. Layers of perminance in fashioning the body (piercing, tatoos, clothing, hairstyle) also levels of interaction between bodies (and perhaps exually architecturally responsive environments provoking a similar effect).
Then there are the parallels in how you read clothing and building, giving some clue to the imediate emotions of the wearer, the cultural beliefs and also the seasonal conditions.
Besides from these theoretical notions there is also a relevant thought regarding the fight in what we wear between comfort and visual, prompting notions of tactility in architecture which is more inviting to the body.
Also the advancements of textile manufacturer suggest that there will be more elecronic interaction between clothing fabric and building fabric.
The idea of micro environments is also something i find interesting, ideas that started in the days of archigram are now much more possible.
I dont know where these things are going but maybe somewhere we feel less numb and isolated by our surroundings. I probably shouldnt post when i am tired.....
Fashion and architecture sounds really interesting phat, suggests a whole range of topics as youve shown.
In terms of an architectural application of spatial interventions, what comes to mind is heightening that sense of intrusion or transition through a space, which is a very powerfull experience. How do we heighten these experiences without the obvious haptic stuff?
good question, i think the haptic stuff is interesting in its self. also i think there has to be something to do with creating individual experience where a singular body feels something unique. Is time based or sequential scripting the way forward? I am interested in some of the ideas in films such as fight club and lost in translation which talk about an isolation from our environments and a sensorary numbness.
William Forsythe in the Creative time project "the plain heaven" - attempt at spatial performance space docu. only works live really.
The question is kinda interesting, although i believe architectural properties like volumes, material, sequence are orchestrated in more intuative, rehearsed, or numerical fashion in designing of space. Im not sure if the singular body is ever really considered the client or end user in most cases. Post occupancy gives us cahnces to inquire into the consequences - diane agrest comes to mind, dealing with body and space steming from gender studies questioning gender based priorities, etc etc. this is late 80s pre(post-feminism) groove - Its kind of off the radar in contemporary architecture theory... anyone?
Oct 8, 07 6:50 pm ·
·
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.
Spatial Interventions: The role of the body in architecture
I have created a collaborative video/performance based art practice with my twin brother that involves issues of the body, space and architecture. I have had the opportunity to collaborate with some architects in the past, but I wanted to get a broader perspective of how other architects view the role of the body in architecture. What role does it play? How does architecture define bodily movement, group activities, etc.? How does the design of spaces restrict or liberate physical expression and exploration? I would like other people to pose questions they see fit as well, to get a lively discussion started. I look forward to hearing from everyone. My artwork can be viewed at www.spatialinterventions.com to get a better sense of the kind of work I am interested in.
wow, nice thread for a new guy.
I'll be back to post after i've got some more time.
here is a provocative - somewhat known - poster from bernard tschumi, which came to mind...i hope it can start a discussion on how we are people(bodies) interact with space and architecture...
Valie Export's "Body Configuration Series" (1972- 82) approached the issue of "the relationship between a constructed body language and the surrounding urban space." I wonder how physicality and an embodied architecture practice might spark more engaging structures. Or how an emphasis on bodily relationships to a site might change the way it is conceptualized and fully realized. I'm sure there is already some architecture out there like this, so if anyone has any links or names I would greatly appreciate it.
what about Matthew Barney's "Drawing Restraint?" does this fit?
do you practice acroyoga??? those balance pics look like it
This is the subject of my Studio this year, although I'm taking it in a slightly different direction.
I haven't reached any conclusions, and mind you, it's basically art school at this point since I have no previous architectural training.
I started with looking at the history of anatomical texts. We all did this as a class. I chose, for whatever reason, a specific French anatomical treatise dating from the 1820's. What I noticed what that this specific text treats the body in a much different way than previous texts. Long story short, the doctor and author separates the body into systems, both in terms of description, and the way he's dissected and illustrated the body itself.
Where is this all going? I don't know. I have an idea, though. I see parallels between dissecting bodies into parts, and the way architects treat buildings: ventilation system, sewage system, mechanical and electrical systems, structure, facade/skin/envelope, etc. I think there's a direct comparison to be made.
I won't give away the ending (because I'm just getting started and everything is subject to change) but I think it's a fairly exciting and novel way of looking at architecture: through the body. It relates to phenomenology, etc.
Next week we're supposed to go watch some dissections at the university health sciences centre. I hope I don't get sick!
The body spoils the purity of architecture.
I was just about to post..."Hey, you sound like those guys from the video in the art building," but then I realized you *are* those guys from the video in the art building. I stood there forever and watched what I guess must have been your BFA project. Glad to see someone putting that echo-chamber of an atrium in TBH to good use.
But it's not just your body, is it? Aren't you also manipulating space (and aesthetics) with your clothes? I mean, I know you can't run around in the architecture building (or in front of the UGL) with no clothes on, but part of the draw of the photographs is that you coordinate with the space rather than clash with it. How do you see/understand your bodies in the buildings on campus?
I'm also interested in the body as an archive (of history), and how the body is compelled or restricted in space (by architecture, by violence, etc.). I think I originally started thinking about it after reading _Bodies in Contact_ (eds. Burton and Ballantyne) and how the body occupies/troubles colonial space (including buildings).
Anyway, I enjoyed your work at UIUC.
yes i really want to see two naked twin brothers humping an eisenmen building
does it matter whether somone hang themselves from a sturdy tree branch or a ceiling beam? in comparison, "performance art" seems like a rehearsal rife with !knowing! suspension of disbelief. if i hang myself, if throw myself off a cliff or a building roof....it might dawn upon me that the world is nothing more than a worldly utility to end the world for me. nature and artifice are one, they fall into their proper place as objects with the dormant potential of assassinating the subject of me. and "space" ...well that seems just as rehearsed a term as is performance art. before space is claustrophobia, agrophobia...the ugly and painful impingement of others' animal presence, their spilling over their outlines and blotting out the distance between them and ur person. by comparison, a building, like an apple, can kill but can never harm harm harm and ur poses are pretty and i respect you for your gymanstics but i just don't believe u. perhaps, its ur way of rejecting the world whilst thinking you're discovering it....and that, i can feel 100/100
claustrophobia, agoraphobia and aerophobia, where does one run to
I have recently become interested in fashion, both the theory and the physical product. I think the parallels between clothing and building could be a relevant point of discussion in this thread. Layers of perminance in fashioning the body (piercing, tatoos, clothing, hairstyle) also levels of interaction between bodies (and perhaps exually architecturally responsive environments provoking a similar effect).
Then there are the parallels in how you read clothing and building, giving some clue to the imediate emotions of the wearer, the cultural beliefs and also the seasonal conditions.
Besides from these theoretical notions there is also a relevant thought regarding the fight in what we wear between comfort and visual, prompting notions of tactility in architecture which is more inviting to the body.
Also the advancements of textile manufacturer suggest that there will be more elecronic interaction between clothing fabric and building fabric.
The idea of micro environments is also something i find interesting, ideas that started in the days of archigram are now much more possible.
I dont know where these things are going but maybe somewhere we feel less numb and isolated by our surroundings. I probably shouldnt post when i am tired.....
Fashion and architecture sounds really interesting phat, suggests a whole range of topics as youve shown.
In terms of an architectural application of spatial interventions, what comes to mind is heightening that sense of intrusion or transition through a space, which is a very powerfull experience. How do we heighten these experiences without the obvious haptic stuff?
good question, i think the haptic stuff is interesting in its self. also i think there has to be something to do with creating individual experience where a singular body feels something unique. Is time based or sequential scripting the way forward? I am interested in some of the ideas in films such as fight club and lost in translation which talk about an isolation from our environments and a sensorary numbness.
William Forsythe in the Creative time project "the plain heaven" - attempt at spatial performance space docu. only works live really.
The question is kinda interesting, although i believe architectural properties like volumes, material, sequence are orchestrated in more intuative, rehearsed, or numerical fashion in designing of space. Im not sure if the singular body is ever really considered the client or end user in most cases. Post occupancy gives us cahnces to inquire into the consequences - diane agrest comes to mind, dealing with body and space steming from gender studies questioning gender based priorities, etc etc. this is late 80s pre(post-feminism) groove - Its kind of off the radar in contemporary architecture theory... anyone?
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.